OMG .... WOTC does it again

[torstan]

Edit: RP posted while I was writing this.

Yep. From the screenshots on the Gametable page (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x...ider/gametable) you can see that it is not isometric (note the perspective) and that the camera view is movable (see the last screenshot on the left for one that is almost from above).

However, the floorplan is essentially a 2D image that is pasted down that the 3D v-minis exist on top of. The maps are not 3D, but the objects that are placed on it are (and cost you money).

I guess the question is whether they will allow for the purchase of 3D components for map building, rather than just 3D set decoration. I can see that being something they might be able to do further down the line but I'm 100% certain that's not where it will be at release (whenever that is).

[Redrobes]

I cant remember if I mentioned my general issue with the whole thing but its stayed the same for several years whilst we wait for the real app to launch.

My issue is that for me role playing games should be something you create and make your own. It has infinite diversity limited by just the imagination. Now making a map in 2D limits you a little to your art skills but anyone can draw something and get it into the PC. My issue is that with 3D, whist undoubtedly its better, its also waaay harder to get custom stuff made for it. You are now limited to what a few expert people have made for you. So basically a 3D role playing app really limits you as to what you can do with it. For one thing your back to generic blocks for all monsters that you don't have the 3D model of.

A good example of this is all the links above. If the character is a minotaur then your stuffed. They have a dungeon builder but I have yet to see even a glimmer of a wilderness creator. Also, towns and buildings which are probably the easiest to do I haven't seen yet. But really it does not matter because at some point your gonna want something that isn't provided for you and your gonna want to make it yourself.

I think its the intention of WotC that its hard and that they will provide them at a cost. I can understand that and don't disagree with it, but it would not be something that I would want to lock myself into. If I couldn't easily add and expand the models and range of stuff I could do with the app then its not in the spirit of what role playing was all about.

I think if they had done this pre VTT's and pre iTunes etc where people didn't fully understand the concept of DRM then I think it might have worked but I just don't think its going to float now.

[torstan]

As for the wilderness and town maps - you can import any map you want as the base image - so you can have your 3D mini walking around on any map you like - the base image is not limited to things you can make with the dungeon builder.

The rest is entirely true. You only get the flashy 3D stuff if they have got around to making it, and if you are willing to stump up the cash for it. I agree that you should not limit players options on the basis of what you've got the v-minis for. Though that never stopped my players when we had lead models - you just pick another one and imagine it's your character. I'm sure the same will apply for most DMs with this.

[Redrobes]

Well, not to sound like a WotC Fanboy or anything, but the purpose of their VTT is not so much a top-down token on a flat table, but it is supposed to be representative of a 3-D environment. Cool if they can get it going, not so sure otherwise.

As for the wilderness and town maps - you can import any map you want as the base image - so you can have your 3D mini walking around on any map you like - the base image is not limited to things you can make with the dungeon builder.

You can see how these are two opposing points of view tho eh ? Right now, from all that I have heard it not very 3D for the environment and the interaction your character gets with it. Guess we'll have to wait a bit longer and see tho. If its not fully 3D then I see no benefit with it being 3D tokens on top. If it is fully 3D then they had better make it possible to create wilderness / buildings (and anything else you want) in proper 3D. Its the 2.5D ness that is bothering me where they are trying to sail this thin line between it being usable and cool at the same time where as I see it one has to compromise one for the other.

[torstan]

My impression was that they never intended to go fully 3D - rather they want to have 3D minis on 2D maps just as you would on a table top at home. I would be astonished if they decide to go fully 3D and really astonished if they allow other people to make custom 3D items.

I can see the appeal of making it 2.5D as it does look cool. A number of people I play with - including a few RP professionals - said that if maptool could do that then they saw no reason to ever to to Wizards Gametable, but without it they could still be tempted away. I was amazed, but I guess I should learn never to underestimate the appeal of eye-candy over functionality.

[Redrobes]

Agreed and yes I am amazed too ! I guess if its got plenty of eye candy and is exceptionally good then sure, why not. But I wouldn't make much in the way of trade offs for it.

[NeonKnight]

Yeah Torstan has pretty much hit it on the head.

The DM's Table is supposed to be a representation of a Minis on a Table. My Battle map is flat 2-D but my minis are 3D as is some of the additional stuff (chests, pillars, etc).

Do I think I would use it? Myself, no, as I play in person with a bunch of friends. Would I use it otherwise? Hard to say.

[jfrazierjr]

And now for the Good news, WotC released it's Character Builder to Beta today. In other news, it does not work on Mac, Linux, oh yea and Vista 64 bit!

[RPMiller]

And now for the Good news, WotC released it's Character Builder to Beta today. In other news, it does not work on Mac, Linux, oh yea and Vista 64 bit!

Good for them for not pandering to those "other" operating systems!


Honestly I'm not surprised that they wouldn't be able to get in support for those especially Vista 64 bit, and honestly from a business perspective I wouldn't have bothered with Vista 64 bit either.

[Redrobes]

Why not Vista 64 ? I mean it will run 32 bit apps quite happily right ? Even if you dont build a 64bit app it should still run a 'normal' 32bit one. It would take considerable effort not to support Vista64 because it would mean that they are writing a device driver. There is only one possibility that I can think of that would require that and that is that they would load a kernel based filter driver on the machine and there is only one reason to do this and that is to bork your machine and run a DRM encryption system on it like Sony's infamous root kit which was installed via inserting some CD's. They would be in big trouble if that was the case. So basically - I don't believe it.

As for no Mac and Linux - well maybe not for now but they might later. Of course, if they use DirectX as their 3D API then they are stuffed in the non MS OS dept.

Oh just checked - it *is* DirectX and its .NET too. So yup, your all stuffed.