Dragon Age - Desslock Comments [Archive]

Dhruin

July 27th, 2009, 23:37

It feels like the Dragon Age show today, although this one might bring heart to some readers. Badesumofu points out some interesting comments (http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showpost.php?p=1824029&postcount=1121)from respected RPG writer Desslock on the QT3 forums:
This game is going to surprise a lot of the naysayers who have been turned off by the dumb advertising -- combat definitely has got a solid BG2 feel, the dialogue system seems a step above anything BioWare has previously done in terms of offering varied conversation choices that actually seem viable and have meaningful consequences, and the world and background lore seems deeper and more interesting than I expected.

From what I've played of the game (only about 8 hours), it actually seems great, and so far has far exceeded my expectations given some of the trailers and advertising.
More information. (http://www.rpgwatch.com/show/newsbit?newsbit=12722)

Surlent

July 27th, 2009, 23:37

That sounds exactly just like another advertise.
"You didn't like impression the last ad gave? Oh wait, well, in truth it's even much better than you could have ever imagined in your mind. Stupendous."

BillSeurer

July 28th, 2009, 00:00

Surlent apparently doesn't know who Desslock is.

rune_74

July 28th, 2009, 00:23

I was just going to say that. Amazing. Desslock has been around a long time.

Caddy

July 28th, 2009, 00:37

Not a fan of this Manson advertising, so this news is reassuring. Everything else looks great though.

Badesumofu

July 28th, 2009, 01:21

Yeah, was going to say, Desslock is one of the few who I really take notice of. My heart warmed a little when I read this comment, because it's basically Desslock confirming my best hopes about the game.

quasimodo

July 28th, 2009, 01:49

After reading what Desslock had to say about Oblivion and then playing the game myself I don't really trust his preview much.

rune_74

July 28th, 2009, 01:50

I liked oblivion...heaven forbid huh?

And I take desslocks comments way over your opinion:)

pantheon

July 28th, 2009, 03:16

After reading what Desslock had to say about Oblivion and then playing the game myself I don't really trust his preview much.

Agreed - anyone who thinks Oblivion is a good game gets no respect from me.

crpgnut

July 28th, 2009, 04:44

Wow, a guy with 30 posts and a guy with 8 posts vs Desslock, who has written for magazines and websites for 20 years. Hmmm, think I'll go with Desslock's opinion over theirs. Anybody heard of quasimodo or pantheon, outside of a few forums? Didn't think so :D

Oblivion was an awesome game. It may not be your cup of tea, but it was an awesome game, nevertheless. I hated the Gothics, but they were awesome games too. Why do I say so? Because many people here, whom I respect, say so. They just weren't an awesome game for me.

I wasn't very interested in Dragon Age at all. Desslock has probably made me a buyer. I'll wait for a few of my forum mates' comments first, but color me intrigued.

Gorath

July 28th, 2009, 05:20

The point behind the newsbit is that Desslock is so far the only available RPG expert with the opportunity to play the game for a several hours.

pantheon

July 28th, 2009, 05:26

txa1265

July 28th, 2009, 05:32

... and he has a similar take on the adverts that many of us do, and is positive about the experience.

On Oblivion ... I believe the devs did exactly what they set out to do. Whether or not that was what WE wanted is something entirely different ;)

Badesumofu

July 28th, 2009, 06:36

Sorry, but I don't call any game I don't like 'awesome' - no matter who else says it is.

Understanding the difference between saying "I like this" and saying "this is good" is a good thing. I didn't like Mass Effect all that much, but I can recognise that it was a pretty good game. Similar with Oblivion - not my cup of tea, but I can see why so many people enjoyed it so much. In my opinion, Oblivion was a good game, but a bad RPG. It is a fact that I didn't like it very much.

What we have here, though, is someone who can be legitimately considered an expert on RPGs, who has actually played the game for 'about 8 hours', has a similar view of the marketing as us, and similar tastes to many of us, who is saying that it seems like a good game. It could also be reasonbly implied that he liked the 8 hours of the game that he played.

That, and what I previously said, is why I brought the post to the attention of the editors of this fine site.

Corwin

July 28th, 2009, 07:35

I agree too. Good game and good RPG are not the same thing. For many people Diablo was an awesome game, but definitely not for me. Many consider PS-T awesome, but others dislike it intensely. It's a matter of taste and opinion. I've rarely disagreed with Desslock over MANY,MANY years of reading his stuff!!

Konjad

July 28th, 2009, 07:58

souha13

July 28th, 2009, 08:02

Interesting news. I've not been very found of Biowares lates but maybe Dragon Age will surprise me.

DArtagnan

July 28th, 2009, 08:09

This is a pleasant surprise. I trust Desslock more than the majority of modern gaming journalists - and his take is the kind of thing I haven't been expecting.

For what it's worth, my original response to Oblivion was very postive indeed - and it took me quite a while to appreciate just how shallow it really was. If you, as someone who writes in public under the circumstances that are true for Desslock, you can't just easily "back out" if you've praised a game to high heaven.

Not that I know what he originally wrote, but I can't fault anyone for having an initial positive reaction towards Oblivion - because that's exactly what Bethesda are so damn good at - namely first impressions. Their entire objective and motivation seems, to me anyway, to be about making the strongest first impression possible - with longevity and solid underpinning being a distant side-goal for them.

Anyway, I'm taking the first step in getting ready to "eat my words" about Dragon Age - but as always, I remain sceptical. Many games make a strong first impression, only to show their true colors later. I had much the same response to Mass Effect until I took a good look at the skill/item mechanics.

But still, sounds great.

Surlent

July 28th, 2009, 08:24

Surlent apparently doesn't know who Desslock is.Actually I do know who he is. But even then why should I care for his opinion about a game when it is only that, an opinion?
-- combat definitely has got a solid BG2 feel, the dialogue system seems a step above anything BioWare has previously done in terms of offering varied conversation choices that actually seem viable and have meaningful consequences, and the world and background lore seems deeper and more interesting than I expected.His post is all opinion.

He offered no rationale for his opinions. Not to mention he didn't provide any new facts about the product. His background and history on the net puts him in a position to make endorsements. We can already see how many on this forum admires his views without questioning them.

TheMadGamer

July 28th, 2009, 08:34

He offered no rationale for his opinions. Not to mention he didn't provide any new facts about the product. His background and history on the net puts him in a position to make endorsements. We can already see how many on this forum admires his views without questioning them.

This is true for just about any 'review' or 'reviewer' on the net or in print. To single out Desslock for this is interesting.

Maybe the guy just rubs you (the metaphor type of rubbing) the wrong way or you just think he's 'sold out' to the 'marketers.'

rune_74

July 28th, 2009, 08:42

Reviewers are no longer reviewers but new kind of advertisers (I don't know Desslock, I'm talking about reviewers in general). That's why I no longer read any reviews but care about people's opinions on forums much more.

This is a funny position. You think people on the forums are any better? None of them have agenda's? I don't think anyone is an "expert" in rpg's, what the hell is that anyways? I think that if a reviewer or person shares similar tastes in rpgs with what you do its safe to say his opinion carries merrit. I myself like to try most games and see if they appeal to me.

I'm not an elitist who believes my opinion on a game is the only one that matters or that I can shoehorn a game into a mold that strictly classifies it as to what it is.

GothicGothicness

July 28th, 2009, 08:57

Prime Junta

July 28th, 2009, 08:57

A bit LTTP, but... oh-kay! Between this and the very Michael Moorcock-esque Fade teaser, I'm suddenly feeling a bit more interested in this thing again.

Interest level +2.

Prime Junta

July 28th, 2009, 09:00

Actually I do know who he is. But even then why should I care for his opinion about a game when it is only that, an opinion?
His post is all opinion.

He offered no rationale for his opinions. Not to mention he didn't provide any new facts about the product. His background and history on the net puts him in a position to make endorsements. We can already see how many on this forum admires his views without questioning them.

All true -- but he has a very long and very solid track record of having pretty damn good opinions. I'd say about 80% good (which is the overlap between his opinion and mine, naturally).

That's why I'm lending his opinion a good deal more weight than, to pick an example at random, yours -- rationale or not.

marko2te

July 28th, 2009, 09:35

Desslock wrote in his Oblivion review that only bad thing in the game are NPC-s and that otherwise its a masterpiece. I hate Oblivion so its obvious that I and Desslock have different taste in games, so why should i care about his opinion especially when he only says that a game is better then every piece of official information has showed. I believe in what I see not what someone says, and up to today I havent seen many good things about Dragon Age.

Maylander

July 28th, 2009, 09:39

Prime Junta

July 28th, 2009, 09:43

The Sims featured Marilyn Manson and geysirs of blood? O_O

(Come to think of it, that reminds me of Sam Peckinpah's Salad Days (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1-NpyaOWV0).)

Maylander

July 28th, 2009, 09:44

I was referring to the lame sex part, not "the new shit". That looks more like a random FPS game. Probably the same lame EA marketing department though.

Alrik Fassbauer

July 28th, 2009, 09:53

The Sims featured Marilyn Manson and geysirs of blood? O_O

(Come to think of it, that reminds me of Sam Peckinpah's Salad Days (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1-NpyaOWV0).)

Uh, interesting thought ...

If carried out correctly ...

DArtagnan

July 28th, 2009, 10:11

I've had the same feeling as Desslock for quite a while, and I certainly haven't tried to keep it a secret - I still believe DA will be a solid title, despite the marketing department in EA being completely bonkers.

It's just something about the way David Gaider, Patrick Weekes, Stormwaltz and so on show up on our forums and defend the title. They sound honest. Why bother coming here to lie in our faces? That makes no sense; everyone who knows anything about the Watch knows that most people around here are too thorough to buy a game based on hype anyway.

It's nice to get a confirmation that the game seems to be on the right track though, from such a well established writer as Desslock (especially after he got to play the game for several hours).

If I was Gaider, I'd probably beat someone up over at the marketing department: "I've been working on this title for FIVE LONG YEARS, and you good-for-nothing morons manage to squeeze it through the same marketing scheme as The Sims!".

For my part, I've never suspected those developers of lying.

It's not about that, it's about how being part of that environment can color your own perceptions, especially if you're directly involved in the development of said title. I don't think you'll find many developers who think of themselves as lacking in creative integrity - and obviously companies like Bethesda and Bioware consider themselves on the forefront of gaming development.

It's only natural they'd come here to defend their titles, as it's their livelihood and likely their passion.

I'm sure many would come here and defend Jade Empire and Mass Effect, for instance, calling them great games. Many here would agree, but I consider them both gigantic steps back in most of the important ways.

Unfortunately, we all expect different things - and personally, being an enthusiastic "hardcore" gamer - I despise the mass market approach, no matter how understandable it is.

So, it's not as clear cut as you might think.

Anyway, in this case - based on Desslock's comments, I'm inclined to believe I might have been too harsh. I'll gladly eat my words about it, and apologize if that's the case. Not that anyone cares, but I think it's only fair.

But I'll have to wait and see the final product and play it for a good while before making my mind up. Again, first impressions are often very misleading in this modern gaming industry.

Alrik Fassbauer

July 28th, 2009, 10:28

I'm wondering more and more whether I should buy this game at all.

It is just too dark for my taste.

I'll rather keep the Drakensang prequel in mind.

Gorath

July 28th, 2009, 11:40

The answer for you is simple, Alrik:
Buy none of the upcoming games. You need a new PC or a decent upgrade first. Your old PC is even too slow for the first Drakensang with all the eye candy on. Newer games wouldn't even run on minimum, which means you would ruin the atmosphere.
The good news is that the consoles are limiting the stress put on PC hardware. Relatively cheap hardware will suffice until the next console cycle if you don't need a bigger upgrade for full-HD gaming on a 24" TFT.

Dhruin

July 28th, 2009, 12:08

Actually I do know who he is. But even then why should I care for his opinion about a game when it is only that, an opinion?
His post is all opinion.

He offered no rationale for his opinions. Not to mention he didn't provide any new facts about the product. His background and history on the net puts him in a position to make endorsements. We can already see how many on this forum admires his views without questioning them.

Yes...it's an opinion. I'm not sure why you think this needs to be pointed out. It was a comment on another forum that we plucked out and used as news so I'm sure he can live with the fact that he didn't provide evidence or - shock! - additional facts.

As for questioning his views...remember that it was an opinion, yes? Most of us are capable of rational thought and his opinion is simply an additional piece of information to consider.

Alistair

July 28th, 2009, 12:29

Very pleased to hear that from Desslock. Looks like a likely buy again.

txa1265

July 28th, 2009, 13:41

darn you desslock now I am interessed in the game again :P

BTW Oblivion objectively is not a good game..... unless good game, equals good graphics.... I do not know why someone would like generic gameplay and killing the same kind of monsters who are the same level as you 100's of times... But it is a good simulation of exploring a computer generated world... I just cannot stretch so far as to call it a good game...

While Oblivion is not a game I would defend ... saying it is 'objectively not good' is different than 'full of flaws' which I would support. Because as a console action game with RPG-lite elements and a huge, well rendered open world I would say that it *is* objectively a good game.

... but I still think it is overrated in the general press.

I also agree that Desslock expressing an opinion is just that - but since he has a history, you can get some feel for what it might be like. Sort of like reading info from one of the folks here. We all know something about each other and therefore can judge opinions accordingly.

Maylander

July 28th, 2009, 13:51

Another important factor is that while Desslocks opinion is certainly subjective, it is the opinion of someone who has 20+ years of experience in RPGs/writing such opinions about RPGs. He generally knows what to look for and what to expect. He can compare it to 100s of titles he has previously played, reviewed and given feedback on.

As for Oblivion: It's not a bad game. It's just a very hyped up game, which makes it easy to try to bring it down further than what it deserves. Very similar to WoW - there are quite a few people claiming it is "the worst MMO ever made", which it clearly is not, but it's easy to hate since it's such a giant/so hyped up. The more hyped up something gets, the easier it is for people who don't like it to hate it (even though the hate comes from the hype and all the people claiming it's the best thing ever, not the actual product).

To me, personally, there are elements in Oblivion that more or less ruins my overall experience. However, when I try to be objective, I can easily see that it would appeal to a lot of people, especially after modding it.

Quests.Muin

July 28th, 2009, 13:52

Lol i was gonna post my newfound optimism until i read this Desslock guy actually praised Oblivion.

I thought this was a place for connaiseurs, you shouldn't allow dumbasses with their "oblivion are teh awesum"

Also pissing out the window is awesome, doesn't mean it's good.

This is the cruelty of critic notoriety. You can write for years until everyone knows you. Then you write a stupid review(prolly while you were high), and suddenly you reveal that you're a fucktard and nobody cares about your opinion anymore.

It's pretty much what happened to that other idiot yahtzee Crapsho.

DArtagnan

July 28th, 2009, 13:54

Let's all agree that no game in the world is objectively good, please.

Maylander

July 28th, 2009, 13:54

Stop being a troll Quests.Muin.

DArtagnan

July 28th, 2009, 13:57

gabe

July 28th, 2009, 14:01

Maylander

July 28th, 2009, 14:02

I know a troll when I see one. You are far from it DArthagnan, but Quests certainly is. :)

DArtagnan

July 28th, 2009, 14:05

..yeah, the same desslock who wrote that FO3 is a faithful sequel to the letter and the spirit of the series. Des has lost it. Whenever the hardcore fanbase has some issues with a certain product, he comes to the rescue. He's a corporate salesman now. It happens to all old lawyers. That's certainly a shame, but he won't fool me again. His articles on PCG aren't any better, mind you. Plus, I certainly don't need his opinion to see what tripe DA is.

Good point, I guess.

That said, I can't just ignore all his good stuff from the past.

FO3 is a pretty good game, in my opinion, but I have to say I don't find it particularly faithful to the prequels.

But since I haven't read his articles related to that game, there is always the biased interpretation factor to consider.

My experience with the industry and the marketing campaign of DA tells me the game will be mass market "mediocre" for an enthusiast gamer like myself. However, this bit from Desslock casts a bright light on my scepticism.

Quests.Muin

July 28th, 2009, 14:10

..yeah, the same desslock who wrote that FO3 is a faithful sequel to the letter and the spirit of the series. Des has lost it. Whenever the hardcore fanbase has some issues with a certain product, he comes to the rescue. He's a corporate salesman now. It happens to all old lawyers. That's certainly a shame, but he won't fool me again. His articles on PCG aren't any better, mind you. Plus, I certainly don't need his opinion to see what tripe DA is.

Heh there you go.

R.i.p Desslock.

(as if i ever heard of him before ofc which i didn't)

Truth is the only ones left to trust are the CODEX ppl, because it's the forum itself that calls for uncompromising uncorruptible steel-hearted old oaks.

And none of them is a "FAMED" PRICK.

Quests.Muin

July 28th, 2009, 14:14

I know a troll when I see one. You are far from it DArthagnan, but Quests certainly is. :)

I only troll bullshit.

With your "oblivion isn't bad but not so good, can be enjoyed, with mods and blabla" you think you're being a balanced mannered gentleman, but you're not making any serious point, you're a no one with no message.

txa1265

July 28th, 2009, 14:15

Let's all agree that no game in the world is objectively good, please.

exactly ... and in the end, does it really matter? Isn't it really about the context of us as RPG fans that the assessments matter anyway?

DArtagnan

July 28th, 2009, 14:19

Heh there you go.

Amen

R.i.p Dasslock.

(as if i ever heard of him before ofc which i didn't)

Truth is the only ones left to trust are the CODEX ppl, because it's the forum itself that calls for uncompromising uncorruptible steel-hearted old oaks.

For anything approaching truth, you're going to need unbiased people dealing with unfiltered facts.

That in itself is so rare, that no forum in the world is going to have more than a tiny percentage of such people.

To top it off, there is likely no truth when we're dealing with objective quality in gaming - because to guage objective quality we need a comprehensive set of clearly defined and measurable aspects of objective qualities.

In effect, you're misguided and strike me as mildly fanatical. This means I can't take you seriously.

EvilManagedCare

July 28th, 2009, 14:22

Desslock's comments regarding this title are not that profound and even Gaider seemed to distance himself from the silly, "edgy" trailer that was released. So it's not a surprise the end product may be above what we have seen already in the form of Marilyn Manon videos.

The only reviewer I ever trusted was Scorpia way back in the day when CGW was good. Having said that I don't think in this case Desslock (at least who alleges to be him) is acting as the Mouth of Evil Video Game Marketing. He could have said this game is the worst since Lionheart and I still will buy this title. I miss a BG style single-player game so I can't wait until October.

Quests.Muin

July 28th, 2009, 14:30

For anything approaching truth, you're going to need unbiased people dealing with unfiltered facts.

That in itself is so rare, that no forum in the world is going to have more than a tiny percentage of such people.

To top it off, there is likely no truth when we're dealing with objective quality in gaming - because to guage objective quality we need a comprehensive set of clearly defined and measurable aspects of objective qualities.

In effect, you're misguided and strike me as mildly fanatical. This means I can't take you seriously.

And i certainly can't disagree more.

in your hard and goofish struggle to be moderate-opinioned, you forget that to go forward someplace we have to chase a point that's ahead, a destination, not try to put the argument to sleep by going "this isn't bad or good, nothing is bad or good", shit. This is not unbiased, this is being biased by sticky gooey moderation at your feet.

In the case of RP gaming the truth can only come from the most hard-assed uncompromising elite players, people who AREN'T biased and corrupted and can't TOLERATE anything that's not fucking GOOD, and when they do it so you can see their stern steel sullen foreheads, heroes whose phrases always end with 2 words

CHOICES AND CONSEQUENCES.

Does an RPG have them? No? SHIT.
Does it? are they good? No? SHIT.

Oblivion is undoubtably the anti-christ of roleplaying game, cause it's a temptation for players to be superficial, and rely ONLY on graphics and "immersion" in a bugged, empty, boring, nonsense but bloatedly good-looking world.

DArtagnan

July 28th, 2009, 14:47

And i certainly can't disagree more.

in your hard and goofish struggle to be moderate-opinioned, you forget that to go forward someplace we have to chase a point that's ahead, a destination, not try to put the argument to sleep by going "this isn't bad or good, nothing is bad or good", shit. This is not unbiased, this is being biased by sticky gooey moderation at your feet.

In the case of RP gaming the truth can only come from the most hard-assed uncompromising players, whose phrases always end with 2 words

CHOICES AND CONSEQUENCES.

Does an RPG have them? No? SHIT.
Does it? are they good? No? SHIT.

Oblivion is undoubtably the anti-christ of roleplaying game, cause it's a temptation for players to be superficial, and rely ONLY on graphics and "immersion" in a bugged, empty, boring, nonsense but bloatedly good-looking world.

You seem to have missed the bit where I told you I can't take you seriously. That's because I don't believe in communicating with fanatics.

Naturally, I could have changed my mind - but your inability to understand the very significant difference between a personal and subjective opinion (what you think of Oblivion, for instance), and then the objective truth - as in the actual quality of Oblivion (is it objectively good) in this case - tells me I was all too right.

You will be placed on ignore, so we can both save time.

That said, your tirade-like posts strike me as good entertainment - and I wouldn't dissuade you from going on like that. I will have to miss out on them, but I'll live.

txa1265

July 28th, 2009, 14:49

Kostaz

July 28th, 2009, 14:53

Actually none of the Marlin Manson vids managed to remove DA from my list(except the one with the sausage) but after reading that this guy praised Fallout 3 I have my doubts.

Quests.Muin

July 28th, 2009, 15:03

whatever, moderat-o-man :biggrin:

If you guys lemme, i'll explain you in 2 words where's the evil in saying

"Oblivion isn't bad".

this is NOT a subjective description of the game, mind you, it's just succint:

When one thinks about that game all one sees is a guy/woman that trots around woods and hills, enters caves that are all the same(fact), kills people and creatures which all fight using the same routines(fact), explores cities and villages, steals random items from houses for money, enjoys night and day cycles. It's all about the graphics to make it appear exciting, there's no doubt about that.

So who says it's a good game and who says it's bad?

1) I say it's good because videogames are in the end meant to be mild casual entertainment, for relax or a laugh, they have to know their limit which is offering a pleasant pastime, a mind-sleeper if you will... hey those are games, nothing to do about it.

2) I say it's bad because videogames are the new media after literature and cinema, they have to offer compelling food for your intellect, they have to explore humanity in ways movies and books couldn't conceive... because videogames offer interaction.

So the fact that Desslock actually liked the antichrist means that he doesn't believe in serious gaming anymore... and his opinions are to be considered junk.

Quests.Muin

July 28th, 2009, 15:04

Problem is, Quests,Muin ... you have very few posts here and have set yourself up as a troll. Not an auspicious start ... but as you say - choices, consequences. Have they been good? No! So your image is ... as you say 'sh!t'.

Yeah screw first impression, nobody will remember to be mad at me for trolling, in 2 hours, this is the net... maybe the ideas stick, instead.

wolfing

July 28th, 2009, 15:04

Since I happen to have liked Oblivion a lot (one of the few games I've played more than once, and without any mods!), I guess I don't have a problem with the reviewer.

vanedor

July 28th, 2009, 15:08

*yawn* Trolls are tiring.

Kostaz

July 28th, 2009, 15:09

Since I happen to have liked Oblivion a lot (one of the few games I've played more than once, and without any mods!), I guess I don't have a problem with the reviewer.I enjoyed Oblivion but IMO F3 is another story.

baron

July 28th, 2009, 15:17

I thought this was a place for connaiseurs,

since they covered azztaka, you can no longet think so :p (j/k)
________
Homemade bong (http://glassgallery.tumblr.com/glass-bongs/)

woges

July 28th, 2009, 15:56

It's connoisseurs, and Desslock's rep with the 'elite' appears to have slipped over the years.

rune_74

July 28th, 2009, 15:59

I enjoyed Oblivion but IMO F3 is another story.

I enjoyed oblivion, and I'm really enjoying playing fallout 3.

The troll who posted earlier about all the things you can do in oblivion made me laugh. What else do you do in other RPG's? It is the same in just about every other game. I can't think of many modern RPG's that you don't do exactly that(most if not all older rpg's as well.) Mostly though, as soon as he mentioned the codex of a place of wisdom and insight he lost me.

It is sad that it seems to be the trend with alot here to pick apart Oblivion and Fallout 3 but then bless the gothic series and even two worlds....the anti bethesda glasses must be working.

I think the difference between Desslock and alot of you is that he hasn't become so jaded that everying new is bad.

Quests.Muin

July 28th, 2009, 16:26

Caddy

July 28th, 2009, 16:29

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/2131/dutycallsm.jpg

BillSeurer

July 28th, 2009, 16:32

Brother None

July 28th, 2009, 16:39

It's connoisseurs, and Desslock's rep with the 'elite' appears to have slipped over the years.

Somewhat, but not terrible. He's still one of the more respected game journos. And in this case, it's not so much what he says as how he says it that interests me; I kind of suspected the game wasn't as bad as PR made it look, and he confirmed as much. If he claimed DA is BG2 reborn I'd be dubious, but claiming combat has the BG2 feel and dialogue is more meaningful than BioWare standard (not hard, BioWare is infamous for fake choices) sounds plausible enough.

I find it laughable that people are always "If he liked *THAT* he sucks!" here.

I dunno. I mean, obviously he doesn't "suck", but if a reviewer, professional or otherwise, simply has wildly different tastes than you, his opinion is irrelevant to you. For example, I like Zero Punctuation, but I know Yahtzee pretty much loathes RPGs in the mold I like to see 'em in, so when he talks about those, I don't take him very seriously. Not because he's wrong, but because his tastes are too different from mine.

That's exactly why Desslock is/was so popular. He's a smart journalist whose tastes and opinions coincide more closely to that of the Watch than the tastes and opinions of most journos.

rune_74

July 28th, 2009, 16:39

Alright, it's settled, this is the forum of the graphic whores. :rolleyes:

LMSBRFAO

Well, that was a well reasoned post....I can see where you came to that conclusion.

Turjan

July 28th, 2009, 17:03

For what it's worth, my original response to Oblivion was very positive indeed - and it took me quite a while to appreciate just how shallow it really was. If you, as someone who writes in public under the circumstances that are true for Desslock, you can't just easily "back out" if you've praised a game to high heaven.

Not that I know what he originally wrote, but I can't fault anyone for having an initial positive reaction towards Oblivion - because that's exactly what Bethesda are so damn good at - namely first impressions.
That pretty much sums up how I feel about this Deslock comment. When I started Oblivion, I also thought it's a great game. There were a few obvious warts even in the beginning, but the initial atmosphere was captivating, and the game had a few great quests. It took me a while to see that the initial atmosphere was all you would ever get, the main quest was incredibly boring, and that the level scaling was absolutely horrible.

If you had asked me what my opinion of Oblivion was after the first 8 hours, I would probably still have given an enthusiastic endorsement. My opinion completely changed after I had some more experience with the game. That's why I see this Deslock comment as a neutral piece of information: Its take home message is that DA seems to make a good first impression.

In the case of RP gaming the truth can only come from the most hard-assed uncompromising elite players...
The Truth®? "Elite" players?

Aside from technical foibles or stuff like huge plot holes (if appropriate), there's not much "truth" in game evaluations. Much of it comes just down to personal preferences. Regarding DA, I could make some "dark and gritty" jokes here, but this would be dishonest, because I'm not a big fan of "dark and gritty", anyway, whether it's well done or not.

And the concept of "elite players" just makes me laugh :D.

txa1265

July 28th, 2009, 17:09

Well, that was a well reasoned post....I can see where you came to that conclusion.

And the concept of "elite players" just makes me laugh :D.

He stated in his second post on these forums that he was a troll, and has done nothing to contradict that through actions since.

quasimodo

July 28th, 2009, 17:11

I find it laughable that people are always "If he liked *THAT* he sucks!" here. I had a teacher in high school who drilled into us that in matters of *taste* what YOU like has nothing to do with "goodness". There are many movies (and games and food and books and drinks and sports and ...) that are generally considered to be good that I do not like but my opinion of them does NOT make them bad.

I no of no one whose tastes exactly match my own in games so I ignore the pre-game hype, read up from a number of sources, try it out if I can, and decide on my own.

I would never say anything bad about the man. I have been playing games for the last 20 years, and I have read some good reviews by Desslock in the past. From what he has written about Oblivion and FO3, however, I must assume his taste has grown to be very different from mine.

Surlent

July 28th, 2009, 17:39

Yes...it's an opinion. I'm not sure why you think this needs to be pointed out.I felt it was needed to point out in this case, where character worship and endorsements seemed to walk in hand in hand.
As for questioning his views...remember that it was an opinion, yes? Most of us are capable of rational thought and his opinion is simply an additional piece of information to consider.Do you ever happen to get into situations where you find yourself tired of scratching through review one after another trying to find the least bit relevant information about the product itself? After the reader has read through multiple reviews, the image of the product pieced together in the reader's mind has ended up being constructed from a general mean of others opionions. Some like friends' opinions might carry more weight obviously. If a writer would bother to focus less on opinions and more on facts, his/her written article alone in itself just might help the reader.

The sad state of affairs is there is nothing but opinions when it comes to game reviews. It's totally out of norm to even point that. The so called industry will remain in its infant shoes when reviewers are just flushing out their general feelings without any coherent thought or insight. Which is why I felt there was no need to give any free air to breathe even for a veteran like Desslock.

Lucky Day

July 28th, 2009, 17:40

One must remember that Desslock absolutely LOVED Morrowind back in 2002. Back then he disappeared for a month after giving us almost daily reviews (today we call them blogs) and shocked everybody including Bethsoft: he locked himself in his house and did nothing but track down every thing that could be possibly done in Morrowind. I believe he wrote the games first walkthrough.

It shouldn't be to anyone's surprised that he would want more of the same and would love Oblivion and FO3 as well in spite of their flaws.

What he says about DA doesn't surprise me in terms of gameplay because I've watched the videos. As BroNone says its not hard to improve on Bio's dialogue choices and they've had several years to watch how the good NWN modders do it, have sunk millions into hiring decent writers, etc.

IMO the type of game this is (how both Bio marketed it) is enough to make me not intereste and truthfully I think EA is actually being more honest.

The only thing that had me was multiplayer with the toolset and since they took the MP away I'm not interested.

I wonder what Dess' take is on the new Chinese Ultima Online?

Sergius64

July 28th, 2009, 18:01

I dunno. Morrowind and Oblivion are quite different, I loved Morrowind, but pre-modded Oblivion was "meh".

Grandor Dragon

July 28th, 2009, 18:14

rune_74

July 28th, 2009, 18:24

God, I think I have finally come to the conclusion that the rpg websites in general are rigid in what they believe is a rpg and what is a good one. The funny thing is you ask anyone about music and they have a very wide range of tastes and that is acceptable. But games? No way, you either like what the hive mind(and unfortunately that is what the hardcore have become) or you get labeled as a graphics whore or somehow not smart enough to enjoy a "real" rpg. I have played so many rpg's I actually have to look up a name if I come across one just to see if yes I played this wayyyy back. Fallout 3 is a great game, so is oblivion....so is BG2, planescape and diablo 1 & 2...divine divinity(great also) I loved the bards tale games and all of the ultima games(the last one not as much, I think mostly due to the games technical dificulties). I'm an avid supporter of indie games(ask basilisk games) was a content creator for minions of mirth a very long time ago. What does all this rambling have to do with this? Well I guess I'm trying to show that taste is subjective, depending on what you like. As a whole I think rpg fans should be a bit more open to others opinions and not so much on this predefined mold that all rpg's fit into.

To those that said oblivion sucked? Your right, it was a horrible turn based game but a great action rpg:)

zakhal

July 28th, 2009, 18:49

Its all about taste. If you dont like what the main audiance likes then your taste belongs to a niche. I myself dislike wow and play niche mmos like ww2ol and darkfall - however I dont consider myself "elite" as codex people likes to think.

Squeek

July 28th, 2009, 18:53

As a whole I think rpg fans should be a bit more open to others opinions....Yet if we were to award a prize to the poster who had shown the most disdain for the opinions of others, I think you might win (See the opening sentence of your post for example).

I remember liking Desslock's review of Oblivion at the time, but I was liking Oblivion back then too. So I can relate. It's not that I hadn't noticed Oblivion's shortcomings, it was that I was willing to forgive them and still had hope that there was intrigue to be found, mysteries to be solved, and adventure waiting somewhere in all that graphic goodness.

I read this entire thread and think Lucky Day put his finger on it best. Desslock has his tastes, and IMO I think at this point you would have to call them "mainstream."

If Dragon Age is the game we've been promised, I imagine you might have to play it a lot longer than eight hours to appreciate it fully. Let's keep our fingers crossed for that.

Edit: Zakhal beat me to it!

BillSeurer

July 28th, 2009, 18:57

I enjoyed both Fallout 3 and Oblivion out of the box, despite some very obvious flaws. I guess with many games I can very much appreciate what they do well and phase out the rest.

Towards the end both games got tedious though. I think this is one flaw of Bethesda games. you play them until you get utterly bored, and then you finish the main plot. Not very climatic.

Anyway, to stay on topic, I still have a lot of respect for Desslock.

And a lot of the "elite" RPGs have huge flaws too but nobody talks about them. If you bring one up the response is "Well THAT horrible flaw in <RPG I hate> is different than the horrible flaw in <elite RPG>!".

DeepO

July 28th, 2009, 19:36

And a lot of the "elite" RPGs have huge flaws too but nobody talks about them.

Yeah, every game has its flaws.
However, I´d say those "elite" RPGs usually do some things so well that it´s much easier to forgive their flaws.

Average or below average RPGs just do nothing remarkably well.
I think that those elite (lol) RPGamers maybe wouldn´t be so angry if media weren´t consistently putting this mediocrity on pedestal.

zakhal

July 28th, 2009, 19:48

I think that those elite (lol) RPGamers maybe wouldn´t be so angry if media weren´t consistently putting this mediocrity on pedestal.

I can totaly relate to that i.e eurogamer gave both wow expansions 100% (perfect) and df 20% while calling everyone (me included) who plays it "mad". I just have to ignore the site and their "opinnions".

Turjan

July 28th, 2009, 20:34

And a lot of the "elite" RPGs have huge flaws too but nobody talks about them. If you bring one up the response is "Well THAT horrible flaw in <RPG I hate> is different than the horrible flaw in <elite RPG>!".
Well, it probably is ;). In the end, everyone of us balances the pros and cons of game according to his or her own criteria, and the verdict will look different. I asked myself why I still have such fond memories of Morrowind, whereas Oblivion left me in a sour mood. Both games are somewhat similar and have tons of flaws and lots of things they get right. I recognized that I enjoy the exploring aspect of RPGs most, and Morrowind somehow managed to keep me curious, whereas Oblivion just left me with the impression that any further exploration would just turn up more of the same. That's obviously my personal make or break criterion, and other people will have different ones.

On the other hand, some typical, eh, "elite" RPGs leave me cold. Wizardry 8 may have one of the most intricate party and combat systems, but that's not really what I look for in an RPG. I would never say Wizardry 8 is bad, it's just not the right game for me.

In this sense, I will see whether DA will be the right game for me. As I don't buy games at release anymore, I will just wait for the first impressions and reviews I'll get here and try to get a feel of the game from there. Whether it's a hardcore RPG (whatever that is) or not is a purely technical question that is not really that important for me.

Prime Junta

July 28th, 2009, 20:54

I was totally taken by the world of Morrowind. The visuals were beautiful, varied, and consistent; the world felt genuinely deep, what with the Daedric ruins, the Dwarven dungeons, the Ashlander camps, the ancient cities with their living gods... the factions were well fleshed-out, genuinely creative and exotic -- a far cry from the "fighters' guild/thieves' guild/assassins' guild/wizards' guild/mercenary guild" setup in Oblivion.

The thing sucked like a tornado in some ways (badly enough that I haven't managed to replay it, despite my very fond memories of it), but it also had a depth, charm, and consistency that Oblivion totally lacked. It felt like there was something new and surprising behind every corner; in Oblivion, it is, indeed, just more of the same. And more. And more. And more.

rune_74

July 28th, 2009, 20:56

Yet if we were to award a prize to the poster who had shown the most disdain for the opinions of others, I think you might win (See the opening sentence of your post for example).

Sure, this because I don't agree that fallout 3 is not a fallout game? My opening sentance was kind ofa blast to the point where I think comming to these sites is getting to the point of being a waste of time. It is the "in" thing to hate the mainstream devs, bethesda for instance. I never said I had to agree with others opinions on games, but they are definately entitled to them.

Have I battled certain posters who seem to be on a zealot craze at times? sure. Do I need to explain to any of you why I like certain games? not a bit. I do not feel I need excuses for liking oblivion(although so many of you are willing to tell me why I should hate it) or fallout 3? Hell I even liked gothic 3 and it was messed up way more then oblivion(which alot of you chose to ignore). I think I have always been about people liking what they like, not what some people say they should like. Does that mean I shouldn't call it like I see it? Should I ignore the fact that people have axes to grind and take what they say on face value?

I would think that I have a pretty good head on my shoulders when it comes to games, I just don't think all of us should be pidgeonholed into what defines an rpg. It is pretty simple when it comes down to it...if you don't like it don't play it...don't buy it....speak with your wallets. You don't even have to like me, or even read this post.

Sorry for the rant, but I think maybe it has got to the point I no longer enjoy forums.

polyhedron

July 28th, 2009, 21:23

Alright....

The way I see it is there is a huge difference between what people here call "Taste" and the actual objective "Quality" of a game. when we toss words around like "Good" we see that the above concepts can be taken interchangeably with this added word, hence disagreements.

to explain the wide difference between "Quality" and personal "Taste" I will use a poor analogy.

I love the film "Manos-the hand of fate" because its hilarious and EXTREME. is it a quality film? no. Does Manos suit someone's personal taste? yes.

If you are unfamiliar with Manos insert any retardedly low budget horror film or a sweded film from youtube.

Films have objective qualities. so do Games.

Obilivion: lots of people personal taste? yes. Quality? no. The point of contention is what is quality?

Qualities of an RPG:

1. Depth and Complexity. It has been an argued that any game is a Role-Playing game because you take the Role of a main character/vehicle/object. but we as rpg players expect more then that, we want details, character development, intricate statistical models, all serving towards the end of drawing us in deeper to the character/game, hence, depth.

If you disagree then stating that Super Mario is an RPG is okay right?

2. Excellent dialogue, Narrative storytelling, overall Writing! most today argue the "show, don't tell" doctrine of relating stories to gamers I've yet to see this impact someone on the level that text actually does routinely at least in gaming. this section can also be difficult to gauge since some games can do part of this right while the rest sucks hard. Example: Mass Effect some decent dialogue between characters but the overall narrative/story/ and writing is mediocrity.

For those who disagree with this aspect or who favor only the "Show, Don't tell" doctrine "Half Life" is your RPG, have fun.

3. Choices and Consequences. a rather nebulous concept since it is rarely achieved. To start some simple truths of CnC. A choice is not really a choice unless there is a direct and lasting consequence that is seen eventually by the player, a hidden consequence has no meaning unless you know about it. Fake choices are the bread and butter of rpgs nowadays some are blatantly obvious(oblivion,ME) others are well implemented(The Witcher) all are an insult to your intelligence as a player.

For those who disagree with this section play a JRPG and have fun.

4. Challenge. when a loss is meaningful you have gained the most from it. when you struggle and win you feel great, it is undeniable human nature. all games need this or they are not games.

This is the difference between Nethack and Fable. for those who disagree enjoy Fable.

These are some of the qualities of great roleplaying games. It is undeniable that if Oblivion or FO3 had possessed an abundance of these qualities in addition to whatever else it accomplishes it would be a great RPG. but it does not.

Addendum: while it does a disservice to the genre by claiming "oblivion is good" it is equally wrong to only say it is bad with out explaining yourself or pointing to quality games elsewhere. oblivion like other games is a stepping stone for those who are less experienced in the true qualities of the genre or a fun romp for those with bad "taste"(see Manos).

2nd addendum: Those who deny the existence of qualities in gaming are relativists and should be shot. while my bad taste in film may be "Manos" I don't recommend it for Oscars nor do I look at others who like "2001: a space odyssey" and say well...that just like...your opinion, man.

opening post rant is over.
Sincerely,
Polyhedron

Thrasher

July 28th, 2009, 21:33

The turning point for me that made me appreciate Morrowind was that first bookstore in Balmora. Tons and tons of lore. I spent a couple nights just reading all the books. It was the world - its alieness and depth imparted by the books.

Will DA do this for me? I can only hope, but somehow doubt it. World building is not one of Bioware's strengths.

In fact I'm not sure where Bioware's strengths lie anymore.

Squeek

July 28th, 2009, 21:37

The turning point for me that made me appreciate Morrowind was that first bookstore in Balmora. Tons and tons of lore. I spent a couple nights just reading all the books. It was the world - its alieness and depth imparted by the books.You might want to check out the previous TES game then. Most of Morrowind's books were Daggerfall books, except several were edited for Morrowind (to make them more "PG").

Thrasher

July 28th, 2009, 21:39

Yeah, I've played Daggerfall, but it didn't give me the same other worldly feeling.

wolfing

July 28th, 2009, 21:39

I guess it depends on what a particular person considers 'good RPG'. It seems to me those who blast Oblivion and praise Gothic it's because there aren't many hidden things to find if you explore the world. To me, I don't care about that, at all. To me it's about gameplay, meaningful stats/spells/skills, and allowing me to play the character I want from the start, which I can't do in Gothic but I can do in Oblivion (and Morrowind). A healthy character generation screen is a big plus (again, Gothic doesn't apply). I'm not saying Gothic is worse than Oblivion, I'm saying it's worse *to my taste*. So if the reviewer shares my likings, then DA seems to be a must buy (which I was going to buy anyway as I just decided to ignore all the stupid EA marketing)

coaster

July 28th, 2009, 21:41

Polyhedron,

I am a relativist and obviously could be shot.

But come on you can see the holes in your arguments a mile off.

Depth and Complexity. Actually the lore of Oblivion is quite deep...even if it was recycled from Morrowind & Daggerfall and some of it is rather inconsistent.

"Excellent" dialogue is obviously a matter of taste. Would you prefer technically correct language with no spelling mistakes which is mediocre, or unusual, interesting writing which is technically poor? Which is "better"?

Choices and consequences...this is argued over repeatedly. Bioware has some C&C but playing evil often boils down to "give me your money or else". Is that better or worse than no choice at all because it is so superficial?

Challenge - Oblivion was very challenging out of the box. Did you not fight the bandits in Daedric armour?

To me video games are essentially pieces of art; a combination of the written/spoken word and visual quality. As such I cannot see them as anything other than taste. Sure, you might be able to discern whether games appeal to more people's taste as an aribiter of what is good - but then you'd plump for something like Oblivion over, say, Arcanum. Mass appeal does not substitute for finding a view which expresses a similar taste to yourself, which goes back to the debate about Desslock - some people think he has "sold out" and no longer represents the tastes of what might be described as the more hardcore end of the RPG market.

polyhedron

July 28th, 2009, 21:43

@ rune and others as a continuation of my post:

I don't want to tell you to hate oblivion. I want you to recognize that oblivion is not a great of even good RPG because there are qualities that it lacks. have fun with it i did for a short while.

The big problem is the attitude of relativism(what anyone likes is okay), the outright lies fed to the general public by gaming media in addition to the decline of gaming with substance as a whole. we ignore what was done better years ago for the quick dollar.

quick examples:

1. narrative: PST, BG2

2. depth and complexity: Fallout 1&2, Darklands

3.CnC: fallout 1&2, parts of KOTOR 2

4. Challenge: Nethack, SMT nocturn, some other JRPGs

P.S. my original post was a reply to the direction of the thread and not an assault on anyone just to clarify

Thrasher

July 28th, 2009, 21:44

I think his tastes have veered towards better hiking simulators and FPS action game mechanics, rather than hardcore RPG mechanics.

I have to admit I enjoyed Oblivion but purely for the exploration purposes, the RPG elements took a major back seat.

Ykiu

July 28th, 2009, 21:59

Agreed - anyone who thinks Oblivion is a good game gets no respect from me.

I think you deserve no respect at all as a human being for thinking that. I don't deserve any respect because I enjoyed Oblivion and thus, feel it is a good game? Well gee. I don't believe in Allah, you going to blow me up too?

Edit: The tone of this post may be offensive, but I honestly think the attitude of people like Pantheon causes a lot of the problems we have nowadays. The simularities are there.

baron

July 28th, 2009, 22:01

Those who deny the existence of qualities in gaming are relativists and should be shot.

sounds very??. democratic. :-/

the kind of democracy americans have been so eagerly exporting around the planet.
________
Problems With Nexium (http://www.classactionsettlements.org/lawsuit/nexium/)

coaster

July 28th, 2009, 22:03

Polyhedron - I don't actually disagree with your tastes (just to clarify). Torment, Fallout, VTM:B, BG2...I love them all. But unfortunately the mass market doesn't agree :-/

I played Oblivion for a while (with mods) but god it was a struggle to finish:

Boring guild quests (mage guild was awful, DB was okay I guess)
Boring main quest
Dreadful copy pasted Oblivion gates
Ditto for the dungeons
World felt too small (someone told me it's supposedly larger in area than Morrowind...it doesn't feel like it, maybe because of the lack of fog/generic landscape)
Even with Francesco's installed, level scaling was still crap - I could understand a few high level bounty hunters coming after me at a high level, but why are goblins more powerful?
Respawning = tedious, relentless killing

polyhedron

July 28th, 2009, 22:05

@Coaster:

Rehashed inconsistent writing does not fall under depth and complexity it falls under narrative.

2nd aren't both preferable or is that too much to ask?

3. both are undesirable(does not mean they are not accomplished with varying degrees of success)

4. it was? a challenge encompasses more then just equal levels or pieces of equipment. we start with equal chess pieces but are you a challenging opponent?

lastly my relativist comment was a gaff. I hope it did not offend but the position is deeply flawed on a multitude of levels.

The Watchman

July 28th, 2009, 22:09

Dess was ok in the old days, today his just another media whore. Claiming Oblivion is anything but mediocre crap marks you as a retard.

polyhedron

July 28th, 2009, 22:20

@baron:

LOL don't take me too seriously. also, Americans are not fascist exporters but we can discuss politics later.

@Coaster:

The old mass market argument. BG2 sold over a million, PST 600000, digital dist. is not counted for VTMB.

the point is you wont get rich off of making great games but you will more then break even. large corps want Bil. profits like wow and Madden hence console focus and degradation of the genre.

coaster

July 28th, 2009, 22:23

I agree that the qualities you've listed are desirable to me. But not to everyone. Take a good example - Torment. I think it's superb on lots of levels but is way too many words for much of today's casual market because (as the RPG Codex might put it) REDDING IS TEH HARD.

Also even if we agree certain qualities are desirable (to us), it may be impossible to achieve them all due to finite resources. If we have a huge number of choices and consequences, this multiplies the amount of writing required for each "branch" so makes it more difficult to achieve your depth and complexity objective - I know this is a point David Gaider has made before (whether or not you agree with him). Fallout has quite a few C&C but all in all is quite a short game. Again I think here Torment just pulls ahead of Fallout since although the C&Cs aren't quite as many or varied, the writing more than makes up for it.

Turjan

July 28th, 2009, 22:29

I love the film "Manos-the hand of fate" because its hilarious and EXTREME. is it a quality film? no. Does Manos suit someone's personal taste? yes.
Wow! I would never have imagined anything saying that. But I guess you enjoy it in a way similar to laughing at a train wreck.

zakhal

July 28th, 2009, 22:35

Game is good when it suits perfectly the taste of the player. Whether it needs to have stuff like choices and consequences is dependant on each individual player. For most mainstream gamers the only choice they care about in rpgs is whether to use sword or axe. They spend hundreds of millions on shiny action-rpgs because thats the type of qualities they want from good rpg.

People vote with their wallets whats the best and if your party ends up loosing it doesnt mean you are an "elite". The only thing it does mean is that you and your party is a "minority"-group among the genre. Im sorry thats just how it is.

Turjan

July 28th, 2009, 22:37

World felt too small (someone told me it's supposedly larger in area than Morrowind...it doesn't feel like it, maybe because of the lack of fog/generic landscape)
I'm pretty sure it's the lack of fog. I heard that the "graphics enhancer" for Morrowind makes you see Balmora from Seyda Neen, which would cause a similar shrinking effect. Regarding Oblivion, I added this image that I took from Frostcraig Spire to the database:

http://www.rpgwatch.com/files/Images/00-0017/DieWeltIstKlein.jpg

Thrasher

July 28th, 2009, 22:38

It's also because your movement speed is much greater in Oblivion than Morrowind.

xSamhainx

July 28th, 2009, 22:39

dont mess w/ Desslock, noobs

Dark Brotherhood will get you

polyhedron

July 28th, 2009, 22:59

@coaster

you are a smart person but again I still have to disagree with you on this mass market thing. claiming the average gamer as the Lowest Common denominator rings false to me, but it is alluring. the reason I find that complaint false is because I haven't seen the opposite attempted in a marketing campaign for video games. That is a campaign that is less "NEW SHIT" and geared towards non-adolescents. The market of 21-35 year old gamers is barely touched or catered too outside of a misogynistic Tits,Ass and Violence approach which is fine in small amounts but its really all we get.

now resources. how is it we can get more done and accomplished with games a decade older then with one that has next gen graphics. its the graphics you say the resources cost too much. then why do jrpgs still dominate handhelds and consoles with 2d graphics. and if not dominate do well enough to be made constantly. its not hard to figure out that the graphics warz are for eleven year olds and if the underlying game is excellent it will transcend any graphical boundary(DF)

Lastly I'm not saying its not difficult I'm saying it hasn't been attempted. also on relativism, games are products we have quality standards for them. a game cannot be hurt by having these qualities only enhanced and able to sell more. just because oblivion sells well doesn't mean the standards change it just means that the gaming industry has found out how to make more money doing less. it will not last forever.

@Turjan:

Yes. Torgo is awesome.

@Zakhal:

more relativism huh? its such a defeatist attitude. Might makes Right. because you appreciate quality and everyone else wants something different. you lose.

I guess I am an optimist. Minority rights for niche gamers!

Bedwyr

July 28th, 2009, 22:59

For the record, I enjoyed both Oblivion as a worthy successor to the other TES games. All of them gave me what I wanted: a fun sandbox RPG with great breadth if poor depth. The story was perfunctory and occasionally weak, but still enjoyable. The game mechanics were and still continue to be an interesting take on RPG standbys. Not "RPGlite" or "FPS", but "RPG different".

Narrative depth and significance aren't in Bethsoft's repertoire and that's perfectly ok. I get that from other sources.

Likewise I'm still enjoying Fallout 3 as a spiritual successor to the other two games. It gets right more than it gets wrong while grafting the Fallout ethos to the sandbox ethos of TES.

Not impressed at all with the dissing of Desslock. The guy's got a critical instinct still mostly in line with my own, so I respect his opinion.

zakhal

July 28th, 2009, 23:10

@Zakhal:

more relativism huh? its such a defeatist attitude. Might makes Right. because you appreciate quality and everyone else wants something different. you lose.

I guess I am an optimist. Minority rights for niche gamers!

I just call it rational thinking. You cant really change the taste of mainstream gamers. Youd die of old age before you can convert even a fraction of them to your likings. All you can really do is wait and hope for the best. Generally I rather spend my time on somthing else like playing those niche games I have.

However it doesnt mean that I have "given up". I do support my niche genres as good as I can i.e with money. I just dont expect everyone else to think the same. And I dont need to be in majority. There is nothing wrong about been in a niche!

But I do hope the best of luck for you. Just dont spend too much time preaching on the forums. Its the least efficient way to support niche gaming.

BillSeurer

July 29th, 2009, 01:34

No computer RPG really has choices and consequences because the producers can't afford to put in true consequences and thus even in Fallout 1&2 you end up playing 99.44% the same game with a thin veneer of different slapped on over the sameness. If you have ever played a table top RPG with a good GM (one who doesn't run "modules") you will understand.

DArtagnan

July 29th, 2009, 11:27

It's incredible that such otherwise intelligent and articulate people can't appreciate that there's no gold standard for what a CRPG should contain.

It's true that enthusiast gamers tend to prefer similar things, but even so - I personally didn't like Torment, just to name one obvious example.

As you delve deeper and more passionately into whatever you care about, you'll find that your tastes get ever more specific and maybe even intolerant. This goes for everything you can be enthusiastic about, and gaming is but one area of interest among countless others.

You'd have to be pretty ignorant, in my opinion, to truly believe that what you personally desire is some kind of objective ideal that all developers should strive for.

Now, I don't see anything wrong with arguing your case, and I think it's healthy to fight that which you don't like - as long as you stick to rational arguments and let others be what they are. One should always keep in mind that as much as you think you're "right" in your likes and dislikes - it carries no justification for demanding that others must agree.

In the end, you're left with what you get - and the industry is obviously driven by commercial gain before artistic integrity, and with that additional key understanding it's downright stupid to expect AAA developers to care about the subjective wishes of the minority.

My own personal way of dealing with this unfortunate mainstream mindset of the modern industry, is to try and create my own damn game. That's what I've been working on for a while - and though it's a monumental task, and will likely never be finished in the form I truly want - it's the only way I see of making my point clear. It's not important that others will like what I'm trying to make with the very limited resources I have available, but at least I can demonstrate that it isn't all empty bitching.

I suggest some of you try to do the same.

In my mind, the only true and pure kind of art is the kind that comes from within motivated 100% by subjective desire. Without any kind of pressure to release or even get a return on my "investment" - there's really nothing stopping me from doing what I want, within my capacity.

txa1265

July 29th, 2009, 11:35

It's incredible that such otherwise intelligent and articulate people can't appreciate that there's no gold standard for what a CRPG should contain.

There is a general tendency for people to bin things into genres for classification purposes ... the problem is that art is created on a continuum, not a binary scale. So whether it is arguing about whether something is a certain type of music or art or movie or game ... it is all the same debate, with the same usefulness.

Benedict

July 29th, 2009, 11:36

Oblivion was an awesome game. It may not be your cup of tea, but it was an awesome game, nevertheless. I hated the Gothics, but they were awesome games too. Why do I say so? Because many people here, whom I respect, say so. They just weren't an awesome game for me.

Entitled to your opinions though you & desslock may be, I also wouldn't really put much store in the crpg opinion of anyone who liked Oblivion (especially if they also didn't like the Gothics). Not the same as suggesting those opinions are wrong, just recognising the scale of differences in taste.

Benedict

July 29th, 2009, 11:50

I have to say I am looking forward to dragon age though, that article this morning reminded me of one major plus of the origin stories.

I've played way too many games where I start out with one character, get far enough in to regret my choice but then don't bother restarting because I'd have to replay things. I'm quite looking forward to playing a number of different origin stories while I work out what i want to do.

DArtagnan

July 29th, 2009, 11:53

There is a general tendency for people to bin things into genres for classification purposes ... the problem is that art is created on a continuum, not a binary scale. So whether it is arguing about whether something is a certain type of music or art or movie or game ... it is all the same debate, with the same usefulness.

Yeah, but this isn't even about genre classifications primarily, it's about objective quality. Something which I suspect you and I agree is impossible to define.

If Oblivion, for instance, isn't an RPG - that's one thing, but then what is it - and is it good for what it is?

The problem is that Oblivion is one of the strongest mainstream titles of the modern industry, and as such it will be targeted by a larger group of people. It's not that the game is all that worse than so many similarly "mainstreamed" games - but it's a game that promotes the direction for all to see. This, I think, is not the fault of the game or Bethesda - but instead it's simply a clear indication of what the modern audience wants.

Some people would doubtlessly argue that the modern audience doesn't know what it wants, and I'd agree with that to an extent. It's because the modern audience is casual, and as such has a less specific and developed taste. Just as I don't have a very specific and developed taste in wines - because I just drink the stuff to get drunk. Casual gamers play the games to have fun, and they don't care about the history of gaming - nor do I think they should. I certainly would never expect it.

coaster

July 29th, 2009, 13:32

DArtagnan

July 29th, 2009, 13:38

I guess the problem for me is that publishers/programmers who used to produce cool stuff now produce...other things because they have wider appeal and bring in more moolah.

Take for example the Warlords series. I enjoyed Warlords 3 DLR (+ to a lesser extent Warlords 4) and the 3 Warlords Battlecry RTS games were OK too. Steve Fawkner has now turned his attention to the casual market with Puzzle Quest, which although is set in the same universe is a completely different game which is aimed at the casual market, and has got much more commercial success. It seems likely to me that Steve will now produce more of these kind of puzzle games and the turn-based strategy of Warlords will fall by the wayside.

So while I recognise it's nice that new people have got pulled into the Warlords universe and that Infinite Interactive are doing better financially, and I also recognise that Puzzle Quest is a fun little game, it's sad that the niche market of TBS is not being catered for. However I'm not sure what the alternatives are - catering for a niche may not be very lucrative after all, Jeff Vogel does OK but it's hardly top dollar.

The core of the problem is the focus on commercial gain, which in turn has to do with the corporate culture that so saturates society. American culture is at the very forefront of this, and since most games are still produced there - this will only escalate in the exact same way as we've seen in movies and the music industry.

But again, the monetary system is apparently what people support so art will have to go by the wayside.

It's not all that sad though, because the best things in life are hardly games and entertainment. Beyond that, we have the emerging indie market, and what I'm hoping will be a strong middle-market. It could potentially go full circle and we'd have games of high creative integrity and "decent" budgets. This will be even easier once the casual audience migrates fully to the console market. Not that it ever will, because casuals mean many things - and there will always be people playing Solitaire in Windows - but you get my meaning.

Then there's going to be a large void on the PC - and there'll be room for both reasonable commercial success and high art.

polyhedron

July 29th, 2009, 18:26

I must not have been clear in my posting. I apologize.

My intention is not to claim that since my taste's coincide with the quality of the games I play that all others should gravitate to them and have similar opinions.

My argument is that the Qualities I mentioned cannot harm a RPG only make it better. hence they are objective in nature and should be considered heavily. The correct implementation of these qualities crossed with peoples personal taste "good or bad" is another point of contention or argument entirely.

@Dartagnan: I think the view that, since "oblivion" sold millions its the fairest indicator of what the RPG market wants, to be disingenuous. There are different markets for different genres and oblivion did well with casuals and RPGers who expected Morrowind part 2. that same casual market was there for "oblivion with guns". However, that doesn't excuse other companies from trying to do great games for the actual genre instead of the extremely poor hybrids they are currently producing. The casual market is fickle and the poor action/rpg era will fade just like everything else.

lastly, no rpg has had every quality pulled off flawlessly. but, if you look at the evolution of the genre you can clearly see a progression towards a better game that possesses these traits. it is only recently that some have decided to reinvent the wheel and get paid more to do it.

DArtagnan

July 29th, 2009, 18:41

I'm really sorry, but your entire post is a very clear demonstration that you don't have the faintest idea what objective quality means.

In any case, I've done what I can to make my point clear - and I'll leave the thread to others :)

crpgnut

July 29th, 2009, 20:55

Hmmm, I can boil my ideas about this thread pretty easily: Me likes Desslock :D There! No 20 page dissertation.

Lucky Day

July 29th, 2009, 21:01

Just a reminder we do have a "Let's Bash Oblivion" thread (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1148) which alone has more replies than three of our specific game forums have threads.

JDR13

July 29th, 2009, 21:43

Just a reminder we do have a "Let's Bash Oblivion" thread (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1148) which alone has more replies than three of our specific game forums have threads.

Yes, but not all of those replies are people bashing it... there is a surprising number of posts defending it as well.

Turjan

July 30th, 2009, 00:11

The problem is that Oblivion is one of the strongest mainstream titles of the modern industry, and as such it will be targeted by a larger group of people. It's not that the game is all that worse than so many similarly "mainstreamed" games - but it's a game that promotes the direction for all to see. This, I think, is not the fault of the game or Bethesda - but instead it's simply a clear indication of what the modern audience wants.
I would say this is right. I know quite a few people who are avid pen & paper RPGers who absolutely love Oblivion, because it allows for a short game after the kids went to bed at night. That's just enough time for one Ayleid ruin, which is obviously the perfect setup for that specific purpose. These people couldn't care less about what "elite" cRPG players think about the game.

BillSeurer

July 30th, 2009, 16:40

Good point, Turjan. Everyone in my paper RPG groups likes Oblivion (and FO:3 for that matter). A few of them did *not* like BG1/2 and even more of them did not like Planescape.

Squeek

July 30th, 2009, 19:44

Good point, Turjan. Everyone in my paper RPG groups likes Oblivion (and FO:3 for that matter).Just a guess, but might that be because Oblivion and FO3 do what their P&P games don't do well, and that's create realistic simulation?

A few of them did *not* like BG1/2 and even more of them did not like Planescape....and the things those games did well wasn't as good as their P&P games?

Turjan

July 31st, 2009, 04:50

Just a guess, but might that be because Oblivion and FO3 do what their P&P games don't do well, and that's create realistic simulation?
...and the things those games did well wasn't as good as their P&P games?
That's about it. They say that computer games can never replace the pen & paper RPG experience, and if they want their RPG fix, they meet around the table. They miss the freedom of action in the more serious cRPGs, but Oblivion just gives them what they want if they are up to a few quick combat encounters.

BillSeurer

August 1st, 2009, 05:39

Most paper RPGs are poor simulations, some (like GURPS) better than others (like D&D). But few cRPGS are better even than D&D. anything with hit points for instance is immediately suspect as a simulation.

As for BG1/2 unless you know the D&D 2E rules well it is easy to make mistakes and not get far in the game. BG1 is especially difficult at the start.

Planescape is just "too weird" for some.

Alrik Fassbauer

August 1st, 2009, 13:26

Your old PC is even too slow for the first Drakensang with all the eye candy on.

Could be, but so far I never had problems with Drakensang.

Sure, with the new texture pack the loading times are much, much longer now, but apart from that I never had many problems.

Maybe that's because I didn't go into the maximum for everything. I prefer to play in lower resolutions, for example.

For newer games you are right then, of course.

Alrik Fassbauer

August 1st, 2009, 13:27

As for BG1/2 unless you know the D&D 2E rules well it is easy to make mistakes and not get far in the game. BG1 is especially difficult at the start.

I agree very much. I made more than enough mistakes and always wondered why people found it kind of easy.

I assume that BG1 became mostly popular where (A)D&D was also popular.

It's the same with Drakensang in Germany.

Alrik Fassbauer

August 1st, 2009, 13:31

(as if i ever heard of him before ofc which i didn't)

This is what we call here in Germany a "Bildungslücke". In English that would be a "hole in the education", roughly translated.

Gorath

August 1st, 2009, 14:20

Alrik, maybe you should learn how the Quote+ button works. ;)

DArtagnan

August 1st, 2009, 14:27

Alrik, maybe you should learn how the Quote+ button works. ;)

That's a thought :)

Gorath

August 1st, 2009, 17:03

I have my moments. ;)

txa1265

August 1st, 2009, 17:58

Alrik, maybe you should learn how the Quote+ button works. ;)

Very true ... noticed that a few times, and thought 'someone around as long as him should be able to manage that' ... :)

Turjan

August 1st, 2009, 18:58

Most paper RPGs are poor simulations, some (like GURPS) better than others (like D&D). But few cRPGS are better even than D&D. anything with hit points for instance is immediately suspect as a simulation.I don't think PnP games have simulation as their foremost goal. It's more about sharing an exciting adventure with your friends.
As for BG1/2 unless you know the D&D 2E rules well it is easy to make mistakes and not get far in the game. BG1 is especially difficult at the start.I came late to cRPGs, and BG1 was the first one I ever tried. I didn't know anything about AD&D(2), and even despite the excellent handbook, I gave up at the Friendly Arms Inn. I then played M&M6, which I finished twice (that took ages :D). After that, I got back to BG1, and this time, it was blast. For me, M&M was much easier to access.

JDR13

August 1st, 2009, 22:29

I came late to cRPGs, and BG1 was the first one I ever tried. I didn't know anything about AD&D(2), and even despite the excellent handbook, I gave up at the Friendly Arms Inn. I then played M&M6, which I finished twice (that took ages :D). After that, I got back to BG1, and this time, it was blast. For me, M&M was much easier to access.

BG1 was also my first real experience with AD&D, other than having read a few of the Monster Manuals. I ended up just doing a bit of research on the web to help me out. Those first 2-3 levels are a bitch though....

Turjan

August 2nd, 2009, 01:59

BG1 was also my first real experience with AD&D, other than having read a few of the Monster Manuals. I ended up just doing a bit of research on the web to help me out. Those first 2-3 levels are a bitch though....
You are probably right. I guess it was mostly complete tactics fail on my side. As soon as I noticed how powerful bows in BG1 were, the game changed completely :).

BillSeurer

August 2nd, 2009, 04:35

But in the actual paper game of D&D 2E bows are NOT that great. That was an artifact of how the game translated to the computer.

Mind you *I* thought BG1 was THE dream game of all time when it came out and I played it like 6 times all the way through in a row. But it was was still hard at the start, even if you knew what you were doing. Unless you did the save/move/save/move/... shuffle which I consider a huge flaw in (most) cRPGs.

Thrasher

August 2nd, 2009, 10:34

I wish game makers would publish compelte rulebooks that really describe the mechanics. Playing a game somtimes turns into a research project...

Prime Junta

August 2nd, 2009, 11:07

Bows are good in BG1? In-teresting... I'll have to give it another shot, then.

zakhal

August 2nd, 2009, 16:29

I tried many classes in BG and ended up playing the series through as archer. And my default loadout for party was bows/xbows/slings for everyone.

Turjan

August 2nd, 2009, 19:05

But in the actual paper game of D&D 2E bows are NOT that great. That was an artifact of how the game translated to the computer.I still don't know whether this was an error or simply because BG1 has most fights in the open or in huge rooms.
Mind you *I* thought BG1 was THE dream game of all time when it came out and I played it like 6 times all the way through in a row. But it was was still hard at the start, even if you knew what you were doing. Unless you did the save/move/save/move/... shuffle which I consider a huge flaw in (most) cRPGs.I think the possibility that one of your characters died in the first encounter with a wolf on the first map after Candlekeep was about 50%. Save/move/reload... Yes, that pretty much describes the start.
Bows are good in BG1? In-teresting... I'll have to give it another shot, then."Good" is the understatement of the day. Just the handling of the arrows was somewhat annoying.

JDR13

August 2nd, 2009, 22:04

I always had all of my characters equipped with bows or slings in addition to their melee weapons, but I don't think "ranged only" would be a very effective, or fun, way to play BG.

I played it like 6 times all the way through in a row.

Now *that* is hardcore. :lol:

Turjan

August 2nd, 2009, 23:11

I always had all of my characters equipped with bows or slings in addition to their melee weapons, but I don't think "ranged only" would be a very effective, or fun, way to play BG.
It loses efficiency inside BG city, and definitely in Dulgar's Tower. Up to then, a bow strategy is mostly superior in the game (slings or crossbows are game neutral). The main problem to keep BG flow requires to prevent your chars from getting injured, at least not more than your limited healing capacity allows. Bows allow enough and sufficiently damaging attacks to kill most enemies before they reach you (and to keep casters from casting). Of course, having one meat shield available to keep your bow targets at distance never hurts.

Then again, you say "ranged only". That's usually not a problem in BG, as most chars have mixed talents, anyway. But I don't think there's any question that bows were very powerful in the original BG. This was considerably nerfed in BG2.

JDR13

August 3rd, 2009, 01:45

Then again, you say "ranged only". That's usually not a problem in BG, as most chars have mixed talents, anyway. But I don't think there's any question that bows were very powerful in the original BG. This was considerably nerfed in BG2.

I don't think bows were nerfed in BG2, at least I don't recall that being the case. I think it's more the fact that the enemies scaled so much higher, and had so many more resistances to types of damage.

Maylander

August 3rd, 2009, 10:13

Bows were good in both BG1 and 2, but only if you had the gear/skills to use them properly. With 5/5 in Longbows and a Composite Longbow +1 in BG1 (buy it in Beregost if I recall correctly), you'll tear through almost anything before it can get close. They're also extremely good at taking out mages - it's like hitting them with a machine gun, leading to very few spells being cast (always gets interrupted).

Generally, I only use bows where needed though, as a character with maxed out bows will burn through a whole inventory of arrows in no time. In BG2 there are several bows that require no ammunition, in addition to various items that give infinite arrows, so it's not as bad there.

Zaleukos

August 4th, 2009, 11:22

Bows are good in BG1? In-teresting... I'll have to give it another shot, then.

They'll take out anything that isnt immune to normal weapons in no time. The crossbow of speed is also very useful. The only problem from a usability point of view is that you burn through your ammo too quickly without stacking mods. Coran is a superb ranged character, but even Montaron will outkill your melee characters if you equip him with a crossbow of speed. Multiclass characters dont suffer much in terms of THAC0 at the low BG levels:)

BG2 is different as you need magical ammo to hurt most enemies (any weapon with less than +3 enchantment bonus will be obsolete for much of the game), and that gets expensive (the bows that dont require ammo are mid-late game equipment, and the bottomless quivers from Watchers Keep can only be upgraded to magic status in ToB.