Interview Brian Fargo on his new game

[Gobbo]

i would want a story to why i am going around and killing things.

You kill things because killing is your business and things need to be killed, dude.

Witcher?

 

[SuicideBunny]

In short, he understands gaming, and many don't.

the new bard's tale.[/thread]

the songs were catchy though.

 

[hoochimama]

I'm interested in seeing how he worked a cover system into melee combat.

So the designer's answer to combat being "99%" of what you do in an rpg(did it even sound like a bad thing to him?) is to make combat better, lowering that % by reducing the amount of filler combat -like devs often admitted to have wanted to do in their interviews about a game years after they've been released: nwn, bloodlines- or even increasing the amount of non combat content doesn't enter the equation?

Not touching the "what is an rpg" argument, does anyone have somewhat objective estimates of how much time you spent in and out of combat in recent popular rpgs(objective because shitty combat feels like it lasts twice as long)?
I know Dragon Age keeps track of a bunch of meaningless stats.

Anyway wasn't wyrmlord being sarcastic?

 

[FeelTheRads]

No.

He really thinks combat is the main ingredient of gaming. He did say "gaming", not "RPGs" after all.

And he also thinks games are inherently bad if they have more than a "GO KIL THATT!!!" story.

That's how stupid he is.

 

[SuicideBunny]

That's how stupid he is.

he likes well-done combat mechanics more than other elements, and just like every single other codexian assumes that his personal tastes constitute some kind of ultimate objective truth, while you are just being a twat.

 

[FeelTheRads]

he likes well-done combat mechanics more than other elements,

Re-read his post. That is what you got from there?

Because I see: "Brian Fargo has combat as his priority thus he knows what gaming is."

Which is utterly retarded.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Some heavy assburgers going on here

I like his priorities.

Combat, atmosphere, scaling rewards properly for big effort, and then marginalize plot and story as far down below as possible.

In short, he understands gaming, and many don't.

Sarcasm literally oozes from this post

 

[Wyrmlord]

Some heavy assburgers going on here

I like his priorities.

Combat, atmosphere, scaling rewards properly for big effort, and then marginalize plot and story as far down below as possible.

In short, he understands gaming, and many don't.

Sarcasm literally oozes from this post

No Clockwork Knight, I really do mean that story should be a smaller priority (whether the labour is divided for it or whether the same people do it), and I don't care whether the worst name calling is done to me for saying that story in game does not matter.

Integrity to wanting an enjoyable game is far more important for me than being a poser who adjusts his standards accordingly.

In before 300 fucking lines of a monologue by Raziel from Soul Reaver about how sad he is about becoming a post-vampire and how he deeply regrets it and hates himself.

 

[janjetina]

Games are known for the ability to tell the story indirectly, rather than following a single linear narrative. A computer game that doesn't have a story to tell is worthless, as its tactical depth pales in comparison to chess, and once there is no story and no tactical depth, what else is there?

I am trying to imagine how a game like Alpha Centauri would look if Wyrmlord designed it.
Factions would be called faction 1, faction 2, etc. Bases would be called faction1base1, faction1base2 etc. Buildings would be called building1, buliding2, etc. Secret projects would be called Project1, Project2, etc. All description (except stat effects) and lore would be scrapped. Diplomacy screen would contain keywords and effect description. Am I being too bold in making a presumption that such a soulless game wouldn't appeal to anybody, but the cream of the Assburger crop?

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

Wyrmlord is correct.

I can understand the want for something to keep many people plugging away, however, an excellent combat and gaming system should always be the first priority of an RPG. The rest should then be worked into this and utilising the system features, not creating bloomy pictures, an emotional storyline, then tossing on the system and combat engine as an afterthought to reach deadline.

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

Games are known for the ability to tell the story indirectly, rather than following a single linear narrative. A computer game that doesn't have a story to tell is worthless, as its tactical depth pales in comparison to chess, and once there is no story and no tactical depth, what else is there?

I am trying to imagine how a game like Alpha Centauri would look if Wyrmlord designed it.
Factions would be called faction 1, faction 2, etc. Bases would be called faction1base1, faction1base2 etc. Buildings would be called building1, buliding2, etc. Secret projects would be called Project1, Project2, etc. All description (except stat effects) and lore would be scrapped. Diplomacy screen would contain keywords and effect description. Am I being too bold in making a presumption that such a soulless game wouldn't appeal to anybody, but the cream of the Assburger crop?

Stop being so black and white. This has been about order of importance, not 'one or the other'. Even the simplest RPG's have some form of story in them.

Before Garriott turned into a complete idiot, his mantra of creating a game was 'System first, work story into system'. This is as it should be, not the other way around.

 

[janjetina]

Stop being so black and white. This has been about order of importance, not 'one or the other'. Even the simplest RPG's have some form of story in them.

Before Garriott turned into a complete idiot, his mantra of creating a game was 'System first, work story into system'. This is as it should be, not the other way around.

I'm far from being "black and white" on the matter, but I do interpret Wyrmlord's last post as such (as there is a difference in thinking of a story as secondary and thinking of it as irrelevant, and Wyrmlord's exact words were: "...story doesn't matter"). . It is imperative that the system gets full attention and is done well. But that doesn't imply the need to cut on the story, as the goal can be accomplished by proper division of labor.

 

[Suchy]

I like his priorities.

Combat, atmosphere, scaling rewards properly for big effort, and then marginalize plot and story as far down below as possible.

In short, he understands gaming, and many don't.

Bullshit. When you focus on combat and reward systems, while marginalizing the story, you end up with shit like Icewind Dale. You get some nice fights with good loot, but it gets utterly boring after two hours.


Also:

what the fuck is this shit, where's my wasteland sequel?

 

[laclongquan]

Tsk!

Torment without its story about the journey of an amnesiac immortal is just a so so RTwP action game. A welldone story will enhance and elevate a good game to Greatness.

On the other hand, genres are pretty meaningless these days and ages. Believeing in welldefined terms proposed by game producers and marketing directors is just asking to be misled.

BF can say whatever the fuck he want, make whatever the fuck kind of game he intend to. We will judge it when we play, not based on what we heard or read.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

No Clockwork Knight, I really do mean that story should be a smaller priority (whether the labour is divided for it or whether the same people do it), and I don't care whether the worst name calling is done to me for saying that story in game does not matter. [...]

oh well

 

[Jim Cojones]

Looks like a blow job. Literary. Hurr durr.

 

[Wyrmlord]

I like his priorities.

Combat, atmosphere, scaling rewards properly for big effort, and then marginalize plot and story as far down below as possible.

In short, he understands gaming, and many don't.

Bullshit. When you focus on combat and reward systems, while marginalizing the story, you end up with shit like Icewind Dale. You get some nice fights with good loot, but it gets utterly boring after two hours.

I, uh, enjoyed it, because the feeling of six dwarves standing there surrounded by wights as they fend them off with axes, and slowly pushing through that crowd as one after another dies and falls off beats any movie battle out there.

And even after such a brutal fight leaves you almost finished, you suddenly find three times as many enemies waiting there for you in the other direction.

It's like the hardest gym workout you have done, where after running on the treadmill for a long time, you attempt to do 30 seconds of pullups. Something like that, yeah...

 

[Morbus]

Was drinking from lead pipes part of the standard crpg development process in the 80s? Did they all sit around sipping methylated spirits at the launch parties? It just seems to be a truism that anyone who made good games in the 80s or very early 90s doesn't just lose form, but goes utterly nuts.

You wait for the 2010's. You're going to see the demise of the late 90s designers

By 2020, there won't be good designers to corrupt anymore, so we'll start to see good interesting games that aren't made because of what the mainstream wants again.

 

[Suchy]

I like his priorities.

Combat, atmosphere, scaling rewards properly for big effort, and then marginalize plot and story as far down below as possible.

In short, he understands gaming, and many don't.

Bullshit. When you focus on combat and reward systems, while marginalizing the story, you end up with shit like Icewind Dale. You get some nice fights with good loot, but it gets utterly boring after two hours.

I, uh, enjoyed it, because the feeling of six dwarves standing there surrounded by wights as they fend them off with axes, and slowly pushing through that crowd as one after another dies and falls off beats any movie battle out there.

And even after such a brutal fight leaves you almost finished, you suddenly find three times as many enemies waiting there for you in the other direction.

It's like the hardest gym workout you have done, where after running on the treadmill for a long time, you attempt to do 30 seconds of pullups. Something like that, yeah...

Well, it's tedious, not fun. For me a good RPG means good writing and story, combat is secondary. Look at Betrayal at Krondor or Planescape - both are totally story driven, with combat much less important (but not bad). And these are two of the best RPGs out there. The Witcher is also good, thanks to the story and despite crappy combat and skill system.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Let's not get out of hand here.

Wyrmlord is a retard because he's a retard. He has some vague ideas in his head which are gathered from people with actual gaming experience and tries to put them out as his own.

RPG is clearly not writing and story, but also combat is clearly not the main ingredient of gaming.

Again, Wyrmlord is a retard.

Icewind Dale is good for what it is. Its main ingredient was combat and it was done good. Doesn't mean all games should follow the same formula. Would it have hurt to have a good story too? No. Only Wyrmlord would think that. Because he's a retard.

The Witcher may have been good, but not as an RPG. I'm sorry, but as RPG Icewind Dale > The Witcher.

 

[Wyrmlord]

I like your emotional investment into videogames.

It was just as amusing to see Drog bait you on saying Fallout 2 sucks.

 

[Mattresses]

Tsk!

Torment without its story about the journey of an amnesiac immortal is just a so so RTwP action game. A welldone story will enhance and elevate a good game to Greatness.

On the other hand, genres are pretty meaningless these days and ages. Believeing in welldefined terms proposed by game producers and marketing directors is just asking to be misled.

BF can say whatever the fuck he want, make whatever the fuck kind of game he intend to. We will judge it when we play, not based on what we heard or read.

no. torment without it's story is an INCREDIBLY SHITTY RTwP action rpg. the story makes it a passible choose-your-own-adventure book, but as a game, it is still rather mediocre. I wouldn't play torment again, but I would play, say, KotC again, which has essentially no story, but strong gameplay.

 

[Kingston]

Way too early for me to make any guesses as to the game's quality, but one thing comes to mind: what the fuck does that game have to do with Wizardry-style-gaming? Reading that interview made me think 'yep, another old great has succumbed to the insanity that afflicts 1980s/90s developers (see Garriot, Molyneux)'.

Was drinking from lead pipes part of the standard crpg development process in the 80s? Did they all sit around sipping methylated spirits at the launch parties? It just seems to be a truism that anyone who made good games in the 80s or very early 90s doesn't just lose form, but goes utterly nuts.

There's no mystery to it. The developers of the 80s were hobbyists who were happy to just be able to make games for a living. Those who made many successful games began to think highly of themselves, saw themselves as visionaries and lost all humility (with the help of fans who held them as gods). Their every uninhibited though was made of pure gold and soon they were expressing themselves through their games while the actual customers were left with shit. When the sales are bad the developer concludes that "they just couldn't understand my game!"

 

[Darth Roxor]

A computer game that doesn't have a story to tell is worthless

Thanks, I never realised that Civilization is a series of worthless games!

 

[Jim Cojones]

A computer game that doesn't have a story to tell is worthless

Thanks, I never realised that Civilization is a series of worthless games!

All Civilization games do have stories. What's more, their stories are completely non-linear and affected by practically every player's decision.