Interview Chris Avellone talks about cancelled games of the past and possibilities for the future at Eurogamer

[Lancehead]

I'd like a first-person open world Arcanum.

 

[karfhud]

Either way you look at it, it's potentially good news for us.

But I am interested in seeing more.

My, Arcanum 2, same scope, but with more filled out content, less bugs and better combat. It would be heaven. Tim Cain as a project lead.

And without filler combat and trash mobs.

And in turn-based.

Well I can see Disney hiring them to make a new Star Wars rpg, maybe one named KotOR 3.

Not possible. EA got all the video game rights to SW.

Disney launches an onslaught of Star Wars stuff, so it's only logical to assume that there will be more SW games in the works than just the new Battlefront. They might be thinking, hey, we've got a shooter, now we should try to develop an RPG. Then someone says, great idea, remember KoTOR? Let's do a third part of the saga! Someone else goes, yeah, Bioware would be perfect for this, but guess what, they have their hands full with retrieving their long-lost reputation through DA III. Why not call Obsidian? They have the manpower and the abilities to do it, plus fans are crazy in love with them. Beep beep beep, hello, Mr Urquhart? We'd like to talk...

I almost see this scenario playing out. God damn, I just accidentally overhyped myself, off to play KoTOR 2.

 

[Jarpie]

Don't think it's Paradox, haven't all their third-party games been clearly very low budget ones, and more and less shovelware?

 

[Semper]

I almost see this scenario playing out. God damn, I just accidentally overhyped myself, off to play KoTOR 2.

ea already secured the rights to exclusively develop and publish star wars games. i doubt that they would hire an external studio for that.

 

[JANKOhrp]

Don't think it's Paradox, haven't all their third-party games been clearly very low budget ones, and more and less shovelware?

Most are, though I would like to believe that Mount and Blade, Warlock and Cities in Motion among a few others, have some redeeming qualities.

 

[Frian Bargo]

"We would like to do a real-world-style RPG," he revealed, "because that would be really interesting for us. Usually there's some minor spin on it, a minor sci-fi spin on it, and sometimes it diverts into superhero territory, but the idea of doing role-playing and design in a real-world environment is actually pretty interesting to us."

Crpg set in modern times and made by MCA or Ziets or Cain?

Alpha Protocol 2!

 

[Rake]

I'd like a first-person open world Arcanum.

 

[Lancehead]

The core of Arcanum (what makes Arcanum great: the setting, the open character system, and the free-form problem solving) is quite suited to such a style of game.

 

[Rake]

The same as Fallout?

 

[Lancehead]

Fallout's character system isn't open or deep enough.

 

[Spectacle]

The same as Fallout?

Yes, as proven by New Vegas, despite the shitty Bethesda engine.

 

[General Maxson]

C'mon motherfuckers. Really? A first person Arcanum? I know the sequel was supposed to be first person, probably because there's more money and publisher involved, and I know Arcanum had quite shitty graphics, but still?! What's the advantage of using first person in such a game like Arcanum? Turn it into a blobber? Iso is much better for such crpgs. I still remember a few cool and atmospheric locations from Arcanum, that I can't imagine seeing in FP.

And New Vegas would be a much better game if it wasn't in that shitty FP engine. One can only dream of someone remaking New Vegas in proper nice iso engine.

And now you're telling me Arcanum is more suited to FP because "The core of Arcanum (what makes Arcanum great: the setting, the open character system, and the free-form problem solving) is quite suited to such a style of game"?? Like iso would handicap it... More likely FP would handicap it (and create a more action-y game)!

Bringers of , , :youreafag: etc.

 

[Rake]

The same as Fallout?

Yes, as proven by New Vegas, despite the shitty Bethesda engine.

Which would be ten times better if it was made in Fallout 2 engine.

I'm not saying that a first person shooter Arcanum would be 100% shit (but only if it was made by Obsidian or at least inXile), but it would be worse than an isometric, tactical one.

 

[Spectacle]

The same as Fallout?

Yes, as proven by New Vegas, despite the shitty Bethesda engine.

Which would be ten times better if it was made in Fallout 2 engine.

I'm not saying that a first person shooter Arcanum would be 100% shit (but only if it was made by Obsidian or at least inXile), but it would be worse than an isometric, tactical one.

Do you even like first person RPGs at all?

 

[General Maxson]

The same as Fallout?

Yes, as proven by New Vegas, despite the shitty Bethesda engine.

Which would be ten times better if it was made in Fallout 2 engine.

I'm not saying that a first person shooter Arcanum would be 100% shit (but only if it was made by Obsidian or at least inXile), but it would be worse than an isometric, tactical one.

Do you even like first person RPGs at all?

Name good ones that aren't blobber? Crpgs like Arcanum (with story, C&C, dialogue, complex character systems (reactivity) etc.)? Bloodlines and? And like Bloodlines didn't lose more than it gained (as a crpg) by being FP.

 

[karfhud]

The same as Fallout?

Yes, as proven by New Vegas, despite the shitty Bethesda engine.

Which would be ten times better if it was made in Fallout 2 engine.

I'm not saying that a first person shooter Arcanum would be 100% shit (but only if it was made by Obsidian or at least inXile), but it would be worse than an isometric, tactical one.

Do you even like first person RPGs at all?

Name good ones that aren't blobber? Crpgs like Arcanum (with story, C&C, dialogue, complex character systems (reactivity) etc.)? Bloodlines and? And like Bloodlines didn't lose more than it gained (as a crpg) by being FP.

With all the bugs it had, I can't imagine Bloodlines in isometric view. First person perspective helped nail the ambiance.

 

[General Maxson]

The same as Fallout?

Yes, as proven by New Vegas, despite the shitty Bethesda engine.

Which would be ten times better if it was made in Fallout 2 engine.

I'm not saying that a first person shooter Arcanum would be 100% shit (but only if it was made by Obsidian or at least inXile), but it would be worse than an isometric, tactical one.

Do you even like first person RPGs at all?

Name good ones that aren't blobber? Crpgs like Arcanum (with story, C&C, dialogue, complex character systems (reactivity) etc.)? Bloodlines and? And like Bloodlines didn't lose more than it gained (as a crpg) by being FP.

With all the bugs it had, I can't imagine Bloodlines in isometric view. First person perspective helped nail the ambiance.

Yeah, FP also nailed obligatory voice acting for every line, and shortened dialogues. That's exactly what it would do to FP Arcanum 2. Who will now dare to make a FP rpg without "immersion" of voiced dialogue?

 

[Lancehead]

What's the advantage of using first person in such a game like Arcanum?

First-person is good for exploration, item interaction, and allows many possibilities for free-form problem solving. Levitation, for example.

I still remember a few cool and atmospheric locations from Arcanum, that I can't imagine seeing in FP.

The art direction was okay in Arcanum, and I don't see how that can't be replicated in full 3D.

And now you're telling me Arcanum is more suited to FP because "The core of Arcanum (what makes Arcanum great: the setting, the open character system, and the free-form problem solving) is quite suited to such a style of game"?? Like iso would handicap it... More likely FP would handicap it (and create a more action-y game)!

First, I said "quite suited to", not "more suited to". Second, I haven't given much thought to whether Arcanum would be better in first-person or isometric, but obviously it depends on what you consider makes the Arcanum experience. I have listed my take on it (the setting, the open character system, and the free-form problem solving), and I don't see any reason why first-person would be disadvantageous for them. Would you mind expounding on how first-person would handicap any of the three qualities I mentioned?

 

[karfhud]

The same as Fallout?

Yes, as proven by New Vegas, despite the shitty Bethesda engine.

Which would be ten times better if it was made in Fallout 2 engine.

I'm not saying that a first person shooter Arcanum would be 100% shit (but only if it was made by Obsidian or at least inXile), but it would be worse than an isometric, tactical one.

Do you even like first person RPGs at all?

Name good ones that aren't blobber? Crpgs like Arcanum (with story, C&C, dialogue, complex character systems (reactivity) etc.)? Bloodlines and? And like Bloodlines didn't lose more than it gained (as a crpg) by being FP.

With all the bugs it had, I can't imagine Bloodlines in isometric view. First person perspective helped nail the ambiance.

Yeah, FP also nailed obligatory voice acting for every line, and shortened dialogues. That's exactly what it would do to FP Arcanum 2. Who will now dare to make a FP rpg without "immersion" of voiced dialogue?

That's unfortunately true. Still, though, would Bloodlines be a better game with more dialogues, albeit less voice acting? Not so sure about that. Troika did a perfect job of storytelling with the overall design - a good RPG doesn't always have to mean wall-of-text RPG, right? Walking around the streets of LA hooked me more than any description would. On the other hand, such storytelling isn't impossible to pull off in isometric view, with PS:T being a great example of that (PS. I'm not sure if that's common practice here, but for me, PS:T usually fits as almost every example of doing something right in terms of RPGs)

 

[Spectacle]

Yeah, FP also nailed obligatory voice acting for every line, and shortened dialogues. That's exactly what it would do to FP Arcanum 2. Who will now dare to make a FP rpg without "immersion" of voiced dialogue?

Any full-budget major RPG these days is going to have fully voiced dialogue, regardless of perspective. Indies can get away with no or partial voice like in the old days.

 

[hiver]

It wouldnt handicap them but it would limit them to its own specifics.

All together a completely stupid and unnecessary idea, that would be collosal effort - since ISo does all those three things as good, only in a different manner of visualization - and doing FP is actually just the base desire for extreme emotional engagement a more direct input into ones cortex achieves.

 

[General Maxson]

First-person is good for exploration, item interaction, and allows many possibilities for free-form problem solving. Levitation, for example.

First, I said "quite suited to", not "more suited to". Second, I haven't given much thought to whether Arcanum would be better in first-person or isometric, but obviously it depends on what you consider makes the Arcanum experience. I have listed my take on it (the setting, the open character system, and the free-form problem solving), and I don't see any reason why first-person would be disadvantageous for them. Would you mind expounding on how first-person would handicap any of the three qualities I mentioned?

Are we talking about TES or Arcanum? o_O I mean like iso games don't have good exploration and it's a strong suite of FP only? Item interaction also... Arcanum had great item interaction options (ideas were nice, but the execution flawed). Unless you mean something else? What's advantageous to have movable furniture like TES games have in a game like Arcanum? No TES game capitalised on item interaction in any meaningful way, unless you mean putting buckets on people's head is meaningful. Only levitation had interesting effect of being able to reach some treasures in older TES games (and I don't consider that such an important aspect of crpgs - loot collection). And I don't think that's paramount to games such as Arcanum. Only reason to use FP really is obviously player "immersion". And that is decline. I can "immerse" myself just fine in iso, thank you very much. Again I don't understand what free form problem solving means and can you give me an example of FP rpg that does it, and why iso couldn't do it? Does open character system mean you level up skills by using them FP like TES games? And I know more iso crpgs with better settings than I do FP ones.

That's unfortunately true. Still, though, would Bloodlines be a better game with more dialogues, albeit less voice acting? Not so sure about that. Troika did a perfect job of storytelling with the overall design - a good RPG doesn't always have to mean wall-of-text RPG, right? Walking around the streets of LA hooked me more than any description would. On the other hand, such storytelling isn't impossible to pull off in isometric view, with PS:T being a great example of that (PS. I'm not sure if that's common practice here, but for me, PS:T usually fits as almost every example of doing something right in terms of RPGs)

I agree, but I don't see a tangible advantage for a "real" crpg to go FP, only disadvantages (spending budget on "immersion" like full voice acting and meaningless details like throwing around furniture etc.). It surely does limit devs in their creativity by using FP. And also the players because nothing is left to imagination. Everything has to be detailed to be believable. And these reasons are the wrong ones how to spend budget in an crpg IMO.

Yeah, FP also nailed obligatory voice acting for every line, and shortened dialogues. That's exactly what it would do to FP Arcanum 2. Who will now dare to make a FP rpg without "immersion" of voiced dialogue?

Any full-budget major RPG these days is going to have fully voiced dialogue, regardless of perspective. Indies can get away with no or partial voice like in the old days.

W2, PE and all the other kickstarter stars won't have fully voiced dialogue. Also do you think that it will be easier to "get away" with it in FP (to have no voiced dialogue, or only partially) or in ISO? And I don't think it's good or important for good crpgs to spend budget on such trivialities (as we will never get a large AAA budget crpgs nowadays). It's a whole different story if you actually like new AAA "rpgs". I don't.

 

[Rake]

The same as Fallout?

Yes, as proven by New Vegas, despite the shitty Bethesda engine.

Which would be ten times better if it was made in Fallout 2 engine.

I'm not saying that a first person shooter Arcanum would be 100% shit (but only if it was made by Obsidian or at least inXile), but it would be worse than an isometric, tactical one.

Do you even like first person RPGs at all?

No.

 

[Space Satan]

Again I don't understand what free form problem solving means and can you give me an example of FP rpg that does it, and why iso couldn't do it? Does open character system mean you level up skills by using them FP like TES games? And I know more iso crpgs with better settings than I do FP ones.

To be fair Deus Ex: HR implemented it very well. With accessing vertical hatches if you leveled athletic aug. or str aug. to move crates etc. Also, FPS always had better stealth. FPS can compete with ISOwell in RPGs, the problem is that noone seem to do it right, always fucking up some vital part.

 

[General Maxson]

Again I don't understand what free form problem solving means and can you give me an example of FP rpg that does it, and why iso couldn't do it? Does open character system mean you level up skills by using them FP like TES games? And I know more iso crpgs with better settings than I do FP ones.

To be fair Deus Ex: HR implemented it very well. With accessing vertical hatches if you leveled athletic aug. or str aug. to move crates etc.

And Deus Ex: HR is a crpg? And game marketed as such? For audience that plays crpgs? o_O That is an action game/shooter with some crpg elements and that's what I'm talking about. Almost all FP crpgs will deteriorate to action-y rpg-lite game eventually. And for real rpg fans, I don't think that's a good thing.

In before what is a crpg...