A Game of Thrones - Interview @ GameBanshee
 

GameBanshee has scored the first ever interview on A Game of Thrones, discussing the game with project manager Thomas Veauclin from Cyanide. The game is still early in development so the revelations are limited but he does unveil two main protagonist characters that the gamer alternates playing, a "tactical" approach to combat with active-pause and a linear structure:
More information.

Hmm this could be a very good game if they use a lot of the lore from the books…then again it could suck, who knows?

"Depth can only be provided if we keep the player to a linear path. "

*WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP*

Wrong.
Next.

Why does everyone always react negatively to linear? If done right there are many linear games that have been a lot of fun or at least that has been my experience. Truthfully, a good story is told better in a linear environment for obvious reasons. The Witcher was pretty linear too and I loved that game.

Well I prefer both styles of games you dont need every rpg to be a open world environment. To actually tell a story and have a campaign you need to make it linear. The key is illusion by making the player think he has control.

"It would be impossible to offer an epic adventure if the game was played in an open world"

Impossible (read: take some effort)

linear = no adventure, or rather it's the developer's adventure, not yours.

Explain because All the elder scroll and other open world games didn't have good story's. You wander around aimlessly taking quest that have no bearing on the campaign. I barely finished any of those games I had to force myself.

Well i usually dont care much for story in games, they're not up to my standards (except for PS:T - better mention that or someone will say i'm wrong and that i didnt play it).

I mean like in an TES game or in the Gothic games, i care for my own little explorations and adventures, even though they are quite simple. That's RPG'ing for me, i don't like hand holding too much. Even if tells a decent story i'm usually not impressed with it, i rather do the stuff that books can't give me, that's why i decided to play a game in the first place.

Even if this game has a good story (i have just read the first book), there's imo no feeling of adventuring if it's not your own.

Linear surely makes for a better story. No argument there.

It is probably going to make it more like a movie and less like a game though.

Planescape: Torment is "linear, but with choices" in the way he describes. In general, they seem to be inspired by the right ideas, but we still have no clue whether or not it will be great.

Worth keeping an eye on though, thanks to GB for the interview.

I've already posted. Books this game is based upon are a disgrace. Yes I've read the first three and feel cheated by the author.
But are a gold goose. Cash cow. Whatever.

The game will probably be crap but no matter - it'll sell. Not to me though. :)
Will it be linear or not, storyrich or h&s, honestly, I'll skip it.

That makes absolutely no sense….cheated by the author? The books the game are based on are probably some of the best fanatsy novels written in the last twenty or so years.

Agreed. They're easily in my top 3 fantasy epics, and as long as Martin doesn't jump the shark, they'll stay there. I've heard from a lot of people that book 4 wasn't what they wanted, but I was wholly satisfied.

Yes, book 4 was a disappointment. Too much meandering around, traveling through grim wilderness, etc. But I am a huge fan of these books.

I hadn't read a single fantasy or sci-fi book in probably 15-20 years, then a few years back I picked up Game of Thrones based on something I read online. Blew me away. Loved it from the start, and read them all voraciously.

Hungering for more, I started looking for other fantasy recommendations. I have been disappointed by every single one I tried. I read all three Abercrombie books, which by the end were extremely tiring. I felt he simply adored and copied Martin's style but just didn't pull off an interesting story, and the brutality and sadism in his books seems like an added on selling point versus a natural part of the book.

I tried reading Lies of Locke Lamora, and just lost interest. The opening parts were pretty good, but it didn't hold up. I tried reading Name of the Wind. I can't believe how much praise that book gets. It was competently written, but so drawn out and tedious in stupid minute details, and the main character is an unrealistic super-human who excels in every aspect of his life. I read Tad Williams Dragonbone Chair which I enjoyed a bit, but after the first book it got less and less interesting. I tried reading a couple Erickson Malazan books and thought they had some interesting ideas, but were a horrible mess of a chaotic jumble. I pretty much hated what I read of him.

I've since accepted that the fantasy genre is just not for me. Outside of GRR Martin, I haven't found a single modern fantasy author whose books I like. MArtin is a great story teller, and is excellent at moving the story along and dragging you in for a good ride, like Stephen King. Neither King nor Martin will ever be considered among the greatest authors ever, but both are extremely skilled at writing and imagination.

In fact, that's where Feast for Crows fell apart for me — the pacing. It didn't have the fun thrill ride pace as the other books with cliffhanger first person chapters making you want more. The fact that he was still introducing new characters out of nowhere that far along in the story makes me think his publishers made him fatten and pad out the books to sell more product. I don't have much faith that the series will ever end very satisfactorily, but I do have hope that it will.

Stephen Donaldson and Clive Barker has written some really great fantasy imo.. I really like King's Dark Tower series too :) Nothing compares to Tolkien though imo.

Have you read anything by Robin Hobb ? From what I've read so far I like… and she is a much better writer than your typical fantasy author( I must reckon I did not read much fantasy for the last 10 years)

I can see that, but where you saw tedium and bloat, I saw a lot of preparation and placement. Instead of a thrill-a-minute ride, he's taken the foot off the gas, and started to introduce some characters that are going to play pivotal roles in the rest of the series. He has to, because he's killed off about half the freaking cast. By the way, have you read the Dark Tower series? You mentioned King, and I figured I'd bring it up.

No I haven't read any Dark Tower. I have mostly given up on King as well. His early stuff is outstanding, but his recent (last ~20 years) is very well written crap. I have enjoyed some of his recently released short story collections, but many of those were written long ago.

Yeah I guess I'm pretty picky.

robin hobb is worth reading,

game of thrones have premier on may 4:th here in Sweden, I guess my fiancé will have to relinquish control of the TV then.

C