|
Going
to the Resident Evil 4 comparison,
obviously, you've made a slight reference, but, one of the things that I
thought was so successful about Resident
Evil 4 is that your character was a little sluggish. You mentioned that you
sped your protagonist up a bit, but you're still not sprinting around -- it
grounds you and makes you feel like, "OK, I've got to deal with this, whatever's
right here. I can't just run away." Very claustrophobic.
CB: It's true. No, true, we don't have you
anywhere near the speeds of, like, a shooter, where you're running, and you're
blowing ammo out of your -- everything -- and [there's] just gunfire
everywhere.
But we're more responsive than the
traditional, sluggish, like "little girl with a knife in the corner"
kind of thing, limping around on a broken foot. So, we don't have that, but
we're in the middle. Like you said: trying to establish and stay within the
survival horror genre, and then keep the mechanics upgraded in our own version
as well. It's been a hell of a challenge to get it to work.
I
don't know if this was deliberate on a visual design side, but the way the
character looks almost drives that home for me; he almost looks like a tank or
something.
CB: Yeah? How funny. Because he's carrying
all this stuff around? I don't think that's part of why he's sluggish, nah. His
visual design is people envisioning what a mining, an "oil rig floating in
space" guy is going to need, right? Because the ship can decompress at any
time -- it's kinda fragile -- and it's zero G, so we had him able to withstand
that at any point in time.
Very
functional.
CB: Yeah, it is; we tried to be really
functional. Everything is driven by the
fiction of why it is, what it is, so that you'd stay in a believable space. Science
fiction is very disassociative -- like a hologram, and a creature with
tentacles on its head, and it just makes you stop believing in things, so
you're not really scared.
Horror is all about how everything is very
believable, and you believe you're there... so
when something gross happens, you're freaked out. So those two butt heads a
lot, sci-fi and horror. Our game is a smaller part sci-fi, like the background
setting... and then the horror is is really
real. That's why Isaac looks real, and is like a human, and is all
relatable. It's just not super-super sci-fi.
I
don't know if there's much more that you wanted to say about your influences,
but if you just wanted to speak on what you guys looked at -- because it
definitely feels like a game that is trying to aggregate a number of things
that are fairly modern, in terms of the past few years. Some of the landmark
design decisions.
CB: Yeah. Absolutely, there's a lot of
inspiration we draw from games that we consider are really good. Like you
were saying, Half-Life 2, with their
design of that whole movieless event; that was really a major... "We
want to do that! We want to do that!"
And then the look of the game. We wanted
our game to be so art-directed that people could look at a frame of Dead Space and say, "Oh yeah! That looks
like Dead Space!" As opposed to,
"It looks like that, looks like that, looks like that..." You know,
people have stopped calling us Doom 3
now, because they've seen enough of our game, or go, "Maybe it's not Doom 3, but Doom 3 did that; they did their own look."
And Blade Runner has its own look, and
Alien has its own look, right? So we wanted to go for our own, and it's really
hard, because every look has been explored, right? But our art direction
focused really hard on trying to give us that.
One
of the interesting things, I think, about the art direction, is that unlike
most games, the interface becomes an organic part of the art direction, instead
of being another layer. It's almost like the Minority Report thing. I mean
that, if someone takes a screenshot that includes the UI, I think then you
really know...
CB: You're like, "Oh, that's Dead Space!" We're really
proud of the whole UI thing. "Not break the fourth wall" became this
big design ethos, and it kind of came out of the whole "no movie
scenes", being immersive. So we started figuring out how we were
going to keep everything all real, all the time, and we put everything on Isaac.
And then, fortunately, it was not a
licensed property, so we had all the creative freedom we needed to make the
fiction fit with what we needed. So that's always really powerful, right; you
get where you need to go. And with that -- putting all the HUD and the UI in
the screen worked for us really effectively.
The other thing I was going to tell you
about was some of the gameplay influences, and how we came to make the game
that we made. The influences as far as movies were Alien, and The Thing, as far
as look goes, and some of the way the emotional feel of the game is supposed to
be.
Because you know how Ripley gets to that
point where she's not really supposed to be in this situation, and she ends up
being alone. Then towards the end she's in that hallway, and it's just that
flashing hallway, and it's kind of steamy, and she has to get past it to get to
the shuttle. All she has is that shotgun with the flamethrower taped to it,
and she knows she has to cross the hallway, and it's extremely likely that the
Alien is in that hallway, and you sit there for a minute in that hallway, and she's
like, "Aw, God, I've gotta go through this hallway."
That emotional moment -- like you don't
know what's in the hallway, and it's just a hallway, but it's a really freaking
scary hallway? That's what we were trying for in most of the design. It's like,
if you tease people that don't know what's happening, everything is
frightening; every blind corner is frightening. So those are the emotional
targets that we're shooting for.
It's
funny that you mention that, because most developers often cite that series as
an influence, but most of them cite Aliens. The second one. It's funny, because
I haven't actually seen that movie.
CB: Really?
Although
I have seen Alien, the first one, and it's funny to hear you cite that instead
of the other one.
CB: They're vastly different movies. Aliens
is a brilliant movie. It's great, but it's vastly different from Alien; it's
not a slower, simmering terror, kind of ponderous film by Ridley Scott. Aliens is
like, "Wah! Bang bang!" you know?
You've got marines shootin' stuff, and it's
a great, great, great sequel. But it's nothing like the first one, as far as
the mood; and we're literally going for that first one, that mood that is just
eerie and terrifying. And if you're playing it, you kind of get the sense that
a lot of it's that combat tension; that, "I'm gonna die! I'm gonna
die!" Yeah, so, we tried to hit it as hard as we could.
|
Real is how System Shock felt to me and to this day it's still one of my most memorable experiences in gaming. System Shock 2 failed in this sense, because of poor decisions on the developer's part. Things like unrealistically fragile weapons and re-spawning monsters from thin air took away from that sense of it being real -- and it ticked me off. The choice of different classes also made the game worse, because it made the game feel incomplete and unbalanced.
I thought this game looked like a cross between RE4 -- loved the Wii version -- and System Shock and now I know that it is to a degree. :)
I look forward to this game. I hope it's story is truly immersive like System Shock, where I feel an actual sense of accomplishment after completing it, but I also hope that it's as re-playable as RE4 Wii, which is easily one of my favorite console games. I didn't play System Shock again, because it probably traumatized me. Shodan's voice was scary as hell.
Anyways, I'm playing this on the PC, so for the love of all things good, I hope this isn't another focus-group-jacked console game like BioShock.
What do you mean?
I couldn't stand the first part of System Shock BTW. I almost wrote the game off completely, but decided to give it another go when they released the enhanced CD version. Unlike BioShock which became a repetitive Disney ride, SS evolved into a complex and suspenseful game that was actually worth finishing.
BioShock was "FUN" for a period time, but here lies one of its biggest faults. I know these are games, but BS shares its name with two of the "scariest" games I've played. It shares its name with a lineage of sci-fi horror games. Why on earth did they call this game a Shock, if the game wasn't scary, but FUN? The kind of enjoyment I got from the first two Shocks wasn't fun, it was suspense and in some cases horror -- especially in the first Shock. They evoked emotions that can be equated to viewing a really scary movie, but they brought it to a much higher level, because they were able to instill that I was that guy saving the day -- more so in SS than SS2.
At no point in BioShock did I feel any real concern. It was like any other FPS, I'll just re-spawn if I get killed. There was never any real sense of danger in this game, so it became a why even bother, it's not what I paid to play, it's not what I was expecting based on my experience with the other two Shocks.
Anyways, loving a game like BioShock over the other Shocks, would be like loving a sequel to "No Country for Old Men" directed by Michael Bay and it's now a typical Holllywood action movie.
Anyways, back to Dead Space. I want this game to be thrilling. I'm looking for that level of suspense that SS conveyed so well. If everything these guys are saying is true, I'm going to love this game.
You consider Ken Levine an amateur?
Lets do a cutscene and FORCE the player to watch our WORK!
The majority of hte time it comes off like a masturbation for wannabee hollywood types...im sick of it...
Bad company was a great example, a couple of the cutscenes I had no idea who the 4th guy in the screen was...then I realized "oh sometimes me, my avatar is in the movie and sometimes its in 1st person" seemed like a pretty poor decision.
Wow, what an appalling decision, lead by ideology, trying to maintain the horror suspense, but one which ultimately can only affect the end user gameplay to its detriment.
I can understand the reasoning for it, but in practice i've yet to find game where it doesn't cause more grief than suspense. So whats the point? I'd rather lose a little of the sense of 'dread' than frequent dying due to a poor game mechanic designed solely to prevent on the fly reactive adaptation to events.
Take for example the recent 'Alone in The dark 5', that had all manor of wonder contraptions to build, but you were often exposed to danger in doing so. As the player you then have to adapt to avoid this, meaning reliance on tried and trusted combinations, pre-building specific combinations, running away and hiding etc.
Unfortunately without the foreknowledge that the game designers have you never know what or if you'll need a specific tool. All too often this can lead to having something equipped that you don't need or is the wrong tool and to top it all you're now in close courters fighting and don't have the time to re-equip. So you spend far too much time dead or disadvantaged, due to decision to take away control from the player.
Conversely BioShock does pause the game, especially useful for switching weapons when dealing with multiple enemies, requiring different ammo types. I'm sure they deliberately added this after testing with the 'no pause' option, but can't find a link to back that up atm. Anyway, a simple change it empowers the player to be far more productive and react dynamically to events as they unfolded, with impunity. Giving a far better game experience.
Now obviously having yet to play the game or a demo i've not seen the full context that the 'no pause' inventory system is used within. It may be that the use of the inventory doesn't implicitly mean encountering the issues i've outlined above, in which case all will be well. However I suspect from the type of game and similar games from the past that this will end up being frustrating, but thankfully not to the point of killing the game. Perhaps one of the first calls for being patched though ;)
Still even with this slight dampener, I'm so looking forward to its release at the end of the month. I was enthralled after I saw the first released video demo as it instantly brought back memories of System Shock 2. It may have looked similar to Doom 3, but unlike that game I suspect this will have real jump out of your seat moments. I have to say I like the concept of no cutscenes and the use of environment along with audio/video logs to tell the story should be perfect, after all it worked so well in SS2.