 |
 |
|
If you enjoy reading this site, you might also want to check out these Think Services sites:
 Game Career Guide (for student game developers.)
 Indie Games (for independent game players/developers.)
 Finger Gaming (news, reviews, and analysis on iPhone and iPod Touch games.)
 GamerBytes (for the latest console digital download news.)
 Worlds In Motion (discussing the business of online worlds.)
 Game Set Watch (the Group's alt.game weblog.) |
|
|
|
| |
Far Cry 2's Redding: 'We're Still In The Software Business'
by Chris Remo
|
|
| |
|
February 2, 2009
|
| |
"We've got to occasionally remind ourselves we're still in the software business," says Ubisoft Montreal's Patrick Redding, speaking to Gamasutra in a recent, extensive interview reflecting back on open-world shooter Far Cry 2.
Redding, who served as narrative designer on the project, notes that it is important for developers not to too closely attempt to mirror Hollywood.
Even though comparisons to the film business and budgeting are often made by observers both within and outside of the industry,its production practices and intended final experiences are quite different, he says.
"While I'm sure there might be some kind of very superficial comfort and certainty in saying, 'We've pulled our budget and schedule from the last game, and we know exactly how long it takes to do this thing,' it's a completely false sense of security, and it's not going to actually help you run your business well," he says.
"I think where there's plenty of room for debate, and will continue to be a lot of lively debate, is how much of that design and development process is going to be driven top-down versus bottom-up."
"We are always going to be dealing with a succession of low-level, non-critical, non-fatal failures that we can then kind of attenuate and make less frequent and make less severe," the Far Cry 2 developer continues.
"The only way that I can think of at this stage to kind of manage that problem is to embrace it and say, 'Great. Let's make sure that we're prototyping things. Let's make sure that we're putting stuff into the game as fast as possible so that we can see if we're even on the right path with it.'"
Redding also speaks on the types of experiences offered by games -- and stressed that the medium has its own fundamental, integral properties that must remain central.
"For all of the kind of superficial similarities we may have to some other [forms], at our beating heart our currency is interactivity and interaction," he says. "For the player, that consists of a set of verbs. And on the developer side, it consists of creating the necessary logical framework and the content to be able to support those verbs in an interesting way."
That currency may not be fully developed yet, Redding notes: "One of the problems is, if we want to make games that are tackling broader topics that are a bit more adult or mature or more meaningful, we need to realize that that means that those verbs, that verb set that we're working in, may not be adequate at this point," he adds.
"It's about a certain kind of collaboration between art and design and technology, between content and process, that allows us to very quickly iterate on a set of features that we feel support a certain aesthetic direction and try to get those things into some kind of engine," the narrative designer says, pointing out the importance of prototyping and iterative development -- versus the more strictly-scheduled Hollywood style of production.
"There should be no question that that flexibility -- the ability to alter and change the design, the ability to alter and change kind of your understanding of what the final product needs to deliver -- is something we need to hang on to at all costs."
|
| |
|
|
Flexibility is what has made the origional half-life game, even now, a popular online FPS.
The inflexibility of the console market is what has seen the falling by the wayside of such wonderful games like Crystalis and Snake Rattle and Roll
First of all, it’s clear that the Hollywood model is not perfect. A movie is not interactive. It’s something that can for all intents and purposes be defined at the start and be executed by professionals who know what their job is. Sure unexpected things arise in production, but generally speaking everyone knows what the scope and goal of the product is.
However, as technology for more “meat and potatoes” games like film based games and other more conventional genres that don’t really push the envelope that much continue, those kind of games can be seen as more likely candidates for Hollywood comparisons. Instead of having development houses, you have more contractual workers who simply finish one job and look for another project. The technology used is unlikely to be from scratch these days. Folks are relying more on technology like XNA and other middleware solutions to save them time.
Then on the flip side you have more of your independent / innovative developments. These tend to have less middleware, or at least more time spent on experimental gameplay and more risky concepts that may or may not catch on. Much like art films and other low budget productions in the film industry. Just like the film industry, these risky products are the ones that tend to “shake things up” in the film industry. From Star Wars.. to Pulp Fiction… to Blair Witch.. etc.. usually they were relatively low budget movies
Still the interactive part of all of this is really key to what makes games not easily fit into the mold of Hollywood. This is what is key to a game being well received or not. This is what makes games much less predictable. Even “safe” titles based on IP’s and such can’t rely that everything will work as planned because each game is a unique creation, even if it’s built on well established middleware and standard development tools. His comment:
“We are always going to be dealing with a succession of low-level, non-critical, non-fatal failures that we can then kind of attenuate and make less frequent and make less severe”
This is very true. There will be setbacks and there will be errors. The key is to avoid as many as possible, especially the ones that have been made in the past. One of the sister posts of this article covers the issue of projects making the same mistakes despite all the post mortems out there. Mistakes made even by the same company in future projects.
The other side comments he made about interactivity and adult themes is definitely and:
“if we want to make games that are tackling broader topics that are a bit more adult or mature or more meaningful, we need to realize that that means that those verbs, that verb set that we're working in, may not be adequate at this point,"
I’d not thought of it quite like that. It’s a good point that perhaps why games like left 4 dead and others are making efforts to make interactive behavior more natural, the truth is that the technology just isn’t there yet for a role playing experience that is able to feel “life like”. L4D is awesome and shows some achievement. It should inspire more development over time, but even L4D isn’t “life like”. I’m sure a lot of time and effort went into making it what it is, which shows how much further we have to go.
If I play Fallout 3… I know these guys are spitting out pre determined possible outcomes. I can’t say whatever I want. It’s known that if I give the same answer each time, I’m pretty much going to get the same response each time. It’s going to take great advancements in AI and Research and Development before we get to a point where a player could say, literally talk to an NPC and the NPC react to the players actual questions intelligently and believably… inflection… words.. gestures… etc.
So while these latest / greatest games are making efforts to push the envelope, it’s clear that new technologies and man hours are needed before we see this kind of evolution materialize.
Also Josh, yea I agree. I really hope that the Xbox community game program continues and serves the developer community well. If Microsoft does it right it could also set precedents for Nintendo and Sony to find more developers. Unfortunately the Japanese business culture of those consoles clearly shows a lack of interest and to some degree, it’s not like they have a lack of developers… but open markets will win out when a developer discovers better paths of least resistance.
Microsoft, a US company has the kind of open mindedness to develop tools like XNA giving anyone with the willpower and a good idea a chance to be seen. You wouldn’t see games like Braid and Osmosis on a console if we continued on the traditional console landscape you had even just a few years ago, most likely they would end up being PC titles because in that market, there is no gate keeper that can stop / limit you from making your product.