Wooz said:
Entertanment continues
I'm still curious how Bethesda gained a reputation of releasing "polished" products.
Game Informer Unlimited FAQ and video
- Thread starter Brother None
- Start date
Entertanment continues
I'm still curious how Bethesda gained a reputation of releasing "polished" products.
Brother None said:
I believe it's a combination of people not really caring and the fact that patches are promised...
Bahaha, OWA and the FF6 music were pretty choice there.
But yeah, it's ridiculous to cherry pick graphical fuckups in an otherwise beautiful game. That's a huge stretch. That said, I'm not sure how the crazy long distance texture fuckery made it into the game.
But yeah, it's ridiculous to cherry pick graphical fuckups in an otherwise beautiful game. That's a huge stretch. That said, I'm not sure how the crazy long distance texture fuckery made it into the game.
Just had a thought...
Aren't game developers and genereal media responsible for the game industry becoming a graphic/visual whores?
Everyone is into shinneeee, preeeety graphics. When you talk about a game with most gamers these days, the first thing they talk about is the AWESOME GRAFIXXXX.
Its just very shallow, like most media these days. It's the MTV generation guys. All about visuals and less content. For the video game industry, Oblivion is just selling its own version of MTV. "Don't think, just take a look at my shiineee new toy!" Gamers are just being brainwashed.
Take a look at Todd Howard as an example of gen-x assimilation. All he talks about is the first person perspective and the graphics and how they will bring more emotion and make the game more "real". We can make some educated guesses as to the real reason:
1. They are incapable of making any other type of game that is not first person.
2. They see first person as their plan/strategy of success because of Morrowind and Oblivion's sales success.
3. They are a group of next gen gamers aka "first person graphic whores".
4. They care more about their current fanbase than the Fallout fans.
I dont discount these guys have been trying, but I don't believe they are doing their homework with the highest integrity. They are taking shortcuts. Because if they truly are, things will at least be in the right direction. Currently, the game is just an Oblivion mod.
They are putting too much an emphasis on graphics and pixel shading and then using that as grounds to bravely say,
"We belive that Fallout is more than just the iso view and turn-based... It's all about the theme, atmoshpere..."
It is all a lie, a cover-up of their lack of creative ability. They have compromised the integrity of the game. Fallout's purpose was to emulate table top pnp rpgs. That's the type of gameply the original developers planned. Period. As for the theme, it was inspired by Wasteland. The essence of Fallout can be simply described as the two aspects put together: PNP gameplay + Post Apoc theme = Fallout 1, Fallout 2.
They have deviated from the original creation, the reason why Fallout has such passionate fans. But they are deciding to start their own brand of followers. Gone are the old, bring in the 10-18 year olds with their shiny broomsticks!
I don't want to judge the game as it has not come out yet, but so far it seems like everything is just lost.
Aren't game developers and genereal media responsible for the game industry becoming a graphic/visual whores?
Everyone is into shinneeee, preeeety graphics. When you talk about a game with most gamers these days, the first thing they talk about is the AWESOME GRAFIXXXX.
Its just very shallow, like most media these days. It's the MTV generation guys. All about visuals and less content. For the video game industry, Oblivion is just selling its own version of MTV. "Don't think, just take a look at my shiineee new toy!" Gamers are just being brainwashed.
Take a look at Todd Howard as an example of gen-x assimilation. All he talks about is the first person perspective and the graphics and how they will bring more emotion and make the game more "real". We can make some educated guesses as to the real reason:
1. They are incapable of making any other type of game that is not first person.
2. They see first person as their plan/strategy of success because of Morrowind and Oblivion's sales success.
3. They are a group of next gen gamers aka "first person graphic whores".
4. They care more about their current fanbase than the Fallout fans.
I dont discount these guys have been trying, but I don't believe they are doing their homework with the highest integrity. They are taking shortcuts. Because if they truly are, things will at least be in the right direction. Currently, the game is just an Oblivion mod.
They are putting too much an emphasis on graphics and pixel shading and then using that as grounds to bravely say,
"We belive that Fallout is more than just the iso view and turn-based... It's all about the theme, atmoshpere..."
It is all a lie, a cover-up of their lack of creative ability. They have compromised the integrity of the game. Fallout's purpose was to emulate table top pnp rpgs. That's the type of gameply the original developers planned. Period. As for the theme, it was inspired by Wasteland. The essence of Fallout can be simply described as the two aspects put together: PNP gameplay + Post Apoc theme = Fallout 1, Fallout 2.
They have deviated from the original creation, the reason why Fallout has such passionate fans. But they are deciding to start their own brand of followers. Gone are the old, bring in the 10-18 year olds with their shiny broomsticks!
I don't want to judge the game as it has not come out yet, but so far it seems like everything is just lost.
quillab said:
Perhaps, but I doubt they'd have been able to do it if nobody was buying the games.
Autoduel76
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
quillab said:
Well, first of all, I'd say that everybody is guilty from media to devs to consumers. People vote with their wallets so I don't think anybody's particularly more guilty than anyone else.
But, the other thing I'd say about your second point here, is that its not a new thing. Even back in the mid 80's, the first thing most gamers talked about was the "awesome grafics".
Yeah, the grafix look like crap, looking back on them, with 21st century glasses on. But even when we had creatures made out of rough pixels and blinking cursors, back in the day we thought the graphics were awesome and they were still the first thing, generally, talked about.
I can remember the Bard's Tale's pictures for each monster being so much more detailed than other games, like Wizardry, and they moved! A friend of mine had to run and show me "how sweet it looked" before I'd heard of the game.
Brother None said:
I guess they discovered the inner lust of human beings... now we're slaves to what the media is feeding us. "We are what we eat."
Autoduel76 said:
Good point, I too was amazed at the graphics of the first games I've played. I can't deny that.
Its just that there is an over and extreme exposure of visual content nowadays... im getting sick of it. Sometimes I think, why can't we just have decent, relevant, thought provoking content without putting in sex, sex, and more sex to sell it.
I just want what matters and not gimiks.
Well, it's using the same graphics engine as well as the same dialog system. I suppose if by "different game" you consider Madden 2007 and Madden 2008 different games, but when you're basically adding new textures over old skeletons, it's considered a mod.
Then again, you're just a troll, so kindly fuck off.
Then again, you're just a troll, so kindly fuck off.
Well your implied definition of mod is obviously wrong, but ok. It's silly to jump the gun and assume that by "similar dialogue system" (in the words of some reviewer watching a demo) when they explain there'll be branching etc. that they really mean "the same [as oblivion, which had branching, but] without branching".
On the question on how old Todd Howard is, here's a snippet from wiki about him:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Howard
Apparently, he graduated from College in 1994(?) and then immediately joined Bethesda Game Studios. And that would mean he's been there for 13-14 years. You're typically 20? or 21? when you finish College, so add +13 years to this, and he is what: aboiut 34-35....
I remember reading an interview (can't remember where, though) with him a few years backs where it was revealed that he actually was married and 1-2 kids, and that he was in his thirties. And I thought to myself: --- eh, why does he then sound like 17 year old, and look like a young man of say 15 or at best 25??
Obviously, the answers to these questions elude me....
edit:
note that the wiki only says 'he's been educated'...not that he actually graduated....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Howard
Apparently, he graduated from College in 1994(?) and then immediately joined Bethesda Game Studios. And that would mean he's been there for 13-14 years. You're typically 20? or 21? when you finish College, so add +13 years to this, and he is what: aboiut 34-35....
I remember reading an interview (can't remember where, though) with him a few years backs where it was revealed that he actually was married and 1-2 kids, and that he was in his thirties. And I thought to myself: --- eh, why does he then sound like 17 year old, and look like a young man of say 15 or at best 25??
Obviously, the answers to these questions elude me....
edit:
note that the wiki only says 'he's been educated'...not that he actually graduated....
aries369 said:
"Todd has commented that he intends to avoid inclusion of mindless filler in any of Bethesda's games, especially Oblivion, something that he admits has happened in the past - saying that despite the fact each game is the previous one's sequel, total reinvention is the prerogative."
If this is true, im just disgusted. This guy is all talk no walk.
One thing people say about a first person game is that it totally "immerses" a person in the game world.
Based on my experience, first person actually limits the experience in terms of depth of view. You get to see more detailed models and architecture but on the other hand, you sacrifice seeing the world a strategist and a story teller sees it.
You lose the tactical side of gameplay where stats matter and trade it for twitch gameplay. It is no longer character-centered but user-centered. Bethesda has compromised gameplay by patching up twitch-gameplay with a pause and boldly claiming, "We don't want to reward twitch-gameplay". Todd, we really are fools in your eyes.
I know it's not just about combat. There are other stats like speech and science that can play a big role in the game. But a total roleplay experience does not make compromises.
If Fallout was a crpg that involved no combat, I might consider. But we are in the wasteland now! I am pretty sure a majority of Fallout fans love the combat. Part of the Fallout experience is ripping apart a slaver with a sub-machine gun. Its merciless but that's the wasteland for ya.
ISO >>>>>> furst persun
Based on my experience, first person actually limits the experience in terms of depth of view. You get to see more detailed models and architecture but on the other hand, you sacrifice seeing the world a strategist and a story teller sees it.
You lose the tactical side of gameplay where stats matter and trade it for twitch gameplay. It is no longer character-centered but user-centered. Bethesda has compromised gameplay by patching up twitch-gameplay with a pause and boldly claiming, "We don't want to reward twitch-gameplay". Todd, we really are fools in your eyes.
I know it's not just about combat. There are other stats like speech and science that can play a big role in the game. But a total roleplay experience does not make compromises.
If Fallout was a crpg that involved no combat, I might consider. But we are in the wasteland now! I am pretty sure a majority of Fallout fans love the combat. Part of the Fallout experience is ripping apart a slaver with a sub-machine gun. Its merciless but that's the wasteland for ya.
ISO >>>>>> furst persun
metalboss44
It Wandered In From the Wastes
I appreciate that Bethesda is explaining their idea for the combat but the problem is, it sounds like a cop-out to appease hardcore fallout fans while gearing the game towards real time that can be used 100% of the time (and will be) Make it one or the other and focus on that please.
I enjoyed morrowind, hated oblivion, and bethesda hasn't proved they have changed their ways yet especially after the catastrophe that is star trek legacy...
I enjoyed morrowind, hated oblivion, and bethesda hasn't proved they have changed their ways yet especially after the catastrophe that is star trek legacy...
Vault 69er
Water Chip? Been There, Done That
Tannhauser said:
What the hell is a "next-gen RPG" anyway? Bethesda's vapid, shallow games?
If that's next-gen, call me a relic.
Vehementi said:
The fact that it doesn't technically fit the definition of Oblivion mod 100% doesn't change that it really does look like one.
In fact, Fallout 3 is essentially an Oblivion mod done by people with the source code.
And Oblivion's dialogue didn't have branching you idiot. Dialogue was reduced to wiki style hyperlinks. And any actual conversations were short and led to the same result (i.e. everything in the Dark Brotherhood)
Angry_Games
First time out of the vault
so....after just finishing Fallout 1 for the first time in about 8 years (playing through them both again while waiting for Fallout3), googled around here and there, and happened to see a link at Gamespot that led to this thread.
And after reading it...I'm...well, I'm not sure how I feel. I must be the only person here (and according to some of you guys, the only one on earth) that can't wait for Fallout 3.
I guess the one question that none of you can answer, and neither can I, is "how can you get so upset about a game that you've seen absolutely nothing from, except for a trailer?"
I mean, I certainly haven't been invited to play a test version, and neither has anyone here that I can see.
Some dudes that work for Bethesda have some interviews and say some things, and you know what? It reminds me of political debates and right-wing nutjob radio in the way that everyone in this thread picks apart the tiniest things that are said and blow them up to be these crimes against nature of the Fallout universe.
I shake my head because I just don't get it. I love the Fallout games and I especially love Wasteland (Interplay 10th anniversary cd still sitting on my shelf). I thought Oblivion was pretty decent, but nothing to shout out on the rooftops about. But I can't understand how everyone assumes Fallout3 is going to suck because they personally didn't like Oblivion. Seriously, am I missing something? Did all of you get to sit down and play Fallout 3 already?
You absolutely for sure know that Fallout 3 going to suck based on some comments made by the developers + your experience with Oblivion? Seriously? Because I am having a real hard time with that equation myself.
Dialogue trees? <shrug>
FPS/3rd person? <shrug>
Oblivion with guns? <shrug>
who really knows what this game is going to be? Not me, and certainly none of you here.
It seems that a lot of you have put all your emotions into the hate basket already without realizing something so important that it's odd to me that you don't already see it....that everyone's perception of something is slightly different than everyone else's.
Meaning...is it so hard to grasp that say...me for example, has a completely different view of Fallout than every single one of you? Is it impossible to imagine that one of you enjoys a certain aspect of Fallout 2 differently than someone else? Is it such a stretch to say that all of us enjoy Fallout in the same general way, but each of us has our own personal specifics that we like about the game? That we interpret while playing?
I'm still stuck on that "how can all of you trash a game that isn't even being released until 2008, and probably not until second half of 2008?"
Another bit to think about is just how popular the Elder Scrolls series really is. Extremely popular. It's no insult to anyone here that hates the series or a specific game to hear that regardless of how much you hate it, it's a smashing success. I don't think I've seen a single positive comment in this thread about the game (nor about Oblivion). Mostly I see the same mindless internet-style message board hate that I see in tech forums (INTEL SUXORS OMG!!! and yet the guy saying it probably never used an Intel anything so how could he make such a statement?), blogs, etc.
Personally, the only studio I would want to have this franchise more than Bethesda would be Bioware. But Bethesda would easily be my second choice based on their previous track record for games (especially the Elder Scrolls series). I guess I'm the only one who doesn't hate them or how they go about making a game. Maybe you might want to rank me out and call me names like I see you calling all these devs and such. But I just can't hate on a game that none of us will see in action until 2008.
But I think more important than any of this, is the harsh reality that might be too hard for some of you to swallow. That harsh reality is that Fallout 3 isn't going to flop. Even if you, me, and everyone in this particular forum hates it with a passion, it isn't going to flop. That's just reality, because a small number of you here who are dedicated, hardcore fans aren't happy more than a year before release aren't going to even be a speed bump in sales for the overwhelming majority of Fallout fans (like me) that are looking forward to this game like console dorks are looking forward to Halo 3 (btw, I'm a console dork too, but I hate Halo and any FPS on a controller).
I know I'll catch hell for my post, but I'm ultimately curious as to how someone can hate something before they've seen a single bit of gameplay or have even more than a semi-cryptic hint as to what the gameplay is going to be like.
I love the game STALKER that just came out. It's a semi-rpg-ish FPS that while other than making your computer run like a Pentium 90, really brings you into the gameworld. It isn't perfect...and I've never played a game that was perfect, and I never will (except maybe tetris or bejeweled). Neither will you. Point is, FPS-RPG games can be done, and they can be done well (Oblivion with guns is EXACTLY how STALKER was described, and the truth is that there's general similarities, but those two games couldn't be more different).
I'm hoping Fallout 3 has a STALKER feel to it, with a bit of Oblivion feel. I guess that means I'm totally in the wrong community, so I apologize....but isn't it always good to have someone who isn't on the bandwagon (in the case of this particular thread, the hate bandwagon) that might point out something you didn't think of because you were too busy hating? (like the fact that not a single one of you have seen the game and are automatically assuming that it's going to be a complete pile of crap based on...piddly bits of words or your personal hatred of a game that was made by the same developer that is making this game?)
Well it seems Vehementi might be one of those that maybe sorta sees things the same way as I do (at least I detect more than hint of sense in him when he asks you "how do you know?" when he knows what I know, that none of you have even a clue of what this game is going to look and play like...it's all assumption, and no one needs to be reminded what assumptions are)
Everyone's vision of Fallout 3 is different. Everyone in this thread has a different vision of what they want in Fallout 3. The only thing I see most of you agreeing on is that you hate Bethesda. That doesn't mean they suck and can't make good games. It simply means that you've found a few others that agree vehemently with you about how much you all hate them. But again, it doesn't mean anything except that it's your opinion.
But for the last time, I'll ask once again, how can you even form an opinion on a product that you haven't seen, and won't for at least another year?
I'm still baffled about this.
And after reading it...I'm...well, I'm not sure how I feel. I must be the only person here (and according to some of you guys, the only one on earth) that can't wait for Fallout 3.
I guess the one question that none of you can answer, and neither can I, is "how can you get so upset about a game that you've seen absolutely nothing from, except for a trailer?"
I mean, I certainly haven't been invited to play a test version, and neither has anyone here that I can see.
Some dudes that work for Bethesda have some interviews and say some things, and you know what? It reminds me of political debates and right-wing nutjob radio in the way that everyone in this thread picks apart the tiniest things that are said and blow them up to be these crimes against nature of the Fallout universe.
I shake my head because I just don't get it. I love the Fallout games and I especially love Wasteland (Interplay 10th anniversary cd still sitting on my shelf). I thought Oblivion was pretty decent, but nothing to shout out on the rooftops about. But I can't understand how everyone assumes Fallout3 is going to suck because they personally didn't like Oblivion. Seriously, am I missing something? Did all of you get to sit down and play Fallout 3 already?
You absolutely for sure know that Fallout 3 going to suck based on some comments made by the developers + your experience with Oblivion? Seriously? Because I am having a real hard time with that equation myself.
Dialogue trees? <shrug>
FPS/3rd person? <shrug>
Oblivion with guns? <shrug>
who really knows what this game is going to be? Not me, and certainly none of you here.
It seems that a lot of you have put all your emotions into the hate basket already without realizing something so important that it's odd to me that you don't already see it....that everyone's perception of something is slightly different than everyone else's.
Meaning...is it so hard to grasp that say...me for example, has a completely different view of Fallout than every single one of you? Is it impossible to imagine that one of you enjoys a certain aspect of Fallout 2 differently than someone else? Is it such a stretch to say that all of us enjoy Fallout in the same general way, but each of us has our own personal specifics that we like about the game? That we interpret while playing?
I'm still stuck on that "how can all of you trash a game that isn't even being released until 2008, and probably not until second half of 2008?"
Another bit to think about is just how popular the Elder Scrolls series really is. Extremely popular. It's no insult to anyone here that hates the series or a specific game to hear that regardless of how much you hate it, it's a smashing success. I don't think I've seen a single positive comment in this thread about the game (nor about Oblivion). Mostly I see the same mindless internet-style message board hate that I see in tech forums (INTEL SUXORS OMG!!! and yet the guy saying it probably never used an Intel anything so how could he make such a statement?), blogs, etc.
Personally, the only studio I would want to have this franchise more than Bethesda would be Bioware. But Bethesda would easily be my second choice based on their previous track record for games (especially the Elder Scrolls series). I guess I'm the only one who doesn't hate them or how they go about making a game. Maybe you might want to rank me out and call me names like I see you calling all these devs and such. But I just can't hate on a game that none of us will see in action until 2008.
But I think more important than any of this, is the harsh reality that might be too hard for some of you to swallow. That harsh reality is that Fallout 3 isn't going to flop. Even if you, me, and everyone in this particular forum hates it with a passion, it isn't going to flop. That's just reality, because a small number of you here who are dedicated, hardcore fans aren't happy more than a year before release aren't going to even be a speed bump in sales for the overwhelming majority of Fallout fans (like me) that are looking forward to this game like console dorks are looking forward to Halo 3 (btw, I'm a console dork too, but I hate Halo and any FPS on a controller).
I know I'll catch hell for my post, but I'm ultimately curious as to how someone can hate something before they've seen a single bit of gameplay or have even more than a semi-cryptic hint as to what the gameplay is going to be like.
I love the game STALKER that just came out. It's a semi-rpg-ish FPS that while other than making your computer run like a Pentium 90, really brings you into the gameworld. It isn't perfect...and I've never played a game that was perfect, and I never will (except maybe tetris or bejeweled). Neither will you. Point is, FPS-RPG games can be done, and they can be done well (Oblivion with guns is EXACTLY how STALKER was described, and the truth is that there's general similarities, but those two games couldn't be more different).
I'm hoping Fallout 3 has a STALKER feel to it, with a bit of Oblivion feel. I guess that means I'm totally in the wrong community, so I apologize....but isn't it always good to have someone who isn't on the bandwagon (in the case of this particular thread, the hate bandwagon) that might point out something you didn't think of because you were too busy hating? (like the fact that not a single one of you have seen the game and are automatically assuming that it's going to be a complete pile of crap based on...piddly bits of words or your personal hatred of a game that was made by the same developer that is making this game?)
Well it seems Vehementi might be one of those that maybe sorta sees things the same way as I do (at least I detect more than hint of sense in him when he asks you "how do you know?" when he knows what I know, that none of you have even a clue of what this game is going to look and play like...it's all assumption, and no one needs to be reminded what assumptions are)
Everyone's vision of Fallout 3 is different. Everyone in this thread has a different vision of what they want in Fallout 3. The only thing I see most of you agreeing on is that you hate Bethesda. That doesn't mean they suck and can't make good games. It simply means that you've found a few others that agree vehemently with you about how much you all hate them. But again, it doesn't mean anything except that it's your opinion.
But for the last time, I'll ask once again, how can you even form an opinion on a product that you haven't seen, and won't for at least another year?
I'm still baffled about this.
Such a long post, such a shame.
How can you NOT have an opinion on a game you CAN'T WAIT for, after being given information that shows it's most basic concepts are going to be far astray from what you would expect from a Fallout sequel?
I'm still baffled about this.
How can you NOT have an opinion on a game you CAN'T WAIT for, after being given information that shows it's most basic concepts are going to be far astray from what you would expect from a Fallout sequel?
I'm still baffled about this.
I think most of us can't wait for FO3 (to a point), which is why we're so easily upset by the evidence available. Not one person here who says "it will suck" is not going to at least read reviews when the game comes out, hoping against hope that it didn't suck after all.Angry_Games said:
And with such emotional investment as already mentioned, of course folks are going to comb through what extremely limited information has been made available. If Beth refuses to provide evidence that the game won't suck (sorry to keep repeating myself), why are you surprised that the reaction is not positive.
Ummm, that's nice?
Again, so what?
Whether it flops or is a roaring success clearly has no reflection on whether or not it turns out to suck (there I go again) as the game industry has proven too many times in the past.
"FPS-RPG" games can indeed be done. The problem is that FO3 should NOT be an "FPS-RPG". Plenty of people like lots of different genres of games. Sometimes you do feel more like shooting stuff than reading, agonising over stats, allowing yourself to become immersed. That doesn't mean you want to do it all the time, nor that you want to compromise to death the RPG in order to have the FPS within the 'same' game.
Unillenium said:
First person is not the only way to immerse a gamer. How do you think writers like Tolkien gain a huge following of the LOTR series? Most, if not all LOTR fans came from reading the book first and not the movie. Visuals, sound, story, dialogue, effects, interactions all play an integral part of immersion. With the LOTR books, the readers used imaginaton to create all those things. The human brain is God's great work of art. Let' s not use it for wiping our butts with okay?
I would rather watch a Fallout movie and see Junktown and the Hub in the real life interpretation of the director rather than Bethesda showing me their pretty architecture.
Give me a movie if you want to thrill me with your visuals but don't mess around with the game PLEASE.
Vault 69er
Water Chip? Been There, Done That
Hell think about all the cosmetics Fallout had. Gender choice. That's it. And that had significant inpact on how NPCs interacted with you.
Did it really matter that you couldn't alter your toon? Did it matter that only Vault 13 actually had it's number written on it's doors and jumpsuits? Did it matter that Fallout was browner than a brown convention? No.
Of course, I'm not saying there shouldn't be pretty graphics and landscapes. I like pretty graphics. I like customising toons. But they should be an addition, not a replacement to the RPG experience.
Basically, they're nice, but Fallout doesn't need them and never has. Ironically, what it does need has been totallly ignored by Bethesda.
Did it really matter that you couldn't alter your toon? Did it matter that only Vault 13 actually had it's number written on it's doors and jumpsuits? Did it matter that Fallout was browner than a brown convention? No.
Of course, I'm not saying there shouldn't be pretty graphics and landscapes. I like pretty graphics. I like customising toons. But they should be an addition, not a replacement to the RPG experience.
Basically, they're nice, but Fallout doesn't need them and never has. Ironically, what it does need has been totallly ignored by Bethesda.