Review Oblivion(XBox) dry humping at Eurogamer

[Saint_Proverbius]

Tags: Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion

There's <a href="http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=63571">a review</a> of <A href="Http://www.elderscrolls.com">Oblivion</a> over at <A href="http://www.eurogamer.net/">Eurogamer</a>. The score is a <b>10/10</b>, meaning the reviewer of the game has found the perfect game, will never get tired of it, and will probably have the retire from being a reviewer because he'll never play anything else again. Here's a clip:
<br>
<blockquote>Your first dilemma is whether to engage with the plot or not, and whether you stride purposefully towards that red triangle on your compass is your choice. You see, the death of the 87 year-old Emperor of Tamriel and his three sons presents something of a problem for this idyllic land. Without an heir to the throne, several hellish rifts or 'gates' to Oblivion are open, and demons are pouring out of them. As you might expect, they're doing a pretty fine job of doing their evil bidding and laying waste to everything in their path - and for reasons not fully apparent, you've been entrusted with the task of putting a stop to all this.</blockquote>
<br>
The big problem with the whole, "Do the plot or not do the plot" given the story about the hellgates and such is that the world doesn't really get any worse if you just ignore the whole hell errupting on Earth thing. It would be nice to give the player the choice of getting involved or not with a consequence to ignoring the world going to hell. Wait, that might actually be a <i>living world</i> type thing. Can't have that. That would be too hard to impliment!
<br>
<br>
Spotted at: <A HREF="http://www.shacknews.com">Shack News</A>

 

[The Innovator of Pain]

Jesus, this is getting boring. And from Saint_Proverbius himself, no less. No wonder this place is on a one-way ticket down the shitter.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Jesus, this is getting boring.

And yet you keep coming back and posting more and more.

 

[Seven]

Wait, that might actually be a living world type thing. Can't have that. That would be too hard to impliment!

Yeah, PRUDY GRAFFIX RUX--Living world, wtf have you been smoking, Oblivion only had a budget of 25 million not like the tons of cash that got plunged into Space Rangers (and I'm not talking about the sequel).

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Actually, I was kind of thinking about Avernum 3 when I was writing that. You can ignore the main plot stuff, but while doing so, those towns are getting savagely beaten down and destroyed by the evil forces around them. But honestly, if the world and towns aren't going to get destroyed in Oblivion, then they probably don't need to be saved either. Just a thought.

 

[Seven]

Actually, I was kind of thinking about Avernum 3 when I was writing that. You can ignore the main plot stuff, but while doing so, those towns are getting savagely beaten down and destroyed by the evil forces around them. But honestly, if the world and towns aren't going to get destroyed in Oblivion, then they probably don't need to be saved either. Just a thought.

'

You're missing the point, you have to use your imagination and imagine that the towns will be destroyed if you don't advance the plot—It’s not the game’s fault that you don’t know how to role play—just like with becoming the leader of all of the guilds, if you can’t imagine a logical reason for that then your imagination is broken.

 

[elander_]

"Your first dilemma is whether to engage with the plot or not, and whether you stride purposefully towards that red triangle on your compass is your choice."

What will be less boring? What a dilema.

"You see, the death of the 87 year-old Emperor of Tamriel and his three sons presents something of a problem for this idyllic land."

Watching the npcs they look like they don't give a shit.

"Without an heir to the throne, several hellish rifts or 'gates' to Oblivion are open, and demons are pouring out of them."

No problem. Theres just one or two of them who ocasionaly steps out, gets kicked by the 40+ level guards and dies. It's not a big pour. Tamriel is safe friend.

"As you might expect, they're doing a pretty fine job of doing their evil bidding and laying waste to everything in their path"

Nah theres just one small village that was burned down and the that was the palace kitchen ladys fault.

"and for reasons not fully apparent, you've been entrusted with the task of putting a stop to all this."

We have just been informed the emperor wasn't very well of his head lately. He thought the player was one of his imaginary friends with whom he used to play in his room so he just gave the player the most precious thing of the Empire and entrusted him with the most important mission.

Not that anyome else cares if the player will close the gates and will find the lost bastard or not. Nothing will stop them from geting then daily drink and throw their daily "the fighters guild are hiring" private joke at the tavern.

 

[VasikkA]

The score is a <b>10/10</b>, meaning the reviewer of the game has found the perfect game, will never get tired of it, and will probably have the retire from being a reviewer because he'll never play anything else again.

Not commenting on the game or the review itself, but I do not consider a 10/10 score as the Ultimate Perfection Ever(especially in such a rough scale), but rather relatively being top-class of the gaming industry today. Anyway, the whole concept of scoring games is impractical and only seems to cause confusion and bitterness.

I'll hopefully get my copy of Oblivion early next week and I'm expecting quite a bit of tweaking, if nothing else.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

It would be nice to give the player the choice of getting involved or not with a consequence to ignoring the world going to hell. Wait, that might actually be a <i>living world</i> type thing. Can't have that. That would be too hard to impliment!

Didn't Fallout originally do that with the Super Mutants progressively taking over towns until you did something about it? They took it out apparently because of... Well, I can't remember why but I think you can re-activate it as originally planned.

Then again, Fallout was released in 1997 and they did make better games back then.

 

[Elwro]

Implement

 

[geminito]

You mean there should be a time limit on the game? That was very unpopular in Fallout. I didn't mind the time limit, actually... the urgency added something to the story. But people who wanted more time to explore complained.

 

[LlamaGod]

not time limit, just an incentive to not let everything go to hell

 

[Seven]

not time limit, just an incentive to not let everything go to hell

Litterally.

 

[Rendelius]

There's <a href="http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=63571">a review</a> of <A href="Http://www.elderscrolls.com">Oblivion</a> over at <A href="http://www.eurogamer.net/">Eurogamer</a>. The score is a <b>10/10</b>, meaning the reviewer of the game has found the perfect game, will never get tired of it, and will probably have the retire from being a reviewer because he'll never play anything else again. Here's a clip:
<blockquote>Your first dilemma is whether to engage with the plot or not, and whether you stride purposefully towards that red triangle on your compass is your choice. You see, the death of the 87 year-old Emperor of Tamriel and his three sons presents something of a problem for this idyllic land. Without an heir to the throne, several hellish rifts or 'gates' to Oblivion are open, and demons are pouring out of them. As you might expect, they're doing a pretty fine job of doing their evil bidding and laying waste to everything in their path - and for reasons not fully apparent, you've been entrusted with the task of putting a stop to all this.</blockquote>
The big problem with the whole, "Do the plot or not do the plot" given the story about the hellgates and such is that the world doesn't really get any worse if you just ignore the whole hell errupting on Earth thing. It would be nice to give the player the choice of getting involved or not with a consequence to ignoring the world going to hell. Wait, that might actually be a <i>living world</i> type thing. Can't have that. That would be too hard to impliment!

Spotted at: <A HREF="http://www.shacknews.com">Shack News</A>

I have to disappoint you. Eurogamer clearly states that 10/10 doesn't mean "perfect game". It doesn't mean it has no flaws and no glitches.

 

[Claw]

Oblivion is full of flaws, and glitches (like clipping) have been noted. D'oh!


Anyway, the whole "you don't have to follow the plot" thing is getting old. Old as in "done last milleinum" old. I could basically do that in either Diablo, or that ultima clone on the C64 which was my first RPG as far as I remember. I am so not impressed by that anymore.

 

[Section8]

You're missing the point, you have to use your imagination and imagine that the towns will be destroyed if you don't advance the plot—It’s not the game’s fault that you don’t know how to role play—just like with becoming the leader of all of the guilds, if you can’t imagine a logical reason for that then your imagination is broken.

Heh. And if you like you can put on your Daedric armour and go hack up the towns yourself, just for the added realism.

You mean there should be a time limit on the game? That was very unpopular in Fallout. I didn't mind the time limit, actually... the urgency added something to the story. But people who wanted more time to explore complained.

Oh no! The game doesn't do exactly what I want! I actually have to think and be challenged! Waaaah, bring me my motherfucking chocolate milk!

That's the same line of reasoning that leads to complaints like "Why do I have limited inventory space? I can't pick up every single piece of loot!", "Why do my characters have to eat? Food costs money, and I'd rather spend that money on ph4t loot", "Why can't my character multiclass as a paladin/blackguard?", etc.

If nothing else, having games with dire consequences such as "If you don't act reasonably swiftly, hell will take over" would teach kids a fucking lesson, just like the Stones once did.

On the other hand, if Freddie Mercury's "I Want It All" attitude spread throughout other aspect of game design, god mode would be enabled by default and there would be no way the player could ever possibly fail anything, because failing is unpopular.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

You mean there should be a time limit on the game? That was very unpopular in Fallout. I didn't mind the time limit, actually... the urgency added something to the story. But people who wanted more time to explore complained.

Haven't they put a time limit on dialogue though? I mean I read someone here saying that playing the 4 wedge mini-game had a timer on it which after a while, their disposition slipped back down so whomever it was, was whipping through the dialogue quickly so they didn't suffer any penalties?

I agree that time limits are unpopular but the point is it'd make a harder game. Imaine walking back into town and finding it full of Oblivion monsters which you have to vanquish? Once you do that, you save the town and people (all 7 of them that were in the town before) start coming back (as do their quests which you would've missed out on otherwise). A bit lame perhaps but it'd add something and it doesn't have to be a "Game Ends when all cities are over-taken" time limit. Just a "Game becomes harder if you don't close those gates". It could make for an interesting living world. Better yet, a beefed up RAI could probably accomplish it all without much difficulty.

It doesn't have to happen that fast either. I mean, most people will spend what, 100 hours in Oblivion? So if there are, for example, 27 cities in the game and one city is over-run every 10 hours of game-play, that's only 10 cities that'd be affected which you'd have to then "save" for them to go back to normal. Say 3 days after that the people start returning to town and calling you a hero. If you don't close the gates, then they get over-run again and again until you do.

 

[Twinfalls]

Oh no! The game doesn't do exactly what I want! I actually have to think and be challenged! Waaaah, bring me my motherfucking chocolate milk!

...

On the other hand, if Freddie Mercury's "I Want It All" attitude spread throughout other aspect of game design, god mode would be enabled by default and there would be no way the player could ever possibly fail anything, because failing is unpopular.

This is the motherfucking huge, pernicous myth, one of the demons at the heart of why things are so fucking shitty right now, which needs to be blown apart.

The reasoning above, that teenagers - children - are now the major target audience, and they need to be pleased with easy gameplay and the automatic 'you are teh ruler', is an excuse for lazy, shitty design.

Bethesda use it as an excuse to simply not bother with:

- the timed quests that Daggerfall had
- actual design in placing NPCs and monsters of varying levels
- consequences to decisions
- a reactive game world (other than 'Hail, Hero').

I say this because if you look back at gaming from the start of its commercial popularity - ie arcade games in the early 80s and the Commodore 64, etc, you'd see that the games were as hard as Blackhart's cock at his yet-to-happen first sight of a woman's actual body back then. Fuck me, games were motherfucking hard, all of them, right through the 80s and 90s. And I and the rest of the kids kept going back for more and more and more.

If this is all wrong, then what we have is a monstrous change in the nature of today's adolescent. They are no longer what they were a mere 15 years ago. If kids really want stuff to be easy, if a challenge is no longer what makes them go back for more, we need to look at why the heck that is.

Or maybe I'm just missing something. Fable I hear is an ultra-easy piece of shit. But it was a big hit with working 20 and 30 somethings, who like something easy as shit and superficially rewarding for when they get home from work or the pub. Maybe this is what's driving things now.

I dunno.

 

[LlamaGod]

how old are you, twinfalls?

 

[Twinfalls]

31.

How old are you? And are you as loose as most magistrates would have us believe?

 

[LlamaGod]

im almost 19

 

[Twinfalls]

Oh.

I thought you were 12.

 

[Brother None]

You're missing the point, you have to use your imagination and imagine that the towns will be destroyed if you don't advance the plot—It’s not the game’s fault that you don’t know how to role play—just like with becoming the leader of all of the guilds, if you can’t imagine a logical reason for that then your imagination is broken.

Use my imagination? What is this, a table-top D&D?

If Bethesda fails to implement something I should just imagine it was there?

Well, in that case, the game is flawless. I can just imagine in whatever it is lacking.

 

[Section8]

If this is all wrong, then what we have is a monstrous change in the nature of today's adolescent. They are no longer what they were a mere 15 years ago. If kids really want stuff to be easy, if a challenge is no longer what makes them go back for more, we need to look at why the heck that is.

Or maybe I'm just missing something. Fable I hear is an ultra-easy piece of shit. But it was a big hit with working 20 and 30 somethings, who like something easy as shit and superficially rewarding for when they get home from work or the pub. Maybe this is what's driving things now.

/me puts on a crotchety old man voice, contrary to his youthful, not particularly good looks.

This is a social problem that extends far beyond entertainment. I've heard it labelled "Generation Me" and that's pretty appropriate. The youth of today, and I'm certainly not untainted by it myself, just expects everything to happen, without having to work for it. They want it all. They want it all. They want it all, and they want it now! <crunch> <Brian May solo>

And they whole idea of "I don't want my entertainment to be challenging, I just want a simple fix of escapism" is troubling, because I don't think the subconscious mind is capable of making the distinction between work and play. So you're effectively training your mind to be lazy and imperceptive. Throw in the fact that your find the act of lazily entertaining your brain more "fun" than work, and that's a dangerous mix.

As they are, I think computer games are pretty unhealthy. You're not doing anything physical, you're engaging your brain with simplicity and you're probably not socialising in any healthy manner.

At the very least, moving away from the "everything on a platter" design philosophy begins to address one of these problems. I also believe that it's probably a minor social benefit, because let's face it - who wants to deal with selfish fucking brats? People who accept that everything is theirs for the taking if they're willing to work for it, are generally much more balanced and pleasant individuals.

[edit] I'm also pretty appalled with the nature of "reality" TV for the same reason. Want to be a singer? Don't bother working hard to be noticed, just audition for the next season of televised karaoke! Want to be "famous"? Sell your soul and dignity, as well as that of anyone you're associated to by appearing on Big Brother! Etc.

 

[LlamaGod]

I'd be more happy if I could actually get a job