[MUD-Dev] Re: Neverwinter Nights

[Lee Sheldon]

-----Original Message-----
From: mud-dev-admin at kanga.nu [mailto:mud-dev-admin at kanga.nu]On Behalf Of
Trent Oster
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 12:23 PM
To: mud-dev at kanga.nu
Subject: [MUD-Dev] Re: Neverwinter Nights


> We had a number of discussions early on about the first person and
> third person viewpoints.  We arrived at the following arguments
> regarding third person isometric views.

> Pros:

> Top down camera allows greater polygon counts and detail in each
> object (limited view volume at all times)

Good technical reason.

> Greater tactical perception of the combat, facilitates more
> strategic play More party oriented view, you lose the other party
> members a lot less than a first person view.

I never found this to be a problem in EQ even during 40+ player
battles.  Not knowing where everybody was tending to heighten the
emtions for me: fear during the battle, sadness when I saw who had
fallen at its end.  But if you want players to be more immersed in
the tactics than human beings, then it's a perfectly reasonable
choice.

> The player is "playing" a character, the player is not the
> character, as such the player will want to see the character
> whenever possible, as such a "god" type view supports this "feel"
> of play better.

Having participated in my share of these conversations, and having
sweated through similar philosophical tap dances, I understand where
this comes from.  But meaning no disrespect, you really can't know
that a "player will want to see the character whenever possible..."
And propping up that conclusion with "The player is playing a
character, the player is not the character..." is just semantics.
Empathy and suspension-of-disbelief can be present in either case.
What is not semantics or theory, but demonstrable human pyschology,
is that god views limit empathy as surely as face-to-face views
increase it.

I gave an example of how the angles are chosen in films.  Another
example is lighting.  What we call "key" lighting is there to
reflect in the eyes of a character.  Most human acting occurs there,
most human emotion reaches there first.  Most character animation is
centered there, as Difficult as they are to render naturalistically.
The farther you get from the eyes with your camera and lighting, the
farther you are from the personality of the NPC, or the human being
behind them.  Compare EQ's expressive faces to AC's blank slates.
Both are static, but EQ's faces have character.  As humans we run
with the personality we see there, "mapping" on far more than is
really modeled.  The EQ faces make you feel at home in the world,
and feeling at home is a step toward community.

Sorry, I know I'm rambling.  Again, your second two examples
indicate that you focused on gameplay elements as opposed to human
interaction.  It's certainly a legitimate design choice, and often
followed.  I'll be curious to see how accepted it will be.  Whether
it will widen the audience, or whether people will play in spite of
it.  I'm looking forward to messing with NWN.  Having it in 3rd
person iso just increases the challenge a bit for me.

Lee

_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev