Gromnir

PS:T had a meh trailer? Did we watch the same one? True, it said bugger all about the gameplay or story, but the images and sheer atmosphere were unforgettable. you must recall that raison dujour for ps:t failure is lousy marketing. sure, ps:t were heavily marketed in gamer magazines, and Gromnir even recalls one of those big cardboard displays at the local game store, but if you says that trailer sucked (a trailer which were included with every copy o' of baldur's gate) and that box art was horrible, or that overall marketing were insufficient, then you got a reason for failure that is complete removed from aspects of game itself. if marketing were the flaw, then you not needs find any mistakes in ps:t itself. given the high regard in which ps:t is held by fans and developers 'round here it is little wonder that peoples works so hard to find reasons for failure that were largely unrelated to developer contribution. HA! Good Fun!

degrees of terrible? oblvion's combat were pretty damned bad.... and mostly mindless. no real tactical considerations. there were a vast disparity 'tween bow and melee users in terms o' complexity and reward. point-and-click swing sword at crab thingie a thousand times and you is become a heroic sword user. learn to target and shoot bow properly probably is gonna take more than all the arrows you gathered in the starting dungeon... and is initially pretty expensive to buy more arrows. oblivion magic were... dunno. collected a bunch o' those orb thingies from a bunch o' gates that seemed to have only 3 genuine variations... and enemies were either tough or weak and either ranged or melee... or both. no real specific tactics for dealing with. as for bloodlines... 'couldn't tell you 'bout the combat. arcanum bored us to tears. toee were so buggy that in spite of fact that we got to elemental nodes we couldn't finish game. why on earth would Gromnir give more money to troika based on previous experience? that being said, if bloodlines combat is worse than oblivion's it has gotta be 'cause bloodlines combat were epic bad... 'cause oblivion were genuine terrible. HA! Good Fun!

preaching to the choir. for years Gromnir has noted that bioware builds games for the mythical Average Gamer. broad appeal doesn't = bad, but it makes tough to be exceptional. if your goal is to meet the expectations of the largest number o' potential consumers, is gonna be unlikely that you exceed the expectations of anybody. "dark, but not too dark." is illustrative o' the current biowarian design philosophy. biowarians wanna make a dark and gritty game, but at same time they not wanna lose customers who likes pleasant. so how dark does you think they is gonna really make da? "dark, but not too dark." can pretty much apply the above philosophy to every design choice. make combat tough, but not too tough. make character generation choices deep, but not too deep. make da a low magic setting, but not too low. *shrug* ps:t failed, in part, 'cause it were too unfamiliar and too unique for the Average Gamer. where were the elves and the dwarves? where was the conventions? am not surprised that biowarians is gonna avoid such a similar mistake with da. nevertheless, when we see dave gaider trying to convince self/others that his setting is anything other than tolkienesqe, Gromnir cannot help but wonder if gaider actually believes what he is saying. self-delusion can be a powerful force. ... game can still be dark and gritty... am simply surprised that gaider honestly thought that his description o' setting would distance da from lotr. HA! Good Fun!

am not bothered that instead of breaking new ground da is actually more lotr than most o' the lotr knock offs. few lotr knock-offs has so boldly embraced the core christian themes o' lotr. few contemporary fantasy authors has had the courage to try and sell their religion along with their fantasy. newc mentions pullman, and perhaps if the blight becomes sympathetic in da then clearly we gots a dark materials kinda pov. that being said, pullman didn't use the lotr conventions the way that da appears to be. btw, am optimistic about da overall... am simply a little surprised that after all the talk o' doing different, gaider is doing even more lotr than most. just look at this thread. if something looks like an orc and fufills same basic function as orcs, then author is gonna have to work that much harder to distinguish from orc... and he won't have a chance to editorialize to achieve distance neither; gaider is gonna have to makes players see different from orcs solely with material from game and he is already working from a self created disadvantage 'cause clearly large numbers o' people is identifying da with lotr. now, is possible that gaider is purpose using the tolkien stuff to actually makes people reevaluate. sometimes you can be using the conventions to actually makes people sees same 'ole, same 'ole in a whole new way. force an epiphany 'pon a person? is a tough grind and takes some skill to manage. oh, and Gromnir is NOT one o' the people that screamed "lotr clone!" after seeing initial trailers. (look above in thread... we expressed optimism for da, but noted that we is cynical 'bout origins, "dark but not too dark" and romances... slam the setting as tolkienesque not occur to us until gaiders pov gots added to the thread.) thought that such comparisons were kinda unfair. that being said, gaider's explanation posted above sounds very tolkienesque. am simply surprised that gaider would make such obvious parallels to lotr given all the earlier talk by developers 'bout doing different. *shrug* regardless, as we said already it ain't 'bout the general stuff so much as it is 'bout actual implementation. is nothing wrong with borrowing from tolkien... as long as you does better. am simply surprised that gaider would go this route considering just how much he claimed to wanna distance himself from the conventions. HA! Good Fun!

you gotta be kidding. first, we didn't pull out an obscure quote by you... rather a relative recent one that speaks direct to the issue. you wanna take exception with the quote? is your fault for saying such obviously contradictory stuff so recent that even Gromnir recalls. heck, we recall in particular 'cause it were one o' the few things you said that we agreed with. play an entire or even most o' game to form basis o' a review? why? don't blame Gromnir 'cause you gets caught in backtracking and fibbery. is not that you is arguing that you didn't say, but rather that Gromnir found an obscure quote? what kinda response is that? also, while di don't seem to be on speaking terms with Gromnir, she could probably back up our claims 'bout how far we played, 'cause she were the one that convinced us to play in first place. she apologized to us when we complained of inability to finish, but we noted that it weren't her fault that she liked the game... just different taste. even so, the game were a diabloesque clone that we played a number o' years ago. we got to orc camp with some tents and a pit... were repetitive stoopid to get to this point so we almost quit. after that we goes to some new map (to the south) where we is constantly attacked by ghosty things every ten seconds or so. tedium. is just like diablo with the constant attack o' seemingly mindless enemies. eventually get to wasteland after the Big Secret and Cut Scene stuff... so we finally quit. want more detail? tough. if game were better it would stick in our mind. we saw first half of the movie "Leprechaun" too, but we can't tell you Any details of that experience... other than that am pretty sure that the leprechaun were played by the dwarf guy from Willow. go ahead an accuse us of lying 'bout that too. btw, the quote of the guy who compared to ultima gave it a 2 out o' 10... 'cause it were that Bad in comparison. can find folks who compared to diablo too... which is easy 'cause it were an action rpg and virtual all action rpgs get compared to diablo at some time. regardless, the game got player feedback similar to obsidian's worst game based on the game rating site. is hardly a glowing endorsement. were loads o' complaints by fans 'bout seemingly pointless character development and banal quests... which explains why the player rankings were pretty lukewarm. nevertheless, if you wanna give game attributes it not possess, be our guest. yeah, pull out now. shoulda' pulled out a while ago... before you did 180s and made wacky accusations HA! Good Fun!

as we noted, the big picture in broad strokes seems pretty traditional. there was this big spiel by biowarians early in development 'bout how they was doing different, but sure sounds familiar. but again, fact that the framework is traditional not mean that bio implementation must be boring or cliche. is all 'bout implementation. use of conventions can be a shortcut or a load stone... or an opportunity for a deft writer. how is Gaider attempting to use... or does he thinks he is breaking new ground? *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

am actually kinda disappointed with that explanation. Gaider has his Ultimate Bad Guy to take place of the Devil/Sauron... a UBG who leads an army o' the fallen. ain't really that much different than lord of rings mythology. tolkien orcs is essentially fallen/corrupted elves. pride were the devil's sin too, right? ... nevertheless, am less concerned 'bout the big picture than we is 'bout how is implemented. HA! Good Fun!

You seem confused Grommie. agreed. Gromnir were confused 'bout what were making that an "awesome" interview. 'course xard admitted that he/she decreed awesomeness Before having read the interview. the interview is standard pre-release advertising. now maybe you thinks that the game sounds awesome based 'pon the interview, but there were nothing awesome 'bout interview. is same old questions you has seen previous to every game release... and obsidian didn't exactly break new ground wit responses neither. which begs question: does ign come up with questions or does obsidian? some celebrities, business giants & political noteworthies is notorious for doing interviews only if they has had a chance to review and ok questions ahead o' time. some folks insist on right to review and edit after the fact. heck, even the guys at 60 minutes has had to essentially do scripted interviews more than once. so, am honestly curious... were the seemingly pre-canned questions by jonric his own questions, or whether or did obsidian get input before or after the interview? *shrug* am guessing that jonric has been doing long enough to know how to keeps developers happy with appropriate questions... no need for sneaky approach. regardless, there weren't nothing awesome 'bout questions or answers. HA! Good Fun!

Or you could link to a map from the same game that actually shows one of the populated areas. Or just maybe one house..? http://www.gamebanshee.com/divinedivinity/...lrathshouse.php I bet you just accidentally chose a map called "Wasteland" out of the 20 or so maps available, rrriiiigggghhhhtttt? But it's pretty much pointless to discuss a game I've played with a person with a prejudice towards a game he hasn't played. Arguing for arguing's sake and all that. *sigh* 1) we virtual finished game 'ccording to where the wasteland shows up in the walk through 2) you is the guy we quoted referencing how complete game is unimportant. guess that makes you a hypocrite as well as kinda lost. 3) the map you link shows a house and a dungeon with hardly anything to actually do. find a key... implicate the bad guy... kill some baddies. if you is gonna choose an example, choose something that is better than stuff that were lame when bg1 were released. 4) Gromnir is indeed prejudiced 'gainst games with lame gameplay 5) am gonna agree that it is mostly pointless to continue you an argument you were never fit to engage in from the start. game got some good reviews and some bad, but in end what you got is a diablo clone with wonky translation. and again, is nothing wrong with cloning diablo 2 as it were very popular... but neither divine divinity nor diablo impress insofar as quest is concerned... and at least diablo2 has character development that others has tried to replicate. character building in divine divinity were hardly worth noting, and has been ignored by industry. HA! Good Fun!

"http://www.gamebanshee.com/divinedivinity/locations/wastelandsoverview.php" hey, we got further than we thought... and why should we trust some random quote you pulled? please note all the wonderfully involved gameplay available on the map we linked... beyond the mindless hack n' slash. "You don't need to finish a game before forming an opinion. Personally I used to play long enough for it to be unlikely that the game would surprise me anymore." now, who said that? HA! "I must admit - after reading most of the reviews on the net - that I'm surprised about the parent lack of criticism of Divine Divinity. Although it has some good elements, it's just a poorly done remake of Ultima VII. Especially the interface should be commented on: It lacks so much finish and design, that 2.6 GB of gameplay the game has, can be thrown out the window. Lousy pathfinding, a camera perspective where you often find yourself not seeing where youre character are and a thousand other, small annoying problems. There is of course a chance, that you can used to these major flaws, but that doesn't make it a good game. Not compared to the big rpg-titles on the market right now." see, we can do same thing with lifted quotes. and yeah, looks at the actual side-quests included on the map/walk through we linked. is mostly very brief and mindless as for character development... diablo 2 skill trees were better balanced and resulted in genuine different approaches to gameplay, so am not quite sure how you thinks you backed up your opinion, but so be it. ps over at games ratings, the average user rating for HoW were better than divine divinity... gothic 3 were worse. HA! Good Fun!

eh? we read the awesome interview and your awesome response.... which was extremely awesome. *shrug* in any event, Gromnir thinks that soz will be awesome... to the extreme. HA! Good Fun!

fair enough. your response was awesome. HA! Good Fun!

awesome? which parts were awesome? seemed likes a pretty standard 3-page text-heavy commercial advertisement kinda interview. it were a nice enough advertisement, but am not sure we is gonna hold up as an "awesome" example o' interview. maybe we shows age again. am forgetting how pretty much everything is "awesome" or "extreme" nowadays. HA! Good Fun!

"...had tons of interesting side-quests and a pretty decent character development scheme." ... rrriiiigggghhhhtttt. mostly fed-ex nonsense and a damned shallow and ultimately meaningless character development system. we got pretty far into game 'cause we were playing on recommendation, so is not as if we only played opening village & dungeon levels. were pretty much diabloesque all the way... which is fine. diablo and diablo 2 is the two most popular action-rpg games ever. if you is gonna clone, might as well clone the most successful. even so, fact that there were side-quests not mean they were interesting save to folks expecting very little, and the character building system ain't exactly inspired other developers to recreate in other games 'cause o' streamlined elegance and depth. divine divinity had strengths, but the "interesting side-quests" and the "character development scheme" were not exactly worth noting... save in comparison to some really terrible games. hack n' 1007. HA! Good Fun!

never finished. were a diablo 2 clone and we never could embrace the diabloesque 1007 & level gameplay. never got much into the story, and we clearly recall moments when we were certain that something musta' been lost in translation. even so, for folks who likes to quick level and gather huge quantities o' booty, divine divinity (a finalist for any "Worst Title Evar" contest) were no doubt worthy o' purchase. HA! Good Fun!

zehir is 4e fr god o' poison. a bunch o' gods get purged from 4e fr, but am not understanding why some handful were added. not have the 4e fr book, so... well, at least they got rid of the egyptian gods. that alone makes changes worthwhile. HA! Good Fun!

does we genuine know that? sure, we expect that the rules will be 3.5e for most part, but if you got a 4e god smack-dab in title o' game, perhaps story and setting will have more 4e relevance than some suggest. HA! Good Fun!

how 'bout the fantasy/children story o' a dough kneading doe... working for enough dough to open her own bakery? sorta a horatio alger thing? d'oh. not that all o' those were similes in any event. as we said above with our suggested rule: don't pretend to know more than you do. HA! Good Fun!

just checking. as we said, Gromnir ain't fan o' lindholm... and that ain't specific 'cause o' her predilection for poncey mano y mano romance. HA! Good Fun!

Can of worms, open! that woman has more names than english royalty. in any event, is that one of megan lindholm's poncey homersexual romances? never been a fan o' lindholm/hobbs. HA! Good Fun!

a friend o' ours once noted that the "write what you know" stuff is bs. good fiction is a realized dream that is compelling and entertaining in large part because the stories being told ain't mundane and ain't even possible. the tiny fraction o' knowledge a writer needs to makes a story Feel real 'nuff to get reader to suspend disbelief is hardly worth noting. ... am not a 100% believer o' such a pov. writing from pov o' first hand experience is useful. is details that the casual or weekend participant is unaware o' and so will leave out o' story. a non-hunter writing story 'bout hunting won't necessarily seem fraudulent, but a hunter with considerable experience simply has more genuine material from which to draw and create a believable fantasy/fiction 'bout hunting. am s'posing that romance is similar. Gromnir could write a hunting story and make it believable even to hunters... 'cause we has considerable experience hunting (though not for decades.) but what if we tries to write hunt story from deer pov? luckily there ain't many deer that is complain that we got wrong... but women? ain't never been a deer... or a woman. Gromnir write 'bout being a deer or a woman has gotta be based 'pon 'magination and research rather than personal experience. 'course virtual all Gromnir's editors in past has been women and they has been quite willing to inform us when we has Mary or Jane or Nancy acting in a way that is implausible to women. regardless, Gromnir can go through list o' the greatest love/romance stories in literary history and a large number o' those stories is going to have been written by men. write what you know? is maybe overstating. better rule: don't pretend to know more than you do. sometimes saying less = more. clarification: Gromnir has never worked in a bakery. for all we know, bread is made by bread gnomes who insures that there is fresh baked goods for Gromnir to purchase at 5:00 am. nevertheless, we could write a story 'bout a baker with little fear. no, we ain't gonna pretend that we know every detail o' the baking industry, but a little research would provide some details... 'least nuff so that our character seemed like a baker. Babbitt is a story 'bout a real estate sales person, but very little real estate sales is happening in that book. Rabbit is Rich is a story 'bout an ex-jock owner of a car dealership, and as far as we know, Updike don't own a car dealership... and am sure that he were never part of a state championship high school basketball team. just as Babbitt ain't 'bout real estate sales, and Rabbit ain't 'bout basketball, our baker's story wouldn't be 'bout baking. 'course if we wanted to write a story 'bout baking... HA! Good Fun!

The most difficult part would be reading more than ten entries without pouring molten lead into my eye sockets. to be fair, that might be appropriate payback for what Gromnir had to endure reading much of iwd:how dialogues... and some of iwd2. (admittedley, after we suffered through middle portions o' iwd2 we found we disliked it less than we had originally believed.) romance is the reason why for to be saving the world or killing the monster... is typically the raison detre for being heroic in the first place. is not the subject matter o' some lightspeed tacked on optional sub-quest made incidental by design. HA! Good Fun!

first of all, Gromnir specifically said that the da board community were divided regarding dark v. traditional. never said that there were some kinda majority desire for pleasant. regardless, developers, in an attempt to mollify those with concerns said that da would be dark, but not too dark... is actually more proper in quotes, "dark, but not too dark." as for why there has to be 6-8 dialogue encounters (is a different thing than 6-8 3-line dialogues) well, that too should be obvious. after bg2 people complained that they finished game before finishing romances. peoples also complained 'bout untimely interjections. am about to fight shadow dragon and jaheira suddenly wanna share her feelings? so now bio and obsidian does their dialogue encounters following main plot points. by the time you has a joinable npc become part o' group there will probably only be 6-8 main plot points remaining... 'specially if you has loads of side-quest opportunities. "BG2 was the 1st attempt at serious romances. And they were far more than 3 line dialogues" sure they was. individual dialogue responses were no more than 3 lines in length. the dialogues could go back and forth a bit during each such encounter, but how much can such a dialogue advance a romance w/o seeming cheesy? has always been the problem with a crpg romance 'cause you gotta advance through entire arc in a handful o' dialogue encounters that is optional and tangential to critical path. make those individual encounters too lengthy and peoples will be alternately bored or unable to suspend disbelief. Gone with the Wind were hundereds o' pages long... and less than half were dialogue (and Gromnir hated it.) Pride and Prejudice weren't as long as Gone with the Wind, but try to squeeze into kotor or je or even bg2. Romeo & Juliet were mostly dialogue, but the romance were hardly tangential. Gromnir is actually a big fan of The Graduate, a screenplay written by two men... loads of dialogue. chicks loved the movie & novel, The Notebook.... written by a guy btw. never saw or read it. how many pages? with movies and lit you can use narration or montage to advance a story many years or even decades. one reason why Citizen Kane is famous is 'cause of the way it used the montage to advance story. in a matter o' a minute and a half o' screen time we sees Kane go from happy newlywed to henpecked husband. can't do that in a crpg 'cause player gotta be in control... no montage to advance romance. literature or movies... name a tangential romance, one that had little impact 'pon what were going on with main plot, that were an all-time favorite. is some short stories, that is... short, but integral. however, even if we makes analogous, such short stories is never virtual all dialogue, and they rarely involve the boy-meets-girl step... romantic figures is already involved. crpg romances, being optional, starts with boy-meets-girl. is not as easy as you folks wanna make it. "The real issue when it comes to romances is the desire to write them. Not just because you "need" to include it as a feature, but because you BELIEVE in it as something that adds to the story and the life of the characters IG." what a load of crap. maybe click your heals together three times and wish upon a star while you is at it. yes, no doubt if the biowarians simply opened themselves up to love, their crpg romances would blossom likes a field of poppies in april. *snort* HA! Good Fun!

"Yes Bio/Obs is smarter than poor kelverin..." probably. "But there writing and design does not show it. " actually, much of biowarian writing and design is pretty good. question is what is wrong with romances. even folks who like the biowarian romances sees room for improvement. maybe kel wanna suggest that all biowarian design and writing is sub-par? *chuckle* is many people who would disagree, and sales alone shows that while bio quality is arguable, their success is fact. "get better writers" "write better romances." is not useful suggestions. is not suggestions that recognize the problems inherent in developing crpg romance. and no, Gromnir not have all the answers, but at least we can identify some o' the obstacles. step 1: identify the problem. they not teach critical thinking, analysis and problem solving in schools no more? HA! Good Fun!

"English Literature interns was just an example, closet authors, would be novelists....whoever is hungry and cheap laughing.gif Getting a writing credit might be one hell of a starting point for one's career, and a selling point for any gaming company trying to land a "up and coming" new writer/novelist, Lets be honest a Jane Austen type comes around every how many years?" clearly you ain't getting the point. no doubt you thinks current bio crpg writers is simply random folks that were discovered working at local gas stations and laundromats? never occurred to the biowarians to hire folks with a writing resume. *snort* the biowarians currently look for folks who can write, but not only is crpg writing vast different than traditional writing, but the folks who is genuine talented writers is unlikely to make crpg writing their 1st choice... or second choice... or third... sure, hold a contest and hire some english lit interns... HA! but of course, even if you get a good crop o' writer talent, the method o' implementing romances in a bio crpg makes "better romances" very difficult. tangent? should be obvious, but a romance that is optional cannot have too great an impact on the critical path story. whatever changes must necessarily be slight. actually, the 3 line bit is giving gamers all the credit they is due. after bg, bio adopted what were described by a developer as a 3-line rule... 'cause gamers started clicking past dialogues that were more than 3 lines. obsidian/bis seems to have followed suit, following the commercial failure o' ps:t. "I'll go a step further and say it should be more, don't know how many relationships you have been in, but it take a hell of a lot more work that that." great... too bad that won't happen under current scheme. again, is limitations 'cause this is a crpg. npc side-quests is limited in scope and the more of em you got, the less involved they is probably gonna be. what is you gonna remove to add considerably more to romances? how you gonna keep tangential? am all for doing more, but... and again, Gromnir is not arguing that romances ain't popular. romances will continue to be popular. bio will continue doing 'em. what folks not seem to get is that the romances will always be relative juvenile, rushed and unfulfilled simply 'cause o' the way they is implemented. biowarians won't be too bothered by that 'cause as much as people like kel complain 'bout current state, biowarians sees that current scheme is popular enough. kel and dr tells bio to do better. HA! hire english interns and hold contests? sure. HA! Good Fun!