What is going on???

[roalan]

Micro

I hope not. I also hope that with the delay there will be fewer bugs less patches.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by GP
Great. Sounds like the publisher is getting screwed by the devleoper. Because of all the time wasted, they will get a worse game than expected. Probably QS and IG will both lose money on the deal. Just great Emrich...the "lose-lose" solution!

Interesting. This approach if the theory holds that IG is holding QS's feet to the fire is indeed a lose-lose proposition.

While QS is culpable for delas and setbacks isn't IG similarly equally culpable for rushing a project that if not properly done means lower sales units and potential damage to the series brand equity.

Seems to me, at first brush, IG may be succumbing to crying over spilt milk syndrome. Lesson of sunk costs. Incremental costs and rewards unfortunately are the ones that matter, leave emotion out of it. Unless one suspects that lessons learned, weren't.

Og

[Rantz]

It was never stated that Alan was the lead designer. He certainly was the most public face of the design team, and so it's understandable how some people might assume that. Didn't think it needed to be stated until it recently became apparent that *many* people held that perception.

All of the areas on QS projects have a lead/head person. That person becomes the arbiter of whether something works or not, or holds to what the stated and unstated goals of the game are. That holds for programming, art and design.

In the case of design, no designer holds that position, it's a position held by the producer. So, there is someone who holds ultimate responsibility for it, it eliminates a lot of the issues that arise like the conflict of interest that can occur with two designers trying to promote their design idea, but one of them has the ability to veto the other due to their being lead.

Agreed on the need for leadership. Nature (and projects) abohr a vacuum, and things or folks will rush in given the opportunity.

Was the project too ambitious? In hindsight, yes. Could we have pruned earlier? Questionable. When the choices were made, we had reached alpha, and until then you never saw all of the components working together as a wholistic gameplay experience. All of the parts and models worked by themselves, but until you see the whole, the 'how does it feel'? part to say if it delivered the intended gameplay experience... that's a hard thing to judge, even for the most experienced amongst us (and we're no rookies with Bill Fisher being in this for 20 some years and myself and Cory having been in it for around 8-9 years)

so, hope that answers some questions...

[LDiCesare]

Thanks for the answer, Rantz. It does make sense that the publisher have the final word in terms of design decision, since that can impact the game a lot and it is easier to manage than programming or art, which are respectively incomprehensible and too much a matter of personal preferences for an outsider to step into.
Since you're around, any bit of info about the ai? Has it already undergone tweaking of the sort "oops that's too powerful a strategy, let's counter it"?

[Pythagoras]

Originally posted by Rantz


Never said it was. Simply stating that Alan was not ever Lead Designer for MOO3. MOO was designed as a team design effort.



Alan was one of the designers, and he's great at ideas, communication and words, so it became obvious very early that he would be the likely choice to 'get the word out' in terms of communicating with the fans and such.

I couldn't even break in down blow by blow as to who wrote what, or who designed what because so many people contributed to it.



it's not a reticence to talk about issues. especially in term of the design revisions. The design got completed, and we started the tuning/editing phase. Until we had actual details pinned down in terms of our assessment of what 'felt right' in terms of gameplay, we thought it premature to say 'oh we're doing this...' when it might turn out, no we're not.

layoffs are company business. It is a tight time in the games industry. I get about 10-20 resumes from artists a week that have recently been laid off.

It obviously is not a preferred option, and obviously you would rather keep folks on staff, but the fact is, when you are a small company with a need to keep a minimal overhead, the amount of time you can keep someone on staff who is not directly billable at 100% to a project is minimal. I'm not using Alan as an example here, I'm saying that is an axiom of the realities of the workplace.

We've recently gotten to a point where we can talk about the game some due to solidification of elements, and time becoming more available. Hopefully, you'll find more information and discussion in the near future... (note the Apol interview as an example)

thanks for your interest.

I have an uncle who tells me that this is a great time for the gaming industry. When people dont have jobs, they have lots more spare time and want to buy games. At least that was his justification. I told him I thought taht it would be the opposite - people wouldnt spend time on frivolous things when their wallets are tight. Of course he invests heavily in the gaming industry (EA mostly) and I dont.

[TCO]

Interesting response, Rantz. thanks.

Some further questions.

1. Who was the producer? (If I read you right, you are saying that he was the de facto head designer. If so, I hope he spent time on that task and concentrated on it.)

2. Just to clarify, you are saying that the design was too ambitious but that features couldn't have been pruned earlier. If I read this right, the optimal approach would have been to upfront scale the design back. (Like pruning before you even start.) This seems fine. Basically it's what I've been saying.

3. Thanks for being upfront. Hope you guys can get as good a game done as possible, given the time and resources remaining. Good luck.

[Xentax]

[Jumping in]
Cory Nelson is the producer...I can't speak to the rest of it.
[/Jumping in]

[Rantz]

Bill Fisher was the producer for about the first year of the project, then Cory Nelson came on as producer and has been on MOO ever since. Great job he does, too.

The design was too ambitious, but that couldn't be confirmed until the alpha build. We could have taken the safe route and not attempted to be as ambitious, but enthusiasm can be a dangerous thing

thanks we're busting ass to make it happen.

[markusf]

Originally posted by Rantz
Bill Fisher was the producer for about the first year of the project, then Cory Nelson came on as producer and has been on MOO ever since. Great job he does, too.

The design was too ambitious, but that couldn't be confirmed until the alpha build. We could have taken the safe route and not attempted to be as ambitious, but enthusiasm can be a dangerous thing

thanks we're busting ass to make it happen.

Any time frame on a release date? I only check in every couple of months and last time i looked it was rumored to be may

[Pythagoras]

I believe the release date is set for Q4 2002.

[Sarxis]

Ho-hum I twiddle my thumb.

Like I said: I refuse to get my panties in a bunch over MoO3. If its spectacular, great! If not, oh well.

[And I didn't say panties]

[Comrade Tribune]

Re: nut

Originally posted by roalan
Because sale is the bottom line and to sell to a few grognards will put them out of business real quick.

Untrue. Have you ever played 'Combat Mission'? Brilliant WWII Company/Batallion Tactics Game for Grognards. Absolutely uncompromisingly realistic/detailed. Sold very well. I wish there were more companys like Battlefront.

[TCO]

Combat Mission is a beautiful work, but has had limited numbers. I read an article about this. You wouldn't understand, in free enterprise, one needs to make the money to recoup an investment.

[Xentax]

Last I heard it was still Q3 -- I'm personally interpreting that to mean mid-September.

Until some sort of beta test starts, however, I'm not really putting a lot of stock in ANY date. IMHO, the game should have a good 3 months minimum beta testing, so I'm holding out for either 3+ months from the start of beta test.

The game could always come out sooner and be less than as bug-free and balanced as I'd like, of course.

Just my .02 AU worth...

[Mikel]

Well thanks to everyone for bringing me up to date. The interview and cut list from Rantz also helps. It doesn't sound as bad as some people have pitched, although it is unfortunate that some of the more adventurous ideas did not work out.

I think the 5th "X" being the Experience was what has held my interest in the game from the start and I am sure many people agree with me. With that I thought I'd post this quote from Todd Howard when he was talking about the design of Morrowind. It seems to really apply here, and I'm sure it is relevant to a lot of companies design process.

"With something this large it's all of those things at once. You try to come up with a high level goal. What kind of experience do you want the user to have? It's one of the three rules I have in game design. One of them is: "Define the experience. Never ever define your game as a set of features." You get married to features and it could end up that that feature doesn't matter … and needs to be removed. Programmers say, "But you designed it, and it took me weeks to program it!" To which I reply with, "Sorry, it sucks, it's not serving our big goal." So we define the experience. With the Elder Scrolls games we want you to be able to freely play the role you want to play and feel the choices you make are as important and the choices you didn't make are interesting. Anything that doesn't serve that gets cut out of the game."