Game News Dragon Age website coming SOONish!

[Volourn]

"Bioware games that include saving the world:
BG1, BG2, BG2: ToB, NWN1, NWN1 XP1, NWN1 XP2, KotOR1, JE, ME"

BG1 - No.

BG2 - No.

TOB - No.

NWN1 - No.

SOU - No.

HOTU - No.

KOTOR - No.

JE - No.

ME - No.


You lose.

 

[Solohk]

Don't you think, mr. Gaider, that Bioware games are a little bit too cheesy and something must be changed?

Nope.

I like saving the world.

But, gee... it's just a shot in the dark here, but I'm guessing you don't?

I do too. However, I also like stories that have a much smaller scope. It could be something as simple as someone trying to survive. I can dig Asimov's Foundation books (save the Empire!), as well as Matheson's I am Legend (Try and live through the day and not go crazy).

I think the problem is that everyone is making games about saving the world/galaxy/universe, but no one is making games with a smaller scope. My game library is overflowing with save the world games. Give me a game about a war, or politics and backstabbing, or something personal, or just as simple as trying to make sense of a bad situation and live through it. Someone? Please?

That said, I remain cautiously optimistic about DA, and hope to see some good info soon!

 

[Claw]

But, gee... it's just a shot in the dark here, but I'm guessing you don't?

I want to enslave the world with necromancy! Nations, bah.

 

[sportforredneck]

KOTOR - No.
ME - No.

If only he had changed them to galaxy.

 

[Dgaider]

I think the problem is that everyone is making games about saving the world/galaxy/universe, but no one is making games with a smaller scope. My game library is overflowing with save the world games. Give me a game about a war, or politics and backstabbing, or something personal, or just as simple as trying to make sense of a bad situation and live through it. Someone? Please?

Oh, I don't doubt that you could make a game just fine with a smaller scope. Saying that a game must be crap because it doesn't supply the jaded with sufficient novelty, however? I don't buy that. The difference between cliche and archetype, I find, lies in how well it is presented... I'd rather have a well-done game with a familiar premise than a poorly-done game that tried too hard just to be oh-so-different.

Of course, some people here are completely certain a Bioware game is going to be crap no matter what -- so be it. You'll have to forgive me if I don't go out of my way to try and convince someone who states every chance they get that they weren't planning on buying the game anyway.

That said, I remain cautiously optimistic about DA, and hope to see some good info soon!

I hope you'll be pleased by what's coming up shortly. I know it's not the ideal that the Codex would be hoping for, but like I said before I think it swings further in that direction that we have in a long time.

 

[Texas Red]

Real world example being that Lenin died, the Soviet Union still remained, hell, Stalin made it worse.

Um no, Stalin turned an agricultura, battered nation in to an industrial power in remarkable time in order to withstand the might of Germany. He saved the Slavs from genocide and slavery. Nazi collaborators, russophobes and all other rubbish just had to be eliminated by thousands, often without a trial, because a new super war was just a glance away.

For someone who believes (humorously) in Jewish conspiracies, you sure can't dismiss the retarded American propaganda about the lulz Stalin worshiped the devil.

 

[J1M]

Don't you think, mr. Gaider, that Bioware games are a little bit too cheesy and something must be changed?

Nope.

I like saving the world.

But, gee... it's just a shot in the dark here, but I'm guessing you don't?

You sound like Pete Hines.

"We are definately kinda-changing level scaling for FO3, but for Oblivion the system worked perfectly and we have never made a single mistake, especially not one involving horse armor."

It's funny you mention the stereotype vs. archtype thing. Is that a meme at Bioware? It's not working. Every time I have heard you guys say that about a game it is full of stereotypes.

 

[Lumpy]

I'd rather have a well-done game with a familiar premise than a poorly-done game that tried too hard just to be oh-so-different.

Because as we all know, all games that try to be different end up being poorly done pieces of shit.
Give me a break, it's only easier to make a cliche game than an original one when you're a shitty writer who can't create anything new.

Of course, some people here are completely certain a Bioware game is going to be crap no matter what

With that attitude - yes, it will.

 

[Castanova]

It's tough to sound like Pete Hines without suffering a severe blow to the head first.

 

[sabishii]

Don't you think, mr. Gaider, that Bioware games are a little bit too cheesy and something must be changed?

Nope.

I like saving the world.

But, gee... it's just a shot in the dark here, but I'm guessing you don't?

And you've made nine games with that same basic plot point. If you made two/three games about "saving the world" I'm sure people wouldn't mind. Even the best writers don't write the same story nine times over. But nine times and you don't have the courage to try something new? I would guess that most of the people here do indeed like saving the world, but you have to acknowledge that encountering a new and refreshing idea can be an enlightening experience in itself.

I'd rather have a well-done game with a familiar premise than a poorly-done game that tried too hard just to be oh-so-different.

So you're saying that if Bioware tries to be "oh-so-different" then you inevitably make a "poorly-done game"? I'm not even trying to bash you here (just your fake mutual exclusivity), as I'm sure you and Bioware can make a well-done game without a familiar premise.

 

[Lumpy]

Was Baldur's Gate 2 about saving the world anyway? Wasn't it about saving your soul?

 

[Dgaider]

I'm not even trying to bash you here (just your fake mutual exclusivity), as I'm sure you and Bioware can make a well-done game without a familiar premise.

And what about the other side of that mutual exclusivity? If it is a familiar premise then it must be crap? THAT idea you have no problem with, I assume. I have no problem with the idea that we could do a great game without said familiar premise -- I reject the notion, however, that this is all there is to a great game.

But as I said before, there's very little point in arguing with those who are already convinced. Every thread this sort of thing comes up you have the exact same posters who are far too eager to drool all over themselves with invective to actually say anything original.

Have fun with that, I guess.

 

[Solohk]

Give me a break, it's only easier to make a cliche game than an original one when you're a shitty writer who can't create anything new.

I'd rather have a well-done game with a familiar premise than a poorly-done game that tried too hard just to be oh-so-different.

So you're saying that if Bioware tries to be "oh-so-different" then you inevitably make a "poorly-done game"? I'm not even trying to bash you here (just your fake mutual exclusivity), as I'm sure you and Bioware can make a well-done game without a familiar premise.

Huh? Maybe I'm crazy, but I didn't read David's quote as "you can only have one or the other!" *laughs and twirls mustache*, but more as if he had to choose between cliched and well executed versus different and poorly executed, he would take the former.

 

[Gromnir]

I'd rather have a well-done game with a familiar premise than a poorly-done game that tried too hard just to be oh-so-different.

Because as we all know, all games that try to be different end up being poorly done pieces of shit.
Give me a break, it's only easier to make a cliche game than an original one when you're a shitty writer who can't create anything new.

your examples is noteworthy.

a game not yet released... as far is Gromnir is aware. other than at codex decadence is not quite so well known, in spite of vd's and codexian promotion.

a game that sold ok (at best) but had one of the all time crappy endings. am not sure if kotor2 would make a list o' How-To-Do-A-Game-Right in many places. half the joinables was terrible written, but overall we did enjoy it... probably more than kotor. too bad the end leaves a bad taste. even so, in spite of what chris a said, kotor2 were clearly epic scale... and ravel were better in ps:t than she were in kotor2.

a game that sold crap. took more than two years and multiple discounted releases for ps:t to eventually get in black. if it makes more sense to leave your money in a mutual fund, then your game development investment were a waste. sure, Gromnir liked ps:t lots, but it had flaws, and were buggy as windows vista, and it sold poorly.

HA! Good Fun!

 

[sportforredneck]

Um no, Stalin turned an agricultura, battered nation in to an industrial power in remarkable time in order to withstand the might of Germany. He saved the Slavs from genocide and slavery. Nazi collaborators, russophobes and all other rubbish just had to be eliminated by thousands, often without a trial, because a new super war was just a glance away.

Except he went insane and was killing anyone in his way, and died before he could've put through another holocaust of Jews. He made it better in someways, but in the end it still ended up the shit hole it remains today.

For someone who believes (humorously) in Jewish conspiracies, you sure can't dismiss the retarded American propaganda about the lulz Stalin worshiped the devil.

I didn't say he worshiped the Devil, he was just a big fan of purges.

 

[Lumpy]

I'm not even trying to bash you here (just your fake mutual exclusivity), as I'm sure you and Bioware can make a well-done game without a familiar premise.

And what about the other side of that mutual exclusivity? If it is a familiar premise then it must be crap? THAT idea you have no problem with, I assume. I have no problem with the idea that we could do a great game without said familiar premise -- I reject the notion, however, that this is all there is to a great game.

Of course that's not all there is to a great game. It's an essential component of a great game.
Okay, maybe an AoD-like game with a generic setting and story might still end up being great, since the main design feature are the choices of consequences, which aren't entirely related to story and design. However, if the game is story based, such as every fucking Bioware game, then that story had better be interesting and original, or the game will inevitably be a piece of shit.

 

[J1M]

I'm not even trying to bash you here (just your fake mutual exclusivity), as I'm sure you and Bioware can make a well-done game without a familiar premise.

And what about the other side of that mutual exclusivity? If it is a familiar premise then it must be crap? THAT idea you have no problem with, I assume. I have no problem with the idea that we could do a great game without said familiar premise -- I reject the notion, however, that this is all there is to a great game.

But as I said before, there's very little point in arguing with those who are already convinced. Every thread this sort of thing comes up you have the exact same posters who are far too eager to drool all over themselves with invective to actually say anything original.

Have fun with that, I guess.

I must say reading your posts sheds a lot of light on the black/white nature of morality in Bioware games. You seem to be only able to think of things in terms of polar-opposite extremes.

 

[Lumpy]

Huh? Maybe I'm crazy, but I didn't read David's quote as "you can only have one or the other!" *laughs and twirls mustache*, but more as if he had to choose between cliched and well executed versus different and poorly executed, he would take the former.

No shit? Everyone would prefer a well executed game rather than a poorly executed one. But a cliche setting and story is bad execution from the start, so a well executed cliche game is little more than an oxymoron.

 

[J1M]

Um no, Stalin turned an agricultura, battered nation in to an industrial power in remarkable time in order to withstand the might of Germany. He saved the Slavs from genocide and slavery. Nazi collaborators, russophobes and all other rubbish just had to be eliminated by thousands, often without a trial, because a new super war was just a glance away.

Except he went insane and was killing anyone in his way, and died before he could've put through another holocaust of Jews. He made it better in someways, but in the end it still ended up the shit hole it remains today.

For someone who believes (humorously) in Jewish conspiracies, you sure can't dismiss the retarded American propaganda about the lulz Stalin worshiped the devil.

I didn't say he worshiped the Devil, he was just a big fan of purges.

Yeah, who cares about the 20 million Russians that died, as long as the jews were ok, right?

 

[Lumpy]

I'd rather have a well-done game with a familiar premise than a poorly-done game that tried too hard just to be oh-so-different.

Because as we all know, all games that try to be different end up being poorly done pieces of shit.
Give me a break, it's only easier to make a cliche game than an original one when you're a shitty writer who can't create anything new.

your examples is noteworthy.

a game not yet released... as far is Gromnir is aware. other than at codex decadence is not quite so well known, in spite of vd's and codexian promotion.

a game that sold ok (at best) but had one of the all time crappy endings. am not sure if kotor2 would make a list o' How-To-Do-A-Game-Right in many places. half the joinables was terrible written, but overall we did enjoy it... probably more than kotor. too bad the end leaves a bad taste. even so, in spite of what chris a said, kotor2 were clearly epic scale... and ravel were better in ps:t than she were in kotor2.

a game that sold crap. took more than two years and multiple discounted releases for ps:t to eventually get in black. if it makes more sense to leave your money in a mutual fund, then your game development investment were a waste. sure, Gromnir liked ps:t lots, but it had flaws, and were buggy as windows vista, and it sold poorly.

HA! Good Fun!

So a small-time game, an unfinished due to deadlines game, and a game that sold poorly. What the fuck does that have to do with what D Gaider said? He implied that original games will be shit.
Oh, he didn't mean that? Then what did he mean?
I'd rather have good X than bad Y. Either he's saying that Y is bad no matter what, or that he personally only capable of producing either good X or bad Y. None of which put him in a very positive light.

Hey Mr. Gaider, I'd rather have a fresh loaf of bread than an old, rotten steak. I guess I'll only eat bread from now on.

 

[Solohk]

No shit? Everyone would prefer a well executed game rather than a poorly executed one. But a cliche setting and story is bad execution from the start, so a well executed cliche game is little more than an oxymoron.

I disagree. While the ultimate would be strong gameplay and a strong original plot, there are well executed games based on cliches. I don't even need to go farther than PS:T. It starts off with everyone's favorite amnesia cliche. Of course, it uses that cliche brilliantly and creates a great story and game around it.

 

[DemonKing]

I forget, are we Evil Incarnate because we are the masters of hype?

No - that's because you sold out to EA.

Seriously though - I know dealing with PR is tough at the best of times, but surely if enough developers had pointed out to them that hyping a new webpage for a product that nothing of substance has been heard about for 4 years and then having the big reveal turn out to be something a 12 year old html novice could have done up before breakfast might be disasterous, they might have listened?

Maybe we have been spoilt by the recent Blizzard launches of SC2 and D3 but this seemed like a slap in the face more than anything...like the Bio PR guys are laughing themselves senseless and cackling "HA HA -made you look!".

 

[Volourn]

"And you've made nine games with that same basic plot point."

Bullshit.

And, consideirng that PST's 'amnesia plot line, i muust find out who i am' is as as ancient as the most ancient of stories is R00fling!

Le'ts not forget that FO series' stories are not original. In fact they're virtually crbon copyies of each other.

And, why AOD looks to be a decent game; it doens't really have an original premise either.

The list goes on. *yawn*

 

[Gromnir]

sorry lumps, but those were your examples.

1) gaider never said or implied that original games were crap.

2) your examples is worthless.

decadence not have proven quality 'cause it ain't even been released. only the worst kinda delirious fanboy would argue otherwise. play... then comment.

kotor2 quality were arguable, but hardly a great example. weren't really original neither.

ps:t kinda "quality" would put a company out of business... so that example is asinine.

HA! Good Fun!

 

[Lumpy]

Do list the games that featured amnesiacs in search of their own identity. Made before PS:T, preferably.

play... then comment.

Let's.