Development Info Pre-2014 GDC videos now available for free at the GDC Vault

[Infinitron]

Tags: Brian Fargo; Chris Avellone; Divinity: Original Sin; Fallout; Fallout: New Vegas; J.E. Sawyer; John Gonzales; Pillars of Eternity; Swen Vincke; Tim Cain

Over the years, various RPG developers have given talks about their work at the Game Developers Conference. These talks were recorded, but were almost always kept locked behind a paywall on the GDC Vault website. Recently, it seems the GDC management have realized the absurdity of this policy, and they've begun to release videos for free at a faster pace. It now appears that pretty much every recorded panel from before 2014 is available for viewing. Here's a selection of them, along with a few that were already free before, because why not:

Brian Fargo at GDC China 2011: Making RPGs That Stand the Test of Time
Chris Avellone at GDC Online 2012: A 4 Hour Story in 400 Simple Steps: Fallout DLC
Josh Sawyer at GDC Europe 2011: The Evolution of RPG Mechanics: From Die Rolls to Hit Volumes
Josh Sawyer at GDC 2012: Do (Say) The Right Thing: Choice Architecture, Player Expression, and Narrative Design in Fallout: New Vegas
Josh Sawyer at GDC Next 2013: Gathering Your Party with Project Eternity
Tim Cain at GDC 2012: Classic Game Postmortem: Fallout
John Gonzales at GDC Online 2010: Narrative Design Between the Lines: Game Development Conversation Standards
Swen Vincke at GDC 2015: Divinity: Original Sin Postmortem - Success Stories and Lessons Learned
​

Josh does like giving speeches. There's also another Tim Cain talk about Wildstar, the MMO he worked on before rejoining with his comrades on Obsidian, and a whole bunch of narrative design group panels in which Chris Avellone was but one of many participants. Not to mention countless other talks by developers from other companies. Fun for the whole weekend!

 

[jagged-jimmy]

Josh Sawyer at GDC Europe 2011: The Evolution of RPG Mechanics: From Die Rolls to Hit Volumes​

Interesting how Josh actually advocates dumbing games down to create a more forgiving fun play experience. I would have expected a well-designed solution instead.
Like ToEE/D&D is too demanding - well guess what, it's made for RPG players and not for casual faggots (Thanks Tim!).
Or missing in Morrowind/Bloodlines/Deus Ex with no/low weapon skill... Well it does suck, but because you might have chosen a wrong perspective and let player do the actual swings/aiming... His point is, of course, Oblivion is more fun, because you do hit and there is no skill check.

Also his own rules,

"Mechanical Chaos" -- so why there are no hard counters in PoE? Why am i relying on RNG? And because i do you probably made the effects unimportant (so i still have fun as a player and am not frustrated being petriefied/charmed/etc constantly).
"What you can perceive is matters most" -- so what happend with PoE weapons? They are all the same through the whole game? DR3 or +10 Acc is not perceived.

 

[flabbyjack]

 

[Infinitron]

Or missing in Morrowind/Bloodlines/Deus Ex with no/low weapon skill... Well it does suck, but because you might have chosen a wrong perspective

Your argument is that he should have said "Haha guys, you made the wrong genre of game"?

"What you can perceive is matters most" -- so what happend with PoE weapons? They are all the same through the whole game? DR3 or +10 Acc is not perceived.

Oh yes it is

 

[jagged-jimmy]

Or missing in Morrowind/Bloodlines/Deus Ex with no/low weapon skill... Well it does suck, but because you might have chosen a wrong perspective

Your argument is that he should have said "Haha guys, you made the wrong genre of game"?

His argument is "manually swinging and hitting without skill check" is more fun.

"What you can perceive is matters most" -- so what happend with PoE weapons? They are all the same through the whole game? DR3 or +10 Acc is not perceived.

Oh yes it is

Yeah, that is why i stashed all "unique" weapons right away without even checking the stats at some point.

 

[Infinitron]

His argument is "manually swinging and hitting without skill check" is more fun.

If you're going to make that kind of game then yes, it is. 9 out of 10 DraQs agree!

(Keep in mind that the talk took place in 2011 and traditional RPGs were so dead that to bring them up in that way at GDC would be hilarious anyway. Action RPGs were the only game in town.)

 

[jagged-jimmy]

The talk is about "evolution of RPG" and his insights of what's good or bad. So i am judging his opinion and not Bethesda's dumbing down. Calling such mechanics "better" and "more fun" is just dumb. It's like he's saying "You know what, RPGs are not fun so make action games instead". Really? That's the evolution of RPG mechanics?

"MMOs get it" "allow respecing" "more options means you can screw you characters"
'Nuff said.

 

[Infinitron]

It's like he's saying "You know what, RPGs are not fun so make action games instead". Really? That's the evolution of RPG mechanics?

Define "RPG mechanics". But yes, if you're talking about action RPGs (again, the only game in town when this talk was given) this is often true.

Roguey can probably take it up from here.

 

[Paul_cz]

Glorious. Will watch the Tim Cain one for sure.

 

[LESS T_T]

I'll do a Roguey-like quoting: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/57754-josh-sawyer-at-gdc-europe-2011/page-2#entry1139782

I am going to address this specifically. I brought this up in my talk as a specific caveat: I am not advocating turning all RPGs into ones that feature real-time core mechanics.

Let me restate what I wrote earlier in this thread: if a developer is going to make a game with real-time first person shooting mechanics and is going to ask the player to manually aim at their targets, the developer should make that mechanic feel good. Inflated spread doesn't actually make the game easier for anyone; it makes it harder for everyone. Similarly, if a developer is going to make a game with real-time direct-control melee combat, the developer should make that mechanic feel good. Going "halfsies" ? la Morrowind doesn't make the game easier for anyone. You're still manually moving around the target and manually swinging the sword. The difference is that when you hit -- maybe you actually don't!

If you're going to make games like the Gold Box series, IE games, or ToEE, make the visual/audio/text combat feedback clear (which really is the player's window into what's going on for such games) and avoid the pointless reload-fodder of all-or-nothing events like the olde tyme Disintegrate spell I cited earlier.

Honestly, though, I don't think many publishers are interested in funding those sorts of games unless they are free-to-play/browser or mobile games. If a publisher wanted us to make one, I'd have no problem doing it. I'd still make the sort of strategic gameplay and mechanical chaos revisions I suggested.

Oh, man, this was the world of just 4 years ago.

 

[DraQ]

His argument is "manually swinging and hitting without skill check" is more fun.

If you're going to make that kind of game then yes, it is. 9 out of 10 DraQs agree!

Actually 10 out of 10 DraQs would rather have stats controlling hitting, but not directly as a simple roll.
OTOH approach with stats governing damage with ensured hits is just foul.

RL combat doesn't involve trading blows till one of the combatants keels over.

I'll do a Roguey-like quoting: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/57754-josh-sawyer-at-gdc-europe-2011/page-2#entry1139782

I am going to address this specifically. I brought this up in my talk as a specific caveat: I am not advocating turning all RPGs into ones that feature real-time core mechanics.

Let me restate what I wrote earlier in this thread: if a developer is going to make a game with real-time first person shooting mechanics and is going to ask the player to manually aim at their targets, the developer should make that mechanic feel good. Inflated spread doesn't actually make the game easier for anyone; it makes it harder for everyone.

And that's pure dumbfuckery.
Inflated spread isn't meant to make it easier for anyone. It's meant to convey that your character sucks at shooting. If it bothers you, make one that doesn't.
So does DX model that tries to reflect that skilled shooter will require less time to aim properly.
The only fault here is using naive spread and not using proper animations to explain why the character is less than accurate. Redress that mechanics with better anims and it works as intended.

 

[jagged-jimmy]

So his talk was about how to improve casual action RPGs for casuals in context of a industry that makes mainstream games. Should've name it so then.

 

[Infinitron]

Actually 10 out of 10 DraQs would rather have stats controlling hitting, but not directly as a simple roll.

Hmmm, how exactly would you implement this in a first person melee game (not a shooter)?

 

[Athelas]

Like ToEE/D&D is too demanding - well guess what, it's made for RPG players and not for casual faggots (Thanks Tim!).

Or missing in Morrowind/Bloodlines/Deus Ex with no/low weapon skill... Well it does suck, but because you might have chosen a wrong perspective and let player do the actual swings/aiming... His point is, of course, Oblivion is more fun, because you do hit and there is no skill check.

It's a real-time action game. You can have the gun waver, slower/faster attack speeds, hit animations that leave you stunlocked longer, etc. to represent the character's stats/skills.

 

[Roguey]

So his talk was about how to improve casual action RPGs for casuals in context of a industry that makes mainstream games. Should've name it so then.

He did. It's called "The Evolution of RPG Mechanics: From Die Rolls to Hit Volumes" and that's true: role playing games with fpp/tpp combat went from die rolls to hit volumes (and they were better for it).

 

[Raapys]

Actually 10 out of 10 DraQs would rather have stats controlling hitting, but not directly as a simple roll.

Hmmm, how exactly would you implement this in a first person melee game (not a shooter)?

Just show the enemy dodge or parry if your to-hit roll fails. That's what action games do and it works fine for them. Morrowind's mistake was the lack of visual/audial feedback, not the stat system itself.

 

[Athelas]

Actually 10 out of 10 DraQs would rather have stats controlling hitting, but not directly as a simple roll.

Hmmm, how exactly would you implement this in a first person melee game (not a shooter)?

Just show the enemy dodge or parry if your to-hit roll fails. That's what action games do and it works fine for them.

There are no to-hit rolls in pure action games - when the enemy dodges, they dodge because they physically move out of the way of the attack.

 

[Infinitron]

Assuming he means action RPGs (which ones?), that's not exactly easy to do either without things eventually becoming ridiculous.

Take Dishonored - no to-hit rolls there, but it has "dodgy" enemies that sort of duck out of the way without actually moving when you slash at them in certain situations. That works in small amounts (though often still feels weird), but now imagine an RPG with to-hit rolls that has those. With an inaccurate character, you'd have what, enemies who do a neverending flurry of belly dance moves as you attack them?



That's compounded by the fact that to the player it appears that they're the ones actively dodging rather than him failing some roll to hit them. At that level, the abstraction begins to break down.

 

[Deleted member 7219]

The Tim Cain Fallout post-mortem is an excellent resource for taking apart Brian Fargo haters. Fargo was just as much the father of Fallout as Cain.

 

[Athelas]

I think the proper analogy would be something more like the creepy uncle.

 

[Raapys]

You guys need to play some more games. Plenty of them have had mechanics that could've been used by first person RPGs. The old Dark Forces: Jedi Knight had your char automatically dodging some shots(laser beam weapons) as well as parrying lightsaber attacks and projectiles. The newer Jedi Knight 2 games had you both parry and dodge lightsaber attacks automatically. Other games, like Dark Messiah, also played appropriate animations to represent parrying. Yes, these games don't have to-hit rolls in the classical RPG sense, but they are there in the background.

Making these moves/animations based on a more visible RPG-tohit roll is a non-issue.

 

[Infinitron]

But dodging in those games is far more simulated and situational. Having a direct RPG-style to-hit roll means you can have characters who might endlessly play dodge animations as you fail to hit them with your low accuracy character. At that point you're just exchanging one absurdity for another, and for no particularly compelling reason since you've already implemented all the animations necessary for a genuine action game.

 

[Athelas]

You guys need to play some more games. Plenty of them have had mechanics that could've been used by first person RPGs. The old Dark Forces: Jedi Knight had your char automatically dodging some shots(laser beam weapons) as well as parrying lightsaber attacks and projectiles. The newer Jedi Knight 2 games had you both parry and dodge lightsaber attacks automatically. Other games, like Dark Messiah, also played appropriate animations to represent parrying. Yes, these games don't have to-hit rolls in the classical RPG sense, but they are there in the background.

Making these moves/animations based on a more visible RPG-tohit roll is a non-issue.

I think you might be confusing move sets (similar to stringing together combo's by pressing button combinations in fighting games) with to-hit rolls. How about posting something like a GameFaqs guide on mechanics that backs up what you're saying?

 

[Raapys]

But dodging in those games is far more simulated and situational. Having a direct RPG-style to-hit roll means you can have characters who might endlessly play dodge animations as you fail to hit them with your low accuracy character. At that point you're just exchanging one absurdity for another, and for no particularly compelling reason since you've already implemented all the animations necessary for a genuine action game.

Yes, you can end up with endless dodge/parry. That's how it works. If someone's a much better fighter, you're not gonna hit him because you suck. How's that bad? Certainly happens in plenty of movies/ tv series where our hero is never hit no matter how many enemies surround him, and people seem to enjoy that.

Secondly, why would you want a genuine action game when you can have a genuine RPG?

 

[Raapys]

I think you might be confusing move sets (similar to stringing together combo's by pressing button combinations in fighting games) with to-hit rolls. How about posting something like a GameFaqs guide on mechanics that backs up what you're saying?

Why bother? You appear to be more interested in dodging the point anyway. The point which is that adopting these dodge/parry mechanics for a to-hit roll based on your character and your opponent's sword fighting/parry/dodge skills is a non-issue.