Bethesda: Why 90% of the community is misinformed
- Thread starter Omnific One
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I probably should have been clearer, I was commenting more on the majority replies in the above mentioned threads, which are little more than Bioware v Bethesda trolling. My mistake.Omnific One said:
Your post certainly struck a chord with me.Machiavellian007 said:
Oblivion's buggy and broken, yet it has adventure and you can actually think your way into some fun in the game because it has the freedom to allow you to do so. This is also true for Fallout 3, which uses the same buggy engine, yet manages to pull off some incredible moments if you learn to play it in a fun way (hint: it's not about the main quest, or even quests in general. Just explore).
Dragon Age: Origins, meanwhile, is a giant, epic dark fantasy with really interesting characters and an interesting system for interacting with them... set in a very unremarkable, linear and non-interactive environment with battles that are at times incredibly difficult (try beating bosses without potions, like I did often due to a low herbalist skill) for no real reason. The gameplay in it was not balanced properly at all.
DA:O would make a better interactive movie than a game. The game elements seem quite unimpressive, there are better versions of every element in Bioware's engine to be found in other games. Fans of the game are welcome to point out just one thing about it that's cool and unique, and I'm sure someone else could point out a game that executes it more intelligently. It's no surprise it sold so well - it's not for the hardcore, who've seen all this before, better done, a hundred times. It's pretty much an MMO engine without other human players in it to liven it up (seriously, it's so akin to Guild Wars that Bioware must be worried about copyright suits, that is if ArenaNet ever makes some actual money). In other words, incredibly dull to play, for me at least.
Anyway, just thought I'd say I agree heartily. Bethesda makes the better games here, though they do have their own problems to work through.
Not Bioware that's for damn sure, I love Bioware (though I'm starting to change my mind on that) but they don't release "Stable, Bugfree games" and they never have, also I don't think anyone in the history of... ever has claimed that Bethesdas games are bug free, that'd just be silly.Lucifron said:
Now read what I actually wrote.Lucifron said:
Not only are a lot of those games so old that they pre-date Bioware as Bioware (Black Isle) but also I addressed several of them directly.
Dragon Age and KoTOR specifically represent the differance I'm talking about. Good games, with good storylines they are, but in the end they are also extremely linear games without much of an exploration element at all. You pretty much choose what order to pursue the plot threads in, but there is no wilderness you can just go walking off in, and no substantial quest lines that are liable to be missed if you follow the directions you are constantly given. In comparison if you play a Bethesda game and you just follow the plotline, your going to miss 90% or more of the game content. Being lead down a path is great for more casual players, who are intimidated with having to explore and discover things on their own. A lot of players hate being able to easily miss things when playing a game, especially if it's a huge game. To a lot of hard core gamers though that's half the point, and what makes it satisfying when you find them.
Even going back to the Black Isle days, pretty much all the games you mention are pretty linear. For example, "Planescape Torment" which generally deserves it's critical acclaim, does not open up the entire city of Sigil and invite you to explore. Rather it hands you plot points and directions and more areas open up as you follow the path your given. What side quests exist, are all placed around the path your going to be following. Your not going to find a castle full of awesome stuff with it's own self-contained plotline sitting in a remote area of a huge game world that nobody tells you to go to in a Bioware game, on the other hand that's pretty much what Bethesda's games do, you go tearing off through the wilderness and actually adventure, never knowing what your going to find as a big part of the game.
Bioware makes great games, they are however pretty casual in the way they are designed, it's just that they are good enough where they can interest fairly hardcore gamers as well.
Even with Baldur's Gate/Baldur's Gate 2, if you follow the prompts your given your going to hit every map in the game and pretty much see everything the game has to offer. As I said, even what deviates from the main storyline is more or less sitting right there in your path. To be the equivilent of a Bethesda game, there would have to be at least a hundred times the number of maps currently in the game, that are packed with content, and which have no bearing on the main plot and are at most casually referred to on the main plot maps, with nobody ever directing you there. Some of those maps would also need to have fairly obscure access conditions. Sort of like how in Morrowwind the best chestpiece in the game is located in an underwater tomb off the coast. Unless you were swimming through the oceans clearing out the black spots as far as you go, you'd never find it unless being told. What's more the access point you find is actually concealing another dungeon entrance inside the dungeon. 90% or more of the players of Morrowwind probably never knew this was there unless they read about it in a strategy guide (and even so it's an obscure mention). The majority of people who found this probably did it due to putting hundreds of hours into the game and trying to explore every nook of the huge game world. Bioware can't even remotely compare even at their best, despite making very good games.
I'm not knocking Bioware, it's simply that I think in the end Bethesda makes better games for a hardcore RPG fan (which I am). Bioware makes better games from the perspective of a more casual player. Both are however good enough where they don't simply attract one demographic though, as a lot of casuals play Elder Scroll games, and a lot of Hardcore players like Bioware RPGs (which I myself do). The style is however very differant and people are going to prefer one over the other when you get down to it.
I'm an avid hater of all things Bethesda. Even things sidelinked to Bethesda. FO3 and Oblivion which everyone seems so happy about, came out BROKEN. I couldn't play 2h in either of them without falling asleep. I loved the games eventually, but that's due to HEAVY modding. I really should thank all of you modders for their hard work.
PS: Bioware is god. I haven't played a single Bioware game I haven't liked.
PS: Bioware is god. I haven't played a single Bioware game I haven't liked.
Oh yeah, didn't that happen after Morrowind? I remember reading about it. I didn't think much of it. Then I played Oblivion, and mourned their departure.Ultratwinkie said:the lore was written by the OLD BETHESDA which was fired after Bethesda was bought out and replaced with its current staff. So in essence, they didn't write shit.
My humble retort to OP, and I take no sides even though this thread is evidently meant to favor Bethesda.
On point one: They didn't have to make those games. If their name is on a product they are culpable. If M&M/Mars had a company working under it's umbrella that invented a bacon and potato flavored candy bar, and it tasted atrocious, people would look at who unleashed this garbage, and would see that ultimately it was the decision of M&M/Mars, and not just whomever came up with this crap. In other words; they put their name on it, they lay claim to it for better or worse.
On point two: Publisher QA. That's all.
On point three: Lore isn't the same as storytelling. Imagine the lord of the rings movies, only with no dialogue, just a lot of grunting whenever they start fighting orcs. "The special effects are neat, but these movies are pretty lame, pretty boring!" one might say. Then someone might say "Nope. They've got lots of lore, just read the books you ding-dong." If I want pages of text, I'll buy a book, if I want a game with a richly detailed narrative that unfolds with more grace than a library of books dumped on my lap like impromptu homework for a nervous substitute teacher , I'll buy a game. I don't want a game just to read an acre of poorly written, messy, conflicting, and mind numbing "lore", but then I've already demonstrated the difference, so I'll stop beating this dead horse.
If I had a preference for either, based on these "facts" I'd side with Bioware... before they became EA's bitches anyway. personally I think they're equally lame now.
On point one: They didn't have to make those games. If their name is on a product they are culpable. If M&M/Mars had a company working under it's umbrella that invented a bacon and potato flavored candy bar, and it tasted atrocious, people would look at who unleashed this garbage, and would see that ultimately it was the decision of M&M/Mars, and not just whomever came up with this crap. In other words; they put their name on it, they lay claim to it for better or worse.
On point two: Publisher QA. That's all.
On point three: Lore isn't the same as storytelling. Imagine the lord of the rings movies, only with no dialogue, just a lot of grunting whenever they start fighting orcs. "The special effects are neat, but these movies are pretty lame, pretty boring!" one might say. Then someone might say "Nope. They've got lots of lore, just read the books you ding-dong." If I want pages of text, I'll buy a book, if I want a game with a richly detailed narrative that unfolds with more grace than a library of books dumped on my lap like impromptu homework for a nervous substitute teacher , I'll buy a game. I don't want a game just to read an acre of poorly written, messy, conflicting, and mind numbing "lore", but then I've already demonstrated the difference, so I'll stop beating this dead horse.
If I had a preference for either, based on these "facts" I'd side with Bioware... before they became EA's bitches anyway. personally I think they're equally lame now.
...For some reason I feel sexually assaulted... Anyway thanks, i found this pic a while back, don't remember were, but I've adored it sense then.Rainboq said:
You see the problem with putting your company name on something is that we think you made that game. Frankly it doesn't matter the damage has been done.