RPGWatch Feature: Two Worlds Interview, Part 1

Originally Posted by Geist
From everything I've read it would seem to have a lot more in common with Gothic 3 (save for the more traditional fantasy setting).

Exactly! That's what I've been trying to say!

Originally Posted by Corwin
I've played adventure games which meet that criteria!!

Of course some would argue that just means that the need for genrefication is obsolete with so much cross-genre pollination.

I would argue that what is or isn't an RPG is this site's most fruitless obsession. Even if we answered the question to everyone's satisfaction, the world would look exactly the same as it does now, because it fundamentally DOES NOT MATTER. I'd like to see people waste less time and energy on that treadmill, because I enjoy the other conversations I have here. Rather selfish of me, really.

Originally Posted by abbaon
I would argue that what is or isn't an RPG is this site's most fruitless obsession.

I think that post is an RPG.

No I don't.

Yes I do.

Aaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhhh …

ow wich one? because that sound like an interesting adventure game to me

@abbaon- you're right, but that probably isn't going to stop it. Besides, if we had a concrete definition of RPG, that would eliminate not only debate about the definition but also ~1/4 of our total posts which argue, "game X is/isn't a true CRPG". Where's the fun in eliminating all that frivolous hand-wringing, particularly since I (of course) am the ultimate authority on such determinations?

I know that Druhin will try to push this guy hard to get some real info. So far it just sounds like marketing PR.

"Explore xxx cities, dungeons, etc..". What does that mean? Are there loading screens? When you say "city" do you mean there are meaningful buildings we can enter? Secret passages to explore? Sewers? Are there ample citizens to talk to? Or is it just going to be a generic place you stop to buy and sell loot.

abbaon. lol that means Fallout isn't an RPG.

Corwin thats exactly what I thought of first, too.
I was trying to think if Monkey Island qualified.

txa1265 lets hope not PR people get away with way too much BS now.

abbaon but… but this is an RPG site shouldn't we know what games qualify to be on the site?

Oblivion, however you'd like to label it, is a great GAME. For all you naysayers who played it 80-100 hours just to decide its retarded…. well then who is the real retard?

Originally Posted by ToddMcF2002
Oblivion, however you'd like to label it, is a great GAME.

But, similar to Half-Life 2, it seems to get a total pass in terms of *real* criticism of flaws. Much of the consternation here is related to seeing the exact same thing get praised in Oblivion reviews and slammed elsewhere (and not just G3 reviews).

Originally Posted by txa1265
But, similar to Half-Life 2, it seems to get a total pass in terms of *real* criticism of flaws. Much of the consternation here is related to seeing the exact same thing get praised in Oblivion reviews and slammed elsewhere (and not just G3 reviews).

True - but for the record there are many things I dislike about Oblivion (scaling, random content, lack of a truely hand crafted world) but I still kept playing for over 100 hours and pretty much loved it warts and all. Is it an RPG? Yes, no, maybe… does it matter?

" Corwin thats exactly what I thought of first, too.
I was trying to think if Monkey Island qualified. "

Other than not having a Goblin, I think so!!

Originally Posted by Acleacius
abbaon but… but this is an RPG site shouldn't we know what games qualify to be on the site?

No. That would provide no value at all. Even if you succeeded in reading Oblivion out of the genre, we'd still want to discuss it. Knowing that we "shouldn't" wouldn't change that.

Originally Posted by abbaon
No. That would provide no value at all. Even if you succeeded in reading Oblivion out of the genre, we'd still want to discuss it. Knowing that we "shouldn't" wouldn't change that.

It would make it an illicit discussion for hidden threads in dark corners … cool stuff

abbaon
"No. That would provide no value at all. Even if you succeeded in reading Oblivion out of the genre, we'd still want to discuss it. Knowing that we "shouldn't" wouldn't change that."
I guess I didn't word that very well since I was attemping to be humorous.

What I mean is this is an RPG site so talking about what is and isn't an RPG is inherent, since we whom participate are basicly saying RPGs exist and if not talk about if game x is an RPG or game y isn't what do you suggest?

My intent or oppinion isn't to weed out oblivion just have a fair accessment as with any game, which most review sites did Not do.
I remember how one reviewer stood up and told the truth about oblivion and all Teh Fanboiz came out attacking him, even though they had never played it and while all the main review sites suckedup with 95% plus scores, he stood his ground and was correct /accurate about all he mentioned, iirc.

The difference is many people looking for a RPG would have waited a couple of months had they known or been told the true state and style of the game, so gamers were mislead and tricked into buying something, this maybe acceptable to some or you it's not to me.

For the record, I have no problem whatsoever with the main review sites pitching reviews to the general public instead of the hysterical shrieking queens who style themselves roleplayers. But that's irrelevant to our discussion, since enforcing the party line on RPGWatch won't change their review policies. Back on topic.

Originally Posted by Acleacius
My intent or oppinion isn't to weed out oblivion just have a fair accessment as with any game, which most review sites did Not do.

And you got it. People complained about the scaling and font size and whatever else from day one on the Dot. Rendel spent half his review going over the problems with the levelled everything, calling it "seriously flawed" and "a step back" from Morrowind, and he doesn't even agree with your definition of an RPG. So there's another thing that wouldn't change. There are plenty of people here who care about the same elements of a game as you do, and they'll go on telling you if you'll like each new one regardless of whether we agree on the definition of an RPG. Just wait and listen next time.

I as still missing your point why it's a precieved waste of time to talk about RPGs in all spectrums, one of our passions as RPGers.

Ok well we have different value systems or something as I find accurate reviews benifical to the RPG sites and I realise that some reviewers have made fair accessments as on the Dot.
I was refering to the PreRelease Play Parties put on by Bethsada and the reviews that spawned from it and the inital frenzation created by the overhype, if we didn't talk about it, share experiences we wouldn't be able to recognize/warn/prevent the next time.

As I mentioned, had many people had they accurate information before the release, many expecting the next coming could have saved there cash at least till they felt the price was right for a good action game.

A good exmaple of the this is Dungeon Lords, when it was first released and the subsequent patches, due to communication by fans and potiental fans, many were warned off since Dreamcatcher was ripping people off and still trying to this day, afaik.

Wow. Never mind, Ace.

I think <hope> the release of part 2 will let us focus more on Two Worlds.
I am especially looking forward to the more indept look at combat, effects on world and dialogue choices if he will go into more detail.

Originally Posted by Acleacius
I think <hope> the release of part 2 will let us focus more on Two Worlds.
I am especially looking forward to the more indept look at combat, effects on world and dialogue choices if he will go into more detail.

Agreed - I *really* want to support this game, but need to feel assuaged about the combat system.