Interview Brian Fargo talks to GameSpot

[Vault Dweller]

Tags: Bard's Tale (2005); Brian Fargo; InXile Entertainment

After giving <a href=http://www.inxile-entertainment.com/>The Bard's Tale</a> 6.7, <a href=http://www.gamespot.com>GameSpot</a> has decided to make it up to <b>Brian Fargo</b> by asking him <a href=http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/rpg/thebardstale/news_6111481.html>a few questions</a> and sucking up - the interview starts with "Really, what's not to like about Brian Fargo?" and goes on praising his honesty, mad genius, humor, etc. Rather funny, considering <a href=http://www.rpgcodex.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=5542>the review</a>.
<br>
<br>
<blockquote><b>What grade do you give yourself on the project? Are you pleased with the final game?</b>
<br>
<br>
We created a game that excels in several areas. The first are the traditional RPG areas like combat and inventory management, because the new game makes serious strides over its predecessors. It also breaks entirely new ground across all genres in the area of humor, because in our game it's pervasive, while in other games it's an afterthought, if it's there at all.</blockquote>It excels in inventory management? Is this guy for real?
<br>
<br>
<blockquote><b>The tone of the new The Bard's Tale is much more humor-oriented than the original. Did you ever worry that might rub more-serious RPG fans the wrong way?</b>
<br>
<br>
...What was important was to deliver a real RPG that was long (40 hours), had replayability, and offered all the level increases, stats, and so on that people expect. The humor is a bonus.</blockquote>40 hours? Didn't GameSpot max out at 16? Btw, cute RPG definition: stats, level increases, and so on.
<br>
<br>
<br>

 

[aboyd]

Standard PR tactic

Standard PR, I think. Determine all the weakest points that people have mentioned, and then just assert that they are in fact your strongest points. It's truth-by-repetition, and arguing to authority ("we built it, therefore we correctly know our strengths").

It doesn't matter if it flies in the face of reality. In fact, that's kind of the point. Beat reality into submission.

It annoyed me enough that after 2 years (or so) of lurking, I had to open an account just to call Brian on his tactic.

 

[Otaku_Hanzo]

Well scoop out my eyes and call me an ocular whore...

WTF?! :shock:

 

[Sol Invictus]

INTERNETS.

But seriously, that interview is lame. It reminds me of the interviews Warren Spector did after DXIW was panned by fans everywhere.

 

[Surlent]

The reviewer and the interviewer are different peole. Ryan Davis was the reviewer and Curt Feldman was the interviewer. That doesn't say they shouldn't work together as group.

But yea, kinda lame to throw bad review and then suck up the designer. Maybe theyt want to keep their connections to Fargo and Inxile with this ?

 

[Seven]

This confirms my opinion that gamespot is full of whores.

 

[Whipporowill]

Hehe, you know an interview is really bad when a guy comes out of lurking for two years just to say it stinks...

 

[Eclecticist]

Haha.

And yeah, nothing new to add but I share your feelings fellow friends. I can call you my friends, right?

 

[dojoteef]

What did you expect.

Well I've been a fairly long time follower of the codex now, and I guess I finally feel I should start posting. Well, now that's out of the way.

What would you expect Fargo to do? Admit that the game sucked? It might be the honorbale and just thing to do, but they guy has to make a living. Since he started a new company, a publishing company at that, he needs the money. I'm sure he's drowning in debt and the bs that he's spewing.

I do find it interesting that the viewers of gamespot gave the game an average score of 8.5. It just goes to show that Brian actually did cater to the fans he was after. It's kind of like Doom 3 catered pretty much to those who wanted a game that was very similar to the old school shooters that gave shallow frights and required twich reflexes. Though I do have to admit, Doom 3 was slower paced than the old school games.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Well, I'm not sure it's the interview itself, but here's the thing about the presentation of the thing from GameSpot:

• Really, what's not to like about Brian Fargo? He places humor on a pedestal, respects the classic games, and rarely tucks his shirt in. If he weren't so SoCal, he might even be called a mensch.

Does he respect the classic games after seeing what the deal is with The Bard's Tale? I'm not so sure considering he took a classic game and the only thing really retained from the original series is the name and that seems to be the only real selling point of the thing. Would anyone even care about this game if it wasn't called, "The Bard's Tale"? So, is he respecting the classic game by using it's name to sell his first game, an action CRPG with a lot of dumbed down elements?

 

[kris]

Re: What did you expect.

What would you expect Fargo to do? Admit that the game sucked? It might be the honorbale and just thing to do, but they guy has to make a living. Since he started a new company, a publishing company at that, he needs the money. I'm sure he's drowning in debt and the bs that he's spewing.

I do find it interesting that the viewers of gamespot gave the game an average score of 8.5. It just goes to show that Brian actually did cater to the fans he was after.

Me and noone else here expects Fargo to say anything else. But we do expect gamespot to have the guts to give him some more critisizing questions and not begin the interview with a "suckup session".

While I neither played nor seen the game I can't comment on it that much, but I must add that I surerly don't trust those player reviews. there is all to many that like a game a bit and then put out a 10/10/10/10/10 review of it... I also have a nagging suspicion that people involved in game development have someone to vote it up. (actually, I never trust a poll/statistics I was not part of. )

 

[dojoteef]

Re: What did you expect.

Me and noone else here expects Fargo to say anything else. But we do expect gamespot to have the guts to give him some more critisizing questions and not begin the interview with a "suckup session".

Why would you expect him to say otherwise. I would really like at least some reason. I mean did you just say that to sound contrary like it seems a lot of the bickering that goes on here at the codex seems to be?

Though, I can see your point about GameSpot trying their hand at a few "hard hitting" questions, it's as if the interviewer hasn't played the game or talked to the reviewer and has only been reading the hype. Then again, I'm sure GameSpot management has a fair amount to say regarding what can and can't be asked for fear of alienating developers and publishers. I can almost bet that people in most mainstream gaming outlets are encouraged not to be harsh to large companies, or in this case a company that might have the potential to become large considering Brain Fargo helped start Interplay.

 

[FireWolf]

Which is going to garner Gamespot more interest? Contraversial but well thought out and interesting interviews which may or may not alienate developers, or obvious pandering to those they interview?

Perhaps this is Fargo's idea of a joke? Can't you just imagine them all huddling around a pc as he writes his reply laughing at the deep irony? Traditional RPG areas like combat and inventory management? Arn't there RPG games that don't rely on combat? Isn't combat a prerequisite for an action game but not an RPG? Inventory management...

Ah, maybe that's it. When he says "excels in several areas.... [of] traditional rpg areas" he actually means removed traditional RPG elements making an Action title rather than an RPG? Lets not forget, people, that this game is meant to be funny! This is new ground, no game before has ever tried to be humerous throughout and with intent! Wait...sam and max? I'm pretty sure Monkey Island had a few quips here and there...new ground...


Humour is a bonus yet they decided to put it throughout their game and shoved it as a major selling point?

Really, you have to considder the fact that Fargo is having a laugh with this interview. He can't be making these claims seriously unless he's had no contact with the game at all.

 

[kris]

Re: What did you expect.

Me and noone else here expects Fargo to say anything else. But we do expect gamespot to have the guts to give him some more critisizing questions and not begin the interview with a "suckup session".

Why would you expect him to say otherwise. I would really like at least some reason. I mean did you just say that to sound contrary like it seems a lot of the bickering that goes on here at the codex seems to be?

Uh what? I just said I did not expect him to say anything else and you ask why I expected him to do that? Please read posts that you quote and question.

 

[dojoteef]

Damned double post. It really is too late/early for me. It's 6am here and I've been up all night. I guess I'm really starting to slip; gotta get to sleep.

 

[dojoteef]

kris I would like to say I'm sorry about that. It was late when I read the post and my brain obviously isn't processing at full capacity, at least that's what I like to think is the reason for my lack of reading comprehension skills. When I was reading it over quickly I read it as: "Me, and no one else, expects Fargo to say anything else." I took it to mean you were the only one to expect Fargo to say something different and no one else here would expect that. Sorry. I guess you're wording was a little confusing to me.

Maybe if you had said "No one here expects Fargo to say anything else." it might have been more clear.

Which is going to garner Gamespot more interest? Contraversial but well thought out and interesting interviews which may or may not alienate developers, or obvious pandering to those they interview?

I think you are assuming too much. Gamespot needs to have exclusives, previews, etc. in order to have the interest of their masses. That requires being on good terms with any developer that might put out a game people will be interested in knowing more about. Another problem is you believe most people care about well thought out articles. It seems people in general are more content to be spoonfed bullshit hype and then bitch about the poor quality games developers are putting out than to worry about thought provoking articles. Those hype articles tend to be just as interesting as a well thought out article. Take Fable for example. The interviews and articles before the release discussing how amazing the cool new features were going to be are extremely interesting forms of fiction, because the reader can just imagine how fun the game is going to be. Then when Fable came out and didn't have any of those features, the gaming mags just touted it saying it wasn't what we expected but look at how cool it is that your models age as you get older! It's just a general trend in gaming now to dumb everything down. Maybe that's because the majority of people purchasing these games don't want to have deeply intellectual computer games or gaming articles. That's really one of my biggest qualms against consoles. It seems to breed such people. Not that a little mindless gaming isn't fun every once in a while, it's just that I'd rather most gaming to be intellectually stimulating on some level.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Well scoop out my eyes and call me an ocular whore...

:shock:

WTF?!

... quite.

 

[Reklar]

kris I would like to say I'm sorry about that. It was late when I read the post and my brain obviously isn't processing at full capacity, at least that's what I like to think is the reason for my lack of reading comprehension skills. When I was reading it over quickly I read it as: "Me, and no one else, expects Fargo to say anything else." I took it to mean you were the only one to expect Fargo to say something different and no one else here would expect that. Sorry. I guess you're wording was a little confusing to me.

Maybe if you had said "No one here expects Fargo to say anything else." it might have been more clear.

Which is going to garner Gamespot more interest? Contraversial but well thought out and interesting interviews which may or may not alienate developers, or obvious pandering to those they interview?

I think you are assuming too much. Gamespot needs to have exclusives, previews, etc. in order to have the interest of their masses. That requires being on good terms with any developer that might put out a game people will be interested in knowing more about. Another problem is you believe most people care about well thought out articles. It seems people in general are more content to be spoonfed bullshit hype and then bitch about the poor quality games developers are putting out than to worry about thought provoking articles. Those hype articles tend to be just as interesting as a well thought out article. Take Fable for example. The interviews and articles before the release discussing how amazing the cool new features were going to be are extremely interesting forms of fiction, because the reader can just imagine how fun the game is going to be. Then when Fable came out and didn't have any of those features, the gaming mags just touted it saying it wasn't what we expected but look at how cool it is that your models age as you get older! It's just a general trend in gaming now to dumb everything down. Maybe that's because the majority of people purchasing these games don't want to have deeply intellectual computer games or gaming articles. That's really one of my biggest qualms against consoles. It seems to breed such people. Not that a little mindless gaming isn't fun every once in a while, it's just that I'd rather most gaming to be intellectually stimulating on some level.

It's amazing how similar this response it to mine in this thread. I can't say it surprises me too much though, because surely I'm not be the only one who has these thoughts. You make a good point about reviewers, especially the online ones like Gamespot, and though I can't say I support what they're doing, I can at least understand why it happens. There aren't too many paid reviewers willing to risk their jobs to give an honest review, so their integrity suffers instead. Fortunately independent, unpaid, sources do give fair reviews of games to counter the hype, though their viewership is generally limited in number.

-Reklar
(a Fallout/RPG fan)

 

[Limorkil]

Re: Standard PR tactic

Standard PR, I think. Determine all the weakest points that people have mentioned, and then just assert that they are in fact your strongest points. It's truth-by-repetition, and arguing to authority ("we built it, therefore we correctly know our strengths").

It doesn't matter if it flies in the face of reality. In fact, that's kind of the point. Beat reality into submission.

Yes, that sounds about right. Its so common that you can pretty much identify the weakness of any product just by looking at the advert and reversing what they say. If its "the most reliable car in its class" then you know its unreliable, if its "got the highest safety rating" then you know safety is an issue, and so on. Say the reverse of reality enough times and enough people will believe it to make it reality. Everyone's doing it. Where I work our biggest criticism from our clients is that we are not responsive enough to their queries, so we launched a multi-million dollar initiative to convey the message that we are responsive to our customer's needs. Did we actually improve our responsiveness? Of course not.

Of course, claiming that inventory management is your best feature is never going to work even if it IS great. People notice when its done badly, but no-one cares if its great.

 

[Otaku_Hanzo]

Does he respect the classic games after seeing what the deal is with The Bard's Tale? I'm not so sure considering he took a classic game and the only thing really retained from the original series is the name and that seems to be the only real selling point of the thing. Would anyone even care about this game if it wasn't called, "The Bard's Tale"? So, is he respecting the classic game by using it's name to sell his first game, an action CRPG with a lot of dumbed down elements?

Here here, Saint. Exactly what I was saying in another topic here. It's pretty sad when you take a good classic game series, totally make something NOT similar to that series with the exception of a fantasy setting, yet use the name of it to garner sales. What's next, Fargo?

Oh. I can see it now. New dating sim set in a post apocalyptic world where the object of the game is to get the girl! And the name of this new project? Why, Wasteland, of course!

 

[Whipporowill]

Well, maybe he was actually telling the truth about that dance mat after all? Dance Dance Wastelands, anyone?

 

[triCritical]

and people blame IPLY's woes on Herve...

 

[monkey]

Well, maybe he was actually telling the truth about that dance mat after all? Dance Dance Wastelands, anyone?

How about Wasteland Damarcy? Or, if you must have a rhythm game with odd controllers, how about Wasteland Conga with the speed of the drumming controlling how rapidly you "rip a clip"?