CHUD.com Community › Forums › VIDEO GAMES & RPG › Video Games › Tim Schafer Should Never Make Another Videogame
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Tim Schafer Should Never Make Another Videogame - Page 3

post #101 of 134
11/3/09 at 4:56pm
Ok, let me have another try at my previous statement. "The game should be at least 30% longer and it should make better use of the RTS aspects through harder and more strategic battles."

Here's an example of how the SP gets it wrong...
- The spell system in multiplayer is cooldown based. The whole thing is a bit of a tug of war, so it's important to use the powerful spells at just the right time. Otherwise you'll be caught with your pants down as the opponent comes in with a full force + spells. You also need to be careful you don't get killed while casting the longer spells.

- In the single player ambushes it's broken cause the cooldowns don't matter and either The Facemelter or Bring It On Home can decimate the incoming squad easily.

It's good mechanics for MP being misapplied in SP. (or at least that's the theory I'm working with)
Reply
post #102 of 134
11/3/09 at 4:58pm
Did you guys never play Grim Fandango with a gamepad? I remember busting through that thing with my old Sidewinder, no problem. Love the hell out of that game.

And yeah, Alex, I really feel what you're saying here. I love the guy, but I didn't have much fun playing Psychonauts and Brutal. All the set dressing for those games is fantastic. The voice acting and writing are great. But the inherent "video gameness" is just flawed and sub par.

The demo for Brutal is misleading as hell. Beats Metal Gear Solid 2's bait and switch by a country mile.
Reply
post #103 of 134
11/3/09 at 4:58pm
Maybe multiplayer is fine, I don't really care. I didn't buy the game for a multiplayer-only RTS, because that wasn't what was promised BY THE DEVELOPER or by any of the leadup material. It was promised as an action adventure hack and slash that incorporated some real time elements, not as an extended little learner book for a game I didn't want to play in the first place.

And frankly, this is pretty anemic just as a strict RTS anyway. Compared to real games in the genre (even old ones like Herzog Zwei, as Alex says) it's a bare bones trifle.
Reply
post #104 of 134
11/3/09 at 5:00pm
Thread Starter 
The solos are the perfect example of a great concept that becomes more irritating than anything in execution. Selecting a solo and watching it play it out would have been infinitely preferable than wasting time hitting "notes" each time. I didn't even get Bring It On Home before beating the game and had no problem melting faces of entire squads while my headbangers did nothing.

It's also irritating how you have to summon the Druid Plow after every mission. What, did they think people would want to walk around the world with no jump button?
Reply
post #105 of 134
11/3/09 at 5:05pm
Also, solos are basically useless in a pitched battle, because you take damage while doing them. Brainless decision.
Reply
post #106 of 134
11/3/09 at 5:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Riviello View Post
It's also irritating how you have to summon the Druid Plow after every mission. What, did they think people would want to walk around the world with no jump button?
GOD, YES. Worst decision ever.
Reply
post #107 of 134
11/3/09 at 5:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad Millette View Post
Also, solos are basically useless in a pitched battle, because you take damage while doing them. Brainless decision.
Isn't that the point though? You should use them only them when you can get them off safely? Thery aren't useless, you just have to use them effectively under the constraints. Eg. Facemelter is much simpler and shorter to cast than Bring It On Home.

I haven't played Herzog Zwei or Sacrifice. I've played Starcraft and War III, but this feels like a different sort of game. Following the basic advice Schafer gave out post-release (stay on the ground with the team, don't split them up much, use double teams) I'm getting the feel for how it's meant to be played. Between the 8 or so solos, 10 or so unit types, double teams and 3 factions, I wouldn't say it's anemic.

Having said that, the single player should stand on it's own. I didn't buy it for multiplayer either. And yeah the gameplay in the SP mode is ends up being shallow (but IMO fun)
Reply
post #108 of 134
11/3/09 at 5:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Shake View Post
I dunno, it just wouldn't be the same without Roy Conroy doing the voice of Ben.

The intro to Full Throttle was just about the most badass gaming thing my 14-year-old brain had seen at the time.
God yes. That's still pretty badass, but maybe that's just because the rest of the game is so great.

It seems to me that Schafer is still making adventure games, just shoehorning them into different genres since adventure games have died off. They're going through something of a rebirth right now, so maybe he should jump back into them. Still, one misstep doesn't mean he should stay out altogether. He just needs to get a solid development team behind him.
Reply
post #109 of 134
11/3/09 at 7:56pm
Herzog Zwei, that was a great game. So simple yet so addictive.
Reply
post #110 of 134
11/4/09 at 1:37pm
Great minds think alike it seems, as Yahtzee says essentially the same thing Alex does here.
Reply
post #111 of 134
11/4/09 at 2:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Riviello View Post
It's also irritating how you have to summon the Druid Plow after every mission. What, did they think people would want to walk around the world with no jump button?
Yup, this is definitely a WTF were they thinking decision. It'd be one thing if you didn't need the jump button, but the landscape is almost designed for you to get stuck constantly on 10" ledges you could easily walk over in real life. So frustrating. It's obviously a conscious decision on their part, I'd just like to know the reasoning behind it. Frustration negates fun.
Reply
post #112 of 134
11/8/09 at 5:08am
There's a big long interview with Schafer here.
http://fidgit.com/archives/2009/11/t...iner_point.php


Some bits:
Quote:
Chick: Let me be more specific them. One of the things you did in Brutal Legend, which was a surprising and risky decision, is that there's a full-featured real time strategy game in there. You've sort of said, 'Look, it's not a real time strategy game' and I can understand what you mean by that, because it's not what people think of when they think of a real time strategy game. But there are certainly elements in there. Brutal Legend is an open world game, but there is this RTS gameplay in it. How have you felt about how that's been received?

Schafer: It's interesting coming it at from my perspective where it started originally as an RTS game and essentially that's all it was. All the other parts evolved out of iterating on the game and expanding on it. So it's funny to hear someone ask 'Why did you add a real time strategy game?' That's like the soup stock the game was cooked in the whole time we were making it, so it's kind of funny to think about adding it. Some people seemed immediately averse to it, as if it was such a surprise when it came into the game. We had a big multiplayer event with the press, where we played stage battles with them and did a bunch of interviews about it. But I guess a lot of people just didn't see that and thought it was completely stealthed. So they were kind of taken aback when it appeared and felt they had been tricked.
Quote:
Chick: So how is Brutal Legend different now that it got that extra year and EA as a publisher? What would it have been like coming out a year earlier and published by Activision or Sierra?

Schafer: The single player campaign would have felt anemic. It would have felt more empty.
Reply
post #113 of 134
11/8/09 at 5:17am
Holy moly. Imagine that single player for a second.
Reply
post #114 of 134
11/8/09 at 5:37am
Well, I suppose the alternative would have been like a pure RTS game, like a Starcraft campaign. 20 or so stage battes in a row, with no open world or exploring. The plot would have been progressed between battles, etc. Maybe there would have been campaigns for the other factions, etc.
Reply
post #115 of 134
11/8/09 at 5:54am
The RTS system as it is isn't deep enough or fun enough to support that.
Reply
post #116 of 134
11/8/09 at 9:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schafer
We had a big multiplayer event with the press, where we played stage battles with them and did a bunch of interviews about it. But I guess a lot of people just didn't see that and thought it was completely stealthed.
Maybe they, oh, I don't know, UNDERSTANDABLY ASSUMED THAT JUST THE MULTIPLAYER WAS RTS AND THAT THE SINGLE-PLAYER CAMPAIGN WOULD BE AN OPEN-WORLD ADVENTURE?
Reply
post #117 of 134
11/8/09 at 12:34pm
I've always thought that Tim's stuff would be great as animated films. CG or 2D. I agree that the gameplay element of his games has been kind of weak. Maybe he should write the stories and let other developers do the actual games.
Reply
post #118 of 134
11/8/09 at 6:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Domingo View Post
The RTS system as it is isn't deep enough or fun enough to support that.
IMO the multiplayer RTS are quite deep, but a lot of that depth doesn't come through in the single player game.

I'm playing a lot of Drowning Doom against the AI and they have things like fake units, a stealth fog (you can't spot them at a distance), possessing units, exploding bombs and aoe health spells. And the style of play involves more scouting the map out sending of individual units to distract or take down a fan geyser.

The singleplayer campaign as it is only sends squads of evenly mixed teams, so it's hard to appreciate the individual units.

I could imagine a campaign which puts more emphasis on these individual mechanics. For instance: a mission where a bunch of frightwigs suddenly spawn and possess your own troops. Or where a bunch of broods use their kamikaze attacks. Or just general things like creeps that spawn, more use of the buffs & debuffs, more defensive towers or other environmental hazards.


Having said all that, I'm sorta glad it's not a pure RTS game, cause I do love the driving and exploring bits too.
Reply
post #119 of 134
11/8/09 at 6:58pm
I tried the multi player last night, and couldn't find a game. I'll try again. It's certainly a lot of effort to put into a game to get to what apparently is the meaty good stuff.
Reply
post #120 of 134
11/8/09 at 11:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Domingo View Post
I tried the multi player last night, and couldn't find a game. I'll try again. It's certainly a lot of effort to put into a game to get to what apparently is the meaty good stuff.
I totally agree regarding effort. I feel there is a lot of content in the game in very easy to miss places. There's tons of recorded dialog between missions that will be missed if the next mission is started straight away. Same goes for the legends which I really liked but are all hidden. I'm amazed at how much effort has obviously gone into the other 2 factions, yet very little of it is evident in the main campaign. Eg. The enemy avatar barely uses double teams or spells in SP.

I've only been playing against the AI in multiplayer. Ramping up the difficulty as I get used to the control scheme and various units has worked for me. My main incentive (apart from it being sort of fun) is unlocking the other concept art which is linked to producing a certain amount of each unit.

I'd like to go up against some other players at some point to get the Six Degrees of Schafer Trophy.
Reply
post #121 of 134
11/9/09 at 5:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas Booth View Post
Taking Alex to task for changing his opinion on a game OR on a designer is ridiculous. So what? He's not a paid shill for the company, he's a reviewer giving his honest opinion on something. He delivers the goods around here and he's usually totally on target with his opinions, so cut him some slack.

If anything, we have too much of the opposite on the Internet. Fanboys who go insane with anticipation about a game, film, book, or whatever, and, even if sucks bigtime, will still defend it because they can't admit to themsleves they were wrong.
Reply
post #122 of 134
11/9/09 at 6:05pm
I'd love to see a film version of Psychonauts... CGI flick... whatever.
Reply
post #123 of 134
11/9/09 at 6:52pm
There's nothing worse than that feeling of playing a hyped game, looking around, and saying "Uh guys... You kind of got it wrong with this one."
Reply
post #124 of 134
12/30/09 at 3:31pm
Thread Starter 
This is still riling people up! http://www.mixnmojo.com/features/rea...esgames&page=0

Love when people feel threatened like that and get all hung up on semantics. It's cute.
Reply
post #125 of 134
12/30/09 at 3:48pm
He might make some good points in that article, but I just can't get past this photo:
Reply
post #126 of 134
12/30/09 at 3:49pm
I lost it at that too. Also, too long of a diatribe.
Reply
post #127 of 134
12/30/09 at 3:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dickson View Post
He might make some good points in that article, but I just can't get past this photo:
I want to know just what the hell he's looking at in that picture.
Reply
post #128 of 134
12/30/09 at 3:56pm
I mean this in the nicest possible way, but that photo is how I imagine some people see Devin.
Reply
post #129 of 134
12/30/09 at 3:59pm
This thread tickles my schadenfraude. Never have I been so overjoyed and so saddened to see a game just fail to live up to expectations.

I think Schafer's particular brand of humour is fantastic for videogames, I just think him writing and designing a game and a decent developer like say Naughty Dog doing the actual nuts and bolts of the programming and acting as a creative counterpoint would create a truly fantastic game.
Reply
post #130 of 134
12/30/09 at 4:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dickson View Post
I mean this in the nicest possible way, but that photo is how I imagine some people see Devin.
Guilty until I actually saw a real picture of Devin years ago...I admit it, and im a bit shamed about it.
Reply
post #131 of 134
12/30/09 at 4:02pm
You guys are making me fear the arrival of Ron Gilbert's "Deathspank" now...
Reply
post #132 of 134
12/30/09 at 4:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Riviello View Post
This is still riling people up! http://www.mixnmojo.com/features/rea...esgames&page=0

Love when people feel threatened like that and get all hung up on semantics. It's cute.
Well written article but I can't say that I agree.
Reply
post #133 of 134
12/30/09 at 4:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall View Post
I think Schafer's particular brand of humour is fantastic for videogames, I just think him writing and designing a game and a decent developer like say Naughty Dog doing the actual nuts and bolts of the programming and acting as a creative counterpoint would create a truly fantastic game.
I agree, but I wouldn't pair him with Naughty Dog who seems wholly capable of telling their own unique and interesting stories but rather someone like Insomniac who keep making technically amazing and beautiful games that somehow feel lifeless (see PS3 f Ratchet & Clanks).
Reply
post #134 of 134
12/30/09 at 4:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Riviello View Post
Too many words.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Games
CHUD.com Community › Forums › VIDEO GAMES & RPG › Video Games › Tim Schafer Should Never Make Another Videogame