Interview Oblivion interview with Gavin

[TheGreatGodPan]

As a consumer I can blame the supplier for whatever the fuck I want to blame them for.

 

[Mech]

As a consumer I can blame the supplier for whatever the fuck I want to blame them for.

Yes, I know, and thats why tech support positions end up creating mentally unstable people after having to speak to retarded individuals such as yourself.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Companies which makes good games, and end up specialising in doing *only* what they want to do, loss out in the end. There is no question to that.

Yes, there is. It's not Arcanum or ToEE that killed Troika, but massmarket-friendly Bloodlines. Arena and Daggerfall, niche games, did well. Battlespire, the first attempt to court the massmarket, almost ruined Bethesda. Funny how that works sometimes.

Despite how good a game may be, if it doesn't have the same market appeal of similar titles it simply won't sell.

Not that simple. One company may need to sell millions of copies to show the return and justify its existence. Another company could be ok with hundreds or even tens of thousands copies sold (indie developers like Spiderweb). It's a question of perspective.

By all means, it shouldn't have sold as well as it did AT ALL because it was such a niche title.

It was a niche title? I'd say it was the opposite.

You can't blame them for that, it's a nessacery evil, and to say that a company shouldn't do that is foolish really.

Sure, I can. It was Arena and Daggerfall that put Bethesda on the map. They sold back then, and they would have still sold now.

If Bethesda hadn't done this with Morrowind, I would say there would have been a very good chance that Oblivion never would have existed.

Morrowind existed because there was Daggerfall. Simple as that.

So if a game has to lose some of it's originality, and maybe ingenuity, in order to keep a company afloat, I say go for it. I would rather have 3 or 4 great games, than just 1 godlike game.

The question is: will Oblivion be a good game?

 

[Mech]

Yes, there is. It's not Arcanum or ToEE that killed Troika, but massmarket-friendly Bloodlines.

Not to be picky but I said "companies which make good games"

 

[Chefe]

Not to be picky but I said "companies which make good games"

You're such a riot.




That is all.

 

[MrSmileyFaceDude]

Weapons have speed and weight associated with them, along with a damage rating and other attributes. Your character has strength, speed and agility in addition to the relevant weapon skill. And even within the bladed weapons, there are different weapon types, which have appropriate attack animations that play at appropriate speeds for the weapon. A strong but slow warrior type will be better suited to a slow claymore than a fast and nimble thief type would be, because the claymore will slow the thief, whose defenses are likely lower wheras the barbarian can take more punishment and is less at risk using a slower weapon. The thief on the other hand can use the lighter and faster dagger better than the slow barbarian, because it's better suited to darting in for quick attacks. The various "blunt" weapons have similar differences.

So the skill counts for part of it -- but other stats, on both the weapons and the characters, count for part of it as well.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

So if a game has to lose some of it's originality, and maybe ingenuity, in order to keep a company afloat, I say go for it. I would rather have 3 or 4 great games, than just 1 godlike game.

Yeah I can't wait for FO:BOS2 either.

 

[TheGreatGodPan]

Yes, I know, and thats why tech support positions end up creating mentally unstable people after having to speak to retarded individuals such as yourself.

Do they get calls from people who don't own their products? Because that would be pretty funny.

 

[Mech]

So if a game has to lose some of it's originality, and maybe ingenuity, in order to keep a company afloat, I say go for it. I would rather have 3 or 4 great games, than just 1 godlike game.

Yeah I can't wait for FO:BOS2 either.

Me neither.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Weapons have speed and weight associated with them, along with a damage rating and other attributes. Your character has strength, speed and agility in addition to the relevant weapon skill. And even within the bladed weapons, there are different weapon types, which have appropriate attack animations that play at appropriate speeds for the weapon.

So the skill counts for part of it -- but other stats, on both the weapons and the characters, count for part of it as well.

If that's the case, why not have just one weapon skill? Perhaps you could call it: Weapon skill. Then, each weapon has its own stats. So while I increase my "Weapon Skill", I'll be good at every weapon! But each weapon will still have its differences like the axe, which will do killer-killer damage but move slowly because, you know, axes move slowly. Then I can switch to the dagger and click the mouse like a crazy fucker and cause just as much damage as the axe because I'm moving faster! Like a Ninja Rabbit! So it's different! And daggers handle just like Axes anyway so it's not like anyone will care.

I believe that (and please, someone correct me if I'm wrong) the concept of different skills for each weapon (or at least, each weapon type) was born out of the idea that someone who's good with an axe, isn't good with a blade. Simply because someone who uses a dagger is faster, more manouverable and dodges around. They also like sneaking up on people and sticking the knife in the back of their opponents neck. Compared to someone who uses a Claymore who isn't as agile. Who doesn't move around. Who uses more block and swing tactics. The heavier weapon also requiring strength and ability to use it effectively. Someone who is good with a Claymore won't be good with a dagger because you don't use the weapons in the same way. You don't make big swings and chops with a dagger and you don't try and poke someone in the eye with a Claymore.

In some respects, it annoyed me in Morrowind that there were the different weapon skills because I found if I wanted to change weapons mid-game, I had to train up that skill. Given there was nowhere to actually train the skill up (like a dojo or whatever), I was left to wander about the countryside, attacking lame animals with my pathetic weapon skill because, you know, that's how you increased your skill. There was no Master Trainer to hunt down who you could get to train you. In the end, the Daedric Axe did more damage than anything else did anyway, so I just stuck with that (Compare that to Real Lifeâ„¢ where a good jab with even a short dagger can kill an opponent in one fell swoop - I'd theorise that a dagger should have a higher chance of performing critical hits and an axe should have less chance given the way it's used, even if the player has their respective skills maxed out).

As for taking out crossbows, that's just fucking lame. Expect the first "Fixing what Bethesda fucked up" mod to implement Crossbows with ease. Again, the company's reputation will take a hit with fans doing what seemed impossible for Bethesda and their "We don't realse games until they're finished (Read: Half-arsed)" motto to do.

Horseback combat will also be implemented when modders discover that it's only a simple flag that's preventing you from doing the highly advanced function of swinging your sword while you're on horseback.

A strong but slow warrior type will be better suited to a slow claymore than a fast and nimble thief type would be, because the claymore will slow the thief, whose defenses are likely lower

This, I'll wait to see before I believe. How is a Claymore going to slow the thief down? Does the equipped weapon have an impact on your foot speed, therefore meaning a thief can't jump about as much because of the heavy weapon? If the weapon doesn't actually slow the thief down at all, a thief's not going to have any problem using the larger weapon. He'll just dodge and swing and he'll do it a lot better than a "slow heavy fighter". Given Morrowind, it's also likely that every single skill can be maxed out anyway, so your "thief" character is going to be able to move like lighting and swing his Claymore just as well as the "Big Heavy Barbarian". His "defenses" won't be lower, either. They'll be maxed out too. Again, allowing everyone to "specialise" in every skill is not A Good Thingâ„¢.

wheras the barbarian can take more punishment and is less at risk using a slower weapon. The thief on the other hand can use the lighter and faster dagger better than the slow barbarian, because it's better suited to darting in for quick attacks. The various "blunt" weapons have similar differences.

As I said above, why would one character be better? If I can max out every skill, why would I allow my Thief to take less punishment than my Barbarian? If I can max out my "Tough Skin" skill for my thief and take a Claymore to the head, I will. My Barbarian will also use the faster weapon just as easily as the thief, because his agility will likely be maxed out by the time I get to the end of the game.

 

[Tintin]

Oh, where would DarkUnderlord's ego be if there were no devs posting at RPGCodex?

 

[Chefe]

Disneyland?

 

[franc kaos]

How exactly does one become a sell out when the whole point of their entire company was, and ever will be, to sell things?

They keep promising those old school fans that we are not getting a watered down RPG. If they just said, 'it's gonna be an action RPG' then we'd move on. Contrary to popular belief, selling out is not a good thing.

From Wicki:

Urban legends and myths were often created around American jazz musicians in the early 20th century to add to the artist's mystique. One popular myth was that one such musician sold his soul to the Devil in order to become successful. It's thought that the modern idea of selling out is a natural progression of this idea.

In the 1990s, comedian Bill Hicks coined the term "sucking Satan's cock", which he used to describe musical acts who make bland music to maximise sales, or allow their music to be used in advertising. This phrase has since become a widely used neologism, and is commonly used to describe the act of selling out.

 

[Rulion]

Someone quoted me in their sig. I'm touched! hehe.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Oh, where would DarkUnderlord's ego be if there were no devs posting at RPGCodex?

Duck and Cover or NMA because the devs also post there.