"FO2 was better than FO1" :shock:
How could you Volly!
How could you Volly!
-
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 Is Troika Dead?
- Thread starter Sol Invictus
- Start date
Blasphemer
Milktooth
Novice
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2005
- Messages
- 39
Nope, you're wrong. On both counts. You lose.Some delusional shitbird said:
Thanks for the compliment but I don't have sex with homos. I wouldn't even fuck you if you were a woman. You are far too stupid for my taste.
Not from where I'm standing. Bioware's games look like they were designed for adolescents with limited attention spans. That's why they were a big hit, especially with all the horny teenage losers who probably masturbated over the thought of having sex with Viconia.
Were you one of them?
TOEE's combat was beyond excellent - it was one of the best turn-based combats in any game. Period. Nothing can compare to it, you know this. It was the most accurate and detailed implementation of D&D in any CRPG. BL's plot was better than anything your idol David Gaider managed to cook up in the john. Unfortunately, he forgot to flush the script. I never encountered the 80 respawning ninjas you're talking about because I moved through the remainder of the game at a fairly rapid pace, so I don't know what you're talking about. The respawning monsters in the Warrens didn't really bother me either, since you could take them out with a single shot. It just sounds like a reason to whine and bitch about something that isn't even a problem!
Once again you fail to understand the point because you're a dumb kid: Troika is a small independent development company compared to Bioware Corp. End of story.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahhahaahahahahhahaha right, kid. Bioware only cares about how much money they can swindle off of your parent's wallet. If releasing a patch will stop you from whining and bitching on the Bioware forums, they'll release one. They're shrewd businessmen and nobody is doubting that, but if you think they give a shit about their fans and care about their games more than about making money then you're deluding yourself, moron.
Troika released 3 patches for Arcanum. 3 for TOEE, and even supported the fans in modding, and Leon helped with workarounds in Bloodlines and I also suspect he had a hand in developing the fan-made patches when Activision tied Troika's hands behind their back over the subject. There is no disputing that Troika cares. You will also take note that Atari was entirely to blame for TOEE's bugs by not devoting any QA to the game, by forcing the game out before it was done, and by not supporting the game after it was released. Sierra forced Troika to implement real time and multiplayer to pander to the mainstream idiots, but Arcanum turned out better than most games. I have no problem with the way RT/TB is implemented in Arcanum: it's not as perfect as Fallout's but it's better than FOT's by a long shot. And it's WAY better than anything Bioware's produced over the years.
What was dumbed down about TOEE's story? It was non-linear and allowed for plenty of character decisions.
Vampire is an RPG. You can't expect Doom 3 style FPS combat in an RPG, moron.
You're either a liar or you're deluded. There is a risk in developing RPGs because they don't sell anywhere as well as FPS or RTS games. Hardcore RPGs are even riskier because the market consists of 13 year olds with ADHD and can't put up with watching enemies take their turns.
Some delusional shitbird said:
You lose for this bullshit alone. You need to get a clue.
Volourn
Pretty Princess
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2003
- Messages
- 24,986
Rock on, dude, rock on.
You keep lying.
A. Troika wans't FORCED to do anything. Only a fool would think they were.
B. TOEE's story was dumbdown. Heck, it was virtually nonexistent. Oh wow, it ha dmultiplee ndings. Multiplee ndings are useless if the trip to get there is boring, useless, simple, and crap.
C. Troika released 3 patches (the last one fixing EXACTLY 1 thing) for TOEE because the fans raked them over the coals for their lazy attitude in not releasing them. And, Atari play tested those patches and put those patches out. Nice try though.
D. Keep spilling lies like 'Troika cares for fans' when their actions say otherwise.
E. Yes, BIoware is about making money. So is Troika. However, BIO's actions illustrate that 1. They are smart enough to realize pissing off your fan base with buggy, crappy games isn't how you make money/stay in business, and 2. That what their audience wants are solid games they that work; not stupid combat like in BL or a horribly basic story striaght from the 80s with TOEE. R00fles!
Keep up the good work dude. You R THA funny!
You keep lying.
A. Troika wans't FORCED to do anything. Only a fool would think they were.
B. TOEE's story was dumbdown. Heck, it was virtually nonexistent. Oh wow, it ha dmultiplee ndings. Multiplee ndings are useless if the trip to get there is boring, useless, simple, and crap.
C. Troika released 3 patches (the last one fixing EXACTLY 1 thing) for TOEE because the fans raked them over the coals for their lazy attitude in not releasing them. And, Atari play tested those patches and put those patches out. Nice try though.
D. Keep spilling lies like 'Troika cares for fans' when their actions say otherwise.
E. Yes, BIoware is about making money. So is Troika. However, BIO's actions illustrate that 1. They are smart enough to realize pissing off your fan base with buggy, crappy games isn't how you make money/stay in business, and 2. That what their audience wants are solid games they that work; not stupid combat like in BL or a horribly basic story striaght from the 80s with TOEE. R00fles!
Keep up the good work dude. You R THA funny!
Volourn said:
You wanted to say that Interplay has more polished and bug free games. All three of these were horribly broken when they were released. Giants and SFC2 are good games, but they were godawful buggy. In fact, SFC2 shipped with it's major feature, the dynaverse, completely not working. Giants had a huge number of bugs including one of the major attacks of the Reaper race crashing the game each and every time it was used, the tornado attack. FOT, I think we all know about the bugs in it, right down to at least ten of the perks not working at all. Even the popular perks, like Sniper, didn't work right.
Oh, and on the subject of FOT, Chris Taylor even said the turn based mode for it was never QAed. So much for Interplay's brilliant QA department, eh?
BG was pretty damned buggy when it was released. The fix list for that game was a mile long. PST still has numerous bugs in it, and there are even fans still releasing fixes for it.
But while we're on the subject, what about Descent to Undermountain? It was one of the most buggy games ever released - back in the mid-1990s, when most games actually worked out of the box.
Jinxed
Liturgist
Milktooth said:
HAHAHAHA, I RUN a Troika FAN SITE! Yes, that's right, www.terra-arcanum.com
Either your entire post is a good try at sarcasm, or you're in real need of vacation.
Prove that you are serious about what you wrote, because... Holy mother of god, no one can be that stupid and arrogant.
Just for the record, I lost count of how many times I've played Arcanum, I've definetly tried out all the different character types there are, I love that game, seriously I do, but definetly not for the lame character and combat system.
Oh fuck it, I'll do it anyway:
Milktooth said:
If the combat system was very much connected to the character system. The problem was that it was FUBARED. Anyone who has a pea of a brain knows this. The combat was way better for melee characters and... Well, I don't really feel to list out all the things, the list is darn long and everyone here knows it, except you. Go read up.
Right, in that case, the mod that removed all the random encounters from the game did not exist. Furthermore, mods that rebalanced random encouters don't exist as well.
With a high outdoorsman skill in fo, you could succesfully choose not to go into the encounter. A lot of people moaned about random encounters in Arcanum, how do I know this? I was in the community since the release of the game and visited a lot of forums and was staff at one. That's how I know. It wasn't only me who was getting tired of fighting 5 wolves, some bears, kites or some other shitbags as high as 4 times when travelling between cities. The train did not take you everywhere and if you had the dog you were fucked. Even a mage with teleport had to do some footwork.
This is not complaining, it's stating facts. There is no comparison of low level mosters you fight in Arcanum and Fallout. Kites, wolves, undead... The whole game is filled with them.
Well fuck you too. At least I have the brains to seperate shit from everything else and by the looks of it, you're having problems with that.
Arcanum was so fucking easy that it hurt. Playing human gunsmithy tech only proved to be a challenge, because you didn't get any good weapons until far into the game, and the system itself is very unfriendly to those type of characters.
Fuck! I made a typo, I wrote dregde instead of dredge! Oh noes! Raise the alarm Bubba, the bombs are falling.
Avé
Liturgist
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2004
- Messages
- 468
Exitium said:
Remember what you wrote?
"games that run on 30fps look like slideshows on monitors. I just don't get how someone can say that 30fps is 'acceptable' when it clearly fucking isn't"
Or, how about
"People at hardware review sites wouldn't be criticizing a graphics card for performing at speeds of lower than 60fps if it wasn't a bad thing and I can guarantee you that it is most certainly a bad thing for a game to be displayed at so low a speed. It's choppy and headache inducing."
Or even,
"My bargain paid off. 35fps is fucking horrible. It's like a faster-paced slideshow, barely better than what you would see on TV. "
Straw man argument?
What the hell drugs are you on?
You clearly DIDNT SAY 30 FPS was acceptable if you were used to it, until pretty much everyone proved it was idiotic to think that 30fps was like a slideshow, or completely unacceptable.
What you said was
"You are trying to downplay the critical bugs in Bloodlines by saying they are 'common in games' Please cite some examples. Most games don't have critical game-stopping bugs, much less several of them, because they are unacceptable. "
NWN, Soldner, and quite a few of the other games on the list sold well and were apparently quite good behind the bugs.
Would you like to put state their development budget, time & Number of people on their team, and compare it to Troika?
Because I would really like to see the corollation.
They would be fallacious if I actually said the things you attribute to me, but I dont.
Delusions, remember?
Because you seem to think reposting news and a few reviews means everyone should bow before your godhood.
Have you written for any games magazines, or done any paid work for gaming sites?
Been accredited anywhere?
Been a part of the staff on any large game news/reviews site?
(yes, putting it according to numbers sucks, but there are too many millions of small fansites around to call anyone who writes a journalist)
Have you actually read the things you attribute me saying?
Because almost all of it I didnt actually say, and it's just you twisting my words.
BTW, about the minimum FPS in bloodlines.
A minimum fps of 5 is no acceptable, I get 1-2 in CS 1.6 when starting a map, and the same in most games when loading a map somewhere for the first time.
So dont bullshit.
Just to prove you wrong, here's my FPS numbers from fraps.
Code:
FPS
36
36
35
36
36
36
37
41
39
39
44
36
36
36
37
41
39
39
44
50
48
55
60
60
38
33
36
42
42
41
42
41
42
41
42
42
41
42
42
42
39
46
44
40
43
43
40
41
41
51
39
39
38
38
37
38
37
37
37
38
40
41
36
36
36
37
41
39
39
44
50
48
55
60
60
38
33
36
42
42
41
42
41
42
41
42
42
41
42
42
42
39
46
44
40
43
43
40
41
41
51
39
39
38
38
37
38
37
37
37
38
40
41
50
48
55
60
60
38
33
36
42
42
41
42
41
42
41
42
42
41
42
42
42
39
46
44
40
43
43
40
41
41
51
39
39
38
38
37
38
37
37
37
38
40
41
39
39
49
54
54
54
52
52
24<<<finished with the opening scene + decapitation
23
23
21<<<Loaded where you talk to jack
59
60
58
59
60
60
60
61
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
61
60
56
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
61
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
44
30<<<< leaving starting appartment after tutorial
23
5
21<<<<finished loading santa monica
38
38
51
54
34
59
61
61
60
47
60
50
58
46
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
50
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
61
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
40
55
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
44
36
36
36
37
41
39
39
44
50
48
55
60
60
38
33
36
42
42
41
42
41
42
41
42
42
41
42
42
42
39
46
44
40
43
43
40
41
41
51
39
39
38
38
37
38
37
37
37
38
40
41
36
36
36
37
41
39
39
44
50
48
55
60
60
38
33
36
42
42
41
42
41
42
41
42
42
41
42
42
42
39
46
44
40
43
43
40
41
41
51
39
39
38
38
37
38
37
37
37
38
40
41
45
60
60
60
60
36
36
36
37
41
39
39
44
50
48
55
60
60
38
33
36
42
42
41
42
41
42
41
42
42
41
42
42
42
39
46
44
40
43
43
40
41
41
51
39
39
38
38
37
38
37
37
37
38
40
41
59
48
60
60
60
36
36
36
37
41
39
39
44
50
48
55
60
60
38
33
36
42
42
41
42
41
42
41
42
42
41
42
42
42
39
46
44
40
43
43
40
41
41
51
39
39
38
38
37
38
37
37
37
38
40
41
60
60
60
42
21<<<loading club
19
6
7
4
6
5
4
14<finised loading
57
28
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60Jinxed
Liturgist
You had 60 fps going around Santa Monica? Damn, I wish I had that much. :/ I did a lot of research on the fps thing and this is what I came up:
In high end cartoons, each second is 25 frames for pal, or 28 for ntsc. This is perfectly normal, and most cartoons do not even get near. Only high bugdet movies get that. The other ones double, or triple the frames DRAWN in a given second.
A movie that has actual 10 frames drawn will still run at 25 fps. The trick is that each drawn frame is played at a ratio of 3/25 of a second, instead of 1/25. This is basically cheating, that is why animation seems to be missing. It's just not there.
In games, you cannot do this trick, each frame has to be generated, depending on the CPU power, and all, your pc may be able to generate at a ration of 1/60 per second, which is damn smooth. Suddenly, the ratio changes and the result is jerkyness, because the computer changed the ratio. In cases of persisting changes, we get something witch is known as stutter.
25 fps IS SMOOTH. Only if the frame rate is totally constant. The proof is right there in front of anyone, cartoons. they run at 25 fps and they are smooth. If one would increase the framerate to 60 fps, which would double the work for animators, people WOULD see the difference, but no one wants to make them at 60fps, because it's not cost effective. An animator would have to draw 60 individual pictures for each second, doubling the lenght of the tape, and the player would have to play it twice as fast.
Some games running at 25 fps are not acceptable, because the engine is flawed. Given more fps the player with see much better animation and can move faster, those games include Quake III arena, where the difference is noticabale up to 125 fps. A game like Doom III has this changed to 60 fps. If games had better engines, 25 fps would be very smooth but sadly they don't. A lot of them skip frames, don't display them correctly and then the bad frames are replaced by other frames. Animation can also be dropped. An engine would have to be capped at say 30 fps. Each frame would have to be generated correctly and non get dropped.
In high end cartoons, each second is 25 frames for pal, or 28 for ntsc. This is perfectly normal, and most cartoons do not even get near. Only high bugdet movies get that. The other ones double, or triple the frames DRAWN in a given second.
A movie that has actual 10 frames drawn will still run at 25 fps. The trick is that each drawn frame is played at a ratio of 3/25 of a second, instead of 1/25. This is basically cheating, that is why animation seems to be missing. It's just not there.
In games, you cannot do this trick, each frame has to be generated, depending on the CPU power, and all, your pc may be able to generate at a ration of 1/60 per second, which is damn smooth. Suddenly, the ratio changes and the result is jerkyness, because the computer changed the ratio. In cases of persisting changes, we get something witch is known as stutter.
25 fps IS SMOOTH. Only if the frame rate is totally constant. The proof is right there in front of anyone, cartoons. they run at 25 fps and they are smooth. If one would increase the framerate to 60 fps, which would double the work for animators, people WOULD see the difference, but no one wants to make them at 60fps, because it's not cost effective. An animator would have to draw 60 individual pictures for each second, doubling the lenght of the tape, and the player would have to play it twice as fast.
Some games running at 25 fps are not acceptable, because the engine is flawed. Given more fps the player with see much better animation and can move faster, those games include Quake III arena, where the difference is noticabale up to 125 fps. A game like Doom III has this changed to 60 fps. If games had better engines, 25 fps would be very smooth but sadly they don't. A lot of them skip frames, don't display them correctly and then the bad frames are replaced by other frames. Animation can also be dropped. An engine would have to be capped at say 30 fps. Each frame would have to be generated correctly and non get dropped.
dojoteef
Self-Ejected
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2004
- Messages
- 970
Wow, Avè, I haven't seen a post like yours in a long while. I like the huge font and the fraps log. Anyway, don't mind Exitium. He's just trying to save face. We all do it, and if you're here long enough, more than likely you'll do it at some point too.
As for the journalist part, I'm sorry, but once again you are mistaken. The internet has become a perfectly valid place for journalism. Also whether you're in a small publication or one of the largest in the world, you still get to be called a journalist.
Now if you want to call Exitium a shitty journalist, be my guest, but he is a journalist.
As for the journalist part, I'm sorry, but once again you are mistaken. The internet has become a perfectly valid place for journalism. Also whether you're in a small publication or one of the largest in the world, you still get to be called a journalist.
Now if you want to call Exitium a shitty journalist, be my guest, but he is a journalist.
Spazmo
Erudite
I'd rather not be called a journalist. It suggests certain tricky standards like "objectivity" and "diligence" and "not lying".
dojoteef
Self-Ejected
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2004
- Messages
- 970
Spazmo, that's not true. You can lie and still be a journalist; look at all the tabloids. You can also be a journalist with no objectivity; just look at the Fox News website. You only have to keep up those standards if you have integrity.
Anyway, no one was accusing you of being a journalist.
Anyway, no one was accusing you of being a journalist.
Avé
Liturgist
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2004
- Messages
- 468
But an internet site isnt a publication, lets be honest.dojoteef said:
According to classical definitions of journalism, when applied to the internet literally, almost everyone's a journalist in some way/shape/form.
Journalism is a profession, just like authoring, and it denotes a certain amount of professionalism.
Is my posting a rant about Sacred an editorial?
Or making a post about how buggy and crap it is?
Is pasting a link to news on eurogamer.net being a reporter?
Perhaps everyone has their own definition, but I dont believe any tom, dick or harry that writes on the internet becomes one.
dojoteef
Self-Ejected
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2004
- Messages
- 970
Whether or not you want to believe it, internet journalism is real. One of the more famous internet journalists is Matt Drudge. Most of what he does is link to news articles and he occasionally has editorials. Not much different than the guys on this site(though it is on a larger scale).
Anyway, it's a stupid point to be arguing. Believe whatever you want to believe.
Anyway, it's a stupid point to be arguing. Believe whatever you want to believe.
Avé
Liturgist
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2004
- Messages
- 468
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Drudgedojoteef said:
First report on the Clinton blowjob scandal, makes an estimated 800k to 1.2million from his site per year has written his own book, and interestingly enough
"A federal judge noted in a judgment on a libel lawsuit, which ended in Drudge's favor, that Drudge was not a "reporter, a journalist, or a newsgatherer"."
dojoteef
Self-Ejected
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2004
- Messages
- 970
We can play the wikipedia game if you want.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalist
Check under the section Internet Journalists, you will find the name Matt Drudge.
Also a quote from the article:
"Reporters are one type of journalist. They create reports as a profession for broadcast or publication in mass media such as newspapers, television, radio, magazines, documentary film, and the Internet."
There is no need to try and change my mind on the topic, it's not going to change. I thought I made it fairly clear that you can believe what you want; and we already know what that belief is. So perpetuating this becomes an effort in futility.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalist
Check under the section Internet Journalists, you will find the name Matt Drudge.
Also a quote from the article:
"Reporters are one type of journalist. They create reports as a profession for broadcast or publication in mass media such as newspapers, television, radio, magazines, documentary film, and the Internet."
There is no need to try and change my mind on the topic, it's not going to change. I thought I made it fairly clear that you can believe what you want; and we already know what that belief is. So perpetuating this becomes an effort in futility.
bryce777
Erudite
I agree with one point vol made anyhow.
Fallout 2 IS better than one.
One lasted about ten hours, for starters, and the dialog was not nearly as good...and the 'villain' was a bit faggy ala star trek TNG counciler troy. I played 2 first, so I did not have the same expectations going in.
There was just so much in 2, so many hidden things and so much to explore.
Fallout 2 IS better than one.
One lasted about ten hours, for starters, and the dialog was not nearly as good...and the 'villain' was a bit faggy ala star trek TNG counciler troy. I played 2 first, so I did not have the same expectations going in.
There was just so much in 2, so many hidden things and so much to explore.
Spazmo
Erudite
Volourn said:
Please feel free to do so.
Jinxed
Liturgist
bryce777 said:
I've got just one thing to say to people who like fo 2 over fo 1
Size<Quality
Dialog was ruined by easter eggs.
BTW, The Master was by far, the coolest villain in any RPG.
Otaku_Hanzo
Erudite
Spazmo said:
Elwro
Arcane
One of you said that Fallout 1 wasn't buggy. It's not true. Under DOS it could corrupt savegames; my friend got to the Cathedral only to see that the game crashed every time he tried to go to the 3rd underground floor and he couldn't load any of his saves. Of course, that's partially his fault for playing with 2 saves iirc.
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.