Interview Game Banshee does Fallout and Wasteland Revisited

[DarkUnderlord]

Tags: Chris Avellone; Fallout 3

<a href="http://www.gamebanshee.com/">Game Banshee</a> are doing some features where they look back on Fallout. They started off with <a href="http://www.gamebanshee.com/interviews/wasteland1.php">Ken St. Andre, one of the original level designers for 1988's Wasteland</a> upon which Fallout was based:
<br>
<blockquote>Ken: Brian Fargo visited me in Phoenix and described a post World War III game that Interplay wanted to do using some new coding techniques that Alan Pavlish had developed. He asked me if I could come up with such a game, maybe modeled along the lines of the movie "Red Dawn"? I told him I thought I could.</blockquote>
<br>
They've followed that up today <a href="http://www.gamebanshee.com/interviews/fallout2-1.php">with an interview with Chris Avellone</a>:
<br>
<blockquote><b>GB:</b> What were Black Isle Studios' main goals for Fallout 3? How was the third installment going to build on what the first two titles had to offer?
<br>
<br>
<b>Chris:</b> Before I resigned, the goals were epic, post-apocalyptic world where you fight against a rival party of survivors (I thought this would be a more interesting series of adversaries - instead of a Foozle villain, you have a group that's a lot like your band - they're not evil, just have a different approach), have a few more Science-based options for braniac characters to solve problems (Science Boy), and try to push the theme of the "Prisoner's Dilemma" (bad, quick explanation - it's a theorem that cooperating with an opponent yields a greater reward than trying to beat them) to explore even new ways of solving situations in role-playing games. I also wanted more gender-based epic options (male players could fight for control of Caesar's Legion and use them as an army, Postman-style, and female characters could take charge of the insidious medical infrastructure and "midwife" structure" of the Daughters of Hecate as informants to gain power). I did want to include more elements I'd liked from Wasteland in Fallout 3. I didn't want the game mechanics or view to change much at all, since I didn't find much wrong with the initial two except for the skill imbalance problems and armor and weapon balance problems.</blockquote>
<br>
Chris also says "Bethesda totally works for me. Oblivion kicked a great deal of ass." when asked about Bethesda acquiring the rights to Fallout 3. He also says a Fallout MMORPG would "totally work" too. Finally, he says he's really an "alien, sent here by his commanders to find out how stupid the planet's population are and whether they'll put up any resistance to being mentally raped by my home world's hive mind". Okay, so I may have made that last bit up but you have to wonder.
<br>
<br>
There's also a <a href="http://www.gamebanshee.com/editorials/fallouthistory1.php">part 1 of a History of Fallout article</a> if you want to take a look over what it's all about.
<br>
<br>
Thanks <b>metallix</b>!
<br>
Spotted at: <A HREF="http://www.gamebanshee.com">Game Banshee</A>

 

[Vault Dweller]

I like this design a lot:

...the goals were epic, post-apocalyptic world where you fight against a rival party of survivors (I thought this would be a more interesting series of adversaries - instead of a Foozle villain, you have a group that's a lot like your band - they're not evil, just have a different approach)
...
and even members of the rival party you could convince to see things your way.

 

[Major_Blackhart]

Did he really say he liked oblivion?

 

[Atrokkus]

Yes.

 

[Zomg]

Avellone is pretty big about running a "Games are schlock" party line, probably halfway posing for suits and half about internalizing a retreat from the responsibilities of an artist (which are obviously a burden for a guy who has to be an entrepreneur first for sixteen hours a day). Good graphics, a big world and a hypewave are good enough to get a thumbs up if you're grading on a scale from company-destroying-failure to successful.

 

[Sarvis]

it's a theorem that cooperating with an opponent yields a greater reward than trying to beat them)

Crazy talk! Everyone knows that competition is the only possible means of progress! Right Libertarians?

He also says a Fallout MMORPG would "totally work" too.

It probably would, just not for you guys. Then again, nothing works for you guys so that's no big deal.

 

[Jim Kata]

I wonder what Ken's wasteland 2 idea was.

Also, fallout 3 sounded pretty stupid.

 

[HardCode]

So, the rights to Wasteland still exist? Hmmm, maybe one day there will be hope.

 

[Atrokkus]

So, the rights to Wasteland still exist?

Not only that, but the baby is in the caring hands of its father, Brian Fargo. The question is: who is he, now that he remade Bards Tale into teen-actiony hacknslash? Can't tell...

 

[suibhne]

So, the rights to Wasteland still exist? Hmmm, maybe one day there will be hope.

Bryan Fargo already hinted (or maybe even outright said) that he'd be remaking it. Or doing a sequel, w/e. Based on his "remake" of Bard's Tale, I'm not too enthusiastic about a new Wasteland.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

He also says a Fallout MMORPG would "totally work" too.

It probably would, just not for you guys. Then again, nothing works for you guys so that's no big deal.

You know it wouldn't, so don't be such a tard...tard.

 

[Jim Kata]

He also says a Fallout MMORPG would "totally work" too.

It probably would, just not for you guys. Then again, nothing works for you guys so that's no big deal.

You know it wouldn't, so don't be such a tard...tard.

Fallout is a better idea than 99% of the MMO "RPG"s out there.

The problem is that MMOs themselves inherently suck unless you have a fondness for 11 year old boys and fat, insane wiccan women in their 30s.

 

[Sovard]

30's? You're far too kind.

 

[elander_]

An MMO RPG must be the most stupid idea someone ever thought about.

 

[POOPERSCOOPER]

I like this design a lot:

...the goals were epic, post-apocalyptic world where you fight against a rival party of survivors (I thought this would be a more interesting series of adversaries - instead of a Foozle villain, you have a group that's a lot like your band - they're not evil, just have a different approach)
...
and even members of the rival party you could convince to see things your way.

Thats because it was my fucking idea. I bet you JE sawyer was the one who made it up after reading my suggestions. This is bullshit.

 

[Jim Kata]

I like this design a lot:

...the goals were epic, post-apocalyptic world where you fight against a rival party of survivors (I thought this would be a more interesting series of adversaries - instead of a Foozle villain, you have a group that's a lot like your band - they're not evil, just have a different approach)
...
and even members of the rival party you could convince to see things your way.

Thats because it was my fucking idea. I bet you JE sawyer was the one who made it up after reading my suggestions. This is bullshit.

That part is the only part that sounds good.

 

[Direwolf]

Do game developers have absolutely no balls nowadays? I'm yet to see and interview with any developer that, when asked what he thought about a particular game, will totally rip it apart using a lot of fucks and shits and will not care for a second how popular the game is or how rabid the fanbois are.

 

[Jim Kata]

Do game developers have absolutely no balls nowadays? I'm yet to see and interview with any developer that, when asked what he thought about a particular game, will totally rip it apart using a lot of fucks and shits and will not care for a second how popular the game is or how rabid the fanbois are.

The scary thing is that in most cases I don't think that they are being PC, but really believe Oblivs is icy hawt just because it has lots of bloom and voice acting.

 

[Human Shield]

it's a theorem that cooperating with an opponent yields a greater reward than trying to beat them)

Crazy talk! Everyone knows that competition is the only possible means of progress! Right Libertarians?

That would be because he is misusing prisoners dilemma.

When you can't enforce contract in a setting where your outcome is tied to group performance, pursuing your best interest would be having the other members do the most work while you take equal benefit. This means that without enforcement (a supervisor) a combined group effort will be less productive because each member is trying to displace work.

Like the classic example of the two prisoners:

"You may choose to confess or remain silent. If you confess and your accomplice remains silent I will drop all charges against you and use your testimony to ensure that your accomplice does serious time. Likewise, if your accomplice confesses while you remain silent, they will go free while you do the time. If you both confess I get two convictions. If you both remain silent, I'll have to settle for token sentences."
The "dilemma" faced by the prisoners here is that, whatever the other does, each is better off confessing than remaining silent. But the outcome obtained when both confess is worse for each than the outcome they would have obtained had both remained silent.

Without being able to confer and enforce contracts groups perform subpar.

So the correct use would be trying to ally with another group to defeat big badie without detailed contracts but both sides tries to get the other to do all the fighting and they both end up losing.

Competition ensures that those best at cooperation get the benefits.

 

[Paranoid Jack]

Did he really say he liked oblivion?

In his defense (though I don't know him personally) maybe he didn't play it long enough to get past the shininess. So he never got a full understanding of it's broken promises and poor design. Or maybe he was using a blanket statement (or assumption) like this... Oblivious sold well making it a good game.

Not sure and I am done stretching here.

 

[Bradylama]

Maybe he's looking to get his foot in the door on the F3 project. Or he could have just suffered head trauma.

Do game developers have absolutely no balls nowadays? I'm yet to see and interview with any developer that, when asked what he thought about a particular game, will totally rip it apart using a lot of fucks and shits and will not care for a second how popular the game is or how rabid the fanbois are.

In an issue of PCGW, the PCGW staff interviewed some Piranha Bites members about Gothic 3, and they said in a very nice way, that Oblivion was vapid, soulless, empty loot-grabbing, while their project would obviously have substance.

 

[Sarvis]

That would be because he is misusing prisoners dilemma.

He's probably not using prisoner's dilemma at all.

"You may choose to confess or remain silent. If you confess and your accomplice remains silent I will drop all charges against you and use your testimony to ensure that your accomplice does serious time. Likewise, if your accomplice confesses while you remain silent, they will go free while you do the time. If you both confess I get two convictions. If you both remain silent, I'll have to settle for token sentences."
The "dilemma" faced by the prisoners here is that, whatever the other does, each is better off confessing than remaining silent. But the outcome obtained when both confess is worse for each than the outcome they would have obtained had both remained silent.

Without being able to confer and enforce contracts groups perform subpar.

You're missing a very important part of Prisoner's Dilemma, which is that an outside agent whose duty is to protect people from the actions of the "prisoners," is the only thing preventing them from communicating and coming to an agreement.

This is the role the government performs with regard to businesses, and without the government fulfilling that role all it would take for cabals to form is mutually agreed upon contracts.

So the correct use would be trying to ally with another group to defeat big badie without detailed contracts but both sides tries to get the other to do all the fighting and they both end up losing.

Competition ensures that those best at cooperation get the benefits.

Yeah, that's why no countries, businesses or even people have EVER allied with each other... right? You're taking the Prisoner's Dilemma, which all but gaurantees no benefit for cooperation, and expecting it to apply to every possible situation in which you can choose cooperation or competition. That is far beyond the scope of what the Dilemma is meant to illustrate.

 

[Bradylama]

On the other hand, there would be no need for alliances if there wasn't a need for competition. The Native Americans wouldn't have formed Confederacies if they didn't think it would help them compete with the White Man or other tribes.

Parties only cooperate in order to gain leverage on a more significant competitor. That's why we had the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the Soviets made the Eastern Bloc.

Besides, Libertarians don't necessarily believe that competition generates all progress. Monopolies have to maintain a standard of quality, price, and innovation or they'll be destroyed by outside pressures, whether it's from an upstart competitor providing a cheaper or better product, or new industries that make its own obsolete.

This is why anti-trust legislation is counter-productive to the economy, since impeding cross-industry cooperation limits the amount of resources available to human interests.

What people forget is that monopolies can only maintain themselves so long as they have consumers, and in this day and age of global communication it's all the more easier for consumers to collectivise and counter the evils of shady business. The problem is creating the informed consumer.

 

[TheGreatGodPan]

Rather than one prisoners dilemna, a more realistic variation is the iterated prisoner's dilemna in which one's behavior leads to a certain reputation.

Sarvis, your understanding of libertarianism is sorely lacking. The most important distinction for us is not individualist vs collective or cooperative vs competitive but voluntary vs coercive. None of this really has anything to do with the thread though.

Speaking of that, did anybody else find it weird that they state that the original Fallout gave Black Isle a reputation, even though Black Isle didn't exist when it was released?

 

[Jim Kata]

"voluntary vs coercive" and "individualist vs collective" are the same things. Total freedom/anarchy/personal ownership vs the opposite.

 

[Sarvis]

Rather than one prisoners dilemna, a more realistic variation is the iterated prisoner's dilemna in which one's behavior leads to a certain reputation.

Sarvis, your understanding of libertarianism is sorely lacking. The most important distinction for us is not individualist vs collective or cooperative vs competitive but voluntary vs coercive. None of this really has anything to do with the thread though.

That may be the question for you, but the question for me is why you think coercion automatically goes away of government does.

There's also the little fact that you CHOSE to live here, so are not nearly so coerced as you'd have us believe. There's really no difference between living in an apartment building that provides services you don't use and living in a country which provides services you don't use.