Wait, Joe actually posted here again? Well, I can't say I didn't see it coming. Most likely after his first contact with the Codex, he was aware that if he ever had anything to say about a big name RPG he would. So thus, upon uploading his review, he kept a watchful eye upon the Codex (or Google) to see if the Codex has yet to make a thread upon his video and see what they think.
Also I will not I myself found this topic by looking up in Google "RPG Codex" and "Angry Joe" to see if Joe had made a Skyrim video and if the Codex had already started picking apart his review and discussing their opinions amongst themselves.
Now as for Joe's post itself,
Angry Joe said:
As a gaming journalist, I might have a bit more insight into these matters, since I play games for a living. Take indie games for example. I love indie games and sometimes they can really push things forward in terms of mechanics or ai (e.g. Facade). But an indie game can never aspire to become a polished modern masterpiece like Skyrim. I think all of them are outdated in one way or the other, be it graphics wise (again, Facade) or even mechanics wise (Nights of the Chalice). This is because they're restricted in budget/time/size, just like the games of old were restricted by the low power of the gaming systems of that time.
I can't help but smash my conscious into a concrete wall as I read it. First of all, being a gaming Journalist means nothing about insight. Insight is like everyone here knowing that Skyrim will be somewhere in the range of bad but will still sell enough copies to make Bethesda think "We're doing a fine job" as people go out of their way to say that Bethesda has created a "Hallmark in the history of RPG's" or "A game that shall soon revolutionize the RPG as we know it".
As for indie games, you make me facepalm. Indie development for the most part sits there and makes a game as they feel they would make it with little care for money (if we are to believe that). An indie devs final product is the culmination of all the hard work and effort to create a game based on an idea that has been refined and tweaked with little additions to the game. An indie developers game tends to be risky and new or an old idea brought back to the modern age. It is not attempting to be the next blockbuster game. An indie game attempts to be something different.
Also on Facade, I believe that was suppose to be an experiment. Nights of the Chalice? I believe that was suppose to be a game based upon D&D 3.5e's rules as closely as possibly. I have yet to play it yet (but I do have it on the do list).
Angry Joe said:
When I started out, I too opposed the big gaming companies, thinking that the huge inflated budgets and hype and marketing suits would decline gaming. But then I realized something. Companies like Blizzard or Bioware or Bethesda have liberalized gaming. They took it out of musty basements and turned it into something everyone could enjoy. They have turned boring dice rolls into heated combat, mushy pixels into nightmarish monsters and checkerboards into immersive landscapes. Can you imagine how much greater Braid would be with the budget of Mirrors Edge, or one of Ben Vogel's games done with the team behind Dragon Age 2?
Going back to my previous statement, Braid would still be Braid. It may look graphically different, but it's not like it's going play the same way even if they were given tons of cash. The only thing that would make them change their minds is if someone who had control over their development said "Your idea is nice but its iffy and seems like it might not sale too well. Do something else"
Blizzard rarely releases games anyways and their games have been simple accesible so nothing can be said about them. Bethesda is the guy who keeps trying to simplify things for the worse and removing things in an attempt to reach simplicity rather than trying to keep a certain complexity and refining it. Then Bioware I got no real comparison. Haven't really looked into Biowares games too much.
Angry Joe said:
But you people just complain about innovation. You're like a bunch of grumpy old guys, sitting inside and complaining that the 1950s were the pinnacle of human civilization and that free healthcare is communism, when outside the sun is shining and everybody is having an awesome time.
It is very wrong to even compare video games to something like healthcare. Innovation? I'm sure the fine fellows here would love innovation. Problem is that there really isn't any being done. What it seems to be is the best innovation has been done but no one is working from it at all. To possibly put it best in the terms you used there, we want free healthcare. But everyone else is blinded into thinking that what they are getting is free healthcare when in truth it isn't.
EDIT: This post might just be useless. I don't think he'll post back here until Bethesda releases Fallout 4 or something and he does a review and we tear apart his review.