|
|
Fallout 3 chat log from June 16th, 2001
| |
|
[ N/A -> Interview ] |
| Interview posted by 258 |
Wed 28 Jul 2004, 10:09 AM |
Fallout 3 chat
16th June, 2001
Held at IRC.gamesurge.net
in #Fallout |
<Dan_Wood|DaC> Okay folks, welcome to... uh... what number is this? Anyway, a Developer Chat with BIS regarding Fallout 3.
<Dan_Wood|DaC> We're just waiting on Our Friend, Feargus with the Complex Last Name.
<Killian|DAC> Urquhart
<Miro|NMA> you can use just FU :)
<Saint_Proverbius> Why don't you lovely BIS people tell us about yourselves, while we wait.
<BIS_ChrisA> Chris Avellone. 29. Designer. Black Isle. Loves Fallout.
<FalloutsChris> Chris Taylor. 32. Designer. 14o East. Loves Brahmin.
<BIS_Darren> Me? Sure. I started at IPlay 7 years ago in QA, became a programmer, and am now a producer in Black Isle.
<Dan_Wood|DaC> Anyway, Let's start off with the big questions: Is There A Fallout 3 CURRENTLY being developed or on the docket to be developed?
<BIS_Darren> At the moment no, Fallout 3 is not in development, but we have been tossing up the idea among other ideas for the Icewind team to move onto.
<ApTyp|NMA> Why don't you tell us about what you think the main elements of Fallout? What in your opinion makes Fallout what it is?
<BIS_ChrisA> 1. Big, Clunky, Americain, 1950s Technology in a gritty Mad Max setting
<BIS_ChrisA> 2. An RPG that caters to your choice of player character
<FalloutsChris> Fallout to me is a vision of the future from America's past. It's about trying to replicate paper and pencil RPGing on the computer.
When that decision comes up to develop f3 will you let the fans know right away?
<BIS_ChrisA> Decision to develop F3: I don't know how the whole PR and legal circuit works, but we'll try to let you know as soon as we can.
<MrCarrot> what communication went on between 14o east and BIS in the planning of FOT and how it ended up dramaticaly skewered away from the fallout canon?
<FalloutsChris> I'd disagree with the dramatically skewered. We intentionally tried to present a different take on the BOS. BIS had very little (to no) input on FOT, however. If you need to blame someone about lack of Fallout continuity, please blame me.
<FalloutsChris> We are taking steps to reduce future problems -- like creating a Fallout bible and trying to coordinate all future Fallout development better.
<Calis> Chris Avellone, you seem to be set for lead designer on Fallout 3. Many fans seem to have doubts you can achieve a gameplay experience with as much freedom of choice and reactiveness (whatever you want to call it) as Fallout 1 & 2, looking at your latest achievement, Torment. What would you say to these infidels?
<BIS_ChrisA> I can only say I won't be doing Torment again. Trust me. :)
<Calis> though the Torment thing would fit nicely in the "dead giveaway" category. :)
<BIS_ChrisA> Seriously, though, if I were to work on a Fallout title, I would respect the genre as much as I did the Planescape genre.
<SkapUnk> is there gonna be an add-on for fallout: tactics? (offical)
<BIS_Feargus> At this point there isn't going to be and add-on for Fallout Tactics. However, we are thinking about doing something. We'll hopefully be announcing something in the next month.
<Dan_Wood|DaC> Is Fallout 3 CURRENTLY being developed or on the docket to be developed?
<BIS_Feargus> Confirm Fallout 3. Ya know I can't do that before we've "offically" announced it. What I can say that we have a whole bunch of people working on TORN, so if Fallout 3 were being worked on - there couldn't be very many people working on it.
but, after TORN is finished, is Fallout 3 one of the dominant options?
<BIS_Feargus> If there were a list of products we would do after TORN finals - Fallout 3 would be on the short list.
<ApTyp|NMA> BIS_Feargus: Why don't you tell us about what you think the main elements of Fallout? What in your opinion makes Fallout what it is?
<BIS_Feargus> As for what I think of Fallout - it's vacuum tubes not transistors, Super Mutants, FEV, Dogmeat, MR. Handy, Mini-Guns, Perks, Traits, Special, blowing shit up, dry/dusty look, areas people know of.
<Dan_Wood|DaC> 'Gus: You've stated that all BIS games from here on out are going to be 3D. Are you folks going to be using the same engine and if so, will you be licensing it out to small devhouses?
<BIS_Feargus> I don't know if we will license stuff out to other companies. Firstly because if we've licensed the core engine that gets complicated - and we aren't an engine company.
<BIS_Feargus> Why do you ask about licensing it to small companies?
<Dan_Wood|DaC> Simple economics, you get the initial money from selling the SDK to the small devhouse and get the money from publishing what they make if it's up to snuff.
<Dan_Wood|DaC> Even after giving some portion of the proceeds to Monolith for their 3D engine, BIS and Interplay would make a sizable amount.
<BIS_Feargus> The money we would make from an SDK could not be a whole lot. The problem is that it costs a lot to have someone around to support people using an engine. You can't just burn the stuff on CD's and send it to people if you want them to have a modicum of success.
<BIS_Feargus> It is hard for companies that are dedicated to licensing engines to make money off of that.
<Dan_Wood|DaC> True, but given that Valve has been pretty successful with their opening up the SDK to the public for Halflife, you'd expect a 3D engine with hooks for networking and persistant world data to rake in the bucks.
<BIS_Feargus> Lastly on the engine stuff, we would not be looking to make money - just not lose money. That's what I mean by that.
<BIS_Feargus> You are absolutely right about Valve and Counterstrike. I wish we had the resources to create a product that was as open to mods. I'm not sure if we can though. We are often limited in the resources that we can throw at a title. And making it have the ability to be moded takes extra resources.
<ApTyp|NMA> What do you think the next Fallout game will be like? RPG? MMORPG? Something else?
<BIS_Feargus> The next Fallout will probably be along the lines of the previous Fallouts in style from the standpoint of it not being a MMORPG.
<Dan_Wood|DaC> ChrisT.:You said something about the Fallout Bible; will this be available to the public?
<Kelly X> I'd buy a Fallout Bible, as long as it is highly graphiced and has lots of original art and such and actually make it a really interesting reference book. =)
I'd certainly buy it.
<FalloutsChris> The Fallout Bible we're working on is really intended to be a tool used by the developers. I'm not sure if it would be appropriate to make it publically available. *shrug* The final decision is not mine, however.
<Greg`> One from me: It's been quite obvious that many original Fallout elements were intentionally avoided and disregarded in Fallout Tactics, to a point where the development was obviously going out of its way to significantly avoid any references or clear similarities to the previous titles - this showed itself in sprites, plot atmosphere and more. Why was this done? To distance the "spin-off" from the original or to attract a new audience
<BIS_Feargus> I think the difference between Tactics and the other Fallouts was due to the game style.
<BIS_Feargus> Tactics is a Strat, while the Fallouts were an RPG.
<BIS_Feargus> As for the difference in the look...
<Greg`> If I could clarify, I meant elements aside from the style of gameplay.
<BIS_Feargus> It's sometimes hard to completely simulate the same exact look with art. Also, while the atmosphere is not exactly the same as the other Fallouts - I wouldn't say that it is completely "un-Fallouty".
<BIS_Feargus> Were there particular things you guys did not like about the look?
<Dan_Wood|DaC> There was the hairy deathclaw, the powerarmor, that sort of thing...
<Saint_Proverbius> Yup, a lot of the sprites looked more fantasy than post nuclear.
<Saint_Proverbius> The metal armor looks like it was pulled from Diablo 2. ;)
<Greg`> It was obvious that many references were not only changed, but avoided.
<BIS_Feargus> Was it that you felt the art style was wrong - or just that the art didnt fit.
<Dan_Wood|DaC> Fit. Is BIS going to have more of an active effort to involve the artists with the fanbase?
<Greg`> But seriously, things which could be easily included in the game not to alienate the original fan-base were taken out, to attract a wider range of customers, don't you think?
i think FOT was too futuristic
<BIS_Feargus> Well, since we created the look of the Fallouts internally and still have some of those artists. I don't think it will be difficult to have the art look like Fallout. In other words - we are going to base the look off of Fallout 1 and 2.
<ApTyp|NMA> Rumors are that you are abandoning the 1950's Retro-Tech feeling of Fallout 1. Is that true? If it is, can you tell us about next Fallout game's atmosphere?
<BIS_Feargus> Those rumors are incorrect.
Fallout 1&2 were 'real' rpg's, turnbased and stats... FOT was more action - based, for the 'bigger audience' - what is your goal, pleasing FO fans or drawing a new public?
<FalloutsChris> Well, FOT wasn't an RPG - but it still had a very large RPG feel, certainly more so than most strategy games.
<BIS_Feargus> Your question is really whether there will be a turn based mode - correct?
<Killian> Sounds like it
<BIS_Feargus> That is something we can talk about. If we can have a Real-Time and a Turn-Base mode without compromising either - than we are talking about doing both.
<Saint_Proverbius> Both would be great.
I believe doggy was asking along the lines of Are trying more to maintain the previous adiance or move to new ones
<FalloutsChris> I've worked on a game which had both RT and TB, and it was a mess (MAX2). I thought the way we did it in FOT was good, however, your feedback would be appreciated.
<BIS_Feargus> We are trying to keep the previous audience without completely alientating the larger RPG player audience. We are not looking to branch out into the Myst audience - but to have enough people by the game we need to make it palitable to the broard CRPG market.
<FalloutsChris> Ultimately, you'd like to do both, Cay. You always have to grow your audience, if you don't you end up with the POR syndrome (look at the SSI AD&D games of the late 80s -- their sales numbers halved for each succeeding game).
<MrCarrot> for fergus god bless him: have you actualy done any industry research or infact asked anyone at all whether they would prefer a 3d camera and real time combat in a future fallut RPG title?
<BIS_Feargus> We haven't done the research, but the one thing I can tell you is that we are not going a 3D game to jump on the 3D bandwagon. continue...
<BIS_Feargus> We are hoping that we can make the backgrounds look as good as the 2D ones. If we can do that, then it doesn't really matter if it is 2D or 3D.
<FalloutsChris> Something that's important to point out in the differences between 2D and 3D is that 3D certainly stresses the memory of a machine less than 2D. We started running up against all sorts of technical problems with FOT and it's very large 2D art resources. ga
<Killian> Political corectness has been slowly creeping it's way into most computer games of late, including FOT. Surely this can't be what'll happen with FO3, right? The Wasteland will still be a mean place?
<ApTyp|NMA> What about Drugs and Sex? Will we see more of it in next Fallout games?
<Saint_Proverbius> And CHILDREN
<BIS_Feargus> We still have to make a decision about having a Teen rating or a Mature rating. The problem is that Teen rated games get into more stores and have the chance to sell more. I'm not saying they definitely sell more - they just have the chance to do so. continue...
<BIS_Feargus> We have to figure out if we can do justice to the Fallout univers with words like "bitch" and "bastard" rather than "shit" and "fuck". What will probably push us over the edge will be the violence though.
<Saint_Proverbius> Fallout didn't have a whole lot of profanity.
<BIS_Feargus> There was quite a bit in Fallout 2.
<Saint_Proverbius> Not much profanity in a 1950's point of view.
<FalloutsChris> My thoughts on profanity is that it should used only when appropriate.
<BIS_ChrisA> Profanity: It was overdone in F2, no question.
<FalloutsChris> However, since we had the M rating on Fallout due to Violence alone, the drugs (erm, chems), language and sex (which there wasn't a whole lot of in FO1) seemed to also make sense in order to make the world seem different and alive.
<BIS_Feargus> Drugs are a big question. No mater what the rating the retailers always ask about drugs. But they don't care about Healing Potions - go figure.
Do you think the sex was overdone in FO2?
<BIS_ChrisA> In places, yes. Especially in New Reno.
<Saint_Proverbius> Didn't you do New Reno, Chris? ;)
<BIS_ChrisA> The Porn Studio was not "Fallouty."
<BIS_ChrisA> Guilty as charged.
<BIS_Feargus> But the Pip boy pictures were funny...
Is the next title going to move from the vault - linked stories ?
<BIS_ChrisA> Do you guys not like vault-linked stories?
<Saint_Proverbius> I like them.
<BIS_Feargus> Vaults are a very big part of the Fallout world in my mind. Avellone might disagree with me though?
<Dan_Wood|DaC> I love vault-linked stories. They're fun.
<Dan_Wood|DaC> Just wish they were deeper.
<BIS_ChrisA> Well, should we follow the gourd or the shoe?
<BIS_ChrisA> Sorry, just asking which school of thought - vault-linked or non-vault linked?
<FalloutsChris> Vaults should always have a place in a Fallout story.
<Dan_Wood|DaC> ChrisA: You should allow for both. :)
<ApTyp|NMA> Will we see more real-life weapons in future Fallout games?
<FalloutsChris> Hmmm. After working on FOT, I'd like to go back to the more original Fallout weapons, myself.
<BIS_Feargus> I couldn't see it being a Fallout without more guns.
<BIS_Feargus> But guns that make sense.
<Dan_Wood|DaC> Use the guns we have, 'Gus!
<Saint_Proverbius> The problem with real world guns is that it dampens the "alternative universe" feel though.
<FalloutsChris> We had a lot of requests to add fan favorites (like the M16, AK47 and Colt .45s), but I miss the more original weapons.
<MrCarrot> can we see less real life weapons just realistic progressions due to the fact the war breaks out 80 years in the future please :)
<BIS_Feargus> More Auto-Shotguns in my mind. :)
<FalloutsChris> I suspect there is a proper balance point for real world weapons versus original weapons.
<FalloutsChris> (Feargus likes shotguns in his games, this I know from the rolemaster Cyberpunk game... :)
People have wondered if Interplay has had any ideas about making a movie and/or book based in the Fallout universe.
<BIS_Feargus> We have offered it to a number of studios and they talk about being interested in it - but one has ever really taken it any farther.
<BIS_Feargus> As for books - no one has really shown an interest in it as a book license.
<Greg`> What do you think is the target audience for any Fallout games you plan to start developing in the near future? What age group do you rely on and would eye candy take priority over the original values which the game was admired for? In other words, will it remain so that the game's appearance is the most important part of the development process?
<BIS_Feargus> The game is the most important part of the development process. If the whole package doesn't work - it doesn't matter how pretty it is - or how close the look is to the original games.
<FalloutsChris> I think a little bit of eye candy is very important for first impressions, and selling the press on it, but the gameplay is really key.
On the player party system, would a sequel most likely have full control over the party like FO:Tactics, an NPC party system which plays a large role in the game like FO2, or perhaps a return to the lone Mad Max like wanderer of FO1?
<FalloutsChris> It depends on the type of game. Frex, Fallout 1 was about the individual versus society. The player was "born" into the world alone and left the world alone. I liked the way NPCs worked for that game.
<FalloutsChris> Fallout Tactics, on the other claw, was about squad management. So it made sense to have the player be in full control of his characters.
<BIS_ChrisA> I'd like an NPC party system, but it would depend on the sequel.
<Miro|NMA> Fallout's character control system is way much better than FT or ie BG... just improve ai
<ApTyp|NMA> The rumor is that original Fallout 3D-art is irretrievable. Does it mean that we will not see the original Power Armor and other 3D-models? Does it mean a complete redesign, or will you try to reconstruct the models? Are you planning on using any of the art from FOT?
<BIS_ChrisA> Mr. Handys will be, and forever shall be, part of the Fallout universe.
<FalloutsChris> I so very much wanted a Mr. Handy for FOT. I really, truly did.
<Dan_Wood|DaC> Please... Bring back Mr. Handy.... *starts sobbing*
<BIS_Feargus> We would probably have to re-do most of the art anyway. The way some of the art was done - it just didn't have the detail to be able to bring it to higher resolutions - whether 2D or 3D.
<BIS_Feargus> As for the orignal art look - I think the goal is to have it look the way it did in the original games.
are we going to go back to the Fallout 1 french translation (US Voices but French texts) or the Fallout2/FOT way that means total translation, because most the french fans prefer US voices.
<FalloutsChris> That's an interesting observation. I had no idea that most french fans prefer the US voices.
trust me, they do!
<BIS_ChrisA> Well, that's another secret the localization dept has been holding out on us.
<BIS_Feargus> Depending on how many units it looks like each of the territories will take in will determine what gets translated. However, we will try to at least get it right if we do full translations.
<Dan_Wood|DaC> Speaking as the only Mac user on the Gamespy Network, will there be a port of FO2, FO3 and/or FOT to MacOS X since MacPlay has been reinstated?
<BIS_Feargus> Unfortunately, I have no idea. Taylor do you know about FOT?
<FalloutsChris> I thought in the original MacPlay release they talked about FOT, but I haven't heard anything about it since. It's a separate company now.
<Europa> in regards to the lenghty patching process which took place after FOT's release, have the developers taken steps to insure that the time and/or severity of the bugs remaining upon release, are cut down for the next title, to avoid any negative feelings from the fans?
<FalloutsChris> The dreaded bug question. Is that the first one?
<Saint_Proverbius> I'm still waiting for another Fallout 2 patch.
<BIS_Feargus> We hope that we can make sure to better test our products. We've gotten much better at it after going through Torment, Icewind, and BG2.
<BIS_Feargus> Tactics was another story...
<BIS_Feargus> It's hard to explain that one - it was a financial decision not a development driven one.
question for feargus: why did interplay approve fot even though many elements weren't consistent with the fallout universe, the deathclaws, lame d&d feel of some of the missions, the removal of most of the old weapons, and the general feel, etc.
<FalloutsChris> I liked the regional deathclaws and the new armor. The mission feel we were kind of stuck with.
<BIS_Feargus> It was approved because it was a good game. It was an interpretation of the Fallout universe.
<FalloutsChris> (The missions were locked down much earlier than we would have liked due to audio recordings.)
<BIS_Feargus> I gotta get out of here everyone. We can do another one of these.
*** Quits: BIS_Feargus (~furquhart@ip-proxy-03.interplay.com)
<Killian> alright a few more Qs for the rest of you
Do you feel that the extremely good reception Fallout 1 / 2 received (if not sales-wise, than critically) gives you any extra measure of freedom for what you can 'get away with,' in terms of unusual features in futures games? If not, why not?
<FalloutsChris> The removal of most of the old weapons was due to the fact that we had requests to add many real world weapons. We ended up with 140 weapons or so, something had to give. ga
<BIS_ChrisA> 1. Reception: No.
<BIS_ChrisA> When you try to "get away with anything," you're consciously undermining the genre.
<Calis> Do you see a possible Interplay buyout having any negative effects on the Fallout franchise?
<FalloutsChris> Calis, I don't.
<BIS_ChrisA> I'm with Chris. I wish I knew what the buyout situation was.
<JC|V13> Is SPECIAL a cornerstone of the Fallout series or is it expendable?
<BIS_ChrisA> Cornerstone
<BIS_Darren> Cornerstone
<BIS_ChrisA> Character Creation is what makes Fallout Fallout
<FalloutsChris> Ohhhh. I'll be different and say that for RPGs and tactical games, it's a cornerstone. But if we ever need to do Dogmeat on Typing, it's expendable. Seriously, it would depend on the game and genre.
<FalloutsChris> I cannot imagine a Fallout RPG without SPECIAL, however.
<FalloutsChris> Okay, if we did a high level 4X strategy game set in the Fallout universe (think Civ), SPECIAL might not be required.
<Killian> In Fallout 3 will we see any inconsistencies as with FO2 (ie. I destroyed Shady Sands in FO1 but NCR still managed to sprout out, likewise in FO2 I destroyed Vault City will I see it in FO3) ??
<FalloutsChris> There will always be a canon universe.
<FalloutsChris> Since the Fallout RPGs have been about choice, that universe might not match up with any one particular players.
<FalloutsChris> And we cannot make a game that takes into account all the different possible choices and outcomes. ga
<BIS_ChrisA> If we did a Fallout 3, we would try to maintain some consistency, but we don't have a surefire way of telling what your character did in F1 and F2 that other players may not have done
<Greg`> rosh: Actions speak louder than words. Fallout Tactics was promised to 'be everything Fallout except for being a CRPG'. I look at everything in Fallout 1&2, then take a look at FOT (not by graphics, but content and such), then shake my head. Great, we have someone from Fallout 2 working on it. That didn't do FOT a whole lot of good, and look at Fo2 compated to Fo1.
<Greg`> rosh: Was buggy because too much time was spent on inane easter eggs and loads of other superfluous stuff instead of the spit-and-polish of Fallout 1. It lost a bit of the wastelandish feel of Fo1. What is to prevent Fallout 3 from being an utter shoveled out the door mockery?
<Greg`> - this was from our news comments, he's not here, as far as I'm aware.
<BIS_ChrisA> We learned a lot from F2. We know what not to do now.
<BIS_ChrisA> If we did a Fallout 3, we'd have that experience to draw upon.
<FalloutsChris> Wow. Fallout 1 was polished? I certainly consider many parts of FO1 to be incomplete or unpolished.
<BIS_ChrisA> He's got a good point.
<Greg`> Well, in comparison to Fallout 2, Chris. Come on.
<BIS_ChrisA> His point still holds.
<Greg`> The "rushing factor" in games is becoming more and more evident.
<Saint_Proverbius> ChrisA: What is "What not to do"? Can you give an example or three?
<BIS_ChrisA> 1. No inside jokes. 2. Don't expense the genre for a funny. 3. Don't include non-technological elements (ghosts, shamanistic visions, etc) in the game.
<BIS_ChrisA> Those are just a few examples.
<FalloutsChris> I just recently played FO1 and I found many things that made me cringe. Cathedral spy, surrending to the Master after destroying the Vats, lots of out of sequence dialogue choices, inconsistent interfaces. We've learned a lot since then.
<FalloutsChris> Falout 1 game balance was not spot on, either.
<FalloutsChris> Hey, I'm trying to be honest. FO1 most certainly could have been improved.
<Greg`> Chris: It's still obviously, by far, more polished than Fallout 2 and even more so than FOT.
<Saint_Proverbius> I still like the idea of a Fallout Gold.
<FalloutsChris> I would love the opportunity to go back in time and fix a lot of things in FO1 (clean up dialogue, adjust balance, add some content to places that needed it). Hmmm. Fallout 1 Gold. Where's Feargus? :)
<Europa> They've basically said that FO3 will use a 3D engine... However, using a camera can be quite a pain, are they planning any special systems to make FO3 unique within the 3D world?
<BIS_ChrisA> We aren't currently working on a F3, so I don't know about the camera -- if we used a 3D engine in a future game, it'd definitely be something we'd have to consider.
<Killian> well ... let's close this out
<Killian> If there is one thing you'd like each and every Fallout fan to leave this chat knowing, what would it be?
<BIS_ChrisA> One thing? Don't worry. :) |
| Edit - Delete |
|
|
| Fallout 4 Responses: What do you think of it? |
|