Slashdot Mirror
Obsidian's Urquhart On NWN2, Fallout 3
Thanks to GameSpot for its interview with Obsidian Entertainment's Feargus Urquhart, as the ex-Black Isle founder talks about the formation of the Star Wars: KOTOR II developers ("I must have been at least an OK boss, or it was just Interplay almost going out of business, but of the 36 people working here at Obsidian, 18 of them are from Black Isle"), regarding updates to BioWare's engine for the 2006-due Neverwinter Nights 2 ("We are going over almost every inch of the engine to add new features and refine things that are going to stay the same. From a graphics standpoint, we are updating most of the graphics engine to support new graphical features like normal mapping"), and discusses the fate of the Fallout 3 license ("I think the team at Bethesda has their work cut out for them. This is mostly because there is almost nothing that they can do that will make the Fallout fans happy.")
I think Obsidian has its work cut out for it on the NWN engine which was outdated before it even left the gate. The game's development was so awkward because they built the tools before the game. This means they had no idea what they actually needed at the most critical design phases. So too much time was spent on unnecessary features while critical features were not discovered until after they started on the content. Constantly returning to the code base to alter very mature code put Bioware significantly behind schedule and at a distinct disadvantage when it cane time to make needed updates.
Ultimately, the NWN engine is a textbook example of how not to develop a game. It is so backwards and kludgy I'm surprised Obsidian has agreed to subject itself to untangling the spaghetti. They have all my respect if they are able to do so, but I think they could find better ways to dedicate their resources than on this lost cause. Why do you think Bioware is writing a new Dragon Age engine after only one game instead of releasing two or three like with the Infinity Engine games?
It should be easy enough. Just don't be stupid.
Keep the feel of the original games. Update the engine all to hell of course and give us flashy things (we like flashy things), but don't go changing the basics. The feel of the world with the whole retro 50's nuclear age motif is perfect. Don't do something strange like give it a fantasy, victorian, or God forbid 80's theme. Keep the gritty feel that the environments had. Bring us new plot devices, but make sure our old favorites (Radscorpions, mutants, slavers, Brahmin, etc.) are lurking around every corner.
Most of all, don't go dicking around with the game system too much. Fallout fans are Fallout fans because the system was so beautiful. You had really good character customization with the perks, skills, and stats. It was like playing a REAL RPG!!! I can see them trying to simplify it or automate it or something really dumb.
There's also this trend to move turn based games into real time combat. Fallout doesn't need it. It goes along with the system and how it makes it feel like you're playing a real table-top style RPG. Just because the world is twitch oriented, doesn't mean people always want their games like that. Even twitch action gamers like to calm down and strategize their combat now and again.
We want new stories. We want a flashy new engine and updated technology. Beyond that, what's so difficult to understand? If they can't understand why we like the original games in the first place, they have no reason to be building the new one.
Luckily, I think Bethesda understands and will have little problem making us happy.
I think the team at Bethesda has their work cut out for them. This is mostly because there is almost nothing that they can do that will make the Fallout fans happy.
On the other hand, the way thins were looking, Black Isle couldn't make them happy either. I remember the rather heated feedback that Black Isle got, first when they said that Fallout 3 would have 3D graphics (although it would still take place in a 2D space like Fallou 1 and 2 did), and later when they wanted to make the combat real-time.
After that, they wanted to balance certain things. Balance is supposed to be a good thing, but the community hated it for some reason. I was stopped reading NMA-fallout.com's forums after the response to a Black Isle member mused about reducing the bonus from the Gifted trait so it would be an actual tradeoff like it was intended to be, and not a freebie.
Just about every new idea thought of - improved science skills, weapon creation/modification, decan and repair, more limited resources in the game world, even more grass on the ground brought some amount of backlash. I just don't think anything short of a remake of Fallout 1 will satisfy many of the hardcore fans.
I can think of a thousand things Bathesda can do wrong with Fallout 3, but the existing fanbase is too firmly set with the original engine. They have to realize that without renovating the game at just about every level, it won't go anywhere. An original-engine game would sell a couple hundred copies to the hardcore fans, but even the bulk of the original fanbase has moved on to more modern things. What the most vocal part of the Fallout community seems to want just isn't a viable game in 2004, especially not with the modding tools available for Fallout and Fallout 2.
For me, it is turnbased combat, orthagonal view, tons of side quests that make the world breath. Great atmosphere.
If they just don't change those basic concepts, they will do fine. If they want to change any of them, just give the game a different name and try to do something original.