jtr7 on 31/3/2008 at 22:54

---

No milk thistle[aide] jokes! :o :p



Correct. It most often is, however, and if the reaction to new ideas around here is any indication, new should never deviate from the tried and true recipe unless the heart and soul stay the same. The Dark Project took so many risks, and broke so many industry rules, and was not made with profits as a primary impetus. If any company pushes for a broader audience, or is profit-driven in the approach to making a new Thief game, they will blow it. I would hope to be pleasantly and gratefully surprised.

Zillameth on 8/4/2008 at 06:33

---

With a bit of luck, this will be known after initial press releases (IF they are indeed going to develop Thief 4). There are people in the industry who would understand your sentiment, but most would probably just see you as a crazy fanperson, and Thief / Deus Ex / System Shock / Whatever as an IP to exploit.

I fail to understand, why prestige is in such a low regard these days. I mean, blockbusters give you most profits, but "ambitious" titles give you publicity. Why insist on making cheesy sequels when you can make proper sequels and cheesy spinoffs? ;)

The Magpie on 8/4/2008 at 14:08

---

Oh, but I know that I'm a crazy fanperson. I had hoped that some of you would know of an interview somewhere with somebody professing the merits of catering to a niche market, for instance. Or championing the immersion aspect. I guess I got hopeful when I read your observation here:



I have heard nothing but goodness about the console-only Mass Effect, by the way. Maybe it and BioShock marks the start of a trend, somehow. (I namedrop BioShock because, you know, after all it does seem to stand out as possessing significantly more depth than your average console title. Doesn't it?)

In any case, the respectability of a developers' studio seems to be too easily compromised by the publishing arm, is my kneejerk reaction. Call me prejudiced.

--
L.

Zillameth on 8/4/2008 at 16:36

---

Well, sure. Warren Spector, back when he was making first Deus Ex, used to say more or less the kind of stuff you're asking about. And then, DX2 and Thief 3 projects started, and he started talking about "streamlining", because the publisher had a policy which he wasn't allowed to question publicly.

Then there are places like the studio I work for. Literally every guy sitting within 20m radius from my desk is a fan of role playing games. Games like Fallout, Gothic, or Eve Online - these are games we would like to develop. But the decision is not ours to make, and the only succesful game our studio has developed so far is an ultra-fast paced FPS that's too simple to deserve being called "dumb". And we're never going to make enything more complex, because apparently we don't know how to do that and survive. This must be especially sad for our studio director, because in his life he's made three point'n'click adventures, three strategy games, one sidescroller and that FPS. And only that FPS was a (modest) success. Now he gives interviews in local press where he says he hates PC gaming.

95% of interviews are either strictly PR stuff or a developer ranting about what pains them. Don't trust either.




I suspect Mass Effect was never meant to be "console-only". It was just advertised in this way, just like some other X-Box "exclusives". Bioshock, on the other hand, is quite complex for a PC first-person shooter, too.

I don't know if we can speak of a recent change. Bioware has been developing their games for consoles since KotOR. There was a console version of Betheshda's Morrowind, too.



Well, the publisher gives money, the publisher makes demands, it's that simple. I have dreamt up a few games of my own. My favourite is a stealth based roleplaying game set in an asteroid field, where people travel around in wooden spaceships and deal with physical incarnations of their own convictions (not the usual "nightmare come true" variety - more like embodied ideas). No publisher is ever going to pay me for that kind of project, it's just too weird. So now I'm working on an ultra-fast paced FPS instead, because I have to pay my bills somehow. And the only reason why I'm allowed to complain publicly is because I'm insignificant. My boss doesn't have this luxury.

Then there is the question of developer's know-how. I've worked for three companies so far, and believe me, their software development practices would raise hair on any professional IT specialist's neck. Requirement analysis? Written documentation? Specification? Use cases? Data flow models? Real men don't need those. It's very difficult to create something interesting in this kind of environment, let alone something inventive.

The Magpie on 8/4/2008 at 18:25

---

I knew many would disagree.

The main point right here isn't gameplay, anyway, but the perceived willingness, imagined or real, of publishers to risk having something developed for console that seemingly aims higher than the now-proverbial 15yo demographic. Let the flaws of BS be discussed elsewhere, long as we can agree upon that.

At least BioWare and Bethesda don't exactly shy away from complexity, but AFAICT the jRPGs are pretty complex little things WRT gameplay, as well... I don't know if that's really useful as a benchmark. So I remain cautiously and guardedly optimistic.

Incidentally, I own DX for PS2 too, but that's a port. The thing is, apparently these days PC versions of games must be ports. Did you see the sales numbers from last year? PC games sold for $ 910,7 mill in the US. Down from $ 970 mill in 2006. Compare that to console games, which sold for $ 6,6 bill last year. At this point maybe we should count ourselves lucky to get a PC version at all.


We're vocal. Shout it out loud. It's blatantly undemocratic, but it works wonders.

--
L.