chevalier
Thu, 6th Apr '06, 2:12pm
Here are today's Neverwinter Nights 2 forum highlights, collected by NWVault (http://nwvault.ign.com). Please take into account that these are only single parts of various threads and should not be taken out of context. Bear in mind also that the posts presented here are copied as-is, and that any bad spelling and grammar does not get corrected on our end.
<font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial" color="#cc6600">Brian D. Lawson, Programmer</font>
NWN2 2560 x 1600 max. settings (http://nwn2forums.bioware.com//forums/viewpost.html?topic=476333&post=4063435&forum=99&highlight=)
Maybe...
If you have a monitor that supports that rez and some video card(s) that can push those kinds of pixel counts then yeah I'm sure it would run at max settings. How fast when running on today's hardware? I can't say...
Everything in our game is computed on a per-pixel basis. So obviously that would be huge number of pixels, requiring huge horsepower.
<font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial" color="#cc6600">J.E. Sawyer, NWN2 Lead Designer</font>
Say goodbye to the radial menu [Part 2] (http://nwn2forums.bioware.com//forums/viewpost.html?topic=475822&post=4062435&forum=95&highlight=)
<hr />P.S. I do find it very interesting that it was very rare to hear someone whining about NWN's radial menu until Mr. Sawyer announced its removal for NWN2. Coincidence? Hmmm...<hr />I announced its removal after I posted a thread asking if people used the numpad for driving the radial. Many of the responses emphatically stated they never used the radial to begin with. Coincidence?
More: <hr />"I announced its removal after I posted a thread asking if people used the numpad for driving the radial. Many of the responses emphatically stated they never used the radial to begin with. Coincidence?"
I hardly ever post on this board but this comment caught my eye. I'm a little worried that the devs are taking what is posted on these boards as representative of the entire RPG community. The people on these boards are, for the most part, the hardcore and most devoted.<hr />This is a specific example that warrants attention. If even the hardcore people don't use the radial menu for a variety of reasons, it probably isn't very useful.
Let me give you an analogy that I think is pretty appropriate. In the late 90s, high-end luxury cars had tended to acquire more and more doo-dads over time, their dashboards wound up being huge masses of buttons. I believe the S-Class Mercedes-Benz from that time period had about 90 buttons for various things ranging from AC to radio controls to seat warming.
In 2002, BMW debuted the E65/E66 7-series (http://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/7/750isedan/default). The 7-series is the top-of-the-line car series for BMW, their biggest sedans. They decided to go in a radical new direction for their system controls. BMW contracted for the development of iDrive (http://www.siemensvdo.fr/news_events/presse/images/nav-wap-idrive.jpg). The idea behind iDrive was a noble one: BMW wanted to remove all of the buttons from the dash and allow the driver to control all non-driving related car functions through the use of a single knob and radial menus displayed on a central screen.
Much like the NWN menus, iDrive allowed for eight items per menu level. Also much like the NWN menus, iDrive often had options that went four layers deep. Despite admissions from drivers that the idea was a sound one, most consumers hated using it. Functions that had previously been one button press away were now invisibly buried under layers of menu systems. More importantly, people simply found the navigation of the menus tiresome.
Later iterations of iDrive moved some functions off of the radial and back onto dash buttons. Audi and Mercedes-Benz learned from BMW's mistakes and made their own radial menu systems, but still kept the majority of functions within easy reach (or categorized them with few layers, as in Audi's MMI).
A lot of people continue to complain about the interfaces in those cars because 1) they use an unfamiliar method of navigation 2) given the number of layers, there are dozens of potential "homes" for objects of interest that may be hidden from the user 3) elegance of layout and accuracy take priority over accessibility and speed of use.
[ April 10, 2006, 02:30: Message edited by: chevalier ]
<font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial" color="#cc6600">Brian D. Lawson, Programmer</font>
NWN2 2560 x 1600 max. settings (http://nwn2forums.bioware.com//forums/viewpost.html?topic=476333&post=4063435&forum=99&highlight=)
Maybe...
If you have a monitor that supports that rez and some video card(s) that can push those kinds of pixel counts then yeah I'm sure it would run at max settings. How fast when running on today's hardware? I can't say...
Everything in our game is computed on a per-pixel basis. So obviously that would be huge number of pixels, requiring huge horsepower.
<font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial" color="#cc6600">J.E. Sawyer, NWN2 Lead Designer</font>
Say goodbye to the radial menu [Part 2] (http://nwn2forums.bioware.com//forums/viewpost.html?topic=475822&post=4062435&forum=95&highlight=)
<hr />P.S. I do find it very interesting that it was very rare to hear someone whining about NWN's radial menu until Mr. Sawyer announced its removal for NWN2. Coincidence? Hmmm...<hr />I announced its removal after I posted a thread asking if people used the numpad for driving the radial. Many of the responses emphatically stated they never used the radial to begin with. Coincidence?
More: <hr />"I announced its removal after I posted a thread asking if people used the numpad for driving the radial. Many of the responses emphatically stated they never used the radial to begin with. Coincidence?"
I hardly ever post on this board but this comment caught my eye. I'm a little worried that the devs are taking what is posted on these boards as representative of the entire RPG community. The people on these boards are, for the most part, the hardcore and most devoted.<hr />This is a specific example that warrants attention. If even the hardcore people don't use the radial menu for a variety of reasons, it probably isn't very useful.
Let me give you an analogy that I think is pretty appropriate. In the late 90s, high-end luxury cars had tended to acquire more and more doo-dads over time, their dashboards wound up being huge masses of buttons. I believe the S-Class Mercedes-Benz from that time period had about 90 buttons for various things ranging from AC to radio controls to seat warming.
In 2002, BMW debuted the E65/E66 7-series (http://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/7/750isedan/default). The 7-series is the top-of-the-line car series for BMW, their biggest sedans. They decided to go in a radical new direction for their system controls. BMW contracted for the development of iDrive (http://www.siemensvdo.fr/news_events/presse/images/nav-wap-idrive.jpg). The idea behind iDrive was a noble one: BMW wanted to remove all of the buttons from the dash and allow the driver to control all non-driving related car functions through the use of a single knob and radial menus displayed on a central screen.
Much like the NWN menus, iDrive allowed for eight items per menu level. Also much like the NWN menus, iDrive often had options that went four layers deep. Despite admissions from drivers that the idea was a sound one, most consumers hated using it. Functions that had previously been one button press away were now invisibly buried under layers of menu systems. More importantly, people simply found the navigation of the menus tiresome.
Later iterations of iDrive moved some functions off of the radial and back onto dash buttons. Audi and Mercedes-Benz learned from BMW's mistakes and made their own radial menu systems, but still kept the majority of functions within easy reach (or categorized them with few layers, as in Audi's MMI).
A lot of people continue to complain about the interfaces in those cars because 1) they use an unfamiliar method of navigation 2) given the number of layers, there are dozens of potential "homes" for objects of interest that may be hidden from the user 3) elegance of layout and accuracy take priority over accessibility and speed of use.
[ April 10, 2006, 02:30: Message edited by: chevalier ]