Black Isle Studios Board Update

Remove all ads!

(Originally posted by Darien)

Lots of activity on the BIS message boards, so let's get to it.

Neverwinter Nights

David Gaider, Senior Designer:

Scripting: Learning how to script will take some time, obviously, but it's not too hard if you don't start off trying to be too ambitious.
One really cool thing is that the game will come with lots of pre-made scripts that you can drop right in, all with explanations on what they do. (These also work as examples)

The modules that come with the game will also serve as examples of how to do various things.

Best of all, the conversation editor is drag-and-drop and has user-friendly pull-down menus for the scripting. Without worrying about translating what you're writing, it can be as long and intricate as you like, too, with conversations across multiple characters and as many player responses as you wish.

Well, I don't want to talk too much about it because there are likely going to still be a lot of features in flux, but I really can't get over the conversation editor, myself.

I spent a couple of years working with the BG dialogue editor and I truly wish that I'd had this one to use. With the BG editor, you entered dialogue by string...you would have a big box up top that had the current string (which was whatever the NPC was saying).
Below that you could add various PC replies (or nothing if it was linked to another string...'CLICK TO CONTINUE'...or was the end of the dialogue). You could do scripting on the same screen (just type it in), but there were a lot of other frustrations.
For one, every time you entered a string, it had to be inserted into the database. As time wore on, that could take anywhere from 2-20 seconds per string, depending on how busy the servers were. May not sound like much, but when you type really quickly it can seem like forever waiting to move onto the next sentence.
For another, when you had really complex dialogues that linked between different characters (like with interjections) or linked a lot back on itself, it could be really hard to keep track of things. A lot of times we would have 'dangling' links that we wouldn't find until QA months later and not remember where it was supposed to go. Bad bad bad.
Even WORSE, if you had dialogues that had a set of questions (PC responses) that needed to be repeated, you only had two options...one, link back continually to a single string with the same set of responses (even if a question had just been answered) or two, re-type the PC responses in new strings.

How is the conversation editor better? Well, for starters:

- You type a string and it is entered instantly.
- You have a big screen where each string is tracked visually in a fountain-type format. You see what links to what, what the responses are, who's saying what (PC responses and NPC lines are in different colors and not only have names attached but you see the portraits as well)...and if it's taking up a lot of space you can 'minimize' a section (you click on the '-' sign next to it and all the links that followed that string disappear, leaving a '+' sign) or even double-click on a string to get rid of everything else that you're seeing so you can focus only on the links from that string and nothing else.
- Want to link a string to some other lines that you've already typed? Easy! Click on the string you're linking from, drag to the one you're linking to and voila...it reproduces the linked string below...greyed-out, too, to tell you that the link may go on from that point but it does so elsewhere.
- Want to link to a PC response over again? No prob. Click-and-drag, like above...the response appears greyed out below your string. You can even mix new responses and linked responses.
- Want to change the order of the responses? Pull down a menu, change your 'drag' option to 'order' instead of 'link' and click-and-drag the response to wherever you want it.
- Scripting's easy (as is making new and saveable scripts on the fly), you got options to tie dialogue to animations (want your NPC to laugh while its talking?), etc. etc.

There's lots of other things I could rave about, but as I said the whole editor's still subject to change. Even if we end up keeping 75% of what I've mentioned, I'll be happy. It is just so easy to use, I can't stress that enough. And that's not just me as a developer talking...that's me as a writer and a gamer.

OK, enough gushing out of me. It's late and I gotta write on that editor all day tomorrow...if I keep talking about it I'll be dreaming about it, too (and that can't be good...)

NWN Optimization: That's something that will have to be answered a lot later in development. The idea is to optimize it as much as possible... especially if we're going to ensure you can have a lot of players on one server, right? But system specs are something that can only be speculated about at this point and I am not the one to do that (when the programmers start talking, my eyes roll up into the back of my head...they find it so annoying...)

2D Art: Just a comment on something said by an earlier poster, where they said that the 2D art in BG looked a lot busier...
To a point, this is true. But I will say, from my experience working with the game, that how dense the area is depends on how dense you want to make it. And when we jump into an area at this point, keep in mind that for the most part no other characters or items have been placed there.

You can make a city or forest area complete with wandering peasants, animals and what-not, up to the point of your computer's capacity (what that ceiling will be, though, I personally don't know yet). Even items can be placed and will show up on-screen.

So as far as the areas looking relatively empty, this will change as game gets closer to completion and full-blown modules/areas are being crafted (what you can slap together in 5 minutes is fairly cool...what you can put down with some effort is pretty amazing).

3d instead of 2d: Sigh. It's not the only way to go, though. You really can't compare NWN to Eye of the Beholder, now, can you?

And truth be told, I don't think it was solely BG's isotropic view that 'revitalized' the CRPG genre.

Nor do I think that the 3D-style of NWN will be it's most important aspect. The quality will show in the end (or the proof's in the pudding, if you will), so all you non-believers can pout and panic if you like...I've got first-hand experience playing the game and I can speak from a gamer's perspective as well (having been a gamer waaaay longer than a developer). It looks GOOD.

Yes, not as good as a painted background for a 2D game...hopefully we can go and do another game like that at some point and improve upon the IE as well. That would still be cool (if a bit limiting in other respects).

NWN Screenshots: Yes, yes, yes...the NWN screenshots look 'dull'. Why some people base everything on screenshots I have no idea. 2d makes for great screenshots, that's already established.

And, yes, Star Wars Galaxies looks fantastic. NWN and that game really won't be competing, though. Star Wars Galaxies is massively multiplayer and sci-fi, to boot. NWN is fantasy, multiplayer (but not massively) and designed to put the tools in the hands of the user.

As for how well it will age? The on-line community that will be created around NWN will give it a lot of life. Beyond that, it will age like any other engine, I imagine, what do you think?

All I'm saying is that it's a given that screenshots for a 3D game don't generally match up with the game once you're in it...that you don't have to hinge everything on screenshots.

For those who simply don't like 3D games, though, not even the game's going to change your mind. I don't really seem the point in griping, then, though.

As for specific shots of what I'm talking about, I wish I could show 'em, really. But a shot wouldn't do it justice for the most part and they're not done their tweaking as it is (not by a long shot)...so, yeah, I guess in the end everyone has to just wait.

Me, I'd fly to an updated IE in a heartbeat. But there are so many opportunities for storytelling with NWN that I just get too excited. Not only do we get to put out a big single-player game that should be pretty cool (I hope), but with luck we'll get to play some masterpieces that other people make, for once.

Single Player in NWN: As far as the single player game goes for NWN, there's a large amount of focus being put into that, as well. NWN has a large design team on it writing the modules...and the modules are part of an overall story arc. Will it be as great as BG? That I don't really know...but NWN isn't being put out there with the thought that all of the responsibility for making a success lies in the hands of the fans.
The fans will give the game a long life. There's already a big community chomping at the bit, waiting for release to make their own modules. And all it takes is one relentless, inspired wit to make a module that thousands of other fans will play...and perhaps be inspired in turn.

But we're not betting entirely on that. That's where the single-player game comes in. It's big...but I think the focus so far when talking about NWN has been completely on the module-building side. Likely for good reason, as that's the most innovative part, but that's not all of it.

And, incidentally, I don't disagree with you. There are some effects with 3D animation that just don't look the same, like the aforementioned spiders. And trees...wow, did it ever take them a long time to come up with trees that didn't look like they were cut out from a cardboard box.
But I think they did it. The new trees look really good. I love the little details that come up automatically on the castle tiles, the little flags and pieces of garbage and crates and stuff. And believe it or not, it all still looks good even close up.
And if we could pull off a game as massive and complex as BG2 by sheer sweat and willpower, then the fact that the same kind of effort is going into NWN gives me considerable relief. The team (and especially Ray and Greg) just aren't willing to compromise their vision...which is good, because NWN has a lot of promises to live up to.

And so did BG, as I recall...and nobody believed us back then, either.

Dungeon Creation and Exploring: You can do something that's half-decent in about 15 minutes. With effort, you can do something really fantastic. A lot of the NWN screenshots look (I think) a bit on the 'empty' side simply because full modules with lots of NPC's and items and stuff filling up dead space haven't been done, yet.

I have seen, though, what can be done with effort. Tobyn, one of the artists on NWN, used the city tileset to make a city block that looked just astounding. And when you're in the game at ground level, what's surprising is that it looks even better.
I've had reservations in the past about the graphical look of 3D. Some early LithTech stuff, for instance, looked really blocky...but it's already come a long way. 2D painted backgrounds will always make for better screenshots, but decently-done 3D makes for a better experience.

The life of an engine that's built to evolve will be, hopefully, a bit longer. As far as it needing expansions, I have to agree. There's a large number of tile-sets that comes with the game, but that does restrict everyone to having the same kind of 'feel' to their modules. I'm sure there's a few wits out there who will alter the tilesets (it can be done), but for the most part new modules have to come out.
I don't know what the plans are for doing so, though, but by the talk it seems to be a no-brainer. After all, we have the capability of doing new modules with new graphics...and so will any other developers that care to do so (wouldn't that be cool?).

Skins for Sarevok and Jon Irenicus for NWN: Do you mean me, personally? Not a chance. I have a little artistic ability, but I haven't a clue how to use the art programs they have.

As for Bioware, I'm not sure that they'd want to. It isn't the BG series, after all, but I suppose you never know.

Incidentally, though, there's a LOT of room to tweak how your character looks (even down to hairstyles and facial hair and stuff). You can easily make a fighter wearing some very evil-looking plate (NWN specifically has 'evil' and 'good' versions of armor), so Sarevok would be pretty easy. As for Irenicus, I imagine it wouldn't be too hard for some wit to add in some of the detail he has, like the facial scars and stuff. Changing the graphics in NWN (like the skins) is a bit more advanced but still fully do-able...I imagine if the NWN on-line community gets big enough (and all indications are that this will be so), I bet someone will do it.

Bob McCabe, Writing & Design:

Old NWN Guilds: There may be the occasional reference to the original title, and possibly general references to the community-at-large. But for the most part, it’ll be more of a salute then a ceremony. Perhaps as we get closer to the end of the project, and we find holes that need to be filled, and we have a stronger sense of how it will all work legally, we can ask the community for their tales and exploits within the realm of AOL.

Personally, I wouldn’t mind adding in a few more books if we have the time and word count available but really, we’ll just have to wait and see.

Guild histories/crests: Well, I put together most of the books for inclusion in our Neverwinter Campaign, and I basically stuck with the official source material. There was talk of using some guild content and tales from the original Neverwinter Nights title that was hosted by AOL, but it was felt that specific, fan-created material would be better served by groups like the Neverwinter Consortium; as far as I know, they’re the leading group dedicated to re-creating the original title with the Neverwinter Toolset.

Character Vault and 20th Level Characters: It's not really too big of an issue. On the same token, I could write up a realistic character for a pen-and-paper game, and then convince the DM that I had roleplayed him over the course of the last few years. Really, is anyone getting hurt? I've never been able to keep up-to-date on the idea of the Vault (haha!), but I'm figuring that the idea of it was so that a 20th level character would be relatively as powerful as any other 20th level character. The idea is to try to prevent stuff like you see on Diablo I right now (a game I play far too often ), where a first level character will have 400 HPs and infinite spells and attributes in the hundreds. With the CV, you'd not be able to do that - a first level character would have less than 20 HPs, 25 points worth of statistics, and equipment with a low number of item points.

Pssst: I got a 20th level NWN character for sale on e-bay... but you can have him for just 500 bucks!

Rob Bartel, Co-Lead Designer:

Guild histories/crests: With regards to the oNWN guild crests, your point about copyright concerns is a good one. As it turns out, texture conservation is also one of the better methods of optimizing the game right now (it can result in faster loading times, better overall performance, and more detail in the textures we do display). Given that there are both legal and technical concerns surrounding this, I think the best solution would be to find some other method of recognizing our oNWN roots. I'll ask around the office a bit for a few ideas and get in touch with you.

Brent Knowles, Co-Lead Designer:

NWN Debugger: A debugger would definitely be useful but is highly unlikely to appear in any initial release.
At BioWare our scripters have learned several creative tricks to get around the lack of debuggers in our scripting languages. Functions like SpeakString("script made it here") are very useful to isolate bugs. As well we practice incremental implementation, in that we implement only small isolated segments of plot, and test them independently until we are satisfied with them.

Baldur's Gate II: Throne of Bhaal

David Gaider, Senior Designer:

End of the Infinity Engine: If I've already stated my case, I don't really see the point in responding to further posts just for the sake of argument...and I would hardly call it avoiding.

But you think we're being dumb by putting aside the IE? OK, then...'allow me to clue you in, if I may':

1) It does not make economic sense to go back and rework the IE. At this point it's been tweaked and played with so many times that even small changes that are made cause numerous problems in almost unrelated places. At this point it is far more economical to take what we have learned and start anew.

2) Sure...I guess it goes without saying that we could pump out more IE games. We could put out a BG3, BG4 or even use the IE for brand new series. Heck, with the money we'd make, we could put out five games at once, all with the IE! Let me back-track for a second, though. You said you'd buy good games, regardless of the engine of fancy-schmancy graphics, right? Well, there's a name for the 'sound economic reasoning' that causes successful games to be cloned endlessly. It's called Milking It. And they are not good for a reason.
Even in ToB, when the designers were going through certain areas, we kinda looked at each other and went "Wow...have we done this encounter before?" It was a real struggle to keep things fresh. Every time we thought of something cool or different we wanted to do, we encountered a limitation with the engine that made it impossible. We've milked the series enough, I think...sure, some new stories could be told, but not in as many new ways or varieties as you think. And the frustration involved with trying to continue would only increase. Going to a new engine is a necessary evolution, and can only improve what we're doing.

3)As far as releasing the IE to the public? I didn't say it wouldn't happen. Who knows? It's not my place to decide what happens to it. It's also nobody's right to demand it. I imagine there's a lot of proprietary code in there...who knows how much will get re-used? Maybe lots, maybe none. Regardless, I've worked with the IE from a designer standpoint. And while I haven't worked with it as a programmer, Mark Darrah has always maintained exactly the same point I have (yet more vehemently)...the IE is not in a state to be released. What good would releasing that do? Who would it help besides those people who could pick over its code carefully...and are likely already over at TeamBG or wherever working with it or using some other code that's simpler. Believe me...there's NO way I could ship the IE to your average user and they'd be able to do much with it.

And I DO agree...there's a lot of potential out there for people with creativity. I just don't think releasing the IE (if doing so was even possible) would be much of a boon.

And that's pretty much all I have to say on the subject. It's pretty complimentary that you guys like the games so much that you want the engine to carry on...but I really don't think the ends you want will be served by that. By all means, though...continue to call for it. Ray and Greg are a pair of great guys who have always listened to the community. If they thought there was a demand for it and that releasing the source code was both legally feasible and a good idea, then I can't see why they wouldn't do it.

Yeah, the whole computer market back then was quite a bit different. A game like the Gold Box SSI games could make a living off of the niche D'er market back then...although I imagine it wasn't much of one.

All I'm saying is that it's going to be pretty hard to maintain a good story and some originality when you keep running into road-blocks, engine-wise. I think ToB is about as far as we could take it...and there are lots of things we tried to do that sort of had to be cobbled together (and I think it shows...whereas doing those things with stuff the engine was meant to work with earlier on doesn't). Could ToB have been supported a full-blown sequel? Story-wise, heck yeah. Engine-wise...I honestly don't know. Never mind the high-level stuff vis a vis the D rules...I'm talking keeping the players interest through lots of new & different encounters and not bringing up the 'been there, done that' for all the fans who've been around since BG1. And one has to keep in mind especially that in a CRPG the story is always tied intrinsically to the gameplay...it doesn't stand on its own like in regular narrative.

Imoen's Belt: Gaaah, not this question again...
OK...Imoen can't die during the first dungeon. Wrecks the story. Instead, when she gets to 0 HP, she starts a script where she gets scared and runs off. The way we gave these abilities to creatures (indeed, all creatures) is through items.

Originally, Imoen had an 'invisible' belt in the slot. However, late in the day we found out that if someone was poking around on Imoen's inventory screen that this 'item' could be clicked on and momentarily moved (but not removed)...and this also tended to crash the game.

Not good. So we made the item real.

HOWEVER...I'm sure that if you read the description of the belt and REALLY REALLY try and use your imagination, any one of you could come up with a good story reason as to why she had it as well, no?

Familiar Changes: I went on the boards back then to get some ideas from people on what kind of changes they wanted with their familiars. A lot of the suggestions revolved around new dialogue, but I told everyone then that any dialogue changes would be very limited.

I never said there was going to be a Familiar-specific item, nor did I make any promises. I asked for ideas and I implemented some of them.

As for the fairy dragon, that is supposed to be 48 HP, same as all the other familiars. I don't know why that wasn't changed at the same time its abilities were added. I'll pass that onto the live team, thx.

BG2 and 3rd Edition Rules: We actually did most of the BG2 characters in 3rd edition back when we received the books from WotC (waaay back) as a way of learning the system.

How you slice the levels depends on what point in the game you're doing the characters. At the beginning of BG2, I think they're about 8th level...by the end of ToB, heck they're at least 16th or 17th (that is, if you don't want to go by the upcoming 3rd edition high-level rules).

If you're going by 10th level, I think you got Minsc right. Imoen, though, is better as a higher-level mage (a 5th level wizard doesn't have many spells...I'm thinking Rogue 3/Wizard 7) and Haer'Dalis is more of a bard (Bard 6/Fighter 4...mind you, someone later suggested adding the Duelist prestige class out of the Fighter/Monk book, and that didn't sound too bad).

We pegged Nalia as a Rogue/Sorcerer, Jan as a Rogue/Illusionist, Yoshimo as a Rogue with an Assassin prestige class...hmmm...can't remember the rest off-hand. Might have to dig up the character sheets sometime.

Viconia: This topic comes up repeatedly. I'm sure this has all been mentioned before, but here it is again:

1) Viconia was exiled from Menzoberranzan before the events in the Drizzt books. Viconia is likely much older than Drizzt.

2) Viconia has no idea what became of her house after she left. She assumes that it fell...but she would have had no idea that House Do'Urden was responsible for House DeVir's fall. Matron Ginafae was not Viconia's mother...it was another Matron Mother after Viconia's mother was killed, and a seperate falling out with Lolth.

3) If she did know that House Do'Urden was involved with DeVir's fall, she wouldn't care.

4) All the nobles of a House must be killed in order for there to be no repercussions. Servants and soldiers and such are generally either sacrificed, sold into slavery...or, I suppose, put on display in other cities as examples of what displeasing Lolth means. Technically, I suppose Viconia is still a noble of House DeVir...although I doubt the issue will ever come up.

2d Rendered Backgrounds: And I'd have to agree with Rob. Sure...the 2D-rendered backgrounds are very detailed, and part of that detail is being sacrificed for versatility. The casual gamer who wants to create something is NOT going to be able to create an area using the IE. You have to be an artist, first, to get something even approaching half-decent...then you have to go through the pain-staking clipping process, etc. etc.

With the NWN engine, the casual gamer can make what they want to. There are still restrictions, of course...something like a Machine of Lum the Mad COULD be made, but is likely going to have to be done by a professional artist/animator.

Now, the next thing you might say is that you have no interest in making your own adventures...you want us to make you adventures, and you want them to be as beautiful and detailed as BG and BG2.

I say why not do both? We can work on making our own adventures using the NWN engine...making unique animations like a Machine of Lum the Mad and similar stuff...all of which players can afterwards use in their adventures. You think WE don't want to use a more accessible engine, too?

And as far as 3D not looking as good...I have to disagree. It looks better than a lot of other 3D games I have seen, and it will continue to improve over time. Right now, we may be sacrificing the fact that the background art for every area amounts to a beautiful painting (albeit a flat one)...but what if we can get to that point with 3D and have that versatility?

Just one comment: I don't think there's any reason to bash someone who prefers the 2D environment. It has its advantages...one being the capability of plugging in some real great 2D art.
It does have its disadvantages too, though, of course.

In the end, it's just personal preference. There are some people that are just not going to like the sacrifice in detail that comes with moving to 3D, no matter how good the 3D environment we try to make. All we can hope for is that the other advantages of the engine make up for that.

I'm not knocking the IE, either. Heck, to me it's like an old shoe...by moving onto a new engine I've become a Beginner again. From an advanced scripter to yelling across the room "HOW do you set a Global?" Icky icky poo.

I love the art, I love the sprites...the gameplay altogether was very intuitive. But when you know as I do what that engine was limited to and the options that are opened up by moving to a good 3D engine...well, for me it was a no-brainer. Not everyone will agree, and I don't expect them to.

I don't think we've ever ruled out making a game in a similar style to BG, with a 2D-style engine. We may do something like that again, certainly...like I said, 2D has its advantages.

Just it's doubtful that we'd use the Infinity Engine.

We can only work on so many projects at once, though.