Click here.

GAMESPOT

PC GAMES
  News
  Reviews
  Previews
  Movies/Media
  Downloads
  Hints/Codes
  Special Features
  Beta Center
  Release Calendar
  Top Games

PC GENRES
  Action
  Adventure
  Driving
  Puzzle
  Role-Playing
  Simulation
  Sports
  Strategy


SWITCH TO:
VIDEO GAMES

WATCH:
GAMESPOT LIVE

PREMIERE SPONSORS
  Outpost.com
  Egghead.com
  GameFever.com
  Buy.com


Click here.



ELITE SERVICES
  Contests
  E-Mail
  eCircles
  PC Newsletter
  VG Newsletter
  Play Games
  Forums
  i-Drive
  Join GameSpot

INFORMATION
  Help
  Contact Us
  Worldwide

SEE ALSO
  3DFiles.com
  GameGuides.com
  Gamespy Arcade
  Heat.net
  Gamespyder.com

MAGAZINES

 



GameSpot News

     Millennium Gaming

George Broussard and Scott Miller
Louis Castle and Brett Sperry
Justin Chin
Richard Garriott
Ron Gilbert
Andy Hollis
Jane Jensen
Norm Koger
Doug Littlejohns
Sid Meier
Peter Molyneux
Michael Morhaime
Ray Muzyka & Greg Zeschuk
Gabe Newell
Chris Roberts
Tim Schafer
Bruce Shelley
John Smedley
Warren Spector
Will Wright

6. What do you think distinguishes you from other visionaries in the industry? Conversely, what do you share in common with them?

George: I wouldn't call us visionaries. We're all just people making games because we love to and have been fortunate enough to do it for a living. I think what distinguishes us from others and what we share in common is the fact that we have a passion for our jobs. We love helping create new games for ourselves and others to play, not because we're simply getting a paycheck or trying to meet some quarterly stock projection, but because we love what we do. I wouldn't even want to - or know how to - do anything else.

Scott: If there's anything that I have in my favor, it's that I place a lot of emphasis on thinking in uncharted directions. I believe in doing things we take for granted in new ways, and I do not believe in the idea of doing things a certain way just because it's been previously successful. Many designers are afraid to change and try something new. Yet, only by taking risks will you avoid making a game that's a clone.

For example, in Duke Nukem Forever, I pushed hard for the idea that Duke can hold two weapons at once, each with its own fire button. This would let the player have two unique weapons, maybe a shotgun and a pipebomb, for example. This would open up a new type of gameplay in which having the right combination of weapons for a situation would lead to greater success. Plus, it's just damn cool to think of Duke holding two weapons and chopping down a roomful of aliens - this idea fits Duke perfectly. Unfortunately, this idea was voted down within the company for being too different. But for me, that's the entire point! Who wants to keep playing games the same way over and over and over again?

Another "radical" idea I very recently suggested for Duke is that he not shoot women in the game. After all, it just doesn't fit Duke's character to shoot strippers or other nonthreatening women - Duke is not a chick killer, he's a chick protector. Anyway, here's another idea that met with heavy resistance within the company because it "takes away from the realism of shooting whatever and whomever the player chooses." Of course, this is faulty thinking because it's actually more realistic for Duke not to shoot nonthreatening females. Also, I suggested that this would even add gameplay in that certain enemies might use women as shields, and Duke couldn't just blow both the female and the enemy away. Instead, Duke would have to make an expert shot that only hit the enemy. Hopefully, I can still get this idea accepted....

Next: George Broussard and Scott Miller (cont.)


 
 

 
 
Use of GameSpot is subject to certain Terms & Conditions.

Copyright © 2000 ZDNet All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of ZDNet is prohibited.