Interview Ultima Underworld inspired Ken Levine to make BioShock

[DarkUnderlord]

Tags: Ken Levine

<a href="http://www.forbes.com/2008/12/03/ken-levine-bioshock-tech-personal-cx_mji_1203levine.html">Forbes had a chat with Ken Levine, maker of BioShock</a>. Here's the part I referenced in the subject:
<br>
<blockquote><b>What game inspired you to make games?</b> It was [1992's] "Ultima Underworld." The feeling of being in a place compared to this abstraction that was adapted from board games--the feeling of being in a 3D world--was incredible. All the things that I wanted to do and all the games that I ended up working on came out of the inspiration I took from that product.
<br>
<br>
<b>What is the most successful game you've worked on?</b> We never really had a hit before "Bioshock." We had marginally successful projects--we never lost money--but "Bioshock" is head and shoulders above the rest. We're north of 2 million sold.
<br>
<br>
<b>What is the industry's biggest mistake?</b> I'm a real believer in industrial Darwinism. It's hard for an industry to make a mistake because the market tends to be self-correcting...but I wish the industry could find a way to make PC gaming more broadly successful.</blockquote>
<br>
Maybe PC games would be more broadly successful if they stopped making so much crap? Just a thought.
<br>
<br>
Spotted @ <a href="http://www.gamebanshee.com">GameBanshee</a>

 

[Wyrmlord]

Yeah, Ultima Underworld is Bioshock years before Bioshock was made.

The world of the underground mountain cave where a man named Sir Cabirus tried to make a paradise world, but failed...sounds awfully familiar.

Except, Bioshock is not near the scope of Ultima Underworld. In this age, where making a single hallway with a 3D engine takes alot of time, Bioshock's scope was severely hindered compared to Ultima Underworld, which was made in a time when 3D simply meant making a few lines and voila.

Ultima Underworld is a much larger and more open game. It resembles what Bioshock would have become without constraints of modern technology. I wonder what it would have been like if Bioshock captured the same awe of venturing a giant world like UUW, that feeling of wandering dark corridors, finding a room, turning on a torch, and finding dozens of dwarves standing right near you.

Interestingly, he also probably was inspired by UUW in the sense that you can't die in UUW. There's a quest early on which rewards you with ressurection at a certain point.

The closest to UUW in this era is STALKER, but that has individual missions with seperate linear progression, not the large seamless world of UUW.

 

[Silellak]

Yeah, Ultima Underworld is Bioshock years before Bioshock was made.

The world of the underground mountain cave where a man named Sir Cabirus tried to make a paradise world, but failed...sounds awfully familiar.

Except, Bioshock is not near the scope of Ultima Underworld. In this age, where making a single hallway with a 3D engine takes alot of time, Bioshock's scope was severely hindered compared to Ultima Underworld, which was made in a time when 3D simply meant making a few lines and voila.

Ultima Underworld is a much larger and more open game. It resembles what Bioshock would have become without constraints of modern technology. I wonder what it would have been like if Bioshock captured the same awe of venturing a giant world like UUW, that feeling of wandering dark corridors, finding a room, turning on a torch, and finding dozens of dwarves standing right near you.

Interestingly, he also probably was inspired by UUW in the sense that you can't die in UUW. There's a quest early on which rewards you with ressurection at a certain point.

The closest to UUW in this era is STALKER, but that has individual missions with seperate linear progression, not the large seamless world of UUW.

UUW was the first first-person RPG I liked enough to bother playing more than an hour or two. This was before I'd played Doom, and so I wasn't used to the first person perspective and much-preferred isometric RPGs.

I was probably 11 or 12 years old max at the time, and bought it just cuz I'd enjoyed Ultima 6 so much. The fact I finished it despite my distaste for the perspective (at the time) preaches to the quality of it.

I never thought of the similarities you mentioned between UUW and Bioshock, but they're definitely present. I enjoyed Bioshock, but UUW blows it out of the fucking water.

 

[Serious_Business]

Maybe PC games would be more broadly successful if they stopped making so much crap? Just a thought.

What? No. Do you think the music industry will start becoming more successful when it stops making so much crap? Oh that's right, you don't listen to music.

 

[Silellak]

Maybe PC games would be more broadly successful if they stopped making so much crap? Just a thought.

What? No. Do you think the music industry will start becoming more successful when it stops making so much crap? Oh that's right, you don't listen to music.

A large reason PC games aren't all that successful is because they just aren't very accessible to Johnny McMainstream.

Imagine this conversation:

Johnny McMainstream: "I want to play this shiny new 8 hour game full of bloom and physics."

Fictional useful salesperson: "Well, you can run that game on a $1000 computer - maybe $500 if you build it yourself - but you'll have to play with the settings to get a decent framerate. Also, you'll have to make sure your drivers are up to date, and they don't conflict with one another. Oh, and a lot of the newer games have painful DRM that can cause significant problems."

Johnny McMainstream: "What's my other choice?"

Fictional useful salesperson: "Buy a $300 console, buy the game, stick it in, grab a controller, and play from your couch. The graphics won't be as nice, and the controls might be a bit worse, bu--"

Johnny McMainstream: "...where are the fucking consoles?"

It's not really a difficult decision for most people, and honestly, as easy as it is to crap on the casual gamers, I can't blame them. I bounce back and forth between console gaming and PC gaming (occasionally swearing off one or the other for a couple years), and every time I'm in the PC gaming camp, I understand why people DON'T want to play games on their computers. It's very often not worth the hassle.

Handhelds are even better, because you don't need the TV, just a game, the console, maybe some headphones, and a comfy place to sit. There's a reason the DS sells so damn well, while PC gaming is full of half-assed console ports and shitty MMOs.

 

[Disconnected]

What? No. Do you think the music industry will start becoming more successful when it stops making so much crap? Oh that's right, you don't listen to music.

Back in 2000, about 40% of the music sales in the US were catalogue sales. The industry itself concluded that a large part of the reason they'd experienced failing sales for a few years up to that point, was because of increasingly poorer consumer access to catalogue items (caused by shit like Walmart becoming the primary music outlets and the limited shelf space of such places).

So yeah, perhaps the video games industry would be more successful if a greater part of it went for specific audiences, instead of everyone trying to appeal to everyone.

Still, the things Silellak pointed out is probably the greater problem.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Maybe PC games would be more broadly successful if they stopped making so much crap? Just a thought.

What? No. Do you think the music industry will start becoming more successful when it stops making so much crap? Oh that's right, you don't listen to music.

Actually there's been a massive shift in music from the mainstream "crap" to more niche music. The advent of iTunes and their like brought on the move towards individual songs, rather than whole albums and the rise of MySpace and indie bans putting their songs online is also getting a lot of attention. Today it's not surprising to have a band release a song on MySpace, get a lot of attention and then turn down a record deal because they can get better deals themselves or prefer not to do business with them. The drive is now towards satisfying niches (even niches within niches) rather than looking for a "one-song-fits-all" approach of the big hit days (which was a necessary model in order to fund all the money they'd spend on the smaller artist).

In short, computer game companies make more FPS' because they think they'll sell, where-as if they stopped making the "think it'll sell" machematically derived and processed mumbo-jumbo and started doing more niche, they'll get better results. Like the rise of mods becoming some of the most popular FPS while professionally releases titles slip by the wayside. Even Steam is seeing a lot of games get market exposure and sales they otherwise wouldn't have gotten. Sites like GoG that are bringing back a back catalogue of games are going to see more and more companies struggle to sell their mainstream crap, while niche's like well-made X-Com clones will rise.

Digital Distribution has cut out entire supply chains and is now making it more profitable. People can find the music / games they like where-as before, like Disconnected said, they were limited to whatever someone else decided would sell based on market research and a small focus group.

 

[Naked Ninja]

First thing DU has written in a long time that I've fully agreed with.

 

[MetalCraze]

Actually there's been a massive shift in music from the mainstream "crap" to more niche music.

No. There was a shift from each good musician having his own sound to hordes of copy-cats without a talent infesting myspace.

 

[Wyrmlord]

Yeah, that's right DU.

There is a certain foolishness in the gaming industry to make big budget games, because even if that means they sell well among a large audience, the margin on that profit is still low. There is a huge expense involved in this venture.

It's better to be more shrewd businessmen and settle for less. Find a target group, and make games for them within a reasonable budget. If it's the game they want, you won't need that extra expense in presentation or aggressively trying to sell it to them, because it's exactly the game they want to play anyway.

Besides, making big budget games is shooting yourself in the foot. After all, there is a greater risk involved that way, and the gaming industry is risky enough with the kind of speculative and unpredictable nature of it. This is the reason why so many developers keep going dead.

 

[Azrael the cat]

Actually there's been a massive shift in music from the mainstream "crap" to more niche music.

No. There was a shift from each good musician having his own sound to hordes of copy-cats without a talent infesting myspace.

Not trying to be condascending here, but how old were you in the 1980s? Have you forgotten how goddamn abysmal music had sunk to? Seriously, as crap as things might seem now, it is NOTHING on how bad things were from 83-92. It's easy to pick the handful of bands that were good - I love the Pixies, New Order, Smiths, Cure, Jane's Addiction, etc as much as the next Gen Xer - but (a) a lot of those bands didn't get big until well after the 80s, and (b) they were the exception amongst a fucking ocean of identical massproduced crap. If Brittany Spears had come out then, you wouldn't be thinking of her as some shitty pop singer - she was the fucking norm, the equivalent of the crappy indie bands infesting myspace. And there were 1000s of them polluting the place.

Music is one thing that has definitely improved since the internet started.

 

[poocolator]

I was talking with some bitch while in line for a night club about music, and she kept telling me of all these band/group names I had never encountered before. When she asked me what I listened to after frustratingly giving up bombarding me with her shitty musical choices, I told her, "Whatever I hear and like," meaning I don't dedicate my life to any one group in particular. This is mostly true but I hadn't told her I have a fetish for military marches, a goodly portion of classical music, ambient, techno, electronica and some other random shit, including soundtracks to movies like Conan: The Barbarian ^_^
My point is I find it extremely difficult to tell most popular musicians apart so I don't bother with them anymore. If I hear something that piques my interest I immediately inquire about it.

 

[S_Verner]

When she asked me what I listened to after frustratingly giving up bombarding me with her shitty musical choices, I told her, "Whatever I hear and like,"


My point is I find it extremely difficult to tell most popular musicians apart so I don't bother with them anymore. If I hear something that piques my interest I immediately inquire about it.

This, I read everything from the Golden Bough to the Grapes of Wrath, I play everything from Team Fortress 2, to Gearhead 2, Dawn of War, and Auditorium, the only bands I have more than three songs by are Pink Floyd, BOC, Led Zeppelin, and Journey, I utterly despise popular music for three reasons:

1.It sucks.

2.The fags they have recording suck.

3.I hate emos, wiggers, most goths, and all people who talk about sticking it to the man while working for a multinational label.

 

[poocolator]

Then I hope you share in the understanding of how difficult was to keep from strangling this hot bitch. Kinky, too.

 

[doctor_kaz]

Actually there's been a massive shift in music from the mainstream "crap" to more niche music.

No. There was a shift from each good musician having his own sound to hordes of copy-cats without a talent infesting myspace.

Not trying to be condascending here, but how old were you in the 1980s? Have you forgotten how goddamn abysmal music had sunk to? Seriously, as crap as things might seem now, it is NOTHING on how bad things were from 83-92. It's easy to pick the handful of bands that were good - I love the Pixies, New Order, Smiths, Cure, Jane's Addiction, etc as much as the next Gen Xer - but (a) a lot of those bands didn't get big until well after the 80s, and (b) they were the exception amongst a fucking ocean of identical massproduced crap. If Brittany Spears had come out then, you wouldn't be thinking of her as some shitty pop singer - she was the fucking norm, the equivalent of the crappy indie bands infesting myspace. And there were 1000s of them polluting the place.

Music is one thing that has definitely improved since the internet started.

Eh? Music was wayyy better in the 1980's than it is today. It was a one hit wonder-filled decade, but at least those hits were worth listening to. People look back on the 1980s with amusement because of the personal styles of artists like Boy George and Pat Benetar, but if you separate the music that they made from the funky hairdos and eccentric clothing, then it sounds really damn good. Unlike today, where pretty much everything is complete shit. Some excellent punk rock music came out in the earlly '80s, along with by far the best stuff from the B-52s. U2, REM, Whitney Houston, Stevie Wonder, Devo, Huey Lewis, Madonna, The Cars, Bruce Springsteen, and many others made a lot of excellent music back then. Ask anyone who has been listening to the Red Hot Chili Peppers since the 1980s and they'll tell you that by far their best stuff came out 20+ years ago. Michael Jackson's early 80s music was great too even though the guy himself is a freak. Music was far less homogeneous and mass produced than it is today (people make fun of Debbie Gibson for being bubble gum music, but at least she actually wrote her own stuff). It was definitely a down decade for hard rock, as shitty talentless hair bands took over that scene, but there was a lot of great stuff as well.

 

[Claw]

I'm just going to interject here and say that anyone who uses "i could care less" is a fucking untermensch.

Please continue, good sirs.

I used to only use "couldn't" but then I reconsidered. To me, the term "I could care less" means "I don't even care how much I care" now.

If Brittany Spears had come out then, you wouldn't be thinking of her as some shitty pop singer - she was the fucking norm

What the hell are you on about - Britney Spears is the fucking norm. Maybe we think of her as some shitty pop singer, but she's an extremely successful pop star. While I didn't even notice she released a new album this year (or last year for that matter), it was apparently quite successful.
It could be argued that she's not actually the norm, but above average, which I don't think is a positive statement about music.


Oh, and I almost forgot the topic..

I'm a real believer in industrial Darwinism. It's hard for an industry to make a mistake because the market tends to be self-correcting

Ah yes, gotta love the self-correction of the market. I hear it's correcting itself hard right now. Go market!

 

[MINIGUNWIELDER]

I really am dissapointed in that industrial darwinism comment, because it's like he believes that he believes in it but doesnt really or something.

 

[buccaroobonzai]

On the music topic, the problem with media like music, film, games is accessibility.
For example there was plenty of niche and outstinding genre specific music being made, but it was much harder to find then it is today.
In the 80s, if you liked heavy metal, punk, thrash metal, hardcore, crossover, alternative rock there was plenty of good music in the fringes. Yet the pop charts and stores only mentioned pop crossovers like Adam Ant, Gary Neuman and Billy Idol. However brilliant bands defining new genres like reggae-punk like the Clash and the the Police made it big then as well.

Ska: Madness, English Beat
Heavy Metal: Iron Maiden, Queensryche, Dio,Ozzy,Guns N Roses, Watchtower
Thrash & Speed metal: Celtic Frost, Metallica, Megadeth, Testament, Exodus, Kreator, Dark Angel, Voi Vod, Panterra
Hardcore punk: Cro Mags, Suicidal Tendencies, Minor Threat, Social Distortion, Quicksand, 7 Seconds, Uniform Choice, Corrosion of Conformity, Dirty Rotten Imbeciles, Society's No F'n Use, Naked Raygun, Blast
Alt rock: Husker Du, Fishbone, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Jane's Addiction, Soundgarden, Primus, Fugazi, Psychefunkapus, Infectious Grooves, Ned's Atomic Dustbin, Stone Roses, The Church, Faith No More

And there were much more. Back then, just like today you had to do a lot of searching, know people who are knowledgeable about all the bands in a genre, or be active in the scene. Today it is much easier to find cutting edge bands like those because of the internet. You still have to spend a lot of time finding them, but they are out there.

Being in a few bands myself, I know that being your own independent label, and putting your music on CDnow, Myspace, MP3.com etc. is the way to go in addition to gigging and touring and word of mouth and flyer advertising. Even if you want to get on a large lable you need to build up following first.