Arcanum - Interview with Leonard Boyarsky @ RPG Codex

I don't know about whether Blizzard games are award-winning or best games ever etc but they certainly are *addictive*.
 
So another person who can't get a joke with added sarcasm.:) I'm well aware of the hundreds of clones that followed and don't need to be reminded.
I actually know the difference between a comment, a joke and a 'clever' comment trying to disguise a comment as a joke.
By the way, your comment was not about hundreds of clones. Your comment was about awards, do I really have to make you remember your own comment, or is this just another way of dodging a valid point?

It's always nice to see human nature cooking up scenarios where their opinions are correct and superior, rather than merely different :)
]Indeed! I must add it's always amusing to see how people come up with opinions and justifications in areas that they don't have the luxury of having an opinion. 100 is always larger than 1, you can't have an opinion about it. You can try to argue that 100 is less than 1, you can go on forever and try to justify those arguments with poor excuses like difference of opinions (no offense), whereas it was not open for discussion in the first place. In other words, while Diablo's quality is open for discussion (something that I didn't comment on), the number of its awards is not (something that I did comment on, and doesn't have anything to do with being subjective- you're either correct, or not).
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
328
The problem with bringing up the number of awards, is that it can easily be argued to be a useless indicator of objective quality - an essentially undefinable concept. So, we're back to subjective again.

Saying something has received a lot of awards, is merely saying that a lot of people liked it - or claimed they liked it.

It's as true for Avatar and Titanic as it is for The Godfather and Schindler's List.

So while what you're saying is true, it's also largely useless.
 
What you are saying is neither new, nor shocking to me. Note my first post please:
I am not going to say multiple awards mean much
I was not trying to relate the number of awards to the quality of game, so if that's your argument, then it's both invalid and irrelevant. The argument was about Diablo NOT being an award winning game, an argument which even it's supporter said was meant as a joke.
 
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
328
I didn't intend for it to be shocking. But I must admit I have a hard time understanding why you would deliberately mention the awards, and then immediately follow up with your idea of an objective truth:

It's an innovative, high-quality and highly influential game which affected gaming world in multiple ways.

The first two claims are subjective - though I personally agree with them. The last two, however, I would accept as reasonable truths.

But I must have misunderstood, and in that case I apologise.
 
You are completely correct about the third part. But as you said, it came up in the follow up section which wasn't directly related to the discussion at hand - Couchpotato's comment about the number of awards.
Perhaps I should have posted them separately to avoid the confusion, the first and second paragraphs of my post being a direct response to Couchpotato's comment, while the third and fourth parts were my own opinions.
To avoid further confusions, I must add that although Diablo has received multiple awards, I haven't reached the conclusion of Diablo being a high-quality game by counting the number of its awards. That conclusion came from personal experience, as it came with Arcanum, a not-so-award-winning-game. And there are numerous award winning games that I consider poor games; Fallout 3, for example. My personal preference doesn't mean anything, though. F3 is an award winning game, and that's a fact. The point is, these are actually two separate discussions.
 
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
328
Back
Top Bottom