Sir F. Raynal mini-Interview

[Dino-Fly]

Graphical could mean good graphics or PG18 violence (graphic).

[Lupin]

Maybe he means less cartoonish style and more like BGE, remember he said he likes BGE quite a lot. I expect something new between Lba1, Lba2 and BGE.

[ChaosFish]

BGE basically ripped off LBA2.

[Streg]

Originally Posted by ChaosFish

BGE basically ripped off LBA2.

[Darkflame]

Only so much as LBA1 ripped of Zelda. (ie, in very simplistic/shallow ways).
BG&E I thinks more inspired by Wind Waker, only a lot faster paced and more interesting.

Style wise I'll be interested too see where LBA goes.
Some BG&E things I think would suit it very well. (eg, remember the very pretty point-sprite based tree near the start).

I wouldnt want a "realistic" LBA though, I prefer a pretty stylistic look.

[Lupin]

Originally Posted by Darkflame

I wouldnt want a "realistic" LBA though, I prefer a pretty stylistic look.

Yeah, me too. Lba2 was just fine. Thought I'm confident Fred has his reasons to want it graphically more realistic, and I'm sure It'll be very good anyway.

[leoboe]

I think the best way to keep a High-Graphik-Game "LBAish" would be the Team Fortress2-Graphik engine
The Characters are awesome and the style i really "cute"
But I hope LBA2 won't be more brutal
I wouldn't like a LBA-Game in which you kill the characters to spread lots of blood

[Lupin]

Who would like it ? If I can talk to him tonight I'll ask him what he means by more mature graphical style but I don't think mature = violent.

[leoboe]

Yeah ask him
It would be awesome
And don't forget the Citadell/Italy-Question

[Lupin]

I thought quetchKiwi had an answer for this already. He was supposed to post it.
I'll ask if I can anyway.

[LBAWinOwns]

I'm not at all an expert in this subject, I'm a lot more of a n00b, but seriously, didn't LBA have astonishing graphics for it's time being released?

[Darkflame]

yes, it did.
And so did their previous games.
Adeline was always pretty cutting edge.

The difference is, these days, cutting edge takes HUGGGGEEEEE bugdets, having smart coders doing engines and a good art guy isnt enough

[LBAWinOwns]

Couldn't there just be one single powerful engine for all new games ? Wouldn't that work?

[elmuerte]

And Zelda ripped off Adventure

[ChaosFish]

"Realistic" computer graphic is just dull in most cases. Surrealistic all the way!

[elmuerte]

Originally Posted by Darkflame

The difference is, these days, cutting edge takes HUGGGGEEEEE bugdets, having smart coders doing engines and a good art guy isnt enough

Compared to back then maybe. But just like in the movie industry, games with the largest budgets are not always the most cutting edge. For example Halo 3's PR budget is the same as GoW development cost.

[Darkflame]

Originally Posted by El_Muerte

Compared to back then maybe. But just like in the movie industry, games with the largest budgets are not always the most cutting edge. For example Halo 3's PR budget is the same as GoW development cost.

Arr, but I didnt say it that way around.
To be cutting edge you need a big budget these days.

However, not all big-budgets result in cutting-edgness.
Indeed, the vaste majority do not.

Of course, its possible for a small team to be ""cutting edge", but not really in a graphical way, not anymore.

[elmuerte]

Most of the cutting edge graphical stuff is produced by a small group. There are usually more artists on a game than developers. And most of the developers work on gameplay rather than engine.
The question always remains if that stuff is really needed.
Seriously, wtf does The Sims 2 have 150 people working on it!?
The best games are produced in small teams. (core developer, excluding services like voice acting or localization).

[leoboe]

Yeah look at Crytek
Nobody knowed the small team before they made Far Cry and Far Cry WAS a really cutting edge-Game
And by the way Crysis is gonna be another one

[DarkOnistar]

Uplink, Darwina, Defcon.. were games made by a small group.
They were graphical, they were simple.. and thats what people liked.

Blades of Exile, Blades of Avernium.. - ya know.. games by Spiderweb software.
And to think.. all those games were made by only 1 person! (and they're still pretty popular)

Even World of Warcraft wasn't graphical, but thats taken off quite well.

Its an idea. Not the way of making it look pretty, but if its an interesting idea and it works and you can get people interested.. then yea it will work.
- With LBA3 though, I expect more freedom (not restricted to an area.. but can go anywhere if found the means - although LBA2 you could a couple of places though..)

Side-quests have been a new thing as well. I would be amazed if you had small quests along with the main storyline of LBA3. For example. Main quest says go to an island, but somebody on the boat asks you a favor to do somewhere else, you get rewarded with something small (perhaps a little cash).


Now I'm not the judge of games or anything like that, but what do you think about side-quests in a game like LBA2? Its been a thought that has been bugging me since I bought Oblivion with my new computer a while back. - Oh.. and alternative quest completing.. (like Deus Ex) - have more choice.. but you can have the plot sway away and then back into the main plot.

[Darkflame]

Most of the cutting edge graphical stuff is produced by a small group. There are usually more artists on a game than developers. And most of the developers work on gameplay rather than engine.
The question always remains if that stuff is really needed.
Seriously, wtf does The Sims 2 have 150 people working on it!?
The best games are produced in small teams. (core developer, excluding services like voice acting or localization).
__________________

Your speaking of engines and such, which are indeed possible to be made with a small group.

But still, thats a group and its only an engine.
In LBA's era it was 2 people doing the engine code if you were lucky.

For alone in the dark, they even have to write their own wireframe engine just for doing the static backdrop perspectives.

I'm not talking about "best" I'm simply saying you cant do amazing graphics (that is, graphics generaly considered amazing) with a small team these days. Unless your talking of extremely stylised so little detail is needed, but even that takes heavy codeing work.

And even if the codeing work is done, those massive teams of artists are needed.

Roughly speaking;

(Amount of detail you want per area) x (Amount of areas) = Total Artistic Workload.

Which can quickly become huge, especialy if we are talking about a genra which has few excuses for repetition. (like Adventure games dont. Cooridoor FPS and RPGs can get away with repeated landscape a bit more).


As for Sim's, not sure about 150, but it probably needed a lot of work for all the bazzlion-odd small modeling jobs and making sure it all fits seamlessly. (not hard work, but very boring, and timetaking). Probably a game that needs a lot of testing and debugging too.

In fact, it was probably the big teams in Sim's that inspired Will Wright to focus so much on procedrals, which do offer hope for small teams again. (The Spore team is vastely smaller then the Sims team)

Uplink, Darwina, Defcon.. were games made by a small group.
They were graphical, they were simple.. and thats what people liked.

Dunno.
I loved the Tron style of Darwinia, but style-wise the others wernt anything special.
(Even if Uplink is a kick-ass game)

Now I'm not the judge of games or anything like that, but what do you think about side-quests in a game like LBA2? Its been a thought that has been bugging me since I bought Oblivion with my new computer a while back. - Oh.. and alternative quest completing.. (like Deus Ex) - have more choice.. but you can have the plot sway away and then back into the main plot.

70% main game, 30% secrets, with the majority of secrets making the main game a bit easier or interesting to play.
Thats my formular I like

Think of how the Zelda games deal with it. You can rewarded for exploring and working out puzzles by finding heart pieces over the landscape. These heart pieces increase your health slightly.
Not essiential by any means, but it feels a nice reward when you find one, and if you get stuck on a dungoen or boss you can always go hunting for hearts to make it easier.

In general I feel theres nothing wrong with "liner" games, however.
The whole non-liner buisness has been hugely overated, imo. If a games good, and a story flows well, then I dont care if my path is fixed.
(aka, Prince of Persia: Sands of Time, or Eternal Darkness)

[Jasiek]

I'm If I remember correctly, some old review or interview I red ages ago before my MBN time , LBA 1 was inspired bas some ZX spectrum isometric game with a castle labyrinth or something like that.

Anyway, I could even like LBA3 to be using same engine and user interface as BG&E, of course it won't, however that's the EXACT style and shape and epicness and pace, I would like LBA3 to have. And If it really will be 4-5 maybe six years for it to come, then who knows! Maybe I could model for it Would be awesome to do even some tiny bits for an LBA game.

[Darkflame]

Personaly I think the Jade engine would be fine for LBA.
Maybe Jade2 or something, tweaking and upgradeing for whatever specs they aim for.

I dont see the need for them to develop an engine from scratch, adding the types of movement in should be fairly easy. Ditto for magic ball.

Id rather they concentrate of gameplay right then worry too much about making a new engine. (of course, if some new feature means a new engine would be easier then retro-fitting Jade, then they should do that)

[Lupin]

LBA seems like a game that needs an engine of its own. I don't think the Jade engine would fit.
Thought this really depends on many things, and we can't know what's best for LBA3, and even if we can, what's the point ?

[Darkflame]

Whats the point of anything?

Its fun to speculate.