Todd Howard DICE lecture

Brother None

Brother None

This ghoul has seen it all
Orderite
Todd Howard lectured at DICE. GameSpot offers some coverage (thanks ][avok), but a more detailed report can be found on Gamasutra.<blockquote>Taking Inspiration From Unlikely Places

"One of the tricks we do -- and you can use this on your franchises -- is read old reviews," Howard explained.

It is important to play old games as well, he went on, but reading old reviews removes much of the aging process, because they are written from the perspective of somebody experiencing those games when they are new.

That allows you to understand how design decisions affected the reviewer, away from the difficulties that come with dealing with archaic graphics and input methods.

"You can pull up a review of Arena, our first Elder Scrolls games, and if you black out a few words, you can't tell what Elder Scrolls game it is, whether it's Daggerfall, Morrowind, or Oblivion," he said.

Inspiration can come from disparate sources -- Fallout 3's body part targeting system drew influence from such seemingly unrelated touchstones as Burnout 3's crash mode and the slow-motion blows of the Fight Night games.</blockquote>
 
Am I the only one getting some severe déjà-vu from this?
 
When he says "black out key words" does he mean "buggy" and "awkward animation"? Those phrases would lead me to believe what he's saying.

If he took his own advice most of the time, Beth would still be producing games at the same level they did a decade ago.
 
Todd Howard said:
Inspiration can come from disparate sources -- Fallout 3's body part targeting system drew influence from such seemingly unrelated touchstones as Burnout 3's crash mode and the slow-motion blows of the Fight Night games.
Click to expand...

WTF?! Body targeting system wasn't *ripped off* from previous Fallouts?
 
Ravager69 said:
Todd Howard said:
Inspiration can come from disparate sources -- Fallout 3's body part targeting system drew influence from such seemingly unrelated touchstones as Burnout 3's crash mode and the slow-motion blows of the Fight Night games.
Click to expand...

WTF?! Body targeting system wasn't *ripped off* from previous Fallouts?
Click to expand...

Actually no, since the original Fallouts didn't do it in slow-motion. Read twice!

Edit: Actually, read between the lines.
 
Now there's an inspiration source for ya - read old reviews.. Not "play old games", hell no.. It would only work if you were creating a game for gamers, not reviewers, ain't that right Todd? And.. Todd lecturing?? Somehow these two words doesn't seem to fit in a sentence.
Probably that's were all his knowledge about previous Fallout games came from - teh old reviewz.
 
I posted about this over in the Fallout 3 forums a few days ago.

I'd like to add that, while it may seem clever, reading old reviews when your making a sequel should be obvious to anyone trying to succeed. I notice he didn't add a coda saying game journalists may not offer a complete and objective review, or what further may be necessary in terms of research. Indicative.

Also, inspiration from Burnout 3 and Fight Night? It serves its purpose I suppose, but shits all over the Fallout theme and style.
 
Howard called out Bethesda's marketing VP, Pete Hines, and argued that marketing must be a part of the development process from the beginning.
Click to expand...

A very revealing lecture on how to make a corporate product, but I don't see much about game design or creating a logically consistent world.

This is pretty revealing in regards to how Fallout 3 turned out.

They read old reviews, not play the original games, and made marketing a part of the development process.

I wonder if the title of this lecture was: How To Be A Corporate Whore
 
"This is the big leap you go to make when you make a game," said Bethesda Game Studios director Todd Howard (Fallout 3), starting his lecture at the DICE Summit with a slide of a man leaping over a blanket littered with babies -- labeled "the fans."
Click to expand...
Glad to see that Bethesda continues to take the high ground and refuses to insult consumers.

"Great games are played, not made," Howard argued, pointing to the importance of real playtesting and feedback over the design ideal. "You can have the greatest design document ever made, and you're going to change 90 percent of it as soon as you play the game."

Studios must be willing to let the game be built the way the team needs it to be built, even if that doesn't fit in the initial plan of action -- "Your plan is not as important as your culture," Howard argued.
Click to expand...
This is totally and utterly wrong, a good design will undergo numerous minor changes but unless there's something really innovative in there or use of another's IP, nothing major should be changed. The reason that this is true for Bethesda is because they make the design process as short as possible so the ideas they come up with are going to be poorly conceived and fleshed out.

"One of the tricks we do -- and you can use this on your franchises -- is read old reviews," Howard explained.

It is important to play old games as well, he went on, but reading old reviews removes much of the aging process, because they are written from the perspective of somebody experiencing those games when they are new.
Click to expand...
Well written reviews by qualified professionals can be useful, but given how rare they are in gaming, I'm gonna call bullshit. Reading gaming reviews gives a good idea of where to focus marketing by telling you what types of stuff reviewers focus on the most. As has already been stated, this is good for marketing but not for designing games. The importance of marketing in their development is shown in the following quote.

Howard called out Bethesda's marketing VP, Pete Hines, and argued that marketing must be a part of the development process from the beginning. Every piece of media a player sees prior to playing the game influences their expectations and perception of the experience itself.
Click to expand...
Marketing should have a good understanding of the game but should have little to no involvement in the development process. When marketing has a heavy role in development you end up with products which attempt to cash in on what's cool and popular, usually resulting in a very mediocre game. In other words it results in design decisions based on what is perceived to make the product sell well rather than make the product high quality and play well.
 
UncannyGarlic said:
Marketing should have a good understanding of the game but should have little to no involvement in the development process. When marketing has a heavy role in development you end up with products which attempt to cash in on what's cool and popular, usually resulting in a very mediocre game. In other words it results in design decisions based on what is perceived to make the product sell well rather than make the product high quality and play well.
Click to expand...

Well said, my son. Marketing has no place in development. Hell, I'll go one step further and quote Mr. Hicks, "If you're in marketing or advertising, kill yourself". Like many industries, manipulating the consumer base can, over time, affect the general consensus of what is acceptable and what is not. Then again, the mainstream has never had an eye for quality...
 
100LBSofDogmeat said:
UncannyGarlic said:
Marketing should have a good understanding of the game but should have little to no involvement in the development process. When marketing has a heavy role in development you end up with products which attempt to cash in on what's cool and popular, usually resulting in a very mediocre game. In other words it results in design decisions based on what is perceived to make the product sell well rather than make the product high quality and play well.
Click to expand...

Well said, my son. Marketing has no place in development. Hell, I'll go one step further and quote Mr. Hicks, "If you're in marketing or advertising, kill yourself". Like many industries, manipulating the consumer base can, over time, affect the general consensus of what is acceptable and what is not. Then again, the mainstream has never had an eye for quality...
Click to expand...

I see you're going for that anti-marketing dollar, that's a huge market!

;) Bill Hicks Forever!
 
Beelzebud said:
I see you're going for that anti-marketing dollar, that's a huge market!

;) Bill Hicks Forever!
Click to expand...
What we're suggesting is that one focuses their marketing and budget (though limits on this can be set early with no problem) around the game design rather than vice versa. You're developers and their game design will determine the market targeted and the game to be made rather than marketers.
 
The Dutch Ghost said:
So when did he realize that he was the only one left in the room?
Click to expand...

It was recording during the coversation, so everyone except Toddy could go drink some beer or coffee.
 
Beelzebud said:
wooooosh that went right over your head.
Click to expand...
Sometimes, when you're shooting at the air over your targets' heads, you might want to consider that the solution is to adjust your aim, rather than to yell at your targets, "Hey! Grow taller!"
 
"Great games are played, not made," Howard argued, pointing to the importance of real playtesting and feedback over the design ideal. "You can have the greatest design document ever made, and you're going to change 90 percent of it as soon as you play the game."
Click to expand...
This reminds me of the differences in design philosophy between Thomas Edison and Nikola Tesla. Edison was a tinkerer. He famously said, "I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work. " This isn't to say he invent a lot of things, but he did these things by changing things around, not by trying to understand the underlying principles (beyond the most obvious).

Tesla, a genius in understanding the principles, was known to design electrical devices in his head, figure out how they wouldn't work, and then redesign them in his head.

My point is who would you rather have as the leader for your developer group: someone who figures out a clear and intelligent vision for your game during pre-production stage and sticks to it unless its absolutely necessary to change it OR someone who has a more vague idea of how the game should play and look and refines it through plentiful tweaking while the game is being made?
 
Edison's tactic sounds like Bethesda's. They've come up with lots of "cool" for them ideas, put them into the game ceoz they thought were cool enough, and you have something like Fallout 3, where only few of them fit to the Fallout setting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top