You Got Flagshipped
Epic Failure or Game of The Year… You Decide!
Subscribe to Flagshipped.com (comments feed)
Hellforge Interviews Travis Baldree of Runic Games
- August
- 20
6:19 pm Hellgate London, Mythos
Sol Invictus, of Hellforge, Interviews Travis Baldree, former Mythos developer, about his and other ex-FSS Seattle Team members newly formed company, Runic Games.
http://hellforge.gameriot.com/blogs/Hel … Interview/
Here’s a few of the choice questions, rest can be read by following the above link.
Who among the team is joining you, are there any people from FSS?
We’ve hired back all of the original Seattle team, and Max Schaefer from San Francisco is onboard as well. He’s been effectively on the Mythos team for quite some time already.
What types of games are you planning to design?
We thought we were headed in the right direction with Mythos - I think our collective desire is to do that type of game right and get it out the door.
If you had unlimited resources what’s one specific game idea you’d really like to put forward and make?
Apart from relocating to the Caribbean?
In a world of unlimited resources, I’d want to build a game with the incredible depth and consistent surprise of Nethack, and the polish and presentation that Blizzard is known for. I have a feeling that’s what a lot of people want.
http://hellforge.gameriot.com/blogs/Hel … Interview/
Also a new Flagshipped.com message forum is now available for the discussion of this new company made entirely of former Flagship Studio Members from the Mythos dev team.
Flagshipped Forum » From The Creators of Diablo… » Runic Games (Ex-FSS Seattle Team)
Share This
12 comments
|
Posted by David Lemke, on August 21st, 2008, at 12:36 am. Hellfoge interview with Travis Baldree 19 August 2008. Q:What sort of business plan are you guys thinking of using for your first new game? GameCyte Interview with Travis Baldree and Max Schaeffer Max Schaefer: MS: But the point is, people don’t really go to Best Buy to buy a PC game anymore and want to pay fifteen bucks a month once they’ve done that. The barrier to entry is just too high for that. Whereas if you download a game for free, try it out, and pay as you choose you want to pay, through item transactions, that’s something that almost anyone can do — and there’s no risk or commitment. What we find in Asia, and even with some games in the United States now, is that YOU’RE ACTUALLY GETTING PEOPLE PAYING MORE THAT WAY, EVEN ON AN AVERAGE PLAYER BASIS, THAN YOU DO WITH A SUBSCRIPTION GAME [my caps]. The barrier to entry is lower, the risk is lower, the commitment is lower, and it’s just much easier for people to do. That’s definitely something we believe in. Diablo and Team Fortress 2, they are free to play. FSS never intended HGL to be free to play, nor does Runic Games intend their new game to be free to play, not if Max has his way in any case. The constant use of the word ‘free’ in advertising these days is a scourge. . TB, maybe you do have some firm ideas about what kind of fee model you’ll use, or maybe that’s all really up in the air right now. Customers, players, don’t really expect or need an answer on that right now. The key is getting what you pay for. If you use microtransactions at all, then, If those microtransactions do end up costing people what a normal subscription would, then that new game had better be a full fledged mmorpg. If RG makes a simple game with 1/10 the content of an mmorpg, and 1/10 the features of an mmorpg, a game that looks and feels like a simpler, less expensive game, then by golly, it had better cost as little as other simpler games. This game will tank like HGL if RG goes by the Max Schaefer model of having a simple game resembling free to play, but expects to bleed players of an mmo size fee. ShadowOfADoubt replied on August 22, 2008 “If those microtransactions do end up costing people what a normal subscription would, then that new game had better be a full fledged mmorpg.” I disagree. mmorpgs also tend to have box sales and larger teams in general. Free-2-play games with microtransactions generally have smaller teams and thus aren’t able to pump out a game like WOW. The main key is not HOW MUCH microtransations a typical player ends up paying, but rather how much of an advantage they get. Generally, the advantage paying players get are a combination of looks and time. Looks is self-explanatory - you buy some avatar clothes to deck out your character. May or may not do anything and ultimately is for vanity. Time is the big one - helps people level faster, collect gold faster, etc. The point of “time” in microtransactions is very complicated. On the one hand, people who have jobs don’t have time to grind endlessly, so if given an option to essentially buy their levels, it helps them get into the game much faster and easier. On the other hand, by doing so, it undermines the entire notion and balance of grinding. Typically what you’ll find is that at high levels, regular grinding is so time consuming, you’ll pretty much have to buy exp/level/gold/whatever. Furthermore, if it’s so easy to “buy” you character, it cheapens the intrinsical value of a levelled up character. Ultimately what I’m saying is that microtransactions for clothes is fine, especially if they’re just for vanity. Microtransactions for time however, is a very very delicate issue and must be balanced with utmost care to allow people who play for free to experience high level content if they play long enough. David Lemke replied on August 22, 2008 Microtransactions appeal to some gamers. Some people, somewhere, are paying microtransactions, and if RG makes a decent game that succeeds using those for revenue, then great for them and their player base. It’s easy to see how some customers would happily use real money transactions to avoid some grinding, or to get some cool looking items without having to go to the ends of the earth or go through a long path of crafting. Also, we have to acknowledge that the appeal of some games can’t be quite quantified or compared to others games. A game might look bad on paper, but if it provides something unique, something compelling, interesting, charming, then people will pay whatever a company charges. I have to admit that I myself, right now, pay to play a game where I know the game is deeply flawed, I know the company is shorting me on content and features, I know the company is somewhat shady, but… there are just some cool aspects of the game I can’t find anywhere else, so, part of my gaming time is spent there. So, yeah, I could see an RG game working with less content and fewer features than an mmo, while costing on average equal to or more than an mmo, sure. If it’s a good game, fans and skeptics alike will play it. Still, that all hinges on the game being something unique and compelling, and that also hinges on the world finding those microtransactions somehow very, very convenient as implemented in the game. To put it in laymans terms and dating terms, which I often do, but haven’t maybe on this board yet, that game had better have a gorgeous face, or super body, or fantastic personality, SOMETHING pretty darn special to make up for shortcomings in other categories, otherwise people will not put up with her bull!*@#. By bull#$@* I mean having less content and having fewer features than an mmo while still costing the player as much or more on average than an MMO. If the game doesn’t have that special something, then it can rot in the bargain bin and the company can go to heck if it thinks we’re going to pay mmo prices for it through those microtransactions. Btw, fans and the company calling the game ‘free to play’ is stupid and annoying, like scratching a chalk board. I know it’s standard in the business world to use the word ‘free’ so much for advertising purposes, but I can tell you that all I, and others like me, hear is, “blah blah blah, free part is really an extended demo, while to really play the game as intended, you will pay microtransactions adjusted to make the fee whatever we can get away with and still keep you happy, blah blah blah.” tbaldree replied on August 22, 2008 We were really aiming for you (and by ‘you’ I mean more traditional players) to legitimately be able to play all of Mythos for free. The currency exchange was going to be the means to allow that. People who were only interested in playing 15 minutes at a time ( which isn’t the vast majority of people ) put the currency into the system, and exchange it with players who DO play for longer periods of time. Those players have ingame assets that the 15-minute players want, so there’s an exchange. Basically, the short-timers almost act like sponsors for the ingame players, in exchange for earned ingame goods that can’t be bought directly. BryanM replied on August 22, 2008 This is the direction the industry must go. (as well as giving up on the bleeding edge (”realism”) of art assets if you’re not Blizzard or DMA Designs.) There’s only so many times you can remake DIKU before no one cares anymore. Guild Wars makes gravy with their micro-transactions. They’re called “character slots”. Tons of other free games, American and otherwise, have been profitable for their developers. (Do many of them have the same type of budget Travis has? Not really, and it’s why they currently have such a bad reputation for the people who don’t pay attention to stuff like Defcon. People pay attention to what money tells them to pay attention to. I can type “Any person who hasn’t read Invincible and The Walking Dead is a soulless husk of a human being” until my fingers bleed, and it’d be entirely true, but I’d be lucky to ever even convince one goober to take 5 minutes out of their life to give them a try. Even though it costs them $0 to do so.) *cough* Anyway. People who like the game will spend a pittance on it. People who really, really LOVE the game will spend vastly more than a meager $15 a month on it. Reference: Magic the Gathering Online. It’s a game entirely based on microtransactions. It’s kind of successful - no matter how many people are pissed off at the latest version. |
|
Posted by BryanM, on August 21st, 2008, at 3:49 am. Dupe! |
|
Posted by Taiko, on August 21st, 2008, at 6:47 am. SELL OUT! |
|
Posted by SpiritThief, on August 21st, 2008, at 12:04 pm. The developers have a challenge ahead of them creating a game like Mythos that can compete directly with Diablo 3. Regardless, I wish them the best of luck. Just don’t be foolish and try and sneak a subscription plan on gamers… |
|
Posted by David Lemke, on August 21st, 2008, at 12:16 pm. |
|
Posted by Tom N, on October 26th, 2008, at 9:21 pm. max needs to be shot. in the head. with a high powered rifle. |
Subscribe to Flagshipped.com (comments feed)
tbaldree replied on August 21, 2008
Obviously as mentioned, I can’t say for sure one way or the other what we’ll do just yet.
But part of doing whatever it is is making sure that players are happy with it - if they aren’t, well, that doesn’t do us a lot of good.
Our intent with Mythos was to use the dual-currency system, so the you could legitimately not pay a cent and still have access to everything by trading ingame assets for purchased currency. I don’t know if we’ll do that or not.
[reply this comment]