Project Eternity - Closes with >$4.1M

[DArtagnan]

That shitty editor has allowed many good sp mods that I don't care about the mp potential.

How nice for you - but I'm not sure what your point is? The editor was a mess compared to the NWN editor, and that's why you're seeing a LOT fewer quality mods for NWN2. That includes SP mods.

You don't care about that? Well, that's your thing.

 

[turian]

i dont wanna think of the difference in the games if the project reached only 1,1 mil.

actually.... will be there really any difference?

 

[rune_74]

Are you saying the NWN (Aurora), Unreal and Fallout 3 (Gamebryo) engines were poorly documented and they didn't have help available from the people developing them?

Because that doesn't sound right to me.

It's true that if you buy an engine blind and you don't have access to good documentation or help from people with experience - then it can be a big problem.

But Obsidian have had good relationships with the people behind the engines AFAIK - and their problem seems to be overextending themselves and a lack of technical skill matching their ambitions.

That's my take, anyway.

Maybe they've hired new people? We'll see.

I agree, highly doubt that they got a shoddy product to work with. if anything it sounds like people trying to shift off obsidians responsibility.

 

[DArtagnan]

There is a big difference between developing on, let say, Bethesda's engine that Bethesda itself can't seems to debug vs working with an engine you built yourself and have the people who created it right beside you to help you out when you have issues (like Onyx).

Yes, the difference being you have to develop your own engine in one example - and in the other you don't.

They had lots of help available - but they just didn't deliver a polished product. Fallout 3 was FAR more polished than New Vegas (not just tech bugs, but a staggering amount of visual glitches that persist to this day after all patches). Pretty much any Unreal game has been FAR more polished than Alpha Protocol. KotOR was a masterpiece in terms of polish compared to KotOR 2. NWN2 was all but unplayable for a while (I had a very good rig, and it just ran like a complete dog - where NWN was always smooth) until it was patched.

If you want to ignore the obvious pattern because you like Obsidian - that's your choice.

I like most of their games myself, but I'm not pretending they haven't had big trouble with a lack of polish and a ton of bugs.

 

[Couchpotato]

How nice for you - but I'm not sure what your point is? The editor was a mess compared to the NWN editor, and that's why you're seeing a LOT fewer quality mods for NWN2. That includes SP mods.

You don't care about that? Well, that's your thing.

Seriously I have to ask do you have a problem with almost every game that comes out?

Just play and enjoy games I find it's better then nitpicking every detail. I often think if a person thinks they can do better go make a game and prove it. I enjoyed all there games and that's all I care about in the end.

 

[DArtagnan]

Seriously I have to ask do you have a problem with almost every game that comes out?

Just play and enjoy games I find it's better then nitpicking every detail. I often think if a person thinks they can do better go make a game and prove it. I enjoyed all there games and that's all I care about in the end.

If I had a problem with every game that comes out, why would I be praising Dishonored and X-Com - like I just did in the thread you apparently overlooked. I praise all games that I consider worthy of praise - and there are many.

However, very much like yourself - I don't have a problem being sceptical when I see the need for it.

So far, all these kickstarter games consist of exactly one thing: promises - and nothing more. Going by my experience with Obsidian, there's a LOT to be sceptical about.

If you don't agree, then I can only hope you're right.

Also, I can enjoy games and think they have issues at the same time.

Obsidian gets a lot of ultra irrational love around here, and it's no surprise given they're among the very last serious "high-profile" RPG developers out there. I can accept some irrational love - but I'm not going to share it. I'm just too rational for that

Obsidian have made some fine games and some duds. They have great writers and they understand mechanics better than most. But they SUCK at polish and they tend to be average visual artists at best. End of story, really.

 

[Asdraguuhl]

Code reuse if the code is not well documented and understood and buggy can be more of a hindrance than a help. Basic lesson learned by anyone with any software development experience. In this example, using someone else's engine rather than a homebrew engine gives no guaranteed advantages, and may actually add risk, without any additional information.

Considering my own professional experience, I agree 100% with this statement.

 

[DArtagnan]

Considering my own professional experience, I agree 100% with this statement.

So do I, but the statement needs to apply before being relevant.

Tell me what engine was poorly documented and poorly understood that Obsidian used for their games?

Well, obviously they were all poorly understood by Obsidian

Nah, I'll just let this go.

Obviously, Obsidian had nothing to do with the level of polish. It must have been inherent in the engines and obviously the publisher provided all the bad QA.

 

[JDR13]

It's good to see that I'm not the only person here that doesn't blindly worship Obsidian.

 

[Couchpotato]

It's good to see that I'm not the only person here that doesn't blindly worship Obsidian.

More generalizations again I love those.. It's so hard to believe people just enjoy the games they made regardless of the bugs and QA.

 

[rune_74]

More generalizations again I love those.. It's so hard to believe people just enjoy the games they made regardless of the bugs and QA.

I like their games a lot too. I unfortanately can find things to like in a lot of games. I have never however found the perfect game.

 

[Asdraguuhl]

Tell me what engine was poorly documented and poorly understood that Obsidian used for their games?

I have absolutely no idea since I don't have any insider knowledge. Do you?


P.S.

There is one thing I don't know and I need you to enlighten me. What on Earth is your avatar supposed to represent? I have been looking and looking and can see many distinct figures but none of them seem to be "right". So please help me out here .

 

[azarhal]

Yes, the difference being you have to develop your own engine in one example - and in the other you don't.

They had lots of help available - but they just didn't deliver a polished product. Fallout 3 was FAR more polished than New Vegas (not just tech bugs, but a staggering amount of visual glitches that persist to this day after all patches). Pretty much any Unreal game has been FAR more polished than Alpha Protocol. KotOR was a masterpiece in terms of polish compared to KotOR 2. NWN2 was all but unplayable for a while (I had a very good rig, and it just ran like a complete dog - where NWN was always smooth) until it was patched.

If you want to ignore the obvious pattern because you like Obsidian - that's your choice.

I got no issues in KoTOR2 from what I remember, the game played as smooth as KoTOR 1 to me. Avellon blame himself for the state of the game though.

I think you mixed NWN2 with NWN there. I was never able to have a smooth NWN running when it was released. It hate ATI video cards (and apparently the latest patch make it worst from what I read). I played NWN2 on max from day 1 (at release) with no issues, the 1st patch did make the framerate better though.

Alpha Protocols: Obsidian most bugged games I think, but nothing major and the glitch seemed to stay in the starting area. Well beside the quick load ones, had to go back in the menu to load an old save game correctly. Sega approved the game to be released in this state after they kept it on the shelf for months though.

Never played the Fallout games, so I can only comment that people seems to have a mixed experience with these 2 games.

General info:

• The only tool Obsidian had to make Fallout New Vegas with the engine provided was the G.E.C.K editor. (Josh Sawyer said this on SomethingAwful)
• The tool they used to make the NWN2 campaign was the one they released as editor. (Josh Sawyer said this on SomethingAwful)
• Feargus said that Obsidian animators find the Unity character animation tools better than those from the Unreal and CryEngine engines. That was from the Kickstarter comments, can't link them individually.

I learned lots of stuff during the PE kickstarter.

Also, from experience developers don't document their software for others dev to use or build upon.

<= Software developer and "reading documentation" usually mean "checking the code". Which you can't do if you don't have access to it.

 

[Thrasher]

There is a big difference between developing on, let say, Bethesda's engine that Bethesda itself can't seems to debug vs working with an engine you built yourself and have the people who created it right beside you to help you out when you have issues (like Onyx).

Yep. Like I said unless you've been there Dart, you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Thrasher]

Also, from experience developers don't document their software for others dev to use or build upon.

<= Software developer and "reading documentation" usually mean "checking the code". Which you can't do if you don't have access to it.

Exactly. So if they don't have access to the source code for the engine, that will definitely screw the pooch. Now I am worried.

 

[JDR13]

So we're to believe that Obsidian developed FO:NV without any assistance or documentation from Bethesda during development, and therefore all the bugs in that game are Bethesda's fault?

I don't think so.

 

[azarhal]

Exactly. So if they don't have access to the source code for the engine, that will definitely screw the pooch. Now I am worried.

Well, like all things. They are exceptions.

Unity is documented (online manual, unofficial? wiki), got tutorials (basic from what I understand), but mostly it is different from the big expensive engines when it come to the user base. If you have questions you search with Google or go to the official community forums for an answers 1st, chance are somebody had the issue before you. At worst there is also paid support (this is offered for more expensive engine) or waiting for somebody's help by posting a question in the forums.

Also, Unity International only exist to have happy (returning) customers, they don't make any games, they just make an extremely customizable game engine. If Unity wasn't easy to use, people wouldn't use it as much as they do right now. Although, having a free version probably helps as well. I probably should download it one day, just to check it out.

So we're to believe that Obsidian developed FO:NV without any assistance or documentation from Bethesda during development, and therefore all the bugs in that game are Bethesda's fault?

I don't think so.

Depends how you look at it. Obsidian is at fault for trying to do something with the engine/tools that wasn't supported (their own admission). Bethesda is a fault for not giving a crap about improving their engine/tools to support what Obsidian was trying to do. As far as I understand it, Obsidian didn't have the power to improve the engine or the tools.

 

[figment]

I've had access to the Gamebryo/netimmerse source in the past though not Bethesda's modified version. I strongly believe they had source code access especially since Bethesda heavily modified/extended it. This is the graphics/model engine and is reasonably well documented and anyone with any C++ experience should not have too much trouble finding their way through it. Its got ok proper documentation but I've seen better and I thought it was lacking in quality real-world examples with proper error handling. Also there are a lot of design decisions made by Emergent that they would have no choice but to work with even if they didn't like it. I'm reminded of texture popping in Unreal games which is a good engine but nearly every game I've played has that problem. The more interesting source would be related to the "real" engine which uses the data structures from Bethesda and that I think is probably lacking quality in up-to-date documentation since that is in-house.

I personally fall on the side that a lot of bugs in FO:NV would mostly be due to starting with Bethesda's engine. We know that codebase is not rock solid based on previous games made with it so anything built on it is only going to be adequate at best. Having said that, I think they did a fine job on FO:NV and I don't recall anything that I would call a showstopper in the unmodded game but there were plenty of bugs. I also think that there is no way in hell it would have been released in <5 years if they didn't leverage the existing base and I'd rather have the game than not.

My concerns about Unity is that its another framework that doesn't have many in-built tools for RPG developers beyond graphics but I will confess ignorance in its workings. If I can find time, I will be learning a lot about Unity due to this game. It also sounds like they are new to it which concerns me slightly as a schedule risk. They have to rework all of the RPG bits around this framework probably from scratch and glue it all together into something cohesive in a short amount of time. I really hope they are able to extract their favorite dialog and quest stuff from previous code bases like the Aliens RPGs but that comes with its own risks. If they do a proper design upfront and start the QA immediately then I think they can make a good and relatively bug free game. They have people that know this as well so its a matter of discipline.

 

[rune_74]

So we're to believe that Obsidian developed FO:NV without any assistance or documentation from Bethesda during development, and therefore all the bugs in that game are Bethesda's fault?

I don't think so.

Hell has frozen over, I agree. Also, Bethesda published the game...why would they want it to be buggy if it had their name on it?

 

[rune_74]

Depends how you look at it. Obsidian is at fault for trying to do something with the engine/tools that wasn't supported (their own admission). Bethesda is a fault for not giving a crap about improving their engine/tools to support what Obsidian was trying to do. As far as I understand it, Obsidian didn't have the power to improve the engine or the tools.

Why do you think bethesda would do that? They published the game right? What you wrote there basically gave a pass to obsidian and shit on Bethesda. I just don't see it happening that way.

Fall out new vegas used the majority of the assets from the original, and didn't do to many things different that I can think of. It had a better story since they were able to focus on developing the story instead of developing the engine.