Warren Spector Interviewed, First Game Cancelled

[Liquidize105]

Warren Spector (http://www.working-title.de/artikel.php?artikel_id=106&page=1) has been interviewed by zhe German press working-title (http://www.working-title.de/).

Let's talk a bit about Junction Point Studios. The company has been founded about 1.5 years ago, but it's been pretty quiet until now. What have you been doing so far?

JPS currently has about 20 people. We started out working on a pretty epic game with a supportive publisher but, through no fault of our own, the deal got cancelled after about 9 months of work. Since then, we've been working on some stuff with Valve (can't talk much about that), doing concept development for some folks (can't talk at ALL about that, sadly!) and pitching some new game ideas. We're keeping plenty busy!

Final question: When can we expect an official announcement of Junction Point's first game?

Your guess is as good as mine! But I'll keep you posted.
Good luck to Warren, Art Min, and Company.

For the sake of sales, I hope it's an action title. http://ttlg.com/forums/images/smilies/erg.gif

[Captain Awesome]

From what info I was told, it sounds like its going to be a "very" animated sort of concept. Might be 2d-like in some ways.

[Draft]

Probably that wascally wabbit game.

[holysin]

For the sake of my enjoyment, something Deus Ex-like PC exclusive.

[Blade]

Something story-based with Deus Ex-like gameplay coming in monthly installments on Steam.

Make it like LOST, where the story is convoluted yet keeps us begging for more.

[Chill]

Something story-based with Deus Ex-like gameplay coming in monthly installments on Steam.

Make it like LOST, where the story is convoluted yet keeps us begging for more.

One of the best game ideas I've ever heard. Bring storytelling back to the forefront of game design.

[RandomViolence]

Put it in front of me, Warren, and I will buy it. Keep up your fantastic work.

[TheBrainKills]

"I wish I knew why more people didn't offer players DX-like choice. It certainly is hard to pull off. And as well as DX sold, you could make an argument that players are just as happy with more linear games. Guess I'm going to have to keep plugging away and hope the world follows! "

Amen brother, I will follow.

[Borys]

DX sold well?

So why did they butcher DX:IW?

[Klade]

DX sold well?

So why did they butcher DX:IW?

Try reading that quote again, DX did not sell well.

[StoneGut]

"stuff with Valve"

I like the sounds of that!

[Borys]

Try reading that quote again, DX did not sell well.

"And as well as DX sold, you could make an argument that players are just as happy with more linear games."

Doesn't that mean that it sold well but it could sell better?

[Stormwatcher]

this guy worked on a LOT of great games. He is one of the best. I'll play anything he makes.

[bean19]

Warren Spector is a good game designer, but he isn't a Miyamoto, Hedlund, Schafer, or a Will Wright, etc. Deus Ex and Thief were great, but neither of these titles maintained their excellence in their most recent builds.

This was probably as much a limitation of Ion Storm's team as Mr. Spector's design, but in Thief he designed a hub-city that was a pain to cross due to frequent and boring load screens and the art, particularly the character models, was uninspired. Also, his level design is generally linear. . . we didn't see the multiple routes that were key to Deus Ex and earlier Thief games in the Invisible War or Deadly Shadows.

Maybe he's lost his touch, or maybe his hand is too removed from his work now. In any case, I hope that he can start delivering the goods again.

[holysin]

Warren Spector is a good game designer, but he isn't a Miyamoto, Hedlund, Schafer, or a Will Wright, etc. Deus Ex and Thief were great, but neither of these titles maintained their excellence in their most recent builds.

This was probably as much a limitation of Ion Storm's team as Mr. Spector's design, but in Thief he designed a hub-city that was a pain to cross due to frequent and boring load screens and the art, particularly the character models, was uninspired. Also, his level design is generally linear. . . we didn't see the multiple routes that were key to Deus Ex and earlier Thief games in the Invisible War or Deadly Shadows.


Actually, I'd say these problems with DX:IW and Thief are there because the game was developed with the Xbox in mind, and 64mb of ram sucks. Had these games been PC exclusive (or had they actually took the time to make a game that'd fit with what people are used to on PCs) there'd be bigger areas, a better HUD, etc.

Maybe that wouldn't be so bad nowadays, with 512mb on the 360, but there could still be a problem with the HUD (just look at oblivion).

[Beelzebud]

I'm glad to see Spector get out of the corporate world he was trapped in.

Hopefully we'll soon see another great game from his team.

I was very pissed off at the release of Deux Ex 2, but let's face it. Their publisher ruined that game, and Spector is probably better off on his own.

[Eggplant!]

"stuff with Valve"

I like the sounds of that!

Valve has hinted that Episode 4 would be done by a third party. Hmmmm....

[Draft]

"And as well as DX sold, you could make an argument that players are just as happy with more linear games."

Doesn't that mean that it sold well but it could sell better?It's a weird sentence, but you could interpret that he's saying, "as poorly as Deus Ex, a non-linear game, sold, you can assume the general public is happy with more linear games."

[Supertongue5000]

DX sold a million copies. They felt that wasn't enough for all the (undeserved) acclaim they got. So they thought, hey, let's just fuck the game up to the high heavens and lololol our way to the bank!
Something story-based with Deus Ex-like gameplay coming in monthly installments on Steam.

Make it like LOST, where the story is convoluted yet keeps us begging for more.
No offense, but that's a really stupid idea. It completely destroys any non-linearity or open-endedness the game could have because it forces the player to take the path directed by the developer as the game comes in installments and there's no way to take into account the player's actions unless the entire game is planned out and if that's the case, why not just release it regularly instead of being a dick and forcing us to get a credit card or use STEAM or some other horrid digital delivery system.

And if I wanted to have a really good story, I'd read a book or watch LOST. Games are for gameplay, stories are merely fronts that provide the player with some superficial motivation to play (maybe if I rescue the princess she'll fuck me!).
Their publisher ruined that game, and Spector is probably better off on his own.
Wrong. Eidos gave that pretentious twat Spector and that moron Harvey complete control over the game and look what happened.

I hope Spector leaves the biz for good. He does nothing but leech his name onto other people's games and creations. I'm suprised he hasnt tried to put his name on Bioshock like he did with System Shock and Ultima Underworld.

[Busted_Astromech]

Wow.

Did Warren Spector rape your puppy while Harvey Smith recorded it?

I think the general view is that IW was screwed for several reasons:
Publisher (game shipped early)
Bad design decisions (1 ammo, simplification)
PC/Console Design combined with a terrible engine (i.e. cramped levels without even good graphics to show for it)

I don't know how much different IW could have been had they all the time in the world. I'd assume that many of the simplification implemented in IW was a result of the dual-platform decision, but it wasn't as though they were rejecting those decisions: they were just bad ideas, period, that Spector and Smith adopted. I love Spector because he likes the same games as I do and, as he says, makes games for himself, but I don't quite know what to make of the fiasco that was the end of Ion Storm: Austin.

[Supertongue5000]

as he says, makes games for himself, but I don't quite know what to make of the fiasco that was the end of Ion Storm: Austin.
It's rather simple: Spector doesn't know shit about game design. He talked so much in inteviews about the revolutionary next-gen emergent AI and what did we get? AI that wouldn't be out of place in fucking Doom. They'd just stand there and take shotgun blasts to the head. He talked about how choices would matter. Did they? Hell no. I could kill the leader of the church of the whatever and all I'd get was a message saying "We're dissapointed in you BUT we're going to give you a second chance!" Need I even mentioned the horrid dialogues? The cramped and boring, bland levels? The shitty interface? The load times?
Bad design decisions (1 ammo, simplification)
PC/Console Design combined with a terrible engine (i.e. cramped levels without even good graphics to show for it)
Both of which are Harvey's and Warren's ideas. Even after the game was released, they acted all smug about it like it was still the second coming of christ. They're assholes. Assholes who couldn't design their way out of a wet paper bag.

[Busted_Astromech]

I'm not going to argue that Invisible War was good, but how does it make his other games any less good? A good designer can still have bad games.

The AI not living up to expectations is extremely common. Remember Oblivion? Remember Half-Life 2? Talk about how in the demo the Strider could find its way around the city? When the game came out they were limited to rooms they could meander in and that's it.

AI is something that's easy to plan and hard to execute. It's a sin a lot of developers make, and while it's not complementary to Spector to be doing it, I'm not going to hold it against him too much.

AI is by its nature supposed to seem good while not necessarily being good. The AI in Invisible War probably was a lot more complex than that in Deus Ex. But because it was only asked to do the same behaviors, behaviors which Deus Ex did a reasonable job of emulating, even with a perfect implementation you wouldn't be able to tell much of a difference. With all the bugs the AI did end up having, for all its complexity it still gave a much less convincing performance--which means it was worse AI.

It's not an easy job to get a good AI system working. Adding depth does not necessarily translate into a good simulation--but can't you give a guy at least one chance to make that mistake?

[Supertongue5000]

but can't you give a guy at least one chance to make that mistake?
I think saying that the AI will be emergent and develop their own behaviors and react in different ways to the player's situation and then ending up having them have serious sam AI is a little unforgiving. Especialy when he still acted like the game had that emergent AI in post-release interviews.

I mean, seriously, beyond the mediocore Deus Ex and the tragedy that was Invisible War, what else has he done? Thief 3 was merely okay, and it was hampered in the same way DXIW was. He didn't do shit for System Shock, he just atached his name onto it, same goes all the looking glass/blue sky games. He's a con artist of a designer. He can talk big about game theory and act like he's on the cutting edge (much like the also very-overblown Will Wright) but in reality he's a dupe, a fraud who thinks he has the cred just 'cause the dumbass press throws his name around a lot.

[Busted_Astromech]

What gives the opinion of one who thinks Deus Ex was mediocre and merit? Even if you didn't like the game it's hard to find flaws with it--we're talking a AAA production across the board.

Now, do you have personal experience of Spector's level of involvement with Ultima Underworld, System Shock, or Deus Ex? Because you're throwing around personal attacks that one would not glean from the material available to the public.

Unless...you're John Romero, angry that Ion Strom Austin upstaged you, aren't you? Aren't you!

[holysin]

LOL @ Busted_Astromech

There were mistakes in IW, I'll bet they learned from them.

[Supertongue5000]

There were mistakes in IW, I'll bet they learned from them.
Read the post-release interviews with Spector and Harvey. They didn't learn shit. Oh, can't forget Spector's "Tyranny of choice." SHOULD I GET THE BIG GUN, OR THE SMALL ONE? OH THE CHOICES!
What gives the opinion of one who thinks Deus Ex was mediocre and merit?
The fact that I can see through the paper-thin veneer of depth the game claims.
Now, do you have personal experience of Spector's level of involvement with Ultima Underworld, System Shock, or Deus Ex?
He's listed as Special Thanks in UU and executive producer or some such for System Shock. We all know he was deeply involved in DX because it sucked serious shit.
Even if you didn't like the game it's hard to find flaws with it--we're talking a AAA production across the board.
Just for fun I'll list some seriously major flaws:

-The starting level: Okay, I'm a highly trained superagent mofo. So all they give me is a knife and they go "okey-dokey, we're gonna TEST YA!" Also, I love starting off with low weapon skills. Aren't I a super-awesome cyborg? Wouldn't they want to make me as strong and powerful as possible? Obvious copout: That'd ruin the game! Reply: Than they should've designed the game better, shouldn't they?

-Binary choices: I get chastised for going in the lady's room, but not for killing all the unacto agents on the island. Also, the choices I make last like what, five seconds? I get yelled at by whatshisname for killing that guy in the statue of liberty and then next mission we're all buddy-buddy again like nothing ever happened.

-Bullshit open-endedness: I love how everyone boasts how open-ended and awesomely non-linear it is, so then how come I HAVE to get arrested by majestic 12? How come I HAVE to escape the prison and blow up the freighter? How come I HAVE to fight Walter? Why can't I join them? Too much work for the designers? Well, Fallout did it so why couldn't the almighty Spector? Oh yes, that's right: Becaue he's a pretentious twat with no clue about design.

-In the end: In the end, your choices don't matter shit. You decide the end of the game in the last two minutes. I made a save game right before I had to choose and got to see all the endings in the span of 10 minutes. THAT WAS SO WORTH IT, THANKS WARREN!

[jBusy]

He's listed as Special Thanks in UU and executive producer or some such for System Shock. We all know he was deeply involved in DX because it sucked serious shit.

Then go start making your own games and leave us alone.

[Supertongue5000]

What? Are we not allowed to criticize games now? We're just supposed to stand by and let devs shit down our mouths? Or am I only allowed to make fun of and criticize games that have been deemed "crappy" by the Powers that Be? Christ.

[Busted_Astromech]

-The starting level: Okay, I'm a highly trained superagent mofo. So all they give me is a knife and they go "okey-dokey, we're gonna TEST YA!" Also, I love starting off with low weapon skills. Aren't I a super-awesome cyborg? Wouldn't they want to make me as strong and powerful as possible? Obvious copout: That'd ruin the game! Reply: Than they should've designed the game better, shouldn't they?
How about: it's bad design to overwhelm the player with too many options at first. They can't give you every weapon, but as a special agent you are equipped with a pistol. That's what I remember Solid Snake having...
Oh, and you get your choice of tranquilizer crossbow, sniper rifle, or rocket launcher within the first five seconds. You're hardly going in unarmed. And remember, the level is a test: the people who built you want to see your skill, and acquiring munitions beyond what you're provided seems a reasonably handy skill for an agent to have. What is less well supported is that you start out with no biomods. It's obviously better for the design to give the player more power over time, but causes fiction problems. Luckily they have a decent explanation: during the course of the game (about a week), you should have received all your upgrades at UNATCO had things gone right. The doctor mentions that. The fiction answers the logical concerns as well as possible. It still needs to make room for game design, where the player is encouraged to continue by the promise of greater powers.

-Binary choices: I get chastised for going in the lady's room, but not for killing all the unacto agents on the island. Also, the choices I make last like what, five seconds? I get yelled at by whatshisname for killing that guy in the statue of liberty and then next mission we're all buddy-buddy again like nothing ever happened.

-Bullshit open-endedness: I love how everyone boasts how open-ended and awesomely non-linear it is, so then how come I HAVE to get arrested by majestic 12? How come I HAVE to escape the prison and blow up the freighter? How come I HAVE to fight Walter? Why can't I join them? Too much work for the designers? Well, Fallout did it so why couldn't the almighty Spector? Oh yes, that's right: Becaue he's a pretentious twat with no clue about design.

Essentially the same point, so I'll address them together.

The real choice in the game is how you do the levels. Deus Ex never advertised having real story choice (though Invisible War did, and didn't provide). Unlike being able to choose where you go, like in Fallout, in Deus Ex the action is provided without the seperation you get from a top-down click-to-move system. The choices you make are similarly close: you choose how to approach a system. The revolution of Deus Ex was that there really were 3 ways to approach a problem. Other games attempted it but none really achieved it; there usually was a 'best way' of doing things.

Changing the direction of the story was not something Deus Ex even attempted to do. I am still impressed, however, by how many little tidbits you get (conversations relating to your actions) that, while not earth shattering, make the world more reactive than in games seen since (action games).


-In the end: In the end, your choices don't matter shit. You decide the end of the game in the last two minutes. I made a save game right before I had to choose and got to see all the endings in the span of 10 minutes. THAT WAS SO WORTH IT, THANKS WARREN!
That's a legitimate complaint. But it's better than having nothing--a small amount of story modification. Anything more would have required the scope of the game to be drastically increased. Generally developers can't throw everything they want in. Falout had story choice as its focus. Deus Ex focused on choice through action. Adding story choice would have been far beyond this production.

As to how important he is in the games he is credited for, I have no information other than everything I've read. So I'm hesitant to change my mind on your say--unless you do have personal involvement and can plausibly deny it. But you seem to hate Mr. Spector with a passion, for reasons unfathomable to me. Making games you think are overrated doesn't warrant that. Heck, even falsely taking credit for games you think are overrated doesn't warrant your ulcer, if you're just an onlooker as the rest of us.

[Supertongue5000]

How about: it's bad design to overwhelm the player with too many options at first.
Your brain would probably explode if you tried to play Ultima 7.
They can't give you every weapon, but as a special agent you are equipped with a pistol. That's what I remember Solid Snake having...
If I'm a special fucking agent that cost billions of dollars, wouldn't they want to ensure my complete and utter protection? Also, what the fuck does Solid Snake have to do with DX?
And remember, the level is a test
Wait, I thought Anna said the tutorial was a test. WHICH IS IT?!?!?!
The revolution of Deus Ex was that there really were 3 ways to approach a problem.
Hack the door, or go through the air vents...HMM REVOLTUION! I should also point out that System Shock 2 had this way before DX and it felt much more natural and immersive than 5 foot tall airvents.
Other games attempted it but none really achieved it; there usually was a 'best way' of doing things.
All DX achieved was two, maybe three different points that all led to the same end. You could take A, B or C, but it still led to D. In, oh let's say, System Shock, you could take A and it would go to C, or maybe C would led to D but D would back to A and if you went through A again it would go to B and so on and so forth.

I do dislike mr. spector immensely mainly because he makes these mediocre titles but is constantly heaped mounds of praise. Did anyone in the mainstream press call him out after DXIW? No, they simply went "PEE ON US SOME MORE, SPECTOR! PLEASE, I WANT YOUR PEE!"

[Liquidize105]

Jesus, material on Spector invariably comes back to DX2.

And now we have a cracker jack who doesn't get DX, at all, who thinks it's possible for the story to fork in 10 directions and still be cohesive, thinks the developers have ten years and a hundred million to work on their project and still be able to afford to sell it at $50 a pop, who takes it personally to ridicule a person he's probably never met in real life before.

It's true, Warren is not credited for Thief 1, 2, System Shock 2. After Deux Ex, he took an adminatrative role and Harvey Smith stepped forward to become the project director. For Thief 3, Randy Smith, a LG veteran, was project director. None of this changes the fact that the man knows emergent gameplay, he knows how to make a good game that defies expectation (ironically one of the reasons why his games aren't breakaway commercial successes). Every project is a race against time to the finish, and every studio works under different conditions. Some sacrifice feature for feature, others take as long as needed within a reasonable timeframe, and some drone on forever.

Enough, you're probably trying to incite a flamewar to get attention. You picked the wrong person to lay the worm's eye view on.

[Busted_Astromech]

I'm not saying I dislike complexity, I'm saying that when you can avoid unnecessary complexity it's good to do so. I enjoy complicated character generation even if it means I only find out after 5th level which skills are worth having. But an elegant design is usually preferable (usually: IW took this way too far).

And the first level is a test, the game explicitly states it. The powers that be (Bob Page, Walton Simons) want to see how well their creation can perform in a real world scenario. That's why the UNATCO troops were pulled out and Gunther is trapped (he refused to retreat). If you were to die in an easy situation the Majestic 12 would have no use for you. Makes sense to me.

I prefer System Shock 2 with its atmosphere. However it was much, much more linear in its level design than Deus Ex. The airvents are somewhat tacky but I don't know of a better way of doing it. And in Deus Ex you could hack doors, find keys, kill all enemies, not kill anyone in the game (I've played through like that before), bribe people, etc.

The choices all led to the same place but that wasn't the point. The point was that the game could be played in a totally different manner: it could be both a stealth game and a combat game.

The choices in where you went in System Shock were due to hub-like level design. There were multiple paths because you had to cross through a level many times. In Deus Ex each level was more of a lockbox you had to figure out a way in. But hey, I'm not going to argue the point that System Shock 2 is better because I fully believe so myself. I just don't think Deus Ex is bad at all by comparison.

[Supertongue5000]

one of this changes the fact that the man knows emergent gameplay, he knows how to make a good game that defies expectation (ironically one of the reasons why his games aren't breakaway commercial successes)
I've yet to see a game that demonstrates this. DX wasn't emergent in the least, nor was Thief 3 or DXIW.
And now we have a cracker jack who doesn't get DX, at all
How can I get DX? Please enlighten me.
who thinks it's possible for the story to fork in 10 directions and still be cohesive,
Worked for System Shock, Ultima 4-7, Ultima Underworld, Darklands, Geneforge, Arcanum, Prelude to Darkness, and Fallout. I don't see why the almighty Spector can't match up to those
thinks the developers have ten years and a hundred million to work on their project and still be able to afford to sell it at $50 a pop
Jeff Vogel sells Geneforge for 30 bucks and his games take maybe 3 years max to make.
who takes it personally to ridicule a person he's probably never met in real life before.
I never met Osama bin LAden in life before either. Guess I should stop making fun of him, too.
The point was that the game could be played in a totally different manner: it could be both a stealth game and a combat game.
Indeed, and I somewhat applaud DX for at least trying to do this. Shame that it only did it half-heartedly.
I enjoy complicated character generation even if it means I only find out after 5th level which skills are worth having.
Just a general point, but in any good RPG all skills should have equal worth.

[Stormwatcher]

I've yet to see a game that demonstrates this. DX wasn't emergent in the least, nor was Thief 3 or DXIW.

How can I get DX? Please enlighten me.
You are pretty dense, holly shit. Busted already explained to Your Holy Smallmindedness that the focus of DX are the GAMEPLAY choices. You can play DX like Thief AND/OR Quake AND/OR some Cyberpunk hacking game. If that's not flixble enough for you, than nothing is.

Worked for System Shock, Ultima 4-7, Ultima Underworld, Darklands, Geneforge, Arcanum, Prelude to Darkness, and Fallout. I don't see why the almighty Spector can't match up to those
That's funny. First: Spector worked in Ultima6! GASP! And also more than one wing commander game too, BTW.

Second: It seems that you really don't know shit about what you're talking about... It seems that, for you, emergent gameplay is FULL freedom on ALL aspects. that's bullshit. Take Ultima7, for instance... you surely can do the plot on mostly any order... except that most of these plot chunks are independent. It doesn't matter if you do Paws first and then Brittania, or the other way around. The sub-plots are ALL the same. Even if you wait until the very end to solve the Paws' subquests, it won't make a difference. It is more like the Second Chapter of Baldur's Gate 2, where you have several major quests to solve and you get to pick the order.

And how is Ultima 7 an example of "too much choice at the start"? You start the game trapped in a very small town with nothing to do but talk to some people! there is not combat or anything in it. You spend about 5-10 minutes walking around talking to Finnigan and Petre and Sparks... THEN you can finally get out of Trinsic, and THEORETICALLY you can do mostly anything... except you have a puny sword, no spells, your skills SUCK... so you'd better go straight to paws. I mean, I love the game, you have ridiculous amounts of freedom, but it's far from the chimaera of freedom you made up.

Stop hating games because they don't conform to YOUR pre-conceptions.

Jeff Vogel sells Geneforge for 30 bucks and his games take maybe 3 years max to make.
And what is Geneforce again?

Just a general point, but in any good RPG all skills should have equal worth.
Or not. Like in Fallout. Or Baldur's Gate. Or Oblivion. Or mostly any game but Ultima7, and that's because in U7 you have a grand total of THREE skills.

[Supertongue5000]

And what is Geneforce again?
It's GENEFORGE and it's one of the best indie games ever made. In GF, you can actually (GASP!) choose who you want to side with and the game totally changes depending on your decisions, and you can flip back and forth and end up destroying both sides. I believe the game ahsa total of 6 (or 7) different endings. You can check it out here at www.spiderwebgames.com
Or not. Like in Fallout. Or Baldur's Gate. Or Oblivion
Oblivion wasn't a good RPG, nor was Baldur's Gate. In Fallout, all skills were useful though the balance was tipped a bit towards combat in the beginning. Name me one useless skill in Fallout.
And how is Ultima 7 an example of "too much choice at the start"? You start the game trapped in a very small town with nothing to do but talk to some people!

After that.
there is not combat or anything in it.
You can start combat if you want and kill everyone. THEN you can finally get out of Trinsic, and THEORETICALLY you can do mostly anything... except you have a puny sword, no spells, your skills SUCK
You don't need good weapons or spells to do most things in the game. Hell, you can run right past paws and go straight to Britain, get LB's ship and then you have the whole world at your disposal....
I mean, I love the game, you have ridiculous amounts of freedom, but it's far from the chimaera of freedom you made up
Not at all, you're just playing it like you'd play any other average RPG (omg better get the best weapons and stuff so i don't get murdereized lol!). In U7 combat takes a back seat and allows for extremely in-depth world interaction and dialogues. Stop playing it like it's freakin' Diablo.
Busted already explained to Your Holy Smallmindedness that the focus of DX are the GAMEPLAY choices.
And? I already explained that I fucking applauded it for this, but that it did it only half-heartedly.

Second: It seems that you really don't know shit about what you're talking about...
It's possible. It seems that, for you, emergent gameplay is FULL freedom on ALL aspects. that's bullshit.
Nope, but emergent gameplay does take a large degree of freedom. Emergement means the game starts making unscripted decisions on it's own. For example, if goblins were wandering around and saw that farmer Bob was hacking away at their forest, and when he left they took his axe and this triggered a quest for you to go get his axe back, that'd be emergent as long as it wasn't pre-scripted.
Take Ultima7, for instance..
I never said that U7 was emergent, though there were aspects of it such as being able to beat the game using just potions and sutff like that.