There are often games that can exemplify just how far indie games have come, and just how much they are exceeding even bigger budget games in aspects of game design or storytelling. One of those games is Polaris, a very interesting open world aerial combat game with full destructible environments- and if that sounds like it’s very ambitious, that’s because it is. GamingBolt recently had the chance to chat with Jonathan Burroughs, CEO and creative director of Variable State, and we discussed a range of things – from the inspirations behind the game, to the tech behind pulling off the destructible environments, to the art style, and a whole lot more. Presented below is our discussion.
"I think I can count on one hand the number of assets in the game which are intentionally non-destructible for gameplay reasons. And to be quite honest, I’m a little disappointed in ourselves for not coming up with a way for those to be destructible too."
From Ace Combat and Red Faction to Syndicate Wars and Halo, there’s supposedly a large number of games that have inspired Polaris. That is, of course, a vast range of games, many of which are very different from each other. As a developer, how do you decide what elements to take, and how challenging is it to ensure that all of them together form a cohesive and well balanced experience?
That’s a great question. On some level, the breadth of influences represents how long this idea has been gestating. I grew up immersed in the works of Bullfrog and Psygnosis, particularly science fiction titles like Syndicate and G-Police. I’ve always had an interest in games which blend real-time combat with strategy and tactics, with a layer of science fiction roleplay and power fantasy on top. And even amongst the specific titles you’ve cited here, hopefully there are some common threads which emerge, for example the arcade flight combat of Ace Combat, the interplay between on foot and in vehicle combat in Halo, the run-and-gun Halo combat experience in the context of simulated real-time destruction in Red Faction: Guerilla. In terms of how we pick and choose from our inspirations, it’ll always be a melting pot of ideas from across the team, then a process of refinement and synthesis whereby we see which ideas can be combined in a complementary way, and then the final proof is by implementing an idea in software and exposing it to playtesting. Even the best idea on paper, taken from the most confident source of inspiration, can fall to pieces when the unique characteristics of your game force you to do things in a slightly different way or as part of a different overall set of mechanics and dynamics.
Polaris’ art style is one of its more eye catching elements. How did you land on this look for the game?
This was actually surprisingly difficult. When we first announced the game, we were pursuing a photorealistic style, as this was a good fit for the talents on the team (we’ve got art talent from Cloud Imperium, Rebellion, and Warhorse Studios on the team, so you can understand we’d naturally lean more realistic). Furthermore, we’ve been working on a parallel project alongside Polaris which is high fidelity photorealistic, so one game naturally flowed into the other. But it actually took quite a bit of work to balance the various interconnected destruction systems, particularly the terrain destruction and the architectural destruction, with a style for the characters, vehicles, and lighting which felt intentional, cohesive, and provided the right kind of gameplay communication and feedback. And that led us to the style we have today. Something else that’s important for us is that folks aren’t comparing Polaris to mega budget AAA giants like Fortnite and Valorant. We’re a team of 11. We’re tiny. We can do something tightly focused and specific and offer our own experience which is distinct from anything else you’ll get in other games. But we do not have the resources or production budgets of Epic or Riot. And if we’re inviting comparisons between Polaris and those games, we’re not just failing ourselves, but we’re failing our audience too. I think we’ve managed to settle on a style which is clearly indie, but also beautiful and easy to read, whilst also conveying our science fiction roleplay fantasy.
How comprehensive are the destructibility mechanics in Polaris? How significantly can players’ surroundings be impacted by their actions, and in turn, what sort of an impact does that have on the moment-to-moment action?
They are as comprehensive as can be. Red Faction: Guerilla is perhaps the best point of comparison. We have fully destructible voxelised terrain which you can dig through, carve up, leave craters in, deform as you see fit. All of our architectural structures are fully destructible. All foliage is destructible. All roads and set decoration is destructible. And on top of that we have destructible vehicles, mission-critical assets, set piece assets, and so on. I think I can count on one hand the number of assets in the game which are intentionally non-destructible for gameplay reasons. And to be quite honest, I’m a little disappointed in ourselves for not coming up with a way for those to be destructible too. Maybe we will do yet and then we can hand on heart say that the game really is 100% destructible, top to bottom.
"The best experiences will be had amongst groups of friends, but we’re making sure not to block solo play, and to provide a range of difficulty modes so solo play is accessible to players of a range of skill levels."
Polaris is billed as a PvE extraction game, but does the game also feature any PvP or solo modes?
It’s fully a PvE experience, although it can be played solo or in teams of up to 4 players. The best experiences will be had amongst groups of friends, but we’re making sure not to block solo play, and to provide a range of difficulty modes so solo play is accessible to players of a range of skill levels. No interest in PvP though. That’s a wholly different kind of game experience, requiring a different set of game design, engineering, and infrastructure challenges to overcome. Something for Polaris 2 perhaps.
What should players expect from the game’s maps, how diverse they will be, and the way they are designed?
We’ve got 4 maps up and running so far. And at least that many at prototype stage. We started off focusing on islands and archipelagos (Silent Cartographer is never far from my thoughts). But we’ve started to break that mould a bit. We have a level set in desert canyons for example. Another which has Avatar-style floating mountains. And with architectural destruction such a core feature of the game, I’m excited for us to explore huge megacities and vast built up metropolises. It’s super quick for us to put maps together and our level creation pipeline is really versatile and easy to iterate on. We’re going to run out of time long before we run out of ideas. With the destruction gameplay, the blend of on foot and in vehicle traversal, and the science fiction setting, there’s just endless possibilities for creative level design.
What sort of variety will the game offer in the weapons and vehicles players will be able to use for their purposes?
At launch, we’re focusing on ranged weapons and air vehicles. But the potential is there for as varied a combat action experience as games like Battlefront, Battlefield, Death Stranding or Halo. In principle there’s nothing preventing us considering ground vehicles, tanks, mechs, anti-gravity bikes, multi-person vehicles, and more. And on the weapon front, although right now we’re focused on ranged projectile weapons, I’d love for us to explore melee weapons, beam weapons, castable abilities, and other offensive, defensive, and support abilities beyond just guns and launchers. It’s all up for grabs. We’re just constrained by the size of team and our available time and resources. I want us to deliver something focused and specific rather than go too broad and spread ourselves too thin.
"The game you buy will be a complete game on day 1 with hours of potential enjoyment available. If the game is a success, then of course we’ll consider supporting it long term. But that’s a decision to consider once our audience has given us permission to do so."
You’ve spoken in the past about how Polaris isn’t intended to be a live service project, which is particularly unusual for a multiplayer shooter these days. Can you talk us through how you decided on this approach for the game, and what prompted you to decide against a games-as-a-service approach?
Firstly, I can’t stress enough that this isn’t me expressing any kind of prejudice against live service or long tail game experiences. This includes early access too. These are games I’ve voraciously enjoyed in the past. I adore Destiny and No Man’s Sky. And at the indie scale, I’m fanatical about games like Risk of Rain, Noita, Caveblazers, Subnautica, V Rising, and more. So I love enjoying games in this way, where the game you buy one month can have transformed into something quite different six months later. But that is a big commitment to make to your audience. If you’re selling your game as a live service, whether that’s a AAA experience like Diablo or an indie game like Lethal Company, you have an obligation to make good on that commitment. Part of what people are paying for is your assurance that you’ll support the game for the long term. It’s almost like selling a soft subscription. And unless you are absolutely, categorically confident you can deliver on that, it’s safer to avoid disappointing folks. There’s so much competition out there right now, why risk overselling and under delivering.
With Polaris, I want to offer players something specific. Pay this amount and get a fixed set of things for your money. The game you buy will be a complete game on day 1 with hours of potential enjoyment available. If the game is a success, then of course we’ll consider supporting it long term. But that’s a decision to consider once our audience has given us permission to do so. It’d be hubris for us to assume that Polaris is worthy of long term support before our players have told us it is. For now, we’re going to focus on making it the best game it can be at launch – something folks feel good about buying and keeping as a finished game.
Do you have any plans to eventually also bring Polaris to consoles?
I’d love to. The limiting factor is cost. If you look at Variable State’s output historically, we’ve always been a PC and console developer. Traditionally we’ve simultaneously shipped across all platforms, but given Polaris is our first self-published title, we’ve had to tread a bit more cautiously with this one. Once we have an absolutely impeccable and airtight PC experience locked down, and assuming we can find the right partner to support us on the business side, then that’s the right time to broaden the player base by porting out to other platforms.