Bethesda's been busy
- Thread starter eddyrhys
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Jesus, Oblivion is buggy enough as it is already! It's entirely unreasonable to expect one game development studio to produce something with as epic a scale as an Elder Scrolls game in one year, let alone one every year.Liberaliter said:
I tried several times to work at Gamestop, hoping to get a job because of the fact that I could at least tell people about the games I knew about. I remember a while back I was in one and was greated by some dude in a suit that didn't know heads or tails about games. I asked several questions that would have led to a purchase but he couldn't give a crap, so I left. I could have sold me that gameTuring said:If you worked at Gamestop, half your customer base would worship you just for knowing the difference between a publisher and a developerVohn_exel said:And knowledge is power!Turing said:Which would be fact, so thats not too badVohn_exel said:
Christ, people still think yearly releases make a good developer... they don't, they really don't.
Yeah that kinda made no sense as a reply to what you quoted me on. Don't worry, we've all done it.Moonpooman said:
I'd rather play the 20 hour campaign that feels like I'm doing something in the game worlds than the hundred hours in Oblivion or Fallout where nothing happens. Non-linear doesn't mean good, it means tons of short campaigns that don't interact with each other or make sense in any way.Metalhandkerchief said:
As leader of the Fighter, Mages, Thief, and Assassin's Guild, why can't I stage a coup? Where are my membership dues? Why doesn't anybody recognize me as the guy the Emperor is honoring?
After completing a mission where I essentially reseed plant life, fix the water table, take down a giant, evil organization and have liberated an entire city that produces all the ammo, why am I not Emperor? Why is the world still essentially the same? What motivation do poorly armed bandits have for attacking a guy in power armor with an attack dog and heavily armed supermutant buddy? They should just run away. It's not like stories of the guy who liberates slaves and hangs out with a supermutant aren't spreading, right?
That's my problem with Bethesda games. After hours of play, the only acknowledgement of everything you've done is the quest log. You beat the main story line, alledgedly saving the world, but the only change is a few people like you or don't. In Bioware games, you grow, the world reacts, and you finish the story and say "Awesome, I saved the world." And instead of seeing that nothing is really different, you stop playing.
When Bethesda make a game with a stable game engine, then and only then will you have the right to ***** about everyone else.Metalhandkerchief said:
What are you talking about? Skyrim looks amazing. Not to mention that Oblivion and Fallout 3 were fantastic. I highly doubt that a lazy and incompetent studio could do all that.Cuy said:
They have. The majority of reported bugs are usually problems with the computer they are played on. Or if its one of those Xbox ports. But why would you play a Bethesda game on anything other than a PC since Bethesda games are practically famous for their user-made content?008Zulu said:
The only rpg developer that managed to put out good games at a game-per-year rate was Interplay (through its Black Isle division), and it made extensive re-use of engines, often releasing 2-3 games, sometimes even different 'IPs', on the same engine with the same graphics. Worked well for rpgs, as it meant that they could spend all the time working on the campaign itself, with FO2 being on the same engine as FO1, Planescape:Torment using Baldurs' Gate's Infinity engine, 3 Bards Tale games on the same engine, etc (and the half of Interplay that went and formed Obsidian has basically made a company out that exact tactic, with KoTOR2, FO:NV, NWN2, Mask of the Betrayer (on NWN2 engine, but far superior campaign, possibly the 2nd best writing after Planescape:Torment), etc).
Prior to the purchase by EA, Bioware never tried to make a game per year. Dragon Age: Origins took about 5-6 years. Even BG2, the 3rd game between the Bioware-Black Isle partnership that produced the Infinity Engine, took 2.5 years, without substantial graphical change other than enabling higher resolutions. And you can really tell the missing years with DA2, Bioware's first attempt to produce a rpg under EA's 'game per IP per year' policy.
RPGs are simply too content-heavy to suit a game-per-year policy. I've got my complaints about Bethesda - particularly their writing, and lack of discipline (putting in content because it 'looks cool', without thinking about whether it undermines the game's setting or conflicts with the lore) - but they are dead right on that point, and their games benefit from it. I'm hoping that after DA2, EA realises that it's a mistake to apply a policy based around marginally updated sports games and action/shooter titles, and apply it to the rpg genre, and that they give Bioware more time between releases. EA's history, however, says otherwise. They've never ever managed to hold on to a functional rpg IP or studio, and I see little difference between their imposing a game-per-year-per-IP policy on Bioware and their approach that crushed Origin when they acquired it.
Remember that prior to EA acquiring them, Origin was absolutely unquestioned as the master of crpgs. Their market standing was even greater than Bioware's and Bethesda's is now, across both the crpg and space sim genres (through their Ultima and Wing Commander series). And EA made the exact same mistake - imposed a game per year per IP (or per team) requirement, treated the rpg developer the same way they treated their sports and action franchises, and didn't make allowance for the extra content required. The parallels between DA2 and Ultima 8 are amazing - shorter timespan and need to broaden the market leading to loss of genuine choices with consequences (alternate paths require more development time), loss of exploration in favour of linear areas (large areas obvious require development time, but explorability - even in a small area - requires that you have time to produce enough content that it's okay that players miss a lot of it on the 1st run, ala Deus Ex, and hence LOT'S of development time) and removal of rpg elements for other genres (action for DA2, platforming for Ultima 8) that are easier to balance (or that the team THINKS are easier to balance - no-one ever called U8 a great platformer, and I doubt that many people think that DA2 is a better action game than God of War).
Bioware has made some of my favourite games. But this just has all the look of 'EA does it again', all over it.
Prior to the purchase by EA, Bioware never tried to make a game per year. Dragon Age: Origins took about 5-6 years. Even BG2, the 3rd game between the Bioware-Black Isle partnership that produced the Infinity Engine, took 2.5 years, without substantial graphical change other than enabling higher resolutions. And you can really tell the missing years with DA2, Bioware's first attempt to produce a rpg under EA's 'game per IP per year' policy.
RPGs are simply too content-heavy to suit a game-per-year policy. I've got my complaints about Bethesda - particularly their writing, and lack of discipline (putting in content because it 'looks cool', without thinking about whether it undermines the game's setting or conflicts with the lore) - but they are dead right on that point, and their games benefit from it. I'm hoping that after DA2, EA realises that it's a mistake to apply a policy based around marginally updated sports games and action/shooter titles, and apply it to the rpg genre, and that they give Bioware more time between releases. EA's history, however, says otherwise. They've never ever managed to hold on to a functional rpg IP or studio, and I see little difference between their imposing a game-per-year-per-IP policy on Bioware and their approach that crushed Origin when they acquired it.
Remember that prior to EA acquiring them, Origin was absolutely unquestioned as the master of crpgs. Their market standing was even greater than Bioware's and Bethesda's is now, across both the crpg and space sim genres (through their Ultima and Wing Commander series). And EA made the exact same mistake - imposed a game per year per IP (or per team) requirement, treated the rpg developer the same way they treated their sports and action franchises, and didn't make allowance for the extra content required. The parallels between DA2 and Ultima 8 are amazing - shorter timespan and need to broaden the market leading to loss of genuine choices with consequences (alternate paths require more development time), loss of exploration in favour of linear areas (large areas obvious require development time, but explorability - even in a small area - requires that you have time to produce enough content that it's okay that players miss a lot of it on the 1st run, ala Deus Ex, and hence LOT'S of development time) and removal of rpg elements for other genres (action for DA2, platforming for Ultima 8) that are easier to balance (or that the team THINKS are easier to balance - no-one ever called U8 a great platformer, and I doubt that many people think that DA2 is a better action game than God of War).
Bioware has made some of my favourite games. But this just has all the look of 'EA does it again', all over it.
