|
[In this extensive interview, id Software CEO Todd Hollenshead and artist Andy Chang answer questions about the creative intent of Rage by describing exactly what the team hoped to accomplish from both art and design perspectives.]
Rage marks id Software's first major release since 2004's Doom 3. It's been in development for a long time, and features the company's own engine technology, id Tech 5, which has gone down some different technical paths than the majority of engines used in game development in 2011.
Gamasutra already spoke to legendary id programmer John Carmack about how he made the decisions when creating the engine, but that is, of course, not the whole story. In this feature interview, Gamasutra speaks to id artist Andy Chang and CEO Todd Hollenshead about the creative decisions the development staff made for Rage.
When it was first announced, the post-apocalyptic and wildly successful Fallout 3 wouldn't be released for over a year; Borderlands showed up a year after that. Does Rage have what it takes to compete in what has become a thriving sub-genre of the current generation? Do decisions made years ago bear fruit, or are they evolutionary dead ends?
In this extensive interview, Hollenshead and Chang answer such questions by describing exactly what the team hoped to accomplish from both art and design perspectives.
What do you personally feel is the unique element of Rage that's going to get people really playing it?
Todd Hollenshead: Well, the game has a number of things, but I think it starts off with -- as most games do -- with "What does it look like?" And when you look at Rage, regardless of what platform you're playing on, it is a game that doesn't look like any other game. It's the only game that has uniquely textured environment, it's the only game that's using id Tech 5, and visuals go a long way towards like, "Okay, this is something."
But we go beyond that with combining, I think, the classic elements of the shooter genre that we invented, with other elements as well, and when it's put all together -- as you play the game, the whole game is sort of brighter than the sum of its parts. And it's that element of putting these things together, as opposed to, "Well, we have this, and we have this, and we have this," and go down a check box list of features, or "We have this, and another game doesn't," or "we have that, and another game doesn't."
I don't actually feel like it looks unlike every other game. It does kind of look like Borderlands or Fallout to me. I mean, I'm sure, when you really get into the tech, it looks different. But it does have a similar kind of look and feel.
Andy Chang: It really came down to the approach of how we constructed the landscapes and stuff. Rather than using procedurally generated mountain programs or stuff like that, we developed our own technique of making unique geometry, and used the stamping system to make sure it didn't apparently look like things were tiled, and stuff like that. So that's kind of the approach we took to making it unique.
Do you think people will really notice? I mean, on the consumer side?
AC: We notice, and we're gamers. We make an effort to make sure it's visually excellent, so that's pretty much my train of thought on that.
Driving around the environments, I noticed these bandits are incredibly artistic. They've got art up on the walls, they're building structures and sculptures, and things like that. I feel like I'm going around and murdering an artist colony somehow.
AC: Yeah. Someone pointed it out -- he asked me if any of the artists had ever been to Burning Man. And I was like, "No, but we looked at lot of Burning Man pictures, so we tried to get in the heads of these guys." And you're right, they're probably found artists. They found garbage and they thought hey, this looks light enough, let's take it to our place and decorate with it.
Within the mythology of the game, is there a reason why these guys are so art-inclined?
AC: It's because they were made by guys that were art-inclined.
|
Printer-Friendly Version
"This looks like every other shooter out there. Tell me again what is different?"
"So.. Borderlands is pretty cool, why did you rip them off?"
"The game is linear. Convince me why that doesn't suck."
"About Borderlands again. That was a fun game, right?"
"My guy doesn't talk. When are you going to fix that?"
"Did I mention that the game was linear? What were you thinking?"
Even the title set the mood, Creative "Intent". As if to say, nice try, maybe next time. This guy has a real case of the Mondays.
I dunno, if it were IGN, Eurogamer or anywhere else, I'd likely be a bit more uncomfortable with trying to push past a fluff piece but this is Gamasutra - a predominantly industry and developer aimed site and I think that yes, we should hold people to more than throwing out marketing fluff and push them if they're not going to give.
I wouldn't like to say the mood between Brandon & iD, I wasn't in the room and there's a few ways you could read this interview (tetchy, humorously, either side being bored with the other...) but if you're going to claim that "it is a game that doesn't look like any other game" and it really, really doesn't look anything of the sort - I don't have a problem with that being queried.
The game DOES look like Fallout or Borderlands. Sure it's prettier and they did do a great job with the environments, but the idea and feel of the place is the same.
The interviewer was also absolutely right to take them to task for claiming the game has "meaningful choices" when they themselves admit that the choices are basically, "play the game" or "don't play the game." Sure, you don't NEED to collect the buggy parts early on if you don't want to. If you don't, there is NOTHING for you to do.
That's like saying Super Mario Bros. has meaningful choices because you never need to actually move.
I like interviewers that ask tough questions, but this was just a ridiculous attempt to make Id look bad. He only asked about the RPG aspects but left driving, weapon punch, visuals, animation and AI untouched (all of which look great).
One of the MAJOR PROBLEMS with all western media is they end up a thinly veiled advertising campain for everyone and anyone.
So called "critics" rarely criticize.
So called Interviewers rarely interview. (questions in advance?)
It all ends up a puppet show. Only have to check out some of the more awful games on metacritic these days to verify.
And don't get me wrong, I actually LIKE rage, I think the game is good, but if more people asked questions of this nature, less bad game companies would still be plying their 2-bit warez to kids who rely on critics to tell them what's good.
"Well the choice on that stuff is like is this something like"
"So when you get them the intent or the idea behind the game"
" wonder if it was probably like, I don't know, maybe five or six years ago when every military shooter was based in World War II. And I think that just happens. Like, technology moves along to a point where it's like, "Hey, you know what? Technology is at a point where we could do a post-apocalyptic game."
To point out a few, it is no problem if you are watching or listening to the interview, but reading it? Take the time to proof it a little more.
I actually viewed the question about the artist colonies as being his attempt at throwing the interviewee a bone - that would stand out as something potentially intriguing with an interesting story behind it. Those details are what people latch onto when looking for evidence of a well-authored creative vision. Unfortunately, this particular element was coincidental, not intentional.
Of course, it's quite possible that the interviewee had a lot of great, specific things to say about Rage that these questions never let him/her get to.
it doesn't just SIMPLY ADMIT to what it is.
- linear? yes. we believe that a linear story worked best for blah blah blah
- protagonist doesn't speak? absolutely. in the tradition of shooters like quake and half life blah blah blah.
- art inclined mutant murdering bad guys? that's a hilarious question and observation. we have no answer.
the mistake is to not admit to those things that correctly characterize your product and instead trying to "spin it" with a dense barrage of sound bite language.
In fact, it was pretty refreshing to see direct questions eliciting (reasonably) direct answers. What Brandon was asking were the questions that many gamers -- whose money id wants -- will be asking. If a game developer is not able to handle such questions from a professional site like Gamasutra, how will they be able to cope with the entitlement-based nastiness of some likely customers?
On balance, I thought this was a tough but fair and informative interview.
People feel falsely entitled to the game that they want released to be released. The entitlement problem is in the minds of gamers who have not yet paid money for a game. It's from the notion that developers (or any business) "has a responsibility to serve their fans." It's not a real responsibility, just a perceived one, but ignoring it can still have very real consequences.
I'm still pretty sensitive to the modern use of the word "entitlement" as it has become a political weapon lately. To sarcastically say that someone's desire is an "entitlement" is really to claim that they don't innately "deserve" what they want; which is fine if that is your opinion, but what does anyone really "deserve"? Who gets to decide what people deserve -- you? And can't that rhetoric be used anywhere -- you are not really "entitled" to welfare, you are not really "entitled" to a job, you are not really "entitled" to a home, you are not really "entitled" to freedom, you are not really "entitled" to live, you are not really "entitled" to opportunity, you are not really "entitled" to _not_ have to pay for other peoples' welfare, you are not "entitled" to your opinion, etc etc. It seems like a disingenuous rhetorical tactic made from spite more than reason (in political use, not in Bart's post -- he just reminded me of it).
Sorry, off topic, but that word has been bugging me a lot lately. I still don't understand why people are using it so much now -- if it is some falloff from the healthcare debacle or if it is a long-standing trend that I just haven't been paying attention to. Thanks for clarifying though.
@Jeffrey, by "entitlement mentality" I'm afraid I did mean it as it's come to be used -- people believing that they have a right to control or possess things that others worked to create. In the gaming context, it usually manifests as an unquestioned certainty that what the gamer wants is the obvious Right Thing, regardless of what anyone else may think, and the developers need to spend whatever time and money are required to implement the gamer's expectations most instantly. (Angry denunciations of "nerfs" are another case.)
I suspect there's likely to be a fair few folks with this attitude interested in Rage. Brandon's questions were gentle by comparison....
Yet, to me, these answers sounded a lot like if the person being interviewed tried to not aknowledge that the game is pretty much like all the other games of this genre. I mean, In Fallout for example, I can save money to get a weapon, hope to find it somewhere else, or whatever, too.
Anyways, I'll see if it can live up to my expectations when it arrives. Only a few more days to go *smiles*
And the mood in the room was not hostile! We had quite a fine time, but my interviews can definitely come across as harsher when you can't hear my inflection!
Let's just hope the physics and the AI is up to par.
There is so much potential with these graphics/art though, even if the other things suck, the game is still going to be awesome to play.
And whatever graphics techniques are used in this game, you can bet they are going to be taken up by the rest of the industry in a few years. Perhaps this engine will be used to make a ton of different games.
Also, you mentioned in the interview that you played 2.5 hours of the game but in the comments section it states 4 hours. How much of the game had you played at the point of the interview?
And frankly, a game that is almost completely brown and grey is not exactly new to the FPS genre. So I think you have every right to point out the exceedingly obvious.
I'd like to see more interviews where interesting, difficult questions are being asked, particularly of big-budget game developers who are often able to get away with marketing the game's selling points in their answers.
Rob
Then I read Ben Kuchera's review on ArsTechnica, and it turns out those concerns were completely justified. Here's the review: http://bit.ly/qLRi2V
This is the exact sort of proper reporting that needs to be applied across all AAA games: trying to cut through the PR bullshit and get some realness in there.
Seriously, I loved this interview because it was an actual interview and not a fluff piece, unlike 99% of these sorts of things. It's sad that calling people on their marketing bs is considered a faux pas by some.
I do seriously sometimes skip articles because it seems obvious the developers have come out to do a fluff piece to help hype their game. Not that developers shouldn't hype their games, but I'm not interested in that aspect, so it's really nice when something that could have been pure fluff turns into something that a developer can read and learn from.
Same things I was thinking to myself while reading. "Why is a lot of the game brown?". Huh?
Wonder if we'll start seing reviews do that too. "Hey, the game is too brown, and even worse, it's an FPS, try better next time: 3.5/10"
I'm already sad for Far Cry 3 when it comes out.
- he NEVER asks why the game is brown. read it.
They are talking about the recent surge in post apocalypse games, and the similarities to the internal mechanics of Borderlands (like driving). The artist notes that when studios think post apocalypse, they can't help but think of Road Warrior. Brandon starts to give the game a pass, agreeing with the artist, noting that brown is just an easy color to build from. The implication is that you can't really fault them for pulling from the same palette as the makers of Borderlands. The point here is still about why there are similarities to other post-apocalypse games.
But the Artist cuts him off at this point, to side track into an art discussion, and notes that while previous id game like Quake could be summed up as brown, the Rage artists chose to focus more on a strong orange aesthetic.
This not at all the same as asking why the game is brown. !!!
And so, the question Sheffield actually asks of the artist is if the art team sought to tie into recent trends in movie poster (and box cover) design, which use blue/orange color palettes. Again, this is not a question about why the game is brown.
@frank, you make up your own answers to why the protagonist is silent, or why he is the only one who can solve problems -but id answers these questions in the interview.
By suggesting these are silly questions to ask: you overlook why he is asking them. His question starts by pointing out that anyone waking up in the game's scenario would have questions, and then asks id how they feel about putting a silent protagonist into this scenario (and they give an answer).
He doesn't set up "why are you the only hero" as well, but if you play the game you'll see why this question was asked. It's because characters in the game tell you they are glad you came along, because only you can solve these problems. And id answers this question by pointing out that the game will answer this question more fully, farther in.
The three questions you point out: are not awkward in the context of the interview.
"There's not necessarily a predetermined order of, 'this is number one, this is number two"
"once you go from the Wasteland One part of the game to Wasteland Two, you go forward; you can't just go back and forth between the two"
Sigh.
The choice of dividing the game in two huge story supported world sections is not like the game being on rails.
They've been pretty clear about this from the beginning.
You can say what you want about the game (I personally think it's awesome but thats just me) they are not misleading anyone. You are projecting your own design tastes onto this game instead of appreciating it for what is and what it tries to do well.
As someone who does a lot of game interviews, I would welcome 10X more of this: mostly game developers have complete and thoughtful reasons as to why decisions were made, and I honestly believe anyone who reads a site like Gamasutra would like to hear them.
i think what amped up the tension was that the id guys weren't prepared for it so they stuck to their guns about the sound bites instead of really coming up with a true answer.
"this looks like no other game" ... i mean come on. interviewer called the hyperbole for what it was.
first game interview to to make me laugh out loud though... "i feel like i'm murdering people at an art colony" and, "what is it about these mutants that make them so art obsessed"...
hilarious.
They just look like they're here to talk about another game :(.
"oh noes, the game is brown and another boring fps!!! oh my god rage sucks!"
Or like those people who say: "wait, the reloading animation in bf3 for the M16 is not 100% accurate???? I'm cancelling my preorder!!!"
So the question is, is "How do you compete with Borderlands?" a) a fair question because it fails to compete with Borderlands at all? or b) cruel and rude because it's too late to fix it now so why would you dampen the hype?
Maybe someone else should have been asking these questions a lot earlier. Internally at id and Zenimax and in all those glowing previews. How often do we have to go through the cycle of hype Hype HYPE HYPE HYPE, and then the game gets released and it's crap?
Edit: Didn't mean to imply that Rage is crap - it's no Call of Juarez: The Cartel. But it is disappointing.
I didn't realize that the current crop of post-apocalyptic games all started development around the same time, though. Considering that, this is simply id's take on that genre, and it fits all the other games they've released since Doom. Personally I think they've just been making the same game over and over since Doom, but with the latest technology. This new engine looks impressive, and surely Bethesda will be using it to power some of their more truly open-ended role-playing-ish games. id may also be leery of offering licensing after the Doom 3 engine didn't end up being particularly popular.
If Fallout 3 and New Vegas and Left 4 Dead and Left 4 Dead 2 and Borderlands had never come out, I probably would have bought this.
Look the interviewer is not some super critical impossible to please troll, he just played the game and saw its potential and the obvious issues that cruised right on thru the entire dev cycle. WTF, id? This is common sense stuff, not picking at irrelevant nits. You guys are way too talented for this. I think that's where the xtra criticism/impatience comes from - seeing the wasted potential. The insult at being tossed basic clunky forced play mechanics by people that should know better & are capable of so much more. From a team like id, it feels phoned in. It's not a garbage game - a garbage game by a nobody studio you are not bothered by, you turn it off & never think of it again, but this is id and it's been years...
So Rage's got these nice big environments & you keep going to the same places over & over. I survived the Ark but now I'm just a hobo w/ a buggy, constantly collecting empty beer bottles. Gotta get those bottles! Can't break a wooden pallet to get up some stairs but sure can grab every damn bottle I see. I'm glad he mentioned the whole 'forced to listen to the vendors canned statement first' thing. I was annoyed at that right off the bat. Also when I put on subtitles, the text box is small & NPC dialogue is interspersed with dialogue from some town loudspeaker... This is basic playtesting stuff. I can't find the shack to change my armor out, I think there was a minimap but I turned it off by accident maybe.. and am on Gamefly so have no manual.. whatever right
Why are the characters teeth so odd? It's some weird graphical shadow effect that bugged me in Doom 3 and 7yrs later they've still got this issue? Apparently they think its cool when everyone looks like Lil Wayne. The grenade proximity icon works great though, just like it did in Modern Warfare. I thought Mutant Bash tv would be fun but for some reason it was boring as hell. What's up w/ the Mayor? Dude never sits down, stands behind his desk w/ his thumbs hooked in his waistcoat.. we're in Deadwood now? The chicks are pretty hot.. everyone's livin in dirt, its the end of the world with mutants, but she sure is clean & does her pilates. I think the game was ultimately put together in a board room.. despite what happened at Team Bondi I think there is something to be said about a zealot with some say on the team.. not sure who it was here.
But you know what's fantastic about Rage? That super smooth framerate, the art, modeling & texturing is top notch. The mutant/zombie fighting is *exactly* what id excels at, how they slam their clubs and trip up from your bullets as they rush you... it's a blast. And they don't inexplicably take 20,000 rounds to down like the shirtless cokeheads in Bulletstorm. Too bad they keep interrupting the flow every 90 seconds for some braindead pretense of RPGness, bottle collecting & another load screen.
For so much emphasis on buggy driving, it could be better. You're screaming thru the desert with boost packs but tap B and you stop instantly? Right stick is an immediate camera flick, not a smooth transition, too weird so just try not to touch it. The idea of little hovering Mario Kart powerups just breaks any thought of RPG immersion anyway. It's all buggies/Cuprinos so far, no bikes, big rigs or choppers etc but am still playing so what do I know. Sometimes seems the original Doom had more enemy variation... btw why are the mutants' eyes glowing blue? To be xtra scary? They seem to all have the same 2 models & voices, where the NPCs voice acting is great, Goodman was a cool choice. The Doom demon sound effect/card thing & the little space marine bobblehead are cute but just make me feel like they know the glory days are in the past, & are leaning on it a bit too much..
Look maybe they just wanted this out the door so they can focus on the next Doom, which is what we all want anyway right? Like this is a warmup for the real show...
About the questions asked by Brandon Sheffield, they felt like the ones that could be asked by a producer, the marketing people or anyone in a development team when they challenge a game design decision.
It's fair, and most of the time, the people asking are just waiting for a clever answer they didn't guess by themselves.
99% of all interviews with game designers are pure, meaningless shit. Everybody talks about the innovations, freedom, narrative, characters. And then they deliver the same damn shoot-everything, space marine bullshit. The writer of this piece actually had to the nerve to ASK QUESTIONS as opposed to just letting the hacks spew their PR drivel.
It is pathetic that so many people equate candor and honest inquiry with being "rude." Like asking athletes, actors, game developers sincere and honest questions is somehow insulting. Id has never really developed beyond the tired and trite conventions of their iconic franchises. They just produce the same game experience, except with better graphics.
Why shouldn't this writer inquire about the inconsistencies of what the devs are asserting and what actually ends up on the screen? Rage seems entirely like another ho-hum, me-too game. Call a spade a spade.
I have ZERO INTEREST in the slavish knob polishings that are handed out to "geniuses" like Cliffy B, Miyamoto, Kojima, Tim Schafer. Those people turn out turds. It's insulting to scrutinize their work?