Area 51 Wrap Report

High-Level Goals Peter Franco: Our high level goal was not really to be true to the Area 51 license and franchise. It was to deliver a top-notch first-person shooter, one that could stand on its own, regardless of the subject matter or license. That's where every ounce of our efforts went. We wanted to focus on the shooting, the aliens, and the action. This was how we gauged every step we took. We did not feel the pressure to have to be true to the original light-gun game.

We decided to pull back on the design to focus on only a few things up front. In doing this, we were able to actually get more time and money by eventually showing that we were capable of doing great work

That being said, we did end up with quite a few similarities to it, seeing as both address aliens and the Area 51 base. What's more, it's not like we ignored the fact that we were making a game about one of the most conspiracy-laden places on earth. We drew on that fact greatly to build our story and develop our game. But primarily, we really just tried to stay focused on giving the community a solid FPS title that just happened to have a rich tapestry of Area 51 as a backdrop.

Technology Peter Franco: The main key decision was to develop our own engine from scratch, one that optimized what the PS2 could do; i.e. draw lots and lots of polys, for example. What's more, we really focused on the tools for team and the pipeline for getting content in the game. We focused on this so intensely that the process for getting art from MAX through the editor to the PS2 was mere seconds.

Also, the levels were built such that prototyping could be done extremely quickly, and ideas could be tested fast. This allowed the design team to mock up ideas and test them in the actual game. Ideas could be pre-visualized faster, giving more time for iterations that would polish the game. This helped so much that at the end of the production cycle, which is usually when you have to work overtime to polish the gameplay in all the encounters, there was little tuning to be done because we had iterated so much on it before.

Development Timeline Zach Wood: We started this project about three years ago, with an 18-month initial schedule, so I'd say we were a little off our target. Part of the problem was lack of up-front planning and a tech base that was not quite ready for prime time. Midway through the development cycle, we sat down as a team and really evaluated the game from all aspects. What was working well? What wasn't? Then, we focused our attention on areas of strength, re-scheduled the project and started our march toward completion.

Peter Franco: We started realizing that great things were happening with our in-house engine. We were getting great features for the artists to play with, and the graphics were starting to really shine. So, the decision was made to extend the timeline, allow time to push the graphics and engine up front, and then, when this R&D was done, design the game from the ground up.

Changes and Enhancements Peter Franco: Most of the major changes were in scope. The initial design was very compelling, but was beyond the ability of our team to develop in the time allotted. So, we pared it down, essentially keeping the core concepts - mutation, alien enemies, etc. - but minimizing the variety of each, for example, three stages of mutation instead of 12. This allowed us to focus on what was left and really craft game systems. We decided to go with quality over quantity.

Zach Wood: I think every project starts off with a very broad focus. They're all very big and over ambitious, but that's the dreaming part that is necessary for success. Our initial design had 12 distinct stages of alien mutation for the player, each with pluses/minuses. Great idea, but it also opened up a whole host of balance issues that would have taken focus away from other core elements of the game. On the flip side, the original design didn't include any squad combat, which we found to be very effective and a lot of fun.

Major Challenges Peter Franco: Challenge #1 - Scope. Initially, this was a project with a relatively small team and a short timeline. Yet, we wanted to do a great game and design rolled out an epic plan. We decided to pull back on the design to focus on only a few things up front. In doing this, we were able to actually get more time and money by eventually showing that we were capable of doing great work if we had them.

Challenge #2 - Personnel Changes. The Lead Designer position changed several times over the course of the project. We finally ended up in good hands, but the constant changing definitely hurt the momentum of the project. It led to the project being redesigned multiple times, and work being thrown away.

Challenge #3 - Aiming for AAA. We were aiming to make a AAA shooter. Whether we succeeded or not is up to the public to decide, but nonetheless, this was a definite challenge. It required lots of competitive analysis, lots of long hours, and lots of learning on the job. At the end of the day, we ended up with an extremely tight team and one that really has an innate knowledge of what it takes to make a strong first-person shooter. It's definitely something that we, as a team, are looking to build upon on the next project we take on.