Georg Zoeller on innovation in Bioware games

Click here and disable ads!

Tags: BioWare; Georg Zoeller

<b>Georg Zoeller</b>, a <a href=http://www.bioware.com>BioWare</a> designer, <a href=http://forums.bioware.com//viewpost.html?topic=369135&post=3038416&forum=84>posted</a> his thoughts on innovation in Bioware games and what we should or should not expect to see in <b>Dragon Age</b>.
<br>
<br>
<blockquote>Let's put it this way: When you are moving on new ground (i.e. own IP, new rules system, etc), you better make sure that the game you are developing still retains some of the elements that made people buy and love your previous games.
<br>
<br>
It wouldn't be very smart to *completely* change your winning recipe in one step, because if you throw too much of what you've done in the past overboard in a single game you
<br>
<br>
a) lose the advantage of your team's experience. If you start over with too many things at once, you lose technical and creative experience you gained with your previous games and your development time will skyrocket.
<br>
b) run a huge risk of alienating your loyal fans/customers and potentially losing them.
<br>
<br>
Innovation is good and necessariy to keep on top, but there is no need for radical innovation if your system works. Stepwise improvement is much smarter
<br>
<br>
BioWare is innovating - with Jade we are entering new ground in many ways (Action based combat, no "classbased" system, etc), with NWN we entered new ground (modable RPG, 3D engine) and with DA we will again enter new ground. But all of these games also have BioWare signature elements that most of the people that buy our games expect from us. NWN went a small bit too far from what people expected and there was quite some critique about it - and we went in with hordes and tried to fix those (i.e. henchman interactivity, number of henchmen) and the review scores tell us that we were on the right track.
<br>
<br>
In the end there is only space for so much innovation in a single game, and you will do a risk analysis and see if "that piece more of innovation" is really worth a significant higher development time or potential lost base customers.
<br>
<br>
Finally, not doing certain things doesn't mean we are not willing to innovate, it can also mean that we think these things don't work, don't work in a BioWare game or that market / technology are not ready for them yet. If we think that i.e. "turnbased combat" or "learning by doing" doesn't belong into a BioWare game, there is no way you will see it.
<br>
<br>
I mean, if it was all about the big buck and such, it would be a lot easier for us to do what most companies seem to be doing these days and throw a couple more sequels at you guys, these are so much cheaper to develop and tend to sell pretty good. </blockquote>
<br>
I like his choice of words: "NWN went a small bit too far". Sounds like it was too advanced for its time or something. How about NWN fell short? I also like that one: "the (HotU) review scores tell us that were on the right track". Didn't NWN review scores also tell you that? Anyway, discuss!
<br>
<br>

I'm glad they don't do this.

Er, wait...

geo is a technical designer for bio... and he ain't been there that long. we wouldn't attribute too much weight to geo's words.

nwn had many flaws. getting too far away from signature elements? nah.

keep in mind that nwn started development 'fore bg1 were completed. what signature elements did bio have at that point? how would one describe the npc party interaction in bg1? a couple o' catchphrases were 'bout all we got from bg1 joinable npcs. signature element our arse.

also, is not like bio were trying to be innovative by giving folks fewer npcs and less control over 'em. nwn were initially designed to be a game that would recreate pnp mp style gaming in an online environment. understandably, the engine were built 'round that concept. not need pause and not want it if you is playing online with a party o' 3-7 other folks. not need to control multiple henchman 'cause you is just a single member of a party. in fact, you not need to accommodate joinable npcs at all if you is making a game where you play online and join a party to do so. nwn were always gonna have an sp element... but initially the original sp element were simply gonna be a short tutorial kinda module to be showing what the toolset and engine were capable of.

'course, sometime after nwn is already being developed, somebody finally realizes that as kewl as mp pnp style d&d online is sounding to hardcore d&d fans, no more than a small handful of folks would actually play such a game. most crpg fans play single player. gosh. realization musta' been painful.

so bioware tries to make nwn everything for everybody... despite fact that they were initially designing it for pnp style mp d&d players and dms. there weren't nothing particularly innovative 'bout the sp aspect o' nwn... was schizophrenia, not innovation. geo just not been ‘round long ‘nuff to realize.

HA! Good Fun!

Zoeller's comments are:

1. Part management jargon. This guy must be looking up the greasy pole and Talking Like Bosses. He's swallowed the Bio pill, had the CD-Rom inserted and good luck to him! "Would you like fries with your CGRP lite, sir?"

2. Part denial. NWN wasn't "critiqued", it was fucking savaged by a significant part of the Bioware/ BG fanbase. Furthermore, it wasn't like the Community didn't bloody well tell them, ad nauseum, during NWN's development where they were going wrong.

3. Partly because English isn' t his first language, and for this he should be cut some slack. I would be very happy to speak (insert his native language here) as well as he writes English.

4. IMO an elegant way of development would be "Stealth Innovation" whereby you insert your wackiest idea sneakily into a game when the punter least expects it. The gamer goes "whoah, fuck!" but kinda gets into it anyhow. Fallout did it with the adult themes and timed critical path. Close Combat did it with the strategic map and battlegroup concept. Dungeon Keeper 2 did it with 3d. Medieval: TW did it with almost everything. So did Planescape (ha, they think it's D&D.....). Fuck, ToEE even did it with retro turn-based. And so on.

Cheers
MC

TOEE's turn based system was hardly retro, it's pretty cutting edge. One of the best and freshest systems i've ever used.

"I mean, if it was all about the big buck and such, it would be a lot easier for us to do what most companies seem to be doing these days and throw a couple more sequels at you guys, these are so much cheaper to develop and tend to sell pretty good.'

If one were tot ake this at face value, BIO isn't working on BG3, or NWN2.... Of course, you never know.



"TOEE's turn based system was hardly retro, it's pretty cutting edge."

No, it wasn't.


"One of the best and freshest systems i've ever used."

It being one of the best is opinion. I wouldn't put in that category. A system with so many bugs, and a system that is so easy can't be one of the best, imo. It could have been one of the best, though.

Freshest? Since when did tb combat become 'fresh"? Afterall, it's been around for years. Geez...


Anyways, NWN wasn't prfect. not by a long shot. gromnir pretty muche xplained why it wans't too. It wans't intitally meant to really have a SO game. this was a case of BIo trying too hard to please crybabies like me and others. Bottom line is they should have just stuck with the intial plan. Still, has not as good as it coulda been, NWN OC was still better than most crpgs to be sure and as good as others SP focused ones. And, HOTU proved that when they focus mainly on SP; they can easily do the job properly.

Compared to biowares average half assed attempts at turnbased it was incredibly fresh, like an iceberg down the trousers.

"Compared to biowares average half assed attempts at turnbased"

See this. This is why liars get a bad rep. BIO actually hans't tried a turn base game so why do you lie? They make pause n play type games.


"it was incredibly fresh"

No, it was not fresh. Stop lying. There have been lots of turn based games. How can soemthing that's been done mutliple times be fresh? R00fles!

Gotta get me some of those cereals.

No, I think he really believes it. GZ is a community hire. He doesn't like NWN because he works at Bio, he works at Bio because he likes NWN.

German.

"No, I think he really believes it. GZ is a community hire. He doesn't like NWN because he works at Bio, he works at Bio because he likes NWN. "

we do get the True Believer feeling from geo.

the thing is, geo likes to speak as an authority on writing and rules and the industry in general, but he really not seem to know what in the heck he is talking 'bout most of the time. geo is a technical designer. am not 100% sure what he actually does at bio, but lord knows that we wouldn't want him writing dialogues or designing levels. he gots some very odd notions.

this wouldn't be a problem if he were still just a community member. is not like geo were transformed from a nerdling boardie into a gaming authority simply by being hired by bio. 'course, now he does work for bio, and like it or not, people seems to think that when geo is talking that he is talking for bio. hell, the codex fellas even republished a post of his as news.

*shrug*

we just think that geo should either educate himself a little more... or at least get a thicker skin. he is new to the industry and nobody expects him to know everything... but he does make self an easy target.

on the positive side, he does post often. if he continues to post with regularity, and if he develops greater knowledge and maturity, we can see him becoming a real asset to the bio community in particular and the gaming community as a whole... 'cause he is a True Believer, and fans can relate to that kinda enthusiasm. he is as much a fan as a developer.

...

'course, we ain't gonna cut him no slack neither.

HA! Good Fun!

When its done right, you see thats a bit of a novelty in itself....

No.

uh huh. it is.

From the article:

Let's see:

"Action Based Combat" - well, not new. but that also depends on how you define RPG O suppose. Given the context, I'd say the definition is slightly loose, and as such this feature is way into not new territory.

Which isn't to say that Jade won't bring something new to the table in that department, natch.

"No classbased systel" - not new. Not even close to new.

Also. . .

NWN was not the first modable RPG, by a long shot (if you want to count rogue-likes, we're pushing 15-20 years on that one).

Nor was it the first one to use a 3D engine.

Everytime I get a little depressed, I just go read interviews with developers. They're always good for a laugh.

"Let's put it this way: When you are moving on new ground (i.e. own IP, new rules system, etc), you better make sure that the game you are developing still retains some of the elements that made people buy and love your previous games."

Of course, if you were half as smart as you think you are; you'd realize he's referring to previous BIO games; not the entire past of the industry. Geez. Don't be a dumbass.


"Everytime I get a little depressed, I just go read interviews with developers. They're always good for a laugh."

I don't get depressed (only wusses like you do), but if I were, I just go read comments from posters like you. they are *always* great for a laugh.

"Action Based" is a pretty loose term for JE combat, I think. "Arcade-Style" would be better.

Personally I can't think of any game that is (or tries to be) both an RPG and have Arcade-Style, 100% real-time combat (lots of hack'n'slash action rpgs and MMORPGs have it, sure). As such, while BIO might not be the 1st, I think they're definetly breaking into new field in this regard.

They're doing something they haven't done before, hence their teams are innovating. Yes, you could read it as some absurd brag that they are the first in the universe to do such a thing, and aren't they simply godlike... but you could also read almost any post on the net as a plea for help from some pathetic man-child with a mental age of 5 who's begging for a good beating.

i'm sorry, but i gotta call you on this one. he did not say it was new. he said they are "entering new ground on this one." literally meaning "it's new for us," not new for the industy. taken in context of the whole statement, it's even more obvious since he was specifically referring to the company doing things they've never done before.

taks