What type of engine for Book II

Here's where all things related to Book II are being discussed!

What type fo engine for Book II

Option #1
136
66%
Option #2
43
21%
Option #3
26
13%
 
Total votes: 205

User avatar
Grue
Steward
Posts: 78
Joined: October 1st, 2007, 6:37 pm
Location: Lurking in the darkness

Post by Grue »

I was juggling between options #1 and #2, and went with #2 because I would love to see a party-based Eschalon game. However, if the option #2 makes the game develoment take *reeeaaally* long, then I'd go with option #1.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
User avatar
Iane
Officer [Bronze Rank]
Officer [Bronze Rank]
Posts: 293
Joined: July 31st, 2007, 9:22 am
Location: Australia

Post by Iane »

I would stick to Book I - Solo play but modified heaps for multi level dungeons citys etc etc - I love Book I and alot of us here do also besides spending 2 1/2 years in making book I you can't just toss aside all that hard work just to make Book II and I don't want to wait 2 1/2 years for it.
sapper_astro
Fellowcraft Apprentice
Posts: 52
Joined: December 3rd, 2007, 7:23 am
Location: Aus

Post by sapper_astro »

I went with option 1. Unless there are story elements that need to have a party, or a different viewpoint, then just building on what there already is would be fine. Changing everything radically can be for any later saga's if that is what you have planned.
User avatar
Fleisch
Marshall
Posts: 108
Joined: October 10th, 2006, 6:23 pm
Location: Middle Age

Post by Fleisch »

If it's not a party, I would at least like to be able to select the sex of my character!
sapper_astro
Fellowcraft Apprentice
Posts: 52
Joined: December 3rd, 2007, 7:23 am
Location: Aus

Post by sapper_astro »

Don't worry, we will probably all have to play as a femme in the next book :lol:
tungprc
Marshall
Posts: 141
Joined: November 20th, 2007, 9:32 am

Post by tungprc »

I voted Option 1 as well. To me, it'd be silly to fix something that's not broke; at least for your first trilogy. I think that each of the classes has a ton of room for expansion. You could write up the NPC's to be more than cardboard questgivers, now that the game engine is complete. Shareware doesn't generally earn enough revenue to afford a new engine for each game. I'd stick with single player and maybe add a new wrinkle. Something like a gambling parlor in the larger towns or a black market that deals in exotic wares. You could perhaps change skill costs for various classes so that every class isn't exactly the same. It'd be cool if I had to pay 3 skill points to learn 1 level of sword as a mage for example.
HydroSqueegee
Pledge
Posts: 4
Joined: December 1st, 2007, 6:52 am

Post by HydroSqueegee »

this engine has so much potential in its current form. Leave it and focus on other features.

gameplay > *
Claw
Apprentice
Posts: 34
Joined: November 22nd, 2007, 2:03 pm

Post by Claw »

BasiliskWrangler wrote:3) Go with a party, but take the engine in a radical new direction: an engine that we have been developing that would be similar to Wizardry 8, with hints of Dungeon Master / Eye of the Beholder.
You mean this was your original plan? Whatever gave you the idea that creating a new engine for Book II would be a good idea? I always assumed you'd just improve upon the existing engine.

vid: Think of the way Book I handles turns. To deal with a party, we need to change over to a phased, action-point system.
You do? What about the way Ultima IV handled turns? Afaik it worked pretty much like Eschalon, but you could control each party member when it was its turn. There were neither action points nor phases.
Unless the party members are completely autonomous (no one wants that) there has to be a functional way for you to control everyone.
I'm not sure what you even mean by that. It might be a good idea to have a key to switch between autonomous and manual control. Maybe just use autonomous mode so the party follows the main character so the player doesn't have to move every single party member when he's travelling.
taspool
Initiate
Posts: 6
Joined: November 26th, 2007, 5:09 pm

Post by taspool »

Option One is, I strongly suspect, far more likely to happen and therefore my choice. I'd love a new classic RPG in the vein of Wizardry 8 or Might & Magic, but the resources and demands I suspect make these a bridge too far for an independent developer (note what happened to SirTech).
Nomander
Initiate
Posts: 5
Joined: September 27th, 2007, 10:07 am

Post by Nomander »

While I like all options, I am going to have to say #1.

You have started an excellent story trilogy. Many people are happy with what you have produced. My suggestion would be to "improve" on what you already have accomplished and leave drastic changes to later projects.

One of the biggest complaints I have had with past games is that they try to reinvent the wheel with each release. All this ends up doing is creating an immediate "measurement" of the next release. While your efforts in new directions might be noble, it usually gets lost in peoples disappointment with the game feeling too different from the last which is something new projects and ventures do not suffer from.

I would focus on your current engine and push it to its absolute limits of capabilities. By the 3rd release, you should be reaching that apex of ability in your engine and players will gain new features in a comfortable shell.

There are still many aspects both small and large with your current engine to improve upon, please continue to do so. After you have finished this line of story, then you can create a new direction with a new story.


Personally, I would love to see a first person RPG similar to wizardry 8, but not at the expense of losing the structure you have already gained with this current project.

Party based games are also a good concept, but I think it would result in continuity issues with your current project. To quote the old software development principal, KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid). A party based system is a good idea on a new project, not this one.

Keep your project structured and focused. Improve upon what you have, make it better, but don't mess with the look, feel, and structure of the current one. Movies don't do well when they change drastically mid trilogy, games don't do well either.
realmzmaster
Officer [Gold Rank]
Officer [Gold Rank]
Posts: 429
Joined: November 21st, 2007, 7:32 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by realmzmaster »

I voted for option one because it would take the least amount of time to get a book II. I admit I am selfish I want Book II in my greedy little hands as soon as possible.
History is written by the winners!
User avatar
alpha
Steward
Posts: 64
Joined: December 3rd, 2007, 6:20 am
Location: Kiev, Ukraine
Contact:

Post by alpha »

Please #1, just some minor fixes/addons.
Xex
Apprentice
Posts: 36
Joined: November 29th, 2007, 5:26 am

Post by Xex »

Option 2 will be buildin gupon the first game. basically its just the first game + party (either you generate the party or people join you). Would it really require that much reworking of the engine?
User avatar
Jonas_Boggs
Initiate
Posts: 8
Joined: December 7th, 2007, 12:41 am

Post by Jonas_Boggs »

I rather like Book 1 just the way it is and other than perhaps a higher resolution option I vote to let Book 2 go the way of Book 1.
Maverik
Pledge
Posts: 2
Joined: December 8th, 2007, 1:00 am

Post by Maverik »

1) I've had Basilisk games bookmarked for as long as I can remember waiting for book 1.
2) I bought book 1 the first day it was available.
3) I signed up to the forum JUST to vote Option 1

That is all :)
Post Reply