Leonard Boyarsky On 'Fallout's Spiritual Successor'

An anonymous reader submits "Duck and Cover have interviewed Troika's Leonard Boyarsky about their currently unsigned post-apocalyptic game. He describes it as the 'spiritual successor to Fallout', which sounds good to me."

Comments

My wish list

[SmallFurryCreature]

First the obvious stuff

• A strong story with plenty of side quests but wich intertwine with the main quest and wich affect each other.
• Let me be a force of good a force of evil (for the 12yr olds who call their mommy sir). I loved the "what happened" at the end of fallout. But give me real freedom. Make it possible to be really really good but make it cost you. Same with evil. So that most people will play in the middle. None of this, give 100 credits out of your one million stash and become a saint. Make good really good, evil really evil and plenty of middle ground for the less idealistic player. I hate games that just make me choose between "sorta nice" and "pointlessly evil".
• No icewind dale. I want to meet intresting characters. Not roll up an army.
• The past troika games suffered from HUGE empty areas. TOOE especially was bad in the opening. 2 screens full of empty non-enterable barn does not say "ooh nice" it says "what is this an rpg or image scroller?" Keep it tight. I never seen the need for seperate weapons and armour dealers. If there is no story need for seperate stores create a market like plaza. Don't make me walk when there is no story need.

As for the combat if they are going real time make it as complex as possible with plenty of options you can turn off for the lesser players.

I would love to see some real tactically options used. Like machine guns being crap at hitting but excellent for supression fire. The thing I hate most about turnbased games is that things like supression fire and encirclement don't really have an effect like they would in realtime.

BUT most important since this will be a troika game. Get a good publisher that is not afraid to make a rated game or don't make the game rated in the first place. None of this TOEE stuff with half the game ripped out seconds before release.

And please please test this time eh. Past games have been to put it mildly a bit buggy. People are getting fed up with this.

Will I get the game I want? Doubt it. Planescape torment was extremely close to perfect (the graphics could have high-res) and didn't sell. Fallout was almost there. Sadly it been an awfully long time since then and there just doesn't seem to be any demand for games like this.

Re:engine recycle

[Morphine007]

They aren't talking about sequels. They're talking about building a (hopefully) robust game engine, which, will allow them to build a game on top of. The game engine has little to do with the content of the game. If it's a flexible engine, which most are, the "sequel" that you talk of would only be related to the original in that they'd be of the same genre, ie. FPS, RTS, MMORPG, etc...

Spiritual Suckessors, Normally

[vjmurphy]

"He describes it as the 'spiritual successor to Fallout', which sounds good to me."

Yeah, just like UFO: Aftermath was a spiritual successor to the UFO games. Usually, that means that the game will really suck and we'll still be waiting for a real successor to the game in question.

Have there ever been any "spiritual successors" to any good game that have been worthy?

Re:Spiritual Suckessors, Normally

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the reference is directly to Fallout. Fallout's manual said the game was 'the spiritual successor to Wasteland'. Hence this quote will get people who know about Fallout excited, as it's a direct reference to that, kind of 'the next generation'.

Whither turn-based games?

[BlightThePower]

I found this quote rather chilling: There's been a lot of debate since I said that we were considering real time with pause over turn based so that we could get this game made. The fact of the matter is that we're not self funded, we rely solely on publishers to fund our projects. Most publishers have flat out told us that they will not be funding any turn based games, and are not even interested in discussing them. If we can't sell a Troika post apocalyptic RPG to a publisher, it will never get made, it's as simple as that. No more turn-based games?! Perhaps an exaggeration but it depresses me that the market is so raidly sinking. I'm a bit hazy on the specific game(s) but I'm sure I've seen hybrids that offered the player the choice. That would seem to be the equitable solution. Perhaps the coding/game balance overheads are too great.

Re:Whither turn-based games?

[Mr. Teatime]

Hi, I was the person who interviewed Leonard and my strong impression is that they WANT to do a turn based game, it's the publishers who don't want to take the risk of a) an unusual setting combined with b) a 'niche' (their view) combat system (turn based). There has to be demand for the system, and as Leonard says, they got a few publisher calls based on the media and community reaction to the screenshots a few months ago. So if we make enough noise about turn based games, there's still a chance.

Re:Whither turn-based games?

[servognome]

I don't think developers are forced to choose, turn-based vs real-time. There is a spectrum of time control:
Traditional turn based (pause during every turn) - Final Fantasy, UFO
Turn-based with user defined pauses - KOTOR, Baldur's Gate
Turn Based with no pause - Everquest, most MMORPGs
Real time w/ speed control - Most RTSs
Real Time - FPSs, Flight/Space Sims
I think only the first one is becoming objectionable for publishers trying to cater to the MTV generation. I do love my Civilization and Empire Deluxe games though :)

Re:Whither turn-based games?

[Rayonic]

reputable development shops oughta be able to sell computer games directly to the consumer, without kowtowing to the bottom line.

Even selling directly to the consumer, they still need money to get the game made.

Re:Whither turn-based games?

[easychord]

It's ironic because a good turn based system can have much better pacing of gameplay than the other systems. As long as the player learns how to play the game fluently and AI/Other players don't take too long.

Re:engine recycle

[neelm]

You don't know your game history then, I can tell. Sierra, in it's high days of the Kings Quest / Police Quest / Larry / etc games did the same approach. I don't think anyone is saying all those classic games were crap because they had the forsight to wrote code in an intelligent manner?

Or think about it another way. I have 5 game ideas; I can either a) write the first game in such a way that it takes 3 years to do, but 1.5 years for each game after, or b) I can spend 3 years on each game, writing code that does the exact same thing over and over again for each game, and each game taking 2-3 years.

Oh yes, my games will be filled with more bugs too because of a new code base each time. With option a, once the bug is fixed in the engine, I don't have to worry about it appearing again. So in theroy each game will take less time than the one before it.

It's either that, adopt a Blizzard release schedule, or release something before it's time because the development costs are running to high and it's time to cash out.

Also, why is it assumed that because a man builds a house, he cannot then be a good story teller in that house?