Cain on Games - Tim Cain's new YouTube channel

[La vie sexuelle]

Oho! After dropping last pieces of information about past century hits, Tim is preparing to video: "How Boyarsky-Cain dream game became a bareboned Reddit experience".

 

[0sacred]

Everybody knows the first question you should answer is "what do they eat?"

"I wonder what word they have for vampire"

 

[Egosphere]

I talk about how to make a good setting for a computer game, and more specifically, what questions your setting should be able to easily answer.

This is just decline apologetics

 

[Geomancer86]

Cannot unsee the "thing" on his nose on the last video...

 

[ItsChon]

I talk about how to make a good setting for a computer game, and more specifically, what questions your setting should be able to easily answer.

I found this video to be good, if a little basic. He's just getting into the swing of making YouTube videos, so it makes sense he's doing these short, surface level discussions, versus diving in deep with insight into his work on Fallout and Arcanum (which he hinted would be coming in the future).

That being said, the thing I found most interesting here was this little blurb.

This whole section was honestly terrible, and it stinks of someone who is trying to rationalize why designing games that appeal to the lowest common denominator doesn't actually effect the quality of the final product. First of all, driving a car up to a mountaintop versus rock climbing doesn't really work as an analogy related to setting, and instead would work far better as an analogy to video game system design. Second, if we were to focus on the analogy for a second, how would having a road that leads to the top of a mountain impact the experience itself? Cain claims that the view from the top of the mountain is just as gorgeous regardless of how you got there, but is that really the case? For you to be able to get to the top of the mountain, a road will have to be built. Once a road going to the top of the mountain is built, a road that leads to the road that leads to the top of the mountain must be built. This directly impacts the view, and the entire experience of climbing said mountain, and that isn't even mentioning the fact that once a road is built, this will likely lead to a lot more people coming, and a certain type of people at that. People with unruly children who make a ton of noise, ruining the atmosphere, people that leave trash everywhere, etc, etc.It's also very interesting that he mentioned a car. How about instead of the two options being a dangerous rock climb to the very top, or a car ride that not only trivializes the whole experience but also takes away from it, we have a tough hike to the top? Isn't it fascinating how even in his own analogy, he immediately jumps to the car, something that pollutes the environment, makes a shit ton of noise, and would require deforestation and a large impact on the natural environment of the mountain?

I understand that this was just an analogy, but it actually was a really great one, just not in the way Tim wanted it to be. It's crazy how a direct comparison can be drawn between adding a road to a mountain so it is more accessible to people, and changing around a game's systems and settings so that it is more accessible to people. As soon as you start listening to investors and executives who mandate decisions like this, it quickly spirals out of control, much like adding a tiny road to a mountain so people can drive up to the top will quickly lead to the entire experience and mountain top spiraling out of control until it is hardly more than a location for tourists.

Tim also doesn't strike me as someone who asks himself a lot of questions. Hey Tim, while it is true that you can modify game systems and settings to appeal to a wider audience, have you ever stopped to consider whether or not this is something that is easy to do? Maybe asking whether or not a setting or game system is mainstream, and making changes based on that question isn't the issue. Maybe the issue is the difficlty level behind making changes that don't completely ruin said games setting and systems. So how about instead of just hand waving away these important questions and issues and acting as if the situation is settled, you meditate on things a bit. I am willing to believe that it is possible for a designer to make settings and systems that will appeal to a wide audience while still preserving the quality of said settings and systems, but I don't think this is something that is easy to do, nor is it something I think developers/designers should attempt to do unless they really have to.

Eh whatever, I'm preaching to the choir here. Someone should copy paste these questions/comments on his YouTube videos, would love to see what he'd have to say to these queries. I wonder if he'd ever agree to do an interview with a RPGCodex chosen representative kek. After we dunked on him for being gay, that ship has probably sailed, if it was ever even in port in the first place.

 

[Late Bloomer]

Here are some questions Tim answered on his first four videos that pertain to gaming(mostly). Minimal fluff with a couple of funny quips. I shortened most questions as needed. No spell checking done. Some of these were answered in videos, but I figured it would be nice to have them for posperity instead of being lost within the depths of various videos.

Youtube videos that these questions and answers are from.

Introduction to "Cain on Games"!
Pick a topic!
My Favorite Sci Fi Novel
Let's Talk Fallout 1


I've always wanted to know who came up with the idea of the "Tell me about" button in Fallout.

That is a good question. I think it was Chris Taylor, but it might have been Scott Campbell. I agree with you that it added a lot to the dialog experience for the player, but some players didn’t enjoy it, feeling like they had to guess exactly what keywords the narrative designers had used, e.g. “mutant” or “supermutant”. It was also a lot of extra work that many (maybe most) players never used.

Hi Tim. Thanks for everything you did as a developer. Could you tell about something about Fallout. I mean is it true before you and Leonard left from Interplay, you wrote draft main story for Fallout 2?

Yes, the story that Fallout 2 used was written by me, Leonard Boyarsky, and Jason Anderson. Some of that story was changed after we left, however.

How much final version of story difference from your vision? In general things

Wow, that was 25 years ago... I mostly remember playing Fallout 2 and thinking the ending was quite different. Also, Fallout 2 was filled with jokes and cultural references that broke my humor rule, which is they need to be added in such a way that anyone who doesn't get the joke or reference doesn't even know it's there. In Fallout 1, we tucked a lot of those into random encounters gated by the player's Luck attribute.

I've been trying to script mods for Fallout/Fallout 2 for a while, and I was wonder what the StarTrek Scripting Language was?
Where did it come from? (What's with the name "StarTrek"?)
Why is it used for Fallout/Fallout 2?

That scripting language was created for one of Interplay’s Star Trek games, and we used it for Fallout. I think John Price created it.

cont- which ones? was it the famously canceled one? Secret of Vulcan Fury?

Star Fleet Academy

Book Questions

But I definitely need to check out Lord of Light—from the hearing, it gives me some Torment: Tides of Numenera vibes, which I found very fascinating as a game.

Roger Zelazny is best known for his Chronicles of Amber series, which is also very good. The first five books in the series are in the bookcase behind me. But Lord of Light is special. I re-read it every couple years, just to enjoy the style of it.

Tales Of The Dying Earth is pretty good, if you haven't checked it out

I love Jack Vance, and I’ve read all of his Dying Earth stories. He is a master of evocative prose.

I'm surprised you did not mention Dune, have you not read it or was it just not a big influence for you?

I’ve read Dune, and coincidentally, I’m rereading it now. But as good as it is, it’s never influenced any of my games.

End Book Questions



So, I have one question: Do you know about Scott Campbell's article "The Origins of Fallout"? And also: is what is written in it true?)

I’ve read Scott’s article, and yup, it’s all true. Well, mostly true, I think. I’ve learned over the years that everyone remembers Fallout’s development a little differently, especially in attributing features and content. Everyone seems to remember who originated a particular idea differently, probably because our process of thinking of an idea, discussing it, changing it, implementing it, and debugging it was so organic and passed through so many hands that it was often difficult at the end to point to something and say “that’s Bob’s feature right there”.

I am providing a link to the article for anyone unfamiliar with this persons question
The Origins of Fallout
(You will need to follow the various links within the page)


I think your line about games just "not being my cup of tea" rather than hating on them is something that the larger gaming community needs to hear about. Is there anything other thoughts that you have about that point?

Nothing insightful. I’ve stopped playing most online games because the communities can be toxic, but I left social media but the same reasons. I wish people could just be nicer to each other, but I don’t see that happening.

I gotta ask, if Obsidian had the oportunity to develop a new Fallout game, would you jump in? Also, I cannot wait for The Outer Worlds 2, hopefully the common folk get to see more of it soon!

I would ALWAYS be interested in a new Fallout game, as a developer and as a fan of the series. If Obsidian started developing a Fallout game, I certainly would want to work on that. But that's true for Bethesda's new Fallout games too. And while I would like to be involved, there is something fun and exciting about playing these games with no foreknowledge of their content. That way, I get to enjoy them as much as any other fan!

If you got to make another fallout what would it be like? Setting, time period, style, plot, characters etc., you are a legend btw happy I found this channel

Conor, I have designed a complete Fallout game with a novel setting, different time period, new mechanics, etc. But I don’t talk about it, because that way if I see those elements appear in a new Fallout game, I’ll know it’s just a coincidence.

Regarding Fallout mods - have you ever tried/seen/played any of mega modifications for F1/ F2 (that are based on your og engine) like Fallout 1.5: Resurrection or Fallout Nevada? If so - what are your thoughts about them?

I have never played any of the mods for Fallout 1 or 2, but I should look at them. The creativity of many modders is just amazing!

I got a question for you which might be hard to answer but maybe if you could discuss how you found your passion within game dev, I myself did that through a lot of weird paths and I am curious how your path was

I always wanted to make video games, ever since getting a home Pong machine and an Atari VCS back in the 1970’s. I even sent designs to Atari when I was 14.
Fortunately, my high school got Atari 800 computers in 1979, and I learned how to program them, especially their graphics modes. That led to a computer game development job when I was 16, and outside of college and graduate school, I’ve never done anything else.

Would you rather make re- make or re- master ( if that is even possible ) for Fallout 1 and 2 ? What is the chance that you actually do it in near future ?

I would rather made a new IP altogether, but I would be lying if I said I hadn't tinkered with the original game a bit, just to get some combat mechanics and script checks working the way they were intended, if I had had more time. I suppose I could always release a mod.

Something I was curious about: what would you say (thematically or otherwise) makes the original fallouts feel the way they do vs the newer ones? What to you is that secret sauce that makes fallout more than just another post-apocalypse game? I'm planning a TTRPG and my biggest TODO item is: Make it more Fallout-y

Leonard Boyarsky and I talk about the Fallout secret sauce a lot, and we think Fallout is a combination of very dark moments punctuated with humorous ones, with a very careful balance so that the game is not too maudlin or too silly. It's a hard balance to find, since it often means choosing when to be serious and when not to be serious. Obviously, I was the one pushing for not serious, and Leonard is the serious guy.

I like your thoughts on Bethesda on Fallout and it sounds similar to if a big company picked up a major IP I'd make. I'd likely be more excited to see how they could push my games in ways I couldn't even imagine instead of playing them with the mindset of "this isn't how I would have done it."

Millions of game players have been exposed to Fallout and fallen in love with it, thanks to Bethesda. How can that not be a good thing?

On the topic of sequels, how did you feel about making Fallout 2 (since you mentioned you don't prefer them), and what circumstances lead to it's creation?
Also, who's idea was the Pariah Dog encounter?

I didn’t want to make Fallout 2, and in fact I had started work on another game. A new team was assigned to make Fallout 2, but the development was seen as troubled by Interplay management, and I was asked to step back in. Unfortunately, a number of different negative events convinced me to leave Interplay after a few months of Fallout 2’s development. And that’s a very long story.
And unfortunately I don’t know who made Pariah Dog.

What piece of cut content from the original fallout do you wish made it into the game the most?

Ha, there are several things. Part of me wants to answer with GURPS, because I was the one who really pushed to get that license. But I will choose the cut area design for the Interplay Productions' building. Not only did it have some fun story telling and interesting loot, but we had planned a cinematic final slide for it (the contents of which would make no sense without the knowing the content of the cut area).

"If a game comes out and you don't like it, play another game." THANK YOU. There are people out there who seem personally insulted when a game isn't what they want.

Always vote with your wallet. A quiet but powerful way to live.

What’s an older game you wish you could play now but it’s almost impossible to? Mine is Nocturne.

I miss playing Star Raiders on my Atari 800. It was fun and quite amazing for a game made in 1979. I bought the Atari 50 package just to play it and to watch the interviews with older game developers, and it inspired me to make my own version using Unity!

What are your thoughts on Arcanum now? Like as a retrospective?? Would you want to make a sequel?

My biggest regret is that Arcanum shipped before we could do a balance pass on combat. So much work left to be done there. A sequel would be interesting to do, but the rights are owned by Activision, and they’ve never expressed the slightest interest in it.

Couldn't you convince Microsoft to buy the rights? I'm sure they could afford it

If Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision-Blizzard goes through, they’ll own Arcanum.

Hi, few of my friends say that fallout 1 story concept is comedic because people living in vault 13 can do all of the vault maintenance by themselves but at the same time can't replace, invent some workaround or just tackle the problem of water earlier by sending some other people or even the protagonist to look for waterchip. What's your opinion on that?

I thought we addressed those concerns in the opening of the game. The Overseer says that the chip is irreparable, and given the integrated equipment involved, a work around isn’t possible (although later in the game, the player can pay for water deliveries to the Vault to extend the timer). And there is evidence that the player was not the first person to leave the Vault, but no one who left has ever returned. Fallout contains humor, but I never thought of the initial situation as comedic.

In my opiniom making a GOOD game is about putting a little bit of your soul into it and it’s exactly what you did with Fallout 1 or Arcanum. It’s something that leaves a mark on your gaming experience so hard that 20 years later you still think about it and how amazing it was.
Saying it’s fine to make them another way is only justifying those big compnies’ objective to earn big money. I’m sorry but I dont’t think it’s fine and I’m not afraid to say it out loud. It’s not fine for all the fans who expected magic and got merely this.

I understand what you saying, and I agree that games are better when developers pour their hearts and souls into them. I could do a whole video (and I might) on the recent trend of work-life balance in the industry. I applaud the attempt, as long as it's tempered with the acknowledgement that game development is as much art as science, and you cannot schedule creativity. At the same time, unless you are an indie, you are making a game using someone else's money, and they expect a return on that investment. Not acknowledging that was part of Troika Games' downfall.

Which relationship do you have with Josh Sawyer, or Chris Avellone? Have you ever met with them?

Yes, I worked with them both at Obsidian. I did programming and design on Josh's game Pillars of Eternity and programming on Chris' game Tyranny.

So it's your face on my fallout shortcut?

Yes. I’m staring back at people from so many desktops. It’s my real legacy.

 

[Pyrite Pachyderm]

I talk about how to make a good setting for a computer game, and more specifically, what questions your setting should be able to easily answer.

The booger in his left nostril bothered me the entire video.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

I wonder if he'd ever agree to do an interview with a RPGCodex chosen representative kek. After we dunked on him for being gay, that ship has probably sailed, if it was ever even in port in the first place.

The Codex can lure Tim back with geometric shapes.

 

[Harthwain]

This whole section was honestly terrible, and it stinks of someone who is trying to rationalize why designing games that appeal to the lowest common denominator doesn't actually effect the quality of the final product. First of all, driving a car up to a mountaintop versus rock climbing doesn't really work as an analogy related to setting, and instead would work far better as an analogy to video game system design.

[...]

I understand that this was just an analogy, but it actually was a really great one, just not in the way Tim wanted it to be.

Is it really a great analogy though? Some games are great exactly because they require effort on the player's part. This provides a sense of creativity, discovery and accomplishment. Dark Souls' ethos of "git gud" is the obvious and most known example of this, but there are also games like Kenshi, Oxygen Not Included, Outward, etc. where "climbing" is essential part of the process.

 

[Shadenuat]

At least we know that outer worlds was basically designed to be bad.

 

[Roguey]

programming on Chris' game Tyranny.

Avellone groaning at a non-owner referring to Tyranny as "his."

 

[Russia is over. The end.]

Cain claims that the view from the top of the mountain is just as gorgeous regardless of how you got there, but is that really the case?

The mountain view may be gorgeous, but is it really objectively more gorgeous than a view of a field? The achievement of getting on a mountain is not the same as walking into a field, and it's what separates mountain view from a field view. The amount of labor/difficulty involved in a task is proportional to the amount of endorphins you'll receive upon the completion of the task. Is he tricking himself because he just wants to fit in with the "incloosive" crowd, or he is genuinely an idiot? Who knows.

Like they say, never meet your heroes. Tim is a bucket of disappointment. He made 2 good games. Everything else in him is a normie guy, a product of his time, with wrong ideas about the world most of the time.

I'm playing a ttrpg right now. We all somehow came to this unspoken rule that we don't talk about ourselves. What a gift. I'm so tired of people.

 

[ItsChon]

Is it really a great analogy though? Some games are great exactly because they require effort on the player's part. This provides a sense of creativity, discovery and accomplishment. Dark Souls' ethos of "git gud" is the obvious and most known example of this, but there are also games like Kenshi, Oxygen Not Included, Outward, etc. where "climbing" is essential part of the process.

He literally states in the video that some people might argue rock climbing to the top will make the view at the top of the mountain more meaningful.

Cain claims that the view from the top of the mountain is just as gorgeous regardless of how you got there, but is that really the case?

The mountain view may be gorgeous, but is it really objectively more gorgeous than a view of a field? The achievement of getting on a mountain is not the same as walking into a field, and it's what separates mountain view from a field view. The amount of labor/difficulty involved in a task is proportional to the amount of endorphins you'll receive upon the completion of the task. Is he tricking himself because he just wants to fit in with the "incloosive" crowd, or he is genuinely an idiot? Who knows.

Great point actually. Worthy of not just a brofist but a post to acknowledge said point.

 

[Goral]

Making excuses why he doesn't talk about The Outer Worlds. On the plus side he linked to Matt Barton's channel.

I talk about why I don't review games on this channel, and as an aside, why I am not talking about The Outer Worlds.Good channels to watch for reviews include:Game development: / @mattbarton Game reviews: / @mortismalgaming Deep dives into book lore: / @quinnsideas Book reviews (and great philosophy teaching): / @_jared Movie and TV show reviews: / @erikkain

 

[Roguey]

Tim Cain's a Halo fan, huh? I've been going through the first game these past few days, a bit perplexed about why it took off the way it did.

 

[Ivan]

the multiplayer

 

[0sacred]

Probably has everything to do with being a soft spoken, conflict averse faggot and nothing to do with anything else.

 

[The_Mask]

Probably has everything to do with being a soft spoken, conflict averse faggot and nothing to do with anything else.

Maybe. But this soft-spoken, conflict averse faggot made Fallout, so... people would more interested in what he has to say, rather than what you have to say.

Besides, it's not like he can't change his mind? He has all the time in the world. He can just play a game, and then give his 2 cents for 10 minutes. Nobody can fault a man for eventually becoming a grandpa.

 

[0sacred]

Maybe. But this soft-spoken, conflict averse faggot made Fallout, so... people would more interested in what he has to say, rather than what you have to say.

"b-but he made Fallout" is why this thread exists

 

[The_Mask]

"b-but he made Fallout" is why this thread exists

Yes.

 

[None]

All the reasons he states why he would be a bad reviewer is why I think he'd be a good reviewer. He has the experience of a industry veteran and the perspective of one, that lends itself to a far more informed critique. 0sacred has got it right, he is just hyper-averse to any sort of conflict.

 

[FalayedGong]

Making excuses why he doesn't talk about The Outer Worlds. On the plus side he linked to Matt Barton's channel.

I talk about why I don't review games on this channel, and as an aside, why I am not talking about The Outer Worlds.Good channels to watch for reviews include:Game development: / @mattbarton Game reviews: / @mortismalgaming Deep dives into book lore: / @quinnsideas Book reviews (and great philosophy teaching): / @_jared Movie and TV show reviews: / @erikkain

That's a very cucked take from him, if I solve a puzzle and feel like it's badly designed then yeah, I can agree, I'm gonna be more pissed at it than if I knew fuck all on puzzle design. However it goes the opposite way as well, if I solve a puzzle and I feel it's well designed it makes everything feel way more satisfying than if I just didn't care about it at all and moved on with my day. It's the difference between reading or watching something passively, just going along for the ride and seeing how it plays out, versus actively, where you're trying to piece together clues figuring out where the story's going. If your story is shit then yes, reading it passively can potentially allow you to ignore mistakes, making it more enjoyable. However if it's well written not only will it not ruin the experience, you can appreciate the story on a entirely differently level. as realize just how clever the whole experience actually was. Not to mention that being passive only potentially fixes the issue, you can still have something so dogshit that even the braindead are rolling in their graves. And I'd argue that if you can't pinpoint why something isn't working for you it makes you more likely to keep stumbling into bullshit. Where as being critical can really allow you to hone in on your tastes, making it more likely you'll stumble into games you enjoy on a deeper level.

 

[Egosphere]

the multiplayer

And it had the split screen option from the get go as well, right? That really made the game. People would get together after school and have a single player campaign to play through together.

 

[conan_edw]

3:17 well they should've listened to her mansplaining Fallout 1 art style to them rather than doubling down on what ended up being the art style of TOW

 

[Egosphere]

3:17 well they should've listened to her mansplaining Fallout 1 art style to them rather than doubling down on what ended up being the art style of TOW

Boyarsky himself said no...
It's over