Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Incline Chris Avellone Appreciation Station

Grotesque

±¼ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Patron
Vatnik
Joined
Apr 16, 2012
Messages
9,017
Divinity: Original Sin Divinity: Original Sin 2
Chris Avellone will you visit Moscow to celebrate Pathfinder release when it comes out?

Why, to be paraded by the dictator named Putin as another american that recognizes the regime values?
I bet Putin finished Planescape Torment several times and knows by heart whole passages in those lonely nights where he had to sleep with the shotgun under his pillow.
 

Kruno

Arcane
Patron
Village Idiot Zionist Agent Shitposter
Joined
Jan 2, 2012
Messages
11,478
BURN:
https://youtu.be/-1iy99MUI5c

A beautiful summary!

Obsidian has burned too many bridges and it is killing the quality of their games. You are now famous among the Youtube community Chris. How does it feel to be a celebrity?
 

Quillon

Arcane
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
5,231
http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2018/05/30/does-role-playing-game-mean-what-it-did-a-decade-ago

Does 'Role-Playing Game' Mean What it Did a Decade Ago?
By Steven Wright on 30 May 2018 at 2:09PM

It seems like any discussion of the economics of game-development runs headlong into cliches that all mean pretty much the same thing. This is a 'hit-driven' industry, where long-cherished notions of 'capitalising on trends' and 'building an audience' dominate the monied end of things; a world where, for good or ill, even a mediocre entry in a mega-franchise will likely bring in ten-times the sales of a breakout indie hit like the recent Celeste. Some trends almost trumpet their arrival from the mountaintops — perhaps you’ve heard of a little concept known as battle royale — while others seep into the popular landscape over years, with the weight of so much rain.

Over time, the AAA action game has slowly moved from the adrenaline-soaked hack-and-slashing of the original God of War and Ninja Gaiden: Black to a more considered blend of 'action-RPG,' demanding quick reflexes and strategic character-building in equal measure. One could argue that this late development — epitomised by the new God of War, which features discrete gear-based leveling and Diablo-style loot-grading, twin characteristics of this new breed — represents the increasing sophistication of big-budget gaming, a shift towards engaging minds as well as thumbs.



But in a world where even mass-market mainstays like Assassin’s Creed have damage numbers flowing forth from an enemy’s gut when you stab him with a spring-blade, what does RPG even mean anymore? If once-mindless brawlers like God of War qualify as action-RPGs, what does that make crunchier contenders like Dark Souls, or more niche offerings fashioned from the dusty template of the old-school computer-RPG, like last year’s seminal Divinity: Original Sin 2? Quality aside, should we still be thinking of the RPG as we always have or has it, almost invisibly, permeated across other genres and evolved in meaning? I reached out to two veteran RPG designers to ask about just that.

Chris Avellone is one of the most respected writer/designers in the western RPG space, best-known for his work on the heterodox Infinity Engine classic Planescape: Torment, as well as Obsidian’s beloved take on the long-running Fallout series, New Vegas. Avellone says that his definition of a role-playing game hasn’t changed at all over his two decades in game development, the integral element being a focus on what industry figures often term “choice and consequence.”

“An RPG allows you to take on a role,” says Avellone. “It allows you to make decisions about your character and your place in the world that are meaningful, and it allows you to grow in some fashion — either XP or otherwise — and present challenges to overcome that allow for that growth: combat, narrative, or otherwise.”

Avellone draws a line between these core tenets of RPG design and other elements that he views as equally important but not essential to it being an RPG. For example, most of the best RPGs out there are loved for their evocative worlds, like Fallout’s vision of an America soaked to the bone with nostalgia and radiation, or the mountains of rusted-out machines that make up Monte Cook’s Numenera, the setting for the spiritual successor to Planescape. More controversially, Avellone says that he regards customisation elements like base-management or even building your own character from scratch as a modern addition to the formula that he finds personally appealing, but ultimately not “key to [every] RPG.”



He points to The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt as an example of a great RPG that doesn’t feature character creation — though you can give Geralt of Rivia a nice shave, or let his white hair flow long and free, you’re ultimately stuck in his role as a social outcast that hunts monsters for a meagre living. “What’s important about Witcher 3 is that it allows significant choices,” Avellone says. “And what’s even better about it is that the questions it asks of you are ones where there isn’t a clear answer — so it’s less about what the game can tell you, and more about asking yourself what you would do in that situation, as a player."

"What I mean is this: suppose you are presented with a decision, but exploring the game world has told you that choice X is Chaotic Evil and choice Y is Lawful Good. That’s less of a role-playing decision to me, versus when it’s not so clear-cut, because you have to do more searching of what values you have as a player, and what risks you might be taking in making a decision — even with how much you trust what you’re being told by the person you’re talking to. The Witcher 3 presented that world. It had a lot of complexity and made you give a lot of thought to your decisions – for that, I thought it was a great RPG.”



Regardless of the particular definition of the form, as any abiding genre fanatic will attest, most RPGs live or die on the strength of their storytelling. It might be surprising but it wasn’t always that way, as veteran RPG developer George Ziets recalls. Ziets started working in the games industry around the turn of the millennium, eventually working on New Vegas and Torment: Tides of Numenera with Avellone, along with a host of other games including Dungeon Siege 3 and Pillars of Eternity.

Ziets recalls that early computer RPGs like Wizardry and the original Bard’s Taleessentially ported the most popular editions of their tabletop progenitors like Dungeons and Dragons to the personal computer, eschewing epic tales of sword and sorcery to focus on the tactical guts of the pen-and-paper experience. “Originally, most RPGs were Tolkienesque, monster-slaying fantasies,” Ziets says. “Now we have RPGs set in science-fiction worlds, modern times, etc. Similarly, most early RPGs had some version of D&D stats and skills, but many are now evolving away from strict adherence to those rules.”

To Ziets, this slow expansion beyond the realm of twenty-sided dice and Vancian magic reflects the advance of video games as a medium, in the same way as early television programs like The Twilight Zone resembled theatrical productions more than the elaborate multi-camera setups of later decades. “As the art form evolved, and creators discovered techniques that were unique to television, that gradually moved further and further away from the techniques of theatre,” says Ziet. “TV got better and came into its own because creators learned what worked best for their medium, but in the early days, they had to start with what they knew. I see RPGs in much the same way.”

As the genre shed its analogue origins and began to explore the immense possibilities of digital space, however, the expectations of the player-base began to change along with it. Avellone remembers the days when players were expected to draw their own maps, engage in tedious pixel-hunts, or — worst of all — call up premium hint lines for help with labyrinthine questlines. For a generation of gamers raised on the likes of THAC0 and needlessly-Byzantine attack tables (staples of early RPGs) the shortcuts of today seem like ostentatiously easy living. There’s a small-but-enthusiastic audience for games 'hardcore' enough to abandon these modern trappings, such as Caves of Qud or Brogue. Even something as lauded as Wild Hunt caught more than its share of flack for its less-than-immaculate inventory system and inexact player movement.

“I’ve noticed that Fallout has removed some elements and added others depending on the game,” says Avellone. “I suspect that’s done to make progression easier — easier for a more casual user to understand... Players expect quest-markers, an auto-map, easy equipment comparisons. Overall, things have changed over the decades to reduce a lot of the heavy lifting RPGs used to do. I’m not saying that’s bad, but its influences aren’t driven by the RPG market, but player expectations.”



When faced with the onslaught of skill-trees and coloured loot flooding the very top of the sales charts, neither Avellone nor Ziets expresses any serious concern about these mega-action games pushing less mainstream fare out of the market. In Ziets’ view the opposite is happening, thanks to the small horde of high-quality 'traditional' RPGs released in the past two years which grappled for the limited time and hard drives of genre fans: Pillars of Eternity 2, Torment, Wasteland, Divinity: Original Sin 2, the Banner Saga series, and stylish newcomers like Disco Elysium (formerly No Truce With the Furies).

“If anything," says Ziets, "I’m worried that the abundance of RPGs is going to make it harder for any individual game to stand out or cause burnout in the core audience.”

Avellone says that he appreciates the wealth of choices modern games allow him to make about gear, fighting style, and general combat capabilities. But to return to his favourite example of The Witcher 3, the game’s wealth of branching questlines is what makes it “a great RPG. In games, the willingness to integrate choice comes down to the budget of the game and the expenses involved with the choice... The more expensive the game, the more resistance there can be in the development process to showing choice in player agency, because branching assets can be very, very expensive.”

“For example, look at Selling Sunlight, a game with a unique and wildly creative premise, and a core game mechanic that’s based in trade rather than combat,” says Avellone. “Some innovation is on the system-side, like the fresh take on skill and ‘narrative combat’ in Disco Elysium. These games are trying things that bigger studios with bigger budgets would never attempt because they’re too risky... the danger in not innovating is real, though. To stand out in today’s RPG market, you need at least one strong hook to distinguish yourself from other games. Without that, even if your game is good overall, you may not attract enough player attention. Having too many hooks is also bad, as it can dilute their benefit — one or two seems about right, allowing players to recognise and remember your game.”

Ziets agrees with this perspective on the limits that big budget titles, perhaps unexpectedly, force onto their developers. Players can expect unparalleled bombast and spectacle from smash-hits like God of War but, in all but a very few cases, need to look 'downmarket' for games that truly embody the RPG ideals of player agency. Branching paths and meaningful choice might crank up the cost and man-hours that developers have to sink into their games, but for developers like Avellone and Ziets the concept is not a bullet point or a sales pitch — it’s the whirring gears that make an RPG truly work.

MCA defined RPG:

“An RPG allows you to take on a role,” says Avellone. “It allows you to make decisions about your character and your place in the world that are meaningful, and it allows you to grow in some fashion — either XP or otherwise — and present challenges to overcome that allow for that growth: combat, narrative, or otherwise.”

The Witcher 3, the game’s wealth of branching questlines is what makes it “a great RPG.

Hehe Lacrymas, what say you? Will you defy your god and savior MCA?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
35,808
Hey, eight years ago https://www.primagames.com/games/fallout-new-vegas/strategy/interview-chris-avellone-obsidian:

Chris Avellone: There's a lot of discussion about what constitutes an RPG, as you said. And the defining game, for me... Well, it's System Shock 2. Let me explain: System Shock 2 was almost a role-playing game. Almost. They had the character stuff down, the skill stuff down, but you never really made a choice, in my opinion. The ending was set; your path was set. If, at one point, there was a moment where you could've made one decision that changed the ending, that would've made it a barebones role-playing game, and a good one.

Prima: So BioShock surely made the cut, then, because of the Little Sisters...

Chris Avellone: Well, yeah, it did have a meaningful choice. Granted, it was the two endings, which may be a bit low compared to Fallout standards where you get a ton of 'em, but at the same time, you're allowed to make a basic moral choice, and I still think that's important for an RPG.

Prima: What do you think of Japanese RPGs? Do they fit into your definition of RPGs, on the whole? Or are they just adventure games with random battles and depressed, gorgeous teenagers?

Chris Avellone: They're role-playing games as long as some choice you make causes some change in the environment, so not everyone has the same experience. Like, a character's attitude may change, or something. Chrono Trigger was clearly an RPG to me - one of the best ever, even. And the amount of choices and consequences you had in that game, like within the first hour, was just excellent. So if that falls under the umbrella of Japanese RPGs, which I'm guessing it would, then yes, they absolutely do.
 

jaydee2k

Savant
Joined
Nov 3, 2016
Messages
449
How does Todds cock taste you fuckin sellout. Laughable

2YR6H1u.png
 
Developer
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
460
Location
Moblin Villige
Nah, he was like this, saying pretty things about F3 and maybe even F4.
He does not like to burn bridges.

I did give my take on F3 for sure, positives and negatives (it's likely on the old Obsidian blog, if at all, and it wasn't all complementary).

I never played F4 enough to weigh in, not because of interest, but because of time. I had the equal mix of positives and negatives from what I did play/see, however.
 

Fairfax

Arcane
Joined
Jun 17, 2015
Messages
3,518
I did give my take on F3 for sure, positives and negatives (it's likely on the old Obsidian blog, if at all, and it wasn't all complementary).
Here:

Alex Nistor:

Concerning Fallout 3 , I really was curious to hear your more in-depth opinion about it.

So you said you had a similiar opinion on it to Sawyer, but what was missing from that, in my opinion, was a breakdown of your pro's and Con's for Fallout 3.

Considering Bethesda made it in a similiar style to Oblivion, I just wanted to know specifically, how was the transition?

And like I said in the above comment, what did you like and not like.


:: Floodgates open ::

It's a testament to the game that for every thing that initially bothered me, there was a solution or a tool to counterbalance it. For example, I was exploring Hubris Comics, dropped my Power Fist so I could haul some extra loot, then came back and couldn't find it on the floor. Pissed. And then I remembered Dogmeat has the dialogue option to go "fetch" existing weapons in the environment and bring them back - so I asked him to go hunt down the Power Fist for me, and he found it in 5 seconds. Awesome. The game had enough options and tools at my disposal to insure I was having fun no matter what the challenges, so I can't ask for much more.

So here's the list:

The negatives: Dogmeat's breathing if you don't adjust the sound sliders. The tiny model house in Minefield not containing anything special. Anyone armed with a flamer can kick my melee-specialized ass, and thus, can kiss my ass. It was confusing to find one's way around Megaton, although it had beautiful set pieces and I got used to it. I played with a 4 ST character and regretted it, but it made me appreciate the ST boost from alcohol more (1st time I've ever considered alcohol a viable drug in any game system, ever) and also made me appreciate Buffouts. I suck at the Science minigame, which is a horrible confession for an English major. Thought Hubris Comics should have had more Grognak issues, although I really liked the fan mail and the text adventure game in there. Didn't like not being able to kill Amata or Andy the Robot at the outset because I hated them both. I didn't like that the first potential companion was a bad karma companion and expensive, but then the twin goals of being an **** and scrounging up a thousand caps became bait and a challenge in trying to get him - when I got Jericho, I felt like I'd earned him as a companion. I think Repair became too valuable as a skill, but it's better than the special case it was in Fallout 1 and 2, so I'd rather that than it remain a broken skill (like Doctor in F2). Maybe because I'm approaching it from the development end, I didn't care, but I think the level cap turned a number of people off, as did not being able to play after and continue the game until Broken Steel came out. Some of the locations I think broke the 4th wall (Dunwich, which I actually enjoyed playing, just not the premise).

So that said...

Likes: Opening immersion and re-introducing you into the Fallout world. Fallout 1 and 2 had consistently broken or special case skills that were rectified in F3 (for example, Repair - and Doctor vs. First Aid in Fallout 2 became broken without a time limit, so Medicine was clearly an improvement). Fast Travel. Felt my skills mattered in general. The kitchen bell XP sound. I love radiation more in F3, it makes me pay close attention to the environment, I loved the Grognak text adventure game, I loved the Gutsy and Robobrain combat barkstrings, I liked the usage of the radio and the reactivity to the player's actions - that seemed an elegant way of reinforcing your actions in the world as well as introducing a bad guy you couldn't immediately shoot in the face, I liked a lot of the moments in the game, including suddenly being surrounded by the creepy Andale residents after entering the basement in town, I never thought a neighborhood filled with land mines would be a good adventure locale and I ate my words, loved the juxtaposition of real world mundane locations and their change into dungeons (Campgrounds, Springvale School, Super Duper Mart). Liked tracking down radio transmission signals for rewards. This is the first game I've ever played where I was excited to see barricades.* Nerd Rage surprised me as a Perk - chose it by default at one level only so I could drop grenades on myself to increase my carrying capacity and found it surprisingly useful at saving my ass when I walked into an ambush. The Pitt DLC, especially the opening vista crossing the bridge, is incredible. Liked the lockpick minigame. The Arlington Cemetery actually hit me pretty hard, and as a location it really drove home the futility of war to me - just seeing all those graves with Washington DC stretching out behind it made me feel really bad. Loved firing my combat shotgun into a bus with 5 ghouls trapped on the Dupont Circle freeway below and watching the whole screen erupt in fire. Consistently being rewarded for exploring the environment - there was always at least three things to see on the horizon that you wanted to go check out. I didn't think I would like Liberty Prime, but the Iron Giant aspect worked for me and made me do a 180. I liked the Brotherhood camping out at the Pentagon. The sign inside the portable bomb shelters made me smile. I liked the Time Bandits aspects of Mothership Zeta. Seeing Dogmeat on fire, and being so tough that he didn't even care that he was on fire. Liked playing as a Psycho-using alcoholic and murdering caravan folks for things I didn't even need. Thought beer was valuable as a ST enhancer to carry loot. Liked the Well-Rested Perk. Shiskebab rocks - tap and burn.

* Yes, barricades. I have never had anything but hate for barricades until this game. They block my progress. **** barricades. But in F3, they are filled with the equivalent of RPG candy - containers are usually embedded in the wreckage, which was a great way to turn something hated into a gaming loot opportunity.

I never played F4 enough to weigh in, not because of interest, but because of time. I had the equal mix of positives and negatives from what I did play/see, however.
You mentioned some of them in interviews:

"The other thing is...I've always been divided on the concept of voice acting the player character. From the developer side it's such a huge budget resource...at the same time I also worry that it also puts some distance between you and role-playing your character, because you're not saying things the way you imagine your voice sounds, the game's providing that for you", "I'm not poo-pooing the VA in Mass Effect or Fallout 4, like FO4 specially the female PC actress [Courtenay Taylor], she's got an amazing voice...and when I'm playing I get into that character, but when I step away from it I'm like...well, I don't know if I would have that same experience if I was imagining my character saying those lines".
On Fallout 4: "respects" the stronghold design; doesn't think it's easy to do and was impressed that they did it. Didn't play a lot of it, so he can't give a full critique. "Some lines made me laugh", "had to get used to the voiced protagonist" (he's criticized this before), but thought Courtenay Taylor did a good job.
 

ScrotumBroth

Arcane
Patron
Joined
May 13, 2018
Messages
1,292
Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here Strap Yourselves In
He actually liked linear Oblivion-corridor-only-on-surface barricades...

I wonder if that's some sort of polar psychology quirk, when smart people find comfort in painfully simple things.
 

Cael

Arcane
Joined
Nov 1, 2017
Messages
20,549
He actually liked linear Oblivion-corridor-only-on-surface barricades...

I wonder if that's some sort of polar psychology quirk, when smart people find comfort in painfully simple things.
Smart people usually have jobs that tax them. Writing a novel is not an easy job, a RPG even harder.

Doing "painfully simple things" is a good break from the constant stress.
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
35,808
I liked Jedi Morgan Freeman and the sheer camp of the Sith Planet. :M

Plus The Sith Code. Nothing can take that away from him.
 

IHaveHugeNick

Arcane
Joined
Apr 5, 2015
Messages
1,870,180
You will never get him to say that someone from games industry sucks, excluding Obsidian owners obviously.

I had a pleasure of reading Karpyshyn's novels and just typing his name makes the vomit come up in my mouth.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom