So.. 2013, the year of RPG drought?

Originally Posted by darkling
Insane SP fanboys ITT.

Like Obsidian gets paid after a game ships. They don't meet Metacritic #'s and everyone gets fired anyhow. THQ falling apart is meaning some bad things in some places but Obsidian isn't going to take the brunt of it. At best, it'll end up at the bottom of their "Unfinished Licensed Crap" bin with Aliens.

You seem confused about how publisher-developer payment schedules work. While it is true that most developers never see royalties and post-sales bonuses can be hit or miss, it is not as though a significant portion of the development fees aren't contingent on delivering a finished product either.

Most developer work like this receives payment on a milestone schedule with the most significant payments being for the product going gold/passing out of beta. Because publishers do love their money, these payment schedules are usually structured such that failure to reach the final milestone - allowing for delays at the publisher's discretion - will be severely unproffitable for the developer. This is often done by providing a significant portion of the pre-release funding in the form of secured third party credit. If the final milestones are reached then the publisher assumes responsibility for that debt. If they do not then the developer retains primary responsibility for repaying significant portions of any funding received up to that point and will be the first target for the third party creditors.

Now if the publisher folds before the final milestones are reached the developer is often still on the hook for any secured loans they had received so far. They will also obviously not be receiving any final payments either. Additionally the creditors will attempt to collect from the developer as quickly as possible because generally they must default before they can content the loan guarantor's assets in bankruptcy court. This is often a far worse scenario than early termination of the project by the publisher as that usually includes some responsibility on the part of the publisher to assume at least some of the debt incurred if the developer was not in breach.

Personally I couldn't care less about ever playing the South Park game but my disinterest in the game and the property its based on does not make me wish for Obsidian to be screwed. If it is inevitable that THQ does eventually go bankrupt I would hope that it at least wouldn't happen until after Obsidian has concluded their relationship with them.

Isn't Bioshock3 supposed to come out in 2013? RPG-lite, but still of interest to many rpg players.

Originally Posted by dteowner
Isn't Bioshock3 supposed to come out in 2013? RPG-lite, but still of interest to many rpg players.

Release date is 26.2.2013. if not delayed.

Originally Posted by ToddMcF2002
I just don't get the Torchlight series. I bought the first game but the art style makes me feel like I'm murdering the tourists in Magic Kingdom. I much prefer a more serious setting like Dungeon Seige 3 or Diablo 3.

Forget the art style. It's basically Diablo clone (not Diablo3!) so called action RPG.
I see no RPG there and the action is nothing but raping your mouse till it breaks.
It's fun for a while and then your own brain (if you have one) starts protesting when you're about to continue.
I had the first game for a while, but never finished the main story (as if there is a story at all), still I turn it on from time to time just to clean one more dungeon level as I don't like to leave games unfinished (except when mobrespawning gets so annoying that I uninstall just out of protest like in the case of Inquisitor).

Still I bought Torchlight 2, it was on sale and I got impressed with, well, totally irrational thing, but since it's both SP and MP it might be more interesting that the first game - if I manage to find a sucker that will co-op with me prepared to buy a new mouse soon.

In any case I didn't buy D3 nor plan to. Also there is no way I'd play Path of Exile or something like that, some new diablo clone that's F2P. If I knew I'll live for several thousands of years, maybe I would. Since the life is short, I simply don't have time for that crap.

I bet that major investors in such games is Logitech and that with next clones you'll get a mouse gratis if you buy a boxed copy.

Originally Posted by dteowner
Isn't Bioshock3 supposed to come out in 2013? RPG-lite, but still of interest to many rpg players.

IIRC there is no RPG within Bioshock3.

Originally Posted by ToddMcF2002
I just don't get the Torchlight series. I bought the first game but the art style makes me feel like I'm murdering the tourists in Magic Kingdom. I much prefer a more serious setting like Dungeon Seige 3 or Diablo 3.

Actually, Torchlight is surprisingly fun as long as you're not looking for a serious or deep RPG experience. I played through it recently and enjoyed it enough to be looking forward to playing TL2 in the future.

My only major gripe was the final boss battle. It's f*cking ridiculous!

TL is one of the most shallow and dull Diablo clones I know of - and I can only speculate that the fans of it aren't big fans of Diablo 2, or they'd find a lot of shit missing.

TL2 is better - but it's still set in a very shallow world with a shallow story and relatively dull characters.

After recent patches, Diablo 3 is actually much better than both games, overall - but it's nowhere near what it should have been.

Originally Posted by joxer
IIRC there is no RPG within Bioshock3.

A little early to draw such opinions since the game isn't even released yet, but I'll play a round of "what's an RPG" with you. Based on Bioshock2, you're looking at a game with a strong emphasis on story. You've got a few minor instances of choice-n-consequence. You've got a bit of character development. Hardcore RPG? Not by a long shot. Containing many of the defining elements of an RPG? Hard to dispute it, even if you want to be a genre snob.

It's not Bioshock 3, though.

Personally, I don't think the Shocks are very RPGish - but I concede they have enough elements to qualify for the genre in the stricter sense.

For my part, only System Shock 2 comes close enough to be called a genuine RPG.

Originally Posted by Maylander
I actually haven't played Kingdoms of Amalur yet, but the demo didn't really grab me. I'll probably give it a go in 2013 though, as my backlog is dry as the desert at the moment…

I have bought the game but also played the demo, remind me Borderlands 1, artificial overall feeling, uninteresting story and story elements, robotic life, repetitive lacking of depth fights and many more stuff. After that I never felt motivated to install the full game.

For me it's not logic to quote this game and not games like Legend of Grimrock or even Borderlands 2, no way KoL is deeper and more RPG than BL2.

For Torchlight or Torchlight 2, well I don't care beat for the game and yes I played with pleasure D2 and its extension but not during years and yes I'm not an extreme fan. You prefer Diablo 3 to Torchlight 2? Fine myself I even prefer TL1 to D3 but I don't consider D3 a so bad game.

I've had TL1 installed for 3 years, and still haven't even fired it up. I played Fate to death so I suppose I fried that pleasure center.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
It's not Bioshock 3, though.

Personally, I don't think the Shocks are very RPGish - but I concede they have enough elements to qualify for the genre in the stricter sense.

I haven't followed Bioshock3 religiously, but the video they put out a year or so ago certainly looked very similar to me. None of the snippets I've read since would lead me to believe they've punted and gone a completely different direction. Yeah, they dropped the underwater city in favor of a cloud city, but beyond that it seemed like a pretty familiar formula.

I completely agree that even "RPG-lite" is probably a bit generous, but I found joxer's curt dismissal to be overly harsh and questionable as well.

Originally Posted by Thrasher
I've had TL1 installed for 3 years, and still haven't even fired it up. I played Fate to death so I suppose I fried that pleasure center.

If you go into it with no real expectations, it's a fairly decent bit of mindless button mashing. We had some buzz around here and someone put it on sale for $5 shortly after the release so I grabbed it. I would consider it an excellent "change of pace" game.

Although TL2 reportedly is better on pretty much every front, I doubt I'll buy it. I broke down and bought the Diablo warchest (D1 thru D2 with expansions) back then and got some mileage out of it but never really got hooked. TL1 hooked me enough to finish the game, but I think I'd scratch an itch with another round of Dungeon Siege 2 before I'd buy another game from the ARPG neighborhood.

Originally Posted by dteowner
I haven't followed Bioshock3 religiously, but the video they put out a year or so ago certainly looked very similar to me. None of the snippets I've read since would lead me to believe they've punted and gone a completely different direction. Yeah, they dropped the underwater city in favor of a cloud city, but beyond that it seemed like a pretty familiar formula.

I completely agree that even "RPG-lite" is probably a bit generous, but I found joxer's curt dismissal to be overly harsh and questionable as well.

It's called Bioshock Infinite - but it has no known connection with the Bioshock games. It's definitely not a direct sequel to Bioshock 2.

However, I suspect the girl featured so prominently is a "Little Sister" and there has to be some connection.

But if you really want to call it Bioshock 3 for whatever reason, I won't get in the way.

Dammit, quit confusing the issue with facts.

Originally Posted by Thrasher
I've had TL1 installed for 3 years, and still haven't even fired it up. I played Fate to death so I suppose I fried that pleasure center.

Fate is a good game, more a full game than TL1 is but TL1 has two lead, ok in my opinion, the fight depth and drops fun are just a lot better in TL1. But Fate have its own plus like levels more Roguelike that are more generic but with more tension. TL1 infinite dungeon is interesting to investigate further a build but it failed to reproduce Fate.

TL1 has flaws, Normal difficulty is too easy and only Hard should be played, but even then first parts are too easy at Hard and the difficulty curve is too step. The gem system is awfully boring. The management of drops and disturbance of labels during fights isn't well done.

TL2 changed the pace of the game, I don't like that much overall it's moving the fighting from dodging (TL1) to mobility and anticipation dodging (TL2). On that point TL1 was on the track of D2 but TL2 choose to take an alternate path. Also TL1 builds are quite flexible, this is coming from the powerful spell system and how classes are designed. TL2 choose a more directive design.

But that's the only point I see everything else is a huge improvement with TL2 including fights with a lot of depth. I'm tempted of a comparison between TL2 and D3, quite out of topic but fitting some previous posts. Just the main points, for me:
- D3 destroyed the notion of builds and for me destroyed the main interest of such games.
- Drops are very fun in TL2, in D3 it's totally tedious and a failed point. There's many causes and reasons but I can't detail here.
- The limited number of skills to select at same time is a lot too limited in D3. It's not a surprise that the result is a fighting quite more repetitive and with quite less depth. It's great to have so many choice but pathetic to be able to select so few.
- The level map design is hugely better in TL2. Outdoor are a typical example, in D3 it's stupid wide arena with some obstacles, TL2 outdoor just shine in comparison. The map random is stupid and poor in D3 and in TL2 it shines in comparison and in fact if much better than D2 outdoor (but D2 outmatch TL2 for dungeons).
- The fight depth is hugely better in TL2. I played both games about the same time and same number of characters. I'm still discovering many subtleties in TL2 fights after 4 characters played and it's over since long in D3 despite the amazing number of skills available. Sure it's just my experience, detail this would be too long.

EDIT: Two hints about TL2:
- Don't play your first character as an outlander (the archer class), many players choose such class first, that will be a wrong choice in TL2. The three other classes are much better to discover the game.
- The Engineer is another hidden trap. It's a good class to discover the game but it has a very special skill, Force Shield, which is quite fun but will hide you the real depth of fights. In way it won't make you learn the game well and later when the shield will be less powerful the game will seem you impossible to master. Then it's time to switch to Berzerker or Embermage to really learn the fight depth.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
Don't mention Aliens. I will never get over not getting my serious take on an Aliens RPG…. To make it worse, they go and focus on a shit-tastic cartoon instead. Oh, the pain.

I'm not even really an Aliens "fan" and I was thinking the idea of an Aliens RPG was a great one! Very fresh setting for an RPG. It was a disappointing cancellation =(

My reply was off topic so I turned it into a PM to Zloth. Sorry!

Originally Posted by dteowner
Containing many of the defining elements of an RPG? Hard to dispute it, even if you want to be a genre snob.

Trouble is that defining a genre by elements that can be shared by so many other genres only ends in one thing: the one happening currently, that is most games are RPGs, soft core RPGs.

The only thing that characterizes unambiguously a RPG is the focus on role playing.
What is used to achieve role playing is secondary.
And the quality of a RPG is measured by the quality of the role playing it allows.

Since it has wheels, doors and engines, it must be a car as wheels, doors and engines are defining elements of a car.

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
Trouble is that defining a genre by elements that can be shared by so many other genres only ends in one thing: the one happening currently, that is most games are RPGs, soft core RPGs.

The market certainly encourages genre-benders these days, so it should come as no surprise that most games would incorporate elements from numerous genres. The debate then turns to which ones are dominant.

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
The only thing that characterizes unambiguously a RPG is the focus on role playing.
What is used to achieve role playing is secondary.
And the quality of a RPG is measured by the quality of the role playing it allows.

But since current software and hardware technology cannot truly allow a player to choose any role and do exclusively things that are appropriate to that role, your definition is pretty well pointless. Full points for ivory tower accuracy, and yet completely devoid of real world application.

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
Since it has wheels, doors and engines, it must be a car as wheels, doors and engines are defining elements of a car.

And the defining elements of a B-52 are wings, props, and payload. None of the elements are unique nor exclusive, and yet, if I pulled the curtain off an unknown vehicle I bet you could tell me whether it was more like a car or a bomber based on those defining elements you're so scornful of.

Originally Posted by dteowner

But since current software and hardware technology cannot truly allow a player to choose any role and do exclusively things that are appropriate to that role, your definition is pretty well pointless. Full points for ivory tower accuracy, and yet completely devoid of real world application.

So basically here, something does not exist, therefore lets pretend it exists so to get a real world application… And not doingthat would be the ivory tower accuracy.

What about some real world application? If it does not exist, just do not pretend it exists.
Or is there some natural law forcing RPG to exist on computers?

And the defining elements of a B-52 are wings, props, and payload. None of the elements are unique nor exclusive, and yet, if I pulled the curtain off an unknown vehicle I bet you could tell me whether it was more like a car or a bomber based on those defining elements you're so scornful of.

Back to reality : cars with wings?
Oh, a bird flying through the skies. It has wings, and payload. Cant be a plane.
Jet fighter has wings, payload, no propeller. Must be a bird.