Why people give Obsidian a little to much credit (IMO)

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

Krantos:

recruit00:
I think when it comes to Obsidian, it is mainly an issue of publishing. They always seem to get pushed by the publisher to get stuff out faster which leads to the huge amounts of bugs in their games like AP and FNV.

That's the excuse I always see carted out when this topic comes out, and I'm just going to say what I always do:

Why is it EVERY publisher Obsidian works with? Also Why can other companies work with those publishers but Obsidian can't?

You could ofcourse approach this problem from the publisher's end too.

Bethesda cannot even work with themselves seeing as how all the Elder Scrolls games have been buggy and glitchy like hell. And Fallout 3 too ofcourse. We have to give Obs the benefit of the doubt in the case of Fallout NV.

Atari. Haven't heared about them publishing something interesting in ages actually. Last RPG in years was some puss filled action game called Daggerdale. Anyway, the original NWN published Atari and made by Bioware, sucked hard and I prefer to play Obs' NWN2.
Lucas Arts. Have they published anything worthwhile ever since they stopped making awesome puzzle adventure games like Monkey Island? Kotor 1 sucks and Kotor 2 kinda sucks too. You could go both ways.

So SEGA. The Total War games are nice even if they are kinda buggy aswell.
The only thing we can really hold against Obsidian is Alpha Protocol and not for bugs, but gameplay that simply isn't good.

For myself, I'm really interested in Eternity, not because of the game, but because it will finally answer the question of whether it's been Obsidian all this time or if it really is the publishers.

Time will tell. In the end, time will tell.

I see PE as their last chance too.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
Snip

Can I just say that you stole this thread for me?

After reading your first post, and then finding your retorts towards those who don't comprehend the relationship of devs/pubs - I actually scoured the thread just to read more of your posts.

You are an enlightening read.

Obsidian Entertainment is made of the same people who used to work for Black Isle before it was shut down by Interplay. Black Isle holds the title of being the greatest game developer in history at the moment. Plus with titles like KOTOR 2 (with the missing content restored) they have a great reputation for writing and character design that rivals other high-esteem game writers like BioWare.

Obsidian gets credit from Black Isle just as Lionhead got credit from Bullfrog.

Seems these PC gamers just can't focus on what new things these companies are doing, most console based gamers haven't heard of Black Isle and Bullfrog are the guys that did Theme Park and Theme Hospital...

In my eyes neither of these studios have done anything spectacular.

Obsidian...New Vegas was good and Dungeon Siege III was pretty solid but that's all the credit I can give them

glchicks:

Ill have to check out temple, Ive heard about that one on and off but never got around to it. Ive also heard a lot of good about mask of the betrayer, but my prejudice against nwn2 prevented me from trying it...maybe Ill give it a shot when I have time.

This is kind of random, but have you ever been to Toronto? I'd love to hear an Albertian opinion on Toronto. Im just weird and random like that. Is it true what they say, that everyone in canada hates toronto?

I live in Toronto, and honestly there's nowhere i enjoy living more. its so varied, and interesting. i wouldnt say that everyone in Canada hates toronto, but it does kind of take the limelight when you bring up cities in Canada.

Veldt Falsetto:
Obsidian gets credit from Black Isle just as Lionhead got credit from Bullfrog.

Seems these PC gamers just can't focus on what new things these companies are doing, most console based gamers haven't heard of Black Isle and Bullfrog are the guys that did Theme Park and Theme Hospital...

In my eyes neither of these studios have done anything spectacular.

Obsidian...New Vegas was good and Dungeon Siege III was pretty solid but that's all the credit I can give them

What about Alpha Protocol? That was an excellent game. Also what about the excellent writing of KOTOR II?

dancinginfernal:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
Snip

Can I just say that you stole this thread for me?

After reading your first post, and then finding your retorts towards those who don't comprehend the relationship of devs/pubs - I actually scoured the thread just to read more of your posts.

You are an enlightening read.

I ...erm ...wow. Thanks for the kind words. Glad to be of service.

I don't understand why people seem to have trouble understanding this issue: the majority of AAA games are now developed by publisher-owned developers, or developers working in-house for publishers. This means that the way the industry runs has become geared towards publisher-owned studios, at the expense of independents. You only have to look at the demise of studios like Clover to see just how mainstream publishers generally see independents now. If you're owned by a publisher, you at least have the resources to talk to the higher ups of your publisher and negotiate further development time if needed. As an independent, that's almost never an option. Because you're getting hired for a fee, publishers almost never want to spend additional money on extra development, and want a return on investment as quickly as possible.

It's part of why mainstream triple-A publishing has become such a problem. They now collectively have a say over pretty much every mainstream game that gets put out on release, and you can guarantee that if it's not one of their own in-house projects, they're going to be mildly supportive at best. Any creative medium should celebrate the independent artists working within it, and this is still true to an extent in cinema and music. In gaming, however, independents are treated with utter contempt, and it has been to the detriment of many great games and great ideas.

Fortunately, some publishers are now taking the hint. Valve have been getting friendly with the indies for years now, and Nintendo recently announced that they're going to allow independent developers complete control over their product on the eShop, on things like pricing, sales, etc, and that they're not going to charge for online patches or ratings or any of the other things that usually cost an arm and a leg. So hopefully in the future, things will be much better for indie developers. If the eShop takes off, and the Wii U sells well, then indies like Obsidian will have access to a Steam-like marketplace on consoles that allows them to do what they want, how they want. And that can only be a good thing.

Traun:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Traun:
[

Publishers are fucking over developers, that's nothing new, but Obsidian seem to be the only one who CAN'T adjust to the system.

Because they're independent. Do you have any idea how much harder things become if you're an independent working in this industry? Especially one trying to develop lengthy, intricate RPGs as Obsidian are wont to do.

No, no I don't. I just find them blaming everything on the publishers fishy.

You don't seem to understand that when it comes to games development, publishers have a final say in pretty much everything.

Games are very rarely developed purely based on what developers want to do any more. Publishers have entire departments made up of focus groups, research teams and the like, trying to find out what's popular, which demographics are buying what, how this potential market is responding to that genre of game... Developers usually agree to develop a game, and then develop it along the lines given to them by the publisher, based on what is popular. So, if online multiplayer is popular right now, you can bet that an online multiplayer component will need to be shoe-horned in. If linear corridor shooters sold more than open-world RPGs last year, then chances are the developers will be forced to make their game more corridory and shooty.

So yes, in an industry where everything comes down to the decision of publishers, you shouldn't be surprised that so many of Obsidian's problems stem from the publishers they've worked with. Believe it or not, most developers just want to develop good games, and if you give them enough time and money, they'll do their best to do that. Publishers are the ones who step in with reduced development schedules, reduced finances, and cancelled projects.

Akichi Daikashima:
From what I can gather it's good writing and quite good gameplay that they're renowned for, I haven't seen a post/met anyone who thinks that they're the Holy Grail of Game Design.

Personally, I like them a lot due to Fallout New Vegas and KoTOR 2, the former as a result of making a Fallout game that's actually fun & charming, unlike Fallout 1-3 which all felt rather bleak, and the latter because they actually attempted to explore the grey area of the Star Wars mythos, and for once, didn't present the Sith as a bunch of inherently evil emo bastards and the Jedi as righteous protectors of the galaxy, instead it presented both on the same level, ie, neither philosophy is right, and neither faction is better than the other, a stark contrast to KoTOR 1's insufferable preaching of the Jedi as the one's in the right(god those endings were unbearable).

So, in short, (I presume), good writing and decent gameplay can both be blown completely out of proportion, and indeed they have, as a result, that's why Obsidian is regarded in such a manner: the same way that Bioware was seen as the exemplars of game writing, even though their moral choice malarkey was completely biased and was nowhere near the level of The Walking Dead(the game).

But that's the fucking point of Star Wars...

The Jedi are gods angels, the Sith are the devils servants.

THAT'S HOW IT GOES.

Star Wars is set up as Black and White for a reason, because that's the appeal of it.

What is it with today's society and not allowing things to be black and white occasionally in fiction? If I wanted endless grey on grey morality I'd never play video games since real life gives me enough of that.

Some franchises are based on grey v. grey, Star Wars isn't one of them.

Sutter Cane:

Veldt Falsetto:
Obsidian gets credit from Black Isle just as Lionhead got credit from Bullfrog.

Seems these PC gamers just can't focus on what new things these companies are doing, most console based gamers haven't heard of Black Isle and Bullfrog are the guys that did Theme Park and Theme Hospital...

In my eyes neither of these studios have done anything spectacular.

Obsidian...New Vegas was good and Dungeon Siege III was pretty solid but that's all the credit I can give them

What about Alpha Protocol? That was an excellent game. Also what about the excellent writing of KOTOR II?

If Alpha Protocol was an excellent game then Deus Ex: Human Revolution must be the greatest game of all time ever...

Not played KOTOR II, can't say anything about it, as I said as a console gamer I have no experience of what Black Isle did or what anyone did on PC for that matter, unless it was the Theme games, I played the hell outta those as a kid

Saviordd1:

But that's the fucking point of Star Wars...

The Jedi are gods angels, the Sith are the devils servants.

THAT'S HOW IT GOES.

Star Wars is set up as Black and White for a reason, because that's the appeal of it.

What is it with today's society and not allowing things to be black and white occasionally in fiction? If I wanted endless grey on grey morality I'd never play video games since real life gives me enough of that.

Some franchises are based on grey v. grey, Star Wars isn't one of them.

Because stories are more interesting when you remove the black/white morality, and actually show the shades of grey inbetween.

The entire Star Wars setting doesn't make any sense. And the basic concept of the Jedi and Sith fighting an endless war is actually pretty terrifying when you take a step back and look at it. That's what KOTOR II did so well. It took a whole bunch of Star Wars and Video Game tropes that people accepted standard, and actually showed how disturbing they actually are. Namely:

- The idea of the main character getting stronger by killing other people and creatures. A standard RPG mechanic that is examined in the game and actually portrayed as being somewhat terrifying if you think about it for more than two minutes. The fact that the main character's party members are drawn to him, and are compelled to help him. These are standard RPG mechanics which we take for granted, yet the game blew the doors right off them.

- The Jedi and Sith essentially perpetuating a religious war that only ever ends up hurting the ordinary citizens of the Republic. How many people died on Alderaan? How many people died in the Clone Wars? How many innocent people died in the wars between Revan and the Jedi? Right there, you have innocent people dying in a religious war they had no part in. Millions upon millions of people dying simply because two religious factions are unable to compromise on their beliefs about the Force.

- The nature of the Force itself. How can both the Jedi and the Sith claim to have mutually exclusive ideas about how the Force works, and yet both are able to use it perfectly well? Even more disturbingly, do the Jedi really use the Force? Or does the Force use them. Is the Force simply a term to describe a god? An amoral god which casually throws aside millions of lives in an effort to impose its own presence on the galaxy, and maintain its own twisted version of balance?

- The idea of Jedi having to be emotionally detached. Emotions are perfectly natural things. Surely by trying to remove yourself from them, you simply cause the Jedi to repress their emotions, and become more susceptible to them at a later date? Atris tried to overcome her love for the Exile, but she couldn't. And in trying to refuse that love, she ended up becoming bitter, hateful and fell to the Dark Side. Surely it would have been better to admit her feelings upfront and be honest with herself, rather than try to ignore them? Surely all Jedi run the risk of becoming bitter, repressed individuals in their focus on being detached from personal emotion?

These would be hefty ideas for any story to try and cover. The fact that a Star Wars game tried to cover such weighty, deconstructive themes and ideas, so richly layered in subtext and deeper meaning, is something worth celebrating. It makes for a more rewarding story, by offering the player so much more to discover than simple Jedi=Good, Sith=Bad mentality. More importantly, it allows the player to form their own judgements, and make their own interpretations about how things all fall out. That's what all truly great fiction does- it allows the audience to analyse and interpret, and come up with their own ideas about what it all means.

ThriKreen:
Remember that NWN was advertised as primarily being a multiplayer centric 'replicate table-top D&D' platform, coupled with its toolset for modding. The campaign was, from what I remember reading, originally 4 separate "demo/example" modules that got mixed together. And it got a very active modding and multiplayer community out of it. To criticize NWN based on it and only ever playing it in single-player does both you and the game a great injustice.

How well that design and legacy was maintained in NWN2, well, I'll refrain from commenting as I don't have direct experience with it.

Also, NWN1 horses are evil.

It was advertised like this:

Epic Story of faith, love, and betrayal my ass. And as if the singleplayer weren't bad enough the game barely worked on release anyway, so you had a bland forgettable singleplayer experience who's sole redeeming feature was that it only worked half the time anyway.

Eventually that was all fixed up over the course of two expansions and many patches later plus a whole library of often excellent fan created modules, and I'd like to stress that as it is today Neverwinter Nights is worth buying for any fan of the rpg genre. But for a primarily singleplayer rpg fan like myself...

Yeah, it was a complete disappointment on release. By contrast on release NWN2 was much more satisfying and has over time proven to be a fantastic rpg in its own rights. This is why I don't understand the many comments throughout this topic and others deriding NWN2, for example:

Candidus:
NWN2 was absolute garbage. Terrible engine. Terrible campaign. Much worse than the original (which was also garbage, but hey).

I guess if you're playing the game exclusively for the multiplayer I can see it, but as an overall experience I tend to consider both games on par with one another with NWN excelling in mp and NWN singleplayer with many brilliant fan modules between them.

Great series.

Obsidian gets way too much credit for some stuff and way too little for other stuff. KotoR 2 -sucks-. I actually like the dark subversion of the Star Wars setting, but it has the crippling problem of all the characters being A: Boring, B: Assholes, C: Both, or D: From KotoR 1. NWN 2...nobody really likes NWN 2, but it still sucks. Primarily for the ending, but also because it missed the central thing that made Neverwinter Nights great, the easy and comprehensive modding.

On the other side of the coin you have Alpha Protocol, a gem with some very serious flaws, and Fallout: New Vegas, a game that successfully and masterfully married the design philosophies of the first two Fallout games with that of Fallout 3, creating a game that is better than either, and for some reason it gets a lot of shit over it.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

You don't seem to understand that when it comes to games development, publishers have a final say in pretty much everything.

I know this, I know they monitor every milestone with clockwork precision, that they tend to move schedules or to directly involve themselves into projects. I know they tend to mismanage things on a legendary scales. I also know that a lot of projects get scrapped on the finish line.

So?

How does this make Obsidian a special snowflake? Every studio goes through the same stuff, studios owned by publishers even more so. Except every time Obsidian fucks up, they come out and blame it on a publisher.

Look at this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wt-iVFxgFWk#t=2m20s

Carmack could have came out and said it was the fault of ATI, he didn't.

When are you going to see the lead programmer of Obsidian come out and say "It's true, we did not put as much effort into bug testing as we could have and the results are pretty obvious." or Avellone say something like "The truth is that we had a grand vision we could not sustain and mismanaged the resources available to us, resulting in cut content and an overall sub-par product, we apologize."? Fuck if they do that, it's the publishers fault.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
Publishers are the ones who step in with reduced development schedules, reduced finances, and cancelled projects.

If it wasn't for the publishers in the first place there would be NO finances, NO project and NO schedule for said project. They interfere because they are interested in profits(Obsidian is a business), because they have trusted the developer with money, and because there are usually 10-20 studios just like Obsidian slaving away.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
-snip-

Basically your whole post is my entire point.
It's star wars, don't over think it and stop forcing grey on it. (A reason I'm glad that Bioware pretty much ignored the second game as much as possible for TOR)

Not everything has to be grey, and making it grey didn't make it more interesting, it just fucks with the entire fantasy of Star Wars.

People seem to forget that sometimes fantasy is supposed to be that, fantasy, a place that's simpler and more interesting than the world we live in.

The Madman:
-snip-

I love how you concentrate on about two lines from the entire trailer.

You DID see how the rest of the trailer was "Yeah, multiplayer, dungeon master, create your own shit".

But that one sentence PROVES they were marketing it on a single player centric adventure.

Saviordd1:

The Madman:
-snip-

I love how you concentrate on about two lines from the entire trailer.

You DID see how the rest of the trailer was "Yeah, multiplayer, dungeon master, create your own shit".

But that one sentence PROVES they were marketing it on a single player centric adventure.

It shows exactly what it shows: That singleplayer and multiplayer alike were being advertised as strengths of the game, which for fans of Biowares previous foray into the Forgotten Realms was more than enough of a promise to get excited about. I never said singleplayer was the games sole purpose.

Relax, like I said in the post you're quoting as well ultimately NWN ended up becoming a fantastic experience. Bioware's singleplayer content never did become one of its great strengths, though Hordes of the Underdark was pretty fun. But the easily accessible tools allowing any fan with the will and patience a chance to tell their own story makes NWN a must own for any rpg fan. NWN2 is similar in that regard although reverse; multiplayer is not its great strength, but the content included in Mask of the Betrayer is easily the singleplayer high-point for the entire franchise. The Obsidian sequel also boasts mod tools which while unfortunately more complex than those of the first game, making it less accessible, does redeem itself in its increased options which allows for extremely unique and heavily customized player campaign such as Misery Stone, which at a glance barely even resembles NWN2 save for the UI.

Both NWN games ultimately became fantastic rpg experience. As I've said time and time again in this topic this is why I'm so confused when people present NWN2 as being an abomination while holding the first game up as some sort of paragon. Both were and continue to be flawed in a number of ways but redeem themselves in the end as two of the strongest examples of D&D roleplaying in the gaming industry. Obsidian and Bioware alike.

I've played a crapton of KOTOR 1 (and never finished it, for some reason), but upon playing KOTOR 2, Obsidian added a shitton of new mechanics and features to KOTOR, making it a really fucking robust game. They added a (proper) crafting system and expanded on the embarrassing non-lightsaber weapon mods from KOTOR 1, they added an influence system, individual party member buffs on the party as a whole, and Kreia is sooo much more interesting than the starting companions from KOTOR 1, and most of the damn party while I'm at it.

Saviordd1:
TL;DRObsidian is meh, the games they make are either built off of old games so it makes it easier for them OR are of extremely meh quality.[/b]

Fallout: New Vegas

KOTOR 2

Aside from some bugs, explain to me how these are "Meh"

Most games are built form pre-existing engines (Look at how much devs use Unreal, including Bioware) Hell Gamebryo was not made by Bethesda! By this logic are Mass Effect 2 and Fallout 3 "Meh" Games because they were built on pre-existing engines?

Saviordd1:

Akichi Daikashima:
From what I can gather it's good writing and quite good gameplay that they're renowned for, I haven't seen a post/met anyone who thinks that they're the Holy Grail of Game Design.

Personally, I like them a lot due to Fallout New Vegas and KoTOR 2, the former as a result of making a Fallout game that's actually fun & charming, unlike Fallout 1-3 which all felt rather bleak, and the latter because they actually attempted to explore the grey area of the Star Wars mythos, and for once, didn't present the Sith as a bunch of inherently evil emo bastards and the Jedi as righteous protectors of the galaxy, instead it presented both on the same level, ie, neither philosophy is right, and neither faction is better than the other, a stark contrast to KoTOR 1's insufferable preaching of the Jedi as the one's in the right(god those endings were unbearable).

So, in short, (I presume), good writing and decent gameplay can both be blown completely out of proportion, and indeed they have, as a result, that's why Obsidian is regarded in such a manner: the same way that Bioware was seen as the exemplars of game writing, even though their moral choice malarkey was completely biased and was nowhere near the level of The Walking Dead(the game).

But that's the fucking point of Star Wars...

The Jedi are gods angels, the Sith are the devils servants.

THAT'S HOW IT GOES.

Star Wars is set up as Black and White for a reason, because that's the appeal of it.

What is it with today's society and not allowing things to be black and white occasionally in fiction? If I wanted endless grey on grey morality I'd never play video games since real life gives me enough of that.

Some franchises are based on grey v. grey, Star Wars isn't one of them.

That's why I like them so; It's the Killer 7 principle, the game flaunts established norms and establishes a new story of its own by taking elements from the source material and mixing shit up.

The Jedi are still portrayed as vaguely good, (SPOILER ALERT, since I don't know how to use the tag thing) after all, several Jedi Masters are seen helping the communities that they're hiding in, and yet, at some points in the story, they're as bad as the Sith.

Also, personally, nothing in life is (EDIT)Black and White.

Saviordd1:

But that's the fucking point of Star Wars...

The Jedi are gods angels, the Sith are the devils servants.

THAT'S HOW IT GOES.

Star Wars is set up as Black and White for a reason, because that's the appeal of it.

I don't care what Star wars 'is supposed to be' Chris Avellone shows us what it should be, he wrote the only Star Wars story that is remotely intelligent and thought provoking, in comparison Bioware looks like bad fan fiction. I mean compare their interpretations of Kreia

Avellone builds Kreia as a mysterious character who's motives remain unclear and beyond you even until the end. She challenges any deeply held beliefs your character has, but not to to change his view to hers (like the Jedi would) simply to make him think about his view and what it actually means in the world. Because she challenges world views and beliefs many see her as evil or supporting the Sith but in reality their outbursts against her simply show how they have fallen to the arrogance the claim to despise.

Biowares says that Kreia was an evil lady turned crazy by Sith holocrons.

It's funny how this seems to mimic the story of Kotor 2, with Bioware as the jedi who are too stupid to understand what Kreia means or meant.

Olikar:

Saviordd1:

But that's the fucking point of Star Wars...

The Jedi are gods angels, the Sith are the devils servants.

THAT'S HOW IT GOES.

Star Wars is set up as Black and White for a reason, because that's the appeal of it.

I don't care what Star wars 'is supposed to be' Chris Avellone shows us what it should be, he wrote the only Star Wars story that is remotely intelligent and thought provoking, in comparison Bioware looks like bad fan fiction. I mean compare their interpretations of Kreia

Avellone builds Kreia as a mysterious character who's motives remain unclear and beyond you even until the end. She challenges any deeply held beliefs your character has, but not to to change his view to hers (like the Jedi would) simply to make him think about his view and what it actually means in the world. Because she challenges world views and beliefs many see her as evil or supporting the Sith but in reality their outbursts against her simply show how they have fallen to the arrogance the claim to despise.

Biowares says that Kreia was an evil lady turned crazy by Sith holocrons.

It's funny how this seems to mimic the story of Kotor 2, with Bioware as the jedi who are too stupid to understand what Kreia means or meant.

I concur. The story was exceptional, and made Star Wars much more interesting. Having every single Star Wars as black vs white is incredibly boring and I loved the descontruction of the mythos. But sadly Bioware and Lucasarts just seemed too stupid to understand it.

Also the gameplay was far better, with all the new abilities and the prestige classes and mutiple misisons going on at once like Dxun/Onderon.

Olikar:

I don't care what Star wars 'is supposed to be' Chris Avellone shows us what it should be, he wrote the only Star Wars story that is remotely intelligent and thought provoking, in comparison Bioware looks like bad fan fiction. I mean compare their interpretations of Kreia

Avellone builds Kreia as a mysterious character who's motives remain unclear and beyond you even until the end. She challenges any deeply held beliefs your character has, but not to to change his view to hers (like the Jedi would) simply to make him think about his view and what it actually means in the world. Because she challenges world views and beliefs many see her as evil or supporting the Sith but in reality their outbursts against her simply show how they have fallen to the arrogance the claim to despise.

Biowares says that Kreia was an evil lady turned crazy by Sith holocrons.

It's funny how this seems to mimic the story of Kotor 2, with Bioware as the jedi who are too stupid to understand what Kreia means or meant.

To be fair to Star Wars fiction, the Republic Commando books are also excellent and show just how monstrous the Clone Wars really are. Totally agree with you though, especially the last bit about Bioware. Goddamned disgraceful, their treatment of better material then they have ever managed.

Also seeing a lot of conclusions being jumped to without knowing much about Obsidian or the background information behind some of their games. Kotaku just put out a mondo article/interview about them should anyone be interested or wish to be more informed when they make broad, sweeping statements:

http://kotaku.com/5968952/the-knights-of-new-vegas-how-obsidian-survived-countless-catastrophes-and-made-some-of-the-coolest-role+playing-games-ever

Olikar:

Traun:

Obsidian do not make their own gameplay, they just write stories. Admittedly, their stories are good for the video game market.

Your joking right? name one existing game company that makes RPGs that has better gameplay than Obisidan, hell name one that has even equal gameplay to Obsidian games.

Bioware. Bethesda. Square Enix. Do I need to go on?

On-topic, I don't know why it is that Obsidian gets a pass with every game they make. Don't get me wrong, I love Alpha Protocol despite its bugginess. Note that I said despite. It is buggy. And to blame it on Sega after Sega delayed the game by 7 months, saying that Sega was rushing development time? Really? I agree that Obsidian got a bum deal with KOTOR 2. But to say that they are one of the best companies ever that just happens to get held back by every publisher they've ever had seems a bit disingenuous.

thebobmaster:

Olikar:

Traun:

Obsidian do not make their own gameplay, they just write stories. Admittedly, their stories are good for the video game market.

Your joking right? name one existing game company that makes RPGs that has better gameplay than Obisidan, hell name one that has even equal gameplay to Obsidian games.

Bioware. Bethesda. Square Enix. Do I need to go on?

You're joking right? please tell me you're joking. Bioware and Bethesda games have terrible gameplay in comparison to Obsidian, and I can't thnk of a single good Rpg Square Enix has ever made. I mean compare the gameplay from Kotor 1 to Kotor 2, Kotor allows almost no role play elements beyond really obvious 'morality' choices where as Kotor 2 implements several features that actually make your character-build choices matter, such as crafting and the ability to use your skills for certain dialogue options.

Olikar:

thebobmaster:

Olikar:

Your joking right? name one existing game company that makes RPGs that has better gameplay than Obisidan, hell name one that has even equal gameplay to Obsidian games.

Bioware. Bethesda. Square Enix. Do I need to go on?

You're joking right? please tell me you're joking. Bioware and Bethesda games have terrible gameplay in comparison to Obsidian, and I can't thnk of a single good Rpg Square Enix has ever made. I mean compare the gameplay from Kotor 1 to Kotor 2, Kotor allows almost no role play elements beyond really obvious 'morality' choices where as Kotor 2 implements several features that actually make your character-build choices matter, such as crafting and the ability to use your skills for certain dialogue options.

You never played Deus Ex: Human Revolution? It's quite good, gameplay-wise. I don't like the rest of the game, but the gameplay is a hell of a lot more innovative than anything Obsidian's done.

Also, you seem to be missing the point with Bioware. It's easy to say "look at the improvements they made in KOTOR 2!" Well, I'd hope to see some improvements in a video game sequel, when they have everything else to work with.

As for RPG elements, tell me how the RPG elements in KOTOR 2 exceed that of Skyrim.

thebobmaster:

Olikar:

thebobmaster:

Bioware. Bethesda. Square Enix. Do I need to go on?

You're joking right? please tell me you're joking. Bioware and Bethesda games have terrible gameplay in comparison to Obsidian, and I can't thnk of a single good Rpg Square Enix has ever made. I mean compare the gameplay from Kotor 1 to Kotor 2, Kotor allows almost no role play elements beyond really obvious 'morality' choices where as Kotor 2 implements several features that actually make your character-build choices matter, such as crafting and the ability to use your skills for certain dialogue options.

You never played Deus Ex: Human Revolution? It's quite good, gameplay-wise. I don't like the rest of the game, but the gameplay is a hell of a lot more innovative than anything Obsidian's done.

Oh yeah I forget about Eidos, they're probably the only company left that has ever matched up to Obsidian in terms of Rpgs (they've gone down hill though, HR is pretty poor in comparison to the original)

As for RPG elements, tell me how the RPG elements in KOTOR 2 exceed that of Skyrim.

Well it's a bit hard to compare their RPG features considering Skyrim doesn't have any, but I'll try. The game actually gives you choices in the outcomes of the game, individual characters and individual locations. The character building allows for more varied builds, as opposed to Skyrim which lacks fundamental features I.e attributes like Strength, Intelligence etc. The game gives you multiple ways to approach a situation like hacking and stealth as opposed to hurr slash them up (or burn them with magic) and before you say it I know Skyrim has stealth but it's terrible, frequently it is actually physically impossible to sneak past enemies (and I am not just talking about bosses)

Edit:

Also, you seem to be missing the point with Bioware. It's easy to say "look at the improvements they made in KOTOR 2!" Well, I'd hope to see some improvements in a video game sequel, when they have everything else to work with.

So you must have been really disappointed with Bethesda then since Fallout 3 was much worse than Fallout 2 (which should be noted is basically an Obdisian game in all but name) in terms of gameplay.

Olikar:

thebobmaster:

Olikar:

You're joking right? please tell me you're joking. Bioware and Bethesda games have terrible gameplay in comparison to Obsidian, and I can't thnk of a single good Rpg Square Enix has ever made. I mean compare the gameplay from Kotor 1 to Kotor 2, Kotor allows almost no role play elements beyond really obvious 'morality' choices where as Kotor 2 implements several features that actually make your character-build choices matter, such as crafting and the ability to use your skills for certain dialogue options.

You never played Deus Ex: Human Revolution? It's quite good, gameplay-wise. I don't like the rest of the game, but the gameplay is a hell of a lot more innovative than anything Obsidian's done.

Oh yeah I forget about Eidos, they're probably the only company left that has ever matched up to Obsidian in terms of Rpgs (they've gone down hill though, HR is pretty poor in comparison to the original)

Fair enough. Like I said, I didn't like much of HR outside of the gameplay, and I can't debate opinions.

As for RPG elements, tell me how the RPG elements in KOTOR 2 exceed that of Skyrim.

Well it's a bit hard to compare their RPG features considering Skyrim doesn't have any, but I'll try. The game actually gives you choices in the outcomes of the game, individual characters and individual locations. The character building allows for more varied builds, as opposed to Skyrim which lacks fundamental features I.e attributes like Strength, Intelligence etc. The game gives you multiple ways to approach a situation like hacking and stealth as opposed to hurr slash them up (or burn them with magic) and before you say it I know Skyrim has stealth but it's terrible, frequently it is actually physically impossible to sneak past enemies (and I am not just talking about bosses)

Skyrim allows you to specialize in all manners of weapons. An archer will play differently from a mage, which will play different than a sword-and-shield specialist, which is different still from a two-handed weapon specialist. And stealth is terrible? Tell that to my level 36 rogue archer who can sneak around just about any enemy, then snipe them with a bow for over 100 damage, before any stealth bonuses are added on.

I'm not trying to pick a fight. But saying Obsidian is the only company that knows how to make a good RPG now is a bit disingenuous.

I'll give you that they more often than not have a good foundation to build their games on, but in the end, a good game is a good game, and I don't think all the work they put into their games should be underestimated.

However, when we look at what their games do that most other games don't, is offer a real sense of choice in the actions you take and how you align yourself in their game worlds. New Vegas, for example, had like 4 different ways you could complete the game. NCR, Legion, House, Yes Man, and maybe more, though i don't think so. Then we look at Alpha Protocol, which, while not really a technically excellent game, it's story and characters reacted to the way you played in a way that makes Mass Effect look like child's play.

So overall, they're generally adored not just for their classic games that people have fond memories of, but because of the choice they give you in their games that isn't really dependent on what engine they were allowed to use as a starting point; because in the end the kinds of intricate stories they tell really all comes down to the hard work and thought they put into their stories.

thebobmaster:

Skyrim allows you to specialize in all manners of weapons. An archer will play differently from a mage, which will play different than a sword-and-shield specialist, which is different still from a two-handed weapon specialist. And stealth is terrible? Tell that to my level 36 rogue archer who can sneak around just about any enemy, then snipe them with a bow for over 100 damage, before any stealth bonuses are added on.

I'm not trying to pick a fight. But saying Obsidian is the only company that knows how to make a good RPG now is a bit disingenuous.

But at the end of the day Skyrim makes you face ALL combat situations with combat, thats not fun and is bad for an Rpg.

Olikar:
Well it's a bit hard to compare their RPG features considering Skyrim doesn't have any, but I'll try. The game actually gives you choices in the outcomes of the game, individual characters and individual locations. The character building allows for more varied builds, as opposed to Skyrim which lacks fundamental features I.e attributes like Strength, Intelligence etc. The game gives you multiple ways to approach a situation like hacking and stealth as opposed to hurr slash them up (or burn them with magic) and before you say it I know Skyrim has stealth but it's terrible, frequently it is actually physically impossible to sneak past enemies (and I am not just talking about bosses)

-Many of Skyrim's quests have different outcomes depending on what you do, or who you side with, and often result in getting to choose who lives or dies.
--The Black Star, A Daedra's Best Friend, Ill met by Moonlight, Pieces of the Past, The Taste of Death, Walking Nightmare, No One Escapes Cidhna Mine, Promises to Keep, In My Time Of Need, and Delayed Burial, to name a few.

-The removal of attributes actually increased the number of build Skyrim could allow for. In past games as you leveled up your skills, and thus leveled up in general, you were forced to raise your attributes, the attributes tied to skills that you raised got bonuses of 1/3/5 depending on how many skills you raised during that level up. Unfortunately since all of a classes ksill were tied to 3 of the 8 attributes, this caused you to get massive bonuses to, and thus max out, your main attributes long before you finished leveling, thus forcing you to have to raise attributes not tied to your skills as you leveled up, ultimatly resulting in all characters, no matter if you started off as a thief/warrior/mage, to end up nearly exactly the same. The leveling system of past ES games was a pyramid. The most diverse your character ever was, was level 1, and the higher level your character got, the more similar they became.

The removal of attributes in Skyrim, and the shifting of everything into perks, not only increased the number of different builds one could make, but it also vastly increased long-term character diversity. More so then any past ES game, and past most games with attribute systems. Effectively, it flipped the pyramid upside down.

-Sneaking up on enemies is only impossible if you
1. Have a low skill/no perks
2. Stack 3 or 4 +sneak bonus items on your character which causes all sneak attempts to fail. Several skills suffer from calculation bugs caused by getting your skill so high that the game cant calculate it and it gets reset to zero.

thebobmaster:

Olikar:

thebobmaster:

Bioware. Bethesda. Square Enix. Do I need to go on?

You're joking right? please tell me you're joking. Bioware and Bethesda games have terrible gameplay in comparison to Obsidian, and I can't thnk of a single good Rpg Square Enix has ever made. I mean compare the gameplay from Kotor 1 to Kotor 2, Kotor allows almost no role play elements beyond really obvious 'morality' choices where as Kotor 2 implements several features that actually make your character-build choices matter, such as crafting and the ability to use your skills for certain dialogue options.

You never played Deus Ex: Human Revolution? It's quite good, gameplay-wise. I don't like the rest of the game, but the gameplay is a hell of a lot more innovative than anything Obsidian's done.

Also, you seem to be missing the point with Bioware. It's easy to say "look at the improvements they made in KOTOR 2!" Well, I'd hope to see some improvements in a video game sequel, when they have everything else to work with.

As for RPG elements, tell me how the RPG elements in KOTOR 2 exceed that of Skyrim.

As Olikar said, Square didn't make Human Revolution, Eidos did. Square published it (Along with Dungeon Siege III, another Obsidian title). As far as games they did make in house, you can't really compare the two as they have wildly different design philosophies. It'd be like comparing id and Popcap over level design.

And if you look at any recent Bioware game, all you'll see is the phasing out of RPG elements in favor of action and set pieces. It's all well and good but they don't really make RPGs anymore so you can't compare them either.

As for Skyrim, it's not a fair comparison either, is it? For starters it's an action sandbox with RPG elements, where KOTOR 2 is a full-on RTwP CRPG, but more importantly it's a 2011 game wheras KOTOR 2 is a game from 2004. Even then, you still see better integration of stats, skills, and equipment in gameplay, dialogue and story progression in KOTOR 2.

SajuukKhar:
-snip

But characters in Skyrim can still do everything all at once, plus if Bethesda where even a half decent Dev they wouldn't have such a Problem getting attributes to work in ES in the first place. I mean every other RPG Dev seems to manage, and the fact they fail on such basic stuff is really telling of the over all quality of their games.

-Sneaking up on enemies is only impossible if you
1. Have a low skill/no perks
2. Stack 3 or 4 +sneak bonus items on your character which causes all sneak attempts to fail. Several skills suffer from calculation bugs caused by getting your skill so high that the game cant calculate it and it gets reset to zero.

No there are parts where it is literally impossible to sneak past an enemy, I remember one dungeon where a high level Draguar was right in front of a door that I had to get through, there was no way I could sneak past.

I think bethesda gets too much credit....people give them a free pass for poor story telling/imersion because of how big and vast their worlds are

I enjoyed New Vgeas waay more than FO3 as buggy as it is its just better

Olikar:
snip

Characters in ES can do everything because the game is deigned that way on purpose, it's a game MADE to allow people to become as godly as they want. But even still, the way Skyrim's skill system is set up, i.e. that 99% of the actually skill power comes from perks, not the skill level itself, it's impossible to become a master at everything, as there are only 80 perks points available, but 250+ perks to get, and even then, it's impossible to reach past level 50ish unless you power game all your non-class related skills to max. you can do everything, but you cant master everything, or even be remotely good in everything.

Actually, every single attribute based game, from Fallout 1-2, all the way to BG and the like, suffer from the exact same problem. Attribute systems throw more numbers in your face, but if you actually take a look at the underlying formulas being used to calculate your character's stats, you will find that unless you do some major attribute gouging,raising or lowing your attributes by a couple points has little, to zero, real effect on your character. It has nothing to do with Bethesda being unable to do something, it has to do with a fundamental flaw in attribute systems themselves. Attribute systems only seem more complex because of all the numbers, but the underlying formulas impose conformity.
.
.
I have never bee in a dungeon where a enemy stood in a doorway, and never moved. I have always been able to sit there for a minute or two, and he moves out of the way. There are literally ZERO NPCs in Skyrim placed in doorways that dont move.

SajuukKhar:

Characters in ES can do everything because the game is deigned that way on purpose,

But that's not the point of RPGs, RPGs are supposed to have variety in different character builds.

Actually, every single attribute based game, from Fallout 1-2, all the way to BG and the like, suffer from the exact same problem. Attribute systems throw more numbers in your face, but if you actually take a look at the underlying formulas being used to calculate your character's stats, you will find that unless you do some major attribute gouging,raising or lowing your attributes by a couple points has little, to zero, effect on your character. It has nothing to do with Bethesda being unable to do something, it has to do with a fundimental flaw in attibtue systems themselves.

Anyone who's played Fallout 1 and 2 know's that's complete BS, your special choices are easily the most important decisions regarding your character, they decide your health, your carry weight, your armour, your AP, what weapons you can wield, how many skill points you get, what dialogue options you get etc

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked