Company News How to make friends and influence previews

[robur]

Does the fact make it worse automatically?

Do you enjoy arguing in circles?

Almost as much as you enjoy not understanding what I typed in all those posts before.

 

[Bradylama]

It wasn't actually you I was responding to, though. deadairis was harping on economy class well beyond the original state where we all fucking got the idea. He was beating on it like a drum as if it completely deafened any of the other kind of benefits. I extrapolated too much from it, big deal.

I don't see why because everybody else is doing it, that makes it ok for gaming journalism to sell themselves out.

You seem like a pretty smart guy, so I don't understand why you're arguing this point.

 

[robur]

Yes. Using someone elses bad behaviour as an excuse for your own isn't "a good thing". Downward spiral of humanity and all that. It's an admittance that you have no good reason to do it yourself. "Everyone else is corrupt / doing it, so why shouldn't I too?". Its avoiding the issue rather than making that moral / ethical decision for yourself.

Well, by now it's probably clear that I did make that decision for myself. Not to be influenced by the surroundings but to watch what I've come to watch with open eyes and a sound, critical mind.

I agree with what you've said. What magazine do you work for by the way (not sure if you've already mentioned it)?

At the moment, a bunch of PC and console mags published by Computec Media over in Germany. Used to work on a few published by Future/Imagine Germany before they shut us down.

Absolutely. But disclosure is about being open about any possible influences. The fact you weren't influenced doesn't negate the fact that they potentially tried to influence you. By disclosing those things, it lets the reader make a judgement call. "Do I trust this guy or has his overly high (or negative) opinion been persuaded by the awesome (or sub-par) event?". By saying "they took us out and we shot AK47's in an all expenses paid trip to Florida", you're being honest and making me more likely to trust that you are giving a truthful opinion about the game you've seen / watched someone else play / got to see photoshopped screenshots of.

Well, every preview where we went places tells that in all the mags I've ever written for. Might be a German thing. We even shoot video with interviews, tours of the developer, that kind of stuff. So I really wonder that this would be something only German readers would dig. We even have a section with pics showing us out on assignment, apart from the preview section, more like a blog thingie so readers know what's going on in the office. When space is scarce, however, you might read about us seeing the game at developer X but not doing activity Y - cause that's not always game related and readers deserve to read about the game and not our past time first and foremost.

As an example, the very fact that most of the previewers didn't disclose this event has lead directly to this thread. If more of them had said "Last week I got flown out to..." and so on, this wouldn't have been an issue. Instead, it goes back to a matter of trust. "So that's how it works, is it? Well what else are you hiding?". Sure, to the industry this is normal but very few people talk about it. Being what we are, we're interested in how the industry works. And really, we'd just like to know why it is that most of the mainstream press see "AWSUM" and salivate where we see "WTF?" and cringe.

But that's what I don't get - why would people not disclose where they have seen what? I want to know that, too.

Take a look at the Fallout 3 previews (which are seemingly, only written based on a movie they saw) and everyone's going "OMG awsum graphics. Look at that, it jumped out and I felt immersed!". We look at things a little deeper / more pedanticly than that. "Everything is voiced?" sure, sounds awesome. Until you realise it's the same 5 voices saying the same 5 things over and over again. We don't care about superficial voice-overs, we want real quality. More to the point, "Who wouldn't want Liam Neeson as your father?" I mean, what the hell kind of design decision is that? Why should I crap my pants in awe just because, you know, LIAM NEESON! It's Patrick Stewart!! all over again. Been there, done that.

Well, the previews (at least mine are) are based on a one hour playthrough of the infamous Megaton journey and some interviews we could do after that. I point that out in my previews, once again. I also point out that it's hard to make a judgement call one year in advance.

I suppose what I'm really asking now is: How come we get that and the mainstream don't?

Maybe just different tastes? Easy as that? I can't think of anything else myself.

No, we expect everyone to back up what they say. Even our own users. It becomes an issue when you appear to be avoiding what's being said though. Shit gets misunderstood, fine. So explain it better or ask the other guy to explain it better. But when you twist it into another issue and fail to respond to the actual point that was being made, even when that point is asked of you again and again, and everyone else seems to quite clearly understand what's being asked while you feign ignorance and outright ignore the question, you'll get labelled sooner or later.

The rules here are simple. Make a statement, back it up. We're not just going to take your word for it because, you know, you think you're someone important (that's not necessarily directed at you).

I am under the impression that I did answer any question to my best knowledge and without evading. Where that has not been the case, I'd be happy to do so. Therefore, I do take offense in being labeled a degenerate who's not even finished school. As much as you take offense in Rausch's "may they all die" stuff.

 

[deadairis]

Well, my learning is: Retreat from the spotlight. Because there's no way that meaningful conversations can be done.

Not exactly. Just be a little more careful with what you say and be ready to be called out on anything you say. Sometimes it might be better to just admit you screwed up than to try and defend everything.

So, I'll chime in: You're wrong, robur is right.
Honestly, doing my best to talk with you guys, and it's entertaining, but damned difficult to get past the fight-picking and ignorance.
Don't believe me? How much fresh blood comes here and stays? How many journalists and devs turn here for insight, like (ugh) GAF?
And how many come, maybe once, and leave in disgust shortly thereafter?
There's "harsh" and there's pointless.


EDIT: Of course, everyone got all reasonable in this thread when I fired this off. Why can't you guys be like that all the time?

 

[deadairis]

What the fuck did he expect? Call someone a shitface, they'll come back with something nastier, it's the nature of the comeback.

But call a brat a brat and if they act bratty, it's not a "comeback." It's proving your observation.
Not that that is or isn't the case, but acting like a tool after someone calls you a tool sure makes it seem like they called it right spot on.

 

[deadairis]

Fair enough.
I'll leave it at this, and you can take it or leave it: traveling for work sucks.
Does having a cool job suck?
No.
Is being a gaming journo a cool job? I sure think so.
Does traveling for work suck?
Yes.
On your other point, the industry does innovate, but not at the pace you -- or I think anyone -- wants. But innovation is hard, and understand the industry -- in my opinion -- is teetering over the goddamned abyss . NO one -- not fans, not companies, not press -- can afford to see one more major publisher or dev house go face down, and if that means no one can pander to the hard-core anymore -- ever, at all, outside of ultra-small dev houses -- well, better that than no gaming industry.
That's the facts, guys.

No, but his opinion of the job would be "significantly altered." So, why aren't your opinions "significantly altered?"

Ok....I made a bad comparison. Sorry.

But let me try to explain things and put them in perspective. The travelling correspondant who goes to all the big events and gets nice treatment from the developers isn't going to be as wowed after quite a few of them. Hence, he might not really think it's great, or he might take it for granted. hence, opinion altered significantly by being jaded.

As for our community, we are jaded because we want something that is really new and exciting for RPGs. Just like the correspondant, we get bored after seeing the same thing over and over. We want the industry to innovate and deliver role-playing in newer and deeper ways. It's just that the industry doesn't. Instead of making worlds truly reactive and "alive", you pretty much hack up monsters, get experience, and be people's errand boys. It's nothing new. Games like Oblivion do nothing new, exciting, or different to us. It's all the same shit.

See the difference?

 

[OccupatedVoid]

I've seen mudcrabs write better previews than you!

 

[deadairis]

Almost, I'm more interested in the grayer areas.

For example, in a hypothetical scenario where you as an editor of a game mag already decided not to sent a reporter to a game preview event and not only that, you already decided not to cover that game in the this month issue, for whatever reason, and a PR "with a budget to spend" sends an all expenses paid invitation, is it likely or possible that you will, as the editor, reconsider?

Nope.
Everywhere I've worked, that decision would be based on the MOST precious resource -- editorial time. Not whether it was paid or not. It's hard to express how many hours EVERYONE in the journalism side puts in without sounding like a whiner.
I could see a smaller site or a blog changing their mind if they just didn't go because they couldn't afford to go, but I've never worked one inbetween "too small" and "bigger than that."

For a somewhat less gray example, if you found out that one of the reporters in a preview event you are attending is under some kind obligation in his writing, like in the link posted earlier, and furthermore, you found out that that reporter would have not attended this event if the PR person would have not paid for his ticket, duo to the fact that he comes from a relatively small publisher that doesn't have a budget to send someone to every tripleA preview, what would you have done/thought?

And btw, to the extend of MY knowledge, PR departments paying for travel expenses for a preview is almost the sole domain of the gaming industry. (quick edit) Especially for products that are a year away from launch.

It happens a lot in film.
As for the question...a reporter under obligations like that who signed to them is fucking fired. Only positive? You know what we do?
Leave the event.
We'll buy the game and give them the review they deserve.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

On your other point, the industry does innovate, but not at the pace you -- or I think anyone -- wants.

As a whole....maybe.....in RPGs.... no way. I don't care who the hell you think you are....the RPG genre is damn stagnant....actually....it's regressing. Look at the entire sub-genre of "japanese RPGs". Those all have gameplay more primitive than some Ultima titles, Wasteland, and some of the Wizardry titles yet sell all the time and recieve glowing reviews as fgreat role-playing by the gaming journalism industry as a whole. And then Diablo clones and games like Oblivion with gameplay dating back into the late 80's and early 90's also get high marks. And it is the gaming journalists lack of calling bullshit on this travesty that allows companies to get away with it.

But innovation is hard, and understand the industry -- in my opinion -- is teetering over the goddamned abyss .

Yeah...it is. Not because of anything but their own damn stupidity in maintaining some asinine production cost arms race that get's higher and higher every year.

NO one -- not fans, not companies, not press -- can afford to see one more major publisher or dev house go face down, and if that means no one can pander to the hard-core anymore -- ever, at all, outside of ultra-small dev houses -- well, better that than no gaming industry.

See....this makes no sense at all. Not from an economic standpoint, nor a common sense one. Both dictate that a major player going belly up would open up a large part of the market and new firms would move in as long as the demand was there (which it is). Surely even the most basic understanding of a free market would allow one to understand that when a large firm goes belly up in monopolistic competition the whole market does not implode in on itself, new firms just fill in or existing ones expand.

That's the facts, guys.

What the hell?

 

[Sodomy]

, and if that means no one can pander to the hard-core anymore

Spiderweb doesn't seem to be having any problems. TOEE was Atari's best selling game in 2003, and Arcanum probably would have done well had it been released when it was finished, instead of Sierra stupidly waiting for the holiday season when it had already been leaked to the torrents. Hell, had Troika any amount of competency on the tech side of things, instead of releasing buggy messes, they'd guaranteedly still be around; aside form issues with bugs, I have yet to see ANY major complaints about their games, either from the hardcore or not. While not an RPG company, Introspective Games seems to have little problems with riding a niche audience. While a title that wastes 20 million+ in production is probably doomed if they're trying to go for the hardcore dollar, the fact is that you wouldn't NEED to spend that much in production, since graphics wouldn't be an issue at all (witness the fact that people buy the Avernum games).

 

[deadairis]

On your other point, the industry does innovate, but not at the pace you -- or I think anyone -- wants.

As a whole....maybe.....in RPGs.... no way. I don't care who the hell you think you are....the RPG genre is damn stagnant....actually....it's regressing. Look at the entire sub-genre of "japanese RPGs". Those all have gameplay more primitive than some Ultima titles, Wasteland, and some of the Wizardry titles yet sell all the time and recieve glowing reviews as fgreat role-playing by the gaming journalism industry as a whole. And then Diablo clones and games like Oblivion with gameplay dating back into the late 80's and early 90's also get high marks. And it is the gaming journalists lack of calling bullshit on this travesty that allows companies to get away with it.

But innovation is hard, and understand the industry -- in my opinion -- is teetering over the goddamned abyss .

Yeah...it is. Not because of anything but their own damn stupidity in maintaining some asinine production cost arms race that get's higher and higher every year.

NO one -- not fans, not companies, not press -- can afford to see one more major publisher or dev house go face down, and if that means no one can pander to the hard-core anymore -- ever, at all, outside of ultra-small dev houses -- well, better that than no gaming industry.

See....this makes no sense at all. Not from an economic standpoint, nor a common sense one. Both dictate that a major player going belly up would open up a large part of the market and new firms would move in as long as the demand was there (which it is). Surely even the most basic understanding of a free market would allow one to understand that when a large firm goes belly up in monopolistic competition the whole market does not implode in on itself, new firms just fill in or existing ones expand.

That's the facts, guys.

What the hell?

The most basic economic understand also takes into account that some forms of economy simply collapse. Or did you miss ET?
Sorry if the closer was too brief. Is the lack of innovation because of a tech arms race? Lack of faith in buyers? Magic witches brew?
It doesn't matter, because the purse-string guys don't care.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Yes. Using someone elses bad behaviour as an excuse for your own isn't "a good thing". Downward spiral of humanity and all that. It's an admittance that you have no good reason to do it yourself. "Everyone else is corrupt / doing it, so why shouldn't I too?". Its avoiding the issue rather than making that moral / ethical decision for yourself.

Well, by now it's probably clear that I did make that decision for myself. Not to be influenced by the surroundings but to watch what I've come to watch with open eyes and a sound, critical mind.

So why try and defend it?

I suppose what I'm really asking now is: How come we get that and the mainstream don't?

Maybe just different tastes? Easy as that? I can't think of anything else myself.

So how come, two years ago, when the Codex was pissing on Oblivion because all the previews were focussed on the crap, we were "wrong" and Oblivion was the second coming of Jesus. How come, on release day, most of the reviews gave it 10/10 with barely a mention of the flaws? And how come, 1 year on, everyone ("the mainstream") finally admits that yes, level scaling was a dumb idea, just like some of us at the Codex said two years ago when we first heard about it?

I am under the impression that I did answer any question to my best knowledge and without evading. Where that has not been the case, I'd be happy to do so. Therefore, I do take offense in being labeled a degenerate who's not even finished school. As much as you take offense in Rausch's "may they all die" stuff.

Where did I ever say I personally took offense?

So, I'll chime in: You're wrong, robur is right.
Honestly, doing my best to talk with you guys, and it's entertaining, but damned difficult to get past the fight-picking and ignorance.

Don't believe me?

Nope.

How much fresh blood comes here and stays?

I like this tactic. More ignorant questions with no facts to back them up. A question which we'll now answer and prove you wrong on before you ignore that and keep repeating it again anyway. It gets a bit tiring with you, hence the tag. Once again though, we'll answer you because that's what we do.

Visitors have been going up ever since we founded the site. For more about freshblood, view our memberlist (NOTE: I even deleted all the spambots and 0 posting members a few months back when we locked down and prevented them from registering). We had a large influx after Oblivion was released. Mainly from the "oh God, I can't believe I liked this game" crowd. Oddly enough, that happened after NWN and KOTOR too. Odd that. Seems that every second coming of Jesus release, the Codex membership grows with jaded RPG gamers.

How many journalists and devs turn here for insight, like (ugh) GAF?
And how many come, maybe once, and leave in disgust shortly thereafter?
There's "harsh" and there's pointless.

David Gaider is an odd pop-in. Most of Troika would pop by ocassionally before they folded. Whomever Mr Smiley is at Bethesda (Emil?) before he got banned because the Codex dished Oblivion. We're not as big as some of the other sites because we cater for a very specific audience (PC RPGs) but people from the industry have come here and talked. A lot of indie developers hang around too. Section 8 used to be in the industry.

EDIT: Of course, everyone got all reasonable in this thread when I fired this off. Why can't you guys be like that all the time?

Because you're a moron. No really, you are. See those questions above? See how you asked them with such arrogance, ignorance and spite? See how you did that in order to win an internet point? See how I just proved all of them wrong? See how you just lost? See how stupid you look?

Nope. Bet you're eyes have glazed over again, haven't they? $10 says you'll come back with more asinine questions though because that's what you do. Oh and rest assured, we'll be wrong somehow because of some logic defying reasoning which you can't explain.

 

[deadairis]

, and if that means no one can pander to the hard-core anymore

Spiderweb doesn't seem to be having any problems. TOEE was Atari's best selling game in 2003, and Arcanum probably would have done well had it been released when it was finished, instead of Sierra stupidly waiting for the holiday season when it had already been leaked to the torrents. Hell, had Troika any amount of competency on the tech side of things, instead of releasing buggy messes, they'd guaranteedly still be around; aside form issues with bugs, I have yet to see ANY major complaints about their games, either from the hardcore or not. While not an RPG company, Introspective Games seems to have little problems with riding a niche audience. While a title that wastes 20 million+ in production is probably doomed if they're trying to go for the hardcore dollar, the fact is that you wouldn't NEED to spend that much in production, since graphics wouldn't be an issue at all (witness the fact that people buy the Avernum games).

But, to Bethesda, that money isn't wasted. No more than buying in when you step to a poker table is -- although with similiar risks.

Spiderweb is a great company, but they're never going to get the Fallout license.
They make -- as I mentioned in one of these threads -- casual games.

The companies are aiming for different markets, and for all the "woulda coulda shouldas," the fact is that EDIT: Obsidian dumped a KOTOR 2 that was eh on the market, TOEE was damn near unplayable at launch (not that I didn't love it, flawed monster child that it was), and Arcanum didn't do well.
The people funding the major market games just look at the bottom line.

 

[Bradylama]

Remember when Black Isle went under? It's a miracle that the gaming industry kept soldiering on after that catastrophe...

The companies are aiming for different markets, and for all the "woulda coulda shouldas," the fact is that Troika dumped a KOTOR 2 that was eh on the market

Uh, Obsidian put out KOTOR 2.

Also, shouldn't "The Bottom Line" be making a positive return on an investment? Did Troika's games not accomplish this?

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

The most basic economic understand also takes into account that some forms of economy simply collapse. Or did you miss ET?

Yeah....but one company falling isn't going to make that happen unless it's a monopoly or some sort of cartel that needs collusion to survive. The videogame industry is monopolistically competitive, so that's not hapening.

Is the lack of innovation because of a tech arms race?

Yeah....shiny doesn't mean innovation.

Lack of faith in buyers? Magic witches brew?
It doesn't matter, because the purse-string guys don't care.

Huh....that has just about no relevance to the topic at hand. I also love how you dodged the other comments I made. Probably hit a little too close to home, eh? I mean......your industry has given high marks to games with such derivitive gameplay it isn't funny. Ah well....it's like expecting a politician to keep their promises.

 

[Sodomy]

, and if that means no one can pander to the hard-core anymore

Spiderweb doesn't seem to be having any problems. TOEE was Atari's best selling game in 2003, and Arcanum probably would have done well had it been released when it was finished, instead of Sierra stupidly waiting for the holiday season when it had already been leaked to the torrents. Hell, had Troika any amount of competency on the tech side of things, instead of releasing buggy messes, they'd guaranteedly still be around; aside form issues with bugs, I have yet to see ANY major complaints about their games, either from the hardcore or not. While not an RPG company, Introspective Games seems to have little problems with riding a niche audience. While a title that wastes 20 million+ in production is probably doomed if they're trying to go for the hardcore dollar, the fact is that you wouldn't NEED to spend that much in production, since graphics wouldn't be an issue at all (witness the fact that people buy the Avernum games).

But, to Bethesda, that money isn't wasted. No more than buying in when you step to a poker table is -- although with similiar risks.

Spiderweb is a great company, but they're never going to get the Fallout license.
They make -- as I mentioned in one of these threads -- casual games.

The companies are aiming for different markets, and for all the "woulda coulda shouldas," the fact is that Troika dumped a KOTOR 2 that was eh on the market, TOEE was damn near unplayable at launch (not that I didn't love it, flawed monster child that it was), and Arcanum didn't do well.
The people funding the major market games just look at the bottom line.

Spiderweb makes casual games? I'm not certain how you mean that; if you mean games for the "casual gamer", are you out of your mind? Their games are easily among the most difficult RPGs released today, and they don't have the "OMG GRAFIX" hook.

Arcanum likely would have done well, again, had it not been for Sierra's stupidity as I outlined in my post above. I can't think of a single other game where most of the people interested in the game had already beaten it, likely multiple times, before the game was ever released.

I notice you just breezed right over how Introspective proves you wrong. So, I ask- what is your response to the fact that Introspective has no problems riding a niche market while maintaining a studio that isn't "tiny"?

 

[deadairis]

Remember when Black Isle went under? It's a miracle that the gaming industry kept soldiering on after that catastrophe...

No, it was a very different market.
Sony's gaming group wasn't wildly in the red.
There wasn't a real feeling that developers can't keep up with the costs, but had to keep trying or fall behind.
EVERY dev wasn't willing to go on record saying that "rising development costs" were the biggest issue of the day -- because they weren't. Now, any dev I ask will go on record with that.
And, sadly, black isle wasn't a major market force. It wasn't diversified. It was a boutique shop that closed -- not a major player folding.

The companies are aiming for different markets, and for all the "woulda coulda shouldas," the fact is that Troika dumped a KOTOR 2 that was eh on the market

Uh, Obsidian put out KOTOR 2.

Doh! Yes they did.
The point stand, but replace Troika with Obsidian : )

Also, shouldn't "The Bottom Line" be making a positive return on an investment? Did Troika's games not accomplish this?

From the wiki:
"In early 2005, Troika ran into financial trouble, and was eventually forced to lay off all its staff and begin selling assets"
Sooo...no.

 

[Sodomy]

EVERY dev wasn't willing to go on record saying that "rising development costs" were the biggest issue of the day -- because they weren't. Now, any dev I ask will go on record with that.

And, instead of trying to rectify this, they go and do everything they can to push them higher by focusing on graphics instead of gameplay! Why? Because, obviously, focusing on graphics is how you're profitable, even when it's causing you to go under.

Doh! Yes they did.
The point stand, but replace Troika with Obsidian : )

Actually, no, now you have no point, since Obsidian is still going strong and making mainstreamed RPGs.

 

[Bradylama]

No, it was a very different market.
Sony's gaming group wasn't wildly in the red.
There wasn't a real feeling that developers can't keep up with the costs, but had to keep trying or fall behind.
EVERY dev wasn't willing to go on record saying that "rising development costs" were the biggest issue of the day -- because they weren't. Now, any dev I ask will go on record with that.
And, sadly, black isle wasn't a major market force. It wasn't diversified. It was a boutique shop that closed -- not a major player folding.

No, but Interplay was a major player, and Black Isle going under was a result of Interplay's downward spiral. Now Herve owes tons of people, yet somehow the industry has been able to deal with Interplay going under.

If Sony's entertainment division tanked you know who would fill the void? Microsoft and Nintendo.

From the wiki:
"In early 2005, Troika ran into financial trouble, and was eventually forced to lay off all its staff and begin selling assets"
Sooo...no.

A couple things: never quote wikipedia. The other thing: Troika layed off staff because they weren't receiving funding, since they had no publisher. This is because the game they were making could not be sold, not to consumers, but to financial backers.

You're drawing a line that doesn't exist, but I guess you've been studying other sectors of the industry.

 

[deadairis]

Ah, nice to meet you all, but the I'm honestly not going to stick around with a slam on my profession as a custom tag.
Enjoy explaining to yourselves how it was all someone elses fault; I'll be reading and checking my messages.

 

[Sodomy]

THE BIG MEAN INTERWEB PEOPLE CALLED ME ON IT WHEN I DODGED EVERY ARGUMENT PRESENTED TO ME! I'M GOING HOME!

 

[Bradylama]

So wait, you made an "I'm taking my ball and leaving" post for both threads? What a winner.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Also, shouldn't "The Bottom Line" be making a positive return on an investment? Did Troika's games not accomplish this?

I'd have to check but I think Troika's games paid for themselves and that was about it. Their major problem was finding a publisher to fund their next game. That's not to say Troika did well. I'm just saying they didn't collapse under a wall of debt and have to declare bankruptcy. They couldn't find someone to fund the games they wanted to make (due to lacklustre sales of their previous games), so they had to fold. The Escapist had an article about it.

Ah, nice to meet you all, but the I'm honestly not going to stick around with a slam on my profession as a custom tag.
Enjoy explaining to yourselves how it was all someone elses fault; I'll be reading and checking my messages.

Please don't take robur with you. He at least doesn't keep dodging the issues.

Psst. Everybody be ready to say "I thought you said you were leaving?" when he inevitably comes back.

 

[robur]

Yes. Using someone elses bad behaviour as an excuse for your own isn't "a good thing". Downward spiral of humanity and all that. It's an admittance that you have no good reason to do it yourself. "Everyone else is corrupt / doing it, so why shouldn't I too?". Its avoiding the issue rather than making that moral / ethical decision for yourself.

Well, by now it's probably clear that I did make that decision for myself. Not to be influenced by the surroundings but to watch what I've come to watch with open eyes and a sound, critical mind.

So why try and defend it?

Now you got me very confused. Because I was asked to in here? Directly and indirectly? Many times? Or did I completely misunderstand that branch of the thread?

So how come, two years ago, when the Codex was pissing on Oblivion because all the previews were focussed on the crap, we were "wrong" and Oblivion was the second coming of Jesus. How come, on release day, most of the reviews gave it 10/10 with barely a mention of the flaws? And how come, 1 year on, everyone ("the mainstream") finally admits that yes, level scaling was a dumb idea, just like some of us at the Codex said two years ago when we first heard about it?

I can't say anything to that really. I stumbled upon the codex a few weeks ago. I wrote a preview on Oblivion, true enough, found that the *idea* of level scaling sounded good (see my discourse with Edward about that part in another thread) but didn't get to actually play the game at the preview visit that I did all by myself. I wrote that in my preview, too. And we did pay our own flight ticket for that visit, if I remember correctly. Now, I can't allow myself a comment about Oblivion because I simply didn't play it enough. I spent large amounts of my RPG time in 05/06 playing World of WarCraft. Sad, but true.

I am under the impression that I did answer any question to my best knowledge and without evading. Where that has not been the case, I'd be happy to do so. Therefore, I do take offense in being labeled a degenerate who's not even finished school. As much as you take offense in Rausch's "may they all die" stuff.

Where did I ever say I personally took offense?

Grr, not you.

 

[kris]

I don't think we wonder, since we're both part of the fallout fan community.
Hell, so is Allen.
But I think that we both took it with the grain of salt indicated.
I mean, he called the community bad. The community responded by, what did I see here and elsewhere:
Calling for his sodomization with a red hot poker;
Calling for his murder; and
Calling for his children's retro-active abortion -- ie, murder.
At what point is he name calling and at what point is he making an observation that the community is responding to?

This is classic journalist stuff, clearly you show you re working on that account. I rechecked the first two pages on that thread in this forum and I didn't see one single notice of anyone wishing him harm. So like a true journalist you have digged deep and found the correct quotes to make this sounds as horrible as it is not. He was on the other hand the guy that went out of line, where the vast majority just laughed him off. that is taking into mind that no other place in the world is it easier to flame and find people flaming someone else than on an internet discussion board.