pmp10

I'm not sure how you intend to measure the level of 'bombing' but don't you think that the target audience is decided upon by the publisher?

That is interesting as Square Enix recently canceled another attempt at a western FF spin off. There are accusations that Square torpedoed that project. Link

It doesn't but if that is your chosen occupation then it certainly doesn't excuse you. Nobody forced obsidian to get into the business of making sequels, but since they did they should effectively compensate for lack of technological familiarity. And yet the general opinion is to the contrary. And in my experience the problem isn't only the prevalence of bugs but also their severity. Nwn1 could crash - nwn2 would hard-lockup the pc, F3 would crash if abused - NV will crash for no apparent reason and freeze the overlay forcing a blind restart. Tech support may mark such issues using the same term but the impact on my experience is significantly different.

That would actually by a valid argument if whole idea behind obsidian wasn't making sequels to games created by other studios. Unless of course you believe F3 fanbase would be fine with a switch to an isometric perspective.

So you are saying that after bethesda spend 2 years patching Fallout 3 in your experience obsidian didn't introduce nearly so many bugs while working with the same engine? Glorious achievement indeed.

I seriously doubt that. And even if the number of bugs is similar the severity is not. I don't ever remember bethesda softworks games losing savegames, in fact the most common bug that I do remember from Fallout3 was crash on quit. People have started to ask if a game is "obsidian-buggy" for a reason.

Let me guess: demo is a timed exclusive for gaming magazines?

Possibly but how would we know? It's certainly the worst received obsidian game to date. We have an chicken or egg problem here. Sadly I'm not so sure about that. The psychological barrier at 70% separates the games that got major elements to an ok levels from the rest. I'm doubtful whether the stealth system as implemented in AP would qualify. Because there was no marketing. Not sure if the company they had hired for the marketing dropped the ball or what happened, but I remember them changing the PR company they use in US and after that we could actually see some marketing for the game. There was never going to be a major marketing campaign for AP. It simply didn't have the graphic or cutscenes to generate serious hype. It's promotional material was pretty standard for obsidian (i.e. pretty low budget). They played strongly the c&c part of the game but the reality is that long term plot developments and npc interaction don't make much impression during trailers. And AP still sold reasonably well but at the expense of obsidian reputation.

That was just one of many complaints raised against the shooting mechanics and it mostly steamed from the fact a lot of them were badly introduced and counter-intuitively executed. Even if the shooting was absolutely perfect there was a host of other issues involving cover, stealth, gadgets ,h2h fighting, boss battles etc. You can't really lie them all at segas feet. I find it really hard to imagine that some exec came to obsidian and simply demanded that the stealth system be unresponsive.

That is a little one sided view of things. The 'publishers fault' is not a new issue that comes about when defending obsidian games and frankly they aimed at AAA status but delivered a game that failed to even reach 70% on metacritic. I could certainly see reasons why sega would not be happy with obsidian. The whole fiasco look like a mess of conflicting expectations. I think sega wanted a more straight up RPG while obsidians plan were for a 3rd person action game with NPC interaction and C&C.

I think they mean menu loading times. It was mentioned in some preview that they could get a little annoying.

Thanks. It's a shame the game is so uneven. I really liked traffic and vice but constant working towards really hurt the felling that your input matters.

Anyone finished arson yet? If so is the overreaching plot as gimmicky as in ? The first case seems to indicate that and I have no more motivation to spend more hours investigating cases just to .

It's more about the timing. If they could get xbox version out within few months why not just wait for it? They could make far better use of advertising and generated hype that way.

ESRB has rated the Xbox360 version Now that was fast. I wonder if the whole PC exclusivity wasn't a ploy to appease raging egos. It certainly allowed CDP to play the good guy in contrast to Bioware.

The problem isn't that I want modernity or have issues with the way such information was obtained, it's that such knowledge has to be absurdly selective and unused to maintain the pseudo-medieval setting. Why, for example, no vaccination for the plague was available? Surely if cancer is understood then immunization should be a the most logical application of similar knowledge in the fields of medicine and biology. Simply put - if the authors insist on revisiting fantasy conventions they should really avoid putting there things that evidently stand out. The moment they step outside the tropes I have been conditioned to accept at face value wondering begins, and that cannot end well in fictional universe. This way one out of place line ends up undermining the setting and ruining a lot of immersion I might have had.

Yes. If you have the knowledge and ability to understand and control cell mutation we should be talking about bio-weaponry not swords. Besides that the whole plague business from witcher 1 suddenly makes little sense.

Not really, once you break away from the notion that everyone in medieval antiquity was a raving zealot and embrace the fact that everything we thought to be modern has been thought out centuries ago. You will feel more comfortable with grimy mages talking about mutations. And yet they still bash each other over the heads with swords?

That may be but if so the real evidence should lie in resource use. Witcher 1 could easily make use of 1.5 gigabytes of RAM and it's savegames exceeded 100MB. It was obvious that it was in no shape for porting to console.

I doubt the same memory mechanics are in place. Console games of this type despawn all objects outside of player sight range to conserve memory. I assume witcher 2 acts differently.

I'm not sure if that is so simple. They never managed it for witcher 1. What is typical witcher 2 memory usage and savegame size? That's usually a good indication of console portability.

When exactly has 80% became low? The game seems to have production values below the expected norm so breaking the 8/10 barrier should actually count as a major success.

Could you elaborate where historically such a thing took place? Because the only thing that comes to my mind are rare and extreme cases of mass-murder when kidnapping attempts failed.

There are visual clues as the NPC react somewhat differently laying. The real problem with game is whole evidence collection and interpretation. I never get what the player character has in mind and constantly end up testing what 'Lie' option says. Dose anyone else have a problem with a slippery slope during gathering clues? Whenever I get first few questions wrong I soon end up unable to call 'Lie' as I lack the right evidence, that effect seems to get bigger as the case progresses resulting in a poor showing. Same. If I'm interested enough to watch then I'm going to want to play myself, and I don't want to watch someone else do it and have it spoiled. The point isn't only to watch the game but how other people react to them and solve problems presented. Besides that it's a perfectly good way to experience story/narrative in games without having to suffer through generic action sections.

Even if obsidian owns the IP who would finance the sequel? Sega is the most risk-taking of the big publishers and even they were not happy with the reception of AP.