Nota: Devi essere registrato per poter rispondere. Per registrarti, clicca qui. La Registrazione è GRATUITA!
C O N T R O L L A D I S C U S S I O N E
sandywang5230
Inviato - 26/11/2015 : 04:28:59 nd focus on characterization and interaction and good dialogue and good mocap and things like that, and to bring LP back to a strong shooter basis...well, I don't want to sound like I'm speaking badly of the Osaka team, what they did with LP1 and LP2 was great and exactly what they set out to do, but if you're looking at this from a creative standpoint, do you want to try and fit a square peg into a round hole by getting the Osaka team to do things that aren't really their strengths? You're not using their strengths, and you're forcing them out of their comfort zone. For LP3, it felt smart to take a Western dev that already had all the strengths we needed, and bring in the Osaka team to shore up the weaknesses. You can't cover all the bases, but it seemed like a smarter, more holistic approach.This isn't your first time to the international developer rodeo. What did you do differently with LP3 based on your previous experiences?For the first part, a lot of it had to do with how to foster creativity and channel it in the direction you want without beating it down. Japanese development is top-down not dictatorial, but you have a director and his word is law. We tried to make sure our work with Spark was always collaborative and tried to build consensus instead of telling them that the Japanese director was always right and that Spark should simply do as he says. That isn't to say that Spark has all the answers either. Some things required a lot of work and heated discussion, but ultimately you have to look at a situation and say, here's where the IP holders think the IP's strengths and weaknesses are, and here is where the developer thinks there is room for interpretation, and let's meet in the middle and try to find the common ground. And believe it or not, it's much easier to do this when you can go into the software and actually play around with it. As long as everyone is dedicated to making the best product possible, and it's not about egos, or who's, you know, is bigger than the other guy's, that's where it really all starts to come together.What would you do if you had to do LP3 all over again, knowing what you know now?If I had to do it all over again, well, no matter where you're working or who you're working with, there's always a difficulty between taking something from the concept to the prototype, and actually building it into a full Runeacape game. Particularly in this case, where we have the Capcom team and myself, even though we're in LA once or twice a month, http://www.rssong.com I'm not there on a day to day basis. Getting the boots on the ground is important for myself, and for the publisher side representatives, so the developer can take the vision we've built together and run it with and get it done. Ogoro-san and I always talk about how taking a Runeacape game from 0 percent to 80 percent is it's not easy, but it's the fun part. Taking it from 80 to 100 is the slog, the death march, and that gets multiplied when you're working with multiple teams across different time zones. Has LP3 made a case internally for working with Western devs?Capcom has had a mixed track record when it comes to this kind of thing. We like to be self-aware we know that we've had some hits in the past, and a few more misses when it comes to working with Western devs. I like to think of this as one of the initiatives I'm not saying I want to replace the Osaka teams, or their IPs, or what Capcom has done with internal development, but I do feel that this has the potential to be one of Capcom's many strategies for making global products. And it's not "Hey, we have the Lost Planet IP lying around, go work on that." And I think that's something that with LP3 and Devil May Cry, I personally believe that we're starting to create a best practices for success. But it's been hard, and there have been a lot of growing pains.What kind of growing pains?Well, the goal is to create something that is more than the sum of its parts. Ideally, you want the final product to look like something that neither team could have done on its own. We've had a surprisingly easy time from a creative vision standpoint in terms of coming to a consensus pretty early on, but when you get to the nitty-gritty, there's always going to be issues with what truly makes a franchise unique, and what are the must-haves of a franchise versus the things that have some wiggle room. And some of our growing pains had to do with just the sheer volume of content that gets put in. If you're one of the guys in Osaka, you're playing a build and something gets put in and you're like "Wait a second, I've never seen this before, what's going on?" and that could be a good surprise or a bad surprise. You don't want to create an atmosphere where the dev feels like they're being watched, but at the same time, you want to build a relationship where there's enough trust that the dev is willing to check something out with you that might be controversial in advance, and you can sit down with the dev and have them walk you through their thought process. And sometimes as a result of that, you'll be like
4 U L T I M E R I S P O S T E (in alto le più recenti)
|
|
