Interview GameSpot Q&A With Feargus Urquhart

[mr. lamat]

 

[geminito]

Back at ya, Ferg

So is it safe to say NWN2 will be Fallout with swords? KOTOR2 will be Fallout with light sabers? Just because Ferg did Fallout doesn't mean he can't do anything else. He can show the same optimism for Bethesda's abilities and passion for CRPG's.

It would be nice if Obsidian could make a KOTOR game that is actually an RPG instead of an "Adventure Lite" game. But I doubt it. Even with Ferg's hands on it, I'm sure it will be as lame and snooze-worthy as the first game. But I'm also sure it will be nothing like Fallout. So why can Ferg only assume Bethesda will repeat it's past successes in Fallout form?

Fallout is a far easier game to implement than Morrowind. So I'm sure Bethesda could do a "faithful" Fallout 3. But that would be sad. Time has passed. Let's beef it up a little.

Or at least replace the vertical scrollbar inventory system. Well, ok, keep it. It wouldn't be Fallout without it. And please make it run in DOS too, because that's what Fallout 1 ran on and it wouldn't be Fallout without DOS. And please keep the NPC AI too. It wouldn't be Fallout without party members bursting you in the back every round.

Move on, people.

 

[Human Shield]

Re: Back at ya, Ferg

Chess is a far easier game to implement then Tag. So I'm sure they could do a "faithful" Chess 2. But that would be sad. Time has passed. Let's beef it up a little.

Throw out the outdated turn-based system and the playing board. It isn't like Chess is respected and did a lot of things better then later games, that is silly, it is just old. No one compares other games to it as a high standard, of course you can change everything about it to make it better.

Move on, people.

 

[geminito]

No! Keep turn-based! That's what would sink Bethesda's Fallout for me. But they couldn't possibly make that error, could they?

 

[Barghest]

Fallout 3 will be a real-time click frenzy with combos. Don't forget the crack whores with the big boobies.

Sheesh.

 

[FrankHorrigan]

For everyone patting feargus on the back... its easy to say whatever you like when you are your own boss, if he had of being doing it back in the BIS days, i might have been impressed.

 

[Montez]

heh, exactly. And they love using the excuse of "Well, they need to understand that we've been tortured since fallout 2 waiting for another true sequel, we've been fucked over too many times to name, things like that can make a fan pissed off and be on their virtual period".

When, I for one have been waiting just as much, but I am not rabid, I don't get pissy with developers. I don't whine about being fucked over. I'm not a pessimistic little jackass complaining about everything that happens.

"I only bitch and moan about people who I think are bitching and moaning, and I'm proud of it!"

 

[plin]

heh, exactly. And they love using the excuse of "Well, they need to understand that we've been tortured since fallout 2 waiting for another true sequel, we've been fucked over too many times to name, things like that can make a fan pissed off and be on their virtual period".

When, I for one have been waiting just as much, but I am not rabid, I don't get pissy with developers. I don't whine about being fucked over. I'm not a pessimistic little jackass complaining about everything that happens.

"I only bitch and moan about people who I think are bitching and moaning, and I'm proud of it!"

No sir, it's not bitching and moaning about your (since you defended them I'm guessing you're one of the idiot fans, wait, I think your the one who just got news posting status at NMA aren't you?) bitching and moaning. It's mocking your bitching and moaning. And I'm not proud, I'm amused.

 

[RGE]

Only BITCHING can bring the light on the whole thing and attract the eyes of other portals/vortals/magazines.

Hey, you've got a point there. I never really thought about that when I mentioned how the developers would have to be really stupid to need advice from rabid spammers. But seeing as reporters would probably pay attention to the number of posts rather than to the number of unique posters, I guess spamming is a valid strategy.

I still don't want to believe that it'll do much to directly influence developers, but indirectly they might pay attention to concerns if they're being repeated by commercial gaming sites. I mean, unless it's true what Bethesda fans say about Bethesda developers already paying attention to their forum. In that case I guess spamming has always been as unnecessary as I've always thought.

And just so that it's clear, I don't think that even most of the hardcore fanbase are rabid spammers.

Why BITCHING but not polite argumentation? First of all, the BITCHING I have seen from Fallout fans is, actually, polite/reasonable argumentation/dispute.

Either you haven't been looking very hard, or you have a rather loose definition of "polite/reasonable argumentation/dispute". Not that there hasn't been any such thing, but there's been a lot of rude and crazy bitching too. I still haven't been able to force myself to read Fallout thread #2 to #10 on the Elder Scrolls forum, and the first thread about Bethesda's Fallout 3 on this site sported some of the worst stuff I've seen yet. Or maybe I just hadn't gotten used to unnecessary profanity at that time. I think that this comment stands out:

This is fucking awful. Idiots who loved shit-eating titles like Morrowind and KOTOR are cheering over this--if that's not proof enough that this sucks an unshaved arab transsexual's cock, I don't know what is.

 

[Jebus]

Alright, so did nobody notice:

Otherwise all the game industry would go towards shallow cRPG experience with no ambitions at all.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...and I think Fallout is an example.

I for one laughed my ass off.

 

[RGE]

GS: You mentioned that you are planning to make "many new upgrades and enhancements" to the BioWare-developed NWN engine and the Aurora Toolset. I assume that means NWN will run on the same engine--is that true?

FU: Actually, no. We are going to be changing a lot of how the art assets work in the engine, so this will break the usage of the original NWN's art assets. However, we are going to be retaining a lot of how other things work, so things like scripts and dialogs (and many other types of content) will most likely run in the engine after an import process in the toolset.

GS: What upgrades and enhancements are you planning?

FU: A lot. We are going over almost every inch of the engine to add new features and refine things that are going to stay the same. From a graphics standpoint, we are updating most of the graphics engine to support new graphical features like normal mapping.

I wonder if this means that there'll be a Z-axis and no more tiles. That would be nice. I should probably go over to those Obsidian forums and see what's up.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

What is wrong with some of you people. The Fallout fanbase aren't unpleasable. If a company kept the setting correct, and gameplay as good as the first one, most would be behind it. Beth doesn't even know what they were going to do with the title besides call it Fallout 3 even if it is really another spin-off.

Yup, it's not like it's really hard. You take a look at Fallout and you just update that. You keep the setting in tact, you keep the mechanics in tact, and you make a new engine around that concept in a new location.

The problem is that hasn't been done since Fallout. Each time the development team working on the game makes the grand claim that they're super-duper Fallout fans who love the setting and love the game itself and yadda yadda yadda, and the result is something that's deluded from the original. You either have a less homogenous setting like Fallout 2 had due to too many developers working to crank it out in too short a time frame, or something like Fallout Tactics where the developers even admitted not enough care was taken to preserve the setting or enough time to impliment some of the features well, or Fallout Enforcer where the developers didn't have a fucking clue about anything.

Even Van Buren had a number of issues with it, things like:

• No 10MM/14MM weapons because when you cross the Rocky Mountains, everyone uses 9MM weapons for some reason. Huh?
• Speech skill was divided in to four skills because no uber skill should allow you to win the game with just it in and of itself., which is fine. Yet, at the same time, guns skills are combined in to one skill? So is throwing and melee? What?
• You start in a prison filled with robot guards where you have a time limit on how long you can escape before you're dragged back to the prison until you escape "right". Eh?
• Space stations, even though it's been stated before that space stuff didn't really exist in the setting because the superpowers spent their resources on developing fusion tech.
• Super Science Characters that can whip up power armors, super energy weapons, stealth suits, and so forth, things that not even the Brotherhood and Enclave could do. Meanwhile, ammo is scarce? In fact, there's people working on rebuilding the railroad system - but no one can make bullets even though there were several groups in Fallout and Fallout 2 making bullets?
• Real time or turn based combat in one game with the same systems and rules. This has never worked well, esspecially with a fairly complex system like Fallout uses.
• Co-op multiplayer which hoses the kinds of things you can do with quests.

Now, the question is, will Bethesda just slap Fallout in to their new engine for TES4 without making it work for Fallout or will they actually take a step back and look at Fallout itself and go from there. Using Fallout as the measuring stick would be their best bet, but I'm not sure they'll do that.

 

[geminito]

What would give you the impression that Bethesda would rush together a Fallout game using the TES4 engine? My impression of Bethesda is that they spend a long time on each of their RPG's. Companies like EA and Atari may have reputations for pumping out games too quickly, but not Bethesda, as far as I know...

And if the TES4 engine is versatile enough, then why not use it to create Fallout 3? If they plan ahead, they can use the "TES 4 Engine" to make many different games! The engine could be 3d, but lock the camera into Fallout-like isometric views (like Simcity 4 does).

 

[Whipporowill]

Well, for once... using the TES4 engine is one of the few things that Bethesda has actually been able to say about Fo3. A reason many see features like TB and top-down view as 'goners'. But I guess, as they say... time will tell.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

And if the TES4 engine is versatile enough, then why not use it to create Fallout 3? If they plan ahead, they can use the "TES 4 Engine" to make many different games! The engine could be 3d, but lock the camera into Fallout-like isometric views (like Simcity 4 does).

That could be a BIG IF. To make it versitile enough could mean they'd have to delay TES4 just to make Fallout 3 like it should be made, which means they're going to have to rely on their coffers for quite a while. It would be quicker and cheaper to make Fallout 3 more like Morrowind(first person, etc.) so they can get it done with the work already being used for TES4.

I doubt they were developing the TES4 engine for much else other than TES4 from the beginning. I don't think they've ever made anything that wasn't first person, so I can't see them thinking along those lines when they were writing it. Why add versilitity when it's not needed for TES4?

 

[kathode]

I don't think they've ever made anything that wasn't first person

Redguard was 3rd person (no doubt considered at least tantamount to dreaded 1st person ).

That interview doesn't seem so awful to me, btw.

 

[FrankHorrigan]

We would have to see what engine they are using for TES:IV, from mucking about with the editor in Morrowind, it would not be such a large technical hurdle to do isometric with that engine, but i imagine they are using something else for TES:IV and as you say, its not likely they are naturaly inclined to use an isometric perspective. It is crazy to think how totaly unprepared they are considering they spent significant money to buy the franchise, it seems almost like a compulsive purchase.

 

[mr. lamat]

freedom force used the netimmersion engine as well... which was tactical-lite

 

[Araanor]

NetImmerse/Gamebryo isn't so much an engine as a renderer.

Of course they could do it, but it'd mean more work.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

I don't think they've ever made anything that wasn't first person

Redguard was 3rd person (no doubt considered at least tantamount to dreaded 1st person ).

That interview doesn't seem so awful to me, btw.

Okay, I've never played that one. If it was third person, over the shoulder though, that's really not too much difference between that and first person in terms of display. You just move the camera back and up a bit, then display the model for the player instead of the v_weap. Use the player as a pivot point for the camera, and you're done. Oh, and add some stuff to handle when the player backs in to a wall so he doesn't push the camera back through the wall. Pretty much everything else, controls, interface, etc. can be handled the same as it if were first person.

 

[Astromarine]

you mean, like in Morrowind?

 

[geminito]

You can do an isometric perspective just as easily. Instead of putting the camera behind the PC, you put it above the PC and lock it into one or more pre-defined positions. And make sure your world models make sense for these camera positions. It would be nice if objects obstructing the view become transparent, and rotating the camera would be nice too.

A 3d engine doesn't have to be first-person. It all depends on how the camera is used.

Anyway, I think we all have an idea of how we would implement Fallout 3 if we could. I'm sure most of them would be fun as long as the story is great and we can blast some brahmin.

 

[Duodenum]

Morrowind isn't JUST a first person game either. You can play the entire game in third person if you want. In fact, on the Xbox, the default WAS third person, while on the PC the default was first person. Granted, some stuff (like archery, for example) is easier to do in first person, but at least you could switch whenever you wanted.

And as it was mentioned, when you have a 3D engine different perspectives are primarily a matter of moving the camera around to give you different views on the scene. It's not rocket science. People aren't giving Bethesda -- a company that's been around for 17+ years and has developed sports games, driving games, FPS's, adventure games as well as RPG's -- nearly enough credit here.

Wait & see, wait & see.

 

[Araanor]

You can do an isometric perspective just as easily.

Sure, but that's ignoring the massive gameplay differences between Morrowind and Fallout. Fine - they have a 3d engine. But if they're planning on making a proper Fallout game they're going to have to implement two completely different games with Fallout and the next TES.

 

[Avin]

no irony, i find refreshing that someone from bethesda still looks and posts here.