The RPG Genre is fucked up

[mountaingoat]

...who wasn’t brought into the world by a mother who clearly drank during her pregnancy, like Todd Howard.

The attack on Todd’s mother was surely a brutally unfair one, and as a whole, out of place.

What can be argued/criticized is Todd’s ability or/and competence as game producer to perceive the distinctiveness and particularity the Fallout series carry.
Did he get it right when comes to Fallout? Personally I think not.

Other than that, Todd could possibly be a perfect Carousel tester, but that’s another story.

All in all, I agree with most of the points the article makes.

 

[Ixyroth]

Neither Beth nor Bioware are interested in making good RPGs. They're both going after the LCD.

The big difference between them is that Bioware actually has talent - better artists, better writers, better VOs. Beth's games (TES, FO3) are open-world, Bioware's tend to be more linear, where most of the world is inaccessible at any given time, and sections are locked/unlocked as the story progresses. Other than that, they both focus on combat, which is weak and unchallenging. The choices are usually binary, and the consequences superficial at best... little to no impact on the gameworld or even the direction of the story and events.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Yeah I wouldn't hold up Bioware as some shining paragon of RPG merit. Their games are well done, well produced, good looking, fairly well written. But damn if they aren't formulaic and stale as all get out. Theirs is a a situation where the graphics get better but the games themselves haven't evolved all that much since Baldur's Gate. As Action/Adventure RPGs they are top shelf, I love me some BG2, but let's not fool opurselves into thinking it's some high water mark in RPG gaming.
That said they are still head and shoulders above anything Bethesda has done with Todd at the helm.

 

[Dionysus]

Yeah. How exactly was the renegade/paragon distinction different? It's the same good/evil, black/white thing under a different name.

Well, they are all binary, but that's the extent of the similarity. Have you played these games? In ME, it's more a distinction between lawful good and chaotic good, or a distinction between Kantian and Millian ethics. And one of the big choices seemed to be completely independent of the dichotomy. It is definitely restricted (as I said), but you don't get the mustache-twirling choices of JE and KotOR. Many of the paragon choices seemed to be stupid or unnecessarily risky compared to the renegade alternative.

There are many valid complaints about Mass Effect, but it's a mistake to say that it predominantly features black/white moral choices. It mostly deals in "shades of white."

 

[Kyuu]

While I suppose you can somewhat accurately make the assertion that the Renegade/Paragon choices in Mass Effect are different, you're just arguing semantics. Yes, Mass Effect doesn't allow you to do anything overtly "evil," really. Choosing Paragon/Renegade is really just choosing between Self-Serving-Asshole/Goody-Two-Shoes. However, it's still really the same thing as (certainly no "deeper," complicated, or morally gray than) Jade Empire's or KotoR's systems.

They're both going after the LCD.

They're both going after the Liquid Crystal Displays?

The attack on Todd’s mother was surely a brutally unfair one, and as a whole, out of place.

Yes, it's brutal. Probably not really necessary. It's not unfair, though, IMO (the attack being an insinuation about Todd's mental abilities, not an attack on his mother).

[Tim Cain] made only one game with Troika that stands up well against FO1/2 in a comparison like this...

Eh? I'd say there's two: Arcanum and VtM: Bloodlines. I suppose that's a matter of debate though.

[...] and he's currently working on MMOs.

He's currently working on only one MMO, I believe. And also, it's premature to assume that, simply because the game in an MMO, Mr. Cain won't produce a game that is good enough to cite as an example of a good RPG.

 

[Trithne]

They're both going after the Liquid Crystal Displays?

Lowest Common Denominator, but I figure you probably knew that anyway.

I agree with the article, for the most part. RPGs are sanitised and their choices mostly just reflect doing thing x and being nice about it, or doing thing x and being a dick about it.

What annoys me more about games like FO3, ME, etc is their focus on combat. Everything is solved by beating up the enemy. And the game gets built completely around beating up the enemy.

 

[Kyuu]

I feel foolish now, but honestly Liquid Crystal Display was the only thing that came to mind to fit that acronym, actually.

 

[mountaingoat]

Yes, it's brutal. Probably not really necessary. It's not unfair, though, IMO (the attack being an insinuation about Todd's mental abilities, not an attack on his mother).

It is unfair because the way the editor puts it, doesn’t look like an insinuation but rather a direct imputation that Todd’s mother is responsible for her son’s I.Q.
She (hypothetically) drank during pregnancy, therefore Todd is innocent, blame the mother.

It was wrong expression and as you said unnecessary.

 

[simdude]

They're right!

If you were around when the Fallouts were hot, before 2000, you'd feel like these guys too, if you started playing PC games after 2005, then F3 is god, nothing better has ever been done and DLC's are the best things ever invented.

Fallout 1&2 are old. Old gamers love them.

 

[H.A.D.E.S.]

Yeah. How exactly was the renegade/paragon distinction different? It's the same good/evil, black/white thing under a different name.

Well actually are still a good guy (as in trying to save the galaxy) when you are renegade. It's more like a choise between being the ultimate dick (renegade) or a wussy (paragon).

 

[Public]

Fallout 1&2 are old. Old gamers love them.

More like quality gamres love them, not only "old" gamres. I know a lot of teenage gamers who after playing first Fallouts, or other RPGs like Arcanum/Planescape:Torment/Baldurs Gate etc, released how good games were and how bad they're now.

It's not an age thing. If all those old games were re-made with today's graphics, kids would definitely eat them up.

 

[Crni Vuk]

They're right!

If you were around when the Fallouts were hot, before 2000, you'd feel like these guys too, if you started playing PC games after 2005, then F3 is god, nothing better has ever been done and DLC's are the best things ever invented.

Fallout 1&2 are old. Old gamers love them.

Seriously. Right I give you that. Fallout is "good". BUT (now the interesting part), compared to what ...

If you ask me (and I know you dont ), it speaks volume for the games, particularly RPGs that have been released in the recent few years.

What was any major block buster one was able to see and play when it comes to RPGs in the last 2-3 years? Not even a handfull.

One might say that old gamers love old games. Though strange how the Fallout box from Iplay is in the PC npd top sales numbers isnt it. Of course just for the PC and I have no clue how presentable that is really, but still its a interesting thing to know. But I doubt that everyone who bought it is over his 30s.

What counts for me at least is that I will not lower my standarts regarding what to expect from a RPG only to be able to enjoy a game like Fallout 3 or any other of Bethesda RPGs that dont even have good dialogues (or any other RPG to begin with). I mean how comes that in graphic we made a huge evolution with almost photo realistic settings (sometimes) compared to titles like Wasteland, Fallout 1/2 and other games but the value of writting and interaction with the enviroment and NPCs has become so shallow, its a devolution one can see here.

If people back then 15 years sometimes 20 years in the past managed to make interaction with interesting NPCs with REAL dialogues, how comes its impossible now? We have more space available on the disks now, programing has become much easier (compared to the past of course), the PCs and consoles have a lot more power today. So just the options have become almost endless. But no one is really using it and pushing the games to their limits when it comes to NPCs and dialogues. What one can see is only great graphic and sometimes a bit of story and content so its just enough to call it RPG.

 

[x'il]

The article is quite correct, unfortunately the writer's position and his argument gets greatly weakened by his ad hominem fallacy against the guy's mother...

It's not an age thing. If all those old games were re-made with today's graphics, kids would definitely eat them up.

Well, they would definitely be unbeatable and really, really nice... but, unfortunately, perhaps you're putting too much stock on the brainwashed, crappy-games-raised kids of today, of course, i would certainly love to be proved wrong there...

If people back then 15 years sometimes 20 years in the past managed to make interaction with interesting NPCs with REAL dialogues, how comes its impossible now?

I can think of many, many reasons (as i'm sure all of us do), but among the firsts, or even the first would be: Time. The time it takes for a player to read all those dialogues, re-read them if they are very interesting and creative, to experiment with the different possiblities in interaction, to try alternate choices and so on, and so on... and there's that sayin' that goes "time is money"... so, it's not money-efficient for them to make games that would take the player maybe even months to complete, experiment and enjoy, when they can make easily consummable sandwiches that take less time, effort and resources to make (and can be sold for the same price, or depending on the PR and the fanboys, even more) that end quickly leaving the gamer hungering for more, and that's when the DLC's, the expansions, and all that crap come into play. That's the gaming industry nowadays, that's the TV industry nowadays, that's the movie industry...blablabla...you get the point.

 

[Public]

Well, they would definitely be unbeatable and really, really nice... but, unfortunately, perhaps you're putting too much stock on the brainwashed, crappy-games-raised kids of today, of course, i would certainly love to be proved wrong there...

Life is not about keeping yourself to the rule others created, but to understand things and find a solution.


Old games are for old gamers=rule

 

[Dionysus]

While I suppose you can somewhat accurately make the assertion that the Renegade/Paragon choices in Mass Effect are different, you're just arguing semantics.

Sure, and if someone says that NBA players are short, then I guess I’m just arguing semantics when I disagree. Mass Effect doesn’t feature many black/white moral choices. I only point this out because I’ve noticed that many people don’t really know what they are saying when they talk about moral choices in games. For example, the first Fallout game didn’t have much moral ambiguity in its choices, but it has an undeserved reputation for featuring that sort of thing. The good guys and bad guys were clear, and the outcomes were almost always consistent with the choices.

Eh? I'd say there's two: Arcanum and VtM: Bloodlines. I suppose that's a matter of debate though.

He's currently working on only one MMO, I believe. And also, it's premature to assume that, simply because the game in an MMO, Mr. Cain won't produce a game that is good enough to cite as an example of a good RPG.

Bloodlines was a story-heavy game that probably had more in common with Bioware’s style (tons of unkillable NPCs, forced linear progression, tons of forced inescapable combat) than Fallout or Arcanum. And I can’t imagine how an MMO could be much like Fallout and still remain viable as an MMO.

 

[x'il]

Life is not about keeping yourself to the rule others created, but to understand things and find a solution.

Old games are for old gamers=rule

???

I don't really see in which way what you're saying there relates to what i posted... honestly.

But "interpreting" a little, i will say that, both PR and consumers are responsible for the quality of the products being released, so even if a company were to release a complete Fallout 1 and 2 remake with the full graphics capabilities of nowadays, today, they would still plummet, and that's because kids nowadays have a set of mediocre standards sculpted into their brains by years of mediocre games, movies, music, etc. (BTW, If it didn't plummet, it would be because of the people with high standards buying it, that is the people who played and knew the originals). Change in people's mindsets and standards doesn't happen overnight.

Trying to be perhaps, optimistic without any justification to be so, i posted that i would love to be proved wrong there and kids standards could be changed overnight (who knows, some people say miracles do happen... )

If you buy a crappy game or DLC or whatever, "knowing" that it is crappy, then you are effectively supporting crappy gaming development. That's it. There's such a thing as a saying that goes "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me".

P.S. i shouldn't need to say this, but i'm talking in general, of course, not in absolutes.

 

[MrBumble]

Yeah it's kinda funny.

In France there is that huge website, Jeuxvideo.com. Last week, they did a series of 3 different ten minutes gaming live videos in which they played Fallout 1. In the first video they introduced the plot. Second video : the mechanics. Finally, in the last video, they showed that you could solve a quest in five very different ways, depending on your stats or simply on how you wanted to approach it.

Now, the Fallout 1 forum is full of teenagers asking where you can buy Fallout 1 and 2...

Don't want to sound like a old-fart but it seems that people who only went to fast foods before actually like it when you force-feed them with quality products.

 

[Morbus]

But "interpreting" a little, i will say that, both PR and consumers are responsible for the quality of the products being released, so even if a company were to release a complete Fallout 1 and 2 remake with the full graphics capabilities of nowadays, today, they would still plummet, and that's because kids nowadays have a set of mediocre standards sculpted into their brains by years of mediocre games, movies, music, etc.

That's stupid.

It starts with your assumption that everygame should have full graphics capabilities of nowadays. Why do you think Europa Universalis turns a profit?

Again, that's stupid.

A Fallout 1 and 2 remake (it would be quite pointless, actually, because you already have Fallout 1 and 2)... no, a Fallout 1 and 2 SEQUEL would sell more than enough to cover the costs of its production, given that the guys doing it weren't a bunch of braindead clowns and spent their money wisely, aiming to the correct market.

 

[MrBumble]

Well, I would sure as hell buy a Fallout 1 remake...

Experiencing the Glow in 1st person can't be a bad experience...

Doing it right would be very complicated for obvious gameplay and design issues but if done right I would totally play that.

 

[x'il]

That's stupid.

It starts with your assumption that everygame should have full graphics capabilities of nowadays. Why do you think Europa Universalis turns a profit?

Again, that's stupid.

A Fallout 1 and 2 remake (it would be quite pointless, actually, because you already have Fallout 1 and 2)... no, a Fallout 1 and 2 SEQUEL would sell more than enough to cover the costs of its production, given that the guys doing it weren't a bunch of braindead clowns and spent their money wisely, aiming to the correct market.

You're:

A) assuming i'm talking in absolutes, which i already posted that i am not,
B) reading what you want from my post and ignoring the rest,
C) ignoring my previous posts and the fact that it wasn't i who posted the Fallout 1-2 remake example,
D) ignoring the undeniable fact that consumers have more than their share of responsibility (along with the media, of course), with the direction game developing takes,
E) dismissing your interpretation of my arguments with a plain "that's stupid" (now, that's smart!!),
F) playing "i don't know" on the fact, that games nowadays are more about graphics than anything else,
G) "aiming to the correct market" you said it yourself and yet, you ignore what i said and just claim "that's stupid"...so, thanks for playing.

(...)it seems that people who only went to fast foods before actually like it when you force-feed them with quality products.

Yes, i agree, the "force-feeding" and the "PR", must start at some point like in that website you're talking about, it is, let's say it, education. But if left "un-educated" they would buy what the media tells them to, and we know what that is (one of the stages of mass making a mediocre standards mentality is to make the subject unable to have his own criteria, so it can then be replaced by whatever criteria is desired, such as "Awwezzuumm action!!" media hyped criteria).

So my point holds, change doesn't happen magically, it must be made to happen.