Todd Howard at QuakeCon: Half of Fallout 3 got cut

Even the best MMORPGs tend to revolve around k.e.w.l. loot and playing dress-up. FO3 is pretty much there already, which doesn't make much sense for a single-player game. Going online is a logical step. After all, what's the point of k.e.w.l. loot if you can't show it off to other idiots like yourself.

Edit: The word k.e.w.l. is obviously being used facetiously. Thanks a lot, NMA sarcasm bot.
 
Ausir said:
So, any idea what Beth might be working on instead of TES5? I doubt it's Fallout 4.
Click to expand...
I suspect that they will put the numbered sequels on next-gen consoles. They might be working on that, but I haven't heard much from MS or Sony about launching new machines.

It is possible that they are putting a spin-off together for Oblivion, like New Vegas. We've also heard about a Wii title in the works, but I don't know if that's BGS or another dev.
 
Per said:
Todd Howard spoke at QuakeCon and BigDownload
Bethesda makes marketing part of the process of developing their games because marketing is how people are first introduced to the game before actually playing it. Even things like designing what the art will look like on the game disk is part of that process.

Admitting to mistakes is a big thing in game development. Howard said the final version of Fallout 3 was about half of the game they actually made. They don't hesitate to throw out something that just isn't fun. The company also charts how a game "feels" with Howard using a graphic that looks like a series of circles inside each other. At the center is the "perfect game" while at the outer part is the "bug and polish" part. The key is to make the "bug and polish" circle as small as they could make it before the game is released.
Spotted at GameBanshee.
Click to expand...

Oh gods that actually makes sense now. Ok, lesson for the future, Don't let the marketing department design the damned game!
Um...wasn't there a Dilbert cartoon that made essentially that same claim about marketing folks??

As for cutting out half the game....What...the...hell?? Who thought that was a good idea? Cause who wants alot of extra fluff and side quests in their RPG?!?
 
thenightgaunt said:
As for cutting out half the game....What...the...hell?? Who thought that was a good idea? Cause who wants alot of extra fluff and side quests in their RPG?!?
Click to expand...

Well, if what they left in are the best parts of what they did. I really don't want to see the other half that they cut prior to release.

Also:

The company also charts how a game "feels" with Howard using a graphic that looks like a series of circles inside each other. At the center is the "perfect game" while at the outer part is the "bug and polish" part. The key is to make the "bug and polish" circle as small as they could make it before the game is released.
Click to expand...

It's a joke, right?

Cause right now I think it's exactly the other way around.
 
Per said:
Admitting to mistakes is a big thing in game development. Howard said the final version of Fallout 3 was about half of the game they actually made. They don't hesitate to throw out something that just isn't fun. The company also charts how a game "feels" with Howard using a graphic that looks like a series of circles inside each other. At the center is the "perfect game" while at the outer part is the "bug and polish" part. The key is to make the "bug and polish" circle as small as they could make it before the game is released.</blockquote>
Click to expand...
I wonder how similar the presentation was to their DICE presentation, assuming it wasn't the exact same thing. I still have trouble believing that they actually brag about the way they develop games instead of being embarrassed by it because it's pretty much the least efficient and effective design/production process.
 
thenightgaunt said:
As for cutting out half the game....What...the...hell?? Who thought that was a good idea? Cause who wants alot of extra fluff and side quests in their RPG?!?
Click to expand...


Why wouldn't they?

From a marketing standpoint, it's a good strategy. Cut half of the game, then release it. Now you can sell back the cut content, and rake in an absurd profit; as you're basically charging $100 for the complete game.
 
thenightgaunt said:
As for cutting out half the game....What...the...hell?? Who thought that was a good idea? Cause who wants alot of extra fluff and side quests in their RPG?!?
Click to expand...
The problem with cutting half of their games isn't that they cut content (editing is extremely important and extremely beneficial) but that their design phase is so short and ineffective that they wasted enough resources to create that much content that then had to be cut because it was conceptually bad.
 
MrBumble said:
I'm really, REALLY interested in what he had to say about the two Interplay games... :twisted:
Click to expand...

Todd "Interesting and brave attempts at RPGs for the time, but failing to generation the immersion we accomplished with Fallout 3. Fallout 3 is the game the developers tried to create at the time with limited hardware and tools."
 
I think they bought the Starcraft license and are going to make Starcraft 3 an FPS/Strategy game hybrid. Not like the cancelled 'Ghost' game, more like a bastardized version of the classic original. Only you'll need to manage your units from a first person perspective. Should be fun because everything is better teh frist persun emmersive view...
Click to expand...

To be fair, Battlezone was an FPS/Strategy game hybrid where you manage your units from a first person perspective. It kicked major, major ass, and a Starcraft version could be very cool, though it should be a spinoff and not in the main line.

Also: I wonder if they'll ever release their design docs so we can see what type of junk they cut? My guess: No.
 
MutantDwarf said:
I think they bought the Starcraft license and are going to make Starcraft 3 an FPS/Strategy game hybrid. Not like the cancelled 'Ghost' game, more like a bastardized version of the classic original. Only you'll need to manage your units from a first person perspective. Should be fun because everything is better teh frist persun emmersive view...
Click to expand...

To be fair, Battlezone was an FPS/Strategy game hybrid where you manage your units from a first person perspective. It kicked major, major ass, and a Starcraft version could be very cool, though it should be a spinoff and not in the main line.

Also: I wonder if they'll ever release their design docs so we can see what type of junk they cut? My guess: No.
Click to expand...

Ditto, Battlezone was great in its time. Uprising was also very fun and chalenging, with a somewhat similar approach.

OT: so that's why we got such a piece of crap, it turns out the good part was cut! What a shame...
 
Per said:
Bethesda makes marketing part of the process of developing their games
Click to expand...
This is news? Rosh was telling us this 5 years ago, no? The only thing suprising about this is Todd's candor in admiting they really do have no overriding design principles but do let marketing and trend chasing dictate their design. These are my words, I think Rosh was a little less diplomatic about it. :lol:

As far as cut content. Who's to say it's not withheld and trickled out as DLC? Were there not existing cues in the game for the UFO DLC?

And I mean, if it got cut from Fallout 3, how much more fucking atrocious and half-baked did it have to be?
 
Ixyroth said:
Even the best MMORPGs tend to revolve around k.e.w.l. loot and playing dress-up. FO3 is pretty much there already, which doesn't make much sense for a single-player game. Going online is a logical step. After all, what's the point of k.e.w.l. loot if you can't show it off to other idiots like yourself.

Edit: The word k.e.w.l. is obviously being used facetiously. Thanks a lot, NMA sarcasm bot.
Click to expand...

:rofl: :clap:

Perfect wording sir, absolutely perfect.
 
Much as I would hate to admit it... bitching or not that their production process is whatever, it works, because the product S E L L S. That's the point at all , isn't it - all the ridiculous amount of bullshit the PR and management are feeding the masses is irrelevant( well, being that they are americans , they might also believe what they say - no offense meant). So, in a world being driven by consumerism, the gaming products we get are shit - they are graphically intensive, with as much depth as my little finger and gradually( even not that gradually) lowering the dificulty and overall expectation of player intelligence or involvement to a minimum. The point in all that not very eloquent rant is, that as you all very well know, the vast majority of mainstream gamers( or humans, for that matter) are getting so preposterously dumb as time goes on, that we have absolutely no basis to hope that a good game in the vein of oldschool "gaming for the sake of gaming done right" is going to be made. Ever. Again. Marketing won't allow it - it won't S E L L. At least not that well.
 
Ausir said:
I think they bought the Starcraft license and are going to make Starcraft 3 an FPS/Strategy game hybrid. Not like the cancelled 'Ghost' game, more like a bastardized version of the classic original. Only you'll need to manage your units from a first person perspective. Should be fun because everything is better teh frist persun emmersive view...
Click to expand...



As others have already pointed out, battlezone was a great game and had loads of fun. I have no bloody idea why no game company has dared to adapt this idea yet. It's like battlefield, only ten times more awesome. The downside is you can't just throw a bunch of 13-year olds and lobotomy patients and expect they'll work in a team. "Team? I don't need no stinkin' team! Onward! HUZZAH!"

You know what's most depressing? That the 50% of the game they cut was probably closer to the spirit of Fallout than the 50% which remained, but they deemed it boring. People want to talk to blood-drinking emos, cretinous Moira Brown, overcolourized evil characters. People want to detonate nukes, talk to archetypal mad scientists, shoot aliens in space while wearing samurai fucking armour. I have no doubt that the removed locations were interesting - but Todd decided that what the game needs is more cool shit and bloom. Todd's philosophy is that characters can be as deep as a sheet of A4, as long as they're sparkly, colourful and posess some cool or funny, totally cretinous presonality trait.

How come even a god-damned beggar in Planescape Torment felt like a real person, when in Fallout 3 everyone who I talk to feels like a mindless drone or XP/karma dispenser?
Click to expand...
 
I can't get over the fact that people invite this... this... person to be a keynote speaker. Then again, Dubya won two elections so...
 
The Dutch Ghost said:
Todd "Interesting and brave attempts at RPGs for the time, but failing to generation the immersion we accomplished with Fallout 3. Fallout 3 is the game the developers tried to create at the time with limited hardware and tools."
Click to expand...

Did...did he really said that? Please, tell me he didn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top