Development Info David Gaider on settings culture & history

[Sol Invictus]

Well, Sheriff, perhaps things have changed. Many people who supported the "hardline" are gone now. Those who've replaced them are taking more moderate positions. I joined the site, and joined the staff, when nothing was held back. That's what attracted me. If that's changed, then maybe somebody else would fit in better. It's as simple as that. I'm waiting for Saint to state his position. If the site is still hardcore, then fuck all those who think we should be politically correct and suck some dicks for some exclusives. If the site is now more ...I dunno..."nice", then I'd rather be a regular member.

Your opinion seems to be one of extreme polarities. In your opinion, you can't just refuse to suck dick; you have to bite their balls off, too. This site isn't any more 'nice' or 'hardcore' than it was a year ago. Role-Player's still around, Volourn's still around, 90% of the people who were here last year are still around. Rosh wouldn't still be posting if changes are as drastic as you say they are. In short, fairly little has changed.

What has changed, though, is that most of us stopped beating the war drums against Bioware - mainly because they managed to improve their reputation with HOTU and KOTOR, and they're doing so with Dragon Age as well. When Spazmo wrote that bashing Bioware in every post is old, it very much applied back then - and it applies now more than ever, a year later.

Troika hasn't exactly warmed us to their presence with their development of a pseudo-RPG like Vampire, nor have they impressed us with their willingness to go ahead with a Pause & Play RPG inspite of their own reservations. That alone clearly reveals how unenthusiastic they are about the games they make. Bioware on the other hand makes games that it wants to (See: Dragon Age, Jade Empire), and some of us can respect that. You've argued recently (and failed, due to lack of any basis whatsoever) that Bioware is worse than Troika because Bioware makes games they don't want to make, and that they're making Dragon Age just to make the D&D playerbase happy. If they wanted to make the D&D playerbase happy, they wouldn't be using their own IP, would they?

One last thing, why do you think that it's impossible to take a moderate position? I don't see any reason for your hardline bullshit. I don't know who's forcing you to be such a complete cocksucker. Oh, and before anyone decides to assault me for 'name-calling': I wasn't calling him a name, I was telling him not to be like one.

 

[Sol Invictus]

You know, there's better ways to imply that Pete Hines is a PR lackey. I know he's a PR lackey and I've pointed it out many times in my posts so it isn't as if I'm trying to jump to his rescue. There's just better ways to insinuate facts and get a point across without calling someone 'full of shit' outright. Calling someone expletives doesn't make your point valid and only serves to prove what a wretch you are.

Oh yeah Whip, don't be such a cocksucker. I'm sure everyone knows Saint's position here without you trying to point that out every fucking couple of posts.

 

[Vault Dweller]

You don't have to call someone an 'idiot' to insult him. You can insult someone by second guessing their decisions, criticizing them unfairly (which is what VD did) or slandering them (which is what VD also did).

That VD sure sounds like a rare bastard Can you please pinpoint where I criticized David unfairly or criticized him at all, and where I slander him?

Here is the full quote for everyone's reference:

"Actually, that's where our major disagreement with Bio designs is. David looks at dialogues as an additional story-telling tool, not as an opportunity for a player to actually choose something. His example is good, and does explain a lot about the conflict, but I doubt that each individual response has any effect on the gameplay. i.e. should you pick #3, you'd not be able to convince the "religious figure" to declare a war and fight in it, and he would hardly give your response #2 much thought."

I said that we have disagreements, I stated that his example is good and informative, and I DOUBTED (as in don't know for sure and don't pretend that it's a fact) that each individual response affects the gameplay. So, can somebody obviously smarter then me show me where that negative subliminal message is?

 

[Sol Invictus]

You slander by taking people's words out of context and criticizing those words to fit your own agenda. Presenting lies isn't a good way to go about arguing a point, VD.

Take note, Jora: I just insulted VD by insinuating that he tells lies. He would accuse me of slander in this matter.

 

[Whipporowill]

I agree that the bio-bashing is getting more and more obsolete - as they're getting better at making games that actually feature choices. Kotor was nice, and to a lesser degree Hotu - there's truth to that. Still, comparing Troika to Bioware is something you keep bringing up - and it's sipmly just pure idiocy. Bio is as independent a developer can get - they can start a project and publishers will come begging to their doorstep - all dependant on the games they made in the past (which many here don't even LIKE). Think that's the case with Troika?

Still, I can't see what "us" your constantly referring to. Basically from what I've seen it's only you that stand for those convictions - although some might share parts of it. I haven't seen anyone else as anti-Troika around here? Feel free to enlighten me who these "us" are - except you, and as you claim Saint.

 

[Calis]

My hints about staff forum seem to fall on deaf ears.

 

[Whipporowill]

Oh yeah Whip, don't be such a cocksucker. I'm sure everyone knows Saint's position here without you trying to point that out every fucking couple of posts.

Way to go proving your point by calling someone a cocksucker! You certainly impressed me with your diplomatic skilz. Can I join your fan club? Please?

Simple thing is - you both fucked up, and keep fucking it up with this debate.

Calis, somehow they seem to appreciate the audience. No matter the cost.

 

[Avin]

... Kotor was nice, and to a lesser degree Hotu - there's truth to that...

I agree with that. I was very surprised by the final parts (i don't wanna spoil it) and the ending of HOTU. They even make different endings

 

[Sol Invictus]

Troika started the same way Bioware did, by taking contracts from publishers and working their way up through successes. Bioware is where it's at because of its past successes. Troika is where it's at because it has failed thus far in the same matter. You're making it seem like Troika deliberately set out to become nothing more than a contract scavenger instead of an independent, powerful developer like Bioware, SquareSoft or Epic Games. I really don't think that the point of them breaking off from Interplay was to become the lapdog of other publishers.

Basically, Troika fucked up. Leniency is unnecessary. If Arcanum didn't feature dated graphics, atrocious combat and a completely imbalanced character system it would have likely been a major hit. Sierra can't be blamed for Troika's failings in this matter, though Sierra's 2-month delay certainly contributed, in part to the game's lack of sales (mainly due to piracy). Though, it's arguable that pirates would have even bought the game had they not have access to it a few weeks early.

Why is comparing Troika to Bioware 'pure idiocy'? They are both game developers, which focus mainly on the development of RPGs. They've both shared similar foundations, and it's likely that they both share the same goals when it comes to corporate success: to be rich and independent. That's pure idiocy!

Unlike Troika, Bioware had no previous game development experience and their software development experience consisted of developing medical software. Troika's developers have had 10+ years of game development (on triple A titles, no less) on their belt. Far be it for them to develop a good game and judged for it. It isn't as if Troika consists of a bunch of teenage newbies, new to the game development scene, fresh, and ready to make a name for themselves.

Whip, who gives a damn if I'm the only person around here who's pessimistic about Troika? I don't need your approval. I truly doubt that's the case. Regardless, having 1-2 or more people with the same opinion isn't going to make mine any less, or any more valid than it currently is. My opinion is my own, just as all people are completely free to make up their own minds about Troika without needing your approval, or anyone else's approval for that matter.

 

[Whipporowill]

You're free to your opinion, although I don't understand it. But the "us" which you've repeatedly used in your arguments are simply lame - if you can't substantiate it. A simple "I" gets you a long way in credability, Rex.

EDIT: You're lame post deletion is legendary b t w. I saw that.

 

[Sol Invictus]

When we speak English we don't often expect listeners to take specific people into consideration each time we make a generalization, unless it's in the form of a statement which serves to represent not only oneself, but others as well (like in a news post).

I don't suppose all of my opinions are invalid just because I said 'us' once or twice. Why would saying "I" often help one's credibility in any case? You sound like one of those assholes on MSN Chat who keeps insisting that everyone use 'IMO' or "IMHO' after every line they say just to 'keep things clear that they are your opinion and your opinion alone'.

Edit: I deleted the post after you saw it. It was for you. I'll call you a mental impotent now, if it pleases you any.

 

[Vault Dweller]

What has changed, though, is that most of us stopped beating the war drums against Bioware

What you failed to realize is that I wasn't bashing Bio in this particular post. If you think that I was, you are mistaken.

You've argued recently (and failed, due to lack of any basis whatsoever) that Bioware is worse than Troika because Bioware makes games they don't want to make, and that they're making Dragon Age just to make the D&D playerbase happy

First, I wasn't arguing that Bio is worse then Troika, if you think so, let's see some quotes. I was arguing though that it's unfair to claim that Bio is better just because Bio's making games that they allegedly really love. Second, the similarities between DA and DnD are obvious. Does it make a bad game? No.

If they wanted to make the D&D playerbase happy, they wouldn't be using their own IP, would they?

It's a common fact that the DnD license comes with a big pricetag: the anti-evil thing, too many people to please, etc. It makes a lot of sense for a company like Bio to try to develop their own IP that runs close enough to DnD to keep the fans happy. I hate WotC bastards so I applaud that decision and hope that DA would do well.

One last thing, why do you think that it's impossible to take a moderate position? I don't see any reason for your hardline bullshit.

Suffice to say that I don't see any reason for a moderate position, if anything there is much more bullshit now in the inbdustry then it ever was. Every game is revolutionary or evolutionary or, in some cases, is already a blockbuster. Most games are either licensed stuff or clones. When was the last time you guys where excited about an RPG or played one you really like?

 

[Whipporowill]

Gee. Difference between you and me is that you're doing your best to defame and slander anyone you're disagreeing with. I'm trying to be constructive and at least somewhat diplomatic here.

You're not in any way interested in proving your point, you argue to belittle people and show that you're cool and hip, and can make witty replies.

If it pleases you to know, you're a fucking despicable worm. Enjoy your internet fandom Rexie-poo.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Calis, somehow they seem to appreciate the audience. No matter the cost.

Do you see me insulting Exitium now? I'm merely responding to his posts in a civilized manner. It's Exitium who calls people cocksuckers and continues with made up accusations.

 

[Sol Invictus]

First, I wasn't arguing that Bio is worse then Troika, if you think so, let's see some quotes.

Maybe you weren't. But as most of my arguments tend to be all-encompassing and not always specifically targetted towards the first person in the quote, it's evident that people like Whip and a lot of others (including you, if I recall correctly) made the argument that comparing Bioware to Troika was unfair without any specified reason whatsoever.

I was arguing though that it's unfair to claim that Bio is better just because Bio's making games that they allegedly really love. Second, the similarities between DA and DnD are obvious. Does it make a bad game? No.

Bioware's games are 'better' (I can't find a better term for this) on the principle that they intend to make the games they make and aren't simply trying to live up to the expectations of their publishers or a certain niche in the development of their products. Products such as those tend to be done in a half-hearted manner and don't deserve much praise, especially if the developers aren't keen on delivering a good and complete package of a game that's worth the printed price tag. Compare Arcanum as a product to Temple of Elemental Evil, for good measure. Flawed as it may have been, Arcanum was created as intended, whereas ToEE seems to have been nothing more than a quick milking of the D&D cash cow. Aside from the well implemented turn based combat, everything else was an afterthought. This alone is warrants cynicism towards Troika's game development ethos.

 

[Sheriff05]

You slander by taking people's words out of context and criticizing those words to fit your own agenda. Presenting lies isn't a good way to go about arguing a point, VD.

Dude, you do the exact same shit, and have done it twice recently where I responded.
You wildly exaggerated negative elements of both Silent Storm and Kohan for the purposes of A) being a dick, and B) promoting whatever the hell it was you trying promote.
Now you're going to say it's different because you claim VD is slandering individuals
and your just talking about a game. It's the same damn thing, you offended me
by "talking shit" so I called you out, and I'm sure that if someone from Nival or Timegate
was around they would have been just as aggravated as Pete Hines for being called "full of shit."

If VD wants to say "X" about Pete Hines or Dave Gaider Let them personally rebutt it. You are, of course free to criticize..BUT NOT TO JUDGE what's good or bad for the rest of us. If you want to defend them fine, but defend the argument, not attack the ACTION.(notice I am not saying "person") That's where you are wrong.

You're not going to dig yourself out of your own words by pinning shit on Vault Dweller
NO FUCKING WAY. Accept some personel responsibility for your own actions and move on.
You want a new level of public discourse here?
Then ask Saint to give the staff some rules to follow, and all you guys can either accept them, shut up or resign. Just like if the rest of us don't like the direction the site takes, we're all free to leave.

FWIW taking quotes "Out of context" is not slander and journalists do it everyday in all forms of media.

 

[Sol Invictus]

If it pleases you to know, you're a fucking despicable worm. Enjoy your internet fandom Rexie-poo.

Get in line. I posit my views just fine without having to submit them to the likes of your approval. See my above post, for example. Perfectly civil discourse with VD, right there.

I tire of your 'higher ground' antics. If you were truly on a higher position to judge anyone you wouldn't be positing flamebait the sentence I just quoted.

 

[Jora]

Calling Pete Hines "full of shit" on the main page (which I personally removed)isn't a good way to start a reasonable discussion. If he wants to state his opinion he can do so by posting on the forums without posting his opinions on the main page as the 'general consensus' of the Codex. I don't care if you or anyone else agrees with his opinions: it is not a consensus. If it seems like my posts are 'paranoidic' (SIC) it's only because I'm referring to the Pete "Full of Shit" Hines incident which you may not have read before it was edited.

I agree that saying Pete is full of shit was not the best choice words but that has nothing to do with VD critizising Dave's statements many days later. The news posters of Codex have always posted their opinion of the news they report and many times those comments have been about the lack of choices in Bioware's games. In this case (and I'm not saying I agree with him) VD decided to point out that the kind of examples Dave posted are part of what made Bio's games not appeal to him (or Saint, or Rosh, or Section 8 etc.).

It doesn't matter if VD is 'nice' to David Gaider. That is completely irrelevent. What's not nice is how he takes words out of context and tries to fit them into his own agenda against Bioware, a crusade that's kicking a herd of dead horses right now.

I have seen no signs of such an agenda. I believe VD really just wanted to correct what he believes to be a major flaw in Bioware's design philosophies (although Dave's post is not a good example).

 

[Sol Invictus]

Dude, you do the exact same shit, and have done it twice recently where I responded.
You wildly exaggerated negative elements of both Silent Storm and Kohan for the purposes of A) being a dick, and B) promoting whatever the hell it was you trying promote.
Now you're going to say it's different because you claim VD is slandering individuals
and your just talking about a game. It's the same damn thing, you offended me
by "talking shit" so I called you out, and I'm sure that if someone from Nival or Timegate
was around they would have been just as aggravated as Pete Hines for being called "full of shit."

Don't behave like an estrogenated fanboy. I'm not calling you one, merely suggesting that you're behaving like one.

Elucidation: You aren't from either Nival or Timegate. Why would my opinion of Kohan or Silent Storm offend you? You sound like one of those people who takes personal offense towards game reviews and first looks if you don't like what is written, no matter how valid those opinions may be. You may not see the game the way I (or anybody else for that matter) does.

Extrapolation: I think Silent Storm is very boring because you have to wait many minutes between turns without any way to skip viewing enemy moves, the buggy implementation of stealth and line of sight, the AI does a lot of dumb things, and the camera is migraine-inducing. Those are its bad qualities. Of course it has good qualities, like the physics engine, the decent sci-fi WWII setting, and the overall willingness to implement a turn based combat system (which is admittedly somewhat inferior to Jagged Alliance 2, save for the implementation of grenades).

Conclusion: If you disagree, feel free to disagree. I see no reason as to why you would have to take this view as a personal insult. You're behaving irrationally. Unlike my specific arguments towards VD's 'overly cynical' behaviour and willingness to take words out of context, your arguments seem to be of a more general nature, in that you are treating them like a personal insult towards defaming your character.

If VD wants to say "X" about Pete Hines or Dave Gaider Let them personally rebutt it. You are, of course free to criticize..BUT NOT TO JUDGE what's good or bad for the rest of us. If you want to defend them fine, but defend the argument, not attack the ACTION.(notice I am not saying "person") That's where you are wrong.

You are a complete hypocrite. See above.

*snip long winded rant*
FWIW taking quotes "Out of context" is not slander and journalists do it everyday in all forms of media.

Did you just make some 'point' about how if everyone does it, it must be OK? Who cares what other journalists do? We should at least try to display an iota of integrity.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Troika's developers have had 10+ years of game development (on triple A titles, no less) on their belt.

Can you name those triple A titles?

 

[Sol Invictus]

Fallout
Fallout 2
Stonekeep
Star Trek: Starfleet Academy

Remember Interplay's heyday? These games put Interplay on the map.

 

[Sol Invictus]

I have seen no signs of such an agenda. I believe VD really just wanted to correct what he believes to be a major flaw in Bioware's design philosophies (although Dave's post is not a good example).

 

[Vault Dweller]

I believe VD really just wanted to correct what he believes to be a major flaw in Bioware's design philosophies (although Dave's post is not a good example).

No, I wasn't trying to correct anything, that would be presumptuous. Bioware has developed their own design philosophy that realy creates a strong sense of a story, culture, background, etc. I've never looked at the dialogues from that point of view, and I brought it up for a discussion without being negative about it. In fact, it's a great technique, the only drawback is that it may create false expectations (i.e. you picked the line about declaring the war, expecting this to go somewhere, but this line is only to inform you about the conflict, not to present a choice.)

 

[Jora]

It's a common fact that the DnD license comes with a big pricetag: the anti-evil thing, too many people to please, etc. It makes a lot of sense for a company like Bio to try to develop their own IP that runs close enough to DnD to keep the fans happy.

And in D&D games developers can't do anything they want to the world. Briosafreak said that it would have been possible to completely destroy the world in Van Buren. You could do that in Arcanum. WotC doesn't allow that or anything that has a major effect on Faerun/Eberron/Greyhawk. It wouldn't make sense to place your epic role-playing game in a world like those.

 

[Volourn]

Whip, you are wrong. Troika is as independent as BIO is. To say otherwise is crap. if Troika lacks any independence it's because of their own choices. Period.


"I believe VD really just wanted to correct what he believes to be a major flaw in Bioware's design philosophies (although Dave's post is not a good example)."

So, what you are saying is that VD was full of shit. Dave's post was answeringa auestion about how BIO would go about imparting important DA histroy and abckground upon the player in game without making the character look retarded. Dave answered in an intelligent and logical matter. He said it through dialogue wa sone way to impart that knowledge. He was not asked how dialogue would effect the game world in that question or thread. Like has been mentioned, his words to taken out of context and twisted around to maintain some bullshit stance against BIO.

And, oh, once again, BIO's RPGs' quests have always had multiple solutions (the only one which didn't to a higher degree was BG1). BG, and on including NWN had LOTS of multiple solution quests. More so than most RPGs.


"FWIW taking quotes "Out of context" is not slander and journalists do it everyday in all forms of media."

It's still pathetic to do, moron.