Chris Avellone E3 2010 Interview at GameBanshee

[funcroc]

http://www.gamebanshee.com/interviews/9856...s-avellone.html

GB: Based on the reception the game has received, is there anything you would have done differently if you could go back?

 

Chris: If I could go back and start on the project from the outset? Sure, absolutely - and don't take anything I say as this would somehow magically be a better game, it would just be different, and most likely have other things people hated about it. Anyway, I'd make a spy version of Kill Bill (if it had to be a spy game at all and not just a real world RPG title, which would be great), change the main character to not be a set character, screw the realism and focus on the fantastic, add more mission reactivity between missions and between cities, change the mission structure to the honeycomb mission structure our Systems Designer proposed 2 years in (and what our Exec Producer originally wanted), remove cinematic conversations, screw trying to compete with other stealth or shooter games that have already mastered those areas and look for ways to make the player feel like spies in other ways - again, assuming a spy game is what you'd want to do with a real-world RPG at all.

 

But that's all fantasy and wishful thinking, and again, it's easy to say that, and it would have most likely resulted in something else that people liked and disliked for different reasons. If I could go back to when I started mid-way through the project and was in the same situation? No, for logistical reasons. I'm sure the other leads felt the same way and so did our Project Director (who became Project Director at this time), and our Project Director who took on the role at this time saved this game from cancellation - or worse. We had a team that was low on morale, that felt like they didn't own the work they were doing (if you keep trading areas and design elements every other month, you can't focus on carrying something to completion), who were on the tides of iteration, and being able to go in there, give people ownership of interface, systems, an area, a Hub, make decisions, add more RPG elements, add more reactivity, restore focus and get rid of the blockages that were keeping people from moving ahead with work was satisfying. It took a while, and it was tough, and some of the decisions weren't ideal, but you can't always be in a perfect situation with development, so you do what you can. We had little to no time to redo anims, redo character models, redo locations from previous iterations, so we did what we could with what he had, and it made sense to us for the time frame (even when the time frame kept changing, we had no clue the release date would be what it became, and we didn't work toward that release date).

 

I'm proud of what we did during that time to help get the project going, organize the design staff, kill a lot of problems, and try to use what assets, locations, and story elements we had to work with to make a game that worked and took RPG elements in a new direction.

Edited July 1, 2010 by funcroc

[Ausir]

Interesting that he actually talks about Fallout Online, given that the interview had to be Bethesda-approved.

[Rane]

Sounds like AP was a bit of a problem child.

[Wombat]

Looks like something which reminds me of IWD2, which was also affected by the design change in the middle of the project.

 

As for a real world setting, was Avellone lying when he'd like to write modern conversations and he liked Heavy Rain? In either case, although I'm interested in RPG in real/historical world settings, well-thought original settings must be much better than half-minded one. Unfortunately, no matter how the design process have gone through, what players can play is the final product.

 

If Avellone likes to make games of his liking, probably, it would be appropriate for him to choose something with low budget (I wonder if Obsidian found a light in this area in web-based gaming...yes, I'm avoiding the obvious pan with flash. ). For, realistically, I think it's getting quite risky for Obsidian to make an original game and, realistically, they need to be really selective when it comes to originality. For Alpha Protocol, to minimize the risk, they should have gone for already established shooter/stealth game-play while exploring their originality in character/story-development area, I think. IMO, it would be wise for Obsidian designers to pick a successful (or already proven) game-play format in the market, analyze it, skin it into basics, re-organize it, build/choose appropriate engine and put a game-play advancement system* and story/character-development system on it. For Obsidian's forte is these latter two factors rather than the originality in game-plays unrelated with character/story development. This includes every factors about the intentional changes in gameplay such as character/equipment advancement, area/map designing, difficulty adjustment and pacing.

 

It's nice to see that Avellone and other designers are proud of their products but I think Obsidian has something the major companies known for CRPG don't have and, IMO, they have this potential to change what the majority think about CRPG. Avellone may only see "hatred" but I think he shouldn't turn his blind eye to these reviews with the tone of "I really wanted to like it but..." I don't think Avellone was doing a game master without paying attention to the reaction of his players. I don't know much about game industry but publishers will stop listening to them if their games don't sell well especially when the ideas are original. Alas, I wanted Obsidian to have the cunning of Ken Levine with Bioshock.

 

* It's usually called character advancement system but, more essentially and comprehensively, it is a part of game-play advancement system with learning curve.

 

PS Flash-bsed gaming sounds interesting...I wonder how they gather money and continue their business with that, though. CD Projekt Red also seems to have something like the Witcher Versus. If the risk balance is O.K., Obsidian can go all for their originality.