|
Your continuous donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Richard Garriott - Your Headline is Wrong

Default Richard Garriott - Your Headline is Wrong

March 22nd, 2013, 00:45
Originally Posted by RampantCoyote View Post
His shoe string is looking to be about 200x the size of mine…
I thought size didn't matter?

She lied to me!!

Swords and Sorcery - Underworld and Sovereign
OlderBytes.com
Charles-cgr is offline

Charles-cgr

Charles-cgr's Avatar
Sentinel

#21

Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 333

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 01:27
Originally Posted by Couchpotato View Post
Reminds me of politicians who open there mouth and backtrack when they realized they shouldn't.
With a major difference in that this man created one of the most influent series of CRPGs ever. He has already delivered so, at least, show him what he deserves : some respect.
Gloo is offline

Gloo

Gloo's Avatar
Sentinel

#22

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Chapelle Guillaume
Posts: 307

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 03:41
Originally Posted by Gloo View Post
With a major difference in that this man created one of the most influent series of CRPGs ever. He has already delivered so, at least, show him what he deserves : some respect.
no kiddin. It's like it's cleve blakemore…

If you don't stand behind your troops, feel free to stand in front.
rune_74 is offline

rune_74

SasqWatch

#23

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,918

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 03:49
Originally Posted by rune_74 View Post
no kiddin. It's like it's cleve blakemore…
Were let me shake his hand. I love his posts. We always need negative people in a world or forum full of optimists.

Otherwise it would be boring.

"Beware the potato for he is easily angered."- Couchpotato
Couchpotato is offline

Couchpotato

Couchpotato's Avatar
LazyGamer
RPGWatch Team

#24

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Potato Land
Posts: 8,781

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 04:28
Originally Posted by rune_74 View Post
How much is considered shoe string?
"The average development budget for a multiplatform next-gen game is $18-$28 million…. high-profile games often breaking the $40 million barrier."
rjshae is offline

rjshae

Bob
RPGWatch Donor

#25

Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,322

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 04:30
Originally Posted by rjshae View Post
"The average development budget for a multiplatform next-gen game is $18-$28 million…. high-profile games often breaking the $40 million barrier."
I'm sure he will do fine, he is going to have more money then obsidian had for theirs.

If you don't stand behind your troops, feel free to stand in front.
rune_74 is offline

rune_74

SasqWatch

#26

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,918

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 05:28
Originally Posted by rune_74 View Post
I'm sure he will do fine, he is going to have more money then obsidian had for theirs.
Their what?
killias2 is offline

killias2

killias2's Avatar
Sentinel

#27

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 356

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 05:30
Game.

No I don't mean because he will make more on his kickstarter, but because he has external money in it as well.

If you don't stand behind your troops, feel free to stand in front.
rune_74 is offline

rune_74

SasqWatch

#28

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,918

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 05:35
Originally Posted by rune_74 View Post
Game.

No I don't mean because he will make more on his kickstarter, but because he has external money in it as well.
Yeah but, to be fair, his game is also trying something a lot more ambitious, in terms of infrastructure. Pulling off single, coop, and MMO-style experiences in one package is hard.. but also expensive. A game like PE really just needs a set of focused designers and writers to put the experience together. There's less need for the kind of technical infrastructure Shroud will require.
killias2 is offline

killias2

killias2's Avatar
Sentinel

#29

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 356

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 05:37
Originally Posted by killias2 View Post
Yeah but, to be fair, his game is also trying something a lot more ambitious, in terms of infrastructure. Pulling off single, coop, and MMO-style experiences in one package is hard.. but also expensive. A game like PE really just needs a set of focused designers and writers to put the experience together. There's less need for the kind of technical infrastructure Shroud will require.
I agree but I have been thinking on this. Notice how they made a couple facebook money makers and richard isn't exactly poor. I'm betting a lot of money is being generated outside the game itself.

If you don't stand behind your troops, feel free to stand in front.
rune_74 is offline

rune_74

SasqWatch

#30

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,918

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 08:59
As far as I'm concerned, this is a lot of pressure to put on yourself - stating that you're a better designer than most people you've met (though he might not have met that many designers, I wouldn't know) - and that means he's even more obligated to deliver.

I hope for his sake that he's not just full of it - and that he's still a great designer. After these honest statements, people are very obviously ready to destroy anything he puts out - so it better be REALLY good

Unfortunately, what little I've bothered to read about his project doesn't impress me. Based on recent interviews and now this article - it seems that Garriott is stuck 20 years in the past or something. He mentions Molyneux and Will Wright as great designers? Well, they're great idea-men - but I think they're weak designers. Certainly if we're looking at what they're like today.

Chris Roberts, however, was a true visionary. I'm really looking forward to seeing how his kickstarter project develops.
DArtagnan is online now

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#31

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,940

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 09:40
Never waste a controversy, it makes traffic.

That person only stated that game designing is hard, that game designers in general were mediocre and lazy and that he was slightly better than the average.

Considering the number of game designs that have failed lately, the observation looks solid.

As to him being better than others, it might come to the fact he operated a decade ago or more when game designing on computers was still young.

At present days, game design seems to be in a ditch and game designers seldom managed to deliver on their ideas. They are failing to maintain a progression in their art and seems to have reached a point when all they can deliver has already been delivered in the past. They fail to add anything that was not done previously.
This condition might be the result of the situation, that is game design has reached its natural end. Therefore as a consequence, this game designer might discover that when it operates in the same situation, he is as bad as the others.
ChienAboyeur is offline

ChienAboyeur

SasqWatch

#32

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,015

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 16:57
I think to understand him, you need to understand that he was never happy back in the day with just doing another game the same as the last. Not one of his Ultima's was just the same game as the last (well unless you include the parts of 7). He is a visionary in that he likes to push the envelope forward everytime.

And that's why he brought up will wright and Peter…these guys try to move forward, not just give you another call of duty or cookie cutter game. Does it always work? Well no. Experiments hardly do, playing safe does but we have seen what that creates.

If you don't stand behind your troops, feel free to stand in front.
rune_74 is offline

rune_74

SasqWatch

#33

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,918

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 17:13
That doesn't make them good game designers. As I said, those two have had great ideas - but they couldn't design great gameplay if their lives depended on it.

Even Populous had dreary gameplay, really - it was just extremely novel at the time. Raising and lowering land so people can settle there. That was basically it. Wow!

To me, there's a huge difference between having a great idea - and then making that idea into a brilliant game.

The same can be said about Ken Levine - though I'd say his ideas are more about story premises and not any kind of unique gameplay. He seems to have wonderful concepts of unique locations and moral dilemmas - but in terms of actual game design, he's been the lead of projects that did nothing for evolution of gameplay. He's just been imitating Looking Glass - and not doing that good a job, to be honest.

I've often wondered what games like Dungeon Keeper, Fable, Bioshock, Spore and the like would have been if they'd had great game designers behind them - instead of "just" great idea men.

To my mind, game designers should understand gameplay and game mechanics first and foremost. Examples of great designers of the past would be Sid Meier, the Gollop brothers, Steve Barcia, Chris Roberts, Doug Church, Warren Spector, Tim Cain, and others. Not saying they're great designers today - but they definitely used to be.

Garriott used to be one as well.

Ideas are a dime a dozen, as far as I'm concerned.
DArtagnan is online now

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#34

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,940

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 17:47
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Even Populous had dreary gameplay, really - it was just extremely novel at the time. Raising and lowering land so people can settle there. That was basically it. Wow!
IMO, Populous was limited in its lasting appeal due to the lack of variation in gameplay but Populous 2 was a huge and signifiant improvement making the 1st one obsolete as so many new God powers were introduced allowing for varied tactics and challenges.

Simply put, the gameplay in Populous 2 was awesome and if you claim otherwise then, as the great DArtagan himself would say, you are not in touch with reality .

EDIT:
On a general note, I agree that "idea" and "execution" are two separate things.
Last edited by Asdraguuhl; March 22nd, 2013 at 18:04.
Asdraguuhl is offline

Asdraguuhl

Asdraguuhl's Avatar
Sentinel

#35

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 392

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 18:13
Originally Posted by Asdraguuhl View Post
IMO, Populous was limited in its lasting appeal due to the lack of variation in gameplay but Populous 2 was a huge and signifiant improvement making the 1st one obsolete as so many new God powers were introduced allowing for varied tactics and challenges.

Simply put, the gameplay in Populous 2 was awesome and if you claim otherwise then, as the great DArtagan himself would say, you are not in touch with reality .

EDIT:
On a general note, I agree that "idea" and "execution" are two separate things.
Yeah, the God powers were great. But I remember thinking - even back in those ancient days - that the core gameplay was just more of the same with very limited variation.

I seem to recall the game having 999 levels - and there was almost no variation. Probably just generated by some simplistic formula.

No, I've never cared for the gameplay in any Molyneux design. Dungeon Keeper was close - but it couldn't hold my attention. Molyneux never understood mechanics or design if you ask me. All his strategy games including Populous, Powermonger, Magic Carpet (action strategy), Dungeon Keeper and Black and White have used the same tired and boring level progression during the campaigns. Nah, he's the guy with the idea and the big mouth, but that's about it.

The best game Bullfrog ever put out was Syndicate - and Molyneux wasn't design lead on that one.
DArtagnan is online now

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#36

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,940

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 18:36
I just got out of a chat with RG and posted the info here:

http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19832

If you don't stand behind your troops, feel free to stand in front.
rune_74 is offline

rune_74

SasqWatch

#37

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,918

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 18:53
Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur View Post
Never waste a controversy, it makes traffic.

That person only stated that game designing is hard, that game designers in general were mediocre and lazy and that he was slightly better than the average.
Actually, the part of what he said that you refer to would put him far above average in his estimation - since he said that he met virtually (he gives a few exceptions) no game designers as good as he is. He elaborated to explain that it is not so much that he is particularly great, but that virtually every game designer he's met is just that bad. The difference between this and how some had interpreted is the difference between him saying "Almost everyone else in my field is clueless" and "I'm less clueless than almost everyone else in my field." The latter is more accurate of an interpretation, but neither comes across particularly well.

Now the points about how and why most game designers traditionally haven't been well prepared or well trained for their ultimate tasks - absent experience at least - are very good ones. They do also tend to get ignored in the examples of the most negative and reflexive reactions to these articles. That he could have made those points without naming himself idiot-savant among idiots makes me question the wisdom of saying that bit. Sure he very well may have intended it to bring attention to his points, but I think that though the articles discussing it may be getting more clicks the valid points he tries to articulate are being overlooked in the face of the more entertaining controversy. I think he would have done better for his reputation amongst his colleagues and potential backers if he brought up those points sans-snark in one of the many interviews he's been offered regarding his kickstarter instead of whatever he was trying to do here.

Overall I think this may have been a miscalculation in terms of saying something controversial in order to bring attention to a real failure to adequately educate, train, and prepare prospective game designers (as well as quality control in your talent pool.) I think it was an opportunity less than ideally utilized in this regard - if not quite entirely squandered. It may suggest an arrogance and condescension on RG's part, though I think it may be far more likely to suggest a lack of self-awareness on his part that many of us who grew up as geeky kids might be able to recognize in ourselves at times.
Last edited by jhwisner; March 22nd, 2013 at 19:04.
jhwisner is offline

jhwisner

SasqWatch

#38

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,510

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 19:04
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Yeah, the God powers were great. But I remember thinking - even back in those ancient days - that the core gameplay was just more of the same with very limited variation.

I seem to recall the game having 999 levels - and there was almost no variation. Probably just generated by some simplistic formula.
In Populous 2, at each level you were normally given a limited selection of your God powers so you had to do with whatever was given to you. Sometimes, the conditions were set that you weren't allowed to alter land at all.

Additionally, the further you advanced, the more disadvantageous your initial conditions were wrt to your opponent so there was an increase in challenge and difficulty.

I remember starting with only one follower while my opponent started with an entire civilization and every time my follower built a hut, the enemy God would cast a volcano on that hut. At first I was at a loss as I couldn't build my civilization but eventually humans will outsmart an AI and it ocurred to me to send that single follower to the edge of the enemy territory, build a hut and then send him away quickly before being attacked. The AI could then cast that volcano on my hut and by doing so he would also partially destroy a little bit of his own territory. I repeated this process so that the enemy AI would little by little destroy his own land untill it was sufficiently reduced so that I could start building my own civilization without constantly being terrorised by volcanoes.

What I liked about Populous 2 was being put in difficult situations and then to be creative in getting the upper hand. Using your powers in onorthodox and devious ways made it incredibly fun for me. I played it all the way to the end (1000 levels) in a span of several years, though not continuously of course, and I consider it to be a fine example of excellent and fun gameplay.
Last edited by Asdraguuhl; March 22nd, 2013 at 20:24.
Asdraguuhl is offline

Asdraguuhl

Asdraguuhl's Avatar
Sentinel

#39

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 392

Default 

March 22nd, 2013, 19:09
I think(my opinion) it is easy to look at these features and say they were easy or not very inspiring nowadays. But at the time, there was nothing like it. IT wasn't copying someone else's work, you had to invent that wheel and move forward. It was the building blocks of a lot of what we see today.

If you don't stand behind your troops, feel free to stand in front.
rune_74 is offline

rune_74

SasqWatch

#40

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,918
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Richard Garriott - Your Headline is Wrong
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:50.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch