Interview Spiderweb Software Interview

[Brother None]

Yes, his recent interviews have raised the dumbing down concern for me too. It seems he's willing to risk his core customer base to attract more casual gamers.

Is he though? The reason I asked on about that specific point was that I was concerned he'd dumb shit down. Dumbing down would be more hand-holding, simpler quests, shit like that.

He's not doing that. All he's really doing is setting the default combat difficulty lower. So? Raise the slider if you so prefer.

It's not the greatest of trends, but it's hardly "omfg dumbing down".

 

[Luzur]

HOLY SHIT ALERT THE MEDIA

Hello, Fez :D

Hello!

I'm wondering about the tense in that sentence from Vogel now. I read it at first as him talking about what he had done with the Exile to Avernum update. It didn't really make much sense otherwise. Perhaps he's going to go back and upgrade the earlier titles to the Avernum 6 standard? It might not take a lot for him to bring them all up to the same interface and graphical standard. This could be aimed at encouraging new customers to buy the older titles, rather than aiming this at current fans.

I would say this is spot on. There are plenty of new people at the Spiderweb forums that refuse to play the first Avernums due to the graphics and UI. I cannot really see a huge difference, but whatever floats their boat.

Of course, there are still people that refuse to play the Avernums because they prefer the Exiles. Perhaps Jeff could also port the entire Avernum series into the Exile engine as well. :idea:

alot of the people on the Spiderweb forums should experience a good old fashion beatdown.

 

[mondblut]

Of course, there are still people that refuse to play the Avernums because they prefer the Exiles. Perhaps Jeff could also port the entire Avernum series into the Exile engine as well. :idea:

I, for one, wouldn't mind that. But I'd rather he make new games than remake one and the same over and over again.

Than again, that kind of perfectionism is better than Blakemore's. At least he *does* release games before deciding they need another improvement

 

[Thrasher]

Yes, his recent interviews have raised the dumbing down concern for me too. It seems he's willing to risk his core customer base to attract more casual gamers.

Is he though? The reason I asked on about that specific point was that I was concerned he'd dumb shit down. Dumbing down would be more hand-holding, simpler quests, shit like that.

He's not doing that. All he's really doing is setting the default combat difficulty lower. So? Raise the slider if you so prefer.

It's not the greatest of trends, but it's hardly "omfg dumbing down".

No. He said he may remove challenging encounters early on. Even with the warnings he gives in game, people would complain it was too hard, rather than come back to them later when leveled. This would be a change to a more linear, scaled design and handholding...

 

[Sceptic]

But I'd rather he make new games than remake one and the same over and over again.

I thought that's what he's been doing for the past 15 years

 

[Thrasher]

Yes, a very disturbing trend.

 

[Martin]

I have had games in the past with "Leadership" skills that affected the dialogue options available. The new game engine won't have that. Instead, I'm focusing on role-playing. I want there to be lots of decisions and for those decisions to shift the storyline in meaningful ways. I am leaving out Leadership skill because, simply, I want all of the cool decision points to be available to all players.[/quote]


wtg.

 

[Elwro]

His blog entry un "bushwacking" the players

 

[Brother None]

No. He said he may remove challenging encounters early on.

Compared to Avernum 6. Did you even play that game? The challenge fight design and layout is pretty bad.

As for linear, the next title will be more linear anyway. If "dumbing down" has a spot on scale linear-to-open for you, then it'll be dumbed down regardless. Placing challenge fights is a really, really small factor in that. To go from that to "he's dumping his core audience to popularize!" is beyond inane.

 

[Elwro]

Re: Avernum 6, consider the shade encounter in the Portal tower near the beginning of the game. In the patched version the door is locked and the keeper will only let you in if he thinks you're powerful enough. I gather it was open in the unpatched version?

 

[nomask7]

Re: Avernum 6, consider the shade encounter in the Portal tower near the beginning of the game. In the patched version the door is locked and the keeper will only let you in if he thinks you're powerful enough. I gather it was open in the unpatched version?

Ugh, I remember thinking what an annoying thing it was that he (?) didn't let me through that gate. For my own good, you see.

 

[Thrasher]

No. He said he may remove challenging encounters early on.

Compared to Avernum 6. Did you even play that game? The challenge fight design and layout is pretty bad.

As for linear, the next title will be more linear anyway. If "dumbing down" has a spot on scale linear-to-open for you, then it'll be dumbed down regardless. Placing challenge fights is a really, really small factor in that. To go from that to "he's dumping his core audience to popularize!" is beyond inane.

Yes linearizing, and removing challenge fights is dumbing it down. If you can't understand that, then I'm not surprised.

 

[Brother None]

Yes linearizing, and removing challenge fights is dumbing it down. If you can't understand that, then I'm not surprised.

Heh heh. You actually, honestly believe linear is dumbing down compared to unlinear, by definition.

You really are precious.

PS: and now it's "removing" challenge fights? Hah. If he said he was taking out one non-combat skill you'd probably be capable of turning that into "he's turning it into a stupid hack 'n slash". Delightful.

Re: Avernum 6, consider the shade encounter in the Portal tower near the beginning of the game. In the patched version the door is locked and the keeper will only let you in if he thinks you're powerful enough. I gather it was open in the unpatched version?

Dunno, didn't play the unpatched version. Sucks. Not a big fan of obvious slamming in the doors.

But Avernum 6's challenge fights were sometimes badly placed, or badly designed. This may shock you guys, but guess what: challenging the player doesn't supersede good design.

 

[Thrasher]

Yes removing choices is dumbing down. But if you're mindless I guess that it wouldn't matter...

 

[Brother None]

Oh wow. You're really, really bad at forming a coherent argument.

I even know what you're talking about. And you have a point somewhere, if it weren't buried under so much overstating crap and doomsday rhetoric.

Defining intelligence in gaming purely by choices really has to be a joke though. It is, right? Please tell me you're not that close-minded.

 

[Thrasher]

Apparently you are really bad at understanding.

 

[Brother None]

Uh...no... you're?

Am I on candid camera or something? Someone put you up to this to pull my leg?

It's funny, regardless.

 

[Alex]

Sorry, Brother None, but I have to agree somewhat with Thrasher here. It seems to me that, all other factors being equal, linearizing a game is dumbing it down. The more linear a game is, the less the player's own actions matter. Which makes the game more trivial. Don't you agree with this? Or is there a trade-off in there somewhere (besides making the game more accessible, that is)?

 

[Thrasher]

Gameplay is choice, otherwise you are watching a movie.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

@BN: I believe he's mad about Jeff removing the optional tough monsters at early game, not about linearity of the game as a whole.

 

[Thrasher]

In effect, removing the choice to fight bad monsters at the front is a form of linearization, right?

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Yeah, it sucks, but not enough to raise the "dumbing down" flag.

 

[Thrasher]

It's a slippery slope. I've seen it time and time again, where a change in philosophy follows from just changing a single encounter. Either stick to your guns or give into the cry babies who want more handholding, or don't want to bother revisiting previously visited areas...

Exploration should entail risk and rewards to keep it interesting and exciting. If there's less risk, it's less interesting (for me at least)... If it is all linearized/scaled to your level, well we know how mindless it can become...

 

[Brother None]

Sorry, Brother None, but I have to agree somewhat with Thrasher here.

Oh, I agree vaguely with him too. I like the challenge fights being there, and I think they'll still be, just less than in Avernum 6, and really, honestly, Avernum 6 overdid it.

Where I just have to laugh it off is when he starts twisting what Jeff Vogel actually said to make it sound like he's "removing" challenge fights, that it "seems" like his intention is to dump his core audience to popularize the game. Vogel is a good designer who listens to fan feedback, and who balances criticism rather than just ignore it to be obstinately edgy, as Trasher might prefer. So he's changing a bit of is design style because it simply wasn't that good. Boo-hoo?

The problem here is the odd perspective that there's some kind of dichotomic, absolute divide between dumbing down and dumbing up. That it's fine to throw shitty challenges at the player because that's more intelligent, challenging gaming? It's not, it's shitty design. He identified something that doesn't works that well, and he's removing it. Quick, sound the alarm!

all other factors being equal

But that is never the case.

Or is there a trade-off in there somewhere (besides making the game more accessible, that is)?

There are many, many tradeoffs. Quality of design. Depth of narrative. Flexibility in important choices, which is something that leaks out the more non-linear you make your narrative. In the end intelligent gameplay and design are about intent, and linear or non-linear isn't the most important point there. Fallout 3 really doesn't become less dumbed down because it's non-linear.

I personally have a big preference for non-linear gaming. But I'm not going to pretend it's something it's not.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Yes linearizing, and removing challenge fights is dumbing it down. If you can't understand that, then I'm not surprised.

Heh heh. You actually, honestly believe linear is dumbing down compared to unlinear, by definition.

You really are precious.

What's the point of playing a cRPG if it's linear? You can read a book at much lesser cost and the story will probably be much higher quality and without all the filler combat. It's removing one of the main advantages that cRPGs have over other media.