Obsidian Entertainment - Interview with Josh Sawyer

VG24/7 reported on an interview Josh Sawyer had at Reboot Develop. In the interview Josh expressed the desire for RPGs to be more radical.

Josh Sawyer, design director at Pillars of Eternity and Fallout: New Vegas developer Obsidian, would like to see the RPG genre evolve radically beyond its current state.

Stats and combat systems shouldn’t define the role-playing game, said Sawyer, although he admitted he has been complicit in creating games that stick to an accepted template.

“The hardcore RPG audience is very traditional,” said Sawyer at Reboot Develop this week, discussing the evolution of genres.

[...]

Click to expand...

More information.

The big drawback to the examples he gives, Fallout and Elder Scrolls, is that they give away virtually any sense of tactics, teamwork, or skill/ability synergies between party members. They are heavily focused on the PC, with companions being given weak, subordinate roles. While they can be enjoyable as action games, I don't think they're an improvement in terms of role-playing. If anything, the heavy focus on graphics in those games has been a malaise upon the cRPG genre, leaving the 20-year old style superior in terms of role-playing elements. Personally, I thought DA:O was a better example of trying to progress the genre… although the skill system sucked and the available tactics were lame.

@rjshae; I think you misunderstood Sawyer, he doesn't think RPG means stats, tactics or combat abilities because too many games have those now (like all of them). For him, role-playing games are defined by the player’s ability to alter the storyline of the game through his or her actions, rather than the amount of stat tweaking or hit points a player delivers in combat.

He just use Fallout and TES as example of games where the role-playing is very different from isometric games (which is true).

Saying that, the Elder Scrolls games since Oblivion have been very linear and shouldn't even count as RPGs to Sawyer, although I suspect the very sim nature of them keep them up there.

Well kinda agree with him but take his opinion with a grain of salt. As he was the main designer of Icewind Dale II, and it was to combat heavy with stats & less story.

I believe he once admitted it was his vision of what Baldur's Gate should of been. Now he might of changed his views since then, but his older blog posts don't show it.

Anyway I wouldn't mind more Bethesda style RPGs. The trend we should all be worried about is Major RPG developers making all future RPG games into GAAS.


*GAAS = Games as a Service

Josh strikes again.

Was it fans or him who decided that crazy world is a new game trait in FO3 and not default worldstate for everyone to "build" from there. Why a player had to make the cardinal choice before the game even started?

The other day I've argued about what RPG is and what RPG elements are dunno with who anymore, but it doesn't really matter. What matters is we're just the audience here and Josh is into game developing business. We don't make games, Josh does.
So Josh, instead of rubbish "balancing" of the dead horse, how about making the bloody player’s ability to alter the storyline of the game through his or her actions already.

No publisher interested? That's the excuse after Eternity's success on KS? Gimme a break. I know I'd buy that at any price no questions asked before spending a dime on stupid Allods MMO I can't remember it's name. Skyforge I think.

Couchpotato said:

The trend we should all be worried about is Major RPG developers making all future RPG games into GAAS.

Click to expand...

It's not just RPGs, it's every genre possible. Both EA and Ubi want it.
I'm not worried however, there are still publishers who understand that a huge number of their customers want new titles and not farm the same stupid farmville over and over for decades. These services are supposed to steal WoW and LoL audience. A (sorry for calling them: boooooooooooooring) audience that plays only one game and nothing else, audience incapable of widening their experience with new stuff, one has to be a big optimist thinking this audience will jump on their "service" just because.
Good luck with that.

Ever since Sawyer had free reign with the design of the PoE systems I take everything he says with a huge grain of salt. That game always gave me the feel it tried to reinvent the wheel just for the sake of it. Not to speak of the obsession with balance. The mental spread alone you had to do just to connect Might with Magic gave me a headache.

azarhal said:

@rjshae; I think you misunderstood Sawyer, he doesn't think RPG means stats, tactics or combat abilities because too many games have those now (like all of them). For him, role-playing games are defined by the player’s ability to alter the storyline of the game through his or her actions, rather than the amount of stat tweaking or hit points a player delivers in combat.

Click to expand...

No, I got that. I just think stat progression and characteristics are a big part of player choice in the game world. It should be a mix; providing the player the ability to play unique characters and to impact the game world through their actions. The examples he's using are focused on actions, without saying your character design choices should have a noticeable impact on how those actions play out.

A radical change in the RPG genre is probably going to require an AI capable of playing the role of the DM. Until then, the variations in outcomes are always going to be limited to what the game designers can foresee.

I'm not sure that computer AI is the limit. The fact is providing more meaningful choices means developing more content. For example the Witcher 2 had two or three really meaningful choices, but you got to see and play through a bunch of material that you didn't with the other choices. And when I mean a bunch, I mean in relation to other computer games. Really you didn't get to play that much more. Age of Decadence has tons of material, but each playthrough is relatively short. Torment and Vampire: Bloodlines make character choice at the beginning very meaningful as to how some characters or locations are. In most other RPGS choices are cosmetic, because to develop that much extra material (which most players will never see) you have sacrifice other elements, or like AoD, work on a game for a decade.

@forgottenlor;
I agree regarding content but still think AI will improve the role playing possibilities for more systemic games where assets can be more repeatable.

Content really is king through for a well rounded rpg experience.