Game News Tyranny Dev Diary #7: Companion Overview - Verse

[Starwars]

Well, he did ragequit the Obsidian forums after PoE and started posting here instead so there's obviously a huge axe to grind there.

Textbook example of:

 

[Sizzle]

Of course there's a chance paradox will intervene and force them to fix this, but I hope not.

So you can have fun bitching at all the bugs you presume the game will have, or will you not even play it, but still take pleasure in the perceived "Ha! Told you it was bound to be shit! Obsidian sucks, hope they go out of business soon!" thing many of the edgier Codexers seem to have going on?

This is the worst, most annoying, scummy attitude the Codex has to offer. He'd rather wants this game to be bad to see obsidian burn, telling "I told you so" than getting a good game. How low can someone sink...

Exactly. I mean, I get where the frustration with Obsidian comes from - their games are usually good, with unique elements not found anywhere else, but there is always something holding them back from true greatness.

So you get mad at them because you can see the game it might have been ("Oh, if only NWN2 had a better camera; FO:NV is the second best FO... but it's in FO3's engine, bleh! PoE's story!", etc.) with just a few alterations/different design decisions/better QA/more budget.

But for all of those faults, they are still one of the few last middle-sized independent RPG studios we have left, and it's not like that market will be made in any way better if they go out of business - they aren't Bethesda or Blizzard, or even BioWare, they don't dictate new RPG trends that others are blindly copying, all that will be achieved in that scenario is that some people here will focus their butthurt obsessions on a different studio - Larian, inXile, CD Projekt.

 

[Lurker King]

Oh cut that elitist bullshit that only the idiot gamers liked PoE meanwhile the monocled ones knew that it was shit. Nobody cares about the monocled, mostly Codexian players.

Since when elitism became a bad word? What is wrong in demanding the best and knowing the difference between great stuff and shit? Who cares that most people don’t care about the opinions of true connoisseurs? Are you talking about the overall sentiment towards PoE as indicators of what, exactly? Quality? The overall sentiment towards FO3 and F04 is that they are better games than FO and FO2, the overall sentiment towards Skyrm is that it is a better game than, let’s say, PS:T. It seems that your whole argumentation can be encapsulate in something like: most players don't care about the critics of Obsidian, so their criticisms don’t matter. It’s a silly way of seeing things.

And PoE is not a AAA game and Obsidian is not a AAA company. I don't think anybody expected it to sell like a AAA game, and Obsidian couldn't have done anything to make it sell like a AAA game.

You are missing the point. The question is not whether they were expected to sell like triple-A games, but whether they can impress publishers enough with those numbers to secure big triple-A contracts. It doesn’t matter if their numbers are perceived to be good for a medium studio, 800k for them is pocket change, they will not be impressed.

Who is holding you back from moving on? You don't have to wait until Obsidian goes to shit, you can stop caring about them right now.

That is a good question. Let’s see, the fact that some codexers insist of having false hopes towards Obsidian even if there is no reason at all to believe in them anymore, the fact that every single minuscule update about their games are posted regularly as if they were expected to be relevant to the codex audience, the fact that closet popamolers will use their games as an opportunity to dumb down the overall expectative on the Codex regarding quality, thus making it normal that popamole isometric games will be perceived as good games in the foreseeable future. The last time this happened, BGs became classics. No good can come of this. At least if they were openly recognized as triple-A studios there were be no expectations, no regular updates and enthusiast popamolers like you would be properly tagged without ceremony.

But for all of those faults, they are still one of the few last middle-sized independent RPG studios we have left, and it's not like that market will be made in any way better if they go out of business - they aren't Bethesda or Blizzard, or even BioWare, they don't dictate new RPG trends that others are blindly copying, all that will be achieved in that scenario is that some people here will focus their butthurt obsessions on a different studio - Larian, inXile, CD Projekt.

You almost make it sound like they are better than the likes of Bethesda because they are a medium studio, but the only reason why they are smaller is that they were not competent enough to become the likes of Bethesda and Bioware. In this sense, they are even worse than triple-A studios, since they like to pretend they are catering to cRPG geeks because they are too incompetent to secure big contracts to make popamole games. They are a bunch of hypocrites without creativity. Since they can't publish another Skyrim clone, they made an uninspired BG clone to cater to aged ex-Bioware fans. What is surprising is not that they get a lot of heat in forums like the Codex, but that they have posters like you defending them against all the facts and their past decisions.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Well there is a whole world outside of the Codex, it is just logical that you have to make compromises when you design an RPG.

Wrong, you have to make compromises if you want to be Bioware or Bethesda Jr.

Whaaaaaaaaat? Is there anything more relevant for a company than to make critically and financially successfull games,

I don't care what's relevant for them. Your reply was to me saying that the game will be worse than PoE. That has nothing to do with critical and financial success. Just because a lot of morons like something doesn't make it good.

Yes, I also believe that the game will go by unnoticed, but that has much less to do with it being shit than it has to do with Obsidian being shit at everything including marketing and ascertaining what players actually want and doing the same stupid "classic but totally for modern audience!!!" mistakes over and over again.

They had a game which people liked, which brought in money, and which they liked working on.

It's nice of you that you care more about how they feel than the quality of their games, shows great empathy, but I'd rather have games I want to play rather than worry about Sawyer's happiness.

Since when elitism became a bad word?

It was always bad among plebs.

 

[Sizzle]

But for all of those faults, they are still one of the few last middle-sized independent RPG studios we have left, and it's not like that market will be made in any way better if they go out of business - they aren't Bethesda or Blizzard, or even BioWare, they don't dictate new RPG trends that others are blindly copying, all that will be achieved in that scenario is that some people here will focus their butthurt obsessions on a different studio - Larian, inXile, CD Projekt.

You almost make it sound like they are better than the likes of Bethesda because they are a medium studio, but the only reason why they are smaller is that they were not competent enough to become the likes of Bethesda and Bioware. In this sense, they are even worse than triple-A studios, since they like to pretend they are catering to cRPG geeks because they are too incompetent to secure big contracts to make popamole games. They are a bunch of hypocrites without creativity. Since they can't publish another Skyrim clone, they made an uninspired BG clone to cater to aged ex-Bioware fans. What is surprising is not that they get a lot of heat in forums like the Codex, but that they have posters like you defending them against all the facts and their past decisions.

I'm not defending everything they do, not even close - all of their games have major flaws. What I am defending is their right to exist and continue making games, which, for some reason, a lot of guys here jerk-off at the notion of them going out of business.

And yes, I'd much rather play an Obsidian game, no matter how flawed, instead of BioWare's romance shit, or Bethesda's hiking simulators. They're far from perfect, but in this industry where RPGs as good as Age of Decadence are released once every 10+ years, I'll take a mediocre Obsidian game that's lightly sprinkled with a few great ideas to anything Beth and Bio can jizz out.

 

[J_C]

Oh cut that elitist bullshit that only the idiot gamers liked PoE meanwhile the monocled ones knew that it was shit. Nobody cares about the monocled, mostly Codexian players.

Since when elitism became a bad word?

A long time ago. Were you sleeping in the last decade?

What is wrong in demanding the best and knowing the difference between great stuff and shit? Who cares that most people don’t care about the opinions of true connoisseurs?

Problem is that some people think about themselves as true connoisseurs, when they are not. When I say that game was critically acclaimed, these "connoisseurs" say that it was not. I didn't even say that the game is objectively good. I just said, that it was critically acclaimed. And you cannot argue about that, because if most gamers think that it is good than it is the very definition of being critically acclaimed.

Are you talking about the overall sentiment towards PoE as indicators of what, exactly? Quality?

No, I was just arguing about success, both financially and critically.

And PoE is not a AAA game and Obsidian is not a AAA company. I don't think anybody expected it to sell like a AAA game, and Obsidian couldn't have done anything to make it sell like a AAA game.

You are missing the point. The question is not whether they were expected to sell like triple-A games, but whether they can impress publishers enough with those numbers to secure big triple-A contracts. It doesn’t matter if their numbers are perceived to be good for a medium studio, 800k for them is pocket change, they will not be impressed.

What do you expect? They cannot do ANYTHING, ANYTHING when making isometric RPGs to make impress publishers. Tell me how could they impress a big publisher with an IE style game? Do you think that if they made the Codex's wet dream game, the publishers would hail that game as the holy grail, which is printing money?

Who is holding you back from moving on? You don't have to wait until Obsidian goes to shit, you can stop caring about them right now.

That is a good question. Let’s see, the fact that some codexers insist of having false hopes towards Obsidian even if there is no reason at all to believe in them anymore,

So? Does it hurt you that we have false hopes about Obsidian? We "destroy" the Codex's pedigree? Please, let us have false hopes about Obsidian and be dissappointed if it comes to that.

the fact that every single minuscule update about their games are posted regularly as if they were expected to be relevant to the codex audience,

Do you have a problem with posting updates on the Codex about a game which you don't care about? Does it hurt your feelings? Please, ask the mods to stop posting updates, I don't care. Or, maybe, just maybe they post updates because many Codexians are interested in these updates.

the fact that closet popamolers will use their games as an opportunity to dumb down the overall expectative on the Codex regarding quality, thus making it normal that popamole isometric games will be perceived as good games in the foreseeable future.

What? Fucking what? You are truly mentally handicapped. Do you really believe that a few of us will destroy the Codex's expectations regarding quality? Us liking an Obsidian game will change nothing. The Codex's opinion won't change the industry's standards toward RPGs.

The last time this happened, BGs became classics. No good can come of this. At least if they were openly recognized as triple-A studios there were be no expectations, no regular updates and enthusiast popamolers like you would be properly tagged without ceremony.

BG2 is a classic, and it deserves it. And you know what, even if the AAA RPG scene went to shit, hardcore oldschool RPGs like Underrail still got made, despite the odds. The Codex's opinion on games won't make oldschool RPGs like Underrail more or less frequent on the market. Or do you really think that the developers of games think that "wow, 500 people on the Codex really like these RPGs, spend years of our lives to make one".

But for all of those faults, they are still one of the few last middle-sized independent RPG studios we have left, and it's not like that market will be made in any way better if they go out of business - they aren't Bethesda or Blizzard, or even BioWare, they don't dictate new RPG trends that others are blindly copying, all that will be achieved in that scenario is that some people here will focus their butthurt obsessions on a different studio - Larian, inXile, CD Projekt.

You almost make it sound like they are better than the likes of Bethesda because they are a medium studio, but the only reason why they are smaller is that they were not competent enough to become the likes of Bethesda and Bioware. In this sense, they are even worse than triple-A studios, since they like to pretend they are catering to cRPG geeks because they are too incompetent to secure big contracts to make popamole games. They are a bunch of hypocrites without creativity. Since they can't publish another Skyrim clone, they made an uninspired BG clone to cater to aged ex-Bioware fans. What is surprising is not that they get a lot of heat in forums like the Codex, but that they have posters like you defending them against all the facts and their past decisions.

Yes yes yes, Obsidian are the worst, because they are making isometric, fairly oldschool RPGs. Yes, they might be flawed, but the niche audiance of RPG players like them and without Obsidian, there will be one less developer who make these kind of games.

 

[Russia is over. The end.]

What I am defending is their right to exist

Oh Please.

More drama and tears, more.

If you want them to survive this, you'll have to do better.

to anything Beth and Bio can jizz out.

Nice "i'm just like you guys, i'm on your side" touch. That was refreshing at least.

 

[Zorba the Hutt]

Who knew that a quiet little thread about a Tyranny companion would blossom in this way...

if most gamers think that it is good than it is the very definition of being critically acclaimed.

 

[J_C]

if most gamers think that it is good than it is the very definition of being critically acclaimed.

What is the definition of critically acclaimed then? Please enlighten me!

 

[J_C]

What I am defending is their right to exist

Oh Please.

More drama and tears, more.

It isn't more dramatic than your "I hope this game sucks so they crash and burn" attitude.

 

[Sizzle]

What I am defending is their right to exist

If you want them to survive this, you'll have to do better.

I'll have to do what better, you sad little psycho?

I'm not the one who's desperately obsessed with them - you are. I merely enjoy their games, you loathe them.

I'd be a bit upset if they went under, yes, but only because that would be one less RPG developer in the world.

Not to mention - where do you even get the idea that this game will be their final nail in the coffin? I get that's what you're longing for, but is it based on any actual fact, or is it just the same old meme you spout every time they announce/publish a game?

I find it particularly interesting that only Obsidian attracts this sort of unmitigated hatred, even BioWare, shit as they are, doesn't have people foaming at the mouth whenever it's mentioned ("Bioware's next game is..." - "going to be shit! Aaaaaaargh!!) with such zeal.

 

[Lurker King]

I'm not defending everything they do, not even close - all of their games have major flaws. What I am defending is their right to exist and continue making games, which, for some reason, a lot of guys here jerk-off at the notion of them going out of business.

And yes, I'd much rather play an Obsidian game, no matter how flawed, instead of BioWare's romance shit, or Bethesda's hiking simulators. They're far from perfect, but in this industry where RPGs as good as Age of Decadence are released once every 10+ years, I'll take a mediocre Obsidian game that's lightly sprinkled with a few great ideas to anything Beth and Bio can jizz out.

You are looking at this thing from the wrong angle. The question is not whether their games X, Y and Z has some good and bad features, but whether they are being truthful to their self-image as geeks who have a passion for cRPGs and the laundry list of excuses they presented every time something went wrong in development (bugs, rushed games, etc.). We are talking about a studio that was perceived as the heirs of Black Isle Studio, but only managed to make two (maybe three) good games in twelve years of existence. Now they have the opportunity to make the game they want, without publisher’s pressure and compromises. What do they decide to do? An uninspired streamlined cash grab. Worse than that, they made money with their game and they decide to keep dumbing down their next projects even more. There is no excuse.

I also disagree with the conformist attitude that we should take whatever is available for lack of something better. First, I could not have the time to play as I did when I was a kid. In fact, I did not play most of the cRPGs classics available. There are so many games worth playing! Second, even if I played every cRPG known to man, I wouldn’t waste my time with games that I know I wouldn’t appreciate when I have more sophisticated alternatives, whether they are good movies or good books. Life is too short to waste with cash grab games with teenager writing.

I just said, that it was critically acclaimed. And you cannot argue about that, because if most gamers think that it is good than it is the very definition of being critically acclaimed.

J_C, I just realized that you are dogmatic and superficial human being. I will just ignore your posts from now on. You are not worth my time.

 

[J_C]

J_C, I just realized that you are dogmatic and superficial human being. I will just ignore your posts from now on. You are not worth my time.

I understand. I usually do the same when I lose an argument against somebody.

 

[Farmer Brun's Dead Son]

And you cannot argue about that, because if most gamers think that it is good than it is the very definition of being critically acclaimed.

of or relating to the judgment of critics <the play was a critical success> /MW/

?????????

 

[Sizzle]

You are looking at this thing from the wrong angle. The question is not whether their games X, Y and Z has some good and bad features, but whether they are being truthful to their self-image as geeks who have a passion for cRPGs and the laundry list of excuses they presented every time something went wrong in development (bugs, rushed games, etc.). We are talking about a studio that was perceived as the heirs of Black Isle Studio, but only managed to make two (maybe three) good games in twelve years of existence.

Who gives a fuck how they self-identify and what people think of them? Why is that so important to you? They're not an indie band, they don't have to "keep it real" to make something good.

Now they have the opportunity to make the game they want, without publisher’s pressure and compromises. What do they decide to do? An uninspired streamlined cash grab. Worse than that, they made money with their game and they decide to keep dumbing down their next projects even more. There is no excuse.

The game was a success, yes, but not the kind where it sold millions of copies (I don't even know if they sold more than a million, the last I heard it was around 800k units). As for dumbing down - Tyranny does seem to have some simplified elements, but at least the combat looks a bit less chaotic. We'll see.

I also disagree with the conformist attitude that we should take whatever is available for lack of something better. First, I could not have the time to play as I did when I was a kid. In fact, I did not play most of the cRPGs classics available. There are so many games worth playing! Second, even if I played every cRPG known to man, I wouldn’t waste my time with games that I know I wouldn’t appreciate when I have more sophisticated alternatives, whether they are good movies or good books. Life is too short to waste with cash grab games with teenager writing.

And I agree, there's no reason for you to play something you don't think you will enjoy. So while I get that this is a forum about debating RPGs, what exactly is the point of investing all that energy and time into hating something you're most likely not even going to play?

 

[Bastion]

the last good video game was made in 1987.

BC.

Watch and see this shit burn. I can't wait already.

Nero would be disappointed.

Who cares that most people don’t care about the opinions of true connoisseurs?

And you are one of them? Connoisseurs, I mean.

 

[an Administrator]

Why do all of their companions have some scars on their faces?

 

[Sannom]

They're soldiers in a brutal war. Verse looks like she got it easy, all things considered.

 

[Roguey]

What is the definition of critically acclaimed then? Please enlighten me!

When it's acclaimed by critics. ^_^

Sure we now live in a time where virtually anyone can post their thoughts on the internet, but the masses aren't considered such.

 

[procrastinator]

Combat is one thing, but what is this? Another "Tales" title? Obsidian is making online dating simulator now?

 

[Lurker King]

Who gives a fuck how they self-identify and what people think of them? Why is that so important to you? They're not an indie band, they don't have to "keep it real" to make something good.

It’s important because it shows that they are not half as good as they always tried to portrait themselves. You do need the “keep it real” attitude to make something good, whether we are talking about mechanics, writing, etc.

So while I get that this is a forum about debating RPGs, what exactly is the point of investing all that energy and time into hating something you're most likely not even going to play?

I’m not investing all my hate. I’m just using this opportunity to remind some posters here that the Codex need standards.

And you are one of them? Connoisseurs, I mean.

Let’s say that I’m a student in a course about cRPGs. The Codex is the university and the reviewers are the teachers.

 

[Sacred82]

To be fair, I'd rather play a game of tag w/ knives with Varg than inflict more of that writing on me.

 

[J_C]

What is the definition of critically acclaimed then? Please enlighten me!

When it's acclaimed by critics. ^_^

Sure we now live in a time where virtually anyone can post their thoughts on the internet, but the masses aren't considered such.

But that's the point. Both the masses, and the majority of the critics like the game. If that is not critically acclaimed, I don't know what is.

 

[l3loodAngel]

Who gives a fuck how they self-identify and what people think of them? Why is that so important to you? They're not an indie band, they don't have to "keep it real" to make something good.

It’s important because it shows that they are not half as good as they always tried to portrait themselves. You do need the “keep it real” attitude to make something good, whether we are talking about mechanics, writing, etc.

Yeah that or TALENT, PLANNING and LISTENING to FEEDBACK...

 

[Sizzle]

Who gives a fuck how they self-identify and what people think of them? Why is that so important to you? They're not an indie band, they don't have to "keep it real" to make something good.

It’s important because it shows that they are not half as good as they always tried to portrait themselves. You do need the “keep it real” attitude to make something good, whether we are talking about mechanics, writing, etc.

Going by that flimsy logic, Amber Scott should be the best writer in the biz. After all, she wears a goddamn bard hat everywhere - how thoroughly geeky of her, she must kick ass as a game designer, right?

So while I get that this is a forum about debating RPGs, what exactly is the point of investing all that energy and time into hating something you're most likely not even going to play?

I’m not investing all my hate. I’m just using this opportunity to remind some posters here that the Codex need standards.

Contrary to popular opinion, the Codex never had, and never will have, a uniform hivemind like/dislike of any game.

And you are one of them? Connoisseurs, I mean.

Let’s say that I’m a student in a course about cRPGs. The Codex is the university and the reviewers are the teachers.

How over-the-top pretentious