TIM CAIN STAYS

[BobSmith101]

Maybe so. I played a lot of games after the fact (like years after release) so my attitude is likely to be somewhat different to someone who experienced things "in the day"

 

@Flouride DS3 was a solid title granted. But it will take something with a bit more ambition to shake that reputation.

 

Or maybe you should replay any Bethesda title ever made. Or actually consider the fact that they are now using their own tech, instead of someone elses horrible code without proper support when things do go wrong.

 

If it were a problem unique to NV you may have a point. But since AP was also buggy , not really seeing it.

[Tigranes]

AP used a third party Unreal engine.

[C2B]

AP didn't have nearly as much bugs as NV, so that's a weird comparison (Was still buggy though, of course).

[BobSmith101]

AP didn't have nearly as much bugs as NV, so that's a weird comparison (Was still buggy though, of course).

 

As many,not as many.The point is Obsidian released enough really buggy games to get a reputation.

 

I left one out on purpose because I have great sympathy for the circumstances. Anyway I don't want to derail the thread any longer I hope things go well for Tim.

Edited February 21, 2012 by BobSmith101

[Malcador]

They'll shake it eventually. Maybe after the next 2 games ?

[Flouride]

 

If it were a problem unique to NV you may have a point. But since AP was also buggy , not really seeing it.

 

I still wonder where all these bugs were when I played AP. Oh and it kinda hurts with the bugfixing when the publisher doesn't let you do a single patch even if the game was just to be released.

 

And since you are clueless about this, Dungeon Siege 3 is the only game so far they've done with their own engine (South Park will be the 2nd). Instead of using engines by BioWare/Bethesda/Epic. NWN2 suffered from bugs, MOTB not so much, I don't think I've heard anyone complain about bugs in SoZ either. There's a trend there, as they got more familiar with the engine they got from BioWare the games got less buggy. Naturally working with their own engine they are pretty damn familiar on how it works etc.

 

And it's not like Bethesda and BioWare magically create non-buggy games. I've had as many if not even more bugs when playing games by BioWare and Bethesda, yet no one whines about them.

[Flouride]

AP used a third party Unreal engine.

 

Wasn't it even an older version of the Unreal engine that was available at that time. Thus having few graphical bugs that had been fixed by Epic.

[Flouride]

They'll shake it eventually. Maybe after the next 2 games ?

 

Maybe if the casual twats who post on most gaming sites actually would bother playing the games instead of throwing poo from their basements.

[Malcador]

Got to love people getting their back up on behalf of a company. Anyway, I didn't have that many bugs with NV or AP, myself. Was pretty surprised at getting no critical ones in AP, myself.

[BobSmith101]

Got to love people getting their back up on behalf of a company. Anyway, I didn't have that many bugs with NV or AP, myself. Was pretty surprised at getting no critical ones in AP, myself.

 

I always wonder about that too. It's not like it does the company any good living in an isolated bubble of fandom. I frequent quite a lot of sites and I often hear people saying how buggy Obsidian games are. Which is sad, but true. There is a lot of really good stuff under the bugs but you can't blame people for avoiding games with that sort of reputation either.

[mkreku]

Go to Eurogamer's forums and mention Obsidian.. it always devolves into an argument about buggy games and how it's even legal to release non-working products for full price.

 

Obsidian's reputation is seriously damaged. The problem with reputation is that it takes years to build but a second to destroy, so I am guessing they will have to live with it until they fold, fair or not.

 

Personally I've never been that bothered by bugs. I enjoyed both Daggerfall and the first Gothic games even though I probably spent more time starting them up from crashes than actually playing them. And one of my favourite games is Boiling Point. That game even had lethal flying jaguars..

[sorophx]

I frequent quite a lot of sites and I often hear people saying how buggy Obsidian games are.

problem with that statement is, a lot of games are buggy, not just Obsidian's games. and a lot of companies release one buggy game after another. yet somehow it's only Obsidian that is getting the bad rep.

 

people just need something to whine about, and since Obsidian's games are all uncut gems, that's the only thing people can really complain about and not feel bad about themselves

[Giantevilhead]

Bugs and glitches can be fixed. Bad writing, poorly conceived game settings, and uninteresting characters cannot.

[Tigranes]

Oh, Obsidian most definitely has a reputation as releasing buggy games. That is indisputable. Whether you could accurately compare the 'bugginess' of their games with other companies and establish them as objectively buggy is another can of worms, but true or false, the reputation is there.

 

More importantly, everything we know about the circumstances of Obs' previous games, Onyx and DS3 shows that Obsidian having learnt some lessons, having settled on Onyx, etc. means we can expect their next few games, especially South Park, to be not very buggy at all - which is good news for everyone.

 

Personally, I don't really worry because I'm so used to buggy games - Bioware I think is the only RPG developer that is consistently not very buggy. Probably helps that in my particular case, KOTOR2 was the only Obsid game with significant bugs.

[C2B]

Personally, I don't really worry because I'm so used to buggy games - Bioware I think is the only RPG developer that is consistently not very buggy.

 

I agree on everything else, but.... That's not really true. DA:O was pretty buggy.

 

Edit: Also I'd argue that NWN2 vanilla had more bugs than K2.

Edited February 21, 2012 by C2B

[Malcador]

The games industry needs to make QA guys rockstars.

[BobSmith101]

I frequent quite a lot of sites and I often hear people saying how buggy Obsidian games are.

problem with that statement is, a lot of games are buggy, not just Obsidian's games. and a lot of companies release one buggy game after another. yet somehow it's only Obsidian that is getting the bad rep.

 

people just need something to whine about, and since Obsidian's games are all uncut gems, that's the only thing people can really complain about and not feel bad about themselves

 

I agree but they did release a string of games with some pretty hefty bugs. Most studious get away with it because the bugs are not so serious and they don't have 2 or 3 releases in a go (well there is Bethesda)

 

Bioware took a beating after DA2 but ME2 whether you like it or not was solid. ME3 50/50 could go either way looking at the demo. I also agree about the uncut gems but if people are not willing to dig to find them because of the overall quality , there is very little you can do.

 

I think Obsidian can shake the reputation if the next couple of releases are both impressive and relatively bug free.

[GhostofAnakin]

I can honestly say I've run into more technical issues with Skryim than I had with FO:NV. I think the difference is, for whatever reason, Bethesda doesn't seem to get called on their technical issues. Maybe Obsidian needs to spend more money "encouraging" these review sites to look at the overall product instead of focusing on one or two glithces along the way.

[WDeranged]

I can honestly say I've run into more technical issues with Skryim than I had with FO:NV.

 

My experience is similar, I'm sure plenty of people had a disastrous time with New Vegas but apart from the odd crash I found it to be solid, Skyrim has way more outright broken quests but thankfully the engine itself was rock solid for me, no crashes at all over 150 hours last time I played.

[Flouride]

I can honestly say I've run into more technical issues with Skryim than I had with FO:NV. I think the difference is, for whatever reason, Bethesda doesn't seem to get called on their technical issues. Maybe Obsidian needs to spend more money "encouraging" these review sites to look at the overall product instead of focusing on one or two glithces along the way.

 

Developers don't have that much power. Publishers can just pull marketing from site/magazines, or decide not to send review copies to their next big game etc.

[Spider]

I think it's more that Obsidian got a bad reputation from NWN2 and Kotor2 and since they have that reputation people are more actively looking at bugs as part of the review. Skyrim was certainly buggier than NV for me, including one game breaking bug. That being said, I wouldn't describe Skyrim as a buggy game exactly.

[Achilles]

The unofficial skyrim patch site is currently tracking >1300 bugs.

 

Obviously, a vast majority of them are minor, but still.

[deuxhero]

Also got to note that the two games that aren't considered horribly buggy from Obsidian are Alpha Protocol and Dungeon Siege 3.

 

These are also the only two to not use Bioware or Bethesda engines.

 

Given we all know how much a mess Bethesda's engines are, and CD Projekt confirmed the Aurora Engine (which was the base for NWN2 and KotOR2's engines) is terribly coded, I don't think it is a coincidence.

[Aedan132]

 

Maybe so. I played a lot of games after the fact (like years after release) so my attitude is likely to be somewhat different to someone who experienced things "in the day"

 

@Flouride DS3 was a solid title granted. But it will take something with a bit more ambition to shake that reputation.

 

You realize that Obsidian's buggy games were the result of a publisher screwing them in same way, right? Bethesda gave them 2 years to create an RPG as big, if not bigger than F3. SEGA kept flipping development on Alpha Protocol on and off and didn't want them to release patches...

 

That isn't Obsidian's fault, man.