The game design was too big — there was no way it could ship in time. How to reduce scope? Take out the conversation system? Reduce the number of player abilities? No… cut the game content based on what makes the most sense story-wise.
Over at GCG, our friend Dave Gilbert describes how he did just that in getting out a sequel to the Blackwell Legacy. Because he made that choice, he was able to create two games instead of one. Now if he had reduced part of the game system, do you think he could have pulled that off?
Guess that game dialog! Today’s line: “I heard a rumor that you’re an idiot. That true?” Check back next week to find out where it’s from.
Found this blog entry useful? Click here to e-mail it to someone!
[...] writerscabal wrote a fantastic post today on “Reducing scope in game story: a case study”Here’s ONLY a quick extractThe game design was too big — there was no way it could ship in time. How to reduce scope? Take out the conversation system? Reduce the number of player abilities? No… cut the game content based on what makes the most sense story-wise. … [...]
[...] Last week’s game dialog came from Owyn the Blademaster in The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion. More Guess that Game Dialog to come! [...]
It is better to wait than rush a game and end up like a disaster like lair.
Agreed. Most game companies either delay, reduce scope, or both. What was nice in Blackwell’s case is that reducing scope based on story allowed Dave to create another, smaller game without rushing.
Weird how I didn’t see this until now. Google Alerts has been slacking!
We like to fly under radar, cuz that’s how we roll