Fallout 3 lead designer Emil Pagliarulo posted a few replies to a number of the complaints that quickly surfaced after his Next Generation interview. It started after people were discussing his one and only short visit to NMA (during which, I remind people, he got nothing but courteous replies, even if I did force a Lindsay Lohan avatar on him). To which he replied, and what follows is a kind of impromptu fan Q&A in which some questions that have been around forever get answered:<blockquote>Wow. Certainly lots of interesting opinions here -- which, of course, is what being a Fallout fan is all about.
ttsec -- Honestly, naivety had nothing to do with it. I knew quite well how some of the hardcore fallout fans would ultimately view Bethesda's take on Fallout 3. And, as lead designer, I knew I would be the subject of much of that criticism. It comes with the territory. I wouldn't have accepted this position if I weren't prepared to deal with that.
And you're right, I did think "Oooh Fallout! I liked Fallout. It'd be fun to make a Fallout 3. Let's mingle with the fans!" I still think that, every day I walk into the office, and it's the reason I'm responding to this forum right now. I love interacting with the fans, and I love being a part of the community. That said, I also refuse to be villified or accept that I -- or any other member of the Fallout team -- is somehow doing something wrong simply because we're making the game we want to make. Sorry, that's just now how I roll.
I do admit that I, personally, have done a pretty crappy job of interacting with the fans on a regular basis. The reason is actually pretty simple -- being lead designer of Fallout 3 keeps a guy crazy busy. I also have a family, and 4 kids, so in the end something's got to give... and the thing has been me interacting with the fans. But reasons are only reasons to the person giving them -- to everyone else they're excuses. So, I'm really going to try to get better at that.
Anyway, if you're wondering if we're actually reading the forums, seeing what you guys are discussing... I think you've got your answer.
So maybe you can explain if "we're making the game we want to make" why did you have to use someone else's IP and then not retain the basis for the series gameplay?
Caligula -- I mean, that's really pretty simple. We love Fallout, and had talked about acquiring the license, and dreamed about creating a Fallout game "Bethesda-style" -- immersive 3rd/1st person. You know, we don't make the type of games we do simply because they're the type of game the studio makes -- we make them because we love them. We love feeling like we're a part of a world. For us, making Fallout 3 was a chance for us to become a part of that world.
Then why no "Have you played Fallout?" question on the Bethesda blog after the first couple of people answered no and we all roasted them for it?
Lingwei -- Do I know for sure that every designer has played Fallout? Well, I haven't stood over them with a whip and a can of mace and forced them to play, but yeah, they've all played Fallout to some degree. Are they all ardant fans? No... some of them love the game, some of them like the game, some are anywhere in between. Some weren't very familiar with Fallout before we started Fallout 3, but they're damn familiar now. Some of them were (and are) walking Fallout encyclopedias.
It's a pretty well-balanced team, and the designers all have their specialties. Actually, it's a great team, and one that makes my job that much easier.
You love the games, but don't want another...
You love the original games, but hated the foundation that made them great. Therefore, ypu intend to "oblivionize it" as much as possible in order to please the Halo fans.
All I can do is give you an honest answer, Caligula. I can't make you like it.
As for shades of gray, and the Brotherhood of Steel depicted in my team diary -- Very fair point, and yeah, I think those shades of gray are incredibly important. There are quite a few quests in Fallout where the truth isn't quite what it seems, and it's up to the player to determine what is right and what is wrong; and that's certainly a there that pervades the entire game.
That's not to say there can't be characters who strive for something more noble. Elder Lyons wanted to help the people of the Capital Wasteland. Was he right? He certainly thought so. Did those around him agree? Not all of 'em.
Question: Dungeonkeeper was a 2d sprite game with a 3d backdrop; but it let you play FPP as well.
DK2 was full 3d, but kept the original vantage, and kept the FPP mode.
[both modes were called for in both games at different times, and the FPP combat worked well with the Isometric]
Was this approach ever considered for Fallout 3? Clearly the engine can support Isometric 'like' game play. So why abandon outright, what could have been blended together if intended?
Gizmo -- Honestly, no, we never really considered making the game like that. And man, I loved me some Dungeon Keeper! But we really saw the game as third/first-person. Me, I prefer first-person by a longshot. It's my preferred perspective for any game. I'm a sucker for immersion, and for me, first-person is the way to achieve that; it just so happens I work with a bunch of people who largely feel the same way, and want to make the same kinds of games.
Was it a surprise that migrating fans would expect the game to feature similar mechanics?
No, no surprise at all. We fully expected that. We knew from step one that some fans would accept what we were doing, some fans wouldn't. But in the end, it was our job to come up with the vision of the project, and that's what we did.
I mean seriously if someone bought Oblivion or Morrowind and changed it to TB ISO you guys would be a little "volitile" too. You know not all fallout fans are rabid deathclaws...
You know, that's the thing... that's the really tough thing. I CAN understand why some Fallout fans would be bitter. I CAN understand why some Fallout fans would feel like someone took their world and flipped it upside down (or, erm, pulled their camera in...). You know, I try to think of one of my favorite, "old school" games. Let's use Sid Meier's Covert Action as an example. If I found out someone had acquired that license and was turning it into, I dunno... an XBox Live Arcade puzzle game... I'd be pretty miffed too. So I totally get why some fans would be put off by what we're doing.
At the same time, we're not making an Xbox Live puzzle game. We're making an RPG, and I think a damned good one, and I think a lot of people are going to be really psyched to finally be able to enter into the Fallout universe in a more immersive manner.
Is it feasible to implement a script that would run when zoomed way out, that enables a mouse cursor, and "auto-centers" the player attack on the entity clicked (by ID#), just the aiming, the rest as normal. Could this make that mode viable in combat?
You know, it's hard to say right now... but I will say how surprised even I was when I saw how far back the camera could be pulled. And, when and if we do release the Fallout construction tools, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if something like this were possible. I mean, just look at what Oblivion fans have been able to do with Oblivion -- it's freaking crazy.
Do you beleive that aftermarket mods are going to be one of the strengths of Fallout 3, like Oblivion (I'm assuming) or the Neverwinter Nights games?
Whenever tools are released, that certainly seems to be the case -- whether for Oblivion, NWN, or even Quake for that matter. Give players the tools, and they're use em to incredible effectiveness.
[I didn't like your version of the BoS, here's some better ideas]
You outline one possible fiction; I've outlined another. Really just two takes on the same situation. I will say that what readers got in the team diary was the very black and white, simple version. In order to get the other sides of the story, you'll need to talk to people in the game.
Last September I sent a tracked PM outlining an idea for fullblown TB combat without an engine overhaul. Did you receive it?
Gizmo PM -- I read all my PMs, certainly, and that one does come to mind specifically. The thing is, anything is possible. We could have made any game we wanted; we could have made Fallout 3 any way we wanted. But we went the way we did because we felt like it was the best perspective/best gameplay for the Fallout 3 we wanted to make.
system shock became a legend though. that won't happen with bioshock, i think.
See, I don't know if I entirely agree with that statement. System Shock 2 is a legend amongst certain old school PC gamers, sure, but there are plenty of people who've never even played it. There are plenty of gamers -- sure call it a new generation, whatever -- that played played Bioshock and will be saying the same thing about that game 10 years from now. And I'm biased -- I love Shock 2. I was at Looking Glass during the its development.
Then why not just come up with "THEIR OWN" post-apoc FPS ( w/pause ) game ?
That's a really fair question, and one that's obviously come up a lot. The answer for us is pretty simple -- no other post-apocalyptic world would have been nearly as awesome as Fallout. No Vault Boy, no S.P.E.C.I.A.L., no futuristic 1950s vibe. We specifically wanted to make Fallout 3 for all those reasons and more; if the license weren't important to us, we could have made a post-apocalyptic game a long time ago.
Do you think that turn-based, isometric RPGs are outdated or inferior and a thing of the past that should not be in furture games?
Oh, hell no. Just because that's not what Fallout 3 is, and not the type of game I prefer to make, doesn't mean I don't love a good turn-based, isometric RPG. I played the hell out of Silent Storm (not an RPG per se, but similar enough), and I'm a big fan of Jeff Vogel's games. I love good games, regardless of genre or perspective, honestly.
That said, if you look a video and computer game trends in general, console games have become a lot more popular -- and are a lot more profitable -- and that has certainly affected game publishers' willingness to finance those types of games. Look at the NPD numbers of the best selling PC games of 2007 vs. the best selling console games. We're talking a difference of, in some cases, a million+ copies. Thankfully, console developers are learning how to make these types of games for consoles, learning how to overcome the obvious interface issues. Hell, the Penny Arcade Adventures game for Xbox Live Arcade is, for all intents and purposes, exactly the type of game you're talking about. Personally, I can't wait to get my hands on that.
Ever play Myth [1 or 2]?
Oh man, I played the death out of both Myth and Myth 2. In fact, back in the day when I was editor at AVault, I had to grudgingly let Jordan Thomas (who is now a developer himself -- he did the Cradle quest in Thief: Deadly Shadows, and worked on Bioshock) do the review, because I wanted to do it so badly. Man, I even played Green Berets, the Vietnam game that used the Myth engine. Ah, good times...
If Mr. Perlman need come back for touchup work... Would you consider asking him to record the last two lines of the F1 junktown ending, and put it on the F3 CD? Modders could fix the intended Fallout quests (to a point), so that it ends with Gimzo causing the town to thrive.
Ha! I can definitely understand why you'd want that, but it's pretty unlikely. Hellboy's a busy man.</blockquote>Wow. That's a lot of hard questions to answer. Kudos to mr Pagiarulo for doing so.
Link: It starts with this post on the Bethesda forums.
Thanks to Lingwei, who I think is starwars, for the pm on the Bethesda forums that I thankfully got fulltext in my email (please don't pm my account on the Bethesda forums, it is too banned to be of any use).
ttsec -- Honestly, naivety had nothing to do with it. I knew quite well how some of the hardcore fallout fans would ultimately view Bethesda's take on Fallout 3. And, as lead designer, I knew I would be the subject of much of that criticism. It comes with the territory. I wouldn't have accepted this position if I weren't prepared to deal with that.
And you're right, I did think "Oooh Fallout! I liked Fallout. It'd be fun to make a Fallout 3. Let's mingle with the fans!" I still think that, every day I walk into the office, and it's the reason I'm responding to this forum right now. I love interacting with the fans, and I love being a part of the community. That said, I also refuse to be villified or accept that I -- or any other member of the Fallout team -- is somehow doing something wrong simply because we're making the game we want to make. Sorry, that's just now how I roll.
I do admit that I, personally, have done a pretty crappy job of interacting with the fans on a regular basis. The reason is actually pretty simple -- being lead designer of Fallout 3 keeps a guy crazy busy. I also have a family, and 4 kids, so in the end something's got to give... and the thing has been me interacting with the fans. But reasons are only reasons to the person giving them -- to everyone else they're excuses. So, I'm really going to try to get better at that.
Anyway, if you're wondering if we're actually reading the forums, seeing what you guys are discussing... I think you've got your answer.
So maybe you can explain if "we're making the game we want to make" why did you have to use someone else's IP and then not retain the basis for the series gameplay?
Caligula -- I mean, that's really pretty simple. We love Fallout, and had talked about acquiring the license, and dreamed about creating a Fallout game "Bethesda-style" -- immersive 3rd/1st person. You know, we don't make the type of games we do simply because they're the type of game the studio makes -- we make them because we love them. We love feeling like we're a part of a world. For us, making Fallout 3 was a chance for us to become a part of that world.
Then why no "Have you played Fallout?" question on the Bethesda blog after the first couple of people answered no and we all roasted them for it?
Lingwei -- Do I know for sure that every designer has played Fallout? Well, I haven't stood over them with a whip and a can of mace and forced them to play, but yeah, they've all played Fallout to some degree. Are they all ardant fans? No... some of them love the game, some of them like the game, some are anywhere in between. Some weren't very familiar with Fallout before we started Fallout 3, but they're damn familiar now. Some of them were (and are) walking Fallout encyclopedias.
It's a pretty well-balanced team, and the designers all have their specialties. Actually, it's a great team, and one that makes my job that much easier.
You love the games, but don't want another...
You love the original games, but hated the foundation that made them great. Therefore, ypu intend to "oblivionize it" as much as possible in order to please the Halo fans.
All I can do is give you an honest answer, Caligula. I can't make you like it.
As for shades of gray, and the Brotherhood of Steel depicted in my team diary -- Very fair point, and yeah, I think those shades of gray are incredibly important. There are quite a few quests in Fallout where the truth isn't quite what it seems, and it's up to the player to determine what is right and what is wrong; and that's certainly a there that pervades the entire game.
That's not to say there can't be characters who strive for something more noble. Elder Lyons wanted to help the people of the Capital Wasteland. Was he right? He certainly thought so. Did those around him agree? Not all of 'em.
Question: Dungeonkeeper was a 2d sprite game with a 3d backdrop; but it let you play FPP as well.
DK2 was full 3d, but kept the original vantage, and kept the FPP mode.
[both modes were called for in both games at different times, and the FPP combat worked well with the Isometric]
Was this approach ever considered for Fallout 3? Clearly the engine can support Isometric 'like' game play. So why abandon outright, what could have been blended together if intended?
Gizmo -- Honestly, no, we never really considered making the game like that. And man, I loved me some Dungeon Keeper! But we really saw the game as third/first-person. Me, I prefer first-person by a longshot. It's my preferred perspective for any game. I'm a sucker for immersion, and for me, first-person is the way to achieve that; it just so happens I work with a bunch of people who largely feel the same way, and want to make the same kinds of games.
Was it a surprise that migrating fans would expect the game to feature similar mechanics?
No, no surprise at all. We fully expected that. We knew from step one that some fans would accept what we were doing, some fans wouldn't. But in the end, it was our job to come up with the vision of the project, and that's what we did.
I mean seriously if someone bought Oblivion or Morrowind and changed it to TB ISO you guys would be a little "volitile" too. You know not all fallout fans are rabid deathclaws...
You know, that's the thing... that's the really tough thing. I CAN understand why some Fallout fans would be bitter. I CAN understand why some Fallout fans would feel like someone took their world and flipped it upside down (or, erm, pulled their camera in...). You know, I try to think of one of my favorite, "old school" games. Let's use Sid Meier's Covert Action as an example. If I found out someone had acquired that license and was turning it into, I dunno... an XBox Live Arcade puzzle game... I'd be pretty miffed too. So I totally get why some fans would be put off by what we're doing.
At the same time, we're not making an Xbox Live puzzle game. We're making an RPG, and I think a damned good one, and I think a lot of people are going to be really psyched to finally be able to enter into the Fallout universe in a more immersive manner.
Is it feasible to implement a script that would run when zoomed way out, that enables a mouse cursor, and "auto-centers" the player attack on the entity clicked (by ID#), just the aiming, the rest as normal. Could this make that mode viable in combat?
You know, it's hard to say right now... but I will say how surprised even I was when I saw how far back the camera could be pulled. And, when and if we do release the Fallout construction tools, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if something like this were possible. I mean, just look at what Oblivion fans have been able to do with Oblivion -- it's freaking crazy.
Do you beleive that aftermarket mods are going to be one of the strengths of Fallout 3, like Oblivion (I'm assuming) or the Neverwinter Nights games?
Whenever tools are released, that certainly seems to be the case -- whether for Oblivion, NWN, or even Quake for that matter. Give players the tools, and they're use em to incredible effectiveness.
[I didn't like your version of the BoS, here's some better ideas]
You outline one possible fiction; I've outlined another. Really just two takes on the same situation. I will say that what readers got in the team diary was the very black and white, simple version. In order to get the other sides of the story, you'll need to talk to people in the game.
Last September I sent a tracked PM outlining an idea for fullblown TB combat without an engine overhaul. Did you receive it?
Gizmo PM -- I read all my PMs, certainly, and that one does come to mind specifically. The thing is, anything is possible. We could have made any game we wanted; we could have made Fallout 3 any way we wanted. But we went the way we did because we felt like it was the best perspective/best gameplay for the Fallout 3 we wanted to make.
system shock became a legend though. that won't happen with bioshock, i think.
See, I don't know if I entirely agree with that statement. System Shock 2 is a legend amongst certain old school PC gamers, sure, but there are plenty of people who've never even played it. There are plenty of gamers -- sure call it a new generation, whatever -- that played played Bioshock and will be saying the same thing about that game 10 years from now. And I'm biased -- I love Shock 2. I was at Looking Glass during the its development.
Then why not just come up with "THEIR OWN" post-apoc FPS ( w/pause ) game ?
That's a really fair question, and one that's obviously come up a lot. The answer for us is pretty simple -- no other post-apocalyptic world would have been nearly as awesome as Fallout. No Vault Boy, no S.P.E.C.I.A.L., no futuristic 1950s vibe. We specifically wanted to make Fallout 3 for all those reasons and more; if the license weren't important to us, we could have made a post-apocalyptic game a long time ago.
Do you think that turn-based, isometric RPGs are outdated or inferior and a thing of the past that should not be in furture games?
Oh, hell no. Just because that's not what Fallout 3 is, and not the type of game I prefer to make, doesn't mean I don't love a good turn-based, isometric RPG. I played the hell out of Silent Storm (not an RPG per se, but similar enough), and I'm a big fan of Jeff Vogel's games. I love good games, regardless of genre or perspective, honestly.
That said, if you look a video and computer game trends in general, console games have become a lot more popular -- and are a lot more profitable -- and that has certainly affected game publishers' willingness to finance those types of games. Look at the NPD numbers of the best selling PC games of 2007 vs. the best selling console games. We're talking a difference of, in some cases, a million+ copies. Thankfully, console developers are learning how to make these types of games for consoles, learning how to overcome the obvious interface issues. Hell, the Penny Arcade Adventures game for Xbox Live Arcade is, for all intents and purposes, exactly the type of game you're talking about. Personally, I can't wait to get my hands on that.
Ever play Myth [1 or 2]?
Oh man, I played the death out of both Myth and Myth 2. In fact, back in the day when I was editor at AVault, I had to grudgingly let Jordan Thomas (who is now a developer himself -- he did the Cradle quest in Thief: Deadly Shadows, and worked on Bioshock) do the review, because I wanted to do it so badly. Man, I even played Green Berets, the Vietnam game that used the Myth engine. Ah, good times...
If Mr. Perlman need come back for touchup work... Would you consider asking him to record the last two lines of the F1 junktown ending, and put it on the F3 CD? Modders could fix the intended Fallout quests (to a point), so that it ends with Gimzo causing the town to thrive.
Ha! I can definitely understand why you'd want that, but it's pretty unlikely. Hellboy's a busy man.</blockquote>Wow. That's a lot of hard questions to answer. Kudos to mr Pagiarulo for doing so.
Link: It starts with this post on the Bethesda forums.
Thanks to Lingwei, who I think is starwars, for the pm on the Bethesda forums that I thankfully got fulltext in my email (please don't pm my account on the Bethesda forums, it is too banned to be of any use).
