Meet the Devs - yet more quotes

[Morbus]

Means he's a business man before an artist. Someone who truely loves their work would choose quality over money. I think the statement reflects poorly on him.

Although I certainly agree with you, don't be so eager to judge in these cases. No one has any obligation to be *that* altruistic, and not everyone has the guts to... Anyhoo, it's very easy to talk when we are not in their position. I, for one, would surely choose quality over money, always, but that's *me*, and not necessarily them. I think we all have to understand and respect others' choices...

That said, I also think we all have to flame, counter-hype and insult bad Fallout games

 

[aries369]

Once mr. Woody got a call about being in a commercial. Mr. Woody didn't want to do it. But then the person told me it would pay like 100,000 USD or so. And then Woody said: hold on a minute, I'd put mr. Allen on the phone...

The point of this story is that when you're an adult, you maybe have responsibilities in life. Maybe you have a nice apartment, a nice family, a somewhat nice car, and then, of course, you would have to eat. Just so that you can keep yourself a like --- just barely --- so that you can continue making videogames.

The question posed to the developers was this:

Which matters more to you, a game that sells a lot and makes a lot of money or a game that’s great and will be loved, maybe even worshipped by its fans?

Let's try to take this for another turn in the spinning machine
If we look at Morrowind, the fans love Morrowind. And Morrowind sold extensively well, and continue selling well. (4-5 millions copies as of may 2007 in total, I believe). If we look at the Fallout games, they also sold somewhat well for a game, released in 1997. It sold about 150,000 coopies, I believe at least for Fallout 1. Arcanum is another game that sold really well in its day, selling about 250,000 copies, I guess. And Arcanum was also very well recieved by the (rpg) fans.

The point is also that I do think that none of the developers of Bethesda could have foreseen Morrowind's succes, both selling wise and fan wise. As for Oblivion, I really do think that some of the fans have been too harsh in their criticism of Oblivion as the game maybe didn't live up to their expectations.

If we compare this with say dressmaking, it is really like asking a dress designer if he prefers designing haute couture or ready to wear casual dress or clothes. Oblivion is clearly made for the casual gamer, while a game such as Planescape: Torment clearly is made for haute couture (or hard core) gamer out there. (and in the end Torment did end up selling about 500,000 copies, though).

Just to get back to the question asked: BG2 was a highly succesfull game, critically as well as fan acclaimed. It sold really, really well for its time (about 2½ million, irrc). The point here being that no developer or publisher know how well a game will sell untill it hits the market, just like you don't know how well a book will sell untill its the market. A game can surprise and sell a lot of copies, just like The Longest Journey, Syberia 1, and Gothic 1+2 did.

The point is also that every developer hopes (secretly, I think) that the game both will be loved by the fans as well as sell a lot of copies. (and hope for great reviews, too ).

The thing is these two things (great game, not much sales or much sale, not that great a game) aren't naturally exclusive. They might be or they might not be, depending on several things. Like everything in life, it is about finding the correct balance between the two. Sometimes, the scale is a little to the one side, sometimes is a little to ther other. But balance seems to be the key here. This means making a game that is appealing enough to casual player as well as the hardcore audience. Morrowind seemed to have this down pretty good, while Oblvion's balance seems to be leaning more towards the casual player, as it seems more streamlined than Morrowind.

If we again look at the posed question (se above) and then add the comments from say Carter, I would say, that I probably will have to agree with Carter. If it is a matter of survival for the firm, and my friends & coworkers suddenly will be without a job, because I made a decision to make great game that I probably knew wouldn't sell that well, but would be critically acclaimed, both by fans and reviewers, I would want to make game with a little mass appeal, making sure that everyone in the firm, including me, got to keep their jobs. (so we could continue to provide for our families, and pay our bills...)

When you work at a game company, there are deadlines to follow, design docs that must be implemented, shortcuts that sometimes needs to be taken in order to make deadlines and stuff like that.
Just in every other job out there...

 

[Goweigus]

Well if Bethesda wont hit both, I know Intoxicate Interactive will!!!

 

[Hovercar Madness]

So, don't worry, Fallout is safely hidden and protected from evil men and sinister women in suits.

Really?

Well, strictly speaking he isn't really lying or anything. Because of the whole combined publisher/developer construct the guy writing this is in a sense an "evil man in a suit" himself. Where a separate developer could fight the publisher to shape the game according to his own, not necessarily commercially viable, vision, the Bethesda designer's decisions automatically (at least to some extent) coincide with that of the marketing department.

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

Hello aries369,

You make some very good points regarding regarding game design and life necessities.

Still I have to respond back with; why did Bethesda then not simply create its own PA franchise if they really wanted to make a Post Apocalyptic RPG.

Starting fresh instead of trying to continue on the ideas of other developers.
By adopting an existing franchise certain expectations of the earlier 'small' group of fans comes with it.

You can't then just say "We just wanted the name, for the rest, screw it!"

 

[4too]

""Who Do You Love""

""Who Do You Love""




aries369:

....
Let's try to take this for another turn in the spinning machine Wink
If we look at Morrowind, the fans love Morrowind. And Morrowind sold extensively well, and continue selling well. (4-5 millions copies as of may 2007 in total, I believe). If we look at the Fallout games, they also sold somewhat well for a game, released in 1997. It sold about 150,000 coopies, I believe at least for Fallout 1. Arcanum is another game that sold really well in its day, selling about 250,000 copies, I guess. And Arcanum was also very well recieved by the (rpg) fans.
...

My presumption is that in your essay, aries369, you are not apologizing for the Beth dev's right to be aesthetically and economically successful in creating video games. aries369 is most likely not a Beth employee, nor a third party 'native guerilla' , a hired propagandist. aries369 is his own persona making his case for "'Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit Of Happiness"".


aries369 slants his spin to Morrowwind, ""4-5 million copies as of may 2007 in total,"".

The sales figures aries369 states for the FO's and Arcanum do not appear to reflect total sales to May 2007. I have no idea why aries369 needs to stack the deck in favor for Morrowind. This open misrepresentation is unnecessary.
This part of aries369's spin is not important to his interesting apology to earning a living.



The question asked of the dev had a hidden meaning: WOULD THE BETHESDA SOFTWORKS DEV --- CHOOOOSE --- TO WORK ON A GAME LIKE MORROWIND OR OBLIVION, OR ON GAMES LIKE THE FO'S OR ARCANUM.

The dev chooses ego view, FPS, action RPG's designed for the console millions, PC port as gravy. A steady factory, assembly line job.

Fine,

Still. ...

It appears that it is not the dev's designing the games but some force of nature, this force of the market place.

Cold hard gutless calculation. A naked denial to all the happy accidents in game design.

When are the game buyers, the game players, allowed to be coldly calculated in this design by business administration? Before or after the hype campaign bandwagon pushes all the buttons? Sooo Nex Gen, it's cool to design computer games that
worship at the alter of Mammon,
and indoctrinate the consumer
to endure boring, derivative, economically engineered, placeboes for entertainment.


An acolyte of market mysticism,
... would NEVER work on projects that would become the 'happy accidents' of the FO's or Arcanum.
... would side with the ''slam dunks'', the sure thing, the mud-crabs on crack cocaine.

This force of nature, this market force is fine for the game companies, but when the consumers are still fighting scripting bugs, even bugs on consoles, and hitting the boredom wall long before the PROMISED 200 hours of game-play, this 'golden calf' seems more an excuse for shovel ware. No patch? Oh, the dog ate it.




I note now the unleveled playing field, the cooked comparison of the game sale numbers. So nice that the elf saga of BG 2 is allowed millions of sales.

FO and Arcanum not on the marketing radar ... not even allowed the cult sales over the years, no indication of market share, not a hint of RPG of the year status ....

On a FO, or RPG forum this is smoke. This is misrepresentation on the seeming path to making a 'nice guy' apologetic point.

The real total sales to May 2007 are not important. Why bother? Not the true intent. FO is a failure to the apologists, the acolyte to Morrowind and the market forces that must rule all.

In aries369's revision of marketing history, with that CRIPPLED sales count, that MISREPRESENTATION, ...


... there never was, NEVER WOULD BE, a FO, nor an Arcanum. Or even a BG2.



An odd subtext to push, to propagandize, on a FO, RPG forum.





4too

 

[aries369]

As for why Bethesda did buy the Falloutl license, I don't know. You really need to ask Bethesda, or Zenimax Media about this. And yes, I'm not a Bethesda employee nor am I trying to make excuses for Bethesda Softworks. I was trying to give you some form a reaistic assessment of what it means to be in the game industry today. And the truth is that it means you have to sell many copies of a game to be successfull, so that you can pay your bills.

I could also be very idealistic in my work as a teacher, saying that I want to this or that with my students. But I know that being a teacher, there simply are things I can't do with my students. And If I do them anyway, I will probably be fired. So I don't do them. And this is the exact similar situation, Bethsoft's developers have to deal with everyday. If you were forced to choose between releasing a game that would sell a lot of units (copies) which meant that the company could continue so you could keep your work, my best bet is that 90% of you would do the same as Bethsoft does. If you were say a painter (artist) of some sorts, you probably wouldn't do this, since the only person being hurt with your artistic choice of not going mainstream would be --- you.

 

[Tagaziel]

As for why Bethesda did buy the Falloutl license, I don't know. You really need to ask Bethesda, or Zenimax Media about this. And yes, I'm not a Bethesda employee nor am I trying to make excuses for Bethesda Softworks. I was trying to give you some form a reaistic assessment of what it means to be in the game industry today. And the truth is that it means you have to sell many copies of a game to be successfull, so that you can pay your bills.

I could also be very idealistic in my work as a teacher, saying that I want to this or that with my students. But I know that being a teacher, there simply are things I can't do with my students. And If I do them anyway, I will probably be fired. So I don't do them. And this is the exact similar situation, Bethsoft's developers have to deal with everyday. If you were forced to choose between releasing a game that would sell a lot of units (copies) which meant that the company could continue so you could keep your work, my best bet is that 90% of you would do the same as Bethsoft does. If you were say a painter (artist) of some sorts, you probably wouldn't do this, since the only person being hurt with your artistic choice of not going mainstream would be --- you.

Why are you attempting to tell us something we already knew, for the past, like, ten years?

 

[Vault 69er]

Still I have to respond back with; why did Bethesda then not simply create its own PA franchise if they really wanted to make a Post Apocalyptic RPG.

That's the 6 million dollar question isn't it? In fact in monetary terms Bethesda could end up being more successful by starting their own PA brand.

 

[Bernard Bumner]

Still I have to respond back with; why did Bethesda then not simply create its own PA franchise if they really wanted to make a Post Apocalyptic RPG.

That's the 6 million dollar question isn't it? In fact in monetary terms Bethesda could end up being more successful by starting their own PA brand.

Maybe, just maybe, they actually liked the previous games and thought they could do something great to revive the franchise? (Although, of course, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions...)

Games developers are also fans - wouldn't you want the chance to make a sequel to one of your favourite games?

I'm also bemused by the idea that art should be paramount, and that financial concerns should be a distant second place. At the end of the day, reality will always intrude into a commercial venture such as this. Be careful what you wish for - there are many fields of art where purists have promised much, but delivered little, simply because they are hamstrung by their own ambition.

Some have locked themselves away in their bedrooms never to re-emerge to produce that great record, or gone insane looking for perfection in colour and form. Many more have simply become poor and unhappy, and have been told to bugger off by those holding the purse-strings. If a particular art is utterly dependent on commerce - as is the case here - then artists without concern for the viability of their backers simply won't be given more money to make more games.

Having said that, I absolutely agree that the initial question presented a false dichotomy; the best games will sell units, whilst also being great art. The fact is that the question was loaded; many people continue to view highly commercial, mainstream games such as Oblivion as both of those things. That fact that anybody might or might not agree that a particular game is both a seller and worthy, doesn't make the choice any less fallacious. Both are possible, and the best artists will hope and work towards both.

 

[Mick1965]

Well said, Bernard Bumner, I'm also in agreeance on this finance vs art debate. In today's climate where shareholders must be appeased, only the smaller developers can afford to cater to niche markets.

The original question was loaded, and I can't imagine a company that would be happy with it's employees spending inordinate amounts of time to produce products more pleasing artistically, but less successful financially. Having said that, every product must be judged on it's own merits, and it should still be possible to produce good games that are financially successful. Unfortunately Bethesda work to a formula that is purely focused on marketing/sales rather than quality gameplay.

On the question as to why Bethesda bought the FO license... maybe they really are fans that want to produce a sequel, or perhaps they just thought it was a cool idea to produce a PA game and decided to buy the license to remove any possible competition.

Mick

 

[God is Dog backwards]

Bethsoft are in a good position to experiment with FO. They have the resources to do so, and they don't have a publisher breathing down their neck making demands.

 

[BRKL]

Games should be designed by drawing diagrams and writing dialogue in street corners, hoping passersby will toss enough change into your overturned hat so you can get at least one meal a day.

 

[Bernard Bumner]

I would also say that implying a dichotomy between commercial and artistic success also provides a neat excuse for those people producing big-budget crap; that they necessarily have to produce simplistic, hackneyed products in order to provide mass-appeal.

That kind of attitude would be very cynical and patronising to their audience. It seems to be pervasive in Hollywood, and I hate the idea that people will start embracing this kind of idea in the games industry.

 

[Vault 69er]

Maybe, just maybe, they actually liked the previous games and thought they could do something great to revive the franchise? (Although, of course, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions...)

And they couldn't just make their own PA game and claim Fallout as a spiritual predecessor, as Wasteland was to Fallout, and save themselves some money and tons of fan aggro?

Games developers are also fans - wouldn't you want the chance to make a sequel to one of your favourite games?

Certainly. If I planned to remain true to what came before and not "do what we do best".

Bethsoft are in a good position to experiment with FO. They have the resources to do so, and they don't have a publisher breathing down their neck making demands.

This not really true. Bethesda Game Studios and Bethesda Softworks are two different things. Bethesda Softworks has repeatedly demonstrated that it will release shoddy, consolised games to appeal to the lowest common denominator simply for money.
Just because the developers are in the same company as the publishers, it doesn't mean that Bethesda and Zenimax won't breath down the necks of the developers for what they think will sell.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Games should be designed by drawing diagrams and writing dialogue in street corners, hoping passersby will toss enough change into your overturned hat so you can get at least one meal a day.

Yeah, umm, sorry but you are sarcastically challenged.

What the hell is with this "OMG, just think of the developers! they have to eat!"
Really, why the fuck should I care, as a gamer, whether or not a game developer eats or no?
I want good games, I don't care if the developers make money or not.
Should I forgive them for a shitty game, because well.. they have to eat? I think not. If a game is shit, then it's shit. It won't be saved by these pathetic excuses.

 

[Autoduel76]

Should I forgive them for a shitty game, because well.. they have to eat? I think not. If a game is shit, then it's shit. It won't be saved by these pathetic excuses.

I think most people agree.

Which is why the question was bullshit to begin with.

 

[Kukident]

Anybody that says they would chose art over money is either:

A) Lying

B) Speaking idealistically, and not being honest with themselves

or

C) Already very wealthy

totally disagree


i would always choose art over money
as long as i have enough money to live...

 

[Sorrow]

Maybe, just maybe, they actually liked the previous games and thought they could do something great to revive the franchise? (Although, of course, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions...)

And they couldn't just make their own PA game and claim Fallout as a spiritual predecessor, as Wasteland was to Fallout, and save themselves some money and tons of fan aggro?

Frankly, taking in account the failure of FC and FoPoS and having to deal with us, making a "spiritual successor" would be a lot safer, both financially and emocionally .

Anybody that says they would chose art over money is either:

A) Lying

B) Speaking idealistically, and not being honest with themselves

or

C) Already very wealthy

totally disagree


i would always choose art over money
as long as i have enough money to live...

I second that. Being very wealthy isn't neccesary. Otherwise mods, roguelikes, freeware and shareware games, etc. wouldn't exist.

 

[Autoduel76]

.


I second that. Being very wealthy isn't neccesary. Otherwise mods, roguelikes, freeware and shareware games, etc. wouldn't exist.

Mods, freeware and shareware have nothing to do with people not wanting money and certainly would still exist.

That's simply a case of people doing things in their spare time. Even people who would take money over art still have free time to work on things that they like.

Ask somebody who made a Fallout mod, if they'd change what they made for a million dollars.