I don't know why I still bother, but here goes.
Vault Dweller said:
No, I did not fucking compared DAO to Arcanum. Best since Arcanum does not mean every bit as good as Arcanum, does it now?
And "comparing" now means "saying it is equal in every way?" WTF VD?
Yes you compared them. Any statement you make which draws any parallel between 2 games is a comparison. "DAO is the best RPG since Arcanum" is a comparison of DAO not only to Arcanum, but to (shockingly enough!) every single RPG that was released in the time frame that you specified. No, you did not say it's every bit as good as Arcanum (and where did *I* claim you said this?), but if you meant "it sucks but we've had nothing better in 10 years" then you may want to revise your choice of words. And if you meant to say "DAO is awesome in a way that totally does not take into account any other game released before it" then that's what you should have said!
For the record though, there is nothing wrong with comparing games to other games.
WTF? *I* am not the one demanding that games be reviewed in a complete vacuum that excludes all games that came before them, including their prequels, any and all statements made by the developers about the game, and even the name of the game itself. Hell I'm not asking that these be the only criteria that be used. I am simply asking that they not be ignored and that we not pretend as if they didn't exist. They do exist, and they are important, whether you like it or not. And in fact I'm sure you do like it, otherwise what's the point of the AoD subforum here, your entire Iron Tower forums, and yes, the combat demo? Wasn't it (among other reasons) so that people could have a taste of what you're brewing, to give potential buyers a feel of the product you're making, and ultimately to get them excited enough about your product so that they end up buying it when it's released? Or are you now going to suddenly released a space flight simulator with no hint of romans or decadence or RPG or TB and then act all surprised if people rage at you? "But it's a
good space flight simulator! Why is everyone being stuck up about these insignificant details?"
As for the developers' quotes, I used them for amusement, to highlight Bethesda's bullshit, not to judge Oblivion. If Oblivion was a better game, let's say as good as Gothic 2 or Morrowind, it wouldn't have mattered if the developers were making shit up, would it?
Erm... yes it would? I would feel placated that the game's actually
good, but I would still mention that there's this laundry list of stuff that the developers lied about, that they advertised as being in the game, and that isn't, and I'd defiinitely criticize them harshly for lying. I'd
still end the review on a positive note and with a "GO BUY THIS RIGHT NOW", but just because the overall product is good doesn't mean I would ignore either what's wrong with the product or the fact that it is not what it is being sold as. If Oblivion was a great game in every aspect but still kept the complete and merciless butchering of the lore I wouldn't let that point slide; it's a TES game, it has TES on the box, and it butchers TES lore; it may still be worth buying, it may still be a great game
otherwise, but the whole point of a good review is to present as many aspects of the issue as possible.
I hope your reading comprehension is advanced enough to see the difference between comparing and judging based on.
Who's talking about judging the game based ONLY on the title? Did you even READ what I said?
This would also be a good time to mention I do agree that judging the game ENTIRELY on blablabla serves no purpose, but I also find completely ignoring EVERYTHING, including the fucking TITLE OF THE GAME ITSELF to be pushing it a little too far.
Oh right, the title. The most important RPG aspect.
No, obviously you didn't read what I said.
