Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
I think BG3 would have won if it didn't consist primarily of gay sex and humans having sex with animals. A lot of people like normal sex. I think that's why BG3 lost but I could be wrong.
I don't think that's the problem. I think the problem is people have values and morals, and the fact that that stuff exists in the game disgusts them and makes them hate it. I'm only speculating. I have no dog in this fight. I hate dogs.
Does JA3 even count as a RPG? The official thread is located in the Tactical Gaming subforum. That warrants disqualification, which means that Elden Ring is still technically the reigning GOTY. Two-time champion, that is most impressive.
True, in addition to gay sex and sex with animals, the game also has monster sex and a full range of fetishes, from feet licking and bdsm to coprophilia.
I think BG3 would have won if it didn't consist primarily of gay sex and humans having sex with animals. A lot of people like normal sex. I think that's why BG3 lost but I could be wrong.
I don't think that's the problem. I think the problem is people have values and morals, and the fact that that stuff exists in the game disgusts them and makes them hate it. I'm only speculating. I have no dog in this fight. I hate dogs.
Given how successful BG3 has been especially among normies, that's demonstrably false
What is true is that some fundamentalists can't get their heads around the fact that what they think is degeneracy is just their own retarded and warped sense of morals
What is true is that some fundamentalists can't get their heads around the fact that what they think is degeneracy is just their own retarded and warped sense of morals
Please quote the part of the OP where I say this. All I've said is that it made it evident that TB RPG can sell a lot, something not that many people were convinced even by 2012 or so where we can suspect Sword Coast Legends started development. From Swen himself we know that the reason why Hasbro gave them the license was that DOS2 sold a lot, so the perception of TB=bad sales lingered and most likely still does.
Given how successful BG3 has been especially among normies, that's demonstrably false
What is true is that some fundamentalists can't get their heads around the fact that what they think is degeneracy is just their own retarded and warped sense of morals
Successful among gaming normies, people who watch twitch streamers and spend the rest of the day on tiktok/twitter. These people are normies in the specific context of video games, but if you look at the bigger picture, most of the population is still disgusted by them.
Anyone who claims that Arcanum is somehow vastly ideologically different than BG3 is delusional. Although I'll concede that Arcanum has far better writing.
Also no queers, thank you intolerant 00s-society. Entertainment overall was at its best when social conservatives still had a fingerhold of influence over the industry (90s-00s) as opposed to none (10s-present) or too much (30s-50s with a gradual decrease through the remaining decades).
Either them or the Resetera pearl clutching types, but I have to say as a rabid antisemite the gnome conspiracy quest even had me going "Jeez guys, tone it down a bit". You could try arguing that it's merely a parody of chud beliefs but uh, idk how successful that argument would be. In any case Arcanum came out back in 2000, BG3 23 years later. The Overton window has shifted so much in between the two games that the only delusional people here are the ones who think they're "ideologically the same". They can't be because the zeitgeists are completely different.
I do however wish that people would stop talking about the bear sex and shitting more on BG3 for its biggest sin, the 5e ruleset. I don't have to play BG3 to know it's a shit game, and that's because I've looked up the mechanics. Deep as a puddle and just as wide.
Leonard Boyarsky is a shitposting Jew, he said as much in that Tim Cain video. It's true that Arcanum and BG3 were both made by groups of liberals (Arcanum's team structure was also a deliberate attempt at having a left-wing hierarchy with no leads; it failed) though there's a a 20 year difference between them. Liberal ideology is not the same in 2020 as it was in 2000 as it was in 1980 as it was in 1960 and so on (though it remains the same in broad strokes).
A good number of turn-based RPGs and tactical RPGs from the past decade (Shadowrun Returns, Wasteland 2, Hard West, Troubleshooter and so on) are clearly influenced by nuXCOM in presentation (the movement grid and cover icons) and sometimes the 2 AP system. nuXCOM's pod behavior even infected Jagged Alliance 3.
Leonard Boyarsky is a shitposting Jew, he said as much in that Tim Cain video. It's true that Arcanum and BG3 were both made by groups of liberals (Arcanum's team structure was also a deliberate attempt at having a left-wing hierarchy with no leads; it failed) though there's a a 20 year difference between them. Liberal ideology is not the same in 2020 as it was in 2000 as it was in 1980 as it was in 1960 and so on (though it remains the same in broad strokes).
Yeah, well. Maybe it's wrong to call those people liberal, they are clearly not liberal at all. That is the whole point of contention, there is no "progression" here, it's a regression from liberal ideas to illiberal ones just with a insane basis of Morals to boot.
Is that "structure failed" something they said themselves and admitted they had to implement a traditional one to push a project out efficiently or something?
IIRC Valve has something similar (IMO they are way too big for it) and there's probably a bunch of other start-ups in tech that had such utopian ideas, and might have survived with it at least until they sold the business to big capital which brought in suits and typical corpo culture nonsence (which is pretty much how you define the end of a start-up phase, when shit starts to becoming more rigid and corporate). Wondering about the "case study" side of this on how it panned out according to the founding Troika themselves.
In general this kind of thing can work fine on a really small scale, if the whole company is the size of a single team (excluding the bureacrats, although accounting and HR can be outsourced and the company can really be just developers). Furthermore if everyone has an equal stake as an owner a rigid hierarchy is quite frankly impossible, the legal side of things already makes it so due to the power relationship/dynamics it creates within the organization.
Anyone who claims that Arcanum is somehow vastly ideologically different than BG3 is delusional. Although I'll concede that Arcanum has far better writing.
Also no queers, thank you intolerant 00s-society. Entertainment overall was at its best when social conservatives still had a fingerhold of influence over the industry (90s-00s) as opposed to none (10s-present) or too much (30s-50s with a gradual decrease through the remaining decades).
It's true that Arcanum and BG3 were both made by groups of liberals (Arcanum's team structure was also a deliberate attempt at having a left-wing hierarchy with no leads; it failed)
I just finished TOEE last week, good game. It had the only good romance I've ever seen in a video game, but I had to kill the wife because she picked up a magic item I wanted and wouldn't give it back.
Leonard Boyarsky is a shitposting Jew, he said as much in that Tim Cain video. It's true that Arcanum and BG3 were both made by groups of liberals (Arcanum's team structure was also a deliberate attempt at having a left-wing hierarchy with no leads; it failed) though there's a a 20 year difference between them. Liberal ideology is not the same in 2020 as it was in 2000 as it was in 1980 as it was in 1960 and so on (though it remains the same in broad strokes).
Yeah, well. Maybe it's wrong to call those people liberal, they are clearly not liberal at all. That is the whole point of contention, there is no "progression" here, it's a regression from liberal ideas to illiberal ones just with a insane basis of Morals to boot.
Your illiberals just take the bs liberals claim to believe seriously. There's a reason why I claim to be ancient Hyperborean reactionary in comparison with your beliefs that would get you burned on stake even in depraved times of 1200 AD
Does JA3 even count as a RPG? The official thread is located in the Tactical Gaming subforum. That warrants disqualification, which means that Elden Ring is still technically the reigning GOTY. Two-time champion, that is most impressive.
As in the title. For some time now, I've noticed that any discussion of bigger cRPGs released in the last couple of years(nearly a decade really) ends up with everyone proclaiming how shit they are and how they really can't match to masterpieces like KOTOR2, Alpha Protocol and Dragon Age: Origins. Somehow, people happened to forget how the whole cRPG "market" looked like after the deserved death of Troika and move of Bioware towards console games.
I want to remind you the period between 2004 and 2014 and set it against 2014-2019 - yes, I'm giving a massive handicap to the newer releases.
So between January 2004 and January 2014 if you were on the market looking for something resembling the IE games/Fallout and I'll be very liberal. I only care about isometric point of view and tactical combat(RT or TB doesn't matter) and I'll be much more agnostic in the first period. Anyway enough talking. I filter out super small games and vogelware because Vogel releases a game yearly so it really evens out no matter what you do, we don't need more clutter to make this point.
In the first period we have:
NWN2 with the expacs
1st Expac
2nd Expac
1st Drakensang Game
2nd Drakensang game
Dragon Age 1
Dragon Age 2
Knights of the Chalice
Shadowrun Returns
Aarklash Legacy
Expeditions:Conquistador
And that's about it. As you can see I've included some games that I guess some of you would include as part of a sort of cRPG renaissance(the last 3 positions released in 2013) so the real stink isn't felt there. Let's go for the 2nd period.
Divinity: Original Sin
Wasteland 2
Underrail
The Age of Decadence
Pillars of Eternity
Tyranny
Divinity:OS2
Tower of Time
Torment:whaever
PoE2
Pathfinder Kangmaker
Now I did a lot to pad the releases in the earlier period, I hope you can see that. The latter one had games like Blackguards or Sword Coast Legends or Expeditions Vikings etc. but I've decided to be nice and not include it, had they been 2013 releases I would've counted them on previous list. What I want to say by this listing is that somehow, with heavy handicap the latter period produced much more of the kind of RPGs that Codex is generally interested in. Now obviously an argument about quality vs. quantity can be raised, but it's not like Drakensang is a high bar. What this listing isn't showing is that RPGs as a genre were certainly very alive in that period, many very era-defining games were released in that period. Ask any normie you want, he'll be able to list masterpieces such as Oblivion, Fallout 3, Mass Effect, The Witcher(2?) yadda yadda. This is a period where all studios had major difficulties finding money for making anything that didn't have action combat, when everyone was proclaiming turn based combat as an artifact of a begone era etc. etc. There is a reason it's dubbed the decline and renaissance is also being postulated as coming at the end of it.
The few games that were released back then have built up some legendarily reputation while the latter titles(as well as those between the end of 2018 and today) are more likely to be derided and you have to be clinically insane. Dragon Age:Origins for instance is a game with 3 classes, where 2 of these classes play exactly the same and the game offers very limited amount of combat options, its combat system is based on cooldowns etc. etc. and yet it will get more praises for combat than Deadfire in spite of the fact that both from system, gameplay and design perspective it's just better at every single point of it. I won't go on about the claims that KOTOR had better combat than PoE2, because this is just Alzheimer tier
People pretend have somehow forgotten approximately 25 years of execs, journalists, analytics, developers etc. saying that turn based combat is dead. You can't sell turn based game. Then there comes Baldurs Gate 3, it takes 5E and implements it relatively faithfully(remember Sword Coast Legends - Hasbro execs probably thought that that was the way for videogame adaptations to go) implements a turn based combat system that maybe isn't a challenge for someone who ate his teeth at RPGs but then again very few games are. I know the kinds of people who NEVER play TB games and they've played this one and thought it's amazing. It is a proof that everything codex hivemind said since its inception was correct. What does Codex have to say about it then? You tell that yourself.
I am not great fan of Owlcat games, but aside from the fact that again, they've adapted Pathfinder PNP system relatively faitfully(apparently there's a huge stat bloat for enemies but I have no idea about Pathfinder) and to give them huge credit for something, they went for something that was always there in RPGs but was never realise and that was adding some degree of quasi-strategic overworld game. It's there because they've adapted preexisting modules that had these things in them, but that was always a direction that cRPG's could've expanded towards and that is worth mentioning already. What will they get on this forum though as of AD 2024? You've guessed it.
Hurka Durka it's because it's politics in my gaming
First of all, you are a disgusting, crazy leftists by the standard of 1200 AD Europe. I am a reactionary by the standards of 10000 BC when Sons of Tur fought Sons of Ari on the frostbound steppes of Hyperborea. We are not the same, there has been a lot of decline between me and you. On little bit more serious note this forum has shifted rightwards politically over the years - I've shifted too, far more than the average - and it's likely that it annoys me just like it annoys most of you(and trust me - more than most of you). Secondly as I've said in another thread this is sadly something you will have to live with because:
Modern videogame writers are people with literature degree from 4 years ago, and if you haven't been asleep for the last 100 years you know exactly what kind of person graduates with a degree in literature, fails as a writer for literature graduates, then fails as a genre fiction writer and then ends up writing for videogames or p&p RPG's - that person took all the racial/sexual agitation seriously, edit and expresses it with no subtlety end of edit there's no other way for them to survive university otherwise.
Now that being said a lot of the classics started having some subversive elements in them as soon as anything resembling full time writer showed up in them. Majority of devs were always liberal, you can almost bet they were atheists too. I think my fav example of this is Arcanum(terrible game btw), which, although it has some edgy content(Isle of Despair), frames industrialisation through the lens of at the very least a social democrat with orcs and half orcs being a racial allegory and so on. Unless you want to go mad or stop playing games and only come here to complain(in which case you're a bitch and should do something else with your life), then there really isn't any way around it than to just ignore writing all together and focus on the aspect where by all means the genre had recovered that is gameplay which is by all means the better out of the two.
The problem is that this wasn't a thing just couple of years ago, outside of general Pillars of Eternity well... scepticism after it mindbroke a bunch of people in here. However, while people complained about things like armour system in Divinity:OS2 you could still see they've enjoyed it, same went for pathfinder etc. You've had people just approaching all this like reasonable. So what happened that broke codex hivemind? I cannot imagine anything than a psychic effect of the bear sex marketing stunt for BG3. It must have caused you to materialise him during sleep and as his cock entered your orifices your minds escaped the dreamland to never come back. Convince me it's not the case because I don't see anything else, other than this place turning into circlejerk where we have a procession of generations crying old good new bad except in 2010 "old" was 1998 and in 2024 it was 2008. I don't believe in the latter so I'll stay with the psychic bear sex hypothesis.
So to paraphrase your argument; games twenty years ago also weren't that good and had liberal elements, so if you think new AAA releases like BG3 have gay woke writing it's because you've gone insane. And you should stop wanting decent writing and be content with mechanics.
This is incoherent and clearly the codex isn't even united in this view, however inaccurate it is, because BG3 came 2nd in game of the year.
Your illiberals just take the bs liberals claim to believe seriously. There's a reason why I claim to be ancient Hyperborean reactionary in comparison with your beliefs that would get you burned on stake even in depraved times of 1200 AD
The point is, what people call "liberals" now are certainly not liberal and also not the "liberals" from before 20 years. Roguey trying to rope causlity between the two is as wrong as it is misguided. They have absolutely nothing in common with each other apart from the label that is a misnomer for the current group.
I did not have any male characters apart from my main in the Party, so I never encountered any of that. I played until act three with shadowheart, Lazeal (or whatever) and then later Minthara. Most companions are not really suitable for a "evil" playthrough. And since there is no real "evil" walkthrough, I am well aware about how fake the C&C are, people not playing evil might as well have a different experience. But I am also just saying what I believe to be true. Complain all you want, the game is bland as hell.
The point is, what people call "liberals" now are certainly not liberal and also not the "liberals" from before 20 years. Roguey trying to rope causlity between the two is as wrong as it is misguided. They have absolutely nothing in common with each other apart from the label that is a misnomer for the current group.
