Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'NMA News and Information' started by Brother None, Mar 22, 2008.
That would be this forum and a Baldur's gate forum I'm unaware of.
"This is so bad it's gone past good and back to bad again"
Seriously, what...the...fuck ? I didn't even know that such a level of cluelessness was even reachable. Congrats bro !
I'm not going to bother standing up for the Crispy Gamer stuff because I do think that they're pretty piss poor journalists, but I do think it's pretty hypocritical for you to have already decided that the game sucks without knowing very much about it, but whenever anybody else takes the same amount of information and decides that it's going to be good, you berate them and trash them up and down for it.
I'm not even saying it's bad to have already come to a conclusion about this game, mind you. But I think it's just as justifiable to have made the decision that this game is going to be good as it is that the game's going to be bad. In either case there's always the possibility that you'll be wrong -- though the way you guys go on and on like this I seriously doubt you'll actually admit to being wrong if you are, no matter how good the game is.
Many people think NMA is just filled with people who hate Beths F3 for NO REASON. Thats the problem.
1. We know from Bethesdas history that their defenition of RPG is TES, Morrowind and Oblivion.
2. We also deduce from Todds and others comments about how F3 will feel like Oblivion (hence oblivion with guns).
3. We know for a fact that F1 and F2 were drastically different in terms of both gameplay and rpg mechanics than what Bethesda has done.
4. We don't want F3 to be like Oblivion. We want Fallout 3 to be like F1 and F2.
5. So if F3 isn't going to be what we want, than how is that not going to suck for us?
Crispy Gamer completely ignores everything we have just pointed out Fallout is and goes on an asskiss fest. They claim to "roast people" yet ask the friendliest of questions possible all the while giving the interviewee the best shoe shine in the world.
We're not berating Crispy Gamer for coming to conclusions based on available information, we're berating Crispy Gamer for going 'I don't know anything about the game, but I think it'll rock because OBLIVION!!!'
We've just come to the conclusion that it was not faithful to the other episodes in terms of gameplay and design. It's not a guess, it's a FACT. If you turn Worms into a FPS with realistic graphics then is it still Worms ? Hell no. Same here.
Everyone is reading over this but it is pretty key: whether or not Crispy Gamer is right in asserting that Oblivion is the best game in 4 years is irrelevant. He does not argue why Oblivion is great, or why Oblivion's elements of greatness would be relevant to Fallout 3. He just states "it rocks, so Fallout 3 will rock".
It doesn't matter if Oblivion is actually great, the argumentation is flawed.
In a topsy turvy world, you might be right.
But flip the Crispy Gamer position around. His argumentation comes down to: I don't know anything about this game, but Oblivion was great so Fallout 3 will be too.
Now flip through the Fallout 3 articles on NMA. No, not the forum posts, because it's ridiculous to compare an editorial on a "professional" media site to forum posts on some fanforum.
Where do we argue "Oblivion sucked so Fallout 3 will suck" in our editorials? Where do we fail to properly back up our reasoning with argumentation, examples and facts?
You're comparing our position to his. That's not fair if you fail to also make a comparison between his our reasoning and his.
I won't spend an excessive amount of words defending myself here, because I don't think I'm likely to change anyone's mind. For the record, I respect NMA, its authors, and their right to their opinions. Though I would ask that people stop linking my work with interviews I didn't write containing questions I'd never ask.
Also for the record, I don't think people who dislike Oblivion are irrational - I think that people who insist it's a bad game because they dislike it are acting irrationally. I hate Rush, for example, but insisting they're a bad band would be rather foolish in the face of their popularity and critical acclaim.
I think DarkCorp summed up the divide in opinion pretty well with this:
"4. We don't want F3 to be like Oblivion. We want Fallout 3 to be like F1 and F2. "
I came to the realization a short while ago that I honestly don't care anymore if Fallout 3 is like Fallout and Fallout 2. I just want it to be good. Since I enjoyed the hell out of Oblivion (many in this forum clearly didn't), I think it's reasonable to presume that I'll enjoy Fallout 3.
Thanks for the page views, gentlemen. I honestly hope that Bethsoft manages to produce a game that makes everyone here happy.
-Chris "CaptainHomeless" Buecheler
Yeah, not biased my ASS. Fucking shit is downright hilarious. It's these morons that are helping in the assrape that is Fallout 3. Thanks guys.
Go fuck yourselves.
The more I read shit like this it pisses me off. I mean, yeah, sure, it's a GAME, after all. But it's one of my fucking favorite series (In any genre, wether it be book, movie, game anything), and it literally hurts me to see this happening to Fallout.
BTW I managed to read a copy of that xbox rag with Fallout on the cover (LOL, I ripped it out of it's plastic seal at Publix). UGH. Did you guys get a load of those dialouge choices? Plus what REALLY bothers me it that Beth admits to getting Pip-boy and Vault Boy mixed up. For such a seemingly small thing that bothered the hell out of me. Anyone else agree?
For fuck's sake, give Bethesda at least a break on messing up pipboy/vaultboy.
I recently have started reading the "Fallout Bible" by Chris Avellone who was a developer on Fallout 2.
I'll have you note that in the #5, Chris Avellone HIMSELF messes up Vaultboy/pipboy when he addresses a fan-made color VaultBoy which he calls a pipboy. I realize that one of the lead designers clarified what version was correct but come on, It's an easy mistake to make and Bethesda, like Chris Avellone, can't get everything right off the top of their head.
BN not saying it was you per say that did the interviews, he just posting how there is a pattern at crispygamer in which many of you guys don't even follow your own mission statement on your site.
There is reasons they dislike it just like reasons you liked it. Doesn't make anybody irrational here. I played it so I can list the reasons I disliked it see were I'm getting at? I don't think anybody that posted said they hate Oblivion just for no reason I'm sure most of them played it at least.
There is something I can argee with you on.
Answer few questions for me.
Would you have preferred Oblivion have multiple paths instead of being linear? Require multiple characters to see everything? Allow you to kill whoever you want? Allow you to influence and change the story and have multiple endings?
Because I sure would have. And other games like Fallout and Arcanum had those things years before Oblivion was made. RPGs have devolved, and I think that's why people are pissed off at Fallout 3 and the console jockeys who think it's going to be good.
I was mocking Crispy Gamer.
CG has an impressive array of talent and experience, and you waste it on this tripe? Meaningless editorials, fanboy interviews? Get serious, guys.
Well, we do. And no amount of "ignorance breeds happiness" is going to change that.
I don't mind if people roll over for short-term enjoyment, but please don't preach it as if it's some kind of better option.
Ok, now explain to me why or where your thought process went with that into thinking "Oblivion rocked, so love Fallout 3" was a good source for an editorial?
In case you didn't notice, editorials are supposed to be thought-provoking and confrontational, they're not supposed to be about one man's crusade to be a fan of a game he hasn't even seen. Your thinking is fine for you, individually, but it's barely even forum post material in what it has to add to the debate or has to say to anyone else.
You'll find most NMAers recognize that Oblivion is well-produced or liked by a certain audience - I won't get into any attempts to claim it's been somehow "objectively asserted" that it's good (especially not since critical acclaim in the gaming world is meaningless).
But here's the kicker: BookWorm Adventures is well-produced and liked by its audience. Does that mean I should jump for joy if PopCap games buys and makes the next Fallout?
You didn't go anywhere with your reasoning. You just went "yeah Oblivion is great" and didn't really show how that relates to Fallout at all. Don't you see how that's pretty ludicrous?
We all do, but not all of us are willing to ignore reality in our quest to be happy.
The funny thing is you said that...
That's kind of a strawman there. Most people, and I'm not saying all because that's impossible, most people who say Oblivion is a bad game here and at the codex know why they think like that (well, maybe not all at the codex... lol). If you ask them they'll give you reasons and argue why it's a bad game, or, specifically, a bad RPG. They would be irrational, yes, if they said it was a bad game just because of their personal preferences. Fortunately, that's not the case.
LOL because they are doing the game off the top of their head, that's right!
Hey cwbuecheler, can you tell my why only because you gave up hope that F3 will be anything like F1 or F2 should we begin to think like you?
I, too, would like F3 to be at least a good game, but when faced with facts and little information we have about the game, I can't honestly forgive Bethesda for what they're doing to the Fallout legacy. And I'm one of the more optimistic people on F3 here.
It's just wrong to do it completly diffrent than it should've been done and expect people to love you for it or tell them to shove off if they don't like it. Seriously, I don't recall Howard or any other F3 developers team actually *apologize* the people they have dissapointed. Right now it's like "we know that most people, to which this game means a lot, don't like our work, but honestly we don't care about it, because we like the way it is done and there are numerous kids and nerds that have no idea about what Fallout is about, that will praise us for it and buy our game".
And that is fucking unfair.
So tell me, do we not have the right to be angry and dissapointed?
*EDIT* minor grammatical fixes
He said we don't have the right to be angry?
I have Oblivion, but I never got around to beating it and never will. It became too boring and repetitive for my tastes. I felt like a One-Man Army unable to complete tasks that become exceedingly difficult. Just about everyone did the "Assassin's Guild." Whoo hoo, you accomplish becoming the most powerfully unbalanced character build ever, Congrats. Too bad sneaking around doesn't give you the ability to beat the game. So I simply said "screw it" (actually more like "f*** this game").
I liked the pretty environments, but that was about it (Oh wait, what's that coming towards me as I admire the trees? A Minotaur coming to pulverizes me as I am minding my own business? Sweet!).
The way the developers said the game would be, it turned out to be only half truths (time constraints or marketing decisions, whatever the case). The A.I. characters are largely sterile, uninteresting, and static. Quite the opposite of what I had read they would be and it was mainly why I bought the game, for the supposedly amazing "life-like" A.I. routines.
And I got around to playing the Fallout games, and other older RPG Hybrid's like Deus Ex and System Shock 2, well after having played Oblivion (and Morrowind before it).
"I loved Oblivion...therefore I will love Fallout 3"
"Fallout 3 won't be like Fallout 1 and 2, but I don't care anymore"
I didn't quote exactly. But these seem to be 2 points, this person is making. Both of these points seem incredibly immature positions to take, as well as completely trivial points when analyzing...anything, really. Unless in the context of a fan on a forum, but this guy seems to be trying to be some kind of journalist. These positions are befitting of a fanboy.
It seems like lazy, and immature thinking. Especially when considering that the author makes absolutely no attempt to back up any of his statements.
I edited out my last points. This article is a joke.
Hey there, mr. Buecheler. I don't know if you're still around, but I thought I'd drop by and say a few words.
As a complete stranger to the very existance of your site, I think I can regard my opinion of it as unbiased, so please think of it as constructive criticism when I say that your editorial was weak. Simply stating that a game is undeniably great when you look at it objectively does not mean that it is or that you are doing just that. I hate Oblivion with a passion, and yet I do believe that the criticisms I direct towards that game are very objective. Here are but a few of the most crucial ones, and feel free to analyze my objectiveness or lack thereof.
First and foremost, Oblivion is hailed and was marketed all the way as a deep rpg, made in the western fashion. It is neither. It resembles more a first-person roguelike or at most a japanese rpg in its wikipedia-style topical dialogues and lack of choices to every quest (most being linear fetch-quests), which have only two possible outcomes - completion or being ignored. Note how this description fits Oblivion just as well as Diablo.
Its gameplay is also fundamentally flawed, to the point that even the fans have to resort to the near-complete overhaul of the game the online modding community has produced. This is mostly due to a ludicrous level scaling system ensuring no real challenge is met through the whole game and that there is no sense of progression to the player, but I think it also owes to the skill system being oversimplified and dull, as are combat and magic, particularly important points for any game that plays as a dungeon-crawler (and precisely where Oblivion failed 9 years after Diablo succeeded).
Graphics-wise, there is some to be said for Oblivion, but the truth is it does not look as good as it should. NPCs faces are notoriously bad, and while the rest of the world looks good, it never achieves awe-inspiring, the gameworld size not really being a good excuse when 99% of it is covered by randomly-generated forests.
There's also "Radiant A.I." - also known as bad scripting - and its countless amusing consequences, or the omniscient imperial guards popping out of nowhere to offer you three very lame consequences for your stealing of bread.
You can enjoy any game all you want in spite of its flaws (like a whole lot of people did in this case), but "fun" is nothing more than a cop-out when it comes to a game's objective qualities simply because it is, in essence, a subjective judgement.