Development Info Pete Hines Responds

[Sol Invictus]

Do you realize that the crux of your argument makes it sound like they brought the license on a whim? Can you imagine, by your statements (I could compile them if you like) you're doing two things: First, you're saying that yeah they haven't planned anything, nothing's written in stone, there's no dev team, right? Second (and what the latter statement imples), is that they have no idea what they're going to do with the license (or at the very least a very vague idea). I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they have a vague idea of what they want to do; this is a fair assessment, right? Well then, here's where the interviews and previews shine because they enable us to see what Beth initially had in mind. Granted, Beth now seems to have flipped flopped (yet again), so what do you want us to do? Give them a third and a forth chance? This is a recurring thing with them where the whine that they were misquoted, or claim that an interview was botched, or just plane deny anything. At some point they have to take responsibility for themselves and admit that they have certain ideas about the direction of the franchaise, and it's future direction; this is what the apologists and the fanboys don't understand; they expect everyone to hope for the best, and accept what we're served despite what we've ordered. I don't remember who said this, but a while back some one said that they (Beth) need to take a standpoint and them stick to it, at least them we all have a similar reference frame.

Yeah, nobody would ever do anything on a whim even though Fallout is a surefire license to go with for creating a CRPG. How absurd that someone would buy a license that is sure to sell like hotcakes without having devoted 200 thousand dollars drawing up a 500 page plan on what to do with it first.

What do you think Activision and VU are thinking when they buy movie and TV show licenses? I suspect none of them have any plans for what to do with it until they acquire them. They are simply surefire money makers. It's the same with comic book artists - it's not as if they go up and draw a whole god damn series for a license that they may or may not acquire.

 

[Seven]

Yeah, nobody would ever do anything on a whim even though Fallout is a surefire license to go with for creating a CRPG. How absurd that someone would buy a license that is sure to sell like hotcakes without having devoted 200 thousand dollars drawing up a 500 page plan on what to do with it first.

Do you realize how absurd you logic is? At this point are you even bothering to think things through before you post, or is your heart set on defending everything that Beth has done even if it means that you're implying that they'd do something as major as accquirering a license with any fore-thought at all?

EDIT: If FO3 was such a surefire money maker why was it cancealed at least 2 times?

 

[Sol Invictus]

... accquirering a license with any fore-thought at all?

Did I ever say that? For fucks sakes, boy. Learn to read - or at least just read the post prior to the one I just made on the 3rd page.

As for Fallout 3's cancellations, you'll have to ask Herve Caen whats up with that. If Fallout 3/VB was released, it have most undoubtedly brought Interplay a hefty amount of profit, but only if they didn't squander it on nonsense like Run Like Hell and FOBOS. Nobody ever said Herve was a good businessman. Fallout 3's double cancellation does definitely not signify Fallout's 'valuelessness' as a license, as you would so think.

Come to mention it, why did they cancel Baldur's Gate 3? I guess BG3 wouldn't have sold at all since it's an unknown title.

 

[Brillo]

I'm not saying that the Bethesda developers are incapable of making different games, but Bethesda overall as a company has a style just like every other company does. Bioware, Blizzard, Troika, ID, etc; they all have their unique styles that sets them apart and works for them. I don't expect them to abandon what they do best: exploration-style open-ended story-less FP RPGs. There is a market, there is a demand, and there is no competition.

No competition, that is, unless they try to make FO3 too similar to Oblivion... When you're producing two very similar products it's pretty easy to dilute things. Try supporting two competing products (especially relatively niche ones) and both brands loose a certain amount of strength. It's very possible that making FO3 too similar to their other RPG franchise, they'd start cannabalizing a least some ES customers rather than bringing in new ones... And if that happens, both games are gonna have a harder time breaking even than if you tried serving two completely different markets.

Do you realize that the crux of your argument makes it sound like they brought the license on a whim? Can you imagine, by your statements (I could compile them if you like) you're doing two things:

Okay, with no other side conversations,let me just try to lay out the points I was trying to make:

• We don't know how much or what kind of planning was done before buying the license.
• If they did do much planning, it can and probably will change - that's the nature of game development.
• It's very possible, and in-fact pretty likely, that they don't have a team together to decide on any changes right now.

Well then, here's where the interviews and previews shine because they enable us to see what Beth initially had in mind. Granted, Beth now seems to have flipped flopped (yet again), so what do you want us to do? Give them a third and a forth chance? This is a recurring thing with them where the whine that they were misquoted, or claim that an interview was botched, or just plane deny anything.

Recurring? It's been two fucking months, and they've said next to nothing since the initial announcement. I'm sorry, I'm just not gonna get all worked up about stuff this early. Lots of things are undecided, and the decided things will probably change. Either way, we'll know soon enough. And at that time, if it sucks, I'll flame away like everyone else before heading off to play something different. *shrug*

At some point they have to take responsibility for themselves and admit that they have certain ideas about the direction of the franchaise, and it's future direction; this is what the apologists and the fanboys don't understand; they expect everyone to hope for the best, and accept what we're served despite what we've ordered. I don't remember who said this, but a while back some one said that they (Beth) need to take a standpoint and them stick to it, at least them we all have a similar reference frame.

You cannot both tell them to take a stand, and demand they change their positions about things you think they've decided. Pick one. Either tell them to 'give in to our demands', or tell them to stick to their guns.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Oh yeah, just to butt-in, this just up: there's posts on the Morrowind forum stating that Oblivion will be released for the PC before it comes out on a next-gen console. I don't expect it to be 'watered down' as a result.

 

[Brillo]

Oh yeah, just to butt-in, this just up: there's posts on the Morrowind forum stating that Oblivion will be released for the PC before it comes out on a next-gen console. I don't expect it to be 'watered down' as a result.

I know there's been a lot of speculation about that, but did the dev's actually say that? Link?

Oh, and it can still be watered down without the consoles as a convenient excuse...

 

[Seven]

Did I ever say that? For fucks sakes, boy. Learn to read - or at least just read the post prior to the one I just made on the 3rd page.

Perhaps you should re-examine your own post. BTW, you look like a 13 year old brat, so watch whom you call boy. FYI, why don't you interpret your ass out of this:

Yeah, nobody would ever do anything on a whim even though Fallout is a surefire license to go with for creating a CRPG. How absurd that someone would buy a license that is sure to sell like hotcakes without having devoted 200 thousand dollars drawing up a 500 page plan on what to do with it first.

So what you're saying is that the only fore-thought that went into getting the license was "it'll sell like hot cakes so why not?" Lovely, I won't pretend to know what goes into you reasoning, but to be quite honest it's scary.

Recurring? It's been two fucking months, and they've said next to nothing since the initial announcement. I'm sorry, I'm just not gonna get all worked up about stuff this early. Lots of things are undecided, and the decided things will probably change. Either way, we'll know soon enough. And at that time, if it sucks, I'll flame away like everyone else before heading off to play something different. *shrug*

They've said al lot if you don't believe me then I can support my argument with posts and interviews and so forth. Granted, after they caught flak they clammed up and started with their current "nothing's been decided" rethoric. If you didn't know this then I suggest that you make yourself aware of certain things before entering into a discussion.

You cannot both tell them to take a stand, and demand they change their positions about things you think they've decided. Pick one. Either tell them to 'give in to our demands', or tell them to stick to their guns.

I'm not telling any one to change their position; I can whine, bitch and moan all I want and I know that FO3 will be RT and FP. Is this going to stop me? Nope. I have an opinion, and I'll express it. As for them taking a stand, well they already have; it's just a question of them being honest about it. The minute they do this they'll soon find that things will get a lot easier for them. It's not a question of wanting change it's a question of wanting the bullshit to stop, and along the way if I want to critique their choices then so be it, and if they in turn choose to do TB and ISM for FO3 all the better (but I'm not holding much hope out for this).

BTW, just so you know no one in my post am I telling them to "stick to their guns" (aren't you the same guy who questioned my reading comprehension a while back?). What I am doing is appealling for a little honesty.

EDIT:

Honestly sorry if that offended anyone.

Don't sweat it. This is the Codex: One day you're loved and cheered, the next day you're reviled and hated

 

[Brillo]

They've said al lot if you don't believe me then I can support my argument with posts and interviews and so forth. Granted, after they caught flak they clammed up and started with their current "nothing's been decided" rethoric. If you didn't know this then I suggest that you make yourself aware of certain things before entering into a discussion.

I can guarantee you I've probably read most if not all the stuff you can pull out.

Anyway, those early interviews had most of the same 'it's too early' shit in them. They only had a sentence or two of actual info in them. Info that was mostly the same as what the mag interviews have said. And I think I'm correct in saying they haven't said shit since then.

I'm not telling any one to change their position; I can whine, bitch and moan all I want and I know that FO3 will be RT and FP. Is this going to stop me? Nope. I have an opinion, and I'll express it.

No you don't, you're guessing like the rest of us. You may even be right. But unless someone at Bethesda's been talking to you, you don't know anything.

As for them taking a stand, well they already have; it's just a question of them being honest about it. The minute they do this they'll soon find that things will get a lot easier for them. It's not a question of wanting change it's a question of wanting the bullshit to stop, and along the way if I want to critique their choices then so be it, and if they in turn choose to do TB and ISM for FO3 all the better (but I'm not holding much hope out for this).

BTW, just so you know no one in my post am I telling them to "stick to their guns" (aren't you the same guy who questioned my reading comprehension a while back?). What I am doing is appealling for a little honesty.

Sorry, I guess I just don't see the bullshit and lies you do.

I'm assuming it'll be RT (maybe modified/hybrid) and Non-Iso (not necessarily FP though) too, but until Bethesda says otherwise, and we find out for sure it's not, I'm not gonna call them liars.

Don't sweat it. This is the Codex: One day you're loved and cheered, the next day you're reviled and hated

Hey, that sounds super fun. :D

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

It's illogical to invest a lot of money just to draw up plans for a game that they may or may not attain the license to.

This is possibly the dumbest thing you've ever said, Exitium. It's ENTIRELY logical to have plans for something you're going to be paying millions of dollars to obtain. It's entirely ILLOGICAL to spend millions of dollars for something you don't have any idea what you're going to do with it once you get it. If you're going to be shelling out millions and millions of dollars for something, you can also pring for the couple grand a designer or two's salary/salaries would take to draft that plan. I mean, DUH.

 

[Section8]

More funtime trivia. Does anyone know the role of the executive producer? (in this case Todd Howard)

 

[Txiasaeia]

So here's my problem with this: the last decent first-person RPG to come out was Deus Ex, and that was pushing it (could have used some more role-playing). Morrowind was boring as hell, same with Daggerfall and Arena. These games were fun for two weeks tops, after which I got tired of the same generic crap over and over again.

Fallout 1 & 2 had wonderful backgrounds, varied scenery (the desert notwithstanding), and an interesting plot. More than that, it was *fun* because you knew that you wouldn't have to live in the same world for months while you went through every tiny aspect of the game, like a vacation to Morrowind's dreary world that you had to live in.

Now, I don't know what Bethesda is up to, but I haven't seen *anything* they've made as an indication that they can make a decent first-person RPG. Their graphic engines *suck* and continue to do so (for the love of St. Peter the Basilisk Toad, just licence an engine already!!), the random quest crap is lame, and there weren't any discernable plots in the three games mentioned above. Maybe I just like the post-apoc millieu too much, but I find it really sad that they were able to get the FO3 rights, and that they're (or whoever) releasing press releases about how the main character has to wear *goggles*. Goggles. I want a desert eagle, a dog, some leather armor and a couple rad scorpions to play with, not some goggles.

Finally, I liked the iso viewpoint in Fallout because you got to see more of the world - the shacks in the various cities, the cathedral in FO1, etc. etc. This may seem trivial, but it's more immersive IMHO to see an entire area and visualise that instead of looking through a narrow viewpoint into a world that I'm not familiar with.

If Bethesda pushes ahead with their "goggles" mandate & all it entails, I personally will choose to not buy their product. It's really that simple. They've got plenty of opportunity to turn this sucker around in the direction that the *fans* want it - maybe they'll see the light, and we'll all (or most of us) get to play the Fallout 3 that we've been waiting for. I'm really not holding my breath, though. Guess I'll go reread A Canticle for Leibowitz instead.

 

[Sol Invictus]

It's illogical to invest a lot of money just to draw up plans for a game that they may or may not attain the license to.

This is possibly the dumbest thing you've ever said, Exitium. It's ENTIRELY logical to have plans for something you're going to be paying millions of dollars to obtain. It's entirely ILLOGICAL to spend millions of dollars for something you don't have any idea what you're going to do with it once you get it. If you're going to be shelling out millions and millions of dollars for something, you can also pring for the couple grand a designer or two's salary/salaries would take to draft that plan. I mean, DUH.

Perhaps I should have elaborated: I meant simply that nobody is going to devote hours upon hours developing a full game for something they don't even posess the license to unless they are absolutely certain that they will get it. I have stated before that it's -obvious- they have had some plans for the game but certainly not something that far ahead like some of you are suggesting. As you should know, plans change - usually in preproduction, so nothing can be set in stone. I could point out how different World of Warcraft is today from when it first entered beta. There's no more skill points, utility spells, and most of the skills (now called professions) don't work anything like they used to, and the gameplay is almost 300% slower. This is all over the span of 8 months, and very late in development, I might add.

Anyway all I'm saying is that ideas are being thrown around at Bethsoft right now and the game didn't even have a permanent team of developers assigned to it yet when those interviews were made. It can also be said that a lot of the things you read in early previews like these don't even make it into the final game. Case in point: Fable - a Zelda clone.

edit: I fucked up when I made that post. It didn't come out the way I intended. I should have read it.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Their graphic engines *suck* and continue to do so (for the love of St. Peter the Basilisk Toad, just licence an engine already!!),

Seen Oblivion lately?

the random quest crap is lame, and there weren't any discernable plots in the three games mentioned above.

No doubt the quests in Morrowind were bland and boring, but who said they were random?

Maybe I just like the post-apoc millieu too much, but I find it really sad that they were able to get the FO3 rights, and that they're (or whoever) releasing press releases about how the main character has to wear *goggles*. Goggles. I want a desert eagle, a dog, some leather armor and a couple rad scorpions to play with, not some goggles.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I just hope you realize that there is a lot more to Fallout than a fucking Mad Max wannabe with a desert eagle. Personally I get rather irritated when all people can think about when they think of Fallout is 'hookers, violence and akimbo deagles!' which is honestly a whole lot worse than whatever Bethesda may or may not have planned with 'goggles'. Case in point: FOBOS.

 

[Astromarine]

Their graphic engines *suck* and continue to do so (for the love of St. Peter the Basilisk Toad, just licence an engine already!!)

Erm, last I checked NetImmerse was not developed by Bethsoft. It pays to have a clue in discussions, you know?

What sucked in Morrowind was simply the art direction. The modding community put bethesda to shame time after time after time. Once Rhedd, who designed models and textures for UT2004, showed the mod community what could be done with the Morrowind engine and actual artistry, they took Bethsoft's art team to the back of the shed, leaned them over a trashcan, and proceeded to take care of their hemorroids forever. With a broomstick. A splintered one.

That's why in Obli they specifically worked on fineass textures, to show people that they learned their lesson.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Yeah, who said all RPGs had to look ugly.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

So on an RPG site, when details of an RPG are announced by the developers in a gaming magazine, people are surprised we listen to them?

Go figure.

At least this way, Bethesda know how we feel.

No, like I said, there are no devs for Fallout 3

So Bethesda spent how many millions on a license to shelve it? I mean hello, plan on doing any work on the game soon other then letting the janitor release PR details?

 

[Vault Dweller]

It's illogical to invest a lot of money just to draw up plans for a game that they may or may not attain the license to.

It's more illogical to buy a license and then see if they can make something profitable out of it. Besides, I've never said that they invested a lot of money to make the plans. More likely they've had a person or two who spent a month coming up with the basic design. That's about $5-10k. Pocket change for Bethesda.

Bottom line, whenever any business is about to invest in something, even if there is no guarantee to get a deal, they invest in planning first.

1) I really don't care. As far as I'm concerned, FO3 died when VB was canned, maybe even earlier. It would have been nice to see Troika doing something with it, but then again, seeing something new from them would be better.

So this is all about Van Buren, isn't it? You're just one of those guys who can't deal with the fact that VB is dead and Black Isle exists no longer.

Wow, Rex, your deductive powahz are amazing. No, I don't care about VB, and I don't care about BIS. BIS has stopped making cool games long time ago. So, while we all hoped that Jefferson and VB would put BIS back on the map, there is no proof of that. From what I heard about VB, it looks like it would have been an interesting PA game but hardly a Fallout game. Things like guns grouping, prison, railroad, robots looking for PC, space station trip, etc were ... well, whatever, point is no, Rex, it's not about VB.

Nobody makes their games from a mold, VD. Just look at the differences between Vampire: Bloodlines and Arcanum. Bethesda isn't a shareware company with a single designer who can't do anything other than what he's been doing for years.

Like I said, it's not about individuals designers, it's about a company doing what works for it. Troika is a young company, they are still trying to find such a style and also have to take what's on the table. Companies like Bethesda, Bioware, ID don't have such restrictions. BG2, HotU, and KOTOR are all different games, yet the similarities, the style, the general design are there. Considering that Beth got a new engine it would also make sense to make another, non-TES game to get a better return on the engine development investment.

 

[Volourn]

"Troika is a young company,"

Oh please. They're on their 3rd game the same number that it took BIo to make their first real big hit, and BIO didn't have the game development experience that Troika has. They have no exuses.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Volourn, who's talking about excuses? I simply stated that it's not too late for them to change and move into different direction. Leonard already stated that sticking with the rules, something that they thought was important, didn't bring them the expected results; and that no publisher is willing to even discuss a TB project. So, it's entirely possible that if Bloodlines is a great success, they would reevaluate their position.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Perhaps they shouldn't have made such a mess on their two games so much, eh, Vault Dweller?

I wonder who's genius idea it was to completely omit TOEE of any worthwhile campaign. The Temple had a couple of nifty quests in it that were fine and all but hardly enough for anything. I don't think it's very clever to take a Gary Gygax barebones campaign (one that's made in a barebones way for DMs to modify themselves, and to make it interesting on their own) and just leave it as is. It's no different than licensing an engine only to release a game that plays like a tech demo with it. If anyone brings up the fucking Brothel I'll say this: it doesn't add anything to the game. It's isn't as if the implementation of the Brothel is going to add a good 40% of content to TOEE. All of the quests there are completeable in less than 10 minutes altogether.

Ah well, most of the bug related issues are Atari's fault, not Troika's - which is where most of the complaints lie. I just think they could have tried harder when dealing with the publisher. It's like they have no faith in their own abilities.

 

[Reklar]

Come to mention it, why did they cancel Baldur's Gate 3? I guess BG3 wouldn't have sold at all since it's an unknown title.

Actually, the reason Baldur's Gate 3 was cancelled was due to Interplay losing the license via breach of contract with BioWare. BioWare sued Interplay and thus added to their already large debt that is not likely to ever be paid. It's possible that it would have made good money for Interplay, but as usual the executive management made critical errors in judgement.

-Reklar
(a Fallout/RPG fan)

 

[Vault Dweller]

They definitely made a mistake with ToEE. It was their chance to do a good TB game and show publishers that such games could do well. Bugs aside, there should have been descriptions, there should have been some sorta story (although it's hard to do a story with limited word count), better side quests and better role-playing. There were some good situations in the temple, but as we know most reviewers don't play for more then half-an-hour and just played around Hommlet aka the most boring town evar. The marriage quest was awful and the fact that you can't do certain things as you see fit (can't use your healing abilities on the idiot, can't convert another guy, etc) was very disappointing. They had a good opportunity and for some reasons they failed to make the best out of it.

 

[Volourn]

"although it's hard to do a story with limited word count)"

BG series had a limited word count. People for the most part - ie. not the Codex - liked that story just fine...

KOTYOR had a limited word count, and the story was the best aprt of the game 9along with the characters). Again, for most people sans the Codex.

TOEE's story sucked becaused it sucked not because of some lame word limit.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Judging by the very short and limited dialogues, one can only assume that the word count limit in ToEE was much smaller then that in BG. After all, Arcanum didn't suffer from any dialogue related problems. Still they shouldn't have wasted words on 3/4 of Hommlets quests.

 

[Volourn]

Then again, TOEE is a much smaller game than the Bgs so it should have less dialogue and hence a smaller word count limit - espicially since most of the game play is with battles that take up time no matter how easy they may. (ie. bugbear battles while easy can easily take 10 min+ even if you just to kill)...

Plus, too many words were wasted on the rules descriptions in game 9which *were* well done for the most aprt). taht should have been used on actual game dialogue and leave the rules to the manual which was also done well and covered the rules fine..