DAC exclusive - interview with Todd Howard

[Mr. Teatime]

http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?s ... d=11574586

It's so sad to see a fan base become this bitter. In the article and in the posts here, all you see is complaining about Bethseda and even bashing Morrowind (wtf? awesome game)

Come on guys, remember where Fallout 3 was BEFORE this press release? Nowhere. You have a beloved franchise owned by a failing company who are NEVER going to be able to do anything with. Then, lo and behold, it's swooped up by a respectable, wealthy company that - gasp - specializes in roll playing games! What is your response? Jubilation? Praise? or... whining. Yeah.

Bethseda software, winners of a bajillion awards for Morrowind, swimming in cash, with another hit game due to come out soon, picks it up - and all you can do is bitch about camera angles?

Hmm...

[Kashluk]

The guy who answered him seems to have a bit sharper tools in his box:

...Bethesda specializes in 'Roll' Playing, which is not much more then combat. Ala, Morrowind.

Role-Playing consists of having engaging stories, typically filled with engaging characters and well thought out plots.

Role-Playing games can easily become Roll Playing games, the opposite is not true about Roll playing games.

[S4ur0n27]

I still don't understand how Morrowind is that popular.

Oh nevermind, people sucks.

The game is fun till you get to the 7 temples or something quest.

[Kashluk]

It gets repetative around level 40 I think, when you're propably such a tough ass that you could take on anyone, anywhere, anytime.

It's nothing spectacular, it looks ok and has plenty of shit to do, even though the quests aren't really from the most intelligent end and the stupid "I like you 45/100, you can't have this item X until I like you 50" shit was just annoying.

[Mr. Teatime]

Nope, Morrowind was no fun for me. I can see why some people may like it, for the MMORPG feel maybe. But relistening to the soundtracks to PS:T and the FO games reminds me how much character those games had and how much they made me feel.

Morrowind had none of that.

[Kashluk]

It's not even close to the same league with PS:T and FO, I give you that... But it was entertainment. I happen to like movies with character, deepness and something real to say instead of showing off special fx, but I also watch average Hollywood flicks every once in a while. Why? It's entertainment - give your brain a rest, sit back and have fun with a simple game.

But of course, there are people who will disagree with me, because they hate Morrowind with all their heart. As there are people who don't like PS:T or FO, but who might like Morrowind. Yeah.

[jiujitsu]

Good job, Teatime!

This is the happy news we've all been deprived of for so long.

[Brother None]

Great job, guys, good work on getting the interview and a nice pick of questions

It's good to see Bethesda got more PR-trained since the starting fiasco, too. Heh, fan interaction rock out.

[Saint_Proverbius]

I must have missed the "awesome" part of Morrowind. Was that in an expansion?

[Sovy Kurosei]

Well, Bloodmoon was kind of fun, except for the fact that being a lycanthrope sort of sucked at higher levels.

As for the interview, I'll wait and see what happens. I find it disheartening that Bethesda would comment on having SPECIAL in their game yet give that ever so subtle hint that the game will be real-time when pressed for that question of wether the game will be turn-based or real-time. I guess the only reasonable thing to hope for is if it is isometric perspective or not.

[DarkUnderlord]

and non-linearity in Morrowind (their biggest game to date) was non-existant (anybody remember the "You have killed an important character! You've stuffed up the main plot! You should reload!" dialogue box?).

I found this a fairly odd statement by DarkOverlord in the Editorial. Yes, we let you know when you've killed a character that is crucial to the main quest. Since our game let's you kill everyone and anyone in the game, we thought it was only fair to do so in case the player wanted to reload.

However, you can kill every single thing in the game (except one NPC) and still finish the main quest, albeit not through the traditional "main quest" path that you would have been on originally, but through a separate "back path." Again, as a completely open-ended game, we thought that was only fair.

The fact that little box pops up at all is what's concerning. If the game was truly non-linear - meaning there were several ways to complete it - why would I care if I killed one character or another? If I want to play as the big bad guy who kills all the good guys, why do I need to be warned? Then again, how can these characters be crucial to the main quest if I can still finish the game without them?

Why are there also so many characters crucial to the main quest? Surely the only crucial one is the bad guy at the end, right? Anybody else inbetween doesn't matter. I can get just as much information from the books about how to kill the bad guy as I could from getting the magic widgits in order, all with only one way to get them forcing your character to do things even if you disagree with them (such as slavery). Instead, the game adheres strictly to the prophecy. You can't even slaughter the tribes and steal the widgits from them. You MUST complete their quests.

I also find this funny:

In Case You Screw Up This is usually not how I like to begin a walkthrough, however in this case I do feel that it is important to cover. You can screw up and accidentally kill someone that is necessary in the main quest very easily in Morrowind. In fact, there is one character that you absolutely must not kill because that will mess up even your second chance, as well as the main quest. That said, should you at any time during the campaign discover that you have accidentally killed someone that you needed to keep alive, you can still salvage your game. As long as that person isn't Yagrum Bagarn, as you'll need to visit him both in the main quest and to salvage a destroyed main quest.

I'm not sure if that's true or not because as soon as I got a "you stuffed up" message, I reloaded. God forbid I got stuck unable to actually complete the game (which is what I took the warning for).

Whether or not you liked Morrowind or had issues with various parts of the game, it'd be tough to argue that the game failed in its effort to be non-linear. In fact, most folks complained that it was TOO non-linear. Open-ended gameplay where the player gets to choose what to do next is actually very important to us and something we're proud to be known for.

My $.02

Don't confuse non-linear with open-ended. Just because you can do it in your own time, doesn't mean it's non-linear. That's what a lot of people get confused about in Morrowind. Oh sure, you can wander around and empty out as many Daedra temples as you like. At the end of the day though, you still have to talk to X, to get Y, so you can do Z which leads you to A and then onto B and all the way through the rest of the alphabet. Broken down, Morrowind has a very straight-as-an-arrow main-plot. Mess it up, you get a funny as hell warning which breaks game immersion.

There was lots to do in Morrowind but most of it had no relevance on the main plot. You become semi God-like at about level 13 (100 Axe skill and a Daedra Axe and you're set) and anything else just nets you "neat stuff" which makes you even more uber.

Every time someome plays Morrowind it boils down to the same things again and again. Get the Dwemer Puzzle Box, get Andrano's Skull, get this, get that all on your way to talking to Vivec.

Most people who call Morrowind "non-linear" do it with something like this: This game is completely non-linear, meaning that at virtually all times it doesn't matter what order you do things in, or whether you actually do anything at all. The order may not matter but you still have to do them and more often than not, there is a set order you have to do them in. If you do nothing at all, you can't finish the game!! In fact, you can wander around for all eternity and nothing will ever happen. The Foozle will still wait patiently in the mountain for you and will never finish his God. Hell, you can ever waltz right into his Royal Foozleness at the start and what does he say? "Come back later, you haven't got the magic widgits yet".

I don't mean these as critiscisms of Morrowind. It was good for what it was and I enjoyed it on a certain level. I stand by my claim of it being linear though and not what I want to see in Fallout.

Oblivion fan interview December 2004
Will Oblivion retain Morrowind's linear quest concept for the main quest, or will it be possible to approach this from many different angles, changing the final outcome in the process?

Overall, the main quest is more linear than it is wide-open, but it does have sections where the actual goals for you become more open. As much as possible, we try to allow you to finish each quest in as many ways as possible. The actual very end is the same no matter what you did to get there. There are little things we can do well with our kind of game, like “get this item from this character� – especially now with our new AI system – where even something that simple opens itself up for tons of different gameplay options.

As for finishing the main quest, can I join the bad guy? Can I sell out my home? Can I talk him into suicide? Can I detonate the nuclear bomb underneath his base and avoid confronting him altogether? Of course, all-out combat is always an option. It's the other stuff that counts.

It's so sad to see a fan base become this bitter. In the article and in the posts here, all you see is complaining about Bethseda and even bashing Morrowind (wtf? awesome game)

Come on guys, remember where Fallout 3 was BEFORE this press release? Nowhere. You have a beloved franchise owned by a failing company who are NEVER going to be able to do anything with. Then, lo and behold, it's swooped up by a respectable, wealthy company that - gasp - specializes in roll playing games! What is your response? Jubilation? Praise? or... whining. Yeah.

Bethseda software, winners of a bajillion awards for Morrowind, swimming in cash, with another hit game due to come out soon, picks it up - and all you can do is bitch about camera angles?

This guy's a tool. His entire point centres around us being grateful just because Fallout 3 is being made. Who cares? No really, who here really cares? It's the TYPE of game Fallout 3 is that matters. If Bethesda make Fallout 3 a glorified real-time first person shooter, should we be grateful of that? While it's not what I think Bethesda will do, the point is we've had Fallout sequels before. They sucked. We want a PROPER Fallout sequel. That's the problem.

[Saint_Proverbius]

Here's a great quote from the Shacknews comments on the interview:

• I almost hope this game is bad just so the rabid fallout community kills themselves en masse.
  
  Although, Bethesda is a fantastic developer so I have no doubt it will be a worth sequel to the original games.

Pretty gosh darned funny considering I'm not expecting the game to be good at this time. So, if it looks like it will suck the more and more info that comes out about it, I'll win by being right in saying it's going to suck. If it's actually good, I'll win by having a good Fallout 3. Either way, I win.

[DarkUnderlord]

I'm pleased to see a few comments in places wanting, of all things, TB combat. Here's hoping "those who matter" think it's fun (Yes Bethesda employee, I'm talking to YOU). Decent TB games are few and far between.

By the way, you need to update the URL in your signature.

[MrSmileyFaceDude]

So, if it looks like it will suck the more and more info that comes out about it, I'll win by being right in saying it's going to suck. If it's actually good, I'll win by having a good Fallout 3. Either way, I win.

lol now THAT is a healthy attitude

[Kashluk]

I don't mean these as critiscisms of Morrowind. It was good for what it was and I enjoyed it on a certain level. I stand by my claim of it being linear though and not what I want to see in Fallout.

Hear hear!

[Stainless]

I didn't like Morrowind simply because of the NPC interaction. Reading about "The Empire" or some such was just....boring as all buggery. I've tryed to get into it, even at the urging of my best mate who loves it (but doesn't like Fallout because of the TB combat...go figure), I havn't been able to motivate myself past the 2nd city/town.

[Insane-Lark]

Certainly turn-based combat limits your audience to a small number, but I do find that audiences will come if your game is good enough and the presentation is superb.

That bit makes me a bit nervous & I wonder why turn based combat is conscidered limiting to audience appeal. If folks want to play a good involved RPG I would conscider TB to be perfect for planning instead of just reacting.

Overall this interview leaves me somewhat hopeful & curious to see what direction Bethesda will take FO3.

[Wolfman Walt]

I don't see how it REALLY limits your audience. Console RPGs have had turn based for years that have large audiences. With the fact that computers provide more of everything, I think a turn based combat gave could be suited for any audience. I hate this idea amongst the computer community that Real Time equals better.

[Kashluk]

Well that's a good point. I never really thought of FF, BoF and such series, but then again, they aren't the first ones to pop in my mind when we're talking about turn-based combat

Why is that? Some sort of a government conspiracy or perhaps just because the turn-based system in those japanese rpgs is forced to be very fast-paced (you can lose your turn, ie. enemy can attack while you're thinking). You just go clickety-clickety-click as fast as you can to cast the Magic Balls Of Fire, but unfortunately you've forgotten the route of which buttons to push (although you spent 3 hours last week memorizing it) so you cast Mega Cubicles Of Healing Light on your enemies instead.

No, I do not like those games.

I think the turn-based system alá Fallout or Jagged Alliance, which require at least some amount of thinking and planning, don't appeal to the big audience for a reason: people don't like to use their brain while they play games / in general. Grr. I have many friends who hated Fallout 1 and/or 2, because they found it

a) too difficult to learn
b) too slow-paced and
c) very ugly

People = STUPID, end of the story.

Blah. It's just me rattling 'me bone box again.

[Wolfman Walt]

I hate it when you make sense Kash. However, one minor thing, games like Final Fantasy Tactics, Nippon Ichi TRPGs and other such strategy RPG's take alot of complex planning and thinking similar on level to fallout...atleast combat wise, but yet remain largely popular. I think it's more of a misconception about Turn Based = Unpopular.

I concur on the idea that people are stupid.