|
Seite 2 von 2
Charles Cecil: Absolutely. Although people who are real scholars actually recognize the difference between real Latin and the way that it’s translated.
Michael Ecke: You have that kind of audience?
Charles Cecil: Oh yes, there is an audience.
 
Michael Ecke: So how old do you think the fans of Broken Sword are?
Charles Cecil: More than other genres we have a wide range. But the point is that actually our audience is an intelligent audience. There is no doubt about that at all. If you are just into mindless shooting you are probably not gonna play Broken Sword. And the market appears to have remained very stable. Broken Sword 3 sold the same as Broken Sword 2. And I think the audience wants to know that it’s as accurate as it can be. And that’s something I do take very seriously.
One of the things that’s quite interesting is that, when you see the game it starts with an Egyptian theme. I went to Egypt to look into the game. And they talked about one of the Pharaos called Amenhotep the Fourth, a very very bad ruler. He changed from multiple gods to a single sun god. So he abandoned Ra, Isis etcetera. And that caused enormous upheaval because all the priests wanted to still worship multiple gods and…
Suddenly the sound of an incredibly loud explosion emerges from the next room. Not a real explosion, naturally, just the audio from a game-demonstration.
Charles Cecil: That’s silly, isn’t it?
The explosion goes on for about 15 additional seconds.
Peter Clausen: Well, that’s what the gaming industry is about these days.
 Charles Cecil: Anyway. So, with Amenhotep the Fourth it was basically Civl War and he was forced out of Egypt. Also, his father had introduced a vizier who was of israelite stock and Amenhotep the Fourth came from that israelite stock too. Now I read this very interesting article which suggested the Amenhotep the Fourth and Moses were one and the same. And when the Exodus took place it was not because he was this guy who’d been brought up in Egyptian Court, but he was actually the Pharaoh that was driven out of Egypt with enormous wealth, an enormous army and there was a real split in the divisions of Egypt. And suddenly all this stuff makes sense. And to me the background history is really important. It’s got to feel convincing. It’s got to feel compelling. Sorry this was a very long answer.
But, yes, we take the story very seriously. If our audience believes it’s credible, then the whole game is credible. And hopefully that’s the way our games are played.
Peter Clausen: So how do you feel about games which only use allusions to mythology? For example naming a character “Deus”, so the designers want to make you think “Well, he is named “God”, what a brilliant story”. Or whatever. Do you think that’s pretentious?
Charles Cecil: Well, I think we have to be very careful. We were the first people to write a game involving templars. Since then dozens of people have done it. So a lot of people would say involving the templars at all is pretentious. So I wouldn’t be anybody. All I would say about this game is that we know it has been overdone, we know it’s very common. So therefore we turn everything on its head.
So I wouldn’t want to criticize anyone else. But there are plenty of games with very shallow stories, I think we can agree on that.
Peter Clausen: Oh yes! Actually I once read a review of Broken Sword 3, where the reviewer criticized it for being another game about templars. And I thought “Well, if they can’t use the templars, who can? They started it!”.
Charles Cecil: Well I know… but this time around we felt we have done it three times. So we do involve the templars but hopefully in a more original way.
Peter Clausen: So has it become more difficult to create an adventure game these days?
Charles Cecil: Well, people are split into two camps. Those that think 2D Point & Click was best, and those who embrace 3D. And 2D Point & Click was great. And 10 years ago that was absolutely legitmate. But there is so much we can do in 3D that it’s really important for us. When we moved to 3D it meant that we could use more special effects, the world hopefully is more alive than it was in 2D. In 2D if you want to move the camera it would be extraordinarily expensive because everything would have to be redrawn from start. But we have very much tried to create something in the spirit of 2D. All the textures are handdrawn and hopefully it feels like it could be a 2D game. Clearly the adventure market is a niche market, but a very significant one. Other markets have grown, while the adventure market hasn’t, but I enjoy writing them and they are quite hard, there is an awful lot of content in an adventure game. I do suppose that storywise we put an awful lot more thought into it, than we would do in pretty much any other genre. So they are hard work, but they are fun.
 
Peter Clausen: Have you ever had a look at recent Nintendo DS adventure games like Another Code or Phoenix Wright? Charles Cecil: I have played Another Code. I thought it was a bit basic to be honest, and quite popular. I suspect it was only as popular as it was because it was published by Nintendo. But the DS is a terrific plattform. In many ways it’s really refreshing because technically it is so far behind the PSP that you are limited so therefore creatively you are more constrained, which I think is great, and the budgets are so much lower. So there is a lot to be said. I hope the Wii is successful. I have no doubt that it will. I could see all three plattforms actually competing. Yes, the PS3 is probably going to be ahead of the 360, but it’s not gonna be far ahead. And hopefully the Wii is not gonna be far behind the 360.
Peter Clausen: So you could imagine creating games for a plattform like the DS?
Charles Cecil: Yes, definitely. But not like Another Code. I think it’d have to feel just more contemporary. Another Code felt to me like a game from 10-15 years ago.
Peter Clausen: In many ways Another Code felt to me like the earlier Sierra games.
Charles Cecil: Exactly.
Peter Clausen: I mean, I liked it, it was fun for as long as it lasted, but after that I almost instantaneously forgot about it.
Michael Ecke: I think a problem is that the Japanese are pretty much ignorant about the whole adventure tradition we have in Europe and America. Most people know Lucasarts, but Broken Sword…
Charles Cecil: But the interesting thing is that Broken Sword 2 was released at the same time as Monkey Island 3. And in Germany Broken Sword 2 was more sucessful. So in Europe Broken Sword is very well known. But in America it’s mediocre. It’s not heard of at all.
 Michael Ecke: Did you see the Japanese artwork for Broken Sword 3?
Charles Cecil: Oh yes. It was great, wasn’t it?
Michael Ecke: I spent the last year in Japan and I saw the package, it reminded me of something, and then I realized it was Broken Sword 3.
Peter Clausen: So, how did the third game sell in Japan?
Charles Cecil: I was afraid you would ask me that. I have no idea. I think the game did allright, but the problem is that in Japan, as you know, we tend to have western games in a different part of the store. And only the real hardcore goes there. So it’s very difficult to succeed in Japan with an European game. Interestingly Grand Theft Auto was pretty much the first game. Spyro and Crash Bandicoot did pretty well too think. Crash Bandicoot I believe they actually had to change because he had too many fingers, which in Japan is a sign of the Devil.
Peter Clausen: Yes, I remember them creating a lot of new artwork too. Anyway, you haven’t played Phoenix Wright?
Charles Cecil: I know Phoenix Wright very well, it’s my shame I haven’t played it. Because you go into crunch mode for four or five months and you don’t play any of the games, which is awful, but now that this phase it coming to its end I am looking forward to actually catching up on some of these things.
Peter Clausen: I think it’s a very clever game, because it uses a great way of storytelling. You actually have 5 different stories, which are intertwined. So every chapter has its own plot, but they all hang together in a larger story-arc, like for example a season of a TV-show. Could you imagine, doing anything like that?
Charles Cecil: Oh yes, very much. I actually think we have a lot to learn. Not so much from film, I am not so sure that film is very good at the moment. But American TV – there are some fantastic series out there. Whether it be 24, or even – God, the horror – Desperate Housewives. What a great series that is!
Peter Clausen: Although I actually love British TV even more.
Charles Cecil: Well, do you?
Peter Clausen: Oh yes! Never watch German TV!
Charles Cecil: We take British TV for granted. Do you like modern British TV?
Peter Clausen: Sure.
Charles Cecil: What do you like?
Peter Clausen: Well, I love Doctor Who…
Charles Cecil: And Doctor Who could have been so bad. But it’s actually pretty good, isn’t it?
Peter Clausen: … Jonathan Creek is quite nice too…
Charles Cecil: But the first Doctor Who was not very good though was he?
Peter Clausen: Well, the original series was quite good for it’s time, but I can see…
Charles Cecil: Oh no. I meant the reinvention. The first new Doctor was only there for a year.
Peter Clausen: Christopher Eccleston?
Charles Cecil: Was it Eccleston? And now you have got whatever his name is…
Peter Clausen: David Tennant?
Charles Cecil: Who I think is brillant!
Peter Clausen: I think so too. And very manic.
Charles Cecil: And now we have lost Billie Piper. That’s terrible. We thought she’d be rubbish. But actually she was really good.
Peter Clausen: Yeah, I hope the series is not going to suffer from it. I want it to be around for many years. Anyway, than there is stuff like The Office… I really like British TV.
Charles Cecil: I am delighted you think that. My son and I watch Bears Tail. Have you ever watched this?
Peter Clausen: I am afraid not.
Charles Cecil: Do you know Bo Selecta?
Peter Clausen: Not yet.
Charles Cecil: Do you like really slapsticky stuff like the Monty Pythons or Fawlty Towers?
Peter Clausen: Oh, I love Fawlty Towers!
Charles Cecil: It’s very rude and very off the wall. There is a character called Bear in it who is very rude, very obscene and actually very funny. Have a look at that.
Peter Clausen: Oh, I will.
Michael Ecke: Back to the crate puzzles. Most people think this kind of thing does not belong in an adventure game, but if you look at the roots of the genre, for example the Space Quest series where we have different arcade sequences. So I think adventure games are not just about thinking.
Charles Cecil: Right. This is very interesting. I think the first Indiana Jones, Raiders of the Lost Ark, was the best adventure film ever. It’s never been surpassed by anything else. Romancing the Stone…
Peter Clausen: I really didn’t like that one.
 Charles Cecil: No. Although the first Mummy was good. But not as good as Indiana Jones. And to me an adventure game should be as appealing as an adventure movie. An adventure game should be easy to control, and the challenge is not the control system but what you do next. But if you can work out a combat system that is easy to master, it’s absolutely legitimate. And what we do at the beginning of Broken Sword 4 is putting the player under pressure while someone is knocking the door down. What I don’t want to write is something like Syberia. Beautiful looking, but it’s absolutely traditional in the sense that nothing happens unless it’s instigated by the player.
So at the beginning of Broken Sword 3 in the plane it’s absolutely legitimate. What happened was that it was extrapolated, and our level designers took them and said “Right, let’s make the game harder”. And it was my fault, I should have stopped that. I don’t blame anybody. But in hindsight the idea of blocking the path can destroy the pacing of a scene. So in Broken Sword 4 we still have the ability to move objects, but we don’t block the path anymore.
Peter Clausen: Well, I guess our time´s over. Thank you VERY much for this interview!
|
