Interview with Warren Spector (game designer)

Gamasutra: It seems to me that even the method of storytelling has some areas to advance. Sometimes the stories seem immature, and I'm just speaking for myself, but people need to realize what a good story is and make compelling characters and a great universe so that the story will tell itself.

WS: I think you've hit upon something that has 3 underlying problems, and here again I'm going to alienate just about everybody in the game business. First of all, I think there's a widespread belief that, even as developers and players get older, at its core, our market is young and that our games are made for kids - and that people stop playing as they get older. So even the games that are “mature”, I mean seriously, who in their 20s or 30s give a good gol-darn about being the last space marine on a space station who has to stave off an alien invasion? Who cares? Games are still aimed at kids even though the players may be adults. It’s a problem that comes from many developers who have no experience of life other than “I've played a lot of games, I love games, let me make games.” You end up with games about other games and not about life. So that's a real issue. We'll start telling better stories when people who have interesting things to say start making games.

full interview here:
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20...field_01.shtml

That actually had me laughing out loud.

I have this visual image of the watchstander, having seen the chain go whipping out of the access port at 90 miles an hour, in a cacaphony of noise, standing there in the now silent forward space and picking up and mike on the 1MC...


"Ummm.... Sir?"

I'm still laughing.

And the way things have been around here today I really needed it. Take a Gold Star out of petty cash for yourself!

JCC

Again... I guess it's an "older" thing.

Perspective.

JCC

Sorry, but whatever you do, you can do it well and clean from the start, if you are willing to. This is proved even in the game industry with console games. Now, I agree with you that standardization is dangerous for creativity. But standardization is not a mandatory condition to obtain this result. It also depend of the level of standardization you introduce.

ACS

I think he is quite serious. I know I was when I stated the shakedown deal. Heck all games need a shakedown. Some more than others. Like they say, "It is what it is". Patch I'm sure if forthcoming and I betting on more than one patch.

Ah well, while I'm waiting for my copy to turn up, I suppose I'll just chime in here as well with my incoherent blather...

I'm not really much of a gamer, and on the *very* rare occasions I do buy a game, it's usually a mil-sim like this. My first interest used to be flight sims, but, with the exception of M$, they pretty much disappeared. The last sub-sim I did was Microprose's 'Silent Service' on an Apple II GS (gee, I hope I didn't date myself there). I actually really enjoyed that game, but it was somewhat limited. Nevertheless, it was one of the few mil-sims that was ever made to run on the Apple II GS, so I was kind of stuck with it. But I did enjoy it.

The reason for that introduction is that the current PC game market does seem shrinking in general, and the mil-sim genre seems to have all but disappeared in recent years. So I feel a little like I'm back in the 'Silent Service/Apple II GS' days. I'm going to buy this thing no matter what and will probably find some way to enjoy it.

Having said that, what I'd really like to hear on this forum is *THE TRUTH*, good , bad or indifferent. If this game has problems, I would like to hear about it. If it's the sim-of-the-century, I'd like to hear that as well. Keep in mind that one person's 'minor issue' is another person's 'buzz-killer'. So, I agree that making posts like 'Silent Hunter 4 SUX!' and leaving it at that is worthless and annoying, I do think that detailed problem descriptions and informed debate/discussion this games shortcomings is perfectly valid and useful. If some/many are 'negative', so be it.

My guess is that, unless this sim just completely fails at every level, about 99% of the folks reading this forum right now are going to bite the bullet and buy it. If any of problem descriptions do hurt the developer's/publisher's feelings, I'm sorry, but that happens in any industry, expecially in entertainment industries. A thick skin is required in any artistic pursuit.

My final thoughts.

A post in another thread reminded me of the real culprit to alot of "release then patch" angst many may have. The real responsiblity lays with the publisher who sets the deadlines and holds the pursestrings, not the developer.

People are quick to blame the developer, and this is usually where i'll take issue. Some People are quick to say Games should be like car's, and again, this is where ill take issue.

While ill admit my experience in programming isn't vast, i will say that it was enough to know that programming games lays more in the realm of the creative, and artistic- and that, i adamtly do not beleive can, nor should, be standardized.

Imagination can never be standardized. I'm at the point that games just need to be patched and I live with it. With that said, I'm not upset over the bugs that have been pointed out so far.

This forum kinda reminds me of Gremlins... all the members are normally cute and cuddly magwai, then all the sudden it was like some one fed them after midnight while in the bathtub and holy ****!!! :rotfl:

Neal, your my hero... even though your Avatar scares the living daylights out of me.... ( and If you've seen the living daylights, thats pretty scarey!! ) :arrgh!:


NOOOO!!! the dreaded Navy Dude!!!

Some negativity could be because some people expect a revolution and not an evolution of shIII.

Also every game is released with bugs, one more than others, i remember sh3 when it was released, spray bow bug, crew in the bridge underwater, empty ports,campaign factors, etc. now shIII is in the evolution climax

i only worried about sh4 blurry graphics and specs:roll:

This game sounds like a modders dream came true .

It all comes down to people's standards. Some people have higher standards than others. Some people don't mind things half-@$$ed in their lives, while others do not. Its all about what you desire and expect out of life. If you don't want much out of life, then you won't get much out of life. The same goes for gaming or any product or service out there.

The negativity on the forums isn't from bugs, the negativity is from lack of support for the game by the developer. The game was sold unfinished and was abandoned after a few patches that failed to fix simple issues (such as broken instruments). On top of that an SDK was never released.

There are developers out there that do support their games (as shocking as this may be to some of you on here) Here is a list of a few that stand out in my mind:

IL2 Series (Initial release of latest engine: 2003, Oleg Maddox continues to patch and support his products to this day)
Falcon 4.0: Allied Force (Built from code developed a decade ago (1998)..the new owners of the code have currently released their 10th patch and continue to support the product)
Medal Of Honor Series (Released Completed, Excellent Quality, noticeable bugs?)
Call of Duty Series (Released Completed, Excellent Quality, noticeable bugs?)
Brothers in Arms Series (Released Completed, Excellent Quality, noticeable bugs?)
Hidden and Dangerous 2 (Released Completed, Excellent Quality, noticeable bugs?)
Company of Heroes (Released Completed, Excellent Quality, noticeable bugs? Continued support and minor patches)
Flight Simulator Series (Released Completed, small patch support, but, allows open ended developent, SDK)
Operation Flashpoint (Released Completed, extensive patch support. Allowed open ended developent, released: SDK after patches were finalized)
Armed Assault (patching as we speak, patches guarantee major fixes, open ended developent: most likely will release an SDK)
Battlefield 1942/Battlefield 2 Series (excellent quality, continued patching and support for products even after expansions and sequels were released. Products are open ended for mod support)
Command and Conquer Series (Released Finished, Excellent Quality (noticeable bugs?)
Soldiers: Heroes of World War II (limited patching, unnoticeable bugs to most who play, open ended for modding)
Faces of War (limited patching, unnoticeable bugs to most who play, open ended for modding)
Steel Beasts (excellent quality, continued patching and support)

Then there are console games which require a game to be finished and complete upon release. Console games do not allow for a "patching crutch" for developers to lean on as found in the PC market.

Expectations of an incomplete game and lack of future product support already before a game is even released is the main reason I am holding off on my purchase of SH4 this time around.

Each developer develops more than just a game. They develop a work history. If a game does not get support it needs when the majority of the public continues to play it, then why should I support any future products that will most likely be abandoned within a few months after release?

I think it's too early to talk about lack of support!

Also notice how most of the games you listed were high-budget, mass-published games with lots of commercial expensions. The only exception to it is Falcon 4, which is not really an exception because it was abandoned by its publisher (and not developers) after about 5 patches, and was only brought back with a new commercial release that was made possible by the game's lingering popularity thanks to the mod community.

It's a vicious circle, but if people don't buy SHIV because of some of the issues, I'm not surprised if the support is cut off earlier than it should be.

Likewise, it's unfair to say that the devs are to blame for lack of any support. Also, I think by 1.04b of SHIII the game itself was very much functional - developments since then focused mostly on features.

I do agree that SHIV will need a bit more patching, perhaps, but I don't see how in a few months (remember - 1.04b of SHIV was released within ~3 months of the original publication, on the heels of 3 more patches) wouldn't do it good!

Nice list, but i have to ask, Is there a PC game that did not require a patch?

It's undeniable some games out there play without major hitches l out of the box, but they did get a patch. (COD series for example) Then theres the exact opposite. Atari published "boiling point". Nearly unplayable out of the box, and support dropped very quickly.

Patch's on pc games are about as inevitable as like death and taxes. Thus In my opinion, theres really no judging until after the final patch has been made and support dropped.

On a side note, some people here im guessing couldnt handle MMO's very well. Game with a constant stream of patches after patches after patchs. Hell, you can d/l patches for 4 to 6 hours straight on some of those games after installing it.