Interview Gothic III - Part I

[Vault Dweller]

Now, now, don't be too vindictive. The fact that you were right about some things does not mean you actually had sufficient info to anticipate it - a lot of what you claimed as "fact" was, I still maintain, not known as fact at the time, and a lot of the reasons why I am dissapointed with Oblivion actually have nothing to do with the arguments you guys constantly threw at me (or the game). So keep your patronizing to yourself.

Why would I want to patronize you? It's not a "Look, I was right, you were wrong" moment. It's a friendly reminder about benefits of paying attention and not confusing facts with wishful thinking. Unfortunately, you are still going with "there wasn't enough info at that time" routine. Yes, there was. Anyway, we shall deal with the gaps in your perception skills later...

"Track record" is in the eye of the beholder - I lioke the series very much, but contrary to many peoples opinion, e.g. I found the "living world" aspect in G2 had taken a step back, as I encountered more NPC with no or minor scheduling, and the places just never quite reached the intensity and believability of the old camp. Also the whole dragon thing was much more cliche.

Track record does include questionable story elements and linear tendencies toward the end.

Finally, besides being larger there was little in the way of evolution or innovation in the second part. Say what you want about TES, but they were not afraid to try new things - some are good, some are bad.

Yep, Beth would try anything for an extra buck, no arguing here. As for the innovation or lack thereof, as you claim, in the second game, there were some new things, like weapon crafting (recepies), an optional new guild (different mechanic and flavor), new class with different mechanics (paladins and runes), some choices & consequences experiments on smaller scale, etc.

But from this track record I am a little afraid that it's gonna be more of the same, and after playing both games + expansion, it may not feel as fresh.

Take my word for that, it won't be a problem. There are many changes. It remains to be seen if all of them are good though.

So it's track record not such a clearcut thing to me.

Track record is what the developer is all about, not the game. I.e. what kinda games a developer wants to make & why, what to expect, the trust issues, design philosophies, etc.

As for RPG elements, I guess the fact that not even the makers of the game agree should tell you something, so what improvement can we expect on that end?

What's in a name? On one hand, we have a game with many role-playing elements, but the developer thinks it's not an RPG; on the other hand, we have a game with very few RPG elements, but the developer thinks it's the greatest RPG ever. See my point?

But mostly, all I am saying is that there are certainly things in the FAQ posts that are ambiguous, and there may be more left unsaid. But the wait and see attitude applies to this game just as much as to any other.

*sigh*

 

[Claw]

Wow, the entire codex applauding an interview that openly states a game is RPG light and wants to increasingly cater to the casual player. Honesty is great, but this still is NOT really what I want to hear. On the other hand, the emphasis on choice bodes very well, and I guess that's the main reason why everyone here is so giddy for the title.

Well, they can call it what they want, I know some RPGs which have less depth in their "RPG-elements" than Gothic. To me, choice is at the very core of roleplaying. Does wearing a robe make me a mage or a sword make me a fighter? It's my skills and decisions which define my character, and Gothic doesn't lend itself so well to playing Mr Cando Itall, so I am more compelled to a well-defined role.

But people here should be aware that the wish of pleasing the casual gamer is a driving force in this games design, there may be yet undisclosed dissapointments in the design. That's a lesson I had to learn, just recently, so I'm a bit more weary right now.

It's not our fault you're gullible. From my experience, PB is being up-front with what they're doing whether we approve or not, so I do not anticipate "hidden" disappointments. They've described their plans for the skill system in detail, basic stats can't be simpler than before, and they apparently wish to expand on the better parts of the previous games. With any luck, the whole game will play like the first chapter in the previous games, without luck, I still can't imagine it being worse than before.
The only element I know so little about I might be disappointed when I do is the magic system.
Oh, and combat is an anticipated disappointment. There is good and bad about it: Finally shields, by all accounts implemented in the simple and effective way I hoped for.
I am prepared for a dumbed-down combat system, but there is a slight chance they'll implement it like in Gothic 2, just using the new controls as default and making the old controls the "alternative" setting.
Besides, I greet abolishing the required timing as it relies too much on player skill and caused some trouble, namely that NPCs always seemed capable of pulling off a combo much faster than I could. We ought to be on more equal footing now.

Of course, there is the possibility that it'll turn out you can just do about all quests for all factions and learn most skills of all professions in one go. But given they've stated helping one faction will descrease your standing with another, and you need a high disposition for "better" quests - I hope for a sort of ranking from "If money is all you love, then that's what you'll receive" to "General Solo, is your strike team assembled?" in terms of how closely you're associated with a particular faction, and switching sides will hopefully gradually get harder the more closely you've associated with one and advanced the plot. If you didn't associate closely enough with anyone in the end, or just scew up your relations with the faction of your choice in the end, you'll get the "Neutral" ending. (There has been information there'll be three endings, one where you choose Beliar's side (Orc-kin), another where you side with Innos and humanity, and finally a neutral ending if you help noone.)

Some wishful thinking there, but even if it's not that good, it's still not awful. Even if they just barly fulfill their promises it'll be worthwhile.

 

[Thrawn05]

Of course any of the Gothic games has its own strengths and weaknesses, and with each new instalment new boobs wormed their way into the design .

Certainly beats the "Trust us, it's going to be awesome" PR line from beth. I'm looking forward to this game.

 

[Atrokkus]

new boobs wormed their way into the design

This is reassuring. Boobies are always welcome. Especially the jiggling ones. Yess....

 

[spacemoose]

new boobs wormed their way into the design

This is reassuring. Boobies are always welcome. Especially the jiggling ones. Yess....

Boobs worming their way into something though? Thats a frightening picture

 

[Rhombus]

God damn, they're gonna get a mature rating for sure if they have jiggly boobies!

 

[Micmu]

If they'll have big Orc boobs, I'll be happy.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

My stance on Oblivion had nothing to do with being gullible, which is the part I find condescending. I probably followed the pre-release facts on Oblivion much closer than any of you, and I had my own doubts about the game. Your mistake VD, is that you confuse your interpretation of those facts with the facts itself. My interpretation differed, and in some instance mine was wrong, but that does not make it wrong or gullible becasue at the time my interpretation was just as much based on the limited facts as was yours. Just an example: I was worried (and still am opposed on prinicple) to the weapon skill amalgamation - but it has no discernable effect on my enjoyment of the game, to be frank. On the other hand I wasn't concerned at all about the dungeons or the way they built the world. But I found the familarity of "landscape densely dotted with semi-random dungeons of four types" a big and unexpected turnoff. The reason was that I immediately understood the way this worked, and what I would more or less find in all of these, and somehow that familarity immediately broke immersion and motivation for me. But that was nothing that we ever discussed here, that Bethesda lied about, or that I was gullible about. I also suspect that part of the reason why the quest linearity turns me off now is the very fact that we talked about it so much on this site. Sometimes ignorance is bliss.
BTW, me anticipating Oblivion was mostly about, if you want, track record - just the same as you claim for Gothic. You have to remeber that I liked -and still like- Morrowind, even slightly better than DF. Which is why I say track record is in the eye of the beholder. To me MW overall moved the series in a direction I appreciated (not in all parts, but overall), and I have explained the reasons before. To you the negatives were more important and that was the track record for you. So don't give me your "Track records" and "told you so's" don't tell me to keep my eyes open and see the facts - that IS condescending, fuck you.

About Gothic: Choice is a great thing in a RPG, in any game really, but it does not alone determine a good RPG. For me, the absence of character creation will always be a negative fact about the Gothic series, as much as I like them otherwise. Easily forgiven, but still negative. And what do you mean you don't care what they call it! That's from the same people who can bitch endlessly about a game that in their opinion "aren't RPG's". If labels are unimportant, than don't put the RPG label on such a pedestal either.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Your mistake VD, is that you confuse your interpretation of those facts with the facts itself.

I don't. It's the reaction to those facts that is subjective. Example: the dialogue system & quality of writing is exactly what I expected. However, some people are ok with that, etc.

Just an example: I was worried (and still am opposed on prinicple) to the weapon skill amalgamation - but it has no discernable effect on my enjoyment of the game, to be frank.

That's nice, dear.

I also suspect that part of the reason why the quest linearity turns me off now is the very fact that we talked about it so much on this site. Sometimes ignorance is bliss.

That's what Volourn told me once. Analyzing games to death does take away some enjoyment.

To you the negatives were more important and that was the track record for you.

Not exactly. The track record is the design approach & philosophy, which, coincidentally, creates too many negatives when implemented.

So don't give me your "Track records" and "told you so's" don't tell me to keep my eyes open and see the facts - that IS condescending, fuck you.

You've got some anger issues, and as we all know only too well, anger leads to hate, and from hate it's one a step away from the Dark Side, young padawan.

If labels are unimportant, than don't put the RPG label on such a pedestal either.

We don't put the label on the pedestal, my blinded-by-anger friend. We put the concept of what an RPG is there.

 

[Llyranor]

I also suspect that part of the reason why the quest linearity turns me off now is the very fact that we talked about it so much on this site. Sometimes ignorance is bliss.

That's what Volourn told me once. Analyzing games to death does take away some enjoyment.

I don't know, how blissful is it to play a mediocre game just because you didn't know better at the time, and even enjoy it, only to thoroughly regret wasting all your time spent on it afterwards?

 

[Twinfalls]

That's from the same people who can bitch endlessly about a game that in their opinion "aren't RPG's". If labels are unimportant, than don't put the RPG label on such a pedestal either.

Ghan, I think the key thing here is that Gothic was never proclaimed to be an RPG. Right from the outset, its makers said they wanted to combine features from adventure, action, and rpgs. And they did so with a no-bullshit style. And continue to do so - look at the latest interview for example.

Morrowind and Oblivion however were not just touted as rpgs, but as 'the fucking be-all and end-all of rpgs', with that awful bullshit style New Beth has made its arrogant own.

Not only that, but what's now called TES continues to be a disgrace to its heritage, the stuff without which it would not exist - Daggerfall's world, lore, systems and success.

Furthermore Gothic has offered more of the key aspect of rpgs - choice and consequence, than post-Daggerfall TES, and we have every reason to believe the developers when they say this will be even better in the upcoming game.

Anyway, on another note - I'm curious. How are you finding Oblivion plus mods? Surely, when combined with the many fine mods that are out there already, it's a better game overall than Morrowind?