Interview RPG Codex Interview: Dan Vávra (Warhorse Studios)

[granit]

just for a game when you tap a button to block or attack.

Right, so action combat is apparently not your thing. But I, for one, enjoy it, and I wouldn't want every single RPG out there to be the same, either. It's great that there are many TB and some RtwP RPGs in production now, but it's also great that we have a rather promising first person action RPG in production here.

If combat is similar to Dark Messiah of M&M, I'll be happy.

Do you know who else enjoys "action combat"? Todd Howard son of a bitch that slaughtered otherwise promising game series. I'm not saying this has anything to do with you, just saying action combat focus may lead to ignoring all the other aspects of what makes RPGs good RPGs.

 

[JarlFrank]

It's not the combat that ruined the Elder Scrolls series, really. The combat has always been at least partly action-based. You're completely missing the point there, that's like saying "Dragon Age 2 was ruined due to RtwP combat" even though DA1 already had the same system and was solid, and Infinity Engine games also had RTwP and were good.

 

[granit]

JarlFrank: Combat partly action based sure, but you can clearly feel the "dices rolling" when you play for example TES II and III (I don't believe that Skyrim even have a "hit" roll for combat?). Certainly combat is not the only thing that ruined TES, I didn't mean to imply that, and in the scheme of things combat was a minor decline compared to things like lore rape, loss of creativity, instant fast travel everywhere and a 100 other crazy things.

 

[mikaelis]

That Dan guy sure is interesting, I always thought of modern game developers as ignorant of the awesomeness of old-school RPG's, or they were just making console games to pay the bills, but this guy literally seems to believe that RPG's have progressed instead of going backwards. Fascinating.

I'll conclude that he must either be a liar and he never played older RPG's, or at least he's very shallow and only sees the graphics of a game and not the systems beneath it.

How about we stop this retarded discussion about things that were beaten to death in tousands of other topics, and ask something related to Warhorse instead (since y'know Daniel.Vavra is in this thread and can probably answer some of the questions)?

Daniel.Vavra ,

1) Was this movie from your vertical slice that was supposed to be shown to various publishers? Or is it just quickly duct-taped collage of some scenes?

2) Are most of the sub-systems already implemented in the vertical slice, or is there still a long way to go, before the current status can be considered as a proper representation of future game?

3) We know so far, that it is probably going to take place in XV century Bohemia. Is setting 100% historical? Do you consider introducing some very-low elements of fantasy/supernatural events etc.? For example witches/priests that can cast enchantment/curse? crude alchemy? Anything that can be explained nowadays with science and knowledge, but could have been interpreted as magic/miracle in middle-ages.

4) Have you started to put story together yet? Are there going to be other local kingdoms involved, apart from Czech? (e.g., German states, Poland)

5) You mentioned at one point that you aim for realistic distances, so the map will probably be a small, contained landscape where the story takes place (between two towns if I recall correctly). Are you (ideally) planning for more of such locations in different parts of the middle Europe (which obviously couldn't be connected seamlessly, but rather with the world map maybe)?

 

[Tommy Wiseau]

That Dan guy sure is interesting, I always thought of modern game developers as ignorant of the awesomeness of old-school RPG's, or they were just making console games to pay the bills, but this guy literally seems to believe that RPG's have progressed instead of going backwards. Fascinating.

I'll conclude that he must either be a liar and he never played older RPG's, or at least he's very shallow and only sees the graphics of a game and not the systems beneath it.

You are right. I am totally retarded.

Why do you keep posting that gif without context?

 

[Mrowak]

Or maybe he just has different taste in games.

No one said he wasn't allowed to have his own tastes in games. People commented that this:

So the RPG is no more about the dices and stats—it could be completely skill-based and it will finally resemble the real world as we all desired back in the days of pen and paper

is solid retardation.

There's no one here telling Dan what he can or can't like, he's the one telling us what we like. Not only is he making the same unfounded bullshit remark about the "evolution" of RPGs as idiot TES fans made back when Oblivion first came out, he's simultaneously talking about the action RPG as the final form of RPGs that we all wanted it to turn into.

And we are on about this again.

You are reading too much into that comment, and going all medieval on him. By putting it this way he kind of voiced the common sentiment, which may appear contrary to Codexian standards but is in no way decline in any principle. RPGs can be and there is no reason for them not to be skill-based - skill is where gameplay comes from, and everything else is statistics couple with dice-rolling.

As an avid PnP player I think you'd be first to acknowledge that you don't hold gaming session just to fap over stats and throw dice bajillion times. This is not why people come together once a week. Stats and dice two components are merely tools for the players to take advantage of in rather limited environment. PnP RPGs have certain constraints, after all: (usually) each player controls just one character, the entire scenery and situations has to be imagined and the player cannot interact with the gameworld directly. So we put a number of artificial constructs, such as stats and dice and weave mechanics areound them. There is a skill in using those tools to deal with situations. That's where the genuine gameplay is born. This is something Dan did not deny, and quite frankly appears to hold in quite high regard.

So far so good. Now enter cRPGs, and you will see that many principles from PnP do not work in this format : if we put the player into lush world he can see and hear, allow him to control just one character we will soon discover that stats and dice can have a derogatory effect on interactivity with the world and thus gameplay. I mean, why should I roll a to-hit dice when I can easily aim myself with a bow - after all the game provides all the necessary mechanics for that, no dice are necessary? Why should I go through [Perception] You are lying check when I clearly can piece together from the gathered evidence, using my own brain power (btw, would you force a player to roll dice in PnP if he - as the player, using non-metagaming knowledge - saw through your plot? Just curious.)

The conclusion is simple: this set of principles doesn't really work here. It might in tactical wargames and tactical RPGs, where you control multiple characters and simply can't have interactivity on personal level, because the gameplay focus is different. However, with the mode Dan is aiming for it could end with a dice-rolling simulator.

This is genre-hegemonic on a level I haven't seen since some goth fucker was arguing the merits of VtM over D&D back in the 90's where everyone in RPG-land thought everyone else was doing it wrong.

Too much nerdrage. You seem to be unnerved by the entire "evolution" angle. Remember - evolution doesn't mean improvement - merely adaptability through (genetic/design) experimentation. It also doesn't mean that the new evolved form is all the rage and the past ones are all shit. In fact it doesn't even mean that the previous form will die out - nature teaches us they'd most likely find their own niche. And yes, I think you are extrapolating Dan's words too far by comparing them to the opinions of some clueless TES dumbfuck.

Personally I am interested in seeing something new. You know - something in the vein of the spirit of experimentation that characterised the "golden era of RPGs (TM)". In fact I believe this was the true value of that period - that the devs tried new solutions and created interesting gameplay. So let the guy have it his way - who knows, maybe his take on RPGs is actually one we could have real fun with.

My only fear is the new gameplay mechanics Dan proposed in place of good old solutions will end up being simplistic and unable to support the features this game is promised to have.

 

[Grunker]

Mrowak: Apparantly you misread me in exactly the same way as JarlFrank, so let's look at my post again:

No one said he wasn't allowed to have his own tastes in games

i.e.: sure, this looks like a solid enough action RPG I guess. I'm not out to yell "his game isn't a RPG!" because frankly I find that discussion tedious. What I find idiotic is him basically saying that everyone moved beyond ten years ago (in the P&P world, at least), which is "we can finally get rid of dice! That's what everyone wanted!" The reason I describe that as hegemonic statement is that this is what we actually had ten years ago in the world of P&P: All kinds of different ways to play the game, and everyone telling everyone else how they weren't playing the game right. Ten years after, most of the P&P world have moved on. All the wargame tactics, indie-players, Vampire-goths and all the rest have basically accepted each other's existence.

He's the one telling others how to enjoy RPGs - not me. In fact, I'll probably play his game, and I hope it will be decent.

In other words, all your crap about how his game can totally work without dice is kind of odd given that I've never stated anything contrary to that, so why are you suddenly defending it as though I had?

Too much nerdrage. You seem to be unnerved by the entire "evolution" angle. Remember - evolution doesn't mean improvement - merely adaptability through (genetic/design) experimentation. It also doesn't mean that the new evolved form is all the rage and the past ones are all shit. In fact it doesn't even mean that the previous form will die out - nature teaches us they'd most likely find their own niche.

I have no idea what you're talking about here, but you're not talking about anything I've commented on.

And yes, I think you are extrapolating Dan's words too far by comparing them to the opinions of some clueless TES dumbfuck.

it will finally resemble the real world as we all desired

So the RPG is no more about the dices and stats

it could be completely skill-based and it will finally resemble the real world as we all desired back in the days of pen and paper

His words, not mine.

Without over-analyzing, I don't see how this is not what that means:

1) We all desired click-to-swing-click-to-block action combat ("skill-based"), and this resembles the real world (he's making such a game, and claiming this is better than what we had previously).

2) The RPG isn't about stats and dice - i.e. such things were always just a necessary evil.


Also:

In real life, I dont see fencers throwin a dice when they fight

I don't see them click their mouse either Dan. It seems you cannot into certain kinds of abstraction.

This is what I take issue with. Fuck his game man, he can make whatever he wants. The aspiration to less-fantasy-more-medieval is one I quite enjoy, I hate high fantasy.

 

[Zed]

are you butthurt because he drew a general reference to "RPG fans" as "we" in an obviously opinionated sentence?

we are all becoming fags.

 

[Grunker]

are you butthurt

obviously

why else would I post on the Codex, if not to endlessly discuss details that don't matter?

 

[mondblut]

In real life, I dont see fencers throwin a dice when they fight

I don't see them click their mouse either Dan. It seems you cannot into certain kinds of abstraction.

He and his p&p friends should have dropped those silly dice and stats to begin with, and just beat one another with wooden stakes instead. Like real fencers.

 

[hiver]

if we put the player into lush world he can see and hear, allow him to control just one character we will soon discover that stats and dice can have a derogatory effect on interactivity with the world and thus gameplay.

You mean to say... if you put the player in a FP open world high graphic fidelity game ... stats dont matter anymore? really?

Sure thing buddy. Sure thing.
Lets say that is so. In that case thats not an RPG game. What you have there is action-adventure. If you add guns then its a shooter.

How about i start calling you Todd, or Pete?

 

[Metro]

The key to a good ARPG is limiting factors in your abilities/skills. If you are able to be as powerful a mage as you are a frontline fighter, have super stealth, and be a deadly marksman all at the same time then... yeah.

Being "as powerful a mage as you are a frontline fighter, have super stealth, and be a deadly marksman all at the same" is about the only thing that makes the action crap somewhat tolerable. Somebody really expects me to "block" and "roll" and "jump" and shit in an RPG? Jesus. I'd take godmode any day over this crap if I ever play one.

Either this is awkward sarcasm or, for some reason, you think ARPGs should be as reliant on stat checks as CRPGS. Keep in mind the limiting factors in skills I mentioned, that is, specific builds is the main proxy for stat checks. If I can cast a mountain of fire at range I should be pretty weak to (and at) melee attacks, etc.

 

[mondblut]

Either this is awkward sarcasm or, for some reason, you think ARPGs should be as reliant on stat checks as CRPGS.

Neither. For some reason, I think ARPGs should not exist.

Since they unfortunately still do - if I ever bother to touch one, first I make bloody sure there will be no "action" left in there to pester me any more. Being uber at everything so that you no longer have to jump and dodge like a twitching retard is a good start.

 

[dnf]

I don't often play ARPGs, but when i do, i play it in godmode.

Also, plz guys don't be mean to Daniel Vavra, he made the awesome Mafia game. Save your rage when he goes full retard with a shitty game plz.

 

[SoupNazi]

Either this is awkward sarcasm or, for some reason, you think ARPGs should be as reliant on stat checks as CRPGS.

Neither. For some reason, I think ARPGs should not exist.

Statements like these should be made before the debate even starts. I mean, what about all the people that wasted their time arguing with you? That's just rude.

 

[FeelTheRads]

In real life, I dont see fencers throwin a dice when they fight

The fuck... that's like the people who are against turn-based combat because LOL U DONT WAIT FOR YOUR TURN IN REAL LIFE
People using games as substitutes for real-life should be evicted from gaming.
...

And if RPGs are not about dice rolls and stats then what the fuck are they about?

 

[mondblut]

I don't often play ARPGs, but when i do, i play it in godmode.

Precisely. We're out to remove the "A" from ARPG

Neither. For some reason, I think ARPGs should not exist.

Statements like these should be made before the debate even starts. I mean, what about all the people that wasted their time arguing with you? That's just rude.

That's mondblut they were arguing with. Methinks by now my stance towards anything akshun was to be known well in advance.

 

[Multidirectional]

That's mondblut they were arguing with. Methinks by now my stance towards anything akshun was to be known well in advance.

How about staying the fuck away from threads about "anything akshun" then, instead of behaving like your opinion on the subject is useful to anyone?

 

[mondblut]

How about staying the fuck away from threads about "anything akshun" then, instead of behaving like your opinion on the subject is useful to anyone?

Keep that shit in general gaming, and you'd never see me around it.

 

[Mrowak]

it will finally resemble the real world as we all desired

.

Gross oversimplification on his part, but that hardly warrants rage. In a sense resembling real world is indeed that we all desire - we play to do the deeds in a fantastic world and have fun doing it, as opposed to toying with dice and excel-like spreadsheets. At least that's how I read it and I see nothing wrong with it.

So the RPG is no more about the dices and stats

Don't see anything wrong here. None RPG should *about* dices and stats - they are about social event, living out an adventure and having fun. As I mentioned before dice and stats are just tools - they are useful, but can be substituted by anything else.

The only thing this tells me is that Dan played his PnP wrong - he attributed too much value to those things. But that sorta happens. I mean look at other Codexers, only they lean in the opposite direction - "if it ain't no stats, in ain't no RPG".

it could be completely skill-based and it will finally resemble the real world as we all desired back in the days of pen and paper

.

Again oversimplification, but he does express the sentiment one could identify with. Basing the game on player's skills is a good thing, even if it's clicking the mouse. How else would you have any gameplay in combat if you control one character in FPP mode?

His words, not mine.

Without over-analyzing, I don't see how this is not what that means:

1) We all desired click-to-swing-click-to-block action combat ("skill-based"), and this resembles the real world (he's making such a game, and claiming this is better than what we had previously).

I think he meant it more in the vein of being in the thick of it and experiencing the world first-hand.

2) The RPG isn't about stats and dice - i.e. such things were always just a necessary evil.

Well I read it more like: the RPG isn't about stats and dice - i.e. such things used to be a necessary tool, but we can attempt something different now.

Also:

In real life, I dont see fencers throwin a dice when they fight

I don't see them click their mouse either Dan. It seems you cannot into certain kinds of abstraction.

That's actually a fair point.

This is what I take issue with. Fuck his game man, he can make whatever he wants. The aspiration to less-fantasy-more-medieval is one I quite enjoy, I hate high fantasy.

I guess he is guilty of is not paying proper homage to the RPGs of old (and not researching the site he was to be interviewed by). That doesn't bother me in the slightest, however. More importantly, I am concerned with his inexperience - this interview indicates that his understanding of gameplay in RPGs might not be sufficient enough. This, I find, to be the true beef of most of its detractors, which sadly wasn't well voiced. It is also my only reservation - click-to-swing-click-to-block action combat isn't that sophisticated by default (just as stats and dice do not automatically guarantee deep and tactical gameplay), so I don't see how it will "resemble the real world as we all desired back in the days of pen and paper". That just isn't enough. However, even this belief doesn't strike me as offensive, but merely naive.

On the whole, I think that instead of entering pampered primadonna cynical butthurt nerdrage mode all over again, it would pay to learn more about the system and drop a few neat suggestions.

I wish we could learn more about the actual gameplay outside of combat scenarios.

 

[Grunker]

Would brofist you if not for your first three or four lines with which I disagree. But overall, I think we're pretty much in agreeance.

 

[FeelTheRads]

but we can attempt something different now.

Replacing them with action combat doesn't still keep it an RPG, you know.

they are about social event, living out an adventure and having fun.

In before Facebook Bioware RPG.

"if it ain't no stats, in ain't no RPG".

Goddamn right it isn't. Just because you swing your sword in the woods doesn't make it an RPG.

 

[Mrowak]

but we can attempt something different now.

Replacing them with action combat doesn't still keep it an RPG, you know.

they are about social event, living out an adventure and having fun.

In before Facebook Bioware RPG.

"if it ain't no stats, in ain't no RPG".

Goddamn right it isn't. Just because you swing your sword in the woods doesn't make it an RPG.

See that's the problem. I say one thing and we have all kinds of butthurt demagoguery and conspiracy theories. o_O

Goddamn right it isn't. Just because you swing your sword in the woods doesn't make it an RPG.

And that's simply a logical fallacy and a strawman. I said that the following is [FALSE]: "if not A then it's not R". You said: "that statement is [TRUE] because if B, it's not R". So what's exactly the logical relation between A and B and [TRUE] statement? How exactly "if B, it's not R" makes the first statement [TRUE].

To put it in lay terms: no one here claimed that swinging sword makes an RPG. Point being: the fact that swinging swords does not make an RPG does not prove rolling the dice creates one.

Your observations is pointless and devoid of any argumentative value.

 

[Daniel.Vavra]

That Dan guy sure is interesting, I always thought of modern game developers as ignorant of the awesomeness of old-school RPG's, or they were just making console games to pay the bills, but this guy literally seems to believe that RPG's have progressed instead of going backwards. Fascinating.

I'll conclude that he must either be a liar and he never played older RPG's, or at least he's very shallow and only sees the graphics of a game and not the systems beneath it.

How about we stop this retarded discussion about things that were beaten to death in tousands of other topics, and ask something related to Warhorse instead (since y'know Daniel.Vavra is in this thread and can probably answer some of the questions)?

Daniel.Vavra ,

1) Was this movie from your vertical slice that was supposed to be shown to various publishers? Or is it just quickly duct-taped collage of some scenes?

2) Are most of the sub-systems already implemented in the vertical slice, or is there still a long way to go, before the current status can be considered as a proper representation of future game?

3) We know so far, that it is probably going to take place in XV century Bohemia. Is setting 100% historical? Do you consider introducing some very-low elements of fantasy/supernatural events etc.? For example witches/priests that can cast enchantment/curse? crude alchemy? Anything that can be explained nowadays with science and knowledge, but could have been interpreted as magic/miracle in middle-ages.

4) Have you started to put story together yet? Are there going to be other local kingdoms involved, apart from Czech? (e.g., German states, Poland)

5) You mentioned at one point that you aim for realistic distances, so the map will probably be a small, contained landscape where the story takes place (between two towns if I recall correctly). Are you (ideally) planning for more of such locations in different parts of the middle Europe (which obviously couldn't be connected seamlessly, but rather with the world map maybe)?

The video is just a very little glimpse of what we already have, nothing is "fake" and we have quite a lot of systems in working state(but there is still a very long way to go. Very long)
Your other questions are pretty good (I asked myself the same questions when I started designing the game), but its too soon to answer them. But I would say that you would not be dissapointed
Story is already set and some parts written, thats only thing I can say.

 

[Daniel.Vavra]

That Dan guy sure is interesting, I always thought of modern game developers as ignorant of the awesomeness of old-school RPG's, or they were just making console games to pay the bills, but this guy literally seems to believe that RPG's have progressed instead of going backwards. Fascinating.

I'll conclude that he must either be a liar and he never played older RPG's, or at least he's very shallow and only sees the graphics of a game and not the systems beneath it.

You are right. I am totally retarded.

Why do you keep posting that gif without context?

Because I am retarded, just like the guy in the gif or some other people in this thread