Someone tell me what the fuck is so special about Daggerfall

[kingcomrade]

Trying to say 'Fallout's backstory/'lore' is better than Daggerfall's or vv, is just pointless.

Which is what I pointed out. Backstory and lore is not the same thing as a deep or compelling setting. Fallout barely has any backstory. I still find the setting to be a lot deeper than pretty much any fantasy game I've played besides Planescape.

KC, tell me, how is another setting with radiation and mutants better than another setting with kingdoms and elves?

This needs to be explained? For starters, how many settings with radiation and mutants can you list? Now, how many settings with medieval kingdoms and elves? I can guarantee you that for every vaporware Russian copy of Fallout you can name, I can name a dozen of the generic fantasy.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hackneyed
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/trite
I'm not really a big fan of new elf subraces with different skin colors, and that's what most fantasy settings are: just a new skin color over the same old setting. I guess that view comes from reading fantasy books ever since I was really little, I've seen the range of the zircon-quality fantasy writer. It takes stuff like Mieville for fantasy to really interest me at all, kinda like how Blackhart probably can't get hard on just normal shemale rape porn, he's got to have jungle cannibal snuff videos.

 

[bryce777]

Trying to say 'Fallout's backstory/'lore' is better than Daggerfall's or vv, is just pointless.

Which is what I pointed out. Backstory and lore is not the same thing as a deep or compelling setting. Fallout barely has any backstory. I still find the setting to be a lot deeper than pretty much any fantasy game I've played besides Planescape.

KC, tell me, how is another setting with radiation and mutants better than another setting with kingdoms and elves?

This needs to be explained? For starters, how many settings with radiation and mutants can you list? Now, how many settings with medieval kingdoms and elves? I can guarantee you that for every vaporware Russian copy of Fallout you can name, I can name a dozen of the generic fantasy.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hackneyed
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/trite
I'm not really a big fan of new elf subraces with different skin colors, and that's what most fantasy settings are: just a new skin color over the same old setting. I guess that view comes from reading fantasy books ever since I was really little, I've seen the range of the zircon-quality fantasy writer. It takes stuff like Mieville for fantasy to really interest me at all, kinda like how Blackhart probably can't get hard on just normal shemale rape porn, he's got to have jungle cannibal snuff videos.

hahaha. I have to agree here.

Actually I can live with it, it's the norm I suppose. I don't have to even like the setting much to enjoy the game. the gameplay and cexploration aspects are the most important to me....

 

[elander_]

Which is what I pointed out. Backstory and lore is not the same thing as a deep or compelling setting. Fallout barely has any backstory. I still find the setting to be a lot deeper than pretty much any fantasy game I've played besides Planescape.

Well you are right. Daggerfall is a game strongly inspired on pnps so it makes sense they did things that way. I pointed out in my post above some reasons why books are used in Daggerfall and when they aren't used.

I think that LlamaGod is more interested in stories, adventures and puzzles with some freedom and thats not the main focus of an hardcore crpg. An hardcore crpg is more about fleshing a world and then throw a character you create in the world to experience and change the world with this character and let the world change it back and see what comes out of it. Ultima VII is too much focus on a story to be an hardcore crpg and it was never the game designers intention to create an hardcore game if i remenber well.

Books, archives from the past, video tapes or whatever are certainly very important for hardcore crpgs and the reason i think we don't see them more in Fallout is because they never got a chance to develop those games into a proper world setting or a more pnp oriented one if you prefer. I think Tim Cain was quite a pnp nuts.

Ultima lore and Daggerfall lore are two pretty different things and hard to compare. You can see how Brittannia evolves and grows because the game IS the story of Brittannia and it's hero, you, the Avatar. You make the lore. I always had fun in the Ultima games talking to people or reading books that talked about my past adventures because hey, I really DID do that. It creates the impression of a truly living, breathing world. And it's brilliant.

I don't say it isn't but you allways play the same character everytime so it's easy to do that. You are allways the hero who is going to help lord British solving some grave problem that treatens Brittania. Yes it has better dialog and more character interaction, it also has more puzzles to solve but it's not realy the same thing.

I played Ultima IV on my Amiga about 12 years ago and i feel that game is the one that gave me more freedom to actualy be my character from all Ultima games.

From what I've seen/played Daggerfall's lore is a bit more static and instead of being your personal tale, it seems more of the BIG PICTURE sort of thing so it makes sense for DF's history and whatnot to be put into old musty tomes in libraries and chit and made enitrely optional because in the long run, does it matter? You can live life without ever reading a history textbook and it wouldn't make a big difference (just generalizing here, so shut up).
Or maybe I'm just a moron. Discuss.

Yes that sums it up. The lore is a bit static in each game but it can change radically from game to game. In Daggerfall it can change radically in the middle of the game if you consider that some powerful and influential characters can raise to power or be nullified while the game carries on. But i never liked Daggerfall main quest too much, even if it was very well writen, except for certain spots that were very roleplayable. In the fight between Helseth and Elysana for example you had the chance to influence who would be the successor to the throne of Wayrest. After Daggerfall, TES games become much more story oriented and we basicaly just follow the story or multiple stories which is the same thing.

 

[LCJr.]

Ultima lore and Daggerfall lore are two pretty different things and hard to compare. You can see how Brittannia evolves and grows because the game IS the story of Brittannia and it's hero, you, the Avatar. You make the lore. I always had fun in the Ultima games talking to people or reading books that talked about my past adventures because hey, I really DID do that. It creates the impression of a truly living, breathing world. And it's brilliant.

From what I've seen/played Daggerfall's lore is a bit more static and instead of being your personal tale, it seems more of the BIG PICTURE sort of thing so it makes sense for DF's history and whatnot to be put into old musty tomes in libraries and chit and made enitrely optional because in the long run, does it matter? You can live life without ever reading a history textbook and it wouldn't make a big difference (just generalizing here, so shut up).

Or maybe I'm just a moron. Discuss.

What the part about you being a moron? Or discuss the UltimaFall thingy? I assume you're referring to the UltimaFall thingy.

I say we just let the Ultima fanboy and the Daggerfall fanboy have at it. It's already spilling over into at least one other thread which I find pure comedy.

 

[Lumpy]

How exactly should history influence the gameplay? How much of the History you read so far influenced you directly?
It did help you to choose your position. Morrowind actually presented lore together with the main quest. As you progressed, you found out who the gods really were. At it helps you make your final decision. Do you do what Azura wants and kill Vivec? Or do you let him live?

 

[elander_]

How exactly should history influence the gameplay? How much of the History you read so far influenced you directly?
It did help you to choose your position. Morrowind actually presented lore together with the main quest. As you progressed, you found out who the gods really were. At it helps you make your final decision. Do you do what Azura wants and kill Vivec? Or do you let him live?

You kill Vivec or let him live and then does anything happen as a consequence you can explore? Thats why Morrowind feels such a lonely game to me. About the gameplay thing all game elements help create the immersion feeling for the game. Specialy when these books have a ficticious author and their veracity is disputable like in the Elderscrolls and some other crpgs that treat books as world building elements. Even gameplay should try to transmit a certain mood to make the experience not only chalenging and fun but as much immersive and beliavable as possible.

 

[Gambler]

History is a systematic description of events in chronological order. It's not the same thing as past. World and characters should have past, but that doesn't mean there should be a book describing who killed whom a thousand years ago.

The game is more enjoyable that way.

Enjoyability is subjective. Artistic value is not. And artistic value of those books is 0.

Anyone can generate description of arbitrary historical events of some fantasy world. Heck, I could write a detailed backstory for Pacman, if I wanted. But since the original game does not express any ideas, that backstory would be completely pointless.

You can't really have an in depth setting for a futuristic game set in the real world.

That's not true. Setting (artistic setting, different from D&D kind of setting) is not required to have history or lore.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

You kill Vivec or let him live and then does anything happen as a consequence you can explore? Thats why Morrowind feels such a lonely game to me. About the gameplay thing all game elements help create the immersion feeling for the game. Specialy when these books have a ficticious author and their veracity is disputable like in the Elderscrolls and some other crpgs that treat books as world building elements. Even gameplay should try to transmit a certain mood to make the experience not only chalenging and fun but as much immersive and beliavable as possible.

Of course not. But although I agree with the implied criticism, in this case I found it strangely fitting. Life goes on regardless. The temple is in denial, and for the dunmer the tribunal was mythical and invisible for ages already. So this end has a nice ironic quality: there they were, living gods, but the end of their existance dosn't even matter much to their followers. It strikes a chord with me, dunno.

 

[Thrawn05]

Of course not. But although I agree with the implied criticism, in this case I found it strangely fitting. Life goes on regardless. The temple is in denial, and for the dunmer the tribunal was mythical and invisible for ages already. So this end has a nice ironic quality: there they were, living gods, but the end of their existance dosn't even matter much to their followers. It strikes a chord with me, dunno.

Didn't think of it that way. I thought it out of programming laziness.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

Of course not. But although I agree with the implied criticism, in this case I found it strangely fitting. Life goes on regardless. The temple is in denial, and for the dunmer the tribunal was mythical and invisible for ages already. So this end has a nice ironic quality: there they were, living gods, but the end of their existance dosn't even matter much to their followers. It strikes a chord with me, dunno.

Didn't think of it that way. I thought it out of programming laziness.

It might well be. But regardless, I liked it.

 

[elander_]

...

I don't think you understand what i wrote. The Elderscrolls lore is not writen at random neither it his give away lore. It's just the words of people that have already died and whose testemonies were writen by schoolars that are game characters themlseves. This history is disputable and questionably, with contraditions and disputes among scholars and slightly changes in every episode. Even true history is not the boring mechanical task that you describe.

Of course not. But although I agree with the implied criticism, in this case I found it strangely fitting. Life goes on regardless. The temple is in denial, and for the dunmer the tribunal was mythical and invisible for ages already. So this end has a nice ironic quality: there they were, living gods, but the end of their existance dosn't even matter much to their followers. It strikes a chord with me, dunno.

Yes there is a certain irony in it. But the only thing they did was adding half a douzen of lines of dialog to the Temple. I would expect a much more interesting and exploitable reaction. What i meant was the game ended in what concerned to Vivecs thing.

 

[Gambler]

To elander_:
Okay, I will reinstall Daggerfall, play it some more, than I will continue this discussion. Maybe I missed something.

 

[Lumpy]

@ Gambler: No need to. You can find all the books at til.gamingsource.net .

 

[TheGreatGodPan]

Enjoyability is subjective. Artistic value is not.

Yes it is.

 

[Gambler]

No, it is not. Artistic value does not depend on how you perceive the game/book/movie, it depends on what and how author tried to express through the game/book/movie. Therefore it's not subjective, and could be examined by analysis.

Anyways, I already had dozens of arguments about objectivity of artistic value. I know in advance most of the arguments you could possibly give me, and I'm tired of this crap. If you think that perception determines whether Planescape has better storyline that Doom, than you clearly have issues.

 

[St. Toxic]

Doom had a pretty funky storyline mang. All those books and comics and shit, jeez. And those :rockon: text snippets at the end of each chapter? Man, oh man.

 

[Gambler]

Doom did not have chapters. Are you speaking about Doom 3?

 

[Naked_Lunch]

Doom totally had chapters. 3 to be exact.

 

[Gambler]

Episodes. That doesn't prove that it had a good storyline. Anyways, it's fairly obvious that you don't give a damn about artistic value, you just use the convenient opportunity to show off.

 

[Naked_Lunch]

Actually, being the creator of many fine comics including the best-selling Troutman, I do care about artistic value but it seems you are barking at the wrong municipal parking garage complex. Y'see, games are merely just that: Games. To look for artistic value in games is perchance an exciting venue for some, but it would be akin to looking for artistic value on one's own monopoly game board! Flabbergasting, I know. But you're a good chap and your autographed copy of my newest comic Baby Arm - The Life of a Swank Dude is on it's way. Cheers!

 

[MacBone]

Anyways, I already had dozens of arguments about objectivity of artistic value. I know in advance most of the arguments you could possibly give me, and I'm tired of this crap. If you think that perception determines whether Planescape has better storyline that Doom, than you clearly have issues.

No? How about this? Some people claim that PS:T is one of the closest attempts gaming has come to Art, but how many university-educated, non-gaming critics would agree with this? Maybe it is, and maybe it isn't, but the fact that we can argue about whether it is or not seems to indicate that the definition of art is indeed subjective.

With any new medium, definitions have to be considered, altered, expanded, or tossed. Jazz, cinema, television, comics - each at some point was decidedly NOT art by both ordinary people and the intelligentsia, but now you'll find many who assert that John Coltrane, Woody Allen, the Monty Python crew, and Alan Moore are indeed creators of art.

 

[mrhappy1991]

@ Gambler: No need to. You can find all the books at til.gamingsource.net .

Yes, though not all lore is books and dialogue. A lot of the lore in Daggerfall came from the quests, gameplay, or characters (the political powers, daedra etc. ), events (like seasons or holidays),or places (cities, provinces, factions, relgions, witch covens etc.) So did Morrowind, but it also had its backstorymore based in history (dwemer, red mountain, tribunal, Great Houses).

 

[Gambler]

I do care about artistic value

Great. Then maybe you will explain what it is?

the fact that we can argue about whether it is or not seems to indicate that the definition of art is indeed subjective.

Ability to argue about something does not indicate that the topic is subjective. In fact, it indicates the opposite. That there is truths somewhere, and that it can be found. People argued about shape of the Earth in the past. People argued about whether Earth is the center of universe. Now we know for sure because they argued.

Now take any truly subjective thing. I can't change your opinion about the taste of Coca-Cola through logic and argumentation. If you like it, you like it. There is no basis for it. Now that's subjective.

If you truly believe that value of games is subjective, then bashing Oblivion is stupid. And praising it too. In fact, that would make any game-related discussion pretty pointless. I don't believe that games are a subjective topic, that's why I discuss them with other people.

 

[Naked_Lunch]

Great. Then maybe you will explain what it is?

Well, it's kinda of like a henway...

 

[ad hominem]

Great. Then maybe you will explain what it is?

Well, it's kinda of like a henway...

Artistic value weighs three pounds? I learned something new today.