Support NeoGAF

[winjer]

Redfall Might've Had a Different Fate If Its 1.4 Version Was Its 1.0 Version, Says Director

Redfall director Harvey Smith thinks that the game and Arkane Austin could've been saved if Redfall's 1.4 version were its 1.0 version.

wccftech.com

While speaking on the My Perfect Console podcast (via Eurogamer), Smith claimed that if Redfall's final update, which was update 1.4, was the version that the studio actually launched with in 2023, then Arkane Austion's fate might've "been a different story."

"It was a shock," Smith began on the decision to close the studio. "It was not a decision I agreed with. I did believe very much in the future of the studio, we were working on something super cool." Smith goes on to describe the 1.4 update as a "huge upgrade to the game," and said, "If we had launched with that and then built from there it might have been a different story." According to Smith, the 1.4 update was as close as the studio was able to get to their full vision for the game.

Beyond saving Redfall, if Arkane Austin had gotten the chance to stick around, we might've even gotten a Blade Runner game from them, according to Smith. "We were working for a while on a Blade Runner game, which was super exciting to me. What we could have done with Blade Runner..."

So the question is. IF the game got delayed and the release version was the 1.4, would it have been enough to save Redfall.

 

[Skifi28]

The problems run much deeper than technical issues, polish or refinement. The core design/art just didn't seem to appeal to people and there's no saving that in an update.

 

[Flabagast]

Stop triying to make Redfall happen.

With Starfield it must be the main reason why Xbox got buried this gen.

Xbox is for the losers

 

[kazuyamishima]

First Starfield cyberpunk return like

And now Redfall.

Just let it go MS

 

[DirtInUrEye]

A 1.4 baseline could have put it in a better position, sure. Something to build on. But the world had an eerie lack of atmosphere and the gameplay lacked drive. I actually thought the art and shooting were top notch, but something else was lacking.

 

[clarky]

Stop triying to make Redfall happen.

With Starfield it must be the main reason why Xbox got buried this gen.

Xbox is for the losers

Lots of other reasons but churning out below average games was certainly one of them.

 

[calistan]

I didn't think it was as terrible as people made it out to be. I'm not sure if I ever saw the 1.4 version, but I played all the way through at launch, and I wouldn't have done that if it was totally shit. I have very little patience, I don't need much of an excuse to drop a game.

Took this screenshot near the end, to remember it by.

 

[Laptop1991]

Now If Arkane Austin had made a new Dishonored instead of whatever Redfall was suppose to be, that would of saved loads of gamers and Arkane Austin, the game was never going to succeed no matter how many patches you throw at it.

 

[StueyDuck]

It was also a modern audience game involving vampires

Even if it was better made it still would of had that bringing it down

 

[Jinzo Prime]

I'm not surprised that this person cannot grasp that his game had no appeal, regardless of it's technical performance. No one wanted to play as a team of quirky anti-capitalist vampire hunters with guns. It was an off-putting premise.

 

[vaibhavpisal]

Gamepass would have ensured its success.

Audience are built into the system.

 

[Punished Miku]

If they changed all the characters to anime girls it probably would have crushed it.

 

[diffusionx]

MS thought 1.0 was a good game and Spencer was surprised at the reception it got, and once I saw that, I knew that Xbox was cooked because the people there do not know what a good game is.

Maybe 1.4 would have gotten better reviews but ultimately it was a weak game with a reddit quirk chungus character roster and nobody wants that shit anymore.

 

[Hollowpoint5557]

I played 1.4, this is cope.

 

[Zacfoldor]

If they changed all the characters to anime girls it probably would have crushed it.

 

[Sticks]

 

[MiguelItUp]

Making it passable doesn't equate success. My understanding is that it "helped" but it certainly didn't elevate the experience. The game could've been much better, sure, but the entire project was handled very poorly.

 

[Saber]

This right here is one of the prime reasons why this game failed. The game director thinks patchs would fix this game. The guy is the freaking director and ain't got a clue about his own failure creation.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Playing vanilla 1.0 at launch, it wasnt the worst game in the world. But right away you could tell it was sloppy with weird water graphics and finicky system picking up or examining items. Music and sound were good. But was only 30 fps.

Shit AI too. The first boss you'll probably encounter is in the fire station basement. it had a limited scope of movement so all you had to do is shoot it and then run out the room up the stairs, regroup and go back down. It had that AI perimeter thing where it couldnt go beyond invisible boundaries.

Never played the patches which improved stuff and added 60 fps. But given what I played I dont think that stuff would greatly improve the game. It was a very Xbox 360/PS3 era kind of action adventure game that was forgettable. Or a modern day indie game.

Maybe it's worth dabbling fully patched on sub plan or for $10. But nothing more. Not worth your time unless youre begging to see what it was about or like the vampire hunting plot.

That Arkane Austin studio must had been a cat with 9 lives because you look at their game history and I dont think any of their games sold well. They try to do these moderate budget games doing their own thing which nobody asked for.

 

[Pasta la Vista]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the game even lack like some very basic shit for a MP focused game like matchmaking??
I gotta be wrong, right?

 

[Topher]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the game even lack like some very basic shit for a MP focused game like matchmaking??
I gotta be wrong, right?

Not sure about that, but I distinctly remember sneaking up on a NPC and punching them in the back (yes, I said punch) and instantly killing them. That's how bad it was. The game was no where near being ready for release. Phil Spencer blamed his internal reviewers who supposedly claimed the game was going to be an 8/10. Why you need a reviewer to tell you this game was not ready for release, I have no idea.

 

[xanaum]

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Not sure about that, but I distinctly remember sneaking up on a NPC and punching them in the back (yes, I said punch) and instantly killing them. That's how bad it was. The game was no where near being ready for release. Phil Spencer blamed his internal reviewers who supposedly claimed the game was going to be an 8/10. Why you need a reviewer to tell you this game was not ready for release, I have no idea.

Probably because gaming execs barely play the games. Heck, I wouldnt be surprised if even the internal employees barely play the games in depth. Not everyone cares about slogging through another game across another 20 hours. If I worked at EA, I wouldnt bother playing a free copy of FIFA because I dont follow the sport. But I'd test out NHL and maybe BF.

I get free shit at every company I've worked at and give most of it away. There's only so much soap and cleaners and random shit you can use. Even prototype samples a year out from release I dont bother most of the time. And these are simple usage products. Not games taking all month to play.

And of course any internal worker is going to claim the product is good. So I can see how gaming execs want to trust their employees a good game is truly a good game. It's a shame if a lot of shit games gets approved because the execs trusted their employees would give an honest evaluation of a game. A gaming VP shouldnt need to slog through every game himself in order to know it's good or bad. Just like the Nike CEO shouldnt need to test out every pair of shoes himself to approve.

In simpler products, the reviews are 10x easier. Products get passed around a table and all of us discuss the packaging art and dimensions, the unit/case price, what marketing is going on and when to launch and which customers are best fit etc.... Nobody needs to actually hand test a bottle of shampoo to say it's good or not. Just smelling it is good enough as the products should be pretty good as a standard default, while gaming can be anywhere from awesome to a total trainwreck.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

Gamepass would have ensured its success.

Audience are built into the system.

Joke post? Gamepass has hastened the demise of Xbox.

 

[Mr Moose]

Gamepass would have ensured its success.

Audience are built into the system.

It launched day one on Game Pass.

 

[vaibhavpisal]

It launched day one on Game Pass.

Lemme clarify.

A lot of people in my friend list on xbox got in to play day 1. Lot of hardcore Division/ Borderlands players. But bailed out next day.

If it was launched like version 1.4, they all would have played it to completion. Would have made making future content for it sensible.

 

[saintjules]

 

[Tiago Rodrigues]

lol..."the Game Might've Been Saved If Its 1.4 Version Was Its 1.0"

if, if, if

If my grandma had wheels she would be a bike. This ain't news.

Also...the game's problems are bigger than just a few updates. It would need to be redesigned in many aspects.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

 

[Arsic]

Listen I played it, I love vampire shit when done right, but this game is FAR behind conceptually to be successful.

Maybe the world and lore could be worth salvaging, but all of the gameplay, character design, game loop, guns, story, quests, etc are just bottom of the barrel shit.

 

[damidu]

if you could only finish the game, before selling it to you

 

[Ovek]

There were zero redeeming features of RedFall no amount of patches would have made that turd successful.

 

[BigLee74]

It would have landed better and have been more technically accomplished (unlike the mess that released), but would still have been an incredibly mid game.

I says no.