Skyrim hopes

[Symon]

I've got to admit that everything published or leaked so far is very scary.

It either sounds like the pre-Oblivion hype that proved to be disappointing or confirmation that this game will be optimized for casual gamers because that will be the source of the revenue.

[Guest Donkey]

Well if it is more reason to stick with oblivion.. No matter how old it is.. If they can't even release a bug free game.. My country has made it illegal for anyone to download stuff like games or movies. But the more you see how badly these things get published..I still have closet full of games who are still waiting to be patched.. And i paid for all these games..

[Shantotto]

The thing about that ... Fallout 3 and  New Vegas share about 95% of their game mechanics. They have a common engine, the same narrative format, the same stats, the quest management, the same lock-picking and programming framework... the list just goes on. Against that, you have what? Survival skill, iron-man mode, magazines as well as books, and some new guns. If FO3 sucks as much as you say it does, if every single game mechanism is as badly broken as you suggest, then so is NV since it shares the overwhelming majority of those rules and mechanisms.

 

For me at least, a lot of the devil is in the details. It's true that the games share a lot of similarities, and yet you have people vastly preferring one to the other (there are Fallout 3 supporters as well). And I mean vastly. A lot of Fallout 3 supporters for example prefer the more free game-world where you can really wander almost anywhere you like from the start. A big thing for me is that NV put much more emphasis on the skills, there are skill checks a plenty. There is a huge freedom of choice in who you can support, you can kill everyone or no-one, the locations/characters/factions in the Mojave are all interconnected. Mechanics have been tweaked.

 

An interesting example is that I love Fallout 1 but I find Fallout 2 to be fairly mediocre (with flashes of brilliance) despite mechanics being the same. Again, the devil is in the details.

 

Still, Obsidian took it to the far extreme with the radscorpions and deathclaws. The result is a lot closer to Fallout lore, true, but at the price of turning NV into something of a rail-shooter at the start. You can't go north, you can't go east, there is no west (on account of not being written yet). So every playthrough starts the same, and I tend to find myself losing the will to live about the time I get to Vegas.

 

NV definitely has a path which is ideal for someone new to the game to take. But it's very possible to find ways to Vegas (for example) that doesn't go down by the Nipton -> Novac -> Vegas way. It's dangerous, oh yes, but it's very possible to do. I also think that there are many smaller pathways that a lot of people simply haven't found or care to use. And if one doesn't want to do that, there is also nothing forcing the player to do the stuff on the way (like the quests in Primm, Novac, Boulder City or whatever).

 

EDIT: As far as Skyrim goes, I don't think the loss of those attributes is a huge deal *if* their new perk system turns out to be worthwhile. I think the attribute system in Oblivion was pretty shitty at least so perhaps it's time for something new. But I would've preferred for them to try and fix it instead of just going the way of "yeah, let's cut that out". Also, I don't have huge faith in Bethesda to create a compelling RPG experience with the perks so yeah... I think further dumbing down will be a strong possibility unfortunately.

[Guest Loogie]

There was a substantial difference in quality between NV and FO3.

 

There' date=' I fixed that for you.

 

That's not a bug. it's a feature.

 

Not of a Fallout game.

 

The thing about that ... Fallout 3 and  New Vegas share about 95% of their game mechanics. They have a common engine' date='[/quote']

 

The engine isn't a game mechanic.  That being said, the engine driving every Fallout game has always sucked.

 

the same narrative format,

 

In NV's case, the narrative within that format actually made sense.

 

the same stats, the quest management, the same lock-picking and programming framework

 

The stats are meaningless in both games to a great extent, the quest management is ridiculously hand-holdy, and the lockpicking and programming minigames are terrible.  I'll tolerate those in NV because, in spirit, it's a Fallout game, unlike Fallout 3.

 

If FO3 sucks as much as you say it does, if every single game mechanism is as badly broken as you suggest, then so is NV since it shares the overwhelming majority of those rules and mechanisms.

 

The gunfighting in NV, thanks to iron sights and other changes, actually feels like first person shooter gunfighting - and if you're going to move a franchise with guns to first person your gunfighting mechanics need to be up to par.  They weren't in Fallout 3.  The other major systems that were failures in Fallout 3 was the quality of the dialog, the story making sense, multiple ammo types (which every other Fallout game has managed to do), and the way armor worked.  All of these have been solved in New Vegas.  To me, Fallout is a well-crafted story that gives the players at least three ways to solve every quest and exciting, well-designed combat.  Fallout 3 didn't deliver on either of those.

 

Well, I don't know any of the people you mention, but the \"now improved with added stupid\" press release rather suggests this may be a valid concern so far as Skyrim is concerned.

 

Todd Howard is the guy who turned TES and Fallout into first person shooters - he's been a project leader for awhile for them, but all he made were their Terminator shooters in the 90s.  You could put the dumbing down of both franchises we're talking about directly on his doorstep.  During Fallout 3's development cycle, he talked about how "adult" the game is based on the fact it would contain tons of gore and swearing.  He also claimed that "violence is funny" during Fallout 3's development, and you'll notice the writing in that game is devoid of virtually all humor aside from some lines from Abraham Washington.

 

Emil is Bethesda's hack writer who came up with such gems as the idiotic exchange between the player and President Eden when the player tells Eden to kill himself.

 

Pete Hines is Bethesda's sleazy PR guy.  Among other things, he let Fallout fans (as in, original fans) know that Bethesda doesn't give a fuck what they think and claimed pre-release Fallout 3 has thousands of possible endings and that all old-school Fallout fans will love what they did with the game.

 

With these guys running the show, Skyrim is going to be Borderlands set in a fantasy world, and Fallout 4 will be Borderlands on Earth unless they do the smart thing and let the experts (read: Obsidian) handle the Fallout games from here on out.

[DocClox]

For me at least' date=' a lot of the devil is in the details. It's true that the games share a lot of similarities, and yet you have people vastly preferring one to the other (there are Fallout 3 supporters as well).

[/quote']

 

No argument there. I can see a lot to like in both games. It's just that while I think NV is probably a better Fallout, I think FO3 makes for a more fun game. Personal opinion, obviously.

 

NV definitely has a path which is ideal for someone new to the game to take. But it's very possible to find ways to Vegas (for example) that doesn't go down by the Nipton -> Novac -> Vegas way. It's dangerous' date=' oh yes, but it's very possible to do.

[/quote']

 

I'm guessing the optimum approach would be through Hidden Valley and then try and kill or get past the blind deathclaw without blundering into either the super mutants at Black Mountain, or the hundred and one giant radscorpions. Apart from that, I believe the mountain is 100% invisible wall all the way down until you hit desert with the giant ants. None of my experiments with sneaking past the deathclaws and waspy-things have ended well, so if there's a way going north, I'll have to take your word for it.

 

 

It still doesn't really compare with the initial choice in FO3 though, to my mind. I mean you can head for the metro and GNR following the main quest. You can run for Tenpenny Tower and blow up Megaton. You can head south for Rivet City and try and get the INT bobblehead early; you can go North following the Wasteland Survival Guide, you can head for Scrapyard and Dogmeat, or (my personal favourite) hell-run to Paradise Falls and get your hands on the mesmetron.

 

NV in contrast always seems to be "get to Vegas", and the choices limited to "do I clean out Primm now, or come back later with some better kit". I don't know - I like NV as a setting, I just don't enjoy playing there half as much as I in Capital Wasteland.

 

[edit]

Thinking about it, you could probably get to Vegas by sneaking past the outer fringe of Sloan if you had decent stealth and didn't blunder into the wasp-things or get caught by the fire-ants. You'd need a bit of luck, since the deathclaws sometimes range that far south, and you're not going to kill one as a starting character. Sounds like a reload-fest however you try it though.

 

 

EDIT: As far as Skyrim goes' date=' I don't think the loss of those attributes is a huge deal *if* their new perk system turns out to be worthwhile. I think the attribute system in Oblivion was pretty shitty at least so perhaps it's time for something new. But I would've preferred for them to try and fix it instead of just going the way of \"yeah, let's cut that out\". Also, I don't have huge faith in Bethesda to create a compelling RPG experience with the perks so yeah... I think further dumbing down will be a strong possibility unfortunately.

[/quote']

 

Yeah. I'm always suspicious about when someone wants to drop stats from an RPG. To my mind, boosting those stats is a major part of the RPG format, and I'd sooner have badly executed stats over no stats at all. I never really thought there was anything particularly bad about the TES attributes, mind. They seemed fairly generic overall. A little uninspired perhaps, but if something isn't broken, why fix it?

 

The bottom line though, is that I'd have a lot more confidence if I hadn't seen the same language in other games trying to spin dumbing the thing down for the console as a the best thing since sliced bread. Deus Ex 2 would be the poster boy in this case.

 

There was a substantial difference in quality between NV and FO3.

 

There' date=' I fixed that for you.

[/quote']

 

Well done, you've totally mastered the shallow, threadbare cliché part. All you're missing now is a serious follow up paragraph to show that you weren't just being a twit, and actually had a point to make.

 

the same narrative format' date='[/quote']

 

In NV's case, the narrative within that format actually made sense.

 

So your point would be not that the mechanism was broken (as apparently all Bethseda everything always is forever) but rather that Obsidian made rather better use of it. In your humble opinion, of course.

 

the same stats' date=' the quest management, the same lock-picking and programming framework[/quote']

 

The stats are meaningless in both games to a great extent, the quest management is ridiculously hand-holdy, and the lockpicking and programming minigames are terrible.  I'll tolerate those in NV because, in spirit, it's a Fallout game, unlike Fallout 3.

 

You see, this is basically the message I'm getting from you right here. "Oblivion sucks because Bethseda disappointed me by not remaining 100% faithful to Fallout lore. And so I'm going to get my revenge by saying mean things about them at every opportunity".

 

Still, at least that's one thing you ought to like about Skyrim. Since they're planning to cut out all those meaningless stats and all that.

 

The other major systems that were failures in Fallout 3 was the quality of the dialog' date='

[/quote']

 

The phrase under discussion was "game mechanics", not "major systems". I only mention that because dialog quality can't really be considered to be a game mechanic. Anyway, do go on.

 

the story making sense' date='

[/quote']

 

Also not a game mechanic. Hard to even consider it as a "major system", for that matter.

 

multiple ammo types (which every other Fallout game has managed to do)' date='

[/quote']

 

The mechanism is there. Bethseda didn't make particularly good use of it, I'll grant. There are mods that more than make up for it, but I don't suppose we're considering mods. Especially since the modding system is something Bethseda did well...

 

and the way armor worked. 

 

Remind me: what did NV do that was different with armour? I mean apart from have it look more like the original Fallout games. (Which wouldn't actually be a game mechanism either).

 

To me' date=' Fallout is a well-crafted story that gives the players at least three ways to solve every quest

[/quote']

 

Some of the Bethseda quest-lines were a little linear, no argument there.

 

and exciting' date=' well-designed combat.  Fallout 3 didn't deliver on either of those.

[/quote']

 

In your humble opinion, as I'm sure you meant to say. Actually, I thought FO3 combat worked better than NV. VATS captured the spirit of the original games nicely, while combat in NV is spoiled by too-frequent slo-mo scenes that last far too long and often don't depict anything of interest. Of course, there's a mod to fix that, but if we're not considering mods as a mitigating factor for FO3's perceived deficiencies, they probably shouldn't apply in NV either.

 

Todd Howard is the guy who turned TES and Fallout into first person shooters - he's been a project leader for awhile for them' date=' but all he made were their Terminator shooters in the 90s. 

[/quote']

 

Hmmm... Except for the the change to the narrative format (Let's save some time: "Bethseda sucks, Oblivion walk on water, yadda yadda yadda") Oblivion is largely Morrowind with better graphics. OK, we can quibble about the magic being nerfed, or changing Cyrodil from alien jungle to a generic European fantasy landscape, but as far as being a FPS goes, I think Oblivion is what Morrowind would have been if they'd had the technology.

 

He also claimed that \"violence is funny\" during Fallout 3's development' date=' and you'll notice the writing in that game is devoid of virtually all humor aside from some lines from Abraham Washington.

[/quote']

 

And Moira Brown. Or is she not going to count again, because you don't like her?

 

Seriously, I think the humour is there; it's just dark and ironic, and largely situational. Apart from Moira, there's the whole "You Got To Shoot Them In The Head" quest. There's the raiders down the road from Dukov with their sad little Christmas tree; Crazy Wolfgang; the entire premise of Megaton; The naughty teddy bears on the factory production line in Grayditch; Charon's reaction when you buy his contract (well, it made me laugh); The Mechanist and the Ant-Agoniser; The Republic of Dave, for heaven's sake. These thinkgs might not have tickled your funny bone, but I think "devoid of humour" is going a bit too far.

 

Emil is Bethesda's hack writer who came up with such gems as the idiotic exchange between the player and President Eden when the player tells Eden to kill himself.

 

There's a fine line sometimes between honouring the genre and lapsing into cliché. Talking an AI into self destructing is a classic SF element' date=' and personally, I found considerable satisfaction in being able to make it happen. It isn't breathtakingly original perhaps, but then it's no worse than (for example) having a ruined city populated entirely by zombie-like mutants, and I'm guessing you don't have a problem with that.

 

Pete Hines is Bethesda's sleazy PR guy.  Among other things, he let Fallout fans (as in, original fans) know that Bethesda doesn't give a fuck what they think and claimed pre-release Fallout 3 has thousands of possible endings and that all old-school Fallout fans will love what they did with the game.

 

Well, based on how he's tried to spin Skyrim's apparent planned deficiencies as improvements, I don't think I'm going to be sending him a Christmas card this year either. Still, I suspect this says more about Pete Hines than it does about Beth's writers and coders.

 

With these guys running the show' date=' Skyrim is going to be Borderlands set in a fantasy world, and Fallout 4 will be Borderlands on Earth unless they do the smart thing and let the experts (read: Obsidian) handle the Fallout games from here on out.

[/quote']

 

Borderlands I could cope with. My worry is that the next iteration will be Operation: Anchorage, The Game.

 

On the bright side, we seem to be moving away from "everyone at Bethesda is a total blithering incompetent" and more toward "Bethseda management have made some questionable strategic decisions post-TES3". Which has to be a good thing in my book.

[Guest Loogie]

Well done' date=' you've totally mastered the shallow, threadbare cliché part. All you're missing now is a serious follow up paragraph to show that you weren't just being a twit, and actually had a point to make.[/quote']

 

Just like you did when you wrote that about something I said.  Don't do it to other people unless you want it done to you.

 

So your point would be not that the mechanism was broken (as apparently all Bethseda everything always is forever) but rather that Obsidian made rather better use of it. In your humble opinion, of course.

 

Systems break when you don't use them improperly.  Bethesda didn't use it properly.  You can't see that in your humble view, of course.

 

You see, this is basically the message I'm getting from you right here. \"Oblivion sucks because Bethseda disappointed me by not remaining 100% faithful to Fallout lore. And so I'm going to get my revenge by saying mean things about them at every opportunity\".

 

No, Oblivion sucks because it didn't stick to TES's lore.

 

Still, at least that's one thing you ought to like about Skyrim. Since they're planning to cut out all those meaningless stats and all that.

 

You've totally missed the point.  The stats in Fallout 3 and NV being meaningless is not a good thing - all they are are window dressing on a first person shooter.

 

The phrase under discussion was \"game mechanics\", not \"major systems\". I only mention that because dialog quality can't really be considered to be a game mechanic.

 

So you have no counter-argument so you argue semantics.  Cute.

 

Also not a game mechanic. Hard to even consider it as a \"major system\", for that matter.

 

Don't know what kind of RPGs you play, but in a story based game, the story and the way its told are pretty huge gameplay mechanisms.

 

Remind me: what did NV do that was different with armour? I mean apart from have it look more like the original Fallout games. (Which wouldn't actually be a game mechanism either).

 

DR versus DT.  If you don't understand the difference, you're not really paying attention to how those games work.

 

In your humble opinion, as I'm sure you meant to say.

 

No, in reality.  Which I just cited.  If you're so big on saying "humble opinion" why don't you end all your sentences with it?

 

Actually, I thought FO3 combat worked better than NV. VATS captured the spirit of the original games nicely, while combat in NV is spoiled by too-frequent slo-mo scenes that last far too long and often don't depict anything of interest.

 

A) VATS still works the same, aside from offering melee moves.  You can turn NV's slow-mo cam off in options.

 

And Moira Brown. Or is she not going to count again, because you don't like her?

 

With Moira, they grasped for funny and failed.  All she did was come off as annoying.

 

Seriously, I think the humour is there; it's just dark and ironic, and largely situational.

 

I didn't realize sophomoric and crass was now dark and ironic.

 

 

Wow, a zombie joke that doesn't have any cultural relevance in the wasteland.  How droll.

 

There's the raiders down the road from Dukov with their sad little Christmas tree;

 

Only thing I found down the road from Dukov was a relatively clear highway with an invisible wall telling me I couldn't continue.

 

Crazy Wolfgang;

 

He could have been funny if his voice actor wasn't phoning it in.

 

the entire premise of Megaton;

 

Suicidally idiotic played straight is funny now?

 

The naughty teddy bears on the factory production line in Grayditch;

 

Yet another sight gag.  Where are the truly funny moments like are found in Cass and Fantastic's dialog?

 

The Mechanist and the Ant-Agoniser;

 

Again, suicidally idiotic given how straight the story is treated by the rest of the game.

 

The Republic of Dave, for heaven's sake.

 

Funny concept, and the school/house museum is funny, but the rest of it is played straight aside from Dave's dialog.

 

Emil is Bethesda's hack writer who came up with such gems as the idiotic exchange between the player and President Eden when the player tells Eden to kill himself.

 

There's a fine line sometimes between honouring the genre and lapsing into cliché. Talking an AI into self destructing is a classic SF element' date=' and personally, I found considerable satisfaction in being able to make it happen. It isn't breathtakingly original perhaps, but then it's no worse than (for example) having a ruined city populated entirely by zombie-like mutants, and I'm guessing you don't have a problem with that.

 

Pete Hines is Bethesda's sleazy PR guy.  Among other things, he let Fallout fans (as in, original fans) know that Bethesda doesn't give a fuck what they think and claimed pre-release Fallout 3 has thousands of possible endings and that all old-school Fallout fans will love what they did with the game.

 

Well, based on how he's tried to spin Skyrim's apparent planned deficiencies as improvements, I don't think I'm going to be sending him a Christmas card this year either. Still, I suspect this says more about Pete Hines than it does about Beth's writers and coders.

 

So the way to save Skyrim is to give the Fallout franchise to Obsidian.

 

No, the way to save Fallout is to give it to Obsidian.  The way to save Skyrim is to get that cofounder of Zenimax back that invented the Elder Scrolls who quit in disgust.

 

we seem to be moving away from \"everyone at Bethesda is a total blithering incompetent\" and more toward \"Bethseda management have made some questionable strategic decisions post-TES3\". Which has to be a good thing in my book.

 

Bethesda's management has made some questionable specific decisions post-TES3 on account of the fact they're blithering idiots.  Strategically, they're raking in hundreds of millions of dollars, so they aren't mis-stepping there.

[DocClox]

In your humble opinion' date=' as I'm sure you meant to say.[/quote']

 

No, in reality.  Which I just cited.  If you're so big on saying "humble opinion" why don't you end all your sentences with it?

 

:

 

All right, you've convinced me. The sole measure of aesthetic worth is in fact with whatever opinions you personally happen to hold any any point in time. The quality of a piece of work is determined solely by your personal prejudices, and saying "this is my opinion, therefore it must be right" is in fact a valid argument. I hereby crown you King Of All The Internets. You may claim your free ice cream.

 

Moving ON...

[Guest Loogie]

I illustrated the fact you kept saying "in your humble opinion" over and over and over again.  It implied your opinion isn't, and it unnecessarily pointed out what I'm saying is my opinion - of course it's my opinion, or I wouldn't be giving it.

 

But when you get down to facts, Fallout 3 was in no shape or form a Fallout game in anything but name.

[owlharvester]

Things are just too different now. Other people are at the reins.

 

Bethesda wants bigger numbers. Another company that comes to mind that wants bigger numbers is Bioware and you can see the differences in their respective games from the past to now.

 

Daggerfall - Oblivion

 

Baldur's Gate - Dragon Age 2

 

They wanted to be big boys, and in order to do that they had to sacrifice a lot of elements that made their games great rpg's.

 

The masses generally don't like having a ton of options to sift through to form their characters. They want to pick up a weapon and go at it ( At least from what I gather). Which leaves a lot of us that are hungry for a good rpg out in the cold. Which is a shame because they really don't have to do this. It would be easy to give people a pre-set option whom aren't into a bunch of stats and careful consideration ( in character creation and throughout the game). Everyone could get what they want but they can't because not only do the game companies want bigger numbers, they want them fast. So to save time, they cut out poorly designed options instead of making them better. They scramble out a weak story because most aren't paying too close of attention. They make uninteresting characters, because who cares about that right? They make the game short, bland and forgettable because a lot of people will probably buy it if it's pretty and kinda playable. Maybe some of the old fans will buy it too if it resembles the old games to some degree.

 

I really wish there were smaller developers who weren't so concerned with sales and just wanted to make a great rpg or...anything really. I mean, you have to be SOMEWHAT concerned with sales and time constraints but... yanno? Where's that old passion eh?

 

That's just my thoughts.

 

 

[tomfoolery]

@owlharvester: CD Projekt Red seems to be one of the few companies that are in it to just make really great games, rather then make lots of money.

 

Seeing previews of Witcher 2... it just looks great. The first game definitely had its flaws, but it is easily one of the best RPG's of the decade. Witcher 2 seems to improve on everything. A bigger story with more branching paths, revamped combat that is far more strategic then Witcher 1's general "click, click, click, dead" combat. It'll reward you for paying attention to how you level up... it just looks great.

 

In fact, let me pull up a short essay that was in the first Witcher 2 trailer. It seems to have been translated into English from Polish(CD Projekt Red is a Polish developer), but it still gets the point across.

 

[Rhavik]

I'm just hoping that there's more to the game than what the trailers are showing me. All of the interviews so far are really focusing on dragons, yeah they're nice, ok. What else is there besides the pretty graphics they're also going on about. "Omg the snow piles up on the ground! The trees actually grow!" I hate to say it, while they're nice additions I don't think I've ever heard someone say, "I'm going to play this game because the trees grow." If I did hear someone say that I'd probably call them an idiot.

 

I'm a little interested in this Radiant Story thing though. It seems... like something that sounds good in theory, but won't be executed well in game and we'll end up hardly noticing it while playing, and hardly caring. Game Designers have a way of making their game seem 2000000x better than it really will be. :[

[Renax]

I know it won't be in it, But i really hope someone mod it to be Co op (not more than 2 to 4 ppl.)

[jinsanx]

I'm just hoping that there's more to the game than what the trailers are showing me. All of the interviews so far are really focusing on dragons' date=' yeah they're nice, ok. What else is there besides the pretty graphics they're also going on about. \"Omg the snow piles up on the ground! The trees actually grow!\" I hate to say it, while they're nice additions I don't think I've ever heard someone say, \"I'm going to play this game because the trees grow.\" If I did hear someone say that I'd probably call them an idiot.

 

I'm a little interested in this Radiant Story thing though. It seems... like something that sounds good in theory, but won't be executed well in game and we'll end up hardly noticing it while playing, and hardly caring. Game Designers have a way of making their game seem 2000000x better than it really will be. :[

[/quote']

 

Those things scare me because I don't have the money to go buy some uber expensive computer so I can grow trees and see snow pile up. All that extra crap is just more of a load for your computer to run the game smoothly. I could buy it for a console but I think it goes without saying that missing the modding scene is not an option.

[snugbug]

I know it's pie in the sky, but I would really like the Morrowind Argonian body shape back. Most importantly the legs. I don't care if I can't use boots.

 

And the one hope which was shattered recently was spears hopefully making a comeback. I miss spears.

[Cezul]

I think spears will be coming back in the form of pole arms, which is stuff like halberds and pole axes, which are pretty fucking baller. I remember seeing the skill table showing this in one of the Game Informer magazines.

 

As far as hopes, if they are going to have horses, there better be mounted combat. Also, more dynamic boss battles would be nice, that require a little more strategy then just hacking away at the boss in question.

[marrow12]

All I could possibly ask for is a fully playable third person mode, as much as I like fps games, rpgs like fallout and oblivion, I just hated playing in first person, that pretty much negates the purpose of character customization in my opinion. Fallout was a bit better, but the aiming was always off, especially when your enemy was right in front of you.

[GSBmodders]

Things are just too different now. Other people are at the reins.

 

Bethesda wants bigger numbers. Another company that comes to mind that wants bigger numbers is Bioware and you can see the differences in their respective games from the past to now.

 

Daggerfall - Oblivion

 

Baldur's Gate - Dragon Age 2

 

They wanted to be big boys' date=' and in order to do that they had to sacrifice a lot of elements that made their games great rpg's.

 

The masses generally don't like having a ton of options to sift through to form their characters. They want to pick up a weapon and go at it ( At least from what I gather). Which leaves a lot of us that are hungry for a good rpg out in the cold. Which is a shame because they really don't have to do this. It would be easy to give people a pre-set option whom aren't into a bunch of stats and careful consideration ( in character creation and throughout the game). Everyone could get what they want but they can't because not only do the game companies want bigger numbers, they want them fast. So to save time, they cut out poorly designed options instead of making them better. They scramble out a weak story because most aren't paying too close of attention. They make uninteresting characters, because who cares about that right? They make the game short, bland and forgettable because a lot of people will probably buy it if it's pretty and kinda playable. Maybe some of the old fans will buy it too if it resembles the old games to some degree.

 

I really wish there were smaller developers who weren't so concerned with sales and just wanted to make a great rpg or...anything really. I mean, you have to be SOMEWHAT concerned with sales and time constraints but... yanno? Where's that old passion eh?

 

That's just my thoughts.

[/quote']

 

Having worked for SSI back in the hey day I know all too well what game development actually takes. Keep in mind as you read this that I am not trying to be insulting or flame baiting or anything of the likes.

 

I'm judging from your post that you have never worked in the industry, nor even participated in the creation of any major game mod. There are definately things that I fault Bioware for, same with Obsidian, Bethseda and every other game developer out there.

 

But one thing Bioware and others cannot be crucified for is creating a bad game.

 

The days of daggerfall / baldurs gate style games are over not because of corperate greed but because of the ever rising cost of production. The graphics and animations that 99% of gamers first judge a game by eat up a great deal of time and the majority of the budget, and its only going to get worse as more consumers demand more voice acting to go along with it.

 

Its no longer the studios decision on wether or not to voice act dialog its a requirement that the public put on the developer in order for the game to succede. So that leaves the developer in a rather shitty situation on trying to figure out just where the hell thier going to come up with 5 to 40 mill for each big name actor they sign on to voice act.

 

So now you can see why content gets cut, a game gets dramaticly shortend, or less time is put into other areas such as minor npcs, side quests ect. Its not the developers fault. Its the consumers.

 

The same things are also taking into consideration in the devolopment of patches. Only now companies like Bioware, Obsidian, and Bethseda have to also take into consideration that they just spent 500 - 700 mill producing a game thats going to now need even more capital to produce the patches and future updates.

 

So keep all of this mind when it comes to judging the developers

[jinsanx]

Things are just too different now. Other people are at the reins.

 

Bethesda wants bigger numbers. Another company that comes to mind that wants bigger numbers is Bioware and you can see the differences in their respective games from the past to now.

 

Daggerfall - Oblivion

 

Baldur's Gate - Dragon Age 2

 

They wanted to be big boys' date=' and in order to do that they had to sacrifice a lot of elements that made their games great rpg's.

 

The masses generally don't like having a ton of options to sift through to form their characters. They want to pick up a weapon and go at it ( At least from what I gather). Which leaves a lot of us that are hungry for a good rpg out in the cold. Which is a shame because they really don't have to do this. It would be easy to give people a pre-set option whom aren't into a bunch of stats and careful consideration ( in character creation and throughout the game). Everyone could get what they want but they can't because not only do the game companies want bigger numbers, they want them fast. So to save time, they cut out poorly designed options instead of making them better. They scramble out a weak story because most aren't paying too close of attention. They make uninteresting characters, because who cares about that right? They make the game short, bland and forgettable because a lot of people will probably buy it if it's pretty and kinda playable. Maybe some of the old fans will buy it too if it resembles the old games to some degree.

 

I really wish there were smaller developers who weren't so concerned with sales and just wanted to make a great rpg or...anything really. I mean, you have to be SOMEWHAT concerned with sales and time constraints but... yanno? Where's that old passion eh?

 

That's just my thoughts.

[/quote']

 

Having worked for SSI back in the hey day I know all too well what game development actually takes. Keep in mind as you read this that I am not trying to be insulting or flame baiting or anything of the likes.

 

I'm judging from your post that you have never worked in the industry, nor even participated in the creation of any major game mod. There are definately things that I fault Bioware for, same with Obsidian, Bethseda and every other game developer out there.

 

But one thing Bioware and others cannot be crucified for is creating a bad game.

 

The days of daggerfall / baldurs gate style games are over not because of corperate greed but because of the ever rising cost of production. The graphics and animations that 99% of gamers first judge a game by eat up a great deal of time and the majority of the budget, and its only going to get worse as more consumers demand more voice acting to go along with it.

 

Its no longer the studios decision on wether or not to voice act dialog its a requirement that the public put on the developer in order for the game to succede. So that leaves the developer in a rather shitty situation on trying to figure out just where the hell thier going to come up with 5 to 40 mill for each big name actor they sign on to voice act.

 

So now you can see why content gets cut, a game gets dramaticly shortend, or less time is put into other areas such as minor npcs, side quests ect. Its not the developers fault. Its the consumers.

 

The same things are also taking into consideration in the devolopment of patches. Only now companies like Bioware, Obsidian, and Bethseda have to also take into consideration that they just spent 500 - 700 mill producing a game thats going to now need even more capital to produce the patches and future updates.

 

So keep all of this mind when it comes to judging the developers

 

What you've said here makes me question the perspective of the developer even further rather than make me sympathize with them. I worked for Gamestop for awhile not too long ago. And customers would come in, we'd make conversation, and the things people generally were wanting resembled more customization than not. Keep in mind this store had a variety of customers. I don't disagree on some features now being "expected", ex. voice acting, but 9 out of 10 of my customers would absolutely smash a game with great voice acting, mediocre game play, and wholly linear everything else. I don't need to point out a land slide of recent games that aren't doing as "expected" because of the one-sided parts of their development.

 

The customers are to blame for some of this, but the developers aren't scot-free. If they are committing to a project for a product, it is their responsibility to understand their consumer base(that's actually pretty much the basis for any product being sold anywhere). And I don't mean reading a topic on their own personal site with 10 people saying what was amazing and what they want next.

 

Maybe in truth, the developers are out of touch with the customer base. I think this is reflected by many big name games with these "big budgets" getting crucified by gamers and critics alike. You may have an amazing feature, but if the package isn't good enough as a whole, it's gonna bomb out still. I say this as being both a customer, but also having been apart of the "middleman" part of the process.

[Guest Loogie]

When a bad game is bad because of shitty writing and poor gameplay mechanics, as is the case with something like Fallout 3, it is solely the developer's fault.  There's no way you can claim otherwise.  New Vegas fixes most everything Fallout 3 did wrong and it's getting a better reception than it's predecessor from everyone I've talked to in person.

 

As an example of a game that's good and was murdered in reviews, though, look at Alpha Protocol for a recent example - a lot of people didn't touch it because of the reviews, but most of the people I know who did play it loved it.  If you want to go farther back for a game that underperformed but was terrific, take SSI's own Renegade: Battle for Jacob's Star.  The only thing wrong with it is it had the misfortune to release alongside X-Wing and a Wing Commander sequel.  This also throws a wrench in the everyone demands voice acting theory - Renegade was fully voice acted and X-Wing wasn't.

[GSBmodders]

If you want to go farther back for a game that underperformed but was terrific' date=' take SSI's own Renegade: Battle for Jacob's Star.[/quote']

 

I still worked for SSI at the time of Renegades release. The failure of that title to come out on top. Was due to SSI's failure to properly evengelize its own product. It is a lesson SSI learned but learned to late.

 

What you are refering to is also ancient history and has no relevance in todays market. Voice acting was still limmited in the late 90's and while PC Gaming may have been at the start of its glory, most Americans still did not own a PC. Those that did were simply unsure of how they felt about voice acting in games.

 

Further more you cannot compare then to now, everything about todays market place is different. What we were once able to release at SSI and be successful with would not even make for a good browser game in todays market and it would not even be attempted.

 

Now lets stop playing back to the future and discuss whats relevent to creating a successful game in todays market. Where the hardware steadily out paces game development, where developers are now preasured into creating games for multiple platforms, to constantly improve on both graphics voice acting and immersion.

 

I allways enjoy these conversions but its rare to see them stay this civilized so lets not ruin things

 

Edit: I believe this threads been hijacked. Maybe we should take this to a new one.

 

 

[jinsanx]

If you want to go farther back for a game that underperformed but was terrific' date=' take SSI's own Renegade: Battle for Jacob's Star.[/quote']

 

I still worked for SSI at the time of Renegades release. The failure of that title to come out on top. Was due to SSI's failure to properly evengelize its own product. It is a lesson SSI learned but learned to late.

 

What you are refering to is also ancient history and has no relevance in todays market. Voice acting was still limmited in the late 90's and while PC Gaming may have been at the start of its glory, most Americans still did not own a PC. Those that did were simply unsure of how they felt about voice acting in games.

 

Further more you cannot compare then to now, everything about todays market place is different. What we were once able to release at SSI and be successful with would not even make for a good browser game in todays market and it would not even be attempted.

 

Now lets stop playing back to the future and discuss whats relevent to creating a successful game in todays market. Where the hardware steadily out paces game development, where developers are now preasured into creating games for multiple platforms, to constantly improve on both graphics voice acting and immersion.

 

I allways enjoy these conversions but its rare to see them stay this civilized so lets not ruin things

 

Edit: I believe this threads been hijacked. Maybe we should take this to a new one.

 

I agree, I respect your opinion and am cool with letting it end if you want, although I for one, also enjoy these conversations.

[snarfies]

Having worked for SSI back in the hey day I know all too well what game development actually takes. Keep in mind as you read this that I am not trying to be insulting or flame baiting or anything of the likes.

 

I've been mostly ignoring this thread, but I saw this.  I was a big fan of SSI games - I owned quite a few of them, and still have the boxes for all of them, mostly for the Commodore 64 (I'm a bit of a collector - which makes me very sad about downloadable-only stuff).  Let's see what I can see on my shelves here... ALL of the goldbox games for both C64 and PC... Shard of Spring, Phantasie III, Questron II, Roadwar 2000, Roadwar Europa, Dragonstrike (didn't like that one)... hm.  I feel like I owned more, but I think I ran out of shelfspace and some of my old gameboxes are in storage.  I know I played the crap out of Colonial Conquest.

[GSBmodders]

Having worked for SSI back in the hey day I know all too well what game development actually takes. Keep in mind as you read this that I am not trying to be insulting or flame baiting or anything of the likes.

I've been mostly ignoring this thread' date=' but I saw this.  I was a big fan of SSI games - I owned quite a few of them, and still have the boxes for all of them, mostly for the Commodore 64 (I'm a bit of a collector - which makes me very sad about downloadable-only stuff).  Let's see what I can see on my shelves here... ALL of the goldbox games for both C64 and PC... Shard of Spring, Phantasie III, Questron II, Roadwar 2000, Roadwar Europa, Dragonstrike (didn't like that one)... hm.  I feel like I owned more, but I think I ran out of shelfspace and some of my old gameboxes are in storage.  I know I played the crap out of Colonial Conquest.

[/quote']

 

My personal list of favorites include SSI's very first PC title Battle of the Bulge. After that comes Pool of Radiance, Curse of the Azure Bonds and Secret of the Silver Blades

 

[HentaiGnome]

Below is a pic of the infamous busty wench of Skyrim. That render has given me hopes of the possibility of better-looking vanilla races. Sure, the lady is old (check out her wrinkles) but at least she looks like a MILF rather than the old women that we're used to in Oblivion. That said, it's exciting to think that we actually have something good to start off with hentai-related, and therefore we may not necessarily be hardpressed for vanilla race overhaul mods right away (unless, of course, you're seriously into anime characters then that'll have to wait for the next-gen XEO mods lol).

[Symon]

She's old? What wrinkles? She might be in her thirties.

 

Some of us are over fifty on this board! (grin).