Gameplay Over Graphics...Honestly?

[Chefe]

Yea. Entrance into Heaven.

NOT!

 

[ExMonk]

Yea. Entrance into Heaven.

NOT!

That's already been won for me by the Son of God made man.

Got any other cool prizes?

 

[Chefe]

I have "The Codex's Greatest Moments" on DVD.

I would offer "The Codex's Dumbest Posts" on DVD, but you're already familiar with them all.

 

[ExMonk]

I have "The Codex's Greatest Moments" on DVD.

I would offer "The Codex's Dumbest Posts" on DVD, but you're already familiar with them all.

I wouldn't say I'm familiar with them all. You do post a lot, you know. I can't possibly read them all.

 

[Chefe]

Well, the cover of the DVD reads: "The most outlandish posts ever from the likes of all your favorite losers! Including ExMonk, Volourn, FalloutRanger, Tintin, and more!"

Make of it what you will.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Once you play through HL2, there is no replay value. That makes it a shitty game. I could have bought 3 to 5 DVD movies that had re-watch value instead. I know there are mods, but that doesn't count, as we are talking "from the studio" here.

Really? That's just your opinion. That wouldn't explain why I've replayed the entire game through several times (including a Speed Run). I hardly finish most games, so Half Life 2 definitely had a lot going for it.

Should have been named, and is referred to by gamers, as BETAfield 2. Another DICE/EA rush job that is buggy as hell, unbalanced, and runs horribly on-line for many players. Sounds like a shitty game to me.

Have you even played Battlefield 2 or did you spend most of your time reading random complaints on the PlanetBattlefield forums? Yes, the game is buggy - or at least it was prior to 1.03, as I have yet to encounter any bugs in 1.03. As for the 'unbalanced' (I think you mean imbalanced), could you please specify what you are referring to?

Besides, Battlefield 2 doesn't look that great. It looks good, but it's not up to par with Quake IV - which would be a much better example of a terrible game with great graphics.

If I hear that Dunkin Donuts is going to put a 14K gold coating on their donut and remove the Boston Cream filling, I don't have to see it or eat it to know it will be shit. So much CORE gameplay was stripped from Oblivion that was present in MW, I can't be anything other than shit. Less weapons, less skills, less factions, more hand-holding ... all wrapped up in nice uber-1337 graphics. I believe that Oblivion qualifies from the evidence.

Oblivion isn't out yet. Speculation is not evidence.

Perhaps, but then again, it's good enough as is, polishing takes time, and the game is selling nicely as it is. Can't beat good word of mouth.

Good graphics gets people talking.

 

[DarkSign]

"Oblivion isn't out yet. Speculation is not evidence"

WTF man. Im sure you've used the whole "we can predict a game before it's out" thing when referencing FO:FOS or Tactics.

Now you're just sucking up to BethSoft.

 

[Sol Invictus]

They are a business. They make money. They make games to make money. Why does that come as a shock to you?

So every business to take in a profit or has the intent to make a profit is a greedy, shallow, sell-out that cares nothing about quality control? Too much cynicism can be a bad thing.

"Oblivion isn't out yet. Speculation is not evidence"

WTF man. Im sure you've used the whole "we can predict a game before it's out" thing when referencing FO:FOS or Tactics.

Now you're just sucking up to BethSoft.

There's a big difference between Bethesda and Interplay. Morrowind may have had a ton of gameplay problems but we still liked it here at the Codex (with the exception of Saint), and most people here do like Daggerfall.

Oblivion has some issues, mostly pertaining to the 'lack of (insert feature)', but from what we've heard of the dialogue choices, gameplay and what we've seen with our own eyes - it actually looks and sounds fun. This is in contrast to the blatant crappiness of FOBOS which looked crappy from a visual standpoint as well as gameplay. It was nothing more than a dumbed down spinoff of a beloved RPG series.

As for Fallout Tactics, I wasn't one of the 'dissenting voices' prior to Tactics' release. I didn't have any interest for it when they announced it and it was more of a 'wait and see' game for me. I've read a lot of the arguments about the game being poor prior to its release, and most of them concern the gameplay - it wasn't turn based and it was worse than the already basic combat of Fallout. I'm not saying that Fallout had bad combat. It just wasn't terribly tactical. Jagged Alliance 2 and X-Com were much better, but the combat in Fallout served its purpose, as it wasn't the main part of the game.

This is different from the combat in Oblivion. Where Morrowind had really boring 'dice rolling' combat, Oblivion has intensive action-based combat while still being dependent on stats. That sounds interesting to me. What's also interesting is that the stealthy mode of gameplay in Oblivion is designed by the same person who did the stealth gameplay in the Thief series. That might not mean much to anyone who didn't enjoy the Thief games, but I liked them a lot, so that's a plus.

 

[obediah]

There are an awful lot of words in here for a thread that should have ended with

"yeah...honestly"

 

[Vault Dweller]

They are a business. They make money. They make games to make money. Why does that come as a shock to you?

So every business to take in a profit or has the intent to make a profit is a greedy, shallow, sell-out that cares nothing about quality control? Too much cynicism can be a bad thing.

I didn't say that every business that cares more about money than about releasing quality products is a greedy sell-out. It's just a different business model to me. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. It worked for MicroSoft. Needless to say, customers usually prefer quality products, but again, it's not like MS has problems selling one faulty Win version after another.

Anyway, maybe my opinion is too cynical, but thinking that every successful business is all about making the best possible product and pleasing customers is too naive.

There's a big difference between Bethesda and Interplay. Morrowind may have had a ton of gameplay problems but we still liked it here at the Codex (with the exception of Saint), and most people here do like Daggerfall.

Not that it matters, but who else liked MW? Spazmo criticized it for a long time, I wasn't overly impressed with it either. Don't recall Ausir's opinion though. DF is a different story, but then again, liking Fallout has nothing to do with disliking FOT or FOBOS.

Oblivion has some issues, mostly pertaining to the 'lack of (insert feature)', but from what we've heard of the dialogue choices, gameplay and what we've seen with our own eyes - it actually looks and sounds fun. This is in contrast to the blatant crappiness of FOBOS which looked crappy from a visual standpoint as well as gameplay. It was nothing more than a dumbed down spinoff of a beloved RPG series.

What you are trying to say is "from what *I*'ve heard of the dialogue choices, gameplay and what *I*'ve seen with our own eyes - *I* think it actually looks and sounds fun". There are very few people here who are as impressed with what they've seen or heard as you are.

Good graphics gets people talking.

Good graphics get people talking a look, it's good gameplay that gets them talking.

 

[Vault Dweller]

It may be easy for you, but it is not easy for most, which should be self-evident from the games released.

What is this mysterious "it"? Is that some sacred knowledge or a set of game design principles one must study for decades or something so amazingly awesome that it could only be described as "it" and shall not be named? Or maybe it's just something as simple and fucking trivial as making one quest for 2 factions to make player choose?

As for Beth, Daggerfall was not the game they wanted to make, so why would they view it as a holy benchmark?

What was their holy benchmark then? A pretty but dumb game with a GOTY label?

They wanted to create unique NPC's (ok, not a smashing success, but that was their goal), and they wanted to create a unique and handcrafted world, with unique quests and dungeons.
( Perhaps you weren't visiting Beth's forums on a regular basis like I was in the two years leading up to Morrowind. If you were, you would recall that the devs repeatedly stated this).

Really? They did? Well, everyone knows that developers always tell the truth, so I guess you are right then.

My point is that iIt is simply not accurate to suggest that all they cared about in creating Morrowind was a game that was visually stunning.

Proof? Where are interesting better-than-in-DF NPCs? Where are interesting better-than-in-DF quests? MW took quite a few steps back from the quality established in DF, but did a nice job with graphics. So, what does that tell you?

Their attitude at the time was, "Why do rpgs always have to be substandard graphically?"

Always? Neither Fallout, not BG, nor Diablo, nor DF were substandard graphically. You really do believe everything they say, don't you?

Did they improve the visuals so that the game would sell more copies? I'm sure they did. And there is nothing wrong with that. What you have yet to prove, is that they chose graphics over your notion of gameplay.

Have you played MW by any chance? Have you played Daggerfall? Well, compare the two and you will see your answer in big fucking letters. It should say something like "LESS OF EVERYTHING, BUT IT SURE LOOKS GOOD". Then take a look at Oblivion and you there would be another sign: "WE REMOVED EVERYTHING THAT WASN'T NAILED DOWN, BUT WHAT'S LEFT LOOKS AWESOME!!!"

 

[ExMonk]

You really are a piece of work, VD. I refuted your constant affirmation, that all Beth cared about in developing Morrowind was pretty graphics. I referenced that the devs repeatedly stated that they wanted unique and handcrafted npcs, quests, dungeons, and world--as well as pretty graphics--on the forums and interviews back in 2001. Your response? "Devs lie", and by implication, "Anyone who believes what they say is naive."

The Morrowind I played was a mixed bag. So was Daggerfall. Both had good points and bad points. If I seem reactionary at times, it is because you and others on this board come across as rpg fundamentalists. You have an extremely narrow-minded notion of what "good game-play" is and what a "good rpg" is. And anyone who disagrees is treated as a kind of rpg heretic or infidel. I've seen more fundamentalism here than I have in many religious discussions I've been involved in. Unbelievable.

 

[DarkSign]

Did he just pull the Sarvis dumbfuck "Codex mentality" argument out? I think he did.

 

[kingcomrade]

Yeah everyone knows the Codex doesn't have a consensus on most topics.

 

[ExMonk]

Did he just pull the Sarvis dumbfuck "Codex mentality" argument out? I think he did.

Thank you for proving my point about the fundamentalism. If someone points something out that doesn't jive with the fundamentalist line, just call them a dumbfuck. Nice.

For the record, I did not say that everyone on the codex acts this way. I think I said, "you and others" have this attitude. It is obvious there ia a difference of opinion here.

 

[Vault Dweller]

You really are a piece of work, VD.

Compliments will get you nowhere

I refuted your constant affirmation, that all Beth cared about in developing Morrowind was pretty graphics. I referenced that the devs repeatedly stated that they wanted unique and handcrafted npcs, quests, dungeons, and world--as well as pretty graphics--on the forums and interviews back in 2001. Your response? "Devs lie", and by implication, "Anyone who believes what they say is naive."

First, you refuted nothing, except for my belief that you are smart enough to use real arguments :wink: Your entire proof of me being wrong was "but the developers said so". Laughable. There are many, many cases where developers lied and deceived because they wanted to sell the game and create favorable impressions.

Bioware assured us that NWN is a Fallout-like game with deep dialogue skills and choices that matter, Obsidian insisted that KOTOR 2 was not rushed, Reflexive repeatedly stated that the Lionheart demo doesn't represent the game and Lionheart is actually awesome, etc.

Point is, let's pay less attention to what developers are saying and more attention to what they actually produce. MW clearly shows where the focus was and wasn't. Open your eyes.

The Morrowind I played was a mixed bag. So was Daggerfall. Both had good points and bad points.

Goes without saying, so?

You have an extremely narrow-minded notion of what "good game-play" is and what a "good rpg" is.

Really? What are they?

And anyone who disagrees is treated as a kind of rpg heretic or infidel.

Proof? Shouldn't be difficult to find a quote, should it?

I've seen more fundamentalism here than I have in many religious discussions I've been involved in. Unbelievable.

Try convincing scientists to accept Intelligent Design theory. Those guys are way more fundamental than us. So close-minded...

 

[obediah]

The Morrowind I played was a mixed bag. So was Daggerfall. Both had good points and bad points. If I seem reactionary at times, it is because you and others on this board come across as rpg fundamentalists.

Why don't you list out the good and bad points of each? Then we can look at your list and see the shift in design that VD is talking about. Your're confusing arguing whether or not the changes were good or bad with whether or not there were trends of simplification and beautification in those changes.

You have an extremely narrow-minded notion of what "good game-play" is and what a "good rpg" is.

They are called opinions, and they're not all that uncommon. You should check up on them some time.

And anyone who disagrees is treated as a kind of rpg heretic or infidel. I've seen more fundamentalism here than I have in many religious discussions I've been involved in. Unbelievable.

Are you suggesting that a forum dedicated to rpg's is full of people with strong feelings about rpgs? That's preposterous. If that was the case I could expect to find foodies and chefs at egullet.org, Morrowwind fans at bethesda's site, and baseball fans at baseballforum.com. I would perhaps even be insulted if I was to go and suggest that all food tastes the same, or that oblivion sucks, or that basketball is the real american past time.

 

[Rat Keeng]

ExMonk, You're a crazy gibbering Jesusfish.

I think most of the Elder Scrolls forums' population is very much in favor of Oblivion and Morrowind, and would be somewhat piffed if you were to question those "fantastic" games. I'm sure the official Star Wars forums wouldn't take too kindly, to having their beloved movies/games critisised. Now, time and time again, i've heard people say things like "It's that game developer's forum, of course they'll like those games!" Well, this is the RPG Codex, a "hardcore" RPG site, presumably one where people from various places congregate, due to similar opinions on what a proper RPG should be like. Is that so strange?

Since you're so hooked on holyness, how would you like it if i came to one of your church's cermons, wearing nothing but a rubber glove on my cock? I bet you fundamentalist christians would throw me out, just because I don't conform to the hivemind regular clothing standards, of your fascist religion. In fact, forget the rubber glove, I'm gonna go to church in my Adam costume, what sort of heathen would object to that?

By the way, i'm 600 pounds, i'm covered in boils and hair, and i eat so much mayonaise, my crusty open bedsores squirt pink mayo whenever i move a muscle. Accept me or die!

 

[Shagnak]

And anyone who disagrees is treated as a kind of rpg heretic or infidel.

Excellent!
After all this time I have finally found something to ad to my sig! Thanks crazy monk guy!

 

[aboyd]

If I hear that Dunkin Donuts is going to put a 14K gold coating on their donut and remove the Boston Cream filling, I don't have to see it or eat it to know it will be shit. So much CORE gameplay was stripped from Oblivion that was present in MW, I can't be anything other than shit. Less weapons, less skills, less factions, more hand-holding ... all wrapped up in nice uber-1337 graphics. I believe that Oblivion qualifies from the evidence.

Oblivion isn't out yet. Speculation is not evidence.

I don't believe he was using speculation as evidence. He has evidence that there will be fewer skills, fewer factions, etc. And because of that, his speculation is that the game will not be enjoyable to him. It's a subtle distinction, but it makes his thinking logical.

Morrowind may have had a ton of gameplay problems but we still liked it here at the Codex (with the exception of Saint), and most people here do like Daggerfall.

I didn't like Morrowind, and I never played Daggerfall. Of course, I rarely post, so I'm hardly representative of the Codex.

-Tony

 

[ExMonk]

Are you suggesting that a forum dedicated to rpg's is full of people with strong feelings about rpgs? That's preposterous. If that was the case I could expect to find foodies and chefs at egullet.org, Morrowwind fans at bethesda's site, and baseball fans at baseballforum.com. I would perhaps even be insulted if I was to go and suggest that all food tastes the same, or that oblivion sucks, or that basketball is the real american past time.

Your analogy is poorly thought out. Try again. Your analogy would hold, dim bulb, if I was coming on the codex and blasting the rpgs that the hard core members hold dear. Have I done that? Ever? No. What I have done is to try to counter the lunatic, and fundamentalistic, and raving anti-Oblivion, anti-Morrowind rhetoric, with the opposite point of view. What I have done is to attack the position of those who keep propounding the same redundantly, poorly-thought-out drivel about Morrowind and Oblivion. For that, I'm called crazy and my religion is ridiculed. Real mature guys. Real mature. Should I start cataloging every occurrence of what I claim here? Would that convince you? Of course not. So perhaps you ought to come back to using analogies when you've had a bit more experience. I don't want you to hurt yourself.

 

[ExMonk]

ExMonk, You're a crazy gibbering Jesusfish.

I think most of the Elder Scrolls forums' population is very much in favor of Oblivion and Morrowind, and would be somewhat piffed if you were to question those "fantastic" games. I'm sure the official Star Wars forums wouldn't take too kindly, to having their beloved movies/games critisised. Now, time and time again, i've heard people say things like "It's that game developer's forum, of course they'll like those games!" Well, this is the RPG Codex, a "hardcore" RPG site, presumably one where people from various places congregate, due to similar opinions on what a proper RPG should be like. Is that so strange?

First: Once again it is made clear that at rpgcodex it is open season on religion in general and Christian specifically. Whatever. If you think you're upsetting me by these comments, guess again.

Second: As I said in the previous post, if you are going to use analogies, know what you are doing, rat brain! Your analogy is flawed. I am not attacking or questioning any game that codexers LOVE. I am defending games that are routinely raked over the coals as kind of a badge of honor. But apparently you're not supposed to do that. I didn't get the memo. Since when does being "hardcore" mean hating Morrowind and Oblivion? I consider myself a "hardcore" rpger that happens to disagree with some people about TWO GAMES. Wow. Radical, I know. Now, go back to your sewer, and be sure to THINK before you post again.

 

[obediah]

blah

Your a bethesda missionary, spewing your filth while thumping your content-free yet super-pretty glossy bible. We've seen the kool-aid and responded with a resounding 'eh'. You can tell us that Morrowind is closer to what we want than Daggerfall and that Oblivion is closer than Morrowind still until you're blue in the face - we already know it's not true. The hive mind has already decided that Oblivion may be a very fine game, but it isn't what we're looking for in an rpg.

Unfortunately this is the internet, so we have to wait for you to give up on converting us and wonder off rather than staging an x-box-er rebellion and displaying your head on the front page.

 

[ExMonk]

First, you refuted nothing, except for my belief that you are smart enough to use real arguments :wink: Your entire proof of me being wrong was "but the developers said so". Laughable. There are many, many cases where developers lied and deceived because they wanted to sell the game and create favorable impressions.

Bioware assured us that NWN is a Fallout-like game with deep dialogue skills and choices that matter, Obsidian insisted that KOTOR 2 was not rushed, Reflexive repeatedly stated that the Lionheart demo doesn't represent the game and Lionheart is actually awesome, etc.

Point is, let's pay less attention to what developers are saying and more attention to what they actually produce. MW clearly shows where the focus was and wasn't. Open your eyes.

You can't really be this dense, can you? More likely, you ignore the gist of what I've said to make your position seem stronger. Was it not obvious that I was basing my argument not merely on what the devs said, but on what actually made it in the game? Of course it was. What made it into the game is a reasonable indication of what the goals were that the devs had for the game, no? You yourself said so. What made it into Morrowind? NPCs, quests, dungeons, and a world that were not randomly generated, but ones that were individually hand crafted.

Now I'll say this slowly so you can grasp it. We are NOT arguing about how well Beth succeeded in implementing these features. I don't think they succeeded all that well, actually. We are arguring about whether your repeated premise is true: that Beth's sole focus and goal for developing Morrowind was pretty graphics; and they didn't care, didn't have the money, or didn't have the time to put in anything else of substance. Live in your fantasy world if you want, but that is just not supported by the features of Morrowind themselves. Again, my point is this: the developers of Morrowind were not ONLY concerned about making a pretty rpg; the wanted to create one that was faithful to the Elder Scrolls lore, one that featured exploration of a vast world, and one that did all this without resorting to randomly generated npcs, quests, dungeons and world.

 

[AZ]

First of all I didn't like Morrowind at all too. Big but boring not living world, boring combat and lots of hype - so Saint is not alone.

I'm not interested in gfx at all, for me immersion in the look is important. I still like the look of Diablo1 or Fallout, or System Shock2, Icewind Dale, Carmageddon1 - nicely drew ui, the whole look of the game has style. But I did not tried SpiderWeb games -not because the dated gfx-, because the ui looked like if an eight years old just used paint the first time.

edit - corrected mistyped words