|
The Mortal Kombat series is, like last year's successful launch of Street Fighter IV, taking the series closer to its roots, with a new game in the franchise titled simply Mortal Kombat. Rooted in contemporary technology, it's most deeply influenced by classic gameplay taken from the first three iterations of the franchise -- which were released to arcades between 1992 and 1995.
Here, Ed Boon, who's been at the center of the fighting franchise since it got its start, talks about the current state of the genre, and both why and how his team has chosen to tackle the concept of rebooting the series into something retro -- while keeping both casual players and hardcore franchise fans in mind.
He also touches on how the transition from the bankrupt Midway to Warner Bros. went for a studio forced to develop a game in "the eye of a storm" of a company going off the rails.
You guys seem to be angling this new Mortal Kombat as a revival, or reinvention, of the franchise. It's been around for so long; at this point, what's the essence of Mortal Kombat? What are you telling your team, and what are you all trying to recapture with this new one?
Ed Boon: You know, I think it hasn't really been that long since the last MK game came out. It's only been like two years, so from that respect, it's not like a reboot like we've seen... like when Tomb Raider went away for a long time, or Street Fighter, Twisted Metal, and all that. Those games had a long absence.
But from our perspective, the last game we did [Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe] was probably the biggest departure for MK. It was the first T-rated MK game, and we added characters that had never been in a MK game, with DC -- you know, Batman, and Superman, and all that.
So from that standpoint, we just heard a lot of feedback asking, "Is the next game going to be back to an M-rated presentation," and, you know, "traditional" MK? So we really felt that now is just a really great time to explore a reboot of sorts.
You know, we've actually kind of rebooted the presentation and the fighting and all that a couple of times in the past. With Deadly Alliance, in 2002, we did. And so we just really felt like, along with the post-MK vs. DC T-rated thing, and the fact that we haven't rebooted our whole presentation and fighting mechanic in awhile, it was just the perfect time for all that to happen.
I played [MK vs. DC] and it was fun, but there was always the question of whether the series would return to its M-rated roots.
EB: Oh yeah, absolutely. Especially coming from a game that was almost instrumental in defining what an M-rated game was -- just sparking the whole argument that ratings are necessary, which they are. So it's ironic, it's like making a G-rated Halloween movie...
So from that standpoint, yeah, it did really well, but at the same time, it created a great opportunity for us, because it gave us a break in terms of a period of time which there hasn't been an M-rated Mortal Kombat, and created this hunger for a return.
So I guess that I really feel like the planets are aligned, and in so many ways; it's the first M-rated MK on this generation of consoles, our last game was a T-rated game... You know, there certainly is a resurgence of games returning to their classic form; Street Fighter, Sonic the Hedgehog, now the more recent Twisted Metal, and there's just a good amount of this trend that's happening.

Are developers recognizing -- about the gamers that grew up in the early '90s playing Mortal Kombat -- "Hey, these people are in their 20s or 30s now, and let's capitalize on that"?
EB: Well, that's certainly one of the elements that's being tapped, I guess. Because we just had the E3 show and, you know, I can't tell you how many people that I spoke with volunteered their own stories of, you know, "Oh, this reminds me so much of when I used to go to the Pizza Hut down the street to play Mortal Kombat" or "I used to go to the bowling alley and did this" or "I used to go to the arcade".
You know, everybody has their memory of first seeing the game and their reaction and all that stuff, and I think it's striking that nostalgic nerve in a lot of people. But, at the same time, it's still state of the art presentation -- our presentation is 3D and our graphics engine is the best that we've had. But it's presenting a more classic game mechanic -- that 2D fighting plane, and all that. And that's what I think is triggering those memories.
In the early '90s, when it came out, MK was it was so graphic and shocking to some people just because they were used to Mario and Sonic and all that. But now, the biggest games are M-rated, and they're violent. Is violence in the new MK there simply to satisfy the violence aspect of the franchise? If you could, would you want to recreate the kind of controversy that you did back in the '90s, with the original?
EB: No, that certainly isn't a goal of ours. It's funny, if you look at Mortal Kombat 1 -- if you were to look at it again now, it's almost funny how archaic the graphics are, but at the time it was state of the art.
So we don't think it's realistic to expect to shock anybody these days. I mean, anybody who's played Gears of War, or any of the survival horror games, or God of War, or something like that -- they're not going to be shocked by something that we do.
So our goal with our violence and all that stuff is way more to just surprise, maybe entertain, just from the outrageousness of it all. You know, the fatalities are just so crazy over-the-top that they're more inventive than inherently violent. I mean, they're violent -- don't get me wrong -- but it's just funny, just such over the top ways of killing people, that you just can't take it seriously.
|
I ask because he's responsible for the character design that has defined all the characters in the series (the original ones) and even though the designs have been modified over the years they still stick to his original ideas. I feel his character design much like steve dikto's spiderman is somewhat timeless.
oh,and is he still taking royalties ;) ?
What the original MK did was create is a compelling universe. Whereas in SF2 (a fighter with more depth and nuance) you had a story about fighters all over the world fighting to find the best fighter, MK had a darker and more cinematic storyline and universe. In SF the Bison/Shadowlaw antagonist wasn't as interesting and Shao Khan along with Goro.
The photoreal fighters and backgrounds still carried their appeal to me in MKII and MK3. I was pretty disappointed to see these sorts of visuals being replaced by a cartoony style, but accepted it because I knew the hardware at that time (PSOne, PS2) was not able to do much for developers who wanted a photoreal look.
So I've been disappointed with the fact that we aren't seeing this sort of style on the PS3/360.
Ed Boon said, "You know, there certainly is a resurgence of games returning to their classic form; Street Fighter, Sonic the Hedgehog...".
I hope he realizes that both games, SF4 and Sonic 4, had extremely poor reception among their fans before their releases (Sonic 4 has yet to be released, as it has been delayed due to the poor reception). In both cases, the developer (Dimps funnily enough) made some critical mistakes and delivering gameplay that was not up to the standards of previous titles. SF4, as we all know, has been altered mid-development so that the hitboxes are 2D much like the 2D SF games, and Sonic 4 is being delayed to address the fact that it plays nothing like the classic Sonic titles.
I hope Boon keeps these things in mind. It's one thing to garner to new audiences, but if you can cater to the old audience, you can have a huge hit on your hands (take a look at SF4). The old audience not only craves some nostalgic attributes, but the high quality gameplay that drew them to the franchise in the first place. Nostalgia alone will not sell these remakes.
Having recently played UMK3 on my 360 with a roundtable of friends, we all had a blast with it experiencing it on our arcade sticks we've purchased for SF4. Controllers don't do the game justice. We all wondered how a high def 2D photoreal MK would look like. I can only dream that someone at Warner Bros is thinking the same.
Cool fatalities and accessibility is no excuse for awful gameplay.
The reason sf4 is actually doing well is because it actually has depth (even though older titles are way stronger fighting titles). Depth and complexity don't have to go hand in hand and it seems like this is an excuse they're using for making another lousy game.
How about actually researching fighting games and not making stuff up about them in interviews, then actually take the time to design one. Fighting games aren't touched much in the US because we weren't lucky enough to have that tradition excluding Mortal Kombat which has done little to nothing in defining the genre competitively. Further, fighting games are the most mechanically complex games you can design and making it competitive makes it 100x harder still.
You may scoff at that "competitive" nonsense, but it is exactly what makes a game long lasting and prestigious--Team Fortress, Starcraft, Halo.
If you really want accessibility go for a 1p/coop experience. Try a beat 'em up, but don't f* it up like all the other ones. That's a genre that allows you to have the brutality, story and characters they seem to want, but you don't have to worry about competitive balancing and can focus more on accessibility and fun.
"if you look at Mortal Kombat 1 -- if you were to look at it again now, it's almost funny how archaic the graphics are....anybody who's played Gears of War, or any of the survival horror games, or God of War, or something like that -- they're not going to be shocked by something that we do."
But really, Gears of War? MEH! Mortal Kombat 1 is still a very violent game, same goes for Chiller (already back in 1986). Siren Blood Curse - extremely violent. Boon isnt an artist, he's a dev... he didnt animate and conceptualise those fatalities by hand and pen... someone (i think Tobias) did... Boons emasculated the franchise and now he thinks he can bring it back... good luck to him.
Andre Thomas
9 Aug 2010 at 6:41 am PST
You know something? It's statements like this that actually piss me off...like, authentically piss me off. You come here to troll about Mortal Kombat, saying "Boon should stop making games because Mortal Kombat isn't good", then you come back and make an asinine comment like the one I copied above.
At first I thought you were one of the countless people who bash MK...honestly it has been a joke for quite some time. Hell, their T-rated MKvDC was the best MK since MK2...14 years to follow up MK2 with a good game.
I thought "Ok, this guy is an MK Hater. No problem. There's plenty and I'm sure he has his reasons. Not sure why he would make himself look like an ass to come to an MK article, read it, and post a comment like that, but to each his own."
And then, you follow it up with "Normally I don't like to dwell on storylines in video games because I find irrelievant and unneeded" (awesome spelling btw). Are you kidding me? On a site like Gamasutra? Do you know how many people who put all of their effort into creating this entertainment for you that you just offended?
You essentially just said "Normally when I see a movie I think a story is irrelevant and unnecessary because I just like seeing moving pictures and shiny colors."
Go back to playing internet checkers and get out of here. You gotta be kidding me, you oaf.