Morrowind...aka WTF happened Bethesda

[WDeranged]

Remember all the clamour when your character "died" at the end of Fallout 3.

 

The Fallout 3 ending (and slides) were the biggest betrayal, I was massively let down because I bought into the ****ty story at the time, I was expecting tons of info and all I got was a quick pat on the head from Ron Pearlman...Skyrim's ending is almost as bad, even Oblivion gave you some kind of fanfare after you beat the MQ, in Skyrim almost no one gives a crap.

 

This could be explained by the notion that the Nords are too busy fighting their civil war and dealing with the Thalmor to notice the world getting saved but it doesn't take much reasoning to guess that Bethesda rushed the game for the 11-11-11 mania, it's sad because Skyrim could have been really special rather than the overly efficient time sink that it is

 

Regardless of all this I still find plenty to enjoy in Bethesda's games but I think it's good to be able to criticise something you like.

Edited November 17, 2012 by WDeranged

[greylord]

I've been playing Morrowind more and more lately and I've come to the realization that this is one of the best RPGs ever created. The faction dynamics have real potential. It has magic creation, alchemy, etc. etc. It has choices and consequences. So what the hell happened over at Bethesda?

 

They dumbed down their games for bigger audience. Bigger audience = more money.

 

 

MW was/is a horrible game. Then again, it's an ES series game so that is just a given.

Morrowind is considered one of the greatest RPG of all time for many, so I interested in why you think it is a terrible game?

 

It's a FACT in world of Volournia, r00fles. NWN OC is also a good game in the same bizarro world.

 

And Dragon Age 2 is the most perfect and greatest game ever...well almost in that world.

[Volourn]

Why do you guys lie about stuff? I never said any of that crap.

[Yes Man]

Morrowind is one of the greatest wRPG's I have ever played. I feel like it's the one game where Bethesda just went crazy and put a ton of insane and interesting stuff in.

 

A lot of Bethesda's other games, I can only enjoy with mods. But no mods can fix bad writing.

Edited November 19, 2012 by Yes Man

[Guest The Architect]

Skyrim's awesome. Who gives a **** if they dumbed down the gameplay mechanics. It's not just pizza face nerds who like playing games. Sure, the caves and miscellaneous quests are repetitive and not worth it, but the main story and faction quests are fun.

[Tagaziel]

Skyrim's awesome. Who gives a **** if they dumbed down the gameplay mechanics. It's not just pizza face nerds who like playing games.

 

Because having varied mechanics that go beyond "health bar, mana bar, press x to kill people" is too complicated?

[Oner]

Skyrim's awesome. Who gives a **** if they dumbed down the gameplay mechanics. It's not just pizza face nerds who like playing games.

 

Because having varied mechanics that go beyond "health bar, mana bar, press x to kill people" is too complicated?

Of couse. The burgerstuffing Untermenschen need simplicity so their primitive minds can comprehend things.

[melkathi]

It's not just pizza face nerds who like playing games.

 

You seem to be carrying a lot of baggage, have a lot to prove. All this aggression against the geek culture. Comments about people being desperate, not having a sex life in that other thread, now here a comment about people's looks.

What exactly is it you are compensating for with all this aggression?

[AGX-17]

Who gives a **** if they dumbed down the gameplay mechanics. It's not just pizza face nerds who like playing games. Sure, the caves and miscellaneous quests are repetitive and not worth it, but the main story and faction quests are fun.

 

People who enjoy non-dumb gameplay. A typical "dumb action game" has more complex gameplay than Skyrim. And the main story and faction quests aren't fun, they're boring and stereotypical. You should pack up and go to Bethesda's forums if you can't stand the people who enjoy well-designed quests, well-written characters, story and dialogue and gameplay that requires some degree of intellectual fortitude (i.e. the majority of Obsidian fans.) Making ad hominem attacks on anyone who doesn't like Skyrim doesn't strengthen your position, it makes it as weak as the cuss-filled Xbox Live rants of a 14 year old Call of Duty player.

Edited November 19, 2012 by AGX-17

[Guest The Architect]

Tagaziel, no it isn't, but what are these varied gameplay mechanics that you wanted?

 

Oner, haha, it was a joke. I like to stir overly sensitive people like you up.

 

melkathi, as I said, it was a joke, but I guess it must be true for some of you based on your defensive reactions (see? I can be an internet pseudo-psychologist, too).

 

AGX-17, yes, I clearly can't stand anyone here, all you story and character loving gamers repulse me. That's why I've been a member for nearly 7 years. I can appreciate a good story and characters you condescending dweeb, but can also enjoy a game that is simple. Sounds like you're the one who can't stand people who enjoy simpler games. And you say the story and characters were boring and stereotypical. Okay, so what exactly was it that you wanted that wouldn't have been boring and stereotypical as you say? And I have no interest in the Call of Duty games.

Edited November 20, 2012 by The Architect

[Oner]

Oner, haha, it was a joke. I like to stir overly sensitive people like you up.

I'm not overly sensitive you dimwitted prick, I just hate morons like you.

[Guest The Architect]

Dimwitted prick? Moron? Is that the best you've got? I've seen better **** on the lawn than the stuff you're coming up with.

[Oner]

"pizza face nerds"

That fourstar on the lawn must not have come from you then. Dimwit.

What's next? Are you going to call me a noob, oh great genius of insults?

Edited November 20, 2012 by Oner

[Drowsy Emperor]

Now that is just sad Architect.

 

 

To return to the topic.

Less complex gameplay mechanics might be a good thing actually. Maybe not necessarily in Skyrim but in general. I used to think that complexity is something desirable but now I'm slowly changing my mind.

 

After all, the point of the game is to sell you an experience. It stands to reason that much of the stuff role playing games decorate themselves in, like leveling, skill points, endless loot etc. - is just arbitrary rubbish whose only purpose is to be a cog in the game system's mathematical model and give out tangible, visible rewards to the player for "good behavior".

 

What does all that have to do with being a brave warrior, or a sneaky thief? You certainly aren't going to give a credible curve of someone's development from beginner to grandmaster swordsman. That sort of thing takes years in real life.

 

Instead they put in a silly game of numerical optimization (with elements of a reflex game if the game is real time) and call it "role playing".

 

So, now I'm in the camp that things should be kept as simple as possible, stripped of all the math crap and that the experience should be at the forefront of it all.

[Guest The Architect]

Yeah I was, actually, how'd you know?

[Guest Slinky]

So, now I'm in the camp that things should be kept as simple as possible, stripped of all the math crap and that the experience should be at the forefront of it all.

 

Hehe, you are in luck, many people share that opinion with you.

 

Call of Duty series has sold millions after all

[Guest The Architect]

Yeah, complicated gameplay mechanics doesn't mean better, you can have simple gameplay, just as long as it's not repetitive. I guess they could've added combo melee attacks and the ability to combine two magic powers into one, but I'd still like to hear what it was that was so bad about the gameplay in Skyrim. You could wield a melee weapon in one hand and magic in the other. I've never played the previous Elder Scrolls games, but apparently you couldn't do that before.

Edited November 20, 2012 by The Architect

[Drowsy Emperor]

So, now I'm in the camp that things should be kept as simple as possible, stripped of all the math crap and that the experience should be at the forefront of it all.

 

Hehe, you are in luck, many people share that opinion with you.

 

Call of Duty series has sold millions after all

 

For a reply see Yahtzee's review of Medal of Honor: Warfighter

 

Btw the problem with Call of Duty isn't the game concept itself (after all, most PC gamers loved CoD2 back in the day), its the fact that they're selling the same game for the 15th time.

Edited November 20, 2012 by Drowsy Emperor

[Guest Slinky]

Yep, I liked the first one a lot.

 

Then the suits put the infinite looping on.

[Drowsy Emperor]

Of course, its also trashy gun porn with a nice veneer - but that the FPS genre for you.

[alanschu]

Btw the problem with Call of Duty isn't the game concept itself (after all, most PC gamers loved CoD2 back in the day), its the fact that they're selling the same game for the 15th time.

 

This is more an issue of "They aren't constantly putting out the game I want to play."

 

The way people talk they would love an annual instalment of an Infinity Engine game.

[Guest Slinky]

Btw the problem with Call of Duty isn't the game concept itself (after all, most PC gamers loved CoD2 back in the day), its the fact that they're selling the same game for the 15th time.

 

This is more an issue of "They aren't constantly putting out the game I want to play."

 

The way people talk they would love an annual instalment of an Infinity Engine game.

 

There is some of that, at least on my part, but I also find stupid to buy the same simple game again and again every year. And that makes me feel superior. I like feeling superior.

[Drowsy Emperor]

Btw the problem with Call of Duty isn't the game concept itself (after all, most PC gamers loved CoD2 back in the day), its the fact that they're selling the same game for the 15th time.

 

This is more an issue of "They aren't constantly putting out the game I want to play."

 

The way people talk they would love an annual instalment of an Infinity Engine game.

 

I have serious doubts that any creatively significant work can be forced into a perpetual yearly release schedule. Anything and everything would degenerate to repetition at best, garbage at worst.

Edited November 20, 2012 by Drowsy Emperor

[alanschu]

I have serious doubts that any creatively significant work can be forced into a perpetual yearly release schedule. Anything and everything would degenerate to repetition at best, garbage at worst.

 

If the game mechanics stayed the same (i.e. no engine and limited programming work required), I wouldn't be surprised if a team could make interesting stories every 1-2 years with Infinity Engine (I say this having no idea what challenges the workflow itself presents in terms of tools and whatnot).

 

At what point is "repetition" bad? People say they'd love more IE games. Does this mean that they're okay with the mechanics remaining unchanged and just getting new stories/adventures with the engine? Or would that eventually grow stale and the only reason we want more Infinity Engine style games is because they are not over done? Is it possible to have "Too much BG2/PST?"

[Drowsy Emperor]

I have serious doubts that any creatively significant work can be forced into a perpetual yearly release schedule. Anything and everything would degenerate to repetition at best, garbage at worst.

 

If the game mechanics stayed the same (i.e. no engine and limited programming work required), I wouldn't be surprised if a team could make interesting stories every 1-2 years with Infinity Engine (I say this having no idea what challenges the workflow itself presents in terms of tools and whatnot).

 

At what point is "repetition" bad? People say they'd love more IE games. Does this mean that they're okay with the mechanics remaining unchanged and just getting new stories/adventures with the engine? Or would that eventually grow stale and the only reason we want more Infinity Engine style games is because they are not over done? Is it possible to have "Too much BG2/PST?"

 

People want to relive the wonder and novelty they felt while playing those games. The ability of a game to produce that feeling isn't tied to technology but to the vision of its creators, their creative freedom and ability.

 

Its indicative that you chose BG2 and PST. Those games are visionary works. That was apparent even at the time and has only been reinforced since. You can't replicate or force a visionary work, it happens on its own or it doesn't.

 

Icewind Dale and ID2 for example, aren't visionary. They're just decently done games, not groundbreaking in any way. BG1 was a sort of pioneering effort, its value more historical and in setting the stage for what came after.

You could churn out ID style adventures on a yearly basis. Whether they'd be any good and how long it would take for people to tire of them is a roll of the dice. I don't think it would take all that long, except for the most fanatical fans.

 

Also, its an uphill battle to make something wondrous by sticking to an already beaten path, because to make an experience unique you have to move away from what the player already knows.