Review Arcanum & Vampire: Bloodlines-- Lost Classics of Troika Games

[SophosTheWise]

Shit as an adjective, as in you are "shit for being highbrow and being uncapable of apretiating anything that isnt to your particular brand of tastes", and ruining it for everyone that does not agree to your apretiation of the subject matter. The dude is shit because he thinks bloodlines being immature is a bad thing, he is incapable of apretiating stuff he does not like, he cant see how some people would like it.

Who said that I am uncapable of enjoying lowbrow stuff? Who said that the guy cannot appreciate lowbrow stuff? Why do you let your enjoyment be ruined by other's comments?

Universal consensus is that when you die and 20 years pass, chances are you wont be farting, universal consensus is that gravity exist, universal consensus is what we like to call facts.

I would rather say that the concept of gravity and how we measure it is universal consensus, not gravity itself. But you made a point that is not really applicable to anything cultural since culture is a completely different system of thought. There are no "Fun quarks" or "Drama leptons" or "Gameplay bosons" that you can measure. Measurement of cultural things is a pure construct. How do you measure enjoyment? Or creativity? That's not a thing that's measurable with methods from the natural sciences. Maybe you could study the field using social studies, but the results aren't going to last because culture and people change. Still, read about objectivity. It's really interesting and also thought-provoking.

No, no, no, the best way to understand what is good and what isnt is to listen to people you normally disagree with, to get a fresh point of view. Some games, movies, books, i didnt like, but that didnt mean they were bad, identifying whats so good about them even if the final product is not particularly enjoyable to me is something that im interested in. Why the fuck would i listen to someone with similar tastes to my own and my same point of view? to listen to what i already know? to look for some validation on my way of thinking? to have someone decide for me what i should buy? that is patheti

Have you read my post at all? My point was that reading things from a person whoose thinking structures, the way he thinks (not the content!) can give you insights you wouldn't have made because maybe he/she is an expert an you are not. But it's easier to understand his/her argument because you know that you're somehow thinking the same way. Also I agree with you on the fresh point of view with a disagreeing opinion. In some cases that can be an eyeopener, but I also know that some people will never make a compelling argument which I can in any way support. Still it can give you a fresh perspective, of course. Still, the point remains: there is no one objective critical score. This is all a ruse made by people who don't even understand what objectivity and subjectivity means. I suggest reading about constructivism. It's one of the key-theories of studying journalistics (which I do).

 

[Burning Bridges]

 

[Lhynn]

I didnt say you were highbrow, i said you were shit, and that they were shit, more specifically him. They dont ruin MY enjoyment, they ruin my FUTURE enjoyment by conditioning shit with their stupid reasoning. because they influence what will get made, fucking shits, i wanted my AP2, with more mute teenagers that dual wield revolvers, more badass russian womens that need a good fuck, more legendary chinesse agents whose job is being cool and misterious, heck scarlet was masterfully written and yet no one noticed, because they were too busy critizing the plot for being silly over the top or mike thorton for his awful sneaking animation.

So shakespeare is shit because he didnt write it in the XXI century? get real. The dude wrote creative and inventive shit, he made stuff that literally hasnt been surpased hundreds of years after he died. How do you measure it? with good fucking judgment, thats how.

 

[SophosTheWise]

I didnt say you were highbrow, i said you were shit, and that they were shit, more specifically him. They dont ruin MY enjoyment, they ruin my FUTURE enjoyment by conditioning shit with their stupid reasoning. because they influence what will get made, fucking shits, i wanted my AP2, with more mute teenagers that dual wield revolvers, more badass russian womens that need a good fuck, more legendary chinesse agents whose job is being cool and misterious, heck scarlet was masterfully written and yet no one noticed, because they were too busy critizing the plot for being silly over the top or mike thorton for his awful sneaking animation.

So shakespeare is shit because he didnt write it in the XXI century? get real. The dude wrote creative and inventive shit, he made stuff that literally hasnt been surpased hundreds of years after he died. How do you measure it? with good fucking judgment, thats how.

You contradict yourself on every imaginable level.
Firstly, there will always be a lowbrow crowd and there will always be a highbrow crowd. One does not overtake the other. That's why even today highbrow co-exists with lowbrow. It's as easy as that. You can go to a store and buy Shakespeare (who, by the way, is still remembered because he had a great impact on the English language and invented a lot of today-common archetypes, not because he was inherently good. Inherently is the key here.
That's why you will, even in a hundred years, still get your "russian women who need a good fuck" and "more legendary chinese agents whose job is being cool and mysterious". They will not disappear, but there will still be criticism. As always. Culture changes, the critics stays the same.

So shakespeare is shit because he didnt write it in the XXI century? get real

What on earth are you even talking about?

Edit: By the way, even if there was such a thing as an objectively good game, it would still have no use as long as my enjoyment of a game remains subjective. And, honestly, it does remain subjective.

 

[hiver]

No, seriously. Just get Boyarsky cause, he probably did everything he could for D3 already, - either on some short term contract or maybe even full position.

Boyarsky Leonard is held captive in the Blizzard basement while 3 bitches suck on his dick and an asian midget regularly injects him with heroin so once a week he could scribble for two seconds also a story for the expansion for Diablo 3.
After Boyarsky completed the Troika saga I bet he doesn't want to hear anything about conducting the economic side of a business/game anymore, not now and not in his life - ever.

Karsa Orlong slowly turn his head. Right arm whips, catches grotesque skull like an apple, closes fingers. POP !

 

[Lhynn]

Maybe you could study the field using social studies, but the results aren't going to last because culture and people change.

This is what im talking about, whats good is good, no matter when it was written. And people paid attention to him (shakespeare) because he was inherently good, that is the reason his plays werent lost, because some faggot liked them and preserved them and so later down the line some other faggot read them and thought they were great, and then he shared it with his reading club of faggots, they all said it was good and that it deserved study, and shit evolved from there.

You contradict yourself on every imaginable level.
Firstly, there will always be a lowbrow crowd and there will always be a highbrow crowd. One does not overtake the other. That's why even today highbrow co-exists with lowbrow. It's as easy as that. You can go to a store and buy Shakespeare (who, by the way, is still remembered because he had a great impact on the English language and invented a lot of today-common archetypes, not because he was inherently good. Inherently is the key here.
That's why you will, even in a hundred years, still get your "russian women who need a good fuck" and "more legendary chinese agents whose job is being cool and mysterious". They will not disappear, but there will still be criticism. As always. Culture changes, the critics stays the same.

Highbrow and lowbrow are both idiotic groups that only demand stuff suited to their tastes, instead of just asking for quality while being open minded about the stuff they are getting.
In an imperfect world with limited resources both groups influence what gets made, that means pretty much either just another shooter, or just another pretentious indie game copying on the success of someone else.
Truly innovative stuff is a big risk, and this shouldnt be so, but because we have these two shit groups it is.This isnt a problem of game devs so much as it is a problem with the consumers in general being closed minded cunts, and this wont change until a big cultural change happens. (and no, before you missinterpret me again, i didnt say that what is good or what is bad depends on the year it was made).

AP was the perfect example of a game that didnt succeed in being attractive to any of those two big demographics, so it was branded as shit when it wasnt so, because the main elements that both groups were after were either bad or not to their prefference and the stuff that was great was not noticed.

And son, i never contradict myself, i know very well what i want.

 

[Midair]

there will always be a lowbrow crowd and there will always be a highbrow crowd.

No, there is a crowd that criticizes lighter stuff about vampires and such to compensate for being too lazy or dumb to discuss serious literature, and a crowd that is interested in all kinds of literature b/c they actually appreciate it.

 

[SophosTheWise]

there will always be a lowbrow crowd and there will always be a highbrow crowd.

No, there is a crowd that criticizes lighter stuff about vampires and such to compensate for being too lazy or dumb to discuss serious literature, and a crowd that is interested in all kinds of literature b/c they actually appreciate it.

Fair enough

 

[Wulfstand]

Erhem.

Dirk Diggler?

 

[curry]

I'd like to thank everyone ITT

Not gonna watch that video and waste my time

 

[Korron]

The guy with the hyphenated last name hates the rampant sexism in VtMB? Guess we know who wears the pants in the family.

 

[Severian Silk]

Watched the first 7 minutes. Would rather be listening to TotalBiscuit. (The voice!)

 

[St. Toxic]

What's a troika? Sounds Russian.

 

[Micmu]

 

[St. Toxic]

Ah, breakfast.

 

[you know what time it is]

fucking youtube reviews

 

[Diggfinger]

Tags: Arcanum: of Steamworks and Magick Obscura; Noah Caldwell-Gervais; Troika Games; Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines

If you feel like reminiscing about Arcanum and Bloodlines, here's a video from Noah Caldwell-Gervais:

This is a video retrospective of legendary, long-defunct Troika Games' two most memorable titles-- Arcanum: of Steamworks and Magic Obscura, Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines. It looks at both games in depth, considering them for their own merits and their legacy in gaming history. If you've heard about these classic games but haven't seen them in action, or if you're looking for an in-depth critical retrospective, why not spend forty minutes with these Lost Classics of Troika Games? MAJOR SPOILERS THROUGHOUT, INCLUDING ENDGAME FOOTAGE. But nothing gratuitous, just what I need for my points.

​

It's a pretty nice run through both of them.

Thanks oasis789!

Yeah I found this awhile back. Always good to find a decent Bloodlines and especially Arcanum review, not a lot of those. Dude is surprisingly critical of the two games, however.

 

[Morality Games]

This is what im talking about, whats good is good, no matter when it was written.

That's not really how art works; you can't parse the quality of a work from its time period and historical context. You can have a design that's pretty timeless (like my whiskey glasses, which form a perfect circle with no trendy grooves or crevices in or outside the cup) -- in terms of pleasing aesthetic sense, a perfect circle has more durability than other geometric configuration. Some stories are written in ways that help them stand up against time, but there's no story that's totally immune from it.

Sort of like having a nice couch, but with alterations of the living room making it obsolete and look ugly, awkward, and out of place by comparison.

Art must exist in context, that is, in comparison.

 

[Lhynn]

That's not really how art works; you can't parse the quality of a work from its time period and historical context. You can have a design that's pretty timeless (like my whiskey glasses, which form a perfect circle with no trendy grooves or crevices in or outside the cup) -- in terms of pleasing aesthetic sense, a perfect circle has more durability than other geometric configuration. Some stories are written in ways that help them stand up against time, but there's no story that's totally immune from it.
Sort of like having a nice couch, but with alterations of the living room making it obsolete and look ugly, awkward, and out of place by comparison.
Art must exist in context, that is, in comparison.

But i dont give a fuck about how the couch looks, if its comfy thats good enough. Games are the same.
To me games have only gotten prettier, blander and shittier with time, shallow art is shit art mate.
I still have fun playing arcanum, i still have fun playing exile, and its not nostalgia, its honest to god actual fun playing a title that can stand up to the test of time.
Shit, 2009 game of the year for most people here was a game that could have been made in 1980 in terms of aesthetic. Because whats important is the quality behind it, not how nice to look at it is.

Anyway, Games havent been around long enough for the passing of time to be an actual factor doe, we are not talking about people that lived ten centuries before us.

 

[Morality Games]

That's not really how art works; you can't parse the quality of a work from its time period and historical context. You can have a design that's pretty timeless (like my whiskey glasses, which form a perfect circle with no trendy grooves or crevices in or outside the cup) -- in terms of pleasing aesthetic sense, a perfect circle has more durability than other geometric configuration. Some stories are written in ways that help them stand up against time, but there's no story that's totally immune from it.
Sort of like having a nice couch, but with alterations of the living room making it obsolete and look ugly, awkward, and out of place by comparison.
Art must exist in context, that is, in comparison.

But i dont give a fuck about how the couch looks, if its comfy thats good enough. Games are the same.
To me games have only gotten prettier, blander and shittier with time, shallow art is shit art mate.
I still have fun playing arcanum, i still have fun playing exile, and its not nostalgia, its honest to god actual fun playing a title that can stand up to the test of time.
Shit, 2009 game of the year for most people here was a game that could have been made in 1980 in terms of aesthetic. Because whats important is the quality behind it, not how nice to look at it is.

Anyway, Games havent been around long enough for the passing of time to be an actual factor doe, we are not talking about people that lived ten centuries before us.

Arguably. The Information Age is making the effects of time work their influence on art faster than ever before. Before you had hand copying, then the printing press, and now the web.

From a mainstream perspective, the best thing that can be said about Troika games is that they are good if you develop the palate for them. David Hume noted that good and bad wine has broadly the same flavor to someone who doesn't expose themselves to the full range of flavors, but that the nuances come through to a tongue that trains itself to spot them. Similarly, beer and coffee are a mesh of sourness and bitterness to children, but a seasoned user can taste things through the sourness and bitterness lost on inexperts.

In short, the quality of the experience improves the more time and attention you are willing to invest in it.

 

[Lhynn]

It does, but you went completely off track o.o