Meta:Two Worlds 2 Interview Part 2: Competition, Multiplayer and Emerging Technologies

This Q&A was posted to the website kombo by Michael Rougeau on August 13, 2010.

Questions and Answers

Here's part two of our interview with Topware Interactive's community director, Jake DiGennaro, in which the Two Worlds 2 dev and I discuss multiplayer, working with an Eastern European studio, the Two Worlds 2 legacy, and more. In case you missed it, don't forget to check out part one here.

Kombo: Leveled loot and enemies, like in Oblivion, are seen as a necessity by some people, and as a game breaker by others (like myself). How is this being addressed in Two Worlds 2? Will the world level along with you, or are there set levels for each area?

Jake Digennaro: The way that we've designed it is there are set ranges for certain creatures and certain areas, where it's not a matter of...everything around you is kind of your level as you go through the game. But things will kind of climb a little bit with you so that it doesn't just become, you're two levels ahead of the curve because you spent a little bit of time grinding, so everything is just, you know, popping up at once, and it's dead. But at the same time, we did want to make it so that as players come back to certain areas, and they just want to take out their huge sword and knock the crap out of an ostrich or a rhino or something like that, that they have the freedom to do that because of the fact that they are higher in level. There's something enjoyable about just whacking a baboon and knocking it into the stratosphere later in the game.

Kombo: Definitely. One of my biggest complaints with Oblivion was, you know, you get to level 20 and every group of bandits has a full set of glass armor, and that was a big change from Morrowind to Oblivion. In Oblivion, you could remain at level one and the end game would actually be easier than if you climbed all those levels. Are you guys addressing that when you think about how to level the world?

Jake Digennaro: Yeah, like I said, let's say you push through the content, and you're level 15 or something. The area that you are in, when we set out to design the game, was designed to be like, okay, we're assuming the player is going to be roughly level 15 in this area. If you decide to go out and grind a little bit and, say, get to level 17 or 18, the enemies may, depending on the actual enemy itself, like, that specific creature, may kind of edge up their damage or their health a little bit more toward the 16 range or the 17 range. So it kind of scales up with you a little bit, but still gives players that satisfaction if they take the time to grind up and get a little bit ahead - if they are a little bit more powerful. Obviously if you were to grind up to, let's say, 20 or 22 or something like that, we're not going to scale it up to 21 to be right behind you at all times. But yeah, it does creep up a little bit with the players as they go through, just to provide that little bit extra sense of challenge, and the XP of killing something that is kind of adjusted accordingly.

Kombo: So when I saw the game in June at E3, a lot of the features that were in there were placeholders, or had yet to be fully implemented or balanced. It seemed to me like a lot to do in just four months. So now that more than a month has passed since then, can you say that there will be enough time to include everything that the team wants to include?

Jake Digennaro: Yeah, it's kind of an interesting dynamic of working with an Eastern European studio, which I've had the pleasure of doing a couple times. They're a little bit less pipeline-like. The best way to describe it is a lot of the studios here in the US that I work with are very like, "We finish this, then we move on to this, We finished this, and we move on to this." The development style of a lot of the studios over there is more like a pyramid, where at the beginning of the project, you have, like, the base of the pyramid, where you literally are working on everything all at once, and as you go toward the end, it gets smaller and smaller and starts to get more refined until you hit that end where everything just kind of comes together at a peak. It's one of the hectic and, yet, really intriguing things about working with them. Where things were placeholder a month or two months ago, they were, like, finalizing stuff, everything just really starts rapidly coming together, and all of a sudden it goes from thing thing that looks like a beta game to being a completed project in, like, two months. It's all just a matter of them kind of having all these separate components, and then, "All right," you know, sewing them together into one cohesive presentation. But a lot of the stuff, as far as placeholders, as far as everything that's coming along, right now we're primarily in QA, and then just honing things, but everything as far as most of the systems and mechanics and everything like that are finalized at this point in time.

Kombo: So how will multiplayer in the sequel work? It was one of the main selling points in the first game. Some players had problems with it, which I assume were technical.

Jake Digennaro: The multiplayer mechanics with the game kind of come threefold, in that we have the PvP element of the game, which makes a return from the first one, obviously, up to eight players, and whether they choose to do that in like a- you can jump in and fight one other person, kind of like a duel, you can get into teams, 2v2, 4v4, whatever. You can do kind of a free-for-all thing. And then we have a couple little, well, I wouldn't call them mini-games, but just alternative formats to just jump in and beat the crap out of somebody. We have, for example, one of them's a little crystal hunt, where you're put out in a field, and there's these crystals you collect by killing other people. You can steal the crystals they've taken, and the first one to a certain quantity wins, or, you know, whoever has the most after a certain time limit. Kind of how you determine it at the outset of that specific match. But creating a little bit of content for the PvP so that it doesn't become really stale really early on, and it has some more lighthearted, fun kind of things. So that's kind of that portion of the multiplayer.

And then we have a co-op mechanic, where there's a whole separate kind of co-op campaign, for up to eight players. It's designed in sort of a mission, or instance, dungeon - or however you want to term it - format. There's about five or six hours of content and the way it's designed is that it's carved up into missions, essentially. The earlier ones are easier. As you progress, they get more and more difficult as you go through, so you can start off with, you know, maybe two people (because it is up to eight people for co-op), you can start off with a couple people as you being to refine your character. Because the single player campaign, storyline, narrative character and the multiplayer characters are completely independent. So when you make that migration over to multiplayer (and you can have multiple characters in multiplayer) you start with a fresh slate. So working through those early co-op missions with friends, or using the matchmaking system that we've implemented to go through that content.

And then the third element of the game is that - we didn't want to forego the kind of experience that players have of jumping into a world with friends and just running around and questing and having that kind of free play environment, so we have what we've essentially dubbed the "Village" mode, where each player is granted a hub village with a surrounding landscape, that is unique to their character, and they can have friends, or random people can jump in and kind of run around and quest together, and as you spend more and more time in this world, the availability of quests, and the challenge of the different activities, and what kind of stuff is available from vendors and shopkeeps, and rewards, and the town itself, kind of all grows and matures alongside the player themselves.

And at a certain point, because the way that each village is supposed to be, like, a trade village, or a crafting village, your village starts to specialize in a certain kind of equipment. Like, maybe mine will specialize in two-handed swords, and yours is leather working or whatever be it. So it encourages us to spend time in each other's worlds, because in order for me to get access to certain leather goods and things like that, I have to be in somebody's world who specializes in leather goods, and it has to be at a certain point, obviously, for it to be worthwhile to me. So helping your town progress, and helping your game progress with the content, is beneficial to me as well as it is to you. And then we can go jump into co-op, and jump to PvP, and all that kind of stuff. So kind of creating this symbiotic relationship between these different mechanics, and really offering a little bit for everyone, was a big focal point when we set out. We wanted to make multiplayer a well-rounded experience, as opposed to just a tacked on feature because everybody's supposed to have multiplayer these days.

Kombo: Why not let players use their single player characters in multiplayer? It seems like to play multiplayer and have your rewards carry over would be a pretty big perk.

Jake Digennaro: The reason that we decided to do that was there's going to be players that jump in, and are going to be a little bit more oriented towards the multiplayer, and some that are going to be, like, "I want to play single player, this campaign." But let's say, for example, I want to do the campaign in single player first. I go through the game, I get all badass armor, and everything like that. I beat it, and then I go play multiplayer. Well, if I come over with this really powerful character, creating all this stuff for the village mode and the co-op campaign and everything like that, is kind of frivolous, because you're just going to jump in and just mash through it really fast, and not actually experience it and grow with it and go through the paces the same way that you would in the single player game.

Plus, the other side of that is by requiring players to start fresh, needing help from other people, for some of the stuff as they progress through and needing to create a community, it builds kind of a community aspect. It makes the multiplayer require you to interact with other people as opposed to if you just brought over a really powerful single player character. You could get through the vast majority of the content by yourself, and then you're basically just faced with PvP and just jumping in and beating up other single player characters that have been ported over. So it kind of defeats the purpose of having a multiplayer in a lot of respects.

Kombo: It seems almost like a separate game.

Jake Digennaro: Yeah, and that's kind of the way that we've developed it, and the way that we've presented the co-op campaign experience is that there is a narrative to it. It's not just a matter of just missions that you plow through with friends. It's obviously not as engrossing as the single player, because we have significantly less time to tell it, and some of the mechanics and the replayability and everything like that, but it helps bridge Two Worlds 1 to Two Worlds 2, it kind of fills some of the plot holes that we intentionally left in the single player game. It explores some of the backgrounds of some of the different characters and stuff like that that you aren't necessarily exposed to in the single player campaign. So it kind of has its narrative and plot related rewards in addition to the enjoyment of the actual content itself.

Kombo: A lot of recent RPGs, like Mass Effect 2, even Final Fantasy XIII, have allowed RPG elements, like inventory management, things like that, to take a back seat to action and story. How is Two Worlds 2 going to compete in that sort of market? Or, do you see it as filling a more conventional role? We haven't had one of those games that's more a conventional RPG in quite a while.

Jake Digennaro: It's much more of the conventional, kind of like, just tons and tons of shit for you to collect and sell, and with the way that we've designed the crafting system, which is reminiscent of the first game, but a lot more hashed out, we actually take equipment that you find, and you can actually break it down into its basic components, whether that be leather, steel, wool, whatever, and you can use that to further augment other pieces of equipment in your inventory. Or you can sell it and try to buy more things, to accrue gold to buy potions, or whatever, and then having all the crazy things that you can collect off in the world, as far as, like, flowers, or undead thyroids, or spider webs, and you have the alchemy system, where you can combine and make all these crazy potions, and you can name them, and all this stuff.

And then having the magic system, where you collect these cards, and you use the cards to build up spells. We really wanted to keep that looting, kind of classic feel to an RPG, and really wanted to bring that back, to kind of keep that old mentality of the collecting and hoarding things. I'm assuming, as far as you talking about inventory management, making it much more simplistic as far as, you get this weapon, and then it grows with you as you go forward, but you collect, like, pieces that make it grow, as opposed to actually changing it or deciding, "Do I want this one, or this one?" But at the same time, for players that like that, that idea of keeping something and having it grow with them, having that crafting mechanic in the game, where you can break down things and augment your weapon, and have it grow with you as players, can do that, if they want, really.

Kombo: The original drew countless comparisons with Oblivion, obviously. Even the back of the box called it "Oblivion on steroids." But there hasn't been a new Elder Scrolls game in half a decade, and Elder Scrolls 5 hasn't been announced, even. So how isTwo Worlds 2 going to take advantage of this monopoly?

Jake Digennaro: When we were launching the first game, obviously, there were a lot of comparisons drawn to Oblivion, because it had kind of become the 800 lb. gorilla in the room when it came to fantasy games. So there was definitely some inspiration, and everybody wanted to kind of be Oblivion, and I think that's one of the missteps that we took, near the end of the cycle, was trying to make it reminiscent of Oblivion and trying to convince people that it was in that same space. But with Two Worlds 2, we've really tried to make something that's a little bit more unique and a little bit more its own thing. It's less that it's trying to be like some sort of Oblivion clone or something like that, and it's trying to create its own niche within that kind of RPG, fantasy landscape, so that maybe two years down the road, somebody will come out with a game, and they'll be like, "Well, it's like Two Worlds," and draw comparisons to us. But on the other side of that, it is kind of nice being the only one in our space right now, and getting that attention and not needing to compete with one of the Elder Scrolls installments, because obviously they're amazing games, and how detailed and developed they are- they're an amazing studio, in general. But not having to have those comparisons drawn, and being able to be evaluated on our own terms and by our own content is really nice this time around.

Kombo: How do you think it's helping the genre evolve, as in, what do you think games in two years (as you said) will take away fromTwo Worlds 2 and want to copy?

Jake Digennaro: As far as our game, in particular, if there are elements of the game itself that we'd like to kind of hang our hats on, it would be some of the flexibility that we've offered in the game, as far as, like I said, being able to do with equipment what you want, whether that means stick with the same stuff and upgrade it, or constantly switch it out, or sell it and buy stuff. And then, like I said, the card mechanics, creating your own spells, and naming them, and the alchemy, and how the class system is presented, where it's not just one thing- where you can kind of mix and match and if you want to reset these points, you have that flexibility. So just the flexibility of the content to have players, obviously within a certain space, tailor the experience to be the most enjoyable for them, I think is what we really want players to walk away with. And then, to walk away knowing that with the narrative and everything like that, that we've started to create an interesting and engaging landscape for possible Two Worlds 3, or whatever direction we take with the franchise.

Kombo: My last question has to do with the technologies that are emerging all over the industry. Do you think there's any place for motion controls in an RPG?

Jake Digennaro: I think with the right producer and creative mind behind it, there may be a way to incorporate it on a level. You know, that's obviously one of those personal things. I mean, a lot of people are really getting behind the Move and the Kinect and the Wii MotionPlus and everything like that, and they're really intriguing technologies. There's a lot of stuff you can do with them that you can't do with a traditional, classic game pad, as far as interaction and actual player to player content, but at the same time it's difficult to kind of manipulate that and make mechanics not feel like a gimmick. So I think there's somebody that's going to do it. Is it going to be us? I wouldn't count on it. We're a much more traditional kind of gaming company. We like our classic games, and we like the way that things were done in the 90s. I think that's kind of our space that we reside in. But when you have these really creative, progressive minds, like, for as loud and outspoken as he is, Peter Molyneux is a brilliant guy, and I'm really interested to see if and how they integrate the Kinect into Fable 3, or any other project that they come up with. You know, what he did with Milo and stuff was really intriguing. So there will be somebody that does it. No doubt. Will they do it well? I don't know. That's to be seen.

Kombo: What about 3D? Do you think it could enhance an RPG, or would it be kind of pointless?

Jake Digennaro: I mean, depending on, especially in the first person perspective, if Elder Scrolls 5, or whatever they decide to name it, wants to, in some capacity, incorporate 3D, obviously it adds some depth to the game. Do I think it will vastly enhance the experience? Not really. With the way that graphics have improved to the point that they have, you can add a lot of depth without needing that stereoscopic vision mechanic. It would be cool. I don't think it would revolutionize the experience. It wouldn't be like, you know, now you have to have 3D, because without 3D, it sucks, but it would be cool.

Kombo: That's all, folks. Thanks again to Mr. DiGennaro for taking the time to chat!