Meet the devs - Meet Todd Howard

[Sorrow]

How many times playing FO 1/2 did you wish you could zoom in/out, raise, lower the camera, or look behind a building?

I never did. My only experience with movable camera in cRPGs was in NWN. It's not an experience that I would like to repeat. One of the things that I like in 2d isometric graphics is that I don't have to rotate/zoom in, etc. the camera.

(and traveling around the game world by constantly jumping is not an acceptable way to develop player character abilities)

I wonder why none of those "innovators" didn't think about simply adding "train" and "teach" functions that would combine the realism (?) of "learn by use" with normal gameplay.

If Todd really wanted to get to the "soul" of Fallout, he would play Wasteland. He would gather a group of people who could stand to be in the same room for an extended time and play some PnP games.

That hit's the nail on the head. People who made Fallout had a heavy PnP background. It's hard to emulate a tabletop gameplay on computer without having a big PnP/tabletop playing experience.

 

[Tom_Sawyer]

jfreund

Rush is coming in June to Tampa

Ticketmaster however managed to screw me as usual. Even though I was online excactly at 10am I still ended up in section 200

And to rub salt in the wounds I get this email last week from live nation about "we just found an overlooked block of tickets in section 100 that we would to offer"

my tickets cost 90 each, those "overlooked" tickets are going for 295

RIAA, Ticketmaster, Game Companies that do not listen

Sigh

Someone pass me a plasma rifle

 

[Autoduel76]

The trend to make 3d "RPGs" with photorealistic 3d graphics is because they are aimed at people who, don't want to play a game with good story, meaningful interaction and interesting concept but to *live* in an imaginary world instead of living their own lives.
They need photorealistic 3d graphics for the illusion that *they* are living in the world of given computer game.

I can't call it a healthy trend.

I don't understand where the idea came from that there was ever some "magic age" of gaming, where this wasn't happening with the technology.

I've been PC gaming pretty much since day 1 and the games have always chased the technology, for better or worse. Usually, the reality is that its for the worse, at first, followed eventually by the better. The true standout games have always been few and far between.

I can remember when games first went to dialog options, rather than having you type in words to ask NPCs.

We called it "dumbing down" at the time, because it seemed like it was just to make games easier. When we used to have to write down everything we came across and try out a ton of different words before we could get the right one, it made us feel good about our experience. And then that was replaced with this simplistic system of just choosing dialog choices.

I remember when Windows first began to rule the OS world and games went from keyboard to mouse. We hated the change. Why not jsut stick with using the arrow keys and enter to move? Point and Click was just so simple and, not nearly as much fun. The first point and click Space Quest/Kings Quest games were "dumbed down" simplistic, easy successors to the fun I had on the keyboard and I never enjoyed those series as much again.

It took my brother years before he would play a game with a mouse and he hated real time combat so much that, to this day, he's never played any Ultima game after Ultima 6. When I got Ultima 7, he just couldn't stand the controls and the "stupid" real time combat so he's never played what I feel is one of my favorite RPGs.

I could go on and on, of course, but its just always been this way. Developers have always spent their time giving us things that we don't think we need, when we were perfectly satisfied with what we had. Eventually, though, we come to accept the changes, often even embrace them.

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

For me it is not so much the worry of graphics (as in that they are more detailed as long as they look 'Fallout') but rather that whatever Bethesda will make will not have the 'feel' of Fallout, a rich detailed world (as in background and personalities), a strong well developed storyline, and a world that feels somewhat realistic and not a 'hero to be' enviroment.

My concern is greatly and seems justified that Bethesda is only out to create a sort of 'vanilla' Fallout, a Fallout that must appeal to all, at all costs.

On personal note; yes I would prefer that any new Fallout is turn based, while I did not mind the 'Continuous Turn Based' system of Tactics things could sometimes quickly degenerated into a chaos as all team members at once were busy with shooting and I had to jump from character to character within second to instruct them to administer a Stimpack before they died.

 

[Dracon M'Alkir]

Again, everybody ignores Dark Legacy, when he always has something *at least* funny to say.

I laughed at some parts out loud, mate, and your brand of humor remains only an aquired taste for some. I may try a few quotes myself, in some of them you just cut the bullshit out flawlessly.

You really don't know how heartwarming it is to realize that someone actually cares..

Even if you are a half vampire wizard that donates.. er.. nevermind.

 

[Vault 69er]

I don't understand where the idea came from that there was ever some "magic age" of gaming, where this wasn't happening with the technology.

I've been PC gaming pretty much since day 1 and the games have always chased the technology, for better or worse. Usually, the reality is that its for the worse, at first, followed eventually by the better. The true standout games have always been few and far between.

So what? Games have always improved graphically, but in today's era, 3D hi res bloom realistic water and face effects blah blah blah take precidence over *everything* because that's what they can shout about on the back of the box. In older games, graphics were simply another element in the overall package. Which improved over time as everything did.

I can remember when games first went to dialog options, rather than having you type in words to ask NPCs.

We called it "dumbing down" at the time, because it seemed like it was just to make games easier. When we used to have to write down everything we came across and try out a ton of different words before we could get the right one, it made us feel good about our experience. And then that was replaced with this simplistic system of just choosing dialog choices.

Okay, I don't recall anyone saying this was "dumbing down". Typing words in vain hopes that something in the game might respond with something other than "unrecognised command" is not fun, and dynamic, character based dialogue is far superior. Look at the Fallouts - different dialogues for male/female, good/evil, clever/stupid and tons of other stuff. That's change. That's not dumbing down.

Now look at Oblivion. You don't have dialogue. You just have a list of generic commands. That's dumbing down.

 

[aries369]

Over at adventuregamers.com we have had a similar (and very enlightening discussion ) about the same theme.

And some of the old veterans from the olden days of Gabriel Knight 1 and Monkey Island 1 did say that they thought it was horrendous to go from moving being done with the arrow keys to movements being done with the point & click of the mouse.
I think they also said that it felt like a 'betrayal' or something along these lines, when dialoque trees were introduced instead of the player having to type in a word to get the character in the game to do something.

And I'm pretty sure that when the first half text/half graphics adventures were released this also had people up in arms going 'it is dumbed down'. (interestingly, there is a very nerdy game, of sorts, going on between Kharn and the Bethesda devs. --- very amusing ---- and very very funny which says to me that the Bethsoft staff do know their text adventures....).

If we, say, look at the Myst games, then, even the first Myst game had absolutely stunning (near photorealistic) graphics & visuals.
Blade Runner and Max Payne 2 (a film noir) have nearly the same level in (photorealistic) graphics as movies have.

If we take a little detour from games and look at say political pamphlets and such, in the 1970's you could publish a pamphlet filled with 1 spaced lines on 1 sheet of A4 paper. In the 1980's and especially in the 1990's form did also matter, and by form I mean how the message is presented. I'm pretty sure that the old veterans of the movements in the 1970's also talked about 'dumbing down' when pamphlets went from singlespaced lines into 1½ lines and (maybe) A5 format.

I have also tried playing some of the older rpgs, like Ultima 4, or
Wizardy 7. And I have to say that the visuals & the graphics, and maybe especially the camera and the interface, are such that I can't play these games, even if I want to do so.

The point is that humans have a innate resistance in trying something new. (which is understandable in terms of evolution, since it could kill you when & if you tried to eat something you didn't know exactly what was. Better than to stay with what you know ). The same thing could be said for video games; everything should be the same, or nearly the same, as it always has been. Even adventure gamers have this: In the same thread, I referred to at the start at this post (from adventuregamers.com) many adventuregamers now seem in uproar over Ragnar Dreamfall Tornquist's statement about 'traditional PnP interface in adventuregame is dead'. And we had quite an interesting discussion about this.

As for RPG games, I like the use of 3D in rpgs as this means I can zoom in/out, turn around all the way etc. What I don't like is why every game developer thinks bloom & HDR are a necessity . I can get really really frustrated seeing how much bloom & HDR a game like Oblivion has, for instance. (it really hurts my eyes uch It is as if every game developer would rather make a movie than a game...

 

[Sorrow]

I don't understand where the idea came from that there was ever some "magic age" of gaming, where this wasn't happening with the technology.

Well, I'm not talking about about the "magic age". I'm talking about something different. Every time I upgraded my comp before, I've seen some real reasons to buy it. I upgraded my comp for Fallout 2 and Baldur's Gate, I upgraded my comp for Arcanum and Fallout Tactics (don't ask.) and I always saw some practical improvement - greater resolution, bigger maps, more colours. Now I don't see a real reason to upgrade the comp again - of course it would be nice to play C&C3 or Warhammer but buying a two year gym ticket or paying for a college or buying a lot of books/music CDs seems to be a lot more attractive to me now than buying a computer just for more photorealistic graphics.

It took my brother years before he would play a game with a mouse and he hated real time combat so much that, to this day, he's never played any Ultima game after Ultima 6. When I got Ultima 7, he just couldn't stand the controls and the "stupid" real time combat so he's never played what I feel is one of my favorite RPGs.

Heh, as much I love Ultima 7, I didn't like the controls too. It didn't stop me from playing, but the combat would be a lot more enjoyable if it was turn based (with aimed shots ).

 

[God is Dog backwards]

It's been gone over a billion times.

Free roaming cameras are annoying and fiddly IMO. Warcraft 3 did it best - kept it simple, with a locked perspective that you could rotate 90 degrees either way by holding down a button. An interface shouldn't be overly complicated, and free roaming cameras always are, getting stuck in scenary, never showing you waht you want to see, etc.
Building a game around a certain angle and perspective, ala Warcraft 3, is the best way of doing it.

As for Mr. howard, well, he basically said a lot without saying anything, but it's nice that he showed his face. Emphasis on Fallout's soul makes me wonder whether he's preparing us for the the mechanics of the game being redone, as in rt combat, diff viewpoints etc. Meh. My bet's on some kind of hybrid combat, I don't think it'll be straight up real time (but please god not play-n-pause).

 

[Autoduel76]

Okay, I don't recall anyone saying this was "dumbing down". Typing words in vain hopes that something in the game might respond with something other than "unrecognised command" is not fun, and dynamic, character based dialogue is far superior. Look at the Fallouts - different dialogues for male/female, good/evil, clever/stupid and tons of other stuff. That's change. That's not dumbing down.

That "became" change. It started off as dumbing down. Whether you personally remember anybody calling it that is not the issue. I do. Me and my friends, in particular did, at the time.

It was never" typing words in vain" You only tried words that you had to actually seek out in the game. When they first went to choice lists, they weren't "fun and dynamic character based dialog". They were still generally just single words, only instead of having to actively seek them out, you selected from a list of 4 or 5.

Change is always met with hostility, but memory gets more pleasant as things age. I don't know how young you were in the early 80's to remember this era but, most definitely, things like this were thought of as dumbing down at first by the hardcore gamers of the time.

Well, I'm not talking about about the "magic age". I'm talking about something different. Every time I upgraded my comp before, I've seen some real reasons to buy it. I upgraded my comp for Fallout 2 and Baldur's Gate, I upgraded my comp for Arcanum and Fallout Tactics (don't ask.) and I always saw some practical improvement - greater resolution, bigger maps, more colours. Now I don't see a real reason to upgrade the comp again - of course it would be nice to play C&C3 or Warhammer but buying a two year gym ticket or paying for a college or buying a lot of books/music CDs seems to be a lot more attractive to me now than buying a computer just for more photorealistic graphics.

I agree with that, for the most part. I upgraded my computer first for Ultima 7, ironically, and the change was very noticeable. I agree that the degree of graphic improvement doesn't seem to warrant the neccessarry upgrades anymore. Actually that's a big reason why I purchased an Xbox 360, since I can't think of any PC games slated to be released in the next couple years that aren't also going to be released on the 360.

The most noticeable improvements from upgrades these days really seem to be the framerates, which can get awfully annoying on a minimun specs system.

 

[Vault 69er]

It was never" typing words in vain" You only tried words that you had to actually seek out in the game.

As long as you found the right NPC with the right knowledge at the right time, otherwise any word is as redundant as the other.

When they first went to choice lists, they weren't "fun and dynamic character based dialog". They were still generally just single words, only instead of having to actively seek them out, you selected from a list of 4 or 5.

That's called development and transition. It starts out through streamlining the process. And just because some change is good, it does not equate to all change is good.

Change is always met with hostility, but memory gets more pleasant as things age. I don't know how young you were in the early 80's to remember this era but, most definitely, things like this were thought of as dumbing down at first by the hardcore gamers of the time.

There are some people who think anything above a DOS prompt is dumbing down. This doesn't change the fact that in the present day, there *is* a trend of dumbing down.
You talk of clunky interfaces being streamlined being seen as dumbing down by some. Fine and dandy. But what's happening today literally is dumbing down.

Look at Oblivion. If CRPGs in general have gone from typed keywords to word lists to dialogue selections.. that's progress. Oblivion actually REVERTS by going back to word lists! Dialogue is out the window entirely. Tell me how that isn't dumbing down.

 

[Autoduel76]

There are some people who think anything above a DOS prompt is dumbing down. This doesn't change the fact that in the present day, there *is* a trend of dumbing down.
You talk of clunky interfaces being streamlined being seen as dumbing down by some. Fine and dandy. But what's happening today literally is dumbing down.

Look at Oblivion. If CRPGs in general have gone from typed keywords to word lists to dialogue selections.. that's progress. Oblivion actually REVERTS by going back to word lists! Dialogue is out the window entirely. Tell me how that isn't dumbing down.

I can't speak for Oblivion, because I've never played it, but I would call that dumbing down too.

With that said, you can point to aspects of most any game as show some areas where they've gone backward from the way games have been progressing.

But it just isn't true that there is a "new trend" of dumbing down games. Games have always been a rapidly changing medium. And most of those changes are considered dumbing down for awhile before they are actually improved.

In fact action games, platformers and FPSs are vastly more complex than they used to be, as they have all added a lot of features that used to only be in the RPG genre, like inventory systems, dialog, statistics, etc. within the last couple years.

While certain games and certain aspects are "dumbed down", others are made more complex. Its the same as been happening for decades. The areas that you feel are dumbed down now will be improved as time goes on.

 

[Vault 69er]

Actually nothing in Oblivion could be called more refined.

There's the aforementioned dialogue.. there's also the quest log which is intrusive and simplistic, the compass which removes all thought and deduction from the player with regards to finding quest targets, the inventory system is clunky and inferior to Morrowind's, the spell system is equally clunky and you can't delete spells. Several skills have been taken out entirely, half the remaining skills are useless, lockpicking and persuasion are governed by twitch-based and illogical minigames respectively, the interface and text is uncomfortably large.. there's probably more that I've forgotten to mention.

Most of Oblivion is a gigantic step back in terms of RPG complexity and usability. It is I feel, a good game at it's very core that is hampered by the fact that it's developers assume it's target audience are stupid. And I use it as my example because of course Bethesda are making Fallout 3 and they regard Oblivion as their masterpiece.

 

[Sorrow]

Most of Oblivion is a gigantic step back in terms of RPG complexity and usability. It is I feel, a good game at it's very core that is hampered by the fact that it's developers assume it's target audience are stupid.

Well, the main problem with modern changes is trying to reach a different audience. They spend more money on game development and need more money back.
That's why we probably won't see any succesor of Planescape: Torment or Arcanum or Fallout created by a major developer.

 

[God is Dog backwards]

I genuinely couldn't play Oblivion very far. The level scaling felt totally wrong and unbalanced - I was having a harder time fighting in the same dungeons I visited when I was level one. I wasn't getting more powerful as I levelled, I was getting weaker, and I chosing skills I wanted to use made me puny - the way to win was to tag skills on your character you WOULDN'T use, so they increased in power whilst your level stayed low.
It felt completely wrong as a game, fundamentally flawed.
The few non-combat quests were quite well done, though, especially ones like the missing painting. It's just the focus of the game - combat, advancement, was horribly, horribly flawed, and everything else was so secondary to that primary goal that you couldnt really get into it. At least, I couldn't, and I tried mutliple times, because I do like sandbox games (love the GTA series, for instance).

 

[Hovercar Madness]

While certain games and certain aspects are "dumbed down", others are made more complex. Its the same as been happening for decades. The areas that you feel are dumbed down now will be improved as time goes on.

Well, actually the dumbing down critique of Bethesda's work is mostly reserved for the substance of its games. Game technically what they're doing is offering a hybrid of first person action gaming and RPG's and hybrids are neither a step backwards nor a new step in gaming evolution (like the revolution in dialogue you mentioned earlier). They just create a new mix of tried gameplay elements.

The problem with making a hybrid of a rpg and a first person action game is that it's nearly impossible to keep it from becoming an action game with the bonus of leveling up.

 

[Vault 69er]

I genuinely couldn't play Oblivion very far. The level scaling felt totally wrong and unbalanced - I was having a harder time fighting in the same dungeons I visited when I was level one. I wasn't getting more powerful as I levelled, I was getting weaker, and I chosing skills I wanted to use made me puny - the way to win was to tag skills on your character you WOULDN'T use, so they increased in power whilst your level stayed low.
It felt completely wrong as a game, fundamentally flawed.
The few non-combat quests were quite well done, though, especially ones like the missing painting. It's just the focus of the game - combat, advancement, was horribly, horribly flawed, and everything else was so secondary to that primary goal that you couldnt really get into it. At least, I couldn't, and I tried mutliple times, because I do like sandbox games (love the GTA series, for instance).

If you have the PC version, you can at least get mods to fix things like that. Including elimination of level scaling and a more natural level up method, getting rid of the insipid Persuasion minigame, etc.
Though honestly, modders shouldn't have to do that. Developers should bloody well see the mistakes they're making.

And of course, it doesn't help owners of the console version at all. Frankly I'd never be able to stand playing console Oblivion.

 

[Sorrow]

If you have the PC version, you can at least get mods to fix things like that. Including elimination of level scaling and a more natural level up method, getting rid of the insipid Persuasion minigame, etc.
Though honestly, modders shouldn't have to do that. Developers should bloody well see the mistakes they're making.

Frankly, I have an impression that developers (and gamers) think that modders exist to finish their games and to remove all the nonsense that they have created.
Recently I was flamed when I said that I won't buy Ufo: Extraterrastials because of immortal soldiers.
Today's reaction to critique is "zomg! stop whining it can be modded out anyway!"

A good design is no longer mandatory. Developers can create a half-finished/poorly thought out product and expect players to mod it into a game they like.

And of course, it doesn't help owners of the console version at all. Frankly I'd never be able to stand playing console Oblivion.

Oh. I see a good reason not to buy an X-Box.

 

[Tom_Sawyer]

Frankly, I have an impression that developers (and gamers) think that modders exist to finish their games and to remove all the nonsense that they have created.
Recently I was flamed when I said that I won't buy Ufo: Extraterrastials because of immortal soldiers.
Today's reaction to critique is "zomg! stop whining it can be modded out anyway!"

A good design is no longer mandatory. Developers can create a half-finished/poorly thought out product and expect players to mod it into a game they like.

Or the bean counters can yell ok you have worked on it long enough, we consider it done, ship it!

That killed Moo 3, Ultima 9 and a slew of others

At list Wizardy 8 wraped up the series to me in a great way

Again I point to Stardock and crew: Want a great game that the fans wil enjoy? Allow the fans to help shape it