RPGWatch Forums

RPGWatch Forums (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/index.php)
-   News Comments (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Project Eternity - prototype 2 Update (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20168)

Myrthos April 24th, 2013 23:07

Project Eternity - prototype 2 Update
 
Adam Brennecke, Executive Producer and Lead Programmer, updates us on the status of prototype 2 in this update for Project Eternity.
Quote:


Last month we finished our prototype 1 build. In Update #47, Josh outlined our goals for the first prototype, which focused on establishing "that IE feel". Not only did we hit that mark with the look of our characters and environments, but we also hit our target with movement, combat, and gameplay systems. Core basics that you all expect from Project Eternity such as party movement, melee and ranged combat attacks, containers (with loot!), doors, using special class abilities and spell casting, area transitions, inventory and equipment are all in the game and functioning. We also established working character and environment pipelines - the art team is now able to create beautiful rendered areas, and we can model armor sets for all of our uniquely proportioned races. Additionally, we've established that we can efficiently concept, model and animate creatures for our soon to be growing bestiary.
More details on their first creature, art, design and programming can be found in the update.
More information.

Moorkh April 24th, 2013 23:07

I know I should probably post this on the PE page, but this is a really bad concept for a medieval fantasy village. It's inefficient, virtually indefensible and economically quite impossible. Where are the fortifications? Why aren't buildings built adjacent to each other? And how are these people supposed to feed themselves without any farms providing the produce that the apparent craftsmen and specialists in these houses offer their services for?
I won't insist on realism in a fantasy game, but on some degree of plausibility.

tuukka April 25th, 2013 00:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moorkh (Post 1061194655)
I know I should probably post this on the PE page, but this is a really bad concept for a medieval fantasy village. It's inefficient, virtually indefensible and economically quite impossible. Where are the fortifications? Why aren't buildings built adjacent to each other? And how are these people supposed to feed themselves without any farms providing the produce that the apparent craftsmen and specialists in these houses offer their services for?
I won't insist on realism in a fantasy game, but on some degree of plausibility.

Have you ever seen an actual medieval village? There are still a lot of them left in Europe.

A village of 7 buildings typically doesn't have fortifications. But in this village there seems to be a ruined tower, which in the past was the place of safety for villagers. And it's rather typical for small medieval villages, that buildings are not adjacent on each other.

The farms would surround the village, but not on immediate vicinity. Because a farm needs *fields* to produce food.

Moorkh April 25th, 2013 02:51

7 buildings didn't make a village in medieval times (nor do they now). At most, that would have been considered a hamlet, more likely a steading. And in one of those, you'd exclusively find agricultural buildings.
And until the late medieval, they'd still have some means of defense, a palisade, earthworks or an enclosure of sorts. These were not safe times, there was actual danger out there (to the livestock even if not to the populace).

Now, Obsidian is not just calling this a village, but an actual town.
This corresponds well to the sort of buildings they have. The tower clearly points towards a seat of nobility or a magistracy. Other buildings, all of them stone structures might signify the presence of trade, crafts, scholarship or clergy. In short, a degree of relative wealth, and the requirement of others, farmers (serfs) close by to feed them.
Where do they live? A town would have tight rows of buildings along the roads with kitchen gardens out back, surrounded by significant defenses and extensive fields outside, even for just a couple hundred inhabitants.
My point stands: plausibility?

guenthar April 25th, 2013 04:31

It says in the name of the picture Village so it isn't a town and those buildings are made out of either wood or clay and not stone. The tower is probably a remnant of a castle that stood there long before the village existed since most of the stone has already been taken over several centuries at least. In a small village like this they likely wouldn't have anyone that is trained in combat so any kind of fortifications would be mostly useless and it is more likely that they would flee into a nearby forest if they are attacked. Only large villages and small towns would have any people trained in combat since it would be more difficult to flee into a nearby forest. Only large towns and cities actually have a dedicated defense force and would likely have walls. The exception to this are frontier villages and towns which are in a much more dangerous area and have dedicated guards and significant defenses.

rjshae April 25th, 2013 07:01

And yet, one might almost suspect it's a sketch of a rudimentary prototype for a game, mmm? I think you guys are reading way too much into this.

Moorkh April 25th, 2013 09:18

*sigh*

Look again.
Wood or clay? Clearly not.
Castle? Where is the foundation?
Trained defense force? Serfs wouldn't have that, yet a deterrent for intruders still made sense. But the buildings clearly inhabitants that are not serfs, and in a feudal society, you will find trained warriors among those.
Frontier villages? A village surrounded by forests would be considered that.

Town (as they call it in the update) or village (as the file name suggests), my point still stands.

But then I guess you are only in this for the sake of the argument…

ChienAboyeur April 25th, 2013 10:00

They probably went for a medieval representation of a village/town. The art by some ways recalls medieval art (even though there are too many lines in it) but the colours look like it.

In a medieval representation, only important buildings were represented: here, we've got the town hall, the well, the water mill, an inn and probably stables ,a few well off mansions of land masters, the bridge and fortifications. All signals an important settlement.

In medieval times, such representations would have been read immediately, people filling the gap with their common life material.

Nowadays, it seems to be confusing.

Actually, buildings might be production buildings only:smithy and a trader house

tolknaz April 25th, 2013 11:39

Not all medieval villages were fortified. But that is completely beside the point. What is on that concept, would in reality be not a town or a village, but a small manor and its supporting buildings.

Sacred_Path April 25th, 2013 14:50

Being called a town, we can be quite sure only "points of interest" are present on that sketch. If this translates 1:1 into the game will have to be seen. That said, the art direction feels really cozy, but not too much, just so that it evokes very pleasurable feelings, like subdued harp music :blush: sry, got carried away there.

guenthar April 25th, 2013 15:00

I'm not going to respond to much but there are a few things. The buildings are a made from clay which is a common building material in many parts of europe and the look of the buildings make it pretty obvious. Many old structures made from stone would disappear over time as people would take the stone and many would only end up with a small part left or even entirely gone down to the foundation.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 03:49.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch