Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Company News Bethesda: Games must evolve & grow!

Section8

Cipher
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
4,321
Location
Wardenclyffe
Oh, I agree. But "they're not improving anything full stop" is different from "they're not improving anything that I consider necessary for a game." Which is what I was pointing out.

Ah, but because I'm a pedantic arsehole, I never said they didn't improve anything, I said "they're not out to improve anything", meaning that their attitude is not advancement of RPG design (note the quote I'm referring to), it's an attitude of doing what it takes to shift millions of copies.

Of course, if I see an opportunity to take on the questionable nature of production values and what not, I'll go for that, too. :P

I've said it here before, but why not say it again: I believe that a clever studio licensing an engine that does the bling-bling, and concentrating on high-value, low-cost content such as dialogue, scripting, and music, could produce a very deep game at a fraction of the cost it would take to do it from ground-up, and let them do it with production values that won't turn off a large part of the potential market.

Okay, hold on a second here. I think we've got very different ideas of what constitutes "production values". The term to me encompasses that which is entirely unnecessary, but far more impressive "at a glance". So in other words, full VO instead of simply written dialogue, multitexturing of all art assets, rendered cutscenes, etc. And basically all of those things are out of reach of a "high-value, low-cost" development budget.

I'm not really doubting the ability of indie developers to put together cost-effective games and target niche markets, because there's quite a few good examples, but I'm questioning the ability of a game like Oblivion, which is all glitz and glamour to act as a stepping stone to games with entirely different selling points.

For instance, do you realistically believe that a worthwhile portion of inexperienced RPGers who bought Oblivion because it's a flashy FP Action RPG are going to warm to say, Geneforge based on their Elder Scrolls experience?

Mun-ny. I've no idea how much Oblivion cost to develop, but it ain't cheap. Big-budget efforts tank too. Software is notorious for going over budget and over schedule. Propose a project that targets 10% of Oblivion's market, but costs 2% to develop, demonstrate that you're capable of delivering software on time and on budget, and I don't think it'd be too hard to make a business case interesting enough to get financing.

Okay, to be perfectly honest, I was being devil's advocate on this point, because I also believe it makes sense to develop "budget" games for niche audiences. We don't see much evidence of publishers willing to try their luck outside of the cutthroat "blockbuster" business plan, though. And to be perfectly honest, I'm not convinced that's a bad thing. After all, it gives the indies more room to move, but it's still a shame to see mainstream gaming get more insipidly uninspired as time goes by.

It expands the market. A bigger market means more opportunities for everyone in the market, including indies and niche players.

I think that's completely subjective, (mind you, most of what I've said is subjective, too. :P) Given the breadth and variation of the "RPG genre", I don't think you can say that there is an actual RPG market. For instance, compare Arcanum to Final Fantasy. Or Oblivion to Planescape Torment. Or Fallout to Diablo.

Again, I think the movie market is a pretty good analogue of what the CRPG market could be: there's room for both Pitch Black and Star Wars, and at least some people who saw Pitch Black wouldn't have seen it if they hadn't been hooked on sci-fi flicks by Star Wars.

Pitch Black cost $23 million to produce, and made about $40 million (in the US). Star Wars cost $11 million, and made about half a billion in box office sales alone.

Now obviously those figures don't mean a whole lot, given the 23 year difference, but they're both of the "blockbuster" mould.

And to keep the analogy in line with the varied production values of a blockbuster game and a niche title, we're basically talking the difference between an all-star cast, CGI extravaganza based on an existing commercial property given worldwide release, vs a stop motion animated, silent movie starring nobodies, that would be lucky to make it to cinemas.

I think your analogy better illustrates what the CRPG industry is rather than could be.
 

Saint_Proverbius

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2002
Messages
12,546
Location
Behind you.
Prime Junta said:
Strictly speaking, though, you're wrong. They are improving something -- namely production values and accessibility to the masses.

That's complete bunk though. Oblivion could have been the most complex, obtuse CRPG ever and it still would have made bank. It's not how accessible a game is that sells in cases like Oblivion, it's how much damned hype there was for it. Word of mouth is fairly meaningless as well, since the hype got people playing Dungeon Siege for a week or two, talking about how wonderful it was, before they figured out there was barely any gameplay involved. In fact, it was the accessibility stuff that got people to stop playing it after the hype effect was washed from their brains.
 

suibhne

Erudite
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
1,951
Location
Chicago
The claim that "If you play it for 80 hours, it must be good!!!" is as logically valid as "If you crave the smack every morning and night, it must be good!!!"
 

Prime Junta

Guest
Section8 said:
Okay, hold on a second here. I think we've got very different ideas of what constitutes "production values". The term to me encompasses that which is entirely unnecessary, but far more impressive "at a glance". So in other words, full VO instead of simply written dialogue, multitexturing of all art assets, rendered cutscenes, etc. And basically all of those things are out of reach of a "high-value, low-cost" development budget.

And all of those are entirely dispensable, I agree. Think of Max Payne, for example: they did the cutscenes with comic book frames instead of rendered animations. Worked great.

I'm not really doubting the ability of indie developers to put together cost-effective games and target niche markets, because there's quite a few good examples, but I'm questioning the ability of a game like Oblivion, which is all glitz and glamour to act as a stepping stone to games with entirely different selling points.

For instance, do you realistically believe that a worthwhile portion of inexperienced RPGers who bought Oblivion because it's a flashy FP Action RPG are going to warm to say, Geneforge based on their Elder Scrolls experience?

No. They won't. Not straightaway, certainly. However, a worthwhile portion might very well warm to a low-budget game leveraging the TES engine, or even the NWN engine.

Okay, to be perfectly honest, I was being devil's advocate on this point, because I also believe it makes sense to develop "budget" games for niche audiences. We don't see much evidence of publishers willing to try their luck outside of the cutthroat "blockbuster" business plan, though. And to be perfectly honest, I'm not convinced that's a bad thing. After all, it gives the indies more room to move, but it's still a shame to see mainstream gaming get more insipidly uninspired as time goes by.

I think the trouble is that "indie games" don't really exist at this time. What we call "indie games" are less like art house movies and more like Bad Taste or In The Pirkinning -- stuff done in an extremely unpredictable way by enthusiasts solely for the love of the art. The closest we've gotten to it that I can think of is Troika -- they tried leveraging existing engines, but didn't have enough of a handle on process to be able to do their thing predictably enough and at a high enough quality to keep the investors on board; also IMO with Bloodlines they made a mistake going with a cutting-edge, non-battlefield-tested engine and having to do stuff they weren't much good at doing, such as "level design" (in the FPS sense) and making rain effects that turn the game into a slideshow.

It expands the market. A bigger market means more opportunities for everyone in the market, including indies and niche players.

I think that's completely subjective, (mind you, most of what I've said is subjective, too. :P) Given the breadth and variation of the "RPG genre", I don't think you can say that there is an actual RPG market. For instance, compare Arcanum to Final Fantasy. Or Oblivion to Planescape Torment. Or Fallout to Diablo.

Perhaps not, but there is a computer/console game market. The more people are playing games, the bigger the market, genres be damned.

Again, I think the movie market is a pretty good analogue of what the CRPG market could be: there's room for both Pitch Black and Star Wars, and at least some people who saw Pitch Black wouldn't have seen it if they hadn't been hooked on sci-fi flicks by Star Wars.

Pitch Black cost $23 million to produce, and made about $40 million (in the US). Star Wars cost $11 million, and made about half a billion in box office sales alone.

Now obviously those figures don't mean a whole lot, given the 23 year difference, but they're both of the "blockbuster" mould.

Actually, I was thinking of the second-generation Star Wars cruft, which is more contemporary to Pitch Black too.

And to keep the analogy in line with the varied production values of a blockbuster game and a niche title, we're basically talking the difference between an all-star cast, CGI extravaganza based on an existing commercial property given worldwide release, vs a stop motion animated, silent movie starring nobodies, that would be lucky to make it to cinemas.

I think your analogy better illustrates what the CRPG industry is rather than could be.

OK. Substitute The Cube for Pitch Black, and re-read the paragraph. Or Lipton Cockton in the Shadows of Sodoma if you want to go really low-budget. (No it isn't gay porn, and yes it was produced and distributed commercially. And it's not half bad either for what it is.)
 

Prime Junta

Guest
Saint_Proverbius said:
Prime Junta said:
Strictly speaking, though, you're wrong. They are improving something -- namely production values and accessibility to the masses.

That's complete bunk though. Oblivion could have been the most complex, obtuse CRPG ever and it still would have made bank. It's not how accessible a game is that sells in cases like Oblivion, it's how much damned hype there was for it. Word of mouth is fairly meaningless as well, since the hype got people playing Dungeon Siege for a week or two, talking about how wonderful it was, before they figured out there was barely any gameplay involved. In fact, it was the accessibility stuff that got people to stop playing it after the hype effect was washed from their brains.

If that were true, then why bother developing the games to start with? Just invest all the money in marketing and be done with it.

No, St.P -- I don't think Oblivion would have sold ~2,000,000 copies purely on hype. As hard as it may be to believe, there are people out there genuinely enjoying it. Lots of people.
 

Briosafreak

Augur
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Messages
792
Location
Atomic Portugal
f that were true, then why bother developing the games to start with? Just invest all the money in marketing and be done with it.


And that pretty much sums up my views on what Oblivion is and why did it get the raving reviews/ good sales in the first weeks.

I still don't see why so many here say the PR guy from Beth is incompetent, he's the main man and the real responsable for the success of the action/arcade joint known as Oblivion.
 

elander_

Arbiter
Joined
Oct 7, 2005
Messages
2,015
Johannes Teugen said:
A great many tabletop games - and a vast majority of the best of them - have dumped levelling altogether, and some have dumped gross character progression, too.

I don't know what you mean with gross character progression but a lot of of pnps and rpgs have shown that classic character progression is very hard to beat in terms of providing quality role-playing when done right that is.

Johannes Teugen said:
Besides, there was progression. The characters gained reputation. They gained money, and with it, the access to better goods. But even without the reactionary psycho-capitalism of cyberpunk, you could do this. None of the basic enjoyments of RPGs necessitate levels or even advancement.

There is a type of pnps that avoid stats and focus more on building a character personality from reactions and impressions than to play with well known stats but advancement is still there. It's just a different flavor of pnp where advancement is not represented by a number but by the character status in the world.

Classic role-playing will never get old. Games like Fallout are so inteligently made that they become classics. That is games that can be played at any time by a wide range of people without ever geting old. Like chess for example. If anyone would say that chess needs to be changed because it is geting old or that its rules are just a sacred cow everyone follows but aren't that fun what would you think of that person? That he is an idiot.
 

VasikkA

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Messages
292
Location
DAC
Briosafreak said:
f that were true, then why bother developing the games to start with? Just invest all the money in marketing and be done with it.


And that pretty much sums up my views on what Oblivion is and why did it get the raving reviews/ good sales in the first weeks.

I still don't see why so many here say the PR guy from Beth is incompetent, he's the main man and the real responsable for the success of the action/arcade joint known as Oblivion.
I'm concerned about the fact that they(the game industry) don't release demos anymore. Your purchase decision is entirely based on the hype, previews and what other people think of it. :roll:
 

Drakron

Arcane
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
6,326
Briosafreak said:
...

I still don't see why so many here say the PR guy from Beth is incompetent, he's the main man and the real responsable for the success of the action/arcade joint known as Oblivion.

But he is not ...

Morrowind was pretty unknown until it was released on the Xbox, MS considered Oblivion one of their key titles for Xbox 360 launch.

A lot of Oblivion hype was generated by MS own needs for Xbox 360 launch, if Oblivion was just a PC title I doubt it would generate 1/4 of the mainstream media interest over it.
 

Old Scratch

Liturgist
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Messages
190
Drakron said:
Briosafreak said:
...

I still don't see why so many here say the PR guy from Beth is incompetent, he's the main man and the real responsable for the success of the action/arcade joint known as Oblivion.

But he is not ...

Morrowind was pretty unknown until it was released on the Xbox, MS considered Oblivion one of their key titles for Xbox 360 launch.

A lot of Oblivion hype was generated by MS own needs for Xbox 360 launch, if Oblivion was just a PC title I doubt it would generate 1/4 of the mainstream media interest over it.

Eh, give credit where it's due. The guy did a great job pimping the game to the masses and keeping up the buzz surrounding it, even though he may have done it with an excessive amount of bullshit along the way. That's his job though, to generate interest in a product...not to be the savior of a video game genre. One could justifiably suggest he's a misleading douche bag, but incompetent? I don't think so.
 

Saint_Proverbius

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2002
Messages
12,546
Location
Behind you.
Prime Junta said:
If that were true, then why bother developing the games to start with? Just invest all the money in marketing and be done with it.

No, St.P -- I don't think Oblivion would have sold ~2,000,000 copies purely on hype. As hard as it may be to believe, there are people out there genuinely enjoying it. Lots of people.

I have to disagree, and I think Dungeon Siege is the ultimate example of where people believe they like something for a span of time when there's actually not much to like about the game. Oblivion will have a much higher hang time for this simply because Oblivion does offer more for the player to do than Dungeon Siege did.

There are gobs of examples of games that sold well on hype and got fantastic reviews despite being horrible games. For a span of time, a lot of people also believed they were really great games and there was a lag time for them to discover that the game was actually fairly shitty. Black & White and Morrowind are also good examples of this. The Movies is another.
 

Prime Junta

Guest
Briosafreak said:
f that were true, then why bother developing the games to start with? Just invest all the money in marketing and be done with it.


And that pretty much sums up my views on what Oblivion is and why did it get the raving reviews/ good sales in the first weeks.

I still don't see why so many here say the PR guy from Beth is incompetent, he's the main man and the real responsable for the success of the action/arcade joint known as Oblivion.

Do you seriously believe that Oblivion *wasn't* a serious software development effort?
 

Prime Junta

Guest
Saint_Proverbius said:
Prime Junta said:
If that were true, then why bother developing the games to start with? Just invest all the money in marketing and be done with it.

No, St.P -- I don't think Oblivion would have sold ~2,000,000 copies purely on hype. As hard as it may be to believe, there are people out there genuinely enjoying it. Lots of people.

I have to disagree, and I think Dungeon Siege is the ultimate example of where people believe they like something for a span of time when there's actually not much to like about the game. Oblivion will have a much higher hang time for this simply because Oblivion does offer more for the player to do than Dungeon Siege did.

There are gobs of examples of games that sold well on hype and got fantastic reviews despite being horrible games. For a span of time, a lot of people also believed they were really great games and there was a lag time for them to discover that the game was actually fairly shitty. Black & White and Morrowind are also good examples of this. The Movies is another.

Both Morrowind and Black & White are still selling, I understand quite well for games their age. I don't know about The Movies.
 

Briosafreak

Augur
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Messages
792
Location
Atomic Portugal
Prime Junta said:
Briosafreak said:
f that were true, then why bother developing the games to start with? Just invest all the money in marketing and be done with it.


And that pretty much sums up my views on what Oblivion is and why did it get the raving reviews/ good sales in the first weeks.

I still don't see why so many here say the PR guy from Beth is incompetent, he's the main man and the real responsable for the success of the action/arcade joint known as Oblivion.

Do you seriously believe that Oblivion *wasn't* a serious software development effort?

Of course it was, and in the midlle of all the "for the kids" mentality that is now the big thing in the "new and refreshed" Beth there were many devs that tried their best, and not everything was worse than Morrowind, that's for sure.

Still that wasn't really important at the end, like Black and White, the Movies and so many others. What matters is the hability to sell the product through repetition of a few simple ideas, until they become consensual in the eyes of the consumer, even if in the end the game is much poorer than what was perceived from the hype. You don't need to put many features well made in the game, you just need to find ways of hypimg them relentessly, while making the media simpathetic of your speech.

And in that Hines is a master, most of you highly underrate the man.

Sometimes this works well, like in Oblivion or Dungeon Siege1 (less in 2), other times it's pushed too thin, like in Black and White2, let's see how much time they can do the media and PR circus right, they are getting tired now.
 

jplestat

Novice
Joined
May 16, 2005
Messages
40
Location
San Diego, CA
Here's the problem I have with the entire argument that Oblivion's developers are making:

There are three inherent assumptions here that have no basis in reality:

1. Oblivion has sold a lot because they simplified it and modernized it for the "average" gamer

2. The average gamer will not play a complex game

3. The "market" is not waiting for RPGs and the RPG market is small

All three of these are crap. In fact, the sales numbers of Oblivion do not necessarily have any relation to the design of the game. I believe it sold well because gamers ARE looking for RPGs and the promise of a huge world to role play in is appealing.

Galactic Civilizations proved that gamers WILL buy in large numbers games that do not pander to them and dumb things down.

The RPG market is NOT small. The biggest games in the world (not including Oblivion) are RPGS in WOW and Diablo II. Now you may argue that one is a MMO and the other is an action RPG (its not really, its a rogulike hack game) but the fact is that there is a huge need and desire for RPGS.

ALL OBLIVION PROVED IS THAT PEOPLE ARE INTERESTED IN SINGLE PLAYER RPGS AS WELL AS MMOS and ACTION RPGS (Sacred has also sold over a million copies, FATE is Wild Tangents biggest game ever by far.

I will take it one step further. If Oblivion had the depth of design and yes, complexity a good RPG should have and includes some of those archaic elements that they seem so keen on getting rid of, Oblivion would sell even more. Bethesda unfortunately will see it the other way, and comvince themselves they did not simplify it enough and the next game in the series will be even worse.

Now I do not agree with many of the opinions here on the importance of certain game play elements (such as dialog options) but I do know that Bethesda removed all the features that would make it fun. More complicated, yes. Require more thought, yes. But it would be a better game without the compass (at the least an option in initial game setup to turn it off), the ridiculous persuasion and lockpicking mini-games, that SCALING ABORTION, etc...

In the end I guess I am saying don't sell your customer short. You (the developer) might find that those 20 year old features were good then and would be good now.

Interesting side note: Of all the horrible features of Oblivion, the worst may actually be Oblivion itself. What a horrible, unispired repetitive mess that is.
 

Prime Junta

Guest
Briosafreak said:
Still that wasn't really important at the end, like Black and White, the Movies and so many others. What matters is the hability to sell the product through repetition of a few simple ideas, until they become consensual in the eyes of the consumer, even if in the end the game is much poorer than what was perceived from the hype. You don't need to put many features well made in the game, you just need to find ways of hypimg them relentessly, while making the media simpathetic of your speech.

That's marketing for ya.

I didn't follow the Oblivion hype religiously, but off-hand the only hyped thing that turned out to be a major disappointment was RAI -- they made it look like Sims on steroids, and it turned out to be a bunch of pretty simple routines modeling autonomous behaviour married to a traditional scripting engine. But AFAICT the rest of the stuff they hyped was very much in there. A huge world? Check. Procedurally generated, realistic-looking terrain and vegetation? Check. Lots and lots and LOTS of dungeons and other locations? Check. Lots and lots and LOTS of side-quests? Check. Complete freedom to do whatever the hell you want? Check. Much improved combat? Check. Physics-based traps? Check. Captain Picard? Check.

The fact that all of this fails to add up to a deep or engaging game is a different matter altogether. But from a "truth in marketing" POV I can't see that Oblivion's hype was any more or less honest than, say, Half-Life 2's hype.

I dunno about the rest of you, but the reasons why I got bored with Oblivion have nothing to do with the hyped features, whether they managed to live up to the hype or not -- they have to do with the stuff that was neither promised nor delivered, such as challenge, balance, originality, good writing, and engaging characters.
 

Briosafreak

Augur
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Messages
792
Location
Atomic Portugal
Prime Junta said:
That's marketing for ya.

Yep, and that's how i view Oblivion, a game where marketing doesn't serve to sell the game, but it's the center of the process, with the game beeing a box that should be sold, an entity that relies not in it's real qualities but those dictated by what marketing thinks it's best.

I didn't follow the Oblivion hype religiously, but off-hand the only hyped thing that turned out to be a major disappointment was RAI -- they made it look like Sims on steroids, and it turned out to be a bunch of pretty simple routines modeling autonomous behaviour married to a traditional scripting engine. But AFAICT the rest of the stuff they hyped was very much in there. A huge world? Check. Procedurally generated, realistic-looking terrain and vegetation? Check. Lots and lots and LOTS of dungeons and other locations? Check. Lots and lots and LOTS of side-quests? Check. Complete freedom to do whatever the hell you want? Check. Much improved combat? Check. Physics-based traps? Check. Captain Picard? Check.

Besides the AI debacle, every other feature was supposed to be well crafted in order to bring gaming to a new level of imersion and freedom. Instead it's the same freedom of Morrowind, and imersion is cut time and time again by the not much hyped idiotic minigames, the magical leveling up of the world, the subpar characters graphics, repetitive dungeons that feel the same and fail to give special rewards spread through the world, making it the same after awhile to enter one dungeon or another, limited dialogue caused by the voice over need. This last feature was hyped as a great success, in the end i got limited dialogue, and i could have aperfectly friendly talk with a NPC and when i finished the dialogue he would just say" i don't like the likes of you, go away".

Where's the imersion?

The fact that all of this fails to add up to a deep or engaging game is a different matter altogether. But from a "truth in marketing" POV I can't see that Oblivion's hype was any more or less honest than, say, Half-Life 2's hype.

I dunno about the rest of you, but the reasons why I got bored with Oblivion have nothing to do with the hyped features, whether they managed to live up to the hype or not -- they have to do with the stuff that was neither promised nor delivered, such as challenge, balance, originality, good writing, and engaging characters.

Features that were hyped until everyone bought the idea they were going to be there. They weren't, but the marketing job was done, and that's all that matters, as long they could talk about these things beeing great, in every place possible, those features didn't need to be well implemented, since they knew many "reviews" were going to be made from the 4 hours preview they setup, and many others were going to be made in rushed reviews with the mindset of the reviewrs already focused by Beths carefull planting of what "they should look into".

That hasn't impressed many TeS fans, i should say this, but it was too late, they already had bought it, together with hundreds of thousands of casual gamers and RPG starving gamers, that needed a quick fix. On that sense jplestat is right, and Saint is right in defending the game would sell like hotcakes whatever the game would be in the end.
 

geminito

Liturgist
Joined
Sep 24, 2003
Messages
144
This site is awful and your opinions are not surprising. Why do you work on this site when you could be playing Fallout instead? Please go save humanity from the mutants and yourselves.
 

LlamaGod

Cipher
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
3,095
Location
Yes
geminito said:
This site is awful and your opinions are not surprising. Why do you work on this site when you could be playing Fallout instead? Please go save humanity from the mutants and yourselves.

maybe because we want more games like Fallout, i.e. good RPGs with real roleplaying.


Why do you post on this site when you could be doing repetitive linear quests involving rats and pillows?
 

Volourn

Pretty Princess
Pretty Princess Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Mar 10, 2003
Messages
24,939
"The biggest games in the world (not including Oblivion) are RPGS in WOW and Diablo II"

Bull.

You forget the Marios, Tetris, the GTA (which do have RPG elements), the EA sports games, and the good 'ol fashion Sims.

Don't speka bullshit without facts.

P.S. ES series sucks. let's move on, folks.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,038
geminito said:
This site is awful and your opinions are not surprising. Why do you work on this site when you could be playing Fallout instead? Please go save humanity from the mutants and yourselves.
Other thoughts by Geminito the Oblivion fanboy

Isn't that Vault Dweller's personal site? The opinions are not surprising.
Your opinions are not surprising and this site is awful.
Why is VD allowed to make comments on the front page? He makes Pete Hines look like a genius.
This site is shameless and your opinions are not surprising.
...Vault Dweller. I think he is probably a robot designed to scan all messages on this site, which is why his opinions are no longer surprising.
This site is awful and your opinions are not surprising.
I always wondered why MSFD came to this site at all and actually posted information! This is not the site for thoughtful discussion. This is an awful site ruled by RPG-haters. All your opinions are made to shit on others.
The problem isn't that people at RPG Codex hate Morrowind, they hate everything that isn't Fallout 1 or Fallout 2 (in that order). Oh yeah, and Planescape: Torment. All fairly linear games, especially PS:T. Codexers also like KOTOR, which is an extremely linear adventure game without any room for role-playing your character beyond saying "I am good" or "I am evil" and wielding a red lightsaber or blue lightsaber.

The arguments that Morrowind is not an RPG are complete Codex ass-wind. Morrowind is the only game where I actually role-played my characters. It's the only RPG that was open enough for you to be able to use your imagination and play your character according to your own ideas.
Once again, without being negative, what the fuck are you doing here if the site is so awful? No, seriously?
 

Volourn

Pretty Princess
Pretty Princess Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Mar 10, 2003
Messages
24,939
"Once again, without being negative, what the fuck are you doing here if the site is so awful? No, seriously?"

For the same reason, certain Codexers go rushing off to the ES forums.... to troll. Duh.

Thankfully, for me, as uch as the Codex is silly, it also does cool things. 8)

Like your hype for your game. (T)AOD is one of only two things that might get me to buy something over the 'net for the first time. :cool:
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,038
Volourn said:
"Once again, without being negative, what the fuck are you doing here if the site is so awful? No, seriously?"

For the same reason, certain Codexers go rushing off to the ES forums.... to troll. Duh.
The ESF is a game forum. Many people went there during Oblivion development to discuss the game. The Codex is a discussion site. If you don't like the discussions, and post mostly "this site is awful" one-liners, why bother coming here at all?
 

DarkUnderlord

Professional Throne Sitter
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2002
Messages
28,392
Vault Dweller said:
geminito said:
This site is awful and your opinions are not surprising. Why do you work on this site when you could be playing Fallout instead? Please go save humanity from the mutants and yourselves.
Other thoughts by Geminito the Oblivion fanboy

Isn't that Vault Dweller's personal site? The opinions are not surprising.
Your opinions are not surprising and this site is awful.
Why is VD allowed to make comments on the front page? He makes Pete Hines look like a genius.
This site is shameless and your opinions are not surprising.
...Vault Dweller. I think he is probably a robot designed to scan all messages on this site, which is why his opinions are no longer surprising.
This site is awful and your opinions are not surprising.
Those quotes are not surprising.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom