Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
XBox (Games)

Tim Schafer Talks Psychonauts Originality, Dialog, Release 15

Posted by simoniker from the sarcasmatron dept.
Thanks to GameSpot for its interview with Double Fine founder and Psychonauts creator Tim Schafer, following the game's split with Microsoft and subsequent re-signing with Majesco. Schafer, best known for "work on Day of The Tentacle, Full Throttle, and Grim Fandango" at LucasArts, discusses originality ("One of the good things about the state of the games industry right now is that it's incredibly easy to be original. I mean, if you released a game these days that didn't have any army guys in it people would freak out. 'Omg. Where did they get the idea to not use army guys? Are they taking drugs?'"), shaping Psychonauts' story ("I still write most of the dialog. I had some help this time around from Erik Wolpaw from Old Man Murray."), and the state of the game ("We've got a few levels at beta right now, some others at alpha, others somewhere in between, and a new level that we're doing now. We're looking at an early- to mid-2005 release.")
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Tim Schafer Talks Psychonauts Originality, Dialog, Release More

Tim Schafer Talks Psychonauts Originality, Dialog, Release

Comments Filter:

  • Psychonauts is also a nickname for those who are religiously following the band Motorpsycho [motorpsycho.fix.no]. The Greateful Dead had/has Deadheads, Motorpsycho has Psychonauts.


    Yes, this is totally off topic, I just thought it'd be fun with a bit of useless trivia.

  • Army guys? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Turn-X Alphonse ( 789240 ) on Sunday August 08, 2004 @07:14AM (#9912623) Journal
    Guess he's not seen the sales figures for original games lately.

    Anyone remember Bill Hatcher? Made by Sonic team, pushed eggs around, fight evil crows dressed in a chicken suit... yea thought now..

    No one wants to take a risk any more because the industry is no longer about the games. It's about the money, if you get a format (FF, FPS games) you can make endeless sequals and be 99% sure of getting your money and a bit more back.

    Just look at this year. Top two most wanted games are, Half-life 2, FFX whatever it is now and Doom 3. All three will sell millions and be called classic even if they suck.

    Why risk money when you can have another sure fire "open my legs and ride me till dawn" sequal?
    • A lot of people were very upset when Microsoft dropped this game. "Oh, finally there is something original, and Microsoft had to go and dump it!"

      The fact that it was picked up by Majesco should say something about the quality of the game. Possibly it is not all that it could have been?
      • No, it just isn't typical US-based stale, derivative game design. Microshaft also canned the new Oddworld game, after they pretty much bought OWI to do Munch's Oddysee and to talk shit about the PS2. Basically, if it doesn't look like a PC game, MS is afraid to publish it. No wonder the XBOX has failed to dominate the market the way they said it would. The people I know with XBOXes bought them just to mod them, and don't run ANY XBOX games.
        • My point was that Majesco is a bottom-of-the-barrel publisher.

          If you've got a great game, then someone else could probably do a much better job getting the game out there for you.

          Just like the stuff you buy off of television...QVC doesn't get exclusive rights to a product because it's good...the just have a direct link to the least discerning consumers. Majesco is the same thing- the SPECIALIZE in cheap discount-bin games.
      • I know Majesco isn't the best publisher, but BloodRayne was a good game and BR2 looks even better. They also have the rights to Advent Rising. So I wouldn't call Majesco a value publisher like ValuSoft. They're a smaller publisher with some good games and some low-price fodder so I wouldn't write Psychonauts off just yet.

      • Re:Army guys? (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Majesco also has Guilty Gear X2 #RELOAD for Xbox, mind you.

        Also, I fail to see how this has anything to do with the company's future publishing business.

        That's like saying in 1997 "Microsoft, make games? Like what, Solitaire and Hearts?" And then they break out Ensemble Studios and corner the RTS market. Now they've got an undeniably strong PC game house and a half decent console business, too.

        Majesco, like all companies, is looking to make money. They re-evaluate markets and business practices. And righ
        • Damn I hate ACs...

          I wasn't judging it solely on the fact that Majesco will be the publisher.

          I was also basing my judgment on the fact that another publisher dropped the game.

          It went from a top-tier publisher on the Xbox (Microsoft) to a bottom-tier publisher.

          To me, that says something.

    • Re:Army guys? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by AvantLegion ( 595806 ) on Sunday August 08, 2004 @08:13AM (#9912722) Journal
      >> Anyone remember Bill Hatcher? Made by Sonic team, pushed eggs around, fight evil crows dressed in a chicken suit... yea thought now..

      It's not the originality that sunk that game - it's the fact that the game oozed with lameness.

      Not that Billy Hatcher was "original" in any sense, except the "it's not a sequel" sense.

      Plus, it's those big games that give publishers the money to make Billy Hatcher games. Complain about the big titles and make them go away, and you lose your Billy Hatchers too. It works that way in movies. It works that way in games. Every time someone makes a post like this, this fact has to be re-explained.

    • Re:Army guys? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by bugbread ( 599172 )
      No one wants to take a risk any more because the industry is no longer about the games. It's about the money

      Perhaps you can refresh me of when, exactly, the industry was about the games, not the money. I'm pretty young, so my memory only goes back to the Atari 2600, but it was quite definitely about the money back then. Perhaps you're thinking about the glory days of Pong or the Magnavox Odyssey?
      • Perhaps you can refresh me of when, exactly, the industry was about the games, not the money.

        I think the original poster meant that the primary focus shifted from making cool games to making large piles of money. The industry has always been about both games and money, but there's the question of where the primary focus is.

        I'm a game developer that has tried to learn a lot about game development history. In my opinion, the early days of video games were mostly about making cool games more than about ma

    • Re:Army guys? (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      No one wants to take a risk any more because the industry is no longer about the games. It's about the money, if you get a format (FF, FPS games) you can make endeless sequals and be 99% sure of getting your money and a bit more back.

      Two words: Nintendo DS.

      And you're still going to tell me nobody wants to take a risk or try anything new?

    • Re:Army guys? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by startled ( 144833 )
      if you get a format (FF, FPS games) you can make endeless sequals and be 99% sure of getting your money and a bit more back.

      Actually, that's the irony of this reactionary shift to clones-- most games still lose money. Unless you're a sequel to a big IP, making a clone is often a sure-fire way to tank.

      If you look at a lot of the sure-fire big hits this season, a lot of them are at least sequels to games that broke ground: Half-Life 2, Doom 3, GTA San Andreas. The Sims is EA's huge money maker; though it

Slashdot Top Deals

"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."

Close