Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • 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.

Preview VE plays Oblivion

Solik

Scholar
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
377
Right. You were not meant to work in marketing, I can see.
 

Micmu

Magister
Joined
Aug 20, 2005
Messages
6,163
Location
ALIEN BASE-3
Solik said:
Right. You were not meant to work in marketing, I can see.
Oh yeah? Then go check hypes for games currently in development, like Gothic 3, The Witcher (watch video), NWN2, Dragon Age, ... and even Two Worlds.
They promise a lot of that "advanced" stuff (from quests that can be solved in multiple ways, choosing sides, non-linearity even enslaving nations with necromancy...). Of course as an addition to other mandatory elements, like graphics and combat.
Oblivion had redicilous hype, as if it were pure FPS or some interactive movie with Patrick Stewart, no wonder why many sites (including official xbox site) lumped it into "Action" genre. They avoided mentioning roleplaying elements like the plague.
 

Zufuriin

Scholar
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
110
Solik said:
I don't think it was advertised as a deep and essential part of the game. Instead, it was advertised because it's something few single-player games have right now.

Why advertise deep quests, dialogue trees, and choices with consequences (to halt the flaming:), even if it had them? Those were all done over a decade ago.
Deep quests, dialogue trees and choices with consequences should be advertised because it's something few single-player games have right now.

Why advertise character customization, graphics, voice acting? Those were all done a few years ago.
 

Antiphon

Scholar
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
112
Zufuriin said:
Antiphon said:
Solik said:
You'll see your face every time you pull up the inventory screen and related menus, unless you're wearing a helmet that covers it. I'd say that's pretty often.

Absolutely. You nailed it. We will be seeing our characters faces a lot.

Don't expect anyone here to concede the point.

I've learned to appreciate your posts like a beacon of light on a stormy sea of corruption.
How does staring at the pretty face of my character while sorting my inventory effect the game at all? Nothing more than eye candy, and possibly creepy if the eyes follow you around. But if you couldn't choose what your character looks like, it wouldn't be there in the first place.

Not that I'm against customizing my avatar, it's good and all, but don't hype it up and pretend it is an awesome and deep part of the game (which it might be, considering what comprises the rest of the game content).
Oh, you talking to me? They already paid for FaceGen to use in making NPCs with the CS that they will be giving away for modding. Looks to me like it's a freebie.

Now I expect the Codex would have been right there saying how they should have included it for player's character creation if they hadn't.

They tendency to jump on any excuse to bash Bethesda here at the Codex is beginning to look pathological.
 

kris

Arcane
Joined
Oct 27, 2004
Messages
8,867
Location
Lulea, Sweden
Antiphon said:
They tendency to jump on any excuse to bash Bethesda here at the Codex is beginning to look pathological.

as with all posts in a forum these are done by individuals. Even me who haven't really enjoyed any ES game have said that something like Face gen should be in all games like this. I don't really think it is that hard to implement and should even make it more easy for them to make varied NPCs, which I find is more important than having the players make a pretty avatar. KOTOR sure could have used it with their constant reusing of models.
 

AlanC9

Liturgist
Joined
Aug 12, 2003
Messages
505
Zufuriin said:
Deep quests, dialogue trees and choices with consequences should be advertised because it's something few single-player games have right now.

Why advertise character customization, graphics, voice acting? Those were all done a few years ago.

You advertise those things because those are the things that your fans like. You dance with who brung ya.
 

AlanC9

Liturgist
Joined
Aug 12, 2003
Messages
505
Vault Dweller said:
(Troika) were "sucky" businessmen, they were pretty good game developers. Again, as a consumer I don't give a fuck if a guy I'm dealing with has a fucking MBA degree. All I care is whether his product is good or not. Troika's products were good. Simple as that.

Well, if more people agreed with you about their products being good, wouldn't Troika still be with us? ToEE failed as an RPG, though it was a pretty good turn-based combat game. Arcanum was the opposite - good RPG, sucky combat. Maybe Bloodlines was the same as Arcanum - that's the impression that I get, but since I have an unreasoning hatred for the whole vampire setting, I haven't played it for myself.

I don't see an unqualified success in the bunch.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,038
AlanC9 said:
Vault Dweller said:
(Troika) were "sucky" businessmen, they were pretty good game developers. Again, as a consumer I don't give a fuck if a guy I'm dealing with has a fucking MBA degree. All I care is whether his product is good or not. Troika's products were good. Simple as that.

Well, if more people agreed with you about their products being good, wouldn't Troika still be with us?
Troika isn't the only good, but dead developer, is it? Looking Glass? Microprose? Sirtech? Origin? Here is a good article, btw:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/14/4

ToEE failed as an RPG, though it was a pretty good turn-based combat game. Arcanum was the opposite - good RPG, sucky combat. Maybe Bloodlines was the same as Arcanum - that's the impression that I get, but since I have an unreasoning hatred for the whole vampire setting, I haven't played it for myself.
Your point is? Bio's BG was a good adventure game with crappy combat. KOTOR2 was a decent RPG with horrible combat, cut content, and rushed ending that didn't make sense. Morrowind ...

Anyway, it's hard to find a better RPG than Arcanum despite the flaws. Bloodlines, although also rushed, was a good RPG with brilliant alive writing. ToEE had the best turn-based combat. Nobody would remember crap like Dungeon Lords or Dungeon Siege few years later, but Troika games will be remembered by those who value role-playing.
 

bryce777

Erudite
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
4,225
Location
In my country the system operates YOU
It just depends on your definition of good. Toee was good despite its flaws, if you like that sort of thing but releasing a game that buggy basically destroys any credibility you have.

Aracanum was a good game, period. The combat was good in turnbased mode - which is all I care about anyhow...they would have been smarter to kill the realtime mode completely rather than have it in there and be so bad. Otherwise, a great game and I only wish for it would be to be able to use your followers' tech skills when making various found schematics. Otherwise it's just impossible to make ANY of the good ones without having a main chracter who is useless for anything besides making gadgets. You also have no idea what schools to work with til you find schematics, and if you go low level in all schools then your character is just worthless.

Ok, back to my POINT.

My point was that success and goodness don't necessarily go hand in hand. On the other hand sirtech, origin, and microprose had tons of actually successful games and went out of business often for really stupid reasons - none of them had to do with either game quality OR sales, whereas in troika's case it was a matter of sales.
 

LlamaGod

Cipher
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
3,095
Location
Yes
none of them had to do with either game quality OR sales, whereas in troika's case it was a matter of sales.

I think its mostly because sales have become a much larger issue than they used to be and whats considered a 'good sale' now is quite larger than what it used to be back then.

Troika was a company in the same vein as them, but in a modern market. I wouldn't be surprised if companies like Irrational end up the same.
 

bryce777

Erudite
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
4,225
Location
In my country the system operates YOU
LlamaGod said:
none of them had to do with either game quality OR sales, whereas in troika's case it was a matter of sales.

I think its mostly because sales have become a much larger issue than they used to be and whats considered a 'good sale' now is quite larger than what it used to be back then.

Troika was a company in the same vein as them, but in a modern market. I wouldn't be surprised if companies like Irrational end up the same.

the point is that they were makign lots of money, and still managed to go out of business. I think a lot of the problem is the shelfspace seems much more expensive and it's choking out pc games....
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom