Interview Chris Taylor On Dungeon Siege 3

[VentilatorOfDoom]

Tags: Chris Taylor (Gas Powered Games); Dungeon Siege III; Obsidian Entertainment

<p>RPS <a href="http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/09/14/interview-chris-taylor-on-dungeon-siege-3/" target="_blank">had a brief interview</a> with Gas Powered Game's Chris Taylor at GamesCom concerning Dungeon Sieg 3 and what involvement he has in its development.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>RPS: So, what’s happening with Dungeon Siege 3? </strong></p>
<p>Chris Taylor: Well, my position on the project is like a, Creative Consultant, given my role in the creation of the franchise. Square Enix asked how we’d like to work in collaboration with another studio that they’d found, and I said “That’s terrific, who have you got in mind,” and they said Obsidian! And I said “That’s perfect! Look no further. You’ve found the best studio for the job. The guys are so talented, and they totally get it, and their working story is right on the money.” So I was pretty happy with that.</p>
<p>The next step was that they went through all of our lore, even the stuff that people never hear about- the reason why there’s a Stonebridge, or what have you, who’s the 10th Legion, who’s The Empire of Stars- and then they create their own extension on that fiction, building their own story off of that.</p>
<p>So what I do is I read through all of their material, and I turn it around 180 degrees, and then I provide some editorial feedback for them.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><em>thanks to <span class="postbody">Santander02 ! </span></em></p>
<p> </p>

 

[Angthoron]

The next step was that they went through all of our lore,

All five pages of it?!

even the stuff that people never hear about- the reason why there’s a Stonebridge, or what have you, who’s the 10th Legion, who’s The Empire of Stars- and then they create their own extension on that fiction, building their own story off of that.

Oh, whoa, no, that's seven pages of lore, poor Obsidian. Hopefully there are pictures in that.

 

[Azrael the cat]

The next step was that they went through all of our lore,

All five pages of it?!

even the stuff that people never hear about- the reason why there’s a Stonebridge, or what have you, who’s the 10th Legion, who’s The Empire of Stars- and then they create their own extension on that fiction, building their own story off of that.

Oh, whoa, no, that's seven pages of lore, poor Obsidian. Hopefully there are pictures in that.

7 pages and so tightly integrated into the gameplay as well. I loved that bit how you could either choose to read the lore in the manual or choose not to.

Surely the best move, if you're the designer of Dungeon Siege, is to just deny the importance of lore to the game - hell, deny any knowledge of 'lore' either as it applies to the game, or as a word in general, and claim that 'story-driven gaming' must be something the government made up to draw attention away from 9/11 - and run with the Romero (doom designer, not zombie film director) quote: 'Story is the thing you put on the back of the box.'

 

[Angthoron]

You know, that might actually be the best move, and I'm not even being ironic. Back when I played DS1, the lore made so much difference it might as well have been written in Chinese.

In general, I sort of feel that there's too much "narrative" going on in modern games - and I'm what Codex would brand a storyfag. The stories are just too many, too poorly written, and too same-like to really make any difference at all. Why are there stories in my shooters? I didn't care about a story in RotT or Doom or Quake, so why bother stuffing it into every single one of them? Hell, wouldn't it be faster and more cost-efficient?

 

[Azrael the cat]

You know, that might actually be the best move, and I'm not even being ironic. Back when I played DS1, the lore made so much difference it might as well have been written in Chinese.

In general, I sort of feel that there's too much "narrative" going on in modern games - and I'm what Codex would brand a storyfag. The stories are just too many, too poorly written, and too same-like to really make any difference at all. Why are there stories in my shooters? I didn't care about a story in RotT or Doom or Quake, so why bother stuffing it into every single one of them? Hell, wouldn't it be faster and more cost-efficient?

On a limited budget, with limited time, there's only so much that a team is going able to create and do well. One thing I recall is that you used to get story-less shooters that would push the tech and gameplay forward (Doom, Quake), and then some other company would licence the engine and do a story-driven fps or fps-rpg with minimal technical innovation.

Just going 'fuck the story' sends a clear message that you're trying to create a game with good gameplay and good tech. There's something sellable in that, I think. BUT you'd have to have the goods to back it up. One thing that stories get used for these days is to cover up the fact that you've just cloned a previous game, or worse. Take a look at all the cover-shooters dressed up in different plot+graphics 'clothes' (Yahtzee got that one right) - mechanics-wise it's all one game just with a different setting and story.

I'm definitely a story-whore, and I'm one of those folks who came out of Deus Ex and PS:T praising interactive story-telling as this great new thing that would revolutionise gaming. Where I was wrong was that I failed to properly estimate how lowest-common-denominator the story elements would go. Yes, I'd rather have no story and a pure gameplay emphasis than a lot of the drivel that gets put out these days. Especially given the total disconnect between technical effort/budget and story quality - AAA games constantly get shipped with D- stories, and not D- as in 'didn't bother, D- as in 'plastered everywhere, can't escape it or ignore it while playing the game, but it's just so inept'. I actually think that drags the game down, such that they'd be better off if they shoved the story to the background completely.

 

[Angthoron]

Yes, I have very similar notions myself, I think part of the reason I am so adverse to the latest products of BioWare are that I can't escape the awful writing, it just keeps jumping at the player wherever the player goes. Sure, some find it fun, like some people think Dan Brown wrote a masterpiece, and some just skip it, but for me, it's just like someone pokes me in a sore spot every time. It's cringeworthy and often pathetic, sort of like watching a mediocre romantic comedy where the protagonist is about to do something so embarrassing that you feel embarrassed to be watching.

And this happens in AAA titles, the sort that can afford the most popular actors to read out stupid lines while being completely uninspired - the very same studios that could hire people with ability and enthusiasm to write - hell, they could make a competition among the fans and kick-start a new star writer for example, instead of doing what they usually do. I, too, expected the story aspect of games to improve in the future, having played the very same games you mention - and it's been rather disappointing to see that the opposite is, in fact, in effect.

 

[Archibald]

Why are there stories in my shooters? I didn't care about a story in RotT or Doom or Quake, so why bother stuffing it into every single one of them? Hell, wouldn't it be faster and more cost-efficient?

I think this is one of the reasons why recent rpgs are shit. "They like stories so why bother with gameplay". Every game should have full package.