Passionaticus wrote...
Totally new would be something, that no game had ever delivered up to NOW. BG2 delivered that in 2000.
In modern times that would be like GTA4 where every pedestrian is "talkable" and can give you some sort of quest. Or DAO, but where you can ask your OWN, not pre-written by developers but rather typed by user using keyboard, questions to npcs.
SLPr0 wrote...
Passionaticus wrote...
... then I suppose even old-timers will switch to Bethesda, CD-Project, whatever. I mean if we cant have rich-detailed world, decent ruleset, convincing characters and deep plot like we used to in BG1-2 and KOTOR in newest Bio' titles, then at least we can get huge(albeit more barren, but who cares since there's no alternative) world and nice graphics in Skyrim, decent plot in Witcher 2.
In other words, if there's no game that can match BG2 in amount of content(i'm not even hoping for the same quality of it, just the amount will do) soon, Bioware is finished as a major developer, imho. Simply good games, like DAO and ME2 were, and DA2 could be(although I doubt it after the demo, but alright, I'll wait for final product) - are no longer enough. Its really not OK to sit around for years baking roughly same cakes, even if they're based on good-old recipe.
Totally new level of interaction is needed, like it was back then in 2000. Come on Bioware, we know you can do it!
Yeah cause Bethesda trotting out another bugged up Gamebyro engine RPG is going to really help them tell a better story than BioWare does.
I feel as though people criticizing BioWare for attempting to appeal to the masses are like people who say Wrath of the Lich King was Blizzard selling out.Purgatious wrote...
For gamers, the more popular something is, the worse of it is.
Using that logic, bioware is slowly dying.
Passionaticus wrote...
Or DAO, but where you can ask your OWN, not pre-written by developers but rather typed by user using keyboard, questions to npcs.
Indeed, SW:TOR is nothing if not revolutionary. Heck Bioware took ME2 and DA2 in a new different direction from their predecessors and you think they don't take risks and try new things?wulfsturm wrote...
Passionaticus wrote...
Totally new would be something, that no game had ever delivered up to NOW. BG2 delivered that in 2000.
In modern times that would be like GTA4 where every pedestrian is "talkable" and can give you some sort of quest. Or DAO, but where you can ask your OWN, not pre-written by developers but rather typed by user using keyboard, questions to npcs.
Yeah, it's called an "MMORPG."
marshalleck wrote...
I think Bioware already achieved that, and the hardcore fanboy response is utterly unsurprising in that it largely mirrors the response we saw from Fallout fanboys on NMA. Which is to say they were out of their minds with rage and contempt for "betraying" the game and "selling out."
Although I do think this response was a bit more muted in the case of FNV.
Modifié par BobSmith101, 26 février 2011 - 12:39 .
marshalleck wrote...
SLPr0 wrote...
Yeah cause Bethesda trotting out another bugged up Gamebyro engine RPG is going to really help them tell a better story than BioWare does.
Only thing Bethesda's doing this year thats going to be any good at all is Rage,
Err, Skyrim isn't using Gamebryo and ID is developing Rage, Bethesda is only publishing it.
How is LA Noire?AllThatJazz wrote...
Bears repeating, I think. Plus also, in my case, L.A. Noire.
Passionaticus wrote...
marshalleck wrote...
So wait, you want something "totally new", and "just like it was back then in 2000"?Passionaticus wrote...
Its really not OK to sit around for years baking roughly same cakes, even if they're based on good-old recipe.
Totally new level of interaction is needed, like it was back then in 2000. Come on Bioware, we know you can do it!
Totally new would be something, that no game had ever delivered up to NOW. BG2 delivered that in 2000.
In modern times that would be like GTA4 where every pedestrian is "talkable" and can give you some sort of quest. Or DAO, but where you can ask your OWN, not pre-written by developers but rather typed by user using keyboard, questions to npcs.
You imply we can only buy games from one RPG developer. I bet most RPG fans have tried a Bethesda game.Passionaticus wrote...
... then I suppose even old-timers will switch to Bethesda, CD-Project, whatever.
Guest_Kordaris_*
Say no to crack.wulfsturm wrote...
Yeah, it's called an "MMORPG."
wulfsturm wrote...
Passionaticus wrote...
Right. If they continue to "develop" this way, it wouldnt be the same Bioware we knew when BG2 and KOTOR games came out. These 2 revolutionary games introduced totally new levels in CRPG gaming, while the both titles you mentioned are just re-imaginings of KOTOR in new settings. Bioware wanted to create two new universes they could own copyrights to - sci-fi and fantasy one, they did it, and did it quite OK(for ME part, at least). But they're not evolving in terms of gameplay.
Bioware used to be revolutionary studio, not the reformist one.
What universe are you from? BG2 and KOTOR were never revolutionary. They were excellent RPGs, yes - but far from "revolutionary."
Well they are definitely not using Gamebryo, it's confirmed. They are using a new internally developed engine they've dubbed the Creation Engine. How well it will perform is right now anyone's guess. And I won't speculate at the nature of the partnership between ID and Bethesda, but I will say ID have been independently chipping away at Rage for several years now, long before they had any publishing deal arranged with Bethesda SoftWorks--which is the publishing branch of Bethesda's operation, not their development studio.SLPr0 wrote...
Yeah cause Id Software needs a publisher. Seriously, its being developed in conjunction between Id and Bethesda. Its an epic meeting of the minds between the original masters of the FPS game engine, and one of the better RPG developers of the industry, frankly I think epic is not even close to a grand enough word to explain my feelings on that mix up.
And if Skyrim isn't using Gamebyro I'll eat my hat, they've been hugging that engine for years now. If they've switched up to something that isn't actually completely incapable of running in a stable fashion under Vista and Win 7 I'll be happily surprised.
Modifié par marshalleck, 26 février 2011 - 12:43 .
elirian_19 wrote...
I'm confused. What exactly is this thread about?
Maria Caliban wrote...
How is LA Noire?AllThatJazz wrote...
Bears repeating, I think. Plus also, in my case, L.A. Noire.
<- Is part of the glorious PC master race and so doesn't get it.
Pick the post that most interests you. Choose your own adventure!elirian_19 wrote...
I'm confused. What exactly is this thread about?
SLPr0 wrote...
Yeah cause Id Software needs a publisher. Seriously, its being developed in conjunction between Id and Bethesda. Its an epic meeting of the minds between the original masters of the FPS game engine, and one of the better RPG developers of the industry, frankly I think epic is not even close to a grand enough word to explain my feelings on that mix up.
And if Skyrim isn't using Gamebyro I'll eat my hat, they've been hugging that engine for years now. If they've switched up to something that isn't actually completely incapable of running in a stable fashion under Vista and Win 7 I'll be happily surprised.
Skyrim utilizes the Creation Engine, a game engine developed internally by Bethesda.[11]
Modifié par wulfsturm, 26 février 2011 - 12:41 .
Passionaticus wrote...
So, there were inter-party banters and romances before BG2? Or fully-voiced cinematic RPG game before KOTOR?
Maria Caliban wrote...
How is LA Noire?AllThatJazz wrote...
Bears repeating, I think. Plus also, in my case, L.A. Noire.
<- Is part of the glorious PC master race and so doesn't get it.
Modifié par AllThatJazz, 26 février 2011 - 12:52 .
You better start eating your hat.
That's nothing new for the typical BSN crowd.Spaghetti_Ninja wrote...
I stopped reading after ''Bethesda''.
Passionaticus wrote...
So, there were inter-party banters and romances before BG2? Or fully-voiced cinematic RPG game before KOTOR?
Retour en haut
