|
You're moving from a game that was successful into a direct sequel. At this point in the generation, a lot of people have moved into the second game in a franchise, but a lot of people still haven't. What areas did you guys see as places to improve and really work for?
AC: Every area needed improvement... We knew what we wanted to change right away. As soon as we shipped Mass 1, every group knew that we wished we had a little more time. So, those were easily identified.
But the other part of the equation was actually taking all the feedback -- I'm not saying some -- absolutely every feedback from press and the fans, and collating all that into a huge list.
Everything eventually fit within certain categories, and when we looked at that, mapped with the things that we wanted to fix, it became really clear. It became a blueprint. It made making the sequel really easy.
But making the sequel, it makes sense both financially, and effort-wise. It was really hard to make the first game. I cannot describe just the amount of effort, the tensions. But once you get that out the door, there's this firm foundation. And the team, they understand exactly what we're building.
And then it made it really simple to focus improvements on specific areas and say, "Hey, this is what our digital acting is all about. Pretty good, but how can we make it better?" So, if you take that through every aspect, whether it's design, writing, or art, everyone was able to make very focused changes. And at the same time, still make all the content for the game. And then overall you take all those changes, and then all of the sudden the game is very different.
We wanted to make sure that absolutely every issue that was brought up was addressed... so the press had nowhere to go, and all the critics had nowhere to go, because we had made an attempt to hopefully address all those issues in some capacity.
When you talk about categorizing the feedback, was that categorizing it into disciplines, or was it categorizing it into like, "These things have to do with the story"? How did you categorize it?
AC: A bit of both. I mean, like, it was a giant Excel sheet [laughs] we all tracked, and all the leads took responsibility in that. And then at the same time, there were different shades of it, right? So, combat would be one, but then we had to really break it down.
It was like, "What was it that irked people?" Or exploration. That's even a better one. Because Uncharted Worlds came up as "We wish it was better." But then we had to break it down like, "Well, what aspect of it needed improvement? But what aspects should we keep?" And we found out that people really like the idea of exploring planets, it's just sometimes the execution where the planet looked the same.
So, we said, "Okay, well, that's easy. Let's keep the exploration side and keep the idea that you can explore all these different planets. What people are really just saying is that they wish the planets looked different and that you didn't end up at the same base all the time." And that made it really clear to say, "Well, how can we go about implementing that?"

I think that over the course of this generation, the shooter genre has become important, and it's been blending very heavily with the RPG genre. You see that more and more. Obviously, games like BioShock, Fallout 3, and Borderlands all blend elements of RPGs and the shooter genre. I feel that Mass Effect came very much from the RPG angle, but with the sequel there is more emphasis on the shooter aspects. What attracts you guys to that?
AC: I think it's accessibility. It's being able to bring [it] into a market that might not have actually tried our games.
And when we made this game, we want to compete with the best of the best out there -- the best first-person and third-person shooters out there. I think the goal was, if we can make that aspect solid and open up the audience, then they'll be blown away by all these other things about a BioWare game, that they might not have played before.
That hybrid is always going to happen. You know, I was thinking about this because we get a lot of that, but I think back to -- switching genres almost -- to something like Onimusha, which is hack and slash, but it actually had really cool RPG elements into it. And to take it to another level, say, GTA. You have shades of role-playing in there as well.
And I think that's what's expected now. People want maybe a bit of something from each. The core gameplay still stays the same for whatever genre that you're in for, but you need that extra depth or complexity to keep players engaged, to say, "Hey, man, that's kind of cool. I do this, but it's not just enough."
So, I think the one thing, like the critique on, say, if you're looking at a pure shooter, it's obvious. The critiques are always the stories are way too flat, there's no character development, it's two-dimensional, there's no rhyme or reason as to why I'm going on this eight-hour journey to kill everything in sight.
So, what Mass Effect does is it still delivers all the visceral impact of that for people to get that really cool feedback, but... that is only one fraction of what the game offers. All the cutscenes, all the cinematics, all the character development, and most importantly the story -- I think those are the things that we want to be able to get to this larger audience.
|
That process elaborated in collecting all manner of feedback for the blueprint of the sequel mirrors my personal golden rule of (game) design; something like: Do unto others as they want, not as you say they want. This quote, "We wanted to make sure that absolutely every issue that was brought up was addressed... so the press had nowhere to go, and all the critics had nowhere to go, because we had made an attempt to hopefully address all those issues in some capacity.", also makes me grin at the sort of vicious kindness employed in that tactic.
Just a fantastic interview! Bookmarked!
Which companies are you referring to? Bioware is Northwest (ish)...
As amazing as ME2 seems to be, I've heard that the controls for the PC feel a bit more like a hack than core design, though I'll have to get my hands on it to test it out.
The only concern for me in the interview was the mention of the 360 and the concluding comment: "We haven't actually taken away any of the RPG systems, but we want to package it so that everything is a little bit more intuitive, more streamlined ..." Ack. In the past, comments like this have been code for "we had to dumb down all the cool features from the PC version and use smaller, sparser levels in order to satisfy console requirements."
Obviously I don't *know* that that's the case with ME2. In fact, I give EA/BioWare credit for releasing the PC version of ME2 at the same time as the console version -- something they did not do with the original Mass Effect. I just get a little twitchy when developers talk about making a game "more streamlined"; too often that's MarketingSpeak for "we pulled some features."
I appreciate that ME2 has been built as "a typical BioWare story." That -- considering BioWare's track record -- is enough to persuade me to plunk down my cash for ME2 on Tuesday without waiting to read a single review. But....
Message to publisher, if you demand the best, you need to supply the raw materials.
KOTOR had a horrible bug -- every time I went onto the surface of Taris (the very first part of the game), I had the most incredibly awful rubberbanding effect. I basically had to aim in the direction I wanted to go and hope nothing got in the way as I blindly slingshotted there. And the endgame was too easy. Perfect? Hardly.
But there was so much else in KOTOR that was so much better than most everything else out there at the time that I still found it a joy to play despite its imperfections.
For that matter, I found Jade Empire more technically flawless than KOTOR, but I personally didn't enjoy it at all. It felt like a half-finished experiment. And yet I don't consider it a "bad" game even though I didn't much care for it myself. Even in what I perceived as a shallow state, BioWare still had made a game that felt more smartly designed and constructed than most other games.
"Fun" is definitely in the eye of the beholder; I'm not saying everybody has to love every BioWare game. I'm just saying there've been a lot of Bad Games made over the years, but BioWare's games have consistently avoided being labeled as such. I rather doubt that ME2 will be the first dud.
Kudos to Bioware for their quality products and (from what I hear) exceptional business practices.
KOTOR is probably the best game that ever came out on the original XBOX. I never had an issue with bugs in that game. And to Bart, I totally agree with you on Jade Empire. It was almost a great game but still is the only Bioware game that I have ever been disappointed by.
i think we all know what is meant by saying bioware makes perfect games . it's the farthest you can go in the direction they are taking and they are always setting the level when it comes to entertaining storytelling and easy to use complexity.
great interview - it's always very enjoyable what great communication skills the people who work at bioware have.
The perfect game: Duke Nukem Forever.
Well it does rank as a legend already...
NWN2 wasn't BioWare. Also, DA:O doesn't use a NWN engine at all. As mentioned, KotOR 2 was done at Obsidian.
(I worked at BioWare for 7 years; DA:O's engine is only related to NWN in the sense that many of the programmers from NWN ended up on that project.)
As for the move to 3D being bad, FFVII is a game that has -- in my opinion -- aged incredibly poorly. It took everyone a while to make good looking 3D games.
Also Bob, c'mon man, if you're going to throw stones at a place as prestigious and successful as BioWare, at least get your facts straight - it says just a few comments above you that KoTOR 2 wasn't even made by BioWare, and it only takes a few seconds to check to see who made NWN2 and what engine DA:O was built off of.
First was the darkness of the 2D days where we saw the birth of the Infinity Engine, which many still hold dearly in their heart. That was 1998 or so.
Then in the first dawn of the 3D age starting in 2002 we see the coming of the Aurora engine used in the crafting of the artifact now know as NWN. NWN2 updated version of Aurora was for it's part called the Electron engine.
Then came the age of rubber also known as the KOTOR and KOTOR2 era where the aurora engine was reforged to become the Odyssey engine, in the year of grace 2003 or so. Also of note that The Witcher also used part of the Odyssey engine.
After came the era known as "New Gen" by the cabals of the field which saw the coming of the Eclipse engine for a dark and mysterious product known as Dragon Age.
Then came Mass Effect who used the Eclipse engine and... *drum roll* Unreal engine 3 renderer.
So some archeologist claim to have found vestige of the Aurora in recent product... no shit Sherlock..