Eurogamer interviews Todd Howard

[Sander]

A few interesting tidbits in this interview. First up, Todd Howard says Bethesda's characters and animation haven't been the best and that they're spending a lot to get it right:<blockquote>If I had to take a step back, I think our worlds are very good, I think we're on the cutting edge as far as that goes. When it comes to the characters and the animation, I think there are other people who do it much, much better. That's something we've put a lot of time into - not just technology but people and talent, and how long we spend doing individual elements.

How other characters behave and look on the screen is the next thing people need to do better. </blockquote>He also comments on making a Fallout game set outside the USA:<blockquote>That's come up before and my view on Fallout is that the Americana is part of the Fallout schtick. It would be interesting to see what's going on over there, but if you were doing a full game over there, in my opinion it wouldn't have the right Fallout tone.</blockquote>And finally, he notes that the level cap was a bad idea, so expect cap-less games in the future.<blockquote>I think it worked out okay for that game, but going forward if we had to completely redo Fallout 3 we'd probably not have a level cap, because it just makes the game more fun to level up.

It just does. The sense of accomplishment every time you do something to get some XP. So I think we'll make efforts in the future to not have one.</blockquote>Link: Eurogamer interview

 

[Lexx]

I don't get why people hate level cap so much. It's simply a key to game balance. If you allow the player to get up in a level as high as nothing else, sooner or later, the game becomes horrible unbalanced.

 

[SharkClub]

I think it worked out okay for that game, but going forward if we had to completely redo Fallout 3 we'd probably not have a level cap, because it just makes the game more fun to level up.

You can tell all the skills will be horribly unbalanced if they do this (like with Broken Steel, how you can max out all skills at 100% if you plan it out enough).

Unless they take the Fallout 2 route and put skill caps up to 300% with points costing more after 100%, I don't see Bethesda doing it right.

 

[SkuLL]

How other characters behave and look on the screen is the next thing people need to do better.

Agreed - environments look good enough already, and so do characters in screenshots. Once you're in-game, though, they start looking crap because of the ancient animations

 

[KING SHIT]

going forward if we had to completely redo Fallout 3 we'd probably not have a level cap, because it just makes the game more fun to level up.

It just does. The sense of accomplishment every time you do something to get some XP. So I think we'll make efforts in the future to not have one.

Should just leave the "cha-ching" sound in there after you kill an enemy at the level cap. You could max out 6 or 7 of the skills with the original 20 cap in F3, and Broken Steel just broke the game more.

 

[Brother None]

Levelling up is a typical "easy draw" in an RPG, just like phat loot. It is the crutch of mediocre developers.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around this whole "still using GameBryo" thing.

 

[Starwars]

Not really surprising about the level cap either. The Bethesda followers really want games that go on forever, even if decisions lose all meaning. Seeing some of the threads discussing it on their forums for New Vegas, there was a big support for having no level cap, and of course people wanting to continue playing after the "ending".

To be honest, I'm kinda surprised that OEI managed to hold out for having a definite ending (especially with Todd or Pete having said before that having a definite ending for F3 was a big mistake, hence the Broken Steel DLC).

 

[Expresate]

. Seeing some of the threads discussing it on their forums for New Vegas, there was a big support for having no level cap, and of course people wanting to continue playing after the "ending".

Actually the most support was for a level cap. Most people didn't care about the definite ending.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

You can tell all the skills will be horribly unbalanced if they do this (like with Broken Steel, how you can max out all skills at 100% if you plan it out enough).

Skills could be maxxed the level 20 cap and were a joke to max with the level 30 cap.

I honestly don't see the level cap having any effect on anything other than perks so meh. If it would mean spacing perks back out to how they were originally then I'd be all for not having a level cap.

We feel like we're terrible game developers.

If only you felt that way more often Bethesda might improve...

Eurogamer: You mentioned earlier that for a game to come to Bethesda it needs to be a certain fit. What would you say the philosophy of a Bethesda game is?

Todd Howard: Phew! That's a good question. We know it when we see it. I know for the internal studio, but in general if it's going to be on the label it is going to hit the action-adventure, fantasy, sci-fi, it's got something cool about it.

Doing a game for the core gamer, it's going to be in those kind of genres.

Thus officially confirming that Bethesda targets the lowest common denominator.

 

[Brother None]

Thus officially confirming that Bethesda targets the lowest common denominator.

Eh? "core gamers" is another word for "not casual gamers". It's exactly not the lowest common denominator.

 

[sampson70]

My only question is....How the hell can the Gamebryo engine be improved to make a game look 'Next gen"!!!???..... I just don't believe this at all, they would have to be using the ID Tech 5 engine. www.thesixthaxis.com

 

[sampson70]

You can tell all the skills will be horribly unbalanced if they do this (like with Broken Steel, how you can max out all skills at 100% if you plan it out enough).

Skills could be maxxed the level 20 cap and were a joke to max with the level 30 cap.

I honestly don't see the level cap having any effect on anything other than perks so meh. If it would mean spacing perks back out to how they were originally then I'd be all for not having a level cap.

We feel like we're terrible game developers.

If only you felt that way more often Bethesda might improve...

Eurogamer: You mentioned earlier that for a game to come to Bethesda it needs to be a certain fit. What would you say the philosophy of a Bethesda game is?

Todd Howard: Phew! That's a good question. We know it when we see it. I know for the internal studio, but in general if it's going to be on the label it is going to hit the action-adventure, fantasy, sci-fi, it's got something cool about it.

Doing a game for the core gamer, it's going to be in those kind of genres.

Thus officially confirming that Bethesda targets the lowest common denominator.

Well he does have a point,those genre are making the most money.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

Eh? "core gamers" is another word for "not casual gamers". It's exactly not the lowest common denominator.

Well that's true, if they were truely going for that then they'd use PopCap's business model and they'd probably go more of a GTA route for the budget and price-point of their games. Looks like I was wrong about that (should have googled core gamers), whoops

 

[LionXavier]

We feel like we're terrible game developers.

I can hardly believe that he really feels that way. But the fact that this is an obvious case of false modesty doesn't mean that what he claims he feels isn't true.

Eh? "core gamers" is another word for "not casual gamers". It's exactly not the lowest common denominator.

Well that's true, if they were truely going for that then they'd use PopCap's business model and they'd probably go more of a GTA route for the budget and price-point of their games. Looks like I was wrong about that (should have googled core gamers), whoops

However, I don't really think that your claim about Bethesda targeting the lowest common denominator is far from the truth. In fact, now that you mention GTA, it is hard to avoid noticing the similarities between it and the way Beth's games are "evolving": sandbox-like gameplay; vehicles (horses), houses, etc collection; minigames; notifications of insignificant details (distance walked, houses owned, etc)... and even the radio! The difference is that Bethesda adds over that some proto-dialogues with secondary npcs, an almost meaningles set of character stats that hardly prevents the fact that every character can do almost everyting and a level-up system which is palliated by some degree of level-scaling, all of it in order to make their game appeal to both those who want to experience at least the vague illusion of an RPG and those who simply want to approach it as another sandbox. Summing up, Bethesda's games target to an even wider audience than GTA does, so when Bethesda talks about the will to make games for the "core gamers", I would take your quote: "Thus officially confirming that Bethesda targets the lowest common denominator" and modify it into: "Thus officially confirming that Bethesda doesn't lack hypocrisy."

My only question is....How the hell can the Gamebryo engine be improved to make a game look 'Next gen"!!!???.....

I'd guess that, in order to achieve that, Beth will have to make a considerable investment of money and resources... into their PR department.

 

[TheSHEEEP]

The thing is, you really don't need level caps. I'm talking about open-world games here.

Assume a random game.
We can balance the game in a way that the mobs around here are lvl 10, here around lvl 15, etc... and in the final stage, they are around lvl 30-35.

Now, what's the difference between level cap and no level cap?

Without a level cap, everything will be fine and the player won't have any unfair difficulties as long as he keeps levelling up and if he levels more than the assumed average player, he will have an easier time. Which is exactly what he wanted, or else he wouldn't have leveled up so much in the first place.

With a level cap (let's say 35), everything will be fine and the player won't have any unfair difficulties as long as he keeps levelling up and if he levels more than the assumed average player, he will have an easier time. Which is exactly what he wanted, or else he wouldn't have leveled up so much in the first place. But once he reaches the level cap, he won't be able to level up any more for the rest of the game. Makes you feel like you have to complete the game now.


Level scaling changes this topic a bit, but you can always make a level scaling that works well and will not be ridiculous.

Of course, most players won't reach the maximum level you had in mind when balancing a game. So, it really doesn't make a difference for balancing if you have one or not.
But some players want to level up more, so why prevent them from doing so?

 

[.Pixote.]

Level caps are a lazy afterthought by game designers – with a level cap they don’t need to flesh out the game in its entirety…the player hopefully reaches the desired level and just restarts the game with a new character. It’s much more challenging to build a game that readjusts as the player improves over time…

 

[Blackened]

Hehe - he's flirting with us. Intentional or not.

About the Fallout game set outside USA - wasn't everything except USA dead and "under the boiling ocean of radiation", or something?

 

[SharkClub]

Hehe - he's flirting with us. Intentional or not.

About the Fallout game set outside USA - wasn't everything except USA dead and "under the boiling ocean of radiation", or something?

Well, there was that Fallout Resource Wars idea that never got put into action. So I expect not everywhere outside the USA to be all dead.

 

[TheSHEEEP]

About the Fallout game set outside USA - wasn't everything except USA dead and "under the boiling ocean of radiation", or something?

Well, if that was true, I beg Bethesda or someone to break the canon, because that would just be utter bullshit.
Some places like Greenland, some places in Africa or New Zealand are far less likely to be completely destroyed than the USA.

But I agree that the Fallout franchise would probably just not fit into anything else but the USA.

I'm kinda frustrated about this. I just want some post-apocalyptic game outside the USA or Russia.

 

[Lexx]

Level caps are a lazy afterthought by game designers – with a level cap they don’t need to flesh out the game in its entirety…the player hopefully reaches the desired level and just restarts the game with a new character. It’s much more challenging to build a game that readjusts as the player improves over time…

While this might be true in a 100% open sandbox game, where you will never get any ending, I don't agree on such things in (i. e.) Fallout. You can see this pretty much in Fallout 1 and 2. Sooner or later, you are an impossible to kill super terminator with not a single 'valid' enemy. I just don't like such stuff, it's lame.