72 réponses à ce sujet

[kamal_]

^^^ game dev budgets and sales projections make it so, not technical reasons. Rpgs have a long history of being behind graphically, with only some exceptions. More people want to play virtual football or shoot ****s/zombies than cast magic missile, apparently.

[kamal_]

The evil Germans from WW2 are apparently filtered word on the forums.

[foil-]

-Semper- wrote...

foil- wrote...

I don't find a lot of the new DX11 features like tesselation delivering like they promised to but that seems to be more related to limited graphics card power resulting in very minor implementation.

that's simply because the current console generation can't handle these features, but in the same time they dictade where the money is. not many developers are putting the extra work and budget into the pc because of the relatively low sales numbers. the power of the available graphics cards are quite sufficient^^

crysis2 with all the features enabled.

I would disagree with that.  Even with Crysis tesselation was minor.   I know you can max out most games these days on an nVidia 580, but I don't find the use of the DX11 technology terribly ambitious.  Throw in some cloth physics, high res textures (more a memory limitation) and other goodies and you're now looking at purchasing an sli solution.  The developers don't really push DX11 elements terribly hard with current graphics technology.  Crysis looks very nice for a DX9/10 game and all, but I saw areas with the DX11 implementation where it was lacking.  Dragon Age 2 is the same and probably even more noticable in the lack of pushing tesselation terribly hard.  And I can't even play Crysis with DX11 features on my "wimpy" nVidia 560Ti without dropping under 20fps. Even though its not that powerful of a card in the whole lineup available, its probably still above the sweet spot that most developers are aiming for.  And nVidia is supposed to be more tesselation friendly than AMD to begin with.

I was thinking of it this way.  We've seen three generations of graphics cards come and go since Crysis 1 was released.  Crysis 1 blew my mind.  Crysis 2 while very nice, is not the mind blower of today.  Mostly I beleive because they have hit a hardware limitation.  Somewhat because consoles need to be considered.

People complained about Crysis 1 being a performance hog, but even with hacking the highest settings to work with my 8800GT, it played fairly well for me.  Now on my 560Ti, with DX11, its a slug.

Anyway, I love the idea of what DX11 can offer, but I think we will need to wait for the southern island die shrink before we see cards that can handle it very well.  That's why I brought the wimpy 560Ti in the first place, I expected southern island to be here already and didn't wan't to blow a wad of cash right before upgrading again.

Modifié par foil-, 13 août 2011 - 03:23 .

[dunniteowl]

All that above dialog, though, does put a finer point on Mr. Dell's dialog in the video demo where his contention is that current polygon animation is currently a matter of pushing more power at it and that there are still some extreme limits based on that alone. The DX11 and the Open GL processing currently rely heavily on waiting for or capitalizing on advances in processing power, memory improvements or speed improvements of those processors and memory.

I think, in light of that, we can at least admit that there could be a good way to get more out of video with this other direction of creating visual representation on screen.

I will say, the more I looked at the video demo, I thought, "Well, it's a good thing those guys admit they're not video artists or render boys, cause it's looking pretty choppy in terms of smoothness of graphics. That said, though, the use of so MANY models and so finely grained, it's still pretty amazing. I watched as they went from zoomed way way out to zoomed in on individual small pebble sized rocks with grass interspersed. In all that zooming, there didn't seem to be any glitching based on too many polygons, or through swapping, or indications of a pause to let the video catch up with the zooming.

Again, I think this is exciting. Not because I think it's necessarily the next great thing, but it could be. If nothing else, this method could be integrated into current technology and this could be a boost to even the use of current poly pushing cards, because it's described as more of a search engine method to particle or atom method. I note that in his first video, there was a strong reference to attempting to get one or the other card manufacturers of processor makers interested in their technology.

So. If there are a little hiccups or inconsistencies, it could be that the main goal is to develop it enough for a real "payday" by getting it bought by ATI (which is now AMD), Nvidia or Intel. In any case, I hope that it's more real than ideal.

dno

[nicethugbert]

kamal_ wrote...

^^^ game dev budgets and sales projections make it so, not technical reasons. Rpgs have a long history of being behind graphically, with only some exceptions. More people want to play virtual football or shoot ****s/zombies than cast magic missile, apparently.

Lots of popular movies involve swords or spells.  So, swords and spells are not what keep so many people away from RPG games.  What turns off many people toward RPGs is the part of an RPG that interfere with action, and it's not always the dialog, although some people can't stand dialog trees either.

It's all that clunk such as inventroy tetris, dumpster diving, slow movement, slow response, bad animations, borked stealth, and all sorts of clunk commonly found in RPGs.  Many times it's just the acceptance of lower standards, second rate graphics for example.

[dunniteowl]

You know, NTB, I don't think your list really hits it on the head for the common gamerus gamerus. That list is pretty much what turns off most folks who are already interested in playing some form of RPG video game. I think the idea for most of the average gamers is that RPGs are those things those geeky nerdy untouchable folks in high school played. For some strange reason, some folks never grow past those associations they made back in high school and it's more of them rather than less.

They'll get past their poor eating habits, or learn to eat new things, even watch other than reality TV, but don't ask them to cross that line of nerdyness -- gasp. I really do think that's it. Of course, those other 'bars' you mention will certainly stop many of them in their tracks if they 'give it a chance' to see if they'll like it.

I think the thing that really sets D&D based RPGs apart from all others is the sheer volume of things you have to at least grasp in a basic sense compared to strafe left, strafe right, duck, jump, shoot in shooter style FPSs and it's more than the average sports gamer can handle in terms of unfamiliar terminology and tactics. After all, I cannot grasp the dynamics of sports games and the amount of data my Son-in-law sifts through in a matter of seconds for football and basketball video games is nothing short of astounding.

So as gamerus fanaticus or gamerus gravis, these things could act as barriers to crossing over into new genres in either direction -- I admit, this gamerus gravis hasn't any real interest in spending the amount of time necessary to learn to play Madden 2011 to become proficient. I have none whatever in baseball, basketball or even hockey (which I happen to appreciate more than those others as a sport.) So I can only imagine that the same would hold true in the opposite direction. If the zeal isn't there in the first place, or even basic desire to fantasize about being a hero in a medieval setting, then the simple weight of new data alone could act as an insurmountable barrier to playing.

Let's say (and I think I'm being generous here) that 20% of the harder core gamers of other genres are willing to cross over. And let's posit that most of them will give a dedicated college effort to getting into and learning the new games. Even so, once you're at that point, then I think the things you mention:

What turns off many people toward RPGs is the part of an RPG that interfere with action...
(and)...It's all that clunk such as inventroy tetris, dumpster diving, slow movement, slow response, bad animations, borked stealth, and all sorts of clunk commonly found in RPGs. Many times it's just the acceptance of lower standards, second rate graphics for example.

At that point, I think you might be right. And, of course, it's those who will tell their buddies and family members (or by visual example of someone getting sucked into a new game in a serious way) that help pave the way for them to cross the barriers I mention in the first place and give it a whirl.

So I guess you could say I'm agreeing with you in a completely different way.

dunniteowl

[kamal_]

One would think that the most successful spell slinging movies of all time, based on the most successful swords and sorcery books, would get triple A games made for them, but one would be wrong. See the Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings single player games. The only successful fantasy Rpg pushing the graphics frontier has been Oblivion. Witcher 2 and Skyrim are just catching up to fps graphics, and are still behind the kinds of graphics you see in fps games (MW3, Rage).

Wow is a huge success, but not because of super advanced graphics.

[foil-]

WoW is the big indicator of what holds people back. Too much story telling in a fashion that doesn't speak to the women gamers/non-gamers. WoW makes a killing in "the boxoffice" and its all about the nerdishness.  I've heard many of the fans will "click through" any dialogue as fast as they can.  I hate to stereotype, especially from word of mouth, but that seams to be the trend.

Go around and ask your friends if they like to read. I can count on one hand the number of my friends that love to read (or even acquaintances). Its always astounded me.

I think BioWare and Dragon Age are doing great things to break into presenting fantasy for a wider audience and especially women gamers/non-gamers. Even with all the backlash at Dragon Age 2, the amount of women who loved it because of the story of the relationship of Hawke with the companions he picks up along the way is astounding. I heard one podcast recently that went into the differences between the masculine story and feminine story in video games (Dragon Age 2 being a feminine story). It was an interesting and eye opening listen.

Anywho, I do agree that RPGs need to pick it up on the graphics front and that they are getting closer.

Dno reminded me of another item/advantage mentioned in the above video: no drawdistance or items "popping in" to view. That pop into view thing is very jarring and I would love to see the end of it. I don't recall it ever effecting NWN2 however. Could be wrong.

Modifié par foil-, 13 août 2011 - 02:56 .

[kamal_]

^^^ functionally Infinite draw distance has already been done. There are infinite draw mods for Morrowind and Oblivion for instance, where you can see the entirety of the provinces as long as you have line of sight to their ends. Draw distance is a function of the devs limiting things to be friendlier to graphics cards.

[nicethugbert]

dunniteowl wrote...

You know, NTB, I don't think your list really hits it on the head for the common gamerus gamerus. That list is pretty much what turns off most folks who are already interested in playing some form of RPG video game. I think the idea for most of the average gamers is that RPGs are those things those geeky nerdy untouchable folks in high school played. For some strange reason, some folks never grow past those associations they made back in high school and it's more of them rather than less.

They'll get past their poor eating habits, or learn to eat new things, even watch other than reality TV, but don't ask them to cross that line of nerdyness -- gasp. I really do think that's it. Of course, those other 'bars' you mention will certainly stop many of them in their tracks if they 'give it a chance' to see if they'll like it.

I think the thing that really sets D&D based RPGs apart from all others is the sheer volume of things you have to at least grasp in a basic sense compared to strafe left, strafe right, duck, jump, shoot in shooter style FPSs and it's more than the average sports gamer can handle in terms of unfamiliar terminology and tactics. After all, I cannot grasp the dynamics of sports games and the amount of data my Son-in-law sifts through in a matter of seconds for football and basketball video games is nothing short of astounding.

So as gamerus fanaticus or gamerus gravis, these things could act as barriers to crossing over into new genres in either direction -- I admit, this gamerus gravis hasn't any real interest in spending the amount of time necessary to learn to play Madden 2011 to become proficient. I have none whatever in baseball, basketball or even hockey (which I happen to appreciate more than those others as a sport.) So I can only imagine that the same would hold true in the opposite direction. If the zeal isn't there in the first place, or even basic desire to fantasize about being a hero in a medieval setting, then the simple weight of new data alone could act as an insurmountable barrier to playing.

Let's say (and I think I'm being generous here) that 20% of the harder core gamers of other genres are willing to cross over. And let's posit that most of them will give a dedicated college effort to getting into and learning the new games. Even so, once you're at that point, then I think the things you mention:

What turns off many people toward RPGs is the part of an RPG that interfere with action...
(and)...It's all that clunk such as inventroy tetris, dumpster diving, slow movement, slow response, bad animations, borked stealth, and all sorts of clunk commonly found in RPGs. Many times it's just the acceptance of lower standards, second rate graphics for example.

At that point, I think you might be right. And, of course, it's those who will tell their buddies and family members (or by visual example of someone getting sucked into a new game in a serious way) that help pave the way for them to cross the barriers I mention in the first place and give it a whirl.

So I guess you could say I'm agreeing with you in a completely different way.

dunniteowl

I think you have a good point about games, geeks, and such.  But, what are the underlying factors that make a game attractive to a geek but not to a non-geek?  I suspect that traditional RPGs have more of those factors than the more action oriented games have while lacking the factors that action gamers tend to prefer.  I've never seen action players happy with second rate graphics.  It is common to hear RPG players say that first rate graphics are not their priority.  You can even see in RPG game forums open revulsion towards action gamers and a deliberate choice of game features designed to keep action gamers away.  Action gamers tend to just want what they want for the sake of direct enjoyment, not for the sake of keeping others from playing the game.

The nerdiness of a game refers to it's image.  The game's description can be reworded to avoid shallow negative associations.  But, ultimitely, the feature set and the quality of the game are what keep impressions positive. 

I don't subscribe to genre terms.  I find them arbitrary and ill suited to catch my interests.

[nicethugbert]

kamal_ wrote...

One would think that the most successful spell slinging movies of all time, based on the most successful swords and sorcery books, would get triple A games made for them, but one would be wrong. See the Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings single player games. The only successful fantasy Rpg pushing the graphics frontier has been Oblivion. Witcher 2 and Skyrim are just catching up to fps graphics, and are still behind the kinds of graphics you see in fps games (MW3, Rage).

Wow is a huge success, but not because of super advanced graphics.

I think the reason for that is because the gamers that associate their prefered gaming experience with the term RPG traditionally don't hold first rate graphics at a high priority.  That's my observation.  It could also involve brand exploitation.  Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings fans tend to assume that anything with those associations are quality products because they expect it to be such.  Same thing happened with DA2.  DAO fans bought it without even trying the demo then proceeded to be bitterly and profusely disappointed.  They assumed that DA meant what they thought it meant when it could have quite easily meant something else.  To this day they stubbornly insist that DA2 is not a DA game as if they had the last word on the matter.

Incidentally, a module based on Man of Fire would be interesting.

Modifié par nicethugbert, 14 août 2011 - 03:05 .

[foil-]

nicethugbert wrote...

Incidentally, a module based on Man of Fire would be interesting.

Finally, a module made for my character.  Supporting hero of course: http://social.biowar...bums/13701/1817

Modifié par foil-, 14 août 2011 - 03:29 .

[The Fred]

nicethugbert wrote...

Game companies know that community is here. But, they want to construct and manage the community to maximize profits. It seems that they have decided that games such as the NWN series are not the most profitable.

I completely see that game devs are doing a job - they're not philanthropists. However, it seems to me odd when I think of how popular all these great RPGs and other games have been. Maybe we're just a tiny minority, but you would think that there would be a market for "intelligent" games. I would have thought that some clever sparks at least would be able to put together a business model which is profitable whilst not designed to screw us over for ever penny we have. Admittedly I don't know all that much about big-business game production but sometimes people need to think outside the box and take risks to do something which isn't just a repetition of what been successful(ish) before.

Either way, I'm slightly optomistic. As games move towards disposable playing styles, big-name FPSes and MMOs, they'll create a void in the market for really good quality games. Eventually someone will spot that and make something there which is successful just because we're starved for something half-decent. Then attention will be brought back to the sector. At least, one can hope. In the mean-time I have a campaign to be making.

[nicethugbert]

I don't doubt that there is a market for intelligent games. I suspect that the suits have calculated that there are bigger gaming markets than intelligent games.

How often do you see a game make big strides? Most "good" games are incrementally better than their predecessors.

I think it's a combination of cluelessness on the part of game devs/pubs and the alure of the safety of milking a community. Game companies want a herd of cash cows.

Gaming has become an industry and industries find great value in standardization.

[Lugaid of the Red Stripes]

I fear you might be giving the suits too much credit. As much as they want to make money, they don't actually play the games, and don't have any real personal understanding of how games are consumed. All they see are sales reports and the buzzwords in their business mags. I think the game industry could do rather well with a standardized, 1940's Hollywood style studio-system, but right now the industry doesn't really have the foresight to invest in the kind of infrastructure that would make that possible. Like TV today, the big houses just throw out cheap junk and market it to death, while a few houses on the margins actually try to put together a quality product, only to be drowned in the sea of drivel.

[nicethugbert]

I don't disagree with your characterization of the suits, Lugaid. It supports my characterization of them. What would catch the eye of a person who does not partake in an activity but wishes to make money off of it? Demographics. How else could it be for them?

The dumb outnumber the smart. The young out number the old. The young are less discerning than the old. It's easy to not test those observations, especially if you're a young ivy league business genius.

[kamal_]

One only needs to look at the reputation among gamers and words of Bobby Kotick, CEO of Activision Blizzard.

[-Semper-]

nicethugbert wrote...

I think the reason for that is because the gamers that associate their prefered gaming experience with the term RPG traditionally don't hold first rate graphics at a high priority.

don't think so. the rpg crowd is just not used to stellar graphics without being against it. hell, everybody likes hd textures, 1080p resolution and awesome design - this helps to raise the immersion. not a single person would buy text adventures or a mess of pixels nowadays. whatever, even the rpg player is slowly changing. look at all the bells and whistles of witcher2 and how it was compared to the blurry/outwashed/boring **** da2 delivered.

[The Fred]

nicethugbert wrote...
The young are less discerning than the old.

Hey, we're not all old around here you know!

-Semper- wrote...
not a single person would buy text adventures or a mess of pixels nowadays.

Kothoses Rothenkisal wrote...
...to try and encourage developers to take risks on more sandbox and community content generated games in the spirit of Neverwinter Nights and Minecraft.

I think graphics are overrated. Admittedly, they seem to be the first thing people complain about, but it's more like a "I'm going to complain, what can I add to my list?" sort of thing, I fancy. Personally, I'd rather see another Infinity Engine pre-rendered-background game with BG1-style graphics which was actually good than another DA or similar.

[dunniteowl]

Yeah, I don't think I ever said, "Graphics? Important? No, not for me, I'm an RPG fan, don't give me good graphics, just give me a great game."

Now that said, Graphics Goodness does take a back seat (in my view, pun intended) to good mechanics, solid gameplay, writing, plot, story. I would never, ever shake my head, though and say, "If at all possible, could you take half your graphics budget and instead spend it on some decent storytelling?"

This isn't to say that I would opt for better graphics if it meant stealing from those other things. The principle behind most RPG fans not being as insistent on good, even stellar graphics as represented in detailed high fps smoothness is that we are primarily creative imagination driven beasts at the core.

A cartoon I saw once, I think highlighted this for me. It was a simple two panel cartoon. In the first panel, a kid in a stroller has a great looking toy ray gun. He's happy and his thought balloon showed a picture of the same raygun.

In the next panel, he's next to another kid in a stroller and this other kid has a wooden stick gun of such a generic design you could only define it as something resembling a gun. His thought balloon, though was of this ray gun with even more cool features and additions to it and he was smiling widely, playing with his 'ray gun.' The first kid, still with his cooler looking toy gun and the same balloon over his head is now sad. The kid had nothing left to imagine, it was all there put out for him in the design and look of the toy he had. The other one wasn't limited by the design due to it's simplicity, leaving room for his imagination.

That doesn't mean, I'd be happier with stick-drawing velociraptors and circles for barrels, okay? It just means that I am capable of overlooking a lot of stuff that's left out. I would be the first to tell you that, with Plan 9, the objective is to have the ability of modeling artists to be able to insert their models into Plan 9's matrix with minimum fuss. I want folks who use Maya, Bryce, Mudbox, Silo and others to have the same power to enter models as, say someone using 3DS Max. I'd want folks to make textures be able to use Photoshop, Paintshop, or the GIMP -- and let the translation tools and plugins handle the conversion process for all that, not limit it to just one that the "Developers" used.

And I want models. Good models. Great, fricking excellent models. And from where I stand, the best chances of that for a Community based open sourcing concept is to open the floodgates and lower the bar to entry as much as possible. Will some folks turn out crap? Sure. But the players, the builders and the artists amongst the group will not simply accept the lowest ability as the pinnacle of achievement and I feel certain that anyone with any desire and talent will rise to the challenge. Those who are not as good will learn to get better. Those who are really good may find more actual value in helping others get better at what they do.

After all, if there are more people doing more things, the load on the individual is lessened and that's always a good thing. In a Community based system, more people with more talent means more gets done. Removing the barriers to getting those things done include modeling, texturing, scripting, storytelling and area design. If you don't like Medieval fantasy, wouldn't it be nice to be able to simply make your own future or modern models and scrap out the medieval mechanics (or better yet, simply make use of new formulae to make the mechanics do what you'd like) and tell the stories and get the visuals your way? Without having to reinvent your own damn game engine, hire a bunch of modelers and make sure they all own the same modeling programs that cost an arm and a leg?

Lofty objectives, yes. Doable also. And, in the end run, I think also profitable in a very high tech cottage industry sort of way.

And I'm counting on the desire of folks to want to have better imagery. I'm counting on folks to want to have things the original campaign doesn't include. I'm counting on folks to say, "Hey, I like the possibility of that engine, but I want to do a Wild West vs Zombies kind of game -- oh, look, I can add, change, modify or remove portions I don't want and the models can be made in Max, Maya, Bryce, Silo, Blender , holy crap, I could get a couple of my friends to do this stuff! Man, I'm getting this!"

Now tell me, honestly, as a builder this would make you drool, right? As a player, think of the potential for talented small independant groups to make different -- I mean completely different -- stories and adventures that you could play -- even if you had to pay a fee of some sort, that such a schema would offer you. As a creator of content, wouldn't it be nice to know that you weren't roped into a specific package only and that the stuff you made could be placed into a 'for pay' package or presented to the community as is for free or for fee, up to you?

Sure folks love free stuff. It's just as true, especially in this particular niche market, though, that folks are generally more aware of the effort it takes and, for the good stuff, would be willing to monetarily support that. Especially if the fees were reasonable; and it wasn't some damned DLC treadmill made only by the developers for one specific format. Again, we're talking about opening the floodgates of creative potential. There's no need to keep making a whole new graphics engine, mechanics engine, physics systems and database structures, with specialized and exclusive modeling programs for assets. A stable gaming package that advances with the state of the arts as much as possible (due to modular design and plug in support) that allows for multi-genre and multi-developer works, both Free Community stuff and small independant gaming groups for commercialized products and allowing the ability of folks to continue their stories, their adventures and their ideas beyond a simple expansion that needs the original game to work.

That's been my dream since computing came into the home as a staple and since I played the old Gold Box games of Pools of Radiance, Hillfar, The Savage Frontier and Champions of Krynn, all baed on the same engine -- which also included a Buck Rogers game as well, which I never got to play. Why can't that be done today?

The answer is: It can be. Will a major publisher/developer ever do that again? That's doubtful.

Today we are in the Acquisition/Merger/Spinoff phase of gaming. I mentioned this about 4 years ago. We were in the Aquisition and Rehash phase then, where many games were being re-released with updated mechanics and graphics, but weren't even close the same feel of the originals. Companies were being bought out, then gutted and subsumed, taken primarily for what technology or game IP they offered the winner.

Now we're in the second stage of that process. The mergers and acquisitions have pretty much run their course as a major influence. During that process, many good and talented folks are tossed onto the company waste heaps as being 'extraneous' to the buyouts, others, once subsumed have stressed under the new company as long as they can stand it and are now either being fired, retiring early or simply quitting.

Some of these folks will ultimately start their own little independant companies and will resist the urge to be bought out by the bigger fish -- knowing what's in store for them and their ideas. There is soon to come a new blossoming of smaller independant titles. A few of these indy companies are going to make a few solid hits in a row and get super funded through their efforts. And then they will, hopefully, realize their dream projects and they will do it to the satisfaction of their fans and increase also their fan bases.

There was a time when Electronic Arts seemed like a great publisher and they produced a lot of great titles. There was time when Activision was the bomb, diggity. Blizzard was a young, rough start up for a time and now look at it. Id Software's first game was freeware and shareware -- look where they are now. You can't say it can't happen. It already has. Crytek. CD Projekt.

We will see even more of that soon, judging by the cycle we are currently in. I've got to witness this cycle at least twice in full circle now and I think we're seeing the third cycle really start to get into the swing. This is the time to invest in new ideas and new concepts. If you don't have money and you have time, then time is the coin to invest.

Sorry, where was I? My prophetic visions were getting in the way. Oh yeah, graphics are great and I think we should demand the best we can get. That said, we should also demand that we, the communities that grow up around these games, should be allowed to add to that content where it's missing, flawed, or out of genre with our own versions and visions of what we can build in a toolset provided game.

dunniteowl

[foil-]

Its a great idea and one that I hope gains traction. I also hope we see the possibilities for another Temple of Elemental Evil by Troika type engine in the collective vision.

It will be nice to see something with possibility gain continued support.  Many commercial products had worlds of possibility but were constrained by licenses and budgets.

Modifié par foil-, 15 août 2011 - 05:45 .

[-Semper-]

foil- wrote...

Its a great idea and one that I hope gains traction. I also hope we see the possibilities for another Temple of Elemental Evil by Troika type engine in the collective vision.

if someone among us has the skills to help out this guy it would really speed up the process of recreating such a nice engine^^

Modifié par -Semper-, 15 août 2011 - 09:12 .

[foil-]

-Semper- wrote...

foil- wrote...

Its a great idea and one that I hope gains traction. I also hope we see the possibilities for another Temple of Elemental Evil by Troika type engine in the collective vision.

if someone among us has the skills to help out this guy it would really speed up the process of recreating such a nice engine^^

That is very cool!  I sort of lost interest in Co8s mod work (although what they did was very respectable for bug fixing and adding back content).  The Keep on the Boarderlands work looked so promising but then it was apparent that even a short module like that was going to keep them occupied for a looong time.  They were insisting that the tools they had developed were likely better than the tools Troika had to develop the original game and that they were no longer petitioning for Troika's module making tools.  If so, then it must have been a man hour sink for Troika.

But I'm glad to see they still see the value in what Troika made and are trying to recreate it.  If they are successful, I may disapeer for a very long time.  The ToEE engine was by far my favorite to date.  It easily rivals the gold box turn based games.  But it seemed dead in the water without support from Atari or a toolset to create community modules.

And the mosters:  Best evah in a D&D game