|
An evening with Todd Howard about Fallout 3
| |
|
[ Game -> Interview ] |
| Interview posted by DarkUnderlord |
Fri 04 Feb 2005, 8:41 AM |
| More info on Person: Todd Howard | More info on Company: Bethesda Softworks | More info on Game: Fallout 3 (Bethesda) |
A bit of History
Fallout fans have wanted a sequel to their favourite game ever since
Fallout 2 (FO2) was released in 1998. While Fallout 2 wasn't
considered a great sequel to Fallout, it was pretty darned good.
Monty Python, Silence of the Lambs and blatant Terminator references
aside, it offered all the goodness of the original Fallout, except that
is, for a well put together ending. While fans clamored for
another sequel along the lines of the original, Interplay had other ideas.
Fallout: Tactics (FO:T) was announced and fans were initially
optimistic, until it was released and they played it... After
that (and much criticism and debate later) Interplay made another
Fallout announcement, Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel
(I'll let you follow the link to find out what we thought about that
one). 17,000 sales later, FO:BOS has long since been forgotten
and Fallout fans, watching the continuing demise of Interplay, had
almost given up hope. Until rumours started circulating about
Project "Van Buren".
Seems Black Isle Studios - the RPG division of Interplay - had started
work on Fallout 3, seeing as Project Jefferson had been cancelled right
at the last minute when Interplay bungled up the D&D license (they
couldn't use it to make PC games basically and Jefferson was a PC game).
The fans went nuts and participated on the Interplay forums for any
topic about Van Buren. Combat, weapons and story were discussed,
some in more detail than others. Some fans helped, others
didn't. Eventually though, Interplay slid into further decline,
Van Buren was cancelled, everyone was forced to leave and Van Buren was
shelved.
Then, on July 12, 2004, Bethesda Softworks published a press release.
Bethesda
Softworks® announced today that it will develop and publish
Fallout 3 -- a sequel to the highly popular Fallout role-playing
game franchise. Bethesda licensed the rights to the Fallout
franchise from Interplay Entertainment Corp. (OTC Bulletin
Board: IPLY) in a deal that awards Bethesda exclusive worldwide
rights to the Fallout franchise on the PC, home consoles,
handhelds, and other media, with the option to develop and
publish additional sequels.
Going down fast, Interplay had sold one of the last things it had that
was worth any money, the Fallout license. The only thing
Interplay kept was the license for a Fallout MMORPG, not that we ever
expect that to get made. When Interplay released their quarterly
report later that year, we found out what Bethesda paid.
Interplay sold to Bethesda Softworks LLC, "Bethesda" the rights to develop FALLOUT 3 on all platforms
for $1.175 million minimum guaranteed advance against royalties.
Bethesda also has an option to develop two sequels, FALLOUT 4, and
FALLOUT 5 for $1.0 million minimum guaranteed advance against royalties
per sequel. Interplay retained the rights to develop a massively
multiplayer online game ("MMORPG") using the Fallout Trademark.
So fans of Fallout were a wee bit concerned at the time. Our
beloved Fallout, which has already seen two bad spin-offs (Tactics and
that console one nobody likes to talk about now), was in the running to possibly get
three sequels... The question is, would they be "real" Fallout games or
"Morrowind with Guns"?
Now that things have quietened down, Duck and Cover decided
to ask the man who knows more about Fallout 3 than anyone
else. Todd Howard, the guy who runs Bethsoft and the one who
makes all the decisions about publishing and developing their
games. Now that you're up to speed, here's what Todd had to say in an interview with Mr. Teatime.
Interview with Todd(Interview by Mr. Teatime)
Hi Todd. Firstly, can you elaborate at all on the status of Fallout 3?
It's currently in pre-production, which includes
design, concept art, and prototyping various systems. We'll be in that
phase for a long time until we have something running we feel is fun
and works well.
Would you say you plan to work on Fallout 3
alongside Oblivion, or wait until Oblivion is nearly ready to ship
before really getting into work on Fallout? I noticed you're looking to
hire new people who preferably have experience with the Fallout
series...
We stagger projects, so while one is in full
production, another is in pre-production. They're very different modes
of developing. Pre-production is a lot looser, trying ideas, doing
concepts, and really getting a small version of the game up to try all
the risky ideas and see what works and what doesn't. Pre-production is
done with a smaller team. Once we have a good nugget of the game pinned
down, we move a lot of staff on the game and start "production," where
we are really churning out content. So you don't really want to throw
lots of people on a project until that pre-production version is really
tight, or you end up with a lot of people doing a lot of work that
ultimately you may redo, which only frustrates everyone and lengthens
the development time.
Are there any plans to have contact with
developers who have worked on the franchise before, for consultation on
the Fallout universe or any other aspect of development of Fallout 3?
Yes, that's already occurred. There's a lot of passion from everyone to see Fallout return.
What, in your mind, are some of the things that
differentiate the Fallout games (ignoring FO: Tactics and FO:
Brotherhood of Steel, which didn't happen) from the Elder Scrolls
series of RPGs?
Outside of the obvious flavor and setting, the
number one thing is stronger characters. Fallout really set the
standard for me on believable people, good dialogue, and character
choice and consequence. With Elder Scrolls, we do aim for something
enormous, and we simply can't focus on say - 20 to 40 really deep
strong characters and just do them. With Oblivion, we're doing a much
better job than we've done before, but the scale of game is so
different that without sacrificing some of what makes The Elder Scrolls
what it is, I don't think we'd be able to have the same level of
characterization in NPCs Fallout did. So with Fallout 3, that's
something we want to do well, a limited number of super-deep NPCs.
Concerning Fallout 1 and Fallout 2, what marked
the games as special for you? What were some of your favourite
experiences in those games?
There are so many, most of them stem from the first
game, because that's the one that obviously had the biggest impact. The
ending always stuck with me. It took balls to end the game like that.
What are your goals for Fallout 3?
To return Fallout to RPG prominence. To do the
series justice while also bringing it into the current day. This is as
big for us as an Elder Scrolls title, so we're not going to skimp on it.
Any hints about plots you're considering?
Sorry, no hints yet. 
What are your thoughts on the timeframe and
location for the game? By the end of Fallout 2, the world had changed a
lot from the way it was when first emerging from the vault at the start
of Fallout 1.
Ok, I can say it takes place after Fallout 2. But
it's much more in the Fallout 1 flavor. I'm not sure if that makes
sense without the specifics, but Fallout 1 is more our role model than
Fallout 2.
Whilst every fan tends to have a different idea
of what precisely Fallout 3 should be, there are a few things that most
of us are unified on. Are you aware of the strong desires for
turn-based combat and the classic 3/4 top-down viewpoint? Do you think
pure turn-based combat in an RPG is viable in today's market?
Yes, of course we've heard many of the old-school
fans regarding the view and combat resolution. What's viable today?
Certainly turn-based combat limits your audience to a small number, but
I do find that audiences will come if your game is good enough and the
presentation is superb. Ultimately we'll do what we think will be the
most fun.
Though I understand a lot of decisions are yet
to be made about the game, could you see Bethesda doing an RPG that
didn't use first/third person camera angle (like Morrowind) as its
default view? Should you decide to explore this direction, is the
technology you're developing capable of supporting this viewpoint?
The rendering technology can put cameras anywhere.
But don't confuse camera angle with interface and interaction, they're
two very different things.
Will you be using the SPECIAL system in Fallout 3?
Yes, we have rights to it and plan on using it.
Ron Pearlman. Do you know if he still does voice-over work?
He does actually. I'm pretty sure he was in Halo 2.
It's known Oblivion will ship with comprehensive
editing tools, just like Morrowind did. Do you plan for similar tools
to ship with Fallout 3, given the strong modding community the series
has built up?
I can't really say yet, but we had a great experience with Morrowind doing it, and are doing it again with Oblivion.
Have you thought of doing any spin-off titles in
the game universe, or is Fallout 3 the only thing you've got planned
for the franchise?
It's the only thing we're doing right now with Fallout. So if you hear or see anything other than "Fallout 3," it's not us.
What's your opinion of the Fallout fanbase?
The response we've gotten from everyone has been
incredible. It seems like almost every gamer and press guy is a fan of
the original, and are really looking forward to what we're going to do
with it, and really looking forward to seeing Fallout return to a new
era of gaming. I think the hardcore fans are incredibly misunderstood,
and frankly, have been mistreated in the past. We've been reading the
forums a lot and much of our thinking on Fallout 3 is just listening to
experiences people had with the other games, like how those games made
them feel, what they liked and disliked about every Fallout game.
The reason we wanted to make a Fallout game in the first place, was
just how much we loved the first game. But we weren't the ones online
posting all the time about a game from 97. Think about that...8 years
later and they still haven't gotten a decent Fallout RPG, and people
keep shoving crap at them. I'd be pissed too. I'd be wary of the new
guys from Bethesda too. Hopefully when they see our game they'll give
it a shot.
Finally, is there anything else you'd like to add, or say to the community in general and Duck and Cover's readers?
Keep it up, keep posting. We really do read most of
it. Frankly, we do get uncomfortable talking about things that are
still a moving target, and really don't want to say something is or
isn't in the game until we're playing a working version we think is
great. We've said stuff prematurely in the past on our other games, and
it really bit us in the end. I know everyone wants to know everything
now, but it's going to be a while and when we have stuff we think is
ready to show, everyone will see it.
[end of interview]
Editorial(Editorial by DarkUnderlord)
This interview, especially now coupled with the
recent situation
regarding Troika, has made me think twice. Like most in the
Fallout community, when I first heard about Bethesda acquiring the
Fallout license my initial reaction was "Morrowind with guns". If
that's not clear, it's not meant to be a compliment. Morrowind
was a great game that let you play dress-up. You got to wander
around an enormous environment playing whack-a-mole as you were railed
down through the story's narrow, linear plot. You had lots of
skills, most of which revolved around combat and the game was, by and
large, all about the combat. The dialogue was little more than a wikipedia. The ending itself was a shoot-out
with a boss monster albeit with a twist akin to the ending of Doom 2
(don't shoot what's attacking you, just ignore it and go for the brain
- or heart in Morrowind's case). So while I had fun with it, it
wasn't Fallout.
The other reaction I had at the time was disbelief at some of the
claims coming from
Bethesda in the string of interviews they gave. All of them
pointed to a "Shit, let's buy the Fallout licence" response without any
pre-planning being made, which I
found unbelievable at the time. No way in hell could Bethesda
have spent big
bucks (remember, we're looking at around about $1 Million US just for
FO3 alone with a total $3 mill for 4 and 5) on a license without having
any idea
of what type of game they were going to make. Surely they had
some
kind of plan. If we take Todd at his word, perhaps they
didn't? Maybe, quite simply, they bought the Fallout licence
because it
was up for grabs and they really are huge fans. I hope that's the
case or if not, that the plans they have include an "isometric" (3/4
over the top) view and turn-based combat. Sure, viewpoint doesn't
make the game but it has a huge affect on how the game plays.
We also now know that Troika were in a bidding war with Bethesda at
the time. They missed out. This disappointed me but looking
at the stakes
now, that may have been a cruel twist of fate. If Troika had
bought the license, would they really be in a position to - as Todd
says - stay in pre-production until they have something "that feels
right"? Though then again, these are the people that seem to
enjoy whack-a-mole an awful lot...
If Troika had bought the license in a deal with Activision, what
sort of compromises would they be forced to make in order to make the
game acceptable to their publishers? Bethesda have one luxury Troika
don't, money in the bank. Interestingly, they are probably the
best developer/publisher in the financial position to create the RPG we
all want Fallout to be. The question is, will they be able to do
it and will they want to do it?
"We are overjoyed," said Howard. "Fallout is one of my favorite games, and
we plan to develop a visually stunning and original game for
Fallout 3 with all the hallmarks of a great RPG: player choice, engaging
story, and non-linearity."
I have no doubt Fallout 3 will have great graphics. The pity is,
Fallout was never about the graphics. Bethesda haven't proven to me
that they can create an interesting dialogue system beyond "dialogue
vending machines" and non-linearity in Morrowind (their biggest game to
date) was non-existant (anybody remember the "You have killed an
important character! You've stuffed up the main plot! You should
reload!" dialogue box?). Here's hoping Bethesda have the will and
determination to pull
it off though because if they can't do it, who else will?
~DarkUnderlord |
|
|
|
