Slashdot Mirror


Interview With John Romero

spensdawg writes "Here is an interesting interview with John Romero on Games.net. He gets into the original design philosophy for the first Doom games, what he would have done differently, and his plans for the future. Worth watching if you want to know a little more about the mad scientist behind Doom." A warning: this is a video interview

40 of 211 comments (clear)

  1. Flashplayer 8 required :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    This article is not going to be much use for Linux users, as it requires Flash 8.

    Two points:

    - Why does a text article require flashplayer 8 to view it? It's a waste of bandwidth, waste of CPU and cutting down on this site's potential market.

    - Why has Macromedia has only released a (very buggy) flashplayer 7 for linux x86, and no flashplayer at all for amd64? The selling point of Flash is that it's multi-platform but that's not really the case.

    I look forward to the day when SVG and other standard technologies becomes more prevalent and Flash is relegated to the technology graveyard.

    1. Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( by Freaky+Spook · · Score: 5, Funny

      - Why has Macromedia has only released a (very buggy) flashplayer 7 for linux x86, and no flashplayer at all for amd64? The selling point of Flash is that it's multi-platform but that's not really the case.

      I guess since adobe is now in charge it isn't as high a priority, they are too busy finding bloat to put in it.

    2. Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( by rolfwind · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Seems like more and more news-sources are releasing videos instead of articles (or transcripts). Is it that much cheaper to produce?


      It brings in more revenue because it's harder to quote (bloggers love to copy and paste entire sections, just as /.ers do but would they type it out? Not most.) and gives incentive for people to go to that site and sit through their ads. Plus, they actually show commercials, not just banners or animated gifs, I had to sit through a minute long Lemmings commercial just to watch the interview.
    3. Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( by Yaztromo · · Score: 5, Informative
      Why does a text article require flashplayer 8 to view it? It's a waste of bandwidth, waste of CPU and cutting down on this site's potential market.

      Because it's not text, it's video. And if that weren't bad enough, every 5 seconds or so it decides to pause the video to buffer some more. I don't know if it's my Internet connection tonight (which has been slow and flakey at times for no apparant reason), or if the site is being /.'ed, but either way the video player has some serious issues with its buffering time heuristic.

      In the end, it just isn't worth it. Trust me, you're not missing a thing.

      Yaz.

    4. Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( by BruceCage · · Score: 5, Informative

      Interestingly enough if you directly go to the SWF file, you can listen to the interview without actually having Flash Player 8.

      --
      Perfect is the enemy of done.
    5. Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( by pablomarx · · Score: 5, Informative
      Except, Adblock assumes an opt-out principle. For flash, I would want opt-in: 99.9% of all Flash is trash.
      Then try either FlashBlock (Firefox Extension) or these userContent.css rules. Both block all Flash, putting a placeholder where the Flash object would've been allowing you to click to load it.
    6. Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( by glesga_kiss · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Flash Video is Evil. Yes, that's with a capital "E". Computer designers had video overlays nailed back in Windows 98. Remember the "Buddy Holly" video? Are you all trying to tell me now that we are throwing all that efficiency away and replacing it with a flash object painting to a browser renderer, which then paints to the screen? I can't believe my 3.0GHz dual-core is dropping frames now.

      You can't save it either, nor can you zoom in / resize. I'm running at 1600x1200, your 100x100 flash video is the size of a postage stamp. "Always on top overlay mode"? Forget it.

      Adobe are KILLING flash. Embedded video will never be more than a novelty thanks to them, they seem to be eating up all of the video content providers.

    7. Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( by Quarters · · Score: 4, Funny
      >> A warning: this is a video interview >> - Why does a text article require flashplayer 8 to view it?

      Ruminate on those two statements for a while.

    8. Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( by jone1941 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Have you ever stopped to think about why that might be? Let's see, what are the most common video formats:
      • Windows Media
      • Quicktime
      • Real Video
      Now, which of these work on the majority of platforms without another plugin to download or better yet lots of dedicated custom streaming servers? Also, which of these provide a simple means to display multiple videos on a single page or can scale to the browser window size automatically? The flash video stuff is used because it's a least common denominator without all of the work associated with managing a true streaming server. Instead the flash client is responsible for pulling the content down dynamically and provides an easier way to provide custom controls to the end user.

      I'm not saying this is the best possible solution, it has it's problems. Quality is far worse. CPU requirements go up. People end up downloading an entire video without watching all of it. Genius content providers can require flash 8 and exclude us linux users (despite the fact that google and youtube managed to do it with flash 7). But on the up side there are far more videos I can easily watch from linux using the flash 7 compatible video players than I could with the crash prone mplayer, xine or totem plugins.

      Finally if your system is dropping frames it's you. Check your cpu utilization, is it spiking? If so something is wrong with your system. I'm running an Athlon64 3800 on linux running win2k in vmware running flash 8 in firefox and I'm seeing 5-10% cpu utilization for everything and I haven't seen a single dropped frame.
      --
      Fear trumps hope and ignorance trumps both
  2. It's amazing... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Funny

    This guy been around longer than Duke Nukem Forever and Daikatana 2 is still not out.

    1. Re:It's amazing... by Mikey-San · · Score: 5, Funny

      Daikatana 2 is still not out.

      And this alone is proof that God exists.

      --
      Mikey-San
      Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
  3. I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? by Duds · · Score: 5, Informative

    He designed some levels, he did a little game design, he was not by any stretch the main creative force behind Doom.

    1. Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? by 91degrees · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Perhaps, but none of ID's games have been so much fun since he left. Perhaps someone else was responsible or perhaps it was just a good team.

    2. Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? by Eivind+Eklund · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Level and game design is critical. It requires a good team to work with for it to be worth anything, and it's still critical. And the game designer is very often the main creative force.

      Eivind, former game developer.

      --
      Doubting the existence of evolution is like doubting the existence of China: It just shows that you're uninformed.
    3. Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? by SCPRedMage · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Maybe the problem is that the gameplay behind id's games hasn't changed in any significant way. Doom was great back in the day, but as a modern game, it would be torn apart for being nothing more than a run-and-gun. Games like Half-Life 2 have done so well because of NON-combat elements, like story development and physics-based puzzles, in addition to some great action. id's games have remained focused on action, and many have found that to become stale, after all these years.

      But that's all besides the point. The point was that Romero's own acheivements do not make him a "gaming god" worthy of emulation. His own actions caused him to be "asked to leave" id software, and since striking it off on his own he has failed to become a commercially successful name.

      --
      My sig can beat up your sig.
    4. Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hehe... "Designed some levels, did a little game design"...

      He was the lead designer of Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, and Quake and co-founder of id Software.

      Lead designers are kinda important for these projects and influence the gameplay quite a bit.

      But conversely, it's not enough with just one decent lead designer when making a game, as Daikatana showed.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    5. Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? by AlexMax2742 · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Maybe the problem is that the gameplay behind id's games hasn't changed in any significant way. Doom was great back in the day, but as a modern game, it would be torn apart for being nothing more than a run-and-gun. Games like Half-Life 2 have done so well because of NON-combat elements, like story development and physics-based puzzles, in addition to some great action. id's games have remained focused on action, and many have found that to become stale, after all these years.



      Incorrect. I can say with a great deal of certainty that there have been very few games like Quake and the classic Doom series in recent years. Run and gun is not stale at all, just as long as it's done right. Being story driven does not necissarily make a game better, and being run and gun does not necissarily make a game worse. I still play Doom all the time, but whats more, I've introduced Doom to other relatively new gamers, and once they get past the graphics they have a lot of fun with it too.

      In my opinion, John Romero and John Carmack made a great team. Romero had the nuts ideas and awesome level designs, and Carmack had the engine and the smarts and the work ethic. Without Carmack, Romero didin't have the tech or the reigns to keep him on target with Daikatana. Without Romero, Carmack and the rest of ID couldn't figure out how to make a fun FPS.

      --
      I'm the guy with the unpopular opinion
    6. Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? by irc.goatse.cx+troll · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not just that, but most hobby "level designers" lack the artistic talent to put together something like doom2. Sure you could make a fun level, but could you set an atmosphere? Keep it consistent with itself? Keep the difficulty level on par with the surrounding levels? Theres a lot more that goes into it than just dropping some monsters and halls.

      I mean no disrespect of course, there are a lot of hobbiests that can pull all of this off, but a lot of good mappers have yet to pull off the kind of artistic talent you see from someone like Romero or McGee.

      Generally I think hobbiests are better at multiplayer mapping and "the big guys" better at single player. Multiplayer doesn't have any storyline or sequence, it just is what it is. All thats important is making it fit how people play the game, and in that regard the hobbiests have the advantage of actually playing the game, and getting to make the maps after the games been out and gameplay finalized. I'd bet a map like Quake1's DM1 was made long before large scale multiplayer testing was out, compared to a map like Aerowalk which fits the multiplayer gameplay much better.

      --
      Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
  4. Rats, flash 8 by Eideewt · · Score: 5, Funny

    Apparently it's not only games that aren't realeased for Linux. Neither are articles about them.

  5. If you don't read this article by AuMatar · · Score: 5, Funny

    John Romero will make you his bitch.

    --
    I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
  6. 2 Paragraph Summary of 5 minute interview by geerbox · · Score: 5, Informative

    Asked questions about what he would have done about Doom differently (he would've hired a great level designer), what was wrong with Doom (nothing, talked about how the game was designed), how he would do if he would make another Doom (pitch black, something new like stuff from HL 2), when he knew he hit it big (after seeing the numbers), what he thought of sequels (would only do one), what other projects he did and what he learned (he likes creation, and not so much cleanup), what he is doing (his new company, that he's working on something new that so far hasn't been done).

    Strange thing to me was that I saw mostly DOOM III video gameplay (no DOOM I or II gameplay video - difficult to find?), and there was HL 2 showed for a quick bit.

    1. Re:2 Paragraph Summary of 5 minute interview by Patrik_AKA_RedX · · Score: 2, Funny
      his new company, that he's working on something new that so far hasn't been done
      So he's going to merge Half life 2 with Guitar Hero and Gran Tourismo?
  7. On level design & Romero by Zhe+Mappel · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I don't think John understands why Doom worked. Asked what he'd change about it, his reply is he'd hire better level designers (and even takes an unnecessary dig at Sandy Petersen). They didn't know any better back then, he says. Huh?! Do you hear anyone complaining about the original Doom?

    In fact, fans are still recreating Doom levels for other games as homages, which isn't to say those levels were stunningly brilliant. No, they were all they had to be--because the gameplay was so great. And the great fun rubbed off on the levels.

    By contrast, Daikatana's levels were built and rebuilt, polished and repolished. Fat lot of good it did. Design is law, of course, as the Ion Storm mantra went; but Daikatana is $0.99 in the bargain bin, too.

    Romero's on better ground when knocking Doom 3 for being dark, repetitive and predictable. Although he doesn't realize it, this argument bears on his earlier misguided comment. D3 is a masterpiece of level design, or at least of a certain highly-detailed future-industrial style. And that's all anyone takes away from it: how it looked. Having stood in line to get a copy the day it came out, I'm still trying to forget how mind-numbingly poorly it played.

    Bottom line: level design is vastly overrated. Sure, it can be an art form (see, for instance, old custom Quake levels built by geniuses such as Headshot or Mr. Fribbles). But most games look alike today; no matter how technically sound their appearance, few do more than go for realism or ape genre cliches. This even as hyper-realistic design means longer development times and higher costs. And nobody thinks games are more fun than their blockier predecessors--no, quite the opposite.

    So where Romero talks about level design as a virtue and even dreams about going back in time to revisualize Doom, the truth is something different. Level design is becoming little more than a clonable commodity.

    The solution is to outsource it. Set up companies that do nothing but build cities, dungeons, jungles, etc. to some standard, scriptable world-building spec. Devs can then buy chunks of these "places" and build their games in them--for much less than the cost of paying salaries for asset creation. This would liberate game companies to pour their energies into gameplay before it becomes a lost art.

    1. Re:On level design & Romero by jacobw · · Score: 5, Insightful
      D3 is a masterpiece of level design, or at least of a certain highly-detailed future-industrial style. And that's all anyone takes away from it: how it looked. Having stood in line to get a copy the day it came out, I'm still trying to forget how mind-numbingly poorly it played.

      Bottom line: level design is vastly overrated.


      You're using level design in a different way than I understand it. (I am a pretty casual gamer, so there's a good chance my definition is wrong, BTW. Also I couldn't get the video to play, so I wouldn't know if you were using it the same way as Romero.)

      To me, "level design" doesn't mean "designing the visual look of a level." That's an aspect of it, but not the most important part. More importantly is designing the layout of the level--where various paths lead, and where various obstacles occur, and where enemies lurk. This obviously has a major impact on how well a game plays, and having a good level designer makes a huge difference.

      In this respect, I think the original Doom levels were incredibly well designed, especially given that they didn't really have the technology for true 3D play. It really created the feeling of not knowing what was around the next corner, and resulted in the famous Doom Lean, where you find yourself tilting your real-world head, as if that was going to let you peer around a corner in the game...

      (I think we agree in substance, actually, but your use of the phrase "level design" was different enough that it made me wonder if I'm the only one who defines it as I do.)
  8. Old news... by KeithLDick · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think I read this on his site quite a while ago... Then again I may have been playing Duke Nukem 3D at the time or just downloading the Prey Demo... ahh well nevermind...

    --
    LifeTime Gamer
  9. Re:it's empty by buddard · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, at least now we know that Romero's still alive...

    --
    B$
  10. inappropriate videos? by arm000 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Did anyone find it strange that the interview was mixed with videos of doom3 and half-life2? Two games that he had nothing to do with?

  11. Transcript by Kugrian · · Score: 5, Informative

    I started to make a transcript of the video. I don't know the games, and I'm not a sectery either (plus hugely hungover), so I got bored quickly. Mananged to do half of it before I reached for the wrist-slitting knife - hopefully someone who can't view the flash will find it helpful:

    games.net Presents Behind The Screens John Romero.

    What would you change about Doom?

    So the thing I would have changed about the original Doom, erm, is to have a better design for all the levels in eposide 2 and eposide 3, and to probably hire someone who was a really great level designer, erm, because, er, Sandy Peterson, hes a, hes a, hes definitely a great game designer [clip of some Doom game I guess], but having that, having somebody who's whole job is placing textures, making sure that levels are, are not just 'hey, I'm just gonna make a level today, see what it turns out to be'. That's kind of what we were doing anyway, so it turned out kind of haphazard, which is kinda Doom 2 [too?] also turned out, that way with the levels, was like 'hey, let's make a buncha cool levels, we'll have [them?] put in the game.'

    What was missing from Doom?

    Well, I don't think there was anything missing from the original Doom. I mean it was, was, we pulled stuff out of the original Doom because it kind of violated the purpose that we had started to change the game [another clip of presumably Doom], which was kinda what we did with Wolfenstein. With Wolfenstein , we'd added a bunch of cool stuff in there, and it slowed the gameplay down, the pace down, and we didn't want that. So we pulled that out, and what you got was just some crazy running at somebody brings [might have been 'for instance'] a second game [didn't hear this well enough]. And so, with Doom we wanted, erm, a game that was the same kind of Wolfenstein feeling, but looked cooler and [had?] cooler monsters, but still had that super speed.

    What if you were to make another Doom?

    If I was going to do another Doom today, I would [possibly wouldn't] do a game that's like Pitch Black for sure. Erm, I wouldn't have predictable situations happening constantly every few seconds, and er, you know, I'd, I'd have something that, er, was kind of pushing the limits, [clip of some game starts here] that would be, I'd definitely take some cues from Half life 2 but, erm, also add in some cool ideas that, that, no one else is doing.

    When did you know you hit it big?

    It was, it was insane with Doom. When we put out Doom and it just, it went all over the place. The internet really helped. Erm, people have tp net [might been 'had the internet'?] and the software creations Bolternborg [didn't get this word] was awsome. When we saw the numbers that were coming in off, off of, Doom it, it was crazy. Erm, that's when I just, just, brought the test release [might have got this bit wrong]. I was just, that's it [laugh]. I'm buying it now.

    What do you think about sequels?

    In Return of Wolfenstein and Comandeer Keen, and, you know [laugh] [some clip starts here of unknown game]. Erm, if I was there those games wouldn't have come out, because I don't do like.. I do a sequel, then it's time to move on.

    Dude talks like a stoned hippy anyway.. I got time to waste on other things that don't include translating a zillion 'erms' to a text file.

  12. Original concept and engine, not game design by Morty · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Doom was not just a game, it was a whole new genre. While it wasn't quite the first first-person-shooter, it was the first one to do 3D reasonably well. When it came out, no one had seen anything like it. The game design was OK, the plot was basically non-existent, but it had no FPS competition because no one else had written one that even approached Doom. Considering that 3D accelerator cards didn't exist, and this all had to be done in software, there weren't too many people at the time who could write a competing FPS engine even if they had thought of it. So the lack of fancy levels and other aspects of the game design didn't matter much; the only thing the level design needed to do was showcase all the cool engine features.

    If there is any doubt as to whether it was the FPS concept and engine or the details of the game, consider what happened next. Other FPSs were released -- licensing the Doom and then the Quake engines, not the Doom and the Quake levels.

  13. Revisionist history? by Moraelin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There were games with much better levels and gameplay long before Doom, or even Wolfenstein 3D, they just weren't textured. E.g., Bethesda had a Terminator game that featured walking or _driving_ (yes, driving) around a town, with cars, pedestrians (yep, you could run them over), etc, years before Doom. It took the textured FPS genre almost a decade to get back to that point.

    Or Ultima Underworld? It was a complex RPG and had a much more complex 3D engine too. It came out around the same time as Wolfenstein 3D and it still allowed far more complex and, well, "more 3D" maps than Doom would much later. E.g., the UU engine allowed bridges and tunnels under other tunnels, while Doom was still a 2D map with terrain elevation.

    What Doom had was simply a more vocal gang of willy-wavers. The kind of personalities that just had to willy-wave about their deathmatch score were suddenly all over the place, making 10 times more noise than the peaceful SP RPG players, and acting as if they're speaking for some absolute majority. Doom was being proclaimed all over the place as the genre of the future, and indeed the only genre that anyone plays any more, at a time where SP console RPGs routinely out-sold it 10 to 1. Heck, even adventures were outselling Doom.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Revisionist history? by bWareiWare.co.uk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Only partially true. Yes UU was two years earlier and had the same textured walls, sprite based items, and more advanced geometry then Doom. But it ran dog slow in a quarter-screen window with a tiny maximum viewing distance. The full screen, open, light and above all FAST Doom engine was altogether a new game.

      Then you add the one and only thing that made Doom worth playing - network play.

      I loved both UU games, but I went 13.5 hours without a toilet or food break in a Doom deathmatch.

      (UU does pre-date Wolfenstine 3D and Carmack has acknowledged it as an inspiration)

    2. Re:Revisionist history? by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think this illustrates the difference between "invention" and "innovation" very well. Doom wasn't the first 3D FPS, but it was the first viable FPS that turned a technology from being merely interesting to something that got into the hands of just about everybody and spawned an entire direction for the industry.

      The Sinclair ZX81 had Psion's "3D Monster Maze", and doubtless there were predecessors to that, but none of the examples you gave, nor 3DMM, ended up generating much interest, however popular they may have been. The excitement started with Doom.

      It's kind of like the GUI. Contrary to popular belief, there were many graphical user interfaces before the Mac. Indeed, the Mac's original, pre-Jobs, interface had little or nothing to do with the Xerox effort. It was the Mac, as released, that actually made people sit up and say "Wait, this one works" (albeit with quite some criticism), and made (despite that criticism) pretty much every new computer from 1985 onward (save for legacy systems, and even they slowly migrated to GEM and then to Windows) pretty much require a GUI.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  14. The only thing worth reading about Romero by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  15. Re:And then? by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Carmack and Romero were neat topics like...10 years ago. Now that there are 100 companies doing it better and faster than they do, what of these guys? I hate to proclaim them relics because we are about the same age, but the truth is, neither Carmack nor Romero have brought anything new and good to the table beyond engine leasing and hair conditioner ad spots for the last 10 years.

    Funny, what engine do all these new great games use? Often as not, something Carmack makes. He's an engine designer, and he's damned good at it.

    Romero is a useless turd though.

  16. Even that's not that simple by Moraelin · · Score: 4, Informative
    But conversely, it's not enough with just one decent lead designer when making a game, as Daikatana showed.


    Well, not contradicting what you wrote, but more as a reminder to everyone else: Daikatana was a complex phenomenon, at no number of designers could have saved it past a certain point.

    For starters, it was largely a management failure, rather than a game design failure. The game design wasn't particularly bad, and in some ways it was ahead of its time. E.g., Daikatana tried to have a story in a FPS long before Half-Life, for example. In fact, it tried to have a story at a point in time where everyone else was churning mindless Wolfenstein 3D clones. And by comparison, once John Romero was gone, Id reverted to John Carmack's view that a plot is as needed for a game as for a porno movie.

    What killed most of that design for Daikatana was simply being released so late as to not matter any more. Story in a FPS was no longer unheard of, the game engine was outdated, and some of the artwork looked like classic ass by sheer virtue of being old by now.

    And that, in turn, could be traced to just bad management of the project and the company as a whole. John Romero wasn't necessarily bad at game design, but he was useless as a manager. All I'm saying is: let's not confuse the two issues, because they're different skills.

    Plus, let's not underestimate the effect of Ion Storm's being the "victim" of a massive hype backlash. Partially because of its own PR blunders, that's for sure. (E.g., the "bitch" ad.) But also partially because a few idiots started screaming that Ion Storm killed Looking Glass, when Eidos let Looking Glass die. Suddenly it was _fashionable_ to be against John Romero and mourning Looking Glass, and a lot of SFVs (Stupid Fashion Victims) joined in the chorus without even having a fucking clue what they're pro or against in that campaign.

    So me say just one thing: if a _quarter_ of the people posting all "Daikatana sucks!!!" all over the place had actually played the fucking game, it would have been a major commercial success. It would have probably outsold The Sims. No, that's not saying it was that good, it's just saying how many SFVs were posting about it without even having seen it. Just because it was fashionable to be against it. It was instant karma to bitch about how much Daikatana sucks.

    A lot of people still bitching about how bad Daikatana's design or gameplay supposedly was, still haven't actually even _seen_ that design or gameplay.

    No, I'm not saying that it was great, but it was's as bad as people love to post all over the place either. It was just a mediocre FPS with a story. No more, no less. I _am_ however, saying, that the world would be a better place if people refrained from talking about stuff they have no clue about. I wish that everyone who hasn't actually played Daikatana (or whatever other game) just freakin' gave it a break already and talked about things they've actually experienced, instead of rehashing the same old canned hype they've read on some site.
    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Even that's not that simple by Pomme+de+Terre! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Daikatana tried to have a story in a FPS long before Half-Life

      Half-Life came out long before Daikatana.

      ...once John Romero was gone, Id reverted to John Carmack's view that a plot is as needed for a game as for a porno movie.

      When Romero was at Id, none of their games had plots, either. They didn't revert; they remained consistent.

      So me say just one thing: if a _quarter_ of the people posting all "Daikatana sucks!!!" all over the place had actually played the fucking game, it would have been a major commercial success. It would have probably outsold The Sims.

      Are you being facetious? Daikatana's target audience was hard-core FPS players. The Sims reached out to every segment of the market. What a ridiculous statement! You are greatly overestimating the number of people who read game sites at the time. Your general gaming audience had never even heard of Daikatana, and the name "John Romero" was meaningless. They saw an ugly red box with a silly title and bad graphics. That's why it was a poor seller.

      A lot of people still bitching about how bad Daikatana's design or gameplay supposedly was, still haven't actually even _seen_ that design or gameplay.

      The first level of the demo consisted of killing small frogs in the rain. The whole level. Design genius? Perhaps in an abstract fun-is-not-cool hipster universe. But in this world, it was stupid, and pointless.

      > The game design wasn't particularly bad

      "I CAN'T LEAVE WITHOUT MY BUDDY SUPERFLY!"

      QED.

  17. Romero by jaemz · · Score: 2, Informative

    Rumors of his success have been greatly exaggerated...

  18. For the bashers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I worked, for a time near the end, at Ion Dallas. While I didn't work directly with Romero's team on what they were doing at the time (I worked for Tom Hall on Anarchonox), I can safely say that the bashers need to just shut the fuck up at this point. The guy didn't kill your first born. He didn't even want to "make you his bitch". That was a "joke". You know, something intended to get you "laughing", which a lot of you fail to do WITH him. You can only laugh at him, and you've never even met him. Real mature fellas. Good call. He's actually a fairly cool guy to sit around and shoot the shit with, always brimming with ideas and thoughts about things. (Though this interview strikes me really as quite absurd for a lot of reasons I won't go in to...)

    His big problem wasn't the ads, the hype, or the lack of John Carmack. His biggest failure was that he had nobody there to keep him going forward on projects. That's what he needed to keep his projects focused towards a goal, and it's what he failed to find at Ion at any point. This isn't something he said to anyone, or something said to me or anything like that. It's just what I picked up on because I have the same issue when I direct projects. If you're an easily distracted director, you should have an assistant director or producer that's really good at putting their foot down when it's time to start work, and you should listen to them.

    Romero didn't have that.

    If Daikatana had released on time and not been mediocre (yes, I played a good part of it. My feeling was that it was hopelessly mediocre for the time it was supposed to have released at originally. Not bad, just nothing amazing.) everybody would have laughed with him about the ad, the hype, and there would have been peace and love in the world.

    You wanna lump hate on somebody in the games industry? Smack Broussard around for his publically insulting other games and talking about how DNF will be better than them. Smack any jerk exec at EA (or any number of abusive publishers) around for raping their employees on hours and pay. Smack Ken Kutaragi around for being a fucktard. But c'mon guys, lay off Romero. He got over it and got on with work at Monkeystone and Midway, you asshats need to get over it too.

  19. As opposed to... by DrYak · · Score: 2, Informative
    It's a video. If it didn't require Flash 8, ...
    ...you could leave an MPEG-4 file on the server and let the default application of the user to take care of it.
    Be it VLC, Windows DRM Player, an iPod, a PalmOS device, or whatever else...

    it'd require streaming windows media (horrible),

    which is supported in recent version of the ff codecs, and thus in VLC version starting from 8.5.0.
    and also which is supported by Wine-wrappers on Linux.

    realplayer (oh, the humanity!)

    Which is only supported in Linux using "libcook.so" or "cook.dll"-with-wine-wrapper from Realplayer. This is the only one that sucks, because you need to have realplayer ported to you CPU architecture.

    or quicktime (actually i wouldn't mind that).

    and sorenson happen to be supported since a few version of FF back. (and thus in VLC from 8.2? or 8.4 ? I don't remember). Before that, the wine-wrapped-DLL was available in player supporting this feature (MPlayer & Xine).

    But the designer choosed suporting laziness : Flash is installed on most computers and can start autoplaying video, independently of what application is installed on the users' computers, as opposed to just put a file and let the software on the user's machine work.

    This sucks because is closes possibility to anything that is not Windows 32-bit Intel based.
    I really hope that Gnash will soon implement network streaming to stop this madness.
    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  20. And it's Romero's fault... how? by Moraelin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    All I see there is Carmack being either (A) a complete nerd, for whom sticking to some rules is more important than his friends, or (B) being a dick willing to ruin everyone's campaign just to teach Romero a lesson.

    It wasn't Romero that decided to introduce the devil into the game, and it wasn't Romero that made that NPC summon enough demons to destroy the world. It was the GM. Plain and simple. It was the kind of spiteful GM action that occasionally nukes everyone's characters to make a point, or as a quick "I've got the power" trip, or just being tired of the existing campaign. We've all run into moments like that.

    The fact is, the game was at all times under the control of the GM. If you don't want your players to nuke the world, don't lead them to a room with big red button that launches the nukes. If you don't want them to bring forth the apocalypse, don't lead them to a room with a big pentagram and written instructions on how to summon the four horsemen. Etc. If you choose to "test" them with an event that may destroy the world, don't be surprised if they push the big red button just to see what happens.

    And if you really want to save the world, you can always twist the rules as you like. That's why you're called a Game _Master_. Maybe decide that that big red button needed to first be activated by the Pentagon, or could be overriden by the Pentagon, so the missiles don't launch. Maybe a bunch of soldiers charge in and try to arrest the party, shooting the cable from that switch in the process. Etc.

    Or in your example, maybe the devil can be toned down so the party can win. Maybe, I don't know, an archangel descends and blasts the book into oblivion. Whatever. If you're the GM, you have the power to pull that kind of shit.

    Basically if you're the GM and (A) you've lead the players to a situation where they can destroy the world, and (B) you let them do that, then just accept the responsibility. _You_ ended the game, not the players. It's ok, if that's what you wanted to do. Start a new campaign or whatever. But don't be a prick and act as if some player is a great monster that deserves all the blame.

    Plus, it's just a freakin' game. Acting like Romero is some monster that destroyed the whole world, strikes me as (A) taking it waaaay too seriously, and (B) pretty damn unimaginative and contrary to the whole spirit of the game.

    I mean, have you actually played a tabletop RPG? That's exactly what the players are supposed to do. In a sense, it's sort of like playing chess against the GM. The whole fun is trying to (A) personally be creative and (B) to challenge others to be creative, in response to some unforeseen twist. That's a _two_ way street: the GM challenges the players and the players challenge the GM.

    Heck, even that Demonicron episode's tame stuff. Look at some episodes on Full Frontal Nerdity (same site as Nodwick) for some stuff that good gamers can pull. Stuff like someone choosing the "royal blood" trait just so later they can usurp the new king of the realm, and turn the whole campaign on its head. Now that's the good stuff. That's what good players _do_.

    As long as it's not deliberately trying to annoy someone or prevent them from achieving their goals, acting unpredictably in a creative way is what RP is all about. Just following the campaign and acting in a predictable way is _boring_.

    From there it's the GM's job to react. It may be some equally surprising twist, or just proclaiming it to not be possible, or somewhere in between. That's what the game is all about.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.