Interview NMA's big to-do about nothing posted as advertised

[Volourn]

"but you were comparing BG to ToEE without considering the circumstances, and that's where you were wrong."

Waaa.. Fopr the unlimited time, here's the situation again:

1. TOEE is Troika's 2nd game. BG is BIO's 2nd game.

2. Both games are D&D and hasd that franchise to push it.

3. Troika had the backing of Atari one of the big publishers. BIO had the backing of Interplay one of the big pubishers.

4. Interplay no longer exists. Atari does. It shows which of thsoe company has a better idea on how to do stay in business.

5. Troika had 2 years to make a rather short game. BIO had 5 to make a rather long game.

6. Troika's founders had a history in making top line RPGs. BIO's founders had a history making medical software 9I cna't even tell ya if it was top of the line since I don't follow medical software, lol).

7. BG was switched in mid prcoess from a seemingly generic action strategy game to a D&D game; while TOEE was D&D from start to finish.

8. Troika used probably the most popualr D&D module in history for the game while BIo made up some silly story for theirs.

Yeah, but BIO had all the advantages when it came to making BG when comapred to Troika making TOEE. Hahahahaha.


"He doesn't understand where he is."

Huh? I'm in North Bay, Ontario, Kanada which thought it sucks is evry much in the real world. You are becoming delusional.


"ToEE because of the short dev cycle."

TOEE had 20 months not coutning the time they spent on the engine before they got the contract. Plenty of time to make a good game consideirng its length and source material.


"specially when he try to show us that bioware is THE GREATEST THING in the world."

No. That would be me having a threesome with Drew Barrymore and Britney Spears. Why do you lie?


"He seems to have more enthusiasm over Troika and is defending their capabilities"

Exactly. I'm sur everyone remembers my many posts pre rlease of TOEE where I voiced much concern over various aspects of the game - from the opening vignettes to the basic story to the npcs. Troika jumped in and said all 'the right stuff". I thought to myself, hey, these folks made Arcanum and helped make Fallout; I'm sure they'll make the game like they say they would. As we all find out, all my pre rleease concerns were more than valid and were proven truthful.

A. Vignettes were nothing more than a throwaway start to the game more or less.

B. NPCs lacked personality and depth and came nowhere close to the IE games, NWN, KOTOR, Arcanum or even the FO npcs which wasn't even tryiong to have the deepest npcs ever. And, that's not to mention all the other inherited problems that TOEE npcs had like the stuff with loot. It was so bad that as I soon as I saw the first few in the inn, I didn't even bother to pick any up and others confirmed my fears.

C. Story. Not much to see here except, again, my fears which were laughed off by you goombas pre relase, also came tru. Troika isnerted the skelton core of the TOEE story and passed it off as deep and then blamed the module itself when it fell flat. Wrong. Anyone who has ever seen a pnp module knows that the story is 8always* skeletal and it's *always* up to the DM to fill it in to make it worthwhile.

I can go on; but TOEE's story has been told already. Hahaha.

The sad thing is, my liking of Troika is the *only* reason I am even remotely interested in Vampire inspite of its FPSness and Boobiness. Anyone else, other than BIO and maybe Obsidian were making that game, and I would not be thinking about it AT ALL.

We shall see...

 

[Vault Dweller]

The fact is simple, though. Troika's lost their edge

You are the worst kind of fan, Rex. You know, the one that changes his entire position after each book/movie/game/whatever. So, one game that wasn't supposed to be that great from the beginning is enough to jump to "Troika's lost their edge" conclusion?

 

[Sol Invictus]

Two.

I did not like Arcanum. I told Tim it was 'too fucking brown'.

 

[xemous]

ToE EEEVVIILLLL

Didd'nt most of the stuff in TOEE get cut becuase of the last minute change of the rating, and that was ATARI's fault because they chased up the wrong market share and ended supporting 2.7% and fucked over 93% of there the games player base.

This i can imagine was a fairly big hit to the games length, as I learnt more than the silly bothel was cut to suit the rating.

But for me, it was a great intro to 'hardcore' d&d gameplay, and the graphics were excellent, but the game ran slow for some reason, unopimised i rekon.

As i see it, .Create a party, .Explore some complex true D&D style combat .Homlett .Nulb. .Temple .End .
That pritty much sums it up.
I'm still hanging for the SP2 fix so i can play it as a different party.

 

[Vault Dweller]

1. TOEE is Troika's 2nd game. BG is BIO's 2nd game.

Again you are with that second game nonsense...

2. Both games are D&D and hasd that franchise to push it.

And they are both camputar games and they appeal to camputar geeks.

3. Troika had the backing of Atari one of the big publishers. BIO had the backing of Interplay one of the big pubishers.

And that's where the key difference is: The Publisher. Think about it, and let me know when you get it.

4. Interplay no longer exists. Atari does. It shows which of thsoe company has a better idea on how to do stay in business.

That's just plain stupid. Are you well?

5. Troika had 2 years to make a rather short game. BIO had 5 to make a rather long game.

Your point is?

6. Troika's founders had a history in making top line RPGs. BIO's founders had a history making medical software 9I cna't even tell ya if it was top of the line since I don't follow medical software, lol).

You should, it may help people like you lol. Anyway, what's with that "had a history in making top line RPGs" crap? Here are some fan facts:

Tim Cain
Jason Anderson
Leonard Boyarsky

So, what's with the bullshit?

Yeah, but BIO had all the advantages when it came to making BG when comapred to Troika making TOEE. Hahahahaha.

There are 2 factors that matter the most: time and money. Bio had both, Troika didn't. Period.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Two.

I did not like Arcanum. I told Tim it was 'too fucking brown'.

I see. That's a very valid concern for an RPG.

 

[RGE]

I’m not a system designer, though, so maybe I’m high. I like the idea, but some other people here have said that they think it would be a bit redundant to have both turn based and paused real time. What do you guys think? Would that be redundant?

I think it would be redundant. While I consider roundbased to be worse than actual realtime for action, I don't think that turnbased is better than roundbased for anything except moving several characters at the same time. My real beef with roundbased games is that so far they've been lacking both the action of Diablo as well as the non-linearity and roleplaying of Fallout and Arcanum.

I'd like to see Troika balance the PA game for proper real time, and then offer plenty of adjustable autopausing to enable something similar to the system that MechForce used. With autopausing for low HPs and absent player input, the game could play in regular realtime until the character has enough wounds for it to be dangerous, or until the player can't manage their tactical decisions and/or options quickly enough. I suppose it might feel like playing with training wheels, but I don't play RPGs to prove my mad gaming skillz. Not to myself or to anyone else. In fact, I don't want RPGs to be difficult - I want them to be interesting.

As for the debate about why BioWare let go of NWN in favour of Dragon Age, I'd say Dragon Age itself appears to be close enough to D&D that it implies that BioWare really loved D&D, and now they have enough of a reputation to sell their own stuff. Lack of D&D label might still cost them, but they save the money that WotC would have gotten, right? And they get freedom to change stuff. Most DMs want to change stuff even in their favourite game. Do things their own way. If Obsidian gains a good reputation by doing good licensed stuff, they too might be able to sell their own stuff and pass any licenses off to someone else. Hopefully they love their current licenses though.

 

[Stark]

My real beef with roundbased games is that so far they've been lacking both the action of Diablo as well as the non-linearity and roleplaying of Fallout and Arcanum.

what? what has round base got to do with non-linearity and role-playing?

I can attempt to understand the role-playing bit (what u mean is stats, and not gamer reflex) governing success/failure of combat? but round base with pause do mitigate the problem.

and what has round base combat got to do with non-linearity?

 

[Sol Invictus]

Re: ToE EEEVVIILLLL

Didd'nt most of the stuff in TOEE get cut becuase of the last minute change of the rating, and that was ATARI's fault because they chased up the wrong market share and ended supporting 2.7% and fucked over 93% of there the games player base.

No. Not most of the stuff. Just some RELATIVELY insignificant stuff. Two things: children and the Brothel. The Brothel data is still in the game, we have added it back into the game - and it's crap. It's just a small area with some meaningless NPCs and an NPC that can join you. Doesn't add much to the game.

This i can imagine was a fairly big hit to the games length, as I learnt more than the silly bothel was cut to suit the rating.

Around 10-15 minutes of length.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Some info for Volourn and anybody else who thinks that 18 months is ALOT:

D2 4 years
DS 3 years
MW 5 years
oblivion since 2002 eta 2006 4 years
arcanum 3 years
kotor 4 years
nwn 5 years
harbinger 4 years
kult 3 years

There is no info on nwn2, dragon age, bg3, fo3, but it's unlikely that they would have less then 3 years development cycles.

The time is from the interviews where developers often mention for how long the game was in development (i.e. morrowind since daggerfall, etc). If there is an error, it's due to any error or misleading in the interviews.

 

[Spazmo]

Fallout took a good three four years, too.

 

[Vault Dweller]

As for the debate about why BioWare let go of NWN in favour of Dragon Age, I'd say Dragon Age itself appears to be close enough to D&D that it implies that BioWare really loved D&D

That implies only one thing: generic fantasy sells well.

 

[Volourn]

"And that's where the key difference is: The Publisher."

No. Key difference is the devloper. Atari published both TOEE, and NWN yet NWN gets patch after pathc and has been much better recieved (this site doesn't count as 4 didngalings aren't enough to sway anything). Only difference? The developer.

As for Tim Cain and co. Thanks for my point. Tim Cain has been in the game industry since 1982. Did BIO even exist as a MEDICAL software company back then. WOWSERS! Like I said, Troika had loads of experience in the field comapred to BIo and they still can't be as successful as BIO.


"There are 2 factors that matter the most: time and money."

Bull. That's a lie, and you know it - espicially since you are someone who dislikes BIO games in spite of the length it takes them to make thier games. Youa re being a hypcrote here saying that good games take time yet a good number of the games you listed that took 3+ years to make you dislike. Are you being stupid on purpose?

Not to mention, there's lots of good games that took less than 3 years. I ain't gonna list them though; as you blew your chance when you spammed your bullshit opinion that good games take long time to make without backing up and when I said the opposite you asked for proof despite you not giving any proof to back up your original argument. I don't play games like that. You had your chance, you blew it, you lose. However, I'll say one thing 'cause I'm a nice guy: Sports games. They take 1 year to make and they are always some of the best games released each year. Game over. You lose as per usual.


Just for fun I'll list these games you lkisted and make you look like the hypocrite youa re:

D2 4 years - You disliked this game and preferred D1.
DS 3 years - You hated it even more than BIO games.
MW 5 years - You hate it.
oblivion since 2002 eta 2006 4 years - You've been bashing it since its announcement.
arcanum 3 years - You like it thoguh with some complaints though this game apparantly bombed finanically not exactly successful is it?
kotor 4 years - You apparantly dislike it.
nwn 5 years - You hate it as we all know.
harbinger 4 years - Didn't know you liked it. The game didn't do so well however.
kult 3 years - Not even out. Looks blaisse.


So, what's this bullshit that you think good games take awhile to make? Hahahaha. Why do you lie?

I also never said 18 months was a LOT. I said it was enough considering its length and size.

 

[Vault Dweller]

"And that's where the key difference is: The Publisher."

No. Key difference is the devloper. Atari published both TOEE, and NWN yet NWN gets patch after pathc and has been much better recieved (this site doesn't count as 4 didngalings aren't enough to sway anything). Only difference? The developer.

Well, first of all, as we've already discussed, Iply paid for the first 4 years. Atari got an almost finished product to distribute. I'm not sure that Atari would have agreed to sponsor 5-year development of a new game.

Second, NWN was an overhyped (ok, heavily advertised) product aimed at mass audience, ToEE was merely a niche TB game to satisfy some hardcode fans. Come on, Volourn, I believe you said that you'd studied journalism, so here is an analogy. A magazine commissions a large 2-3 pages central article and a short column. Would you expect the same overall quality, details, facts, etc from both articles?

As for Tim Cain and co. Thanks for my point. Tim Cain has been in the game industry since 1982. Did BIO even exist as a MEDICAL software company back then. WOWSERS! Like I said, Troika had loads of experience in the field comapred to BIo and they still can't be as successful as BIO.

Volourn, if you are unable to identify the reasons of Bio's success, you are blind and biased. Or you are really a girl :p lol

"There are 2 factors that matter the most: time and money."

Bull. That's a lie, and you know it - espicially since you are someone who dislikes BIO games in spite of the length it takes them to make thier games.

I dislike the lack of the RPG elements that *I* like, but I enjoy their games (other then NWN) as excellent adventure games. I am aware of the overall quality and efforts (other then NWN, of course).

Youa re being a hypcrote here saying that good games take time yet a good number of the games you listed that took 3+ years to make you dislike. Are you being stupid on purpose?

I said 2 factors that matter the most, not the only factors. You can't make a good commercial game with limited time and money. However, time and money alone don't guarantee quality. I thought that was clear, and I don't need to explain basics to you.

Not to mention, there's lots of good games that took less than 3 years. I ain't gonna list them though; as you blew your chance when you spammed your bullshit opinion that good games take long time to make without backing up and when I said the opposite you asked for proof despite you not giving any proof to back up your original argument. I don't play games like that. You had your chance, you blew it, you lose.

What a load of crap.

However, I'll say one thing 'cause I'm a nice guy: Sports games. They take 1 year to make and they are always some of the best games released each year. Game over. You lose as per usual.

You've got to be fucking kidding me! Sports games? SPORTS GAMES? Well, guess what, I'm sure that a tetris clone could be done in a month, and I'm pretty sure that arcade games take less then a year. Go figure.

D2 4 years - You disliked this game and preferred D1.
DS 3 years - You hated it even more than BIO games.
MW 5 years - You hate it.
oblivion since 2002 eta 2006 4 years - You've been bashing it since its announcement.
arcanum 3 years - You like it thoguh with some complaints though this game apparantly bombed finanically not exactly successful is it?
kotor 4 years - You apparantly dislike it.
nwn 5 years - You hate it as we all know.
harbinger 4 years - Didn't know you liked it. The game didn't do so well however.
kult 3 years - Not even out. Looks blaisse.

My likes and dislikes have nothing to do with the list. I simply listed some rpgs and their development time. Had I listed only the rpgs that I liked, that would have been biased and stupid.

Few comments though. I liked both D1 and D2, I preferred D2 gameplay but D1 monsters graphics and overall feel. I don't hate MW, I was merely disappointed. I liked DF (4 years in making I believe). I've never complained about Arcanum - one of the best games ever. I didn't like Harbinger. I played Kult demo - so so.

 

[Sol Invictus]

harbinger 4 years

Ha! I can't believe you put this in the same list as games which were actually good and/or commercially successful. Didn't know you liked it either, for that matter.

Harbinger had both time AND money. The end result was so awful that Dreamcatcher had to sell the game for 20 dollars upon release in order to make any sort of return on their investment. It certainly wouldn't have gone for anything more than that. I suppose it was all Dreamcatcher's fault that the game turned out so poor, eh, VD? Couldn't have anything to do with Silverback being completely inept.

Metacritic verdict: 56%
http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/harbinger/

I find the GameZilla! review very amusing. They give it an 80% but say that everyone who plays it will likely shelve it after a few hours. I wonder how much Dreamcatcher or Silverback paid them for that review.

PC Gamer gave it a 76%, because Dreamcatcher advertises exclusively in their magazine.

Adreneline Vault gave it a 70%. The review points out a billion of the game's flaws, however. I don't trust them for their scores sometimes. IGN (gasp!) and GameSpot are a lot more objective in their reviews.

GameSpot gave it a strong 45%: "Although the futuristic setting is a welcome change of pace, Harbinger falls short of the mark, with half-baked action and role-playing elements that are overly shallow and simplistic."

IGN hit the spot with it's 40% when it wrote: "It lacks ambition. It doesn't really set out to do anything new. Even with what it does do, it doesn't do well. Give this one a pass."

Bottom line: Harbinger is awful, and neither 'time' nor 'money', the two 'most important factors in the development of a game' (or so you say) could produce a good title with Silverback at the helm. Lionheart had a budget that was sliced, salary withheld and rushed out the door, and still came up with the same level of mediocrity as Harbinger, picking up a 57% verdict at Metacritic. That just goes to show that time and money aren't the most important factors in game development.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platfor ... ecrusader/

Can you guess what GameZilla's score is? 88%
"A patch away from gaming excellence. Recommended for "Baldur’s Gate" and "Neverwinter Nights" fans, after a good patch, this title will have all the goods."

My ass.

Game Informer gave it an 85%, writing "Playing Lionheart could easily be a completely different experience every time. [Oct 2003, p.141]"

Bullshit.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Harbinger had both time AND money. The end result was so awful that Dreamcatcher had to sell the game for 20 dollars upon release in order to make any sort of return on their investment. It certainly wouldn't have gone for anything more than that. I suppose it was all Dreamcatcher's fault that the game turned out so poor, eh, VD? Couldn't have anything to do with Silverback being completely inept.

I can repeat what I said to Volourn:

"I said 2 factors that matter the most, not the only factors. You can't make a good commercial game with limited time and money. However, time and money alone don't guarantee quality. I thought that was clear, and I don't need to explain basics to you."

 

[Sol Invictus]

You're still wrong, VD. Time and money, while extremely important, do not matter the most. What matters the most is the developer.

See: Jeff Vogel and Geneforge. Time? Money? Hardly.

Troika might have had a really great team going when they were at Interplay with Chris Taylor, Feargus Urquhart and Dave Hendee, but on their own, they just aren't cutting it as a team. They have individual talents, that is a fact - but what they may not have is proper cohesiveness as a development team.

See: Ion Storm.

Also see: Czech Republic during Euro 2004. They were the strongest team on the field, with some of the best players this year, but they lost to the Greeks even though they were better than all of the Greeks on an individual level, yet they failed as a team, due to lack of cohesion and focus. The Greeks, who are underdogs, weak in every possible way, and don't have much of a history in football managed to overthrow the giants. Will they win next season? Doubtful. But once was enough to prove that team spirit is more important than individual talent.



Now to Volourn:

Not to mention, there's lots of good games that took less than 3 years. I ain't gonna list them though; as you blew your chance when you spammed your bullshit opinion that good games take long time to make without backing up and when I said the opposite you asked for proof despite you not giving any proof to back up your original argument. I don't play games like that. You had your chance, you blew it, you lose.

Elaborate. Don't skirt the issue by saying 'you had your chance, LOL, YOU LOSE LOLOL'. You put it out on the table, now you have the burden of delivering the proof.

But I'll do you a favor: Dawn of War, Geneforge 1 & 2, Fallout 2, Evil Genius, Icewind Dale, BG2: TOB (I don't give a rat's behind if it was an expansion. it was as big as most games are), Planescape Torment, CAll of Duty: United Offensive, Homeworld 2 (despite VU screwing them over on time, they delivered!), Red Alert 2.

 

[rob]

interesting parallel exitium, and maybe also a good point.
But there is anything substantial that suggests that troika is really a case of too many maradonas in a team?

 

[Volourn]

"Second, NWN was an overhyped (ok, heavily advertised) product aimed at mass audience, ToEE was merely a niche TB game to satisfy some hardcode fans. Come on, Volourn, I believe you said that you'd studied journalism, so here is an analogy. A magazine commissions a large 2-3 pages central article and a short column. Would you expect the same overall quality, details, facts, etc from both articles?"

What a load of crap. TOEE had lots of advertisement. And, it was pushed on the same people who bought NWN - D&D geeks. They also were trying to hook non D&D geeks. Yous eem to think that turn base games automatically = hardcore gamers which the FF series proves is bull. TOEE had more than few rather large columns in gaming magazines and it was hyped around the net on the major gaming sites just like NWN was. Don't crap the foolishness.


"Volourn, if you are unable to identify the reasons of Bio's success, you are blind and biased."

The reasons for BIo's success are very simple. They know what the heck they are doing. It's not complicated at all. Heck, Vampire is almost done and ready for release yet no release date has been really set as the publisher can't even release it until the game its engine is based off of is reaeased. Talk about poor business sense on Troika's part. With BIO's recent license of the URE for one of their games; i doubt they amde the same bulcrpa mistake and if they did I 'd call it on them.

Bottom line, is BIO has the talent, and business sense and wherewithall to make games. Troika apparantly has the talent (imo) but everything else they do handicaps that talent and it shows in their games and their decisions.


"I am aware of the overall quality and efforts"

No, youa ren't. All you do is whine and lie about them. Heck, you don't even call them RPGs which they are so you have the perception of an igloo. In essence, you know nothing and your list proves it.


"I said 2 factors that matter the most, not the only factors."

And, I said your full of bull. Money and time ar eimportant; but talent always wins out. Then again, this shows your hypocricsy again. Afterall, you presumably admit to BIO's 'talent' and we both know they had time and money so what went wrong with NWN in your mind? See, youa re full of it again.


"What a load of crap."

Doubtful. But, it is, at least it's not loadS of crap that you trying tos howvel down mine and others' throats in this thread. Haha.


"You've got to be fucking kidding me! Sports games? SPORTS GAMES? Well, guess what, I'm sure that a tetris clone could be done in a month, and I'm pretty sure that arcade games take less then a year. Go figure."


Waaa... The argument was that good games can't be made in less than 3 years. I proved youw rong so now you cry. Game Over. I win. You lose.


"My likes and dislikes have nothing to do with the list. I simply listed some rpgs and their development time. Had I listed only the rpgs that I liked, that would have been biased and stupid."

No. The hypocrisy comes form the fact that you say that good games take time and money to be made yet fully half the games on that list you dislike which proves your statement utterly wrong.

Face it. Troika blew it with their 2nd game. BIO didn't with their second game. The only difference that matter s was not the publisher (it's nice how you try to give cedit for BIo's success to a company that has self destructed despite the fact that BIO has been going strong if not stronger without Interplay); but the dveloper.

As long as BIo has their shit together and Troika doesn't; BIo is going to continue to make top of the line games that will have financial, critical, and fan success while Troika will just flittter along floating and space with hits and misses.

Before crying that BIO has all the money and time they do; you should ask yourself why? Why do publishers seem to do well with BIO while not so well with others. Seriously; Interplay, Atari, Lucas Arts, and Microsoft all apparantly have bad reps (despite being successful) and have their share of bombs yet BIO games seem to succeed no matter what. Meanwhile, Troika continues to whine about Evil Publishers tm. and how those publishers are evry mean - ie. Atari and the TOEE stuff, Atari doesn't want a sequel to TOEE, Troika wants to do an Arcanum sequel badly but the publisher who its right won't budge, and publishers don't seemingly want to touch Troika' tb PA game with a 10' gun. Yet, funnily enough, we both know if BIO picthed the same exact idea a publisher would probably agree.

It's the same with the whole NWN vs. TOEE. When some gets a buggy copy of NWN they blame BIO. When someone gets a buggy copy of TOEE they blame Atari (except of course0. That's weird. NWN has the same publisher yet somehow Troika escapes much of the blame. Hahahaha. Hypocrites.

Stop making exuses and make Troika take responsibilty. At least when I complain about KOTOR's combat, inventory, and control; I don't go blame LA. LOL

Lameos.


Exitim: "You put it out on the table, now you have the burden of delivering the proof."

No, I didn't. VD did. He's the one who brought up the 'good games need 3+ years". He did so without prof or exmaples than when I called him on it he demanded proof. I gave him one as I was nice. I'm not doing it because he blew his chance. And, though we seem to be basically on the same side, you can't fight his battles for him. Maybe next time VD will not be such a hypcorite asking for proof when he originally did not give any himself.

P.S. You did my work for me anyways. LOL

 

[Sol Invictus]

What a load of crap. TOEE had lots of advertisement. And, it was pushed on the same people who bought NWN - D&D geeks. They also were trying to hook non D&D geeks. Yous eem to think that turn base games automatically = hardcore gamers which the FF series proves is bull. TOEE had more than few rather large columns in gaming magazines and it was hyped around the net on the major gaming sites just like NWN was. Don't crap the foolishness.

TOEE definitely had a LOT of coverage, not as much as NWN, but definitely more than a lot of other games. It even had the endorsement of Gary Gygax, who for some reason (cough) withdrew his endorsement just before the game was released. Remember the "Signed Copies" on GameSpy? They withdrew them and it never happened. Atari also pulled the demo (and released it only 2 weeks later) becauase they felt it displayed the game's weaknesses too blaringly for its sparse dialogue and lack of content. The Moathouse is an incredibly short area and comprises of 1/3rd of the game.

Atari also went ahead with the 6-hour trial TryMedia release for some reason or another. Extra sales?

It's pretty clear that a lot of people were interested in the game, and that interest waned after some people got their hands on it and shared their experience with friends, and wrote reviews of them in the magazines. Remember the Atari forums? They were swamped with complaints, more so than NWN's ever was on release. NWN may have had more numerous bugs (most, if not all of which are fixed now) but with the exception of the savegame corruption that occured to some people (I'm one) the game never CTD'd, or have any of the horrible, and obvious bugs that TOEE had. TOEE would CTD for people half the time before the 2nd patch was released many, many months later. Heck, the fucking executable wouldn't work properly either, so much so that Huy posted a Sticky on the Atari forum linking people to GameCopyWorld.com urging them to grab the cracked EXE because the one that came with the game would crash on startup for a lot of people. Someone at Atari/Troika apparently didn't bother to test the Safedisc triggers on a variety of hardware set ups.

Atari is rightfully to blame for most of the bugs slipping their QA, with both NWN and TOEE. Just as I don't blame Troika for all the bugs, I wouldn't blame Bioware for all the bugs that came with the original game in pre-patch status. At least Bioware was extremely quick to fix it, devoting actual resources to it. The difference, though, is that some of TOEE's bugs were so obvious it's questionable why nobody at Troika caught it before they sent off the RC. Magic Weapon & Magic Armor, for instance. Weapon crafting crashing the game 100% of the time, as a more serious issue.

If anyone wants to argue that Troika may not have had the resources to do the same, I will state this: TOEE isn't exactly a flop either, not with 300k sales. If any of you want to argue about TOEE's failures, stick with the facts. You can't have it both ways by claiming Troika didn't have the money to fix it, all the while stating that Troika made a good sum of money with it. Patches aren't exactly expensive. Even little companies with little money do it. Ascaron for instance, with Sacred 1.7.

My understanding of Troika is basically this: while they may have the talent, they just don't have the clout. A good company usually benefits from good management, which is something Troika doesn't seem to have, and never seemed to have. Their "heads" don't seem to be able to voice their concerns with publishers, concerns that are urgent and need desparate looking into. Do you think most of the other Triple A development teams would have allowed the Arcanum "3 month delay for simultanious international release, oh BTW we already shipped the game off to suppliers" debacle to happen? How about, the "Atari forced a word count on us " issue? Bioware had no problem getting their own word count removed from LucasArts - possibly by sabotaging the presented dialogue (to make it asinine and basic) as a strong, and valid reason to remove the wordcount.

You know what's really sad? Troika couldn't be arsed (or didn't have the clout or speaking ability) to get Patch 2 of TOEE released. It's true. In fact, the release of Patch 2 can be attributable to the efforts made by Atari's localization manager in Japan to push its release, as the game was only being released in Japan and he didn't want to release a buggy product over there. As I understand it, Steve had to be the one to do all the convincing via personal e-mails with the Japanese guy. Where the hell was Troika's senior management?

Now you'll forgive me (and the rest of the CO8 community) if we aren't exactly happy with Troika.

I think Volourn said it best when he said (and I paraphrase), "Bioware has their shit together, while Troika does not."

 

[Vault Dweller]

TOEE had more than few rather large columns in gaming magazines and it was hyped around the net on the major gaming sites just like NWN was.

Let me know when you are done lying.

Heck, Vampire is almost done and ready for release yet no release date has been really set as the publisher can't even release it until the game its engine is based off of is reaeased. Talk about poor business sense on Troika's part.

On the contrary, it was a smart move as HL2 is overhyped, and Bloodlines would probably get some sales simply by association. Nobody could have predicted the problem HL2 development and release ran into.

Bottom line, is BIO has the talent, and business sense and wherewithall to make games. Troika apparantly has the talent (imo) but everything else they do handicaps that talent and it shows in their games and their decisions.

Quite a business analyst you are. Don't quit your day job yet.

No, youa ren't. All you do is whine and lie about them. Heck, you don't even call them RPGs which they are so you have the perception of an igloo.

Here is a good quote I dug up when I was looking for the development time:
http://rpgvaultarchive.ign.com/features ... t1_a.shtml

Jonric: In your minds, what qualifies a game as an RPG? Do you have a static or fairly static definition, or is it more fluid and subjective? How important or unimportant is this genre label to you, and how do you feel about genre labels in general? Are they useful to you personally?

Ray Muzyka: Very difficult question. If one needs to define such things, I think that an RPG can include any number of from a list of "RPG-like" features. When it includes enough of these features, then people start referring to it as a "roleplaying game". At its simplest, an RPG includes a character with whom you identify, whose abilities progress and develop during the course of the game based on your efforts; of course RPGs also include a deep and immersive storyline. But there are many different ways to build a roleplaying game - I'd argue that games like Metal Gear Solid, Deus Ex, Diablo, Baldur's Gate, EverQuest, Neverwinter Nights, and Silent Hill are all RPGs, but different types of RPGs.

Greg Zeschuk: I don't really have an answer to this question - in my opinion games don't really need definitions. I don't like to get involved in the endless newsgroup discussions about whether or not a game is an RPG. There's no right answer and, more importantly, it doesn't really matter. What matters to me is if a game is fun. If it is, then I care about it.

Let me summarize it for you:
RPG Vault: What's an RPG?
Ray: Story with characters who level up (i.e. adventure games with stats)
Greg: I don't even know what an RPG is, I like fun games.

In essence, you know nothing and your list proves it.

In essense, your posts in this thread color you clueless :p

Money and time ar eimportant; but talent always wins out.

What are you, 12? Have you been to the real world yet? Talent is necessary of course, but it would be useless without investements to give it creative freedom. Remind me again, who got the Fallout license? Talent or money? Where was talent when Jefferson got shelved? Where is Sir-Tech, the talented studio behind Wizardry and Jagged Alliance? Where is Looking Glass Studio? Why there are money to make all that crap that shelves are filled with, but not for great games? What decides whether a game will be made? Money, not talent. Remember Sea Dogs 2? Well, money figured that Pirates of the Carribean would sell better. Etc, etc, etc.

Then again, this shows your hypocricsy again. Afterall, you presumably admit to BIO's 'talent' and we both know they had time and money so what went wrong with NWN in your mind? See, youa re full of it again.

NWN has the crappiest OC evar. I told that many times. I'm not interested in MP, i know, my loss, whatever. Now, tell me YOU weren't disappointed in the OC.

Waaa... The argument was that good games can't be made in less than 3 years. I proved youw rong so now you cry. Game Over. I win. You lose.

Nice dodge. Well, if you are trying to win on technicality, what the hell is "youw rong"? Is that some new internet lingo that kids are using these days?

No. The hypocrisy comes form the fact that you say that good games take time and money to be made yet fully half the games on that list you dislike which proves your statement utterly wrong.

Once again, for stupid people: I listed development times of various games, good and bad, to show the average time it takes to make a game, good or bad. Why did I do that? Because you and Exitium said that 18 months was enough time.

Face it. Troika blew it with their 2nd game. BIO didn't with their second game. The only difference that matter s was not the publisher (it's nice how you try to give cedit for BIo's success to a company that has self destructed despite the fact that BIO has been going strong if not stronger without Interplay); but the dveloper.

We don't know if Troika blew it. Perhaps they delivered what Atari expected them to deliver (reference to the Atari report). Personally, I wish they did more, and they could have, but stating that they blew it without any facts is stupid. Just like comparing it to BG is stupid. I wish you were smarter to realize that.

As long as BIo has their shit together and Troika doesn't; BIo is going to continue to make top of the line games that will have financial, critical, and fan success while Troika will just flittter along floating and space with hits and misses.

I will take Arcanum over any pseudo RPG crap that Bio produces annually.

Before crying that BIO has all the money and time they do; you should ask yourself why? Why do publishers seem to do well with BIO while not so well with others.

Uhh, real time easy to get into games for mass market? That one seems to be teh w1nz0r these days.

Troika wants to do an Arcanum sequel badly but the publisher who its right won't budge, and publishers don't seemingly want to touch Troika' tb PA game with a 10' gun. Yet, funnily enough, we both know if BIO picthed the same exact idea a publisher would probably agree.

If you just said that Bio could have pitched a TB non-linear, multi path (as in a lot of "exponential" work) game to a publisher, you are even more delusional that I thought possible. You are plain crazy.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I agree with many things you've said, Exitium (yeah, I'm suprised myself). Just a few quick comments:

Remember the Atari forums? They were swamped with complaints, more so than NWN's ever was on release.

It's worth noting that many complaints were from people who couldn't handle "the complexity of TB combat", weren't familiar with the actual non-bastardized rules, and were plain stupid. There is no denying that ToEE was buggy though, and unplayable on some computers.

Their "heads" don't seem to be able to voice their concerns with publishers, concerns that are urgent and need desparate looking into. Do you think most of the other Triple A development teams would have allowed the Arcanum "3 month delay for simultanious international release...

About that, I don't think it's that simple. Recent examples that come to mind are HL2 and Jefferson.

 

[Volourn]

"On the contrary, it was a smart move as HL2 is overhyped, and Bloodlines would probably get some sales simply by association. Nobody could have predicted the problem HL2 development and release ran into."

Yeah, cause we all know the IWD series and PST sold millions due to its association with BIO and the IE. Hahahaha. Sure, seriosuly, it'll selkl some more copies, but what will detemrine its sales is how much people really wanta n FPS-RPG hybrid where they can play a Vampire. And, how many of those have either forgotten or are ignoring the disaster that was the VTM game.

"Let me summarize it for you:
RPG Vault: What's an RPG?
Ray: Story with characters who level up (i.e. adventure games with stats)
Greg: I don't even know what an RPG is, I like fun games."

Your piss poor and skewered twisting of what they said proves nothing. Kinda ahrd to really tell what they think in shuch a short interview espicially when one of them badically didn't bother to answer the question. LOL


"In essense, your posts in this thread color you clueless :p"

I hope so. I don't need clues to post facts.


"What are you, 12? Have you been to the real world yet? Talent is necessary of course, but it would be useless without investements to give it creative freedom. Remind me again, who got the Fallout license? Talent or money? Where was talent when Jefferson got shelved? Where is Sir-Tech, the talented studio behind Wizardry and Jagged Alliance? Where is Looking Glass Studio? Why there are money to make all that crap that shelves are filled with, but not for great games? What decides whether a game will be made? Money, not talent. Remember Sea Dogs 2? Well, money figured that Pirates of the Carribean would sell better. Etc, etc, etc."

*yawn* Almost the big time game developers started small. Be it BIO, Blizzard, et al. They all have earned their success and the oppurtunity to get tow here theya re. Heck, both Troika and Obsdian have gotten it a bit easier because they can spam their owners' history. Afterall, we see it with Troika and the 'Creators of FO' tag line that makes the rounds when they'r emention. It's funny when Troika is most well known for a game they technically didn't even make, and only some of them helped create. Hahaha.


"Now, tell me YOU weren't disappointed in the OC."

Only because it wans't the best evar. However, I cna look past my owns elf made dispppointment and see thatd epsite the OC's problems it's better than most of the crap out there - ie. DS, MW, and sadly even TOEE. Heck, remember,I'm "on record" stateing pre TOEE release that I beleive that it would be better than the OC. Boy, was I *ever* wrong.


"Is that some new internet lingo that kids are using these days?"

Yes.


"Because you and Exitium said that 18 months was enough time."

Because, it is. And, we proved it. Me with the sports games and him with his list.]


"Personally, I wish they did more, and they could have, but stating that they blew it without any facts is stupid."

We both own, and have played TOEE. We have the facts right there. Outside of the combat SYSTEM; TOEE is a failue. And, oh, it sold ok too. But, not ok enough for an expansion or sequel apparantly. Hahaha.


"Uhh, real time easy to get into games for mass market? That one seems to be teh w1nz0r these days."

Sqauresoft sure doesn't seem to have a problem making money off of tb games.


"If you just said that Bio could have pitched a TB non-linear, multi path (as in a lot of "exponential" work) game to a publisher, you are even more delusional that I thought possible."

Yeah, because we all know a publisher is gonna turn down the chance to work with a devlopment house that's pretty much gauranteed an insta hit. Though; the JE and DA games will either confirm that or wash the BIo myth away. We shall see...


"It's worth noting that many complaints were from people who couldn't handle "the complexity of TB combat", weren't familiar with the actual non-bastardized rules, and were plain stupid."

Hahhaa. Mnay of the NWN complaints were along the same lines (switch the complexity of TB combat with RT/W puase) and there you have it. Don't make exuses for it. Though NWN had more compaliners mor elikely... then again, it has more than 10 people posting on its baords. Hhahaha.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Oops, missed one, I knew I disagreed with something:

You're still wrong, VD. Time and money, while extremely important, do not matter the most. What matters the most is the developer.

See: Jeff Vogel and Geneforge. Time? Money? Hardly.

I'm not sure what the right word is: commercial? I meant games that are released in stores through publishers, the one that have a chance to be sold in hundreds of thousands copies, and thus justify and pay for many people's efforts. Jeff sells several thousands copies per game, which is a different ballpark.

Troika might have had a really great team going when they were at Interplay with Chris Taylor, Feargus Urquhart and Dave Hendee, but on their own, they just aren't cutting it as a team. They have individual talents, that is a fact - but what they may not have is proper cohesiveness as a development team.

I guess Bloodlines will tell.

But I'll do you a favor: Dawn of War, Geneforge 1 & 2, Fallout 2, Evil Genius, Icewind Dale, BG2: TOB (I don't give a rat's behind if it was an expansion. it was as big as most games are), Planescape Torment, CAll of Duty: United Offensive, Homeworld 2 (despite VU screwing them over on time, they delivered!), Red Alert 2.

Now, let's first remove all non-RPGs as they are much easier to make. Games like Red Alert and Homeworld only require basic gameplay, balancing, AI and cutscenes. After that part is done, al you need to do is mission design which is not very difficult. RPGs require all that AND tons of dialogue, checks, different paths, solutions, etc. Now, let's remove all games that are based on the existing engines and art assets. Reasons are obvious. What's left? Geneforge 1. I believe I've already covered that.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Yeah, cause we all know the IWD series and PST sold millions due to its association with BIO and the IE

First, there are/were many fans of the IE games who liked everything that looked like that. Second, traditionally, FP engines are much more overhyped that the RPG ones.

Let me summarize it for you:
RPG Vault: What's an RPG?
Ray: Story with characters who level up (i.e. adventure games with stats)
Greg: I don't even know what an RPG is, I like fun games."

Your piss poor and skewered twisting of what they said proves nothing.

Really? You must have piss poor reading skills. Ask somebody who can read AND comprehend to read the answers to you.

Kinda ahrd to really tell what they think in shuch a short interview

Come on. Let's not play dumb. They were asked a question, they answered it in rather detailed way. What has the overall length of the interview got to do with anything?

*yawn* Almost the big time game developers started small. Be it BIO, Blizzard, et al. They all have earned their success and the oppurtunity to get tow here theya re.

Blizzard did so well, because nobody ever pushed them to finish their games on time. Why? The publisher again. A blind person would start seeing a pattern here.

It's funny when Troika is most well known for a game they technically didn't even make, and only some of them helped create. Hahaha.

Haha indeed, bullshit boy. "only some of them helped to create"? Yeah, they were in charge of coffee and donuts.

"Because you and Exitium said that 18 months was enough time."

Because, it is. And, we proved it. Me with the sports games and him with his list.]

It hurts me to think that you are stupid, but I guess I must deal with this disappointment. Sport games.... that was priceless. I replied to Exitium's list above, btw.

Outside of the combat SYSTEM; TOEE is a failue.

True. However, its combat secured it a good place in the dungeon crawler section. NWN was also a failure, however its MP component made it successful. Etc.

"Uhh, real time easy to get into games for mass market? That one seems to be teh w1nz0r these days."

Sqauresoft sure doesn't seem to have a problem making money off of tb games.

That's Japan. Different mentality. You know very well what the publishers think of that here. There are many examples of successful TB games: JA, SS, XCom, even ToEE, yet they think that RT is da bomb. Go figure. Once again, money vs talent.

Yeah, because we all know a publisher is gonna turn down the chance to work with a devlopment house that's pretty much gauranteed an insta hit. Though; the JE and DA games will either confirm that or wash the BIo myth away. We shall see...

One of the developers on Bio boards stated that they would not make a TB game because there is no market (other then the niche one) for them. I can dig up that quote for you if you want.

"It's worth noting that many complaints were from people who couldn't handle "the complexity of TB combat", weren't familiar with the actual non-bastardized rules, and were plain stupid."

Hahhaa. Mnay of the NWN complaints were along the same lines (switch the complexity of TB combat with RT/W puase) and there you have it. Don't make exuses for it. Though NWN had more compaliners mor elikely... then again, it has more than 10 people posting on its baords. Hhahaha.

I've already posted for you once the quotes from many ToEE reviews that all stated that the game is insanely difficult and that casual players and DnD noobs need not apply because of the complexity of the rules and combat. I don't think that was the case with NWN.