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

[Souplex]

Opinions about Obsidian are pretty diverse, I'd say the credit balances out.
Source:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.382677-If-Obsidian-made

 

[Auron]

Obsidian is awesome, I really don't know why the hell people think kotor 2's better than the first though. It was plagued by mary sue stuff and borderline canon-breaking stuff, even though it was a great game.

PS - not to mention it was severely unfinished.

 

[teebeeohh]

KOTOR 2 was the single best star wars product ever.
because it was not very starwarsy.
your argument is invalid

 

[Overlard]

People who like Obsidian: Too
People who dislike Obsidian: To

End argument.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

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).

 

[Something Amyss]

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.

I'm betting PE ships with the same sort of bugs but with no such excuses available.

 

[MetalDooley]

As for bugs and such, yeah, it's sometimes rough. I do however think their reputation for games being of that nature is undeserved. From my limited experience New Vegas was no more (Or less) buggy on launch than Fallout 3 itself, same with Neverwinter Nights which is something a lot of fans tend to forget. That game barely even worked on launch. Meanwhile other games like Dungeon Siege 3 or expansions like Mask of the Betrayer are pretty much without glitches or issues.

Couldn't agree more.People seem to have a tendancy to completely overexaggerate the smallest bugs in Obsidian games while other devs get a free pass for similar or worse stuff..You only have to look at Skyrim on PS3.That game was literally unplayable for lots of people yet people seemed to blame everyone but Bethesda for it.If Obsidian had released something that bad they would be absolutely crucified

Obsidian is very overrated.

1. They never make their own freaking IP (Project Eternity will be the first, Alpha Protocal doesn't count considering how much of a total flop it was)

So you complain that they never create their own IP's and then completely discount an original IP they did create because it wasn't sucessful enough.Yup that's a solid logical argument right there.An original IP only counts as one if it sells several million copies

2. Their games are either buggy messes or down right unplayable.

I've never encountered any major bugs outside of a few graphical glitches in any Obsidian game I've played.

3. My opinion of course but their sequels to the other developer's predecessors are always inferior (KOTOR, NW, Fallout 3, etc.)

Just my opinion but I actually preferred KOTOR 2 and New Vegas to their predecessors

4. Their writing for the most part range from best case scenario decent and worse case very subpar.

Which makes it better than most seeing as the majority of writing in games is pulp level at best anyway

 

[Something Amyss]

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).

Bioware's stories aren't really all that great, either. They've coasted on the same rough formula for almost all of their games and a lot of their so-called depth of story comes through exposition dumps. That's not good storytelling, it's just...Homework.

 

[Doom972]

Obsidian gets much of that credit for the games its founders made as Black Isle: Fallout 1 & 2, Icewind Dale 1 & 2, and mostly for Planescape: Torment.

Personally, I enjoyed every Obsidian game I played so far. Even though they had buggy releases and unfinished content, they were still great. NWN 2 and KOTOR 2 were very buggy and have much missing content (KOTOR 2 at least got fixed by fans), while Alpha Protocol and New Vegas were very buggy, but got fixed. I think that they are on the right path.

I'm not hyped for Project Eternity though. I would've liked to see them make another non-fantasy RPG.

I wouldn't call New Vegas "fixed".

It's in a worse state now then it was at launch.

At launch, there were 500 extremely irritating/problematic bugs. Now, there is one bug that prevents me from playing entirely.

After a mere 30 hours on my latest file, the game can no longer load The Strip. You know, the most important location in the game.

From what i heard, this was caused by the last patch.

Are playing on a console by any chance? I haven't seen that bug on the PC. all games based on Bethesda's game engines tend to be buggy, but the community usually gets an unofficial patch mod out pretty quickly and updates it frequently. Not an excuse, just something to consider.

 

[Something Amyss]

Couldn't agree more.People seem to have a tendancy to completely overexaggerate the smallest bugs in Obsidian games while other devs get a free pass for similar or worse stuff..You only have to look at Skyrim on PS3.That game was literally unplayable for lots of people yet people seemed to blame everyone but Bethesda for it.If Obsidian had released something that bad they would be absolutely crucified

Come now. Bethesda and Obsidian are often mentioned in the same breath when it comes to bugs. Bethesda fanboys make excuses for them while Obsidian fanboys make excuses for them.

 

[Saviordd1]

So, you want me to stop loving New Vegas and Obsidian for making it just because you didn't enjoy it?

(And don't give me that "Bethesda was QA" crap, Obsidian was the one who looked at the finished product and said to Bethesda "Yes, ship it")

Then explain to me why in the credits the "Director of Quality Assurance" works for Bethesda, the "QA Manager" works for Bethesda, the "QA Lead" works for Bethesda and why 69 of the 72 "QA Testers" and "Additional QA" all work for Bethesda?

I think we have a small case of "Didn't read full OP" here.
To quote my post
"Now, they don't have BAD games, not by any stretch of the imagination."

I never said you should stop liking, hell, even I like their games. That's not the point of my post at all.

Again, they might be the QA team but Obsidian is STILL the one who approved he final product, they looked at that buggy mess and said "Yup".

 

[Saviordd1]

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).

Bioware's stories aren't really all that great, either. They've coasted on the same rough formula for almost all of their games and a lot of their so-called depth of story comes through exposition dumps. That's not good storytelling, it's just...Homework.

I'd argue that Bioware aren't so much gifted story tellers (at least not anymore) as much as they are good world builders.

 

[Imthatguy]

Use only stealth combat in Alpha Protocol and join the master race. I never encountered ANY bugs oddly enough......

 

[TheDrunkNinja]

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).

Bioware's stories aren't really all that great, either. They've coasted on the same rough formula for almost all of their games and a lot of their so-called depth of story comes through exposition dumps. That's not good storytelling, it's just...Homework.

I'd argue that Bioware aren't so much gifted story tellers (at least not anymore) as much as they are good world builders.

They make damn good memorable characters as well, don't forget. What people expect most from Bioware isn't some brilliant over-arcing plot that no one ever thought of before, they do "the hero's journey" plot every time. No, what people do expect from Bioware when they laud it's story-telling ability is the nitty-gritty of the script. The dialogue, the memorable moments, the set-pieces, the scenes, the world--all of these are what makes Bioware games a fantastic experience. People tend to just simplify it by saying they are great story-tellers.

Hmmm, I wonder if that chap that debates in list format and bold-emphasized text will make an appearance. This is usually his kind of thread.

 

[Scow2]

So, you want me to stop loving New Vegas and Obsidian for making it just because you didn't enjoy it?

(And don't give me that "Bethesda was QA" crap, Obsidian was the one who looked at the finished product and said to Bethesda "Yes, ship it")

Then explain to me why in the credits the "Director of Quality Assurance" works for Bethesda, the "QA Manager" works for Bethesda, the "QA Lead" works for Bethesda and why 69 of the 72 "QA Testers" and "Additional QA" all work for Bethesda?

I think we have a small case of "Didn't read full OP" here.
To quote my post
"Now, they don't have BAD games, not by any stretch of the imagination."

I never said you should stop liking, hell, even I like their games. That's not the point of my post at all.

Again, they might be the QA team but Obsidian is STILL the one who approved he final product, they looked at that buggy mess and said "Yup".

No, Obsidian DIDN'T approve the final product. They are given two choices when the publisher comes demanding the game early. Either "Fine, take it", and they ship a buggy game, or "It's not ready yet", and then get hit with EVERYTHING the publisher has for 'defaulting' on their contract.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

I still find it incredibly ironic that people used to slam Obsidian for "ruining" games like KotOR II and NWN 2 and praising Bioware and saying Bioware should develop everything and now everyone is praising Obsidian and saying they should develop everything and slamming Bioware. Oh how the tables have turned.

 

[Saviordd1]

So, you want me to stop loving New Vegas and Obsidian for making it just because you didn't enjoy it?

(And don't give me that "Bethesda was QA" crap, Obsidian was the one who looked at the finished product and said to Bethesda "Yes, ship it")

Then explain to me why in the credits the "Director of Quality Assurance" works for Bethesda, the "QA Manager" works for Bethesda, the "QA Lead" works for Bethesda and why 69 of the 72 "QA Testers" and "Additional QA" all work for Bethesda?

I think we have a small case of "Didn't read full OP" here.
To quote my post
"Now, they don't have BAD games, not by any stretch of the imagination."

I never said you should stop liking, hell, even I like their games. That's not the point of my post at all.

Again, they might be the QA team but Obsidian is STILL the one who approved he final product, they looked at that buggy mess and said "Yup".

No, Obsidian DIDN'T approve the final product. They are given two choices when the publisher comes demanding the game early. Either "Fine, take it", and they ship a buggy game, or "It's not ready yet", and then get hit with EVERYTHING the publisher has for 'defaulting' on their contract.

See I'd say that's true except that when they ARE given all the time in the world (Alpha Protocol) The end result is still buggy and messy.

 

[MetalDooley]

Couldn't agree more.People seem to have a tendancy to completely overexaggerate the smallest bugs in Obsidian games while other devs get a free pass for similar or worse stuff..You only have to look at Skyrim on PS3.That game was literally unplayable for lots of people yet people seemed to blame everyone but Bethesda for it.If Obsidian had released something that bad they would be absolutely crucified

Come now. Bethesda and Obsidian are often mentioned in the same breath when it comes to bugs. Bethesda fanboys make excuses for them while Obsidian fanboys make excuses for them.

To be honest dude I've never seen Bethesda get anywhere near the same level of criticism that Obsidian get even though their games are just as buggy if not worse.Please feel free to correct me but I don't think Obsidian have ever released anything as broken as Skyrim on PS3 yet reading through this thread(and every thread people make about them)you would think that that's all they do

I'm not an Obsidian fanboy but I just don't like to see people get criticised heavily for the same stuff others seem to get a free pass for