IGN interview

[funcroc]

http://pc.ign.com/articles/925/925916p1.html

 

GNPC: Finally, we're glad to be hearing some new details on the game. Where is the game at in terms of development? What are you currently working on right now and what's next?

 

Tim Ernst: We just finished our level creation and we are working to finalize the script and game systems. We just hit alpha, and we are starting to polish the whole experience. Making an RPG is tough, since we have more game systems than any other genre. We will keep creating some new tools and gadgets along the way, continue balancing and polishing the levels, and finally work on pacing. We have done a lot, but we still have work ahead. We hope you stay tuned in the near future as we start releasing some gameplay footage!

Edited November 1, 2008 by funcroc

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

They just hit alpha?

 

 

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

[garbageben]

That was a good, informative interview. Thanks for posting!

 

We hope you stay tuned in the near future as we start releasing some gameplay footage!

I wonder how soon the near future is? /continues to wait patiently

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

Nice. Similar to a lot of the other previews, but it's something to read.

 

So, alpha . . . is it really still March? Or are we talking April/May?

[Zoma]

Good interview, but it still didn't add any notable new infos compared to the previous ones in terms of gameplay. They did add minor details regarding of weapons and upgradable melees.

 

However, the actual action gameplay content remains in question:

 

-How does standard combat plays out? Since using the reference of Gears of War, I assume the base of the combat gameplay plays similar to it using a cover system and health regeneration.

 

-Will there be an inventory system to manage despite the unlimited ammo system and static equipment(You cannot pick up enemy's weapons last we were informed) the game uses? If we take the ammo and weapon system into consideration as well as the possibility of utilizing health regen system, the inventory system seems to be obselete.

 

-How sophisticated are the enemy A.Is in combat to provide the challege for players who prefer to play as a Rambo? Are they capable of flanking the player, flushing the player out of his cover mode with grenades? Even better, will they be able to use smoke grenades or flashbangs to gain advantages in flanking? The player having the edge in combat with abilities like chain shots and fire storm(Unlimited SMG bulets), how is Obsidian planning to provide the enemies a challenge in combat aside from outnumbering the player?

 

Are the enemies finite per level similar to Splinter Cell but deadly in every encounters as each shots are lethal as well as the player often faces overwhelming odds?

 

Or plays out like Metal Gear series where the enemies constantly respawn during the alert mode which the situation can either be avoided(Kill the guards before they sign the alarm) or evaded(Hide until its over)?

 

-How is stealth played out? The factors of hiding in darkness, out of sight as well as the sounds of movement are definitely in play. Most importantly, are we able to relocate the bodies of disposed enemies to avoid others from stumbling over it? Last I heard Obsidian is still considering this particular factor which boggles my mind since I thought the answer is certain for enhancing stealth gameplay.

[H]

Or plays out like Metal Gear series where the enemies constantly respawn during the alert mode which the situation can either be avoided(Kill the guards before they sign the alarm) or evaded(Hide until its over)?

Please, no. The Temple of Respawning Asians in Bloodlines almost drove me insane.

[Calax]

well the inventory answer is shown in Knights of the old republic. you didn't pick up your opponents weapons... just some random lint they had thrown in their pockets.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

Well, I can answer at least a few of your (Zoma's) questions based on preview/forum materials.

 

Yes there is a cover system, and no there isn't regenerating health.

 

Although I can't confirm this, I seriously doubt there will be endlessly respawning bad guys. Combat is supposed to be a viable path through the game, whereas MGS was kind of designed to punish the player until he went stealthy again.

[Zoma]

Well, I can answer at least a few of your (Zoma's) questions based on preview/forum materials.

 

Yes there is a cover system, and no there isn't regenerating health.

 

Although I can't confirm this, I seriously doubt there will be endlessly respawning bad guys. Combat is supposed to be a viable path through the game, whereas MGS was kind of designed to punish the player until he went stealthy again.

 

Seems the actioney part of the game sounds identical to Stranglehold, with unlimited bullet spray and bullet time abilities and such minus the stylish acrobats. I certainly hope there's more than that though.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

Heh, more than that? I think the "more than that" comes in the form of stealth, CQC, hacking, and flexible storyline. I certainly don't expect AP to out-action pure action games.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

How important is the cover system?

 

Gears of War or Mass Effect? GoW has you constantly running from cover to cover, yet in Mass Effec the cover system is pretty much useless and is ignored. Personnally I think the combat feels more visceral with heavy coer system use, but hey, GoW wasn't an RPG.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

IMO, the Mass Effect cover system worked fine. It's not gears, but what is?

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

IMO, the Mass Effect cover system worked fine. It's not gears, but what is?

Gears of War? Duh.

 

What I mean is, will we actually use it? No one used the cover system in Mass Effect.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

IMO, the Mass Effect cover system worked fine. It's not gears, but what is?

Gears of War? Duh.

 

What I mean is, will we actually use it? No one used the cover system in Mass Effect.

 

What do you mean? I use the cover system in Mass Effect plenty.

[Wombat]

I'm happy with most of the other parts, especially NPC-PC interactions, or role-playing, but as for presentation...

 

IGNPC: You've also opted to go for an over-the-shoulder perspective for the game. What's behind that decision and how does it affect the player's experience?

 

Matthew Rorie: It was not a tough decision, since Obsidian has a long history of using third-person perspectives in their games. The industry as a whole has also been shifting more and more to the third-person viewpoint, as well, probably because we want to control the game's character, not our "self" inside of the game.

This is deliberately different design philosophy from (ex) Looking Glass Studio designers and even Bethesda designers (I haven't played FO3 yet, though). I'd be happier if there is a chance for switching views. Personally, I'm not familiar with third person action games at all. Even Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines was first person except melee combat. Considering Aliens RPG is also based on the same engine, I guess I have to be accustomed to the third person view. I admit that this is my personal preference, though.

 

funcroc is really quick...I came here immediately after reading the article.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

Fallout 3 has third person, even if it is a somewhat shoddy attempt at it. One could also play Load times- I mean Bloodlines entirely in third person. You're free to dislike third person games, though if you're unfamiliar with them, why not play a few good ones (Bethesda and Troika games are really *not* good examples of third person gameplay) and base your opinions on that?

 

I've known a few people who thought first person was the ultimate method of playing games because you're more immersed, etc. I would answer "yes, in theory." In practice, most first person games have the player incorporeally floating through the world on some sort of high-tech mobile weapons platform. The player character has no visible body, the camera floats in an unrealistic yet seemingly ubiquitous fashion, and player movement is limited to (at most) leaning, crouching, and prone.

 

One game that IMO took a step in the right direction was Far Cry 2. The first person cutscenes, seamless movement through the world, and use of weapon sights was a step in the right direction. It also took several steps backwards by having sprinting, crouching, and sliding as the only movement options.

 

Until FP gets to the point where actual immersion is the norm, I'll largely prefer third person games because they tend to come with more movement options. Even when a first person game "stoops" to adding a cover system, it often zips into third person.

 

So, that's another "perspective," so to speak.

[Wrath of Dagon]

IMO, the Mass Effect cover system worked fine. It's not gears, but what is?

Gears of War? Duh.

 

What I mean is, will we actually use it? No one used the cover system in Mass Effect.

What do you mean? You won't last 5 sec in ME without cover, unless may be it's on easy.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

IMO, the Mass Effect cover system worked fine. It's not gears, but what is?

Gears of War? Duh.

 

What I mean is, will we actually use it? No one used the cover system in Mass Effect.

What do you mean? You won't last 5 sec in ME without cover, unless may be it's on easy.

I've passed the game on the hardest difficulty without ever using cover. Hell, even walkthroughs say "screw that, ignore the cover system, you'll live fine without it".

[Cycloneman]

I've always prefered third person, since it prevents me from walking backwards into walls and getting killed while I try to back away further. It's far to difficult to tell when you've hit a wall on your backside in a FPS, especially with the way that backing into a wall often causes your character to move (albeit much more slowly) to one side.

[Wombat]

I think the reason why I tend to like the first person games is that they feel like movies and adapt many techniques from movie camera works. Third person games constantly remind me that I am playing a game. Since the strength of Obsidian is story/dialog, I think the first person view with cinematic technique would be suitable.

 

Even about the Witcher, which is unanimously praised for its atmospheric graphics, I feel the occasional switching from the third person game-play view to cinematic cut-scenes unnatural. The first person view would deal with switching much more fluently. To be fair, I haven't played Mass Effect but quite many people praise its cinematic expressions. How good are they when compared with first person games such as Half Life 2, Bioshock, The Chronicles of Riddick?

 

Of course, the decision has been already made long time ago about Alpha Protocol and probably Aliens RPG but Obsidian so easily saying "It was not a tough decision," gives me impression that they are not so eager to examine cinematic techniques and combine them with their writing. I wonder how many of my posts you may have come across in these boards but I am not worried about their ability in writing but in the presentation of it in modern 3D graphic. Like FO3, I think some charms of role-playing games can be re-discovered once they are modernized properly.

[Wrath of Dagon]

I think third person works OK in RPG's, I can't stand it in shooters though. It would be nice if there was a choice of camera selection.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

I'm lost. How is the transition from first person gameplay perspective to a third person cutscene inherently more fluid than transitioning from a third person gameplay perspective to third person cutscene? Or, how would use of first-person scripted cutscenes be "cinematic" when movies seldom employ first person?

[Wombat]

I'm lost. How is the transition from first person gameplay perspective to a third person cutscene inherently more fluid than transitioning from a third person gameplay perspective to third person cutscene? Or, how would use of first-person scripted cutscenes be "cinematic" when movies seldom employ first person?

How many movies which have the protagonist always in front of the camera and make the audience keep seeing his/her back? It is obviously unnatural.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

I'm lost. How is the transition from first person gameplay perspective to a third person cutscene inherently more fluid than transitioning from a third person gameplay perspective to third person cutscene? Or, how would use of first-person scripted cutscenes be "cinematic" when movies seldom employ first person?

How many movies which have the protagonist always in front of the camera and make the audience keep seeing his/her back? It is obviously unnatural.

 

So would a movie in first person, particular when the camera is unnaturally stable and the protagonists body doesn't exist.

[Wombat]

So would a movie in first person, particular when the camera is unnaturally stable and the protagonists body doesn't exist.

Quite many movies use someone's views. Sometimes, it's protagonist's, sometimes, it is another person's. Of course, not so many movies are shown exclusively in first person view. Mostly the camera work involves switching between third person and first person views. However, even in third person view, the protagonist staying in front of camera is somehow unnatural, which constantly reminds me that I am playing a game. Rather, a game which has third person views in cut-scenes while staying first person view in game-play feels more natural to me. Furthermore, even first person view works like a third person camera when the protagonist watching NPCs.

 

I cannot see my shoulders when I am typing this...I see my PC monitor. I believe it is same to you.

 

The above may not be a good theory but I am simply trying to figure out why I cannot get cinematic feel in third person games while I can immediately point out a few first person games just like above with good cinematic feel.