Interview Vince D. Weller Speaks Truth With RPGNuke

[hiver]

Excellent interview. as always.

 

[Volourn]

"Time to re-evaluate your AoD demo impressions "

Why?

 

[Vault Dweller]

What's the story with Shadowrun's boxed copy?

Just a little hyperbole on my part. I was disappointed in the SR boxed edition as it had no manual and was "small" and cheaply made. I am a collector of cRPGs (and other games) from days gone by. The new wave of KS games promising a return to those boxed days of yore has stirred my collecting bug once more. Nothing like unfolding a map and looking at a new world or flipping through a thick manual describing the adventure that awaits.

Indeed. I have the same appreciation of a good manual as you, so when we shopped around, we were looking for a high quality box, a map, 200-page spiral-bound manual with history, lore, concept art, and such. Something that people would enjoy reading and displaying.

 

[Vault Dweller]

"In comparison, Commander Shepard has all the depth of a cardboard cutout and the story is remarkably idiotic."

One can say the same about your opinion which is shallow, pathetic, and has absolute no depth or no sense of reality or the truth. Shepard is as 'deep' as TNO. To say otherwise is to be ignorant, retarted, foolish.

Oh please. TNO had an interesting backstory. Exploring his memories, discovering how he was connected to the party members, finding what the other incarnations did was one of the best aspects of the game. What did Shepard have? Nothing. He was a generic and laughable 'badass', the best of the best and all this shite. He was there to kick ass and make "tough" decisions because he was the best of the best. And the story has gotten dumber and dumber with every game, going 'full retard' in ME3.

 

[hiver]

i didnt think that even required an answer.

volly, that was very, very disappointing. i mean really.

 

[J_C]

LOL, and I always thought that Vince D. Weller was VD's real name. I said it to myself once, wow, that name is so similar to Vault Dweller. :D

 

[Serious_Business]

To say otherwise is to be ignorant, retarted, foolish.

 

[abnaxus]

 

[Volourn]

VD making up shit as usual proving, yet again, he is as shallow as ever.

 

[FrancoTAU]

If you don't need the money than why would you even do a Kickstarter? I guess if you thought giving up the extra 10% for the KS fee was worth the extra publicity? I guess Vince doesn't think it's worth it, so I'm not sure why people are critical.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I prefer the old-school way of doing thing — prove yourself first, deliver something playable, then ask for money.

When taken out of context, sounds reasonable. Would even agree. Sometimes in some cases it's a right way. But when the context includes VD talking about "proving first" and "delivering something playable"... oh, the irony.

Still butthurt? Surely, there is some kinda cream that can help you.

We did release two demos. A thousand people liked them enough and found them to be playable enough to pre-order the game, paying $30 on average. So, yes, we did prove ourselves and we did deliver something playable. It's an undeniable fact and your low opinion of the game doesn't change it.

VD ranting about someone not listening to feedback. Now that's some irony. So big it has it's own gravity.

First, I didn't, but since you were dying to bring it up, I'll be happy to clarify it for you.

We do listen to feedback. It's another undeniable fact. We spent more than 6 months tweaking the game based on the feedback received and released 3 versions, each bringing the game closer to what our core audience wanted to see. So, when you say that we don't listen to feedback, you mean that we don't listen to you, which is a different story.

 

[Major_Blackhart]

Good interview VD.
Hope to see the game soon!

 

[Vault Dweller]

Thanks, Major.

If you don't need the money than why would you even do a Kickstarter? I guess if you thought giving up the extra 10% for the KS fee was worth the extra publicity? I guess Vince doesn't think it's worth it, so I'm not sure why people are critical.

You pay 10% anyway, as it's a standard payment transaction fee.

 

[Mastermind]

If you don't need the money than why would you even do a Kickstarter?

Advertisement.

 

[stony3k]

If you don't need the money than why would you even do a Kickstarter?

Advertisement.

This. KS can get you a lot of eyes that wouldn't have even heard of your game before. I completely understand where VD's distaste for phony marketing comes from, but he's missing an opportunity here. Oh well, hopefully Steam early access will make up for it.

 

[Infinitron]

If you don't need the money than why would you even do a Kickstarter?

Advertisement.

This. KS can get you a lot of eyes that wouldn't have even heard of your game before. I completely understand where VD's distaste for phony marketing comes from, but he's missing an opportunity here. Oh well, hopefully Steam early access will make up for it.

It'll more than make up for it, especially if he can also get some press for the Early Access release. An RPS post or something.

 

[Delterius]

We did release a sequel. Millions of people liked it enough and found it to be playable enough to buy the game, paying $60. So, yes, we did prove ourselves and we did deliver something playable. It's an undeniable fact and your low opinion of the game doesn't change it.

Sorry but I couldn't help but picture this as Bethesda's answer to one of your reviews.

Soon enough I should be able to pre-order AoD, provided not yet another textbook becomes mandatory in my life so keep up the good work.

 

[hiver]

Its not even close, dont be daft....

-edit-
- ahh, zo. proceed.

 

[Vault Dweller]

We did release a sequel. Millions of people liked it enough and found it to be playable enough to buy the game, paying $60. So, yes, we did prove ourselves and we did deliver something playable. It's an undeniable fact and your low opinion of the game doesn't change it.

Sorry but I couldn't help but picture this as Bethesda's answer to one of your reviews.

To a certain degree, it's true. When I review games, I offer my opinion for people who have similar tastes, not the ultimate judgement. I'm well aware that AoD isn't for everyone and that some people are convinced that it's a bad game. A Bioware fan, for example, might write a negative review and have a point there because the game doesn't deliver for him.

As for Bethesda, what rubs many people the wrong way is that they fucked their core audience twice. Morrowind was a departure from the design established in Daggerfall and Oblivion was a huge departure from the design established in Morrowind. So, we went from a top 10 RPG with depth and ambition to shallow 'moar sales' shit.

 

[Roguey]

Josh Sawyer and his former Obsidian pal Patrick K Mills can and have argued that Oblivion fixed the inherent flaws in Morrowind's gameplay concepts. Daggerfall nearly made 'em bankrupt so to hell with that audience.

 

[Zeriel]

Yeah, I don't think anyone questions developers/publishers right to make a profit. We just question their choice to bullshit that really "this is an improvement, guys! These are the best games ever made!".

 

[Infinitron]

Daggerfall nearly made 'em bankrupt so to hell with that audience.

A word of note: you should be careful about making those kinds of statements about games from the 90s. Before widespread Internet, effective marketing and digital distribution, it was much easier for a good, deserving game to fail in the marketplace.

You don't really hear that kind of thing anymore nowadays - generally speaking, PC or console games that are actually good and are made on a reasonable budget almost always find an audience and at least break even. Take System Shock 2, for instance - a commercial flop when it was released in 1999. Can you imagine an EA-published game _that was actually good_ failing like that nowadays?

 

[Vault Dweller]

Josh Sawyer and his former Obsidian pal Patrick K Mills can and have argued that Oblivion fixed the inherent flaws in Morrowind's gameplay concepts.

Then the inheritor flaws must have been depth and complexity. And fix them they did.

Daggerfall nearly made 'em bankrupt so to hell with that audience.

And Morrowind made them a successful company swimming in money, which didn't stop them from ditching that audience and flirting with retards.

 

[Roguey]

A word of note: you should be careful about making those kinds of statements about games from the 90s. Before widespread Internet, effective marketing and digital distribution, it was much easier for a good, deserving game to fail in the marketplace.

As I understand it, Daggerfall was bug central and barely working.

Josh Sawyer and his former Obsidian pal Patrick K Mills can and have argued that Oblivion fixed the inherent flaws in Morrowind's gameplay concepts.

Then the inheritor flaws must have been depth and complexity. And fix them they did.

Daggerfall nearly made 'em bankrupt so to hell with that audience.

And Morrowind made them a successful company swimming in money, which didn't stop them from ditching that audience and flirting with retards.

A rare opportunity to paste Patrick quotes instead of my usual suspect.

Blockbusters like Oblivion may seem to come out of no where, but anyone familiar with Bethesda's history knows that Oblivion comes after a long line of hugely ambitious games that fell short in important areas.
...

From a gameplay and overall quality point of view Oblivion was pretty shitty

This is basically untrue. While Oblivion had a lot of system design issues, their terrible character building and leveling system, for one, overall it was a solid experience. It was well engineered and scoped and while not free of bugs it was polished enough to sell a bajillion copies, and if there is one thing that gamers react to more than design or art direction or story or sound or anything else it is overall polish. Shooting a guy with 5000 arrows before he dies may be pretty shitty, but I'll be damned if those arrows didn't skewer him entertainingly.
...

No. At least, not in that order of priority. Pedigree first, polish second. Dragon Age 2, anyone?

This is true. Keep in mind though, that prior to Oblivion Bethesda only had any pedigree with hardcore gamers, but more casual gamers responded to it in droves anyway. I think we can rule out Oblivion's massive popularity as being a product of Morrowind's smashing popular success.

The game was well marketed as well, but again, marketing isn't shit when the product sucks. Particularly if you don't have a brand that promises enough first-day purchases to make you a hit even if you blow.

The game was, in many ways, a step back from the design (particularly creative design) of Morrowind, but in many ways it was a lot better. You know what precisely zero people liked about Morrowind? Swinging your axe at a guy and being told you missed based on a hidden die roll.

Anyway, I'm not here to defend Oblivion as a paragon of excellent game design, but it did mark the point in Bethesda's production where scope, ambition, and production lined up perfectly and matched the market's desires in such a way as to produce a hit that helped build a brand.

EDIT: In my opinion it's actually critics and hardcore gamers who respond more to pedigree than your average gamer. For years no one but the most serious gamer coudl actually tell you the difference between Bioware and Black Isle and routinely confused the two. People still do. I know lots of (casual adequateness) people who played New Vegas and not one of them knows what Obsidian is. On the other hand, Bioware could probably release a turd in a box and critics would give it high 8s and low 9s while the majority of the gaming comunity responds with apathy (unless the turd has Dragon Age or Mass Effect written on the box, in which case week 1 sales will be good, but that's it).

Each BGS game since Morrowind has had significantly greater sales than the one before it, and it takes talent (both marketing and delivering to the masses what they want) to keep up that kind of momentum. Otherwise everyone would be doing it. But no, it's pretty much just them making these leaps.

 

[hiver]

Since when is licking someones ass flirting?

When I review games, I offer my opinion for people who have similar tastes, not the ultimate judgement.

Really? So there is no actual objectively strong flaws in obliblion? or mas deffect series or DA2? Its all a matter of perspective?

A Bioware fan, for example, might write a negative review and have a point there because the game doesn't deliver for him.

What the point that may be? How can someone have a "point" when reviewing a game of other genre then he likes then being negative about it because it doesnt play as a game that he likes?

isnt the point that such a hypothetical person is obviously a moron? or just ignorant.
Isnt the only point that there could be some actual flaw of AoD he managed to find?