Tintin
Arbiter
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2005
- Messages
- 1,480
This isn't about *my* grasp of game design, but *yours*. You are the one who claims to be a professional game designer, yet is too inept to spot even the most basic blemishes in Oblivion.Solik said:Interesting to know that you have a better grasp of game design than professional game designers, reviewers, and critics. HOT TIP: You're part of a niche group. You do not hold Sekret Ultimate Truth on this.
I'll say, what an uneducated list. As Section8 pointed out, the only games on your list that are even remotely comparable to Oblivion are Daggerfall, Morrowind and Gothic II. All of those have superior combat, for reasons I'll discuss later.Well, let's see. After putting in another 12 hours into Oblivion, a huge amount of that spent on combat, my original opinion about it is only solidifying. It's got even more nuances than I noticed at first, and group combat is really turning out great. Since you cheesed out with the word "innumerable" without actually listing any, I'll give you a nice list of some combat systems that are inferior to Oblivion's:
Daggerfall
Morrowind
Wizardry (all that I've played)
Might and Magic (all that I've played)
Ultima (all that I've played, though that's only about two)
Infinity Engine games (Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale)
AD&D Gold Box games
The Legend of Zelda (all of them)
Gothic II
Star Trail
Darklands
Here's a list of some combat systems that are superior to Oblivion's:
Tales of Symphonia
Grandia III
Maybe so, but that doesn't make the word "twitchy" any less of an adequate adjective to describe combat in Oblivion.The use of the word "twitch" pretty much blacklists you.
Oh, is it? And I suppose you base that claim on the fact that you created half a dozen diverse characters and tested the combat system with each and every one of them? Because I have been hearing *very* varying accounts. While some people complain about ridiculous lack of challenge even with a low-level character and poor-quality gear, others criticize extreme difficulty. I have heard about rangers who can mow down any monster with a single arrow shot, about mages (me, coincidentially) who have devised an unbeatable and highly sophisticated tactic which can be best summarized as block-block-block-fireball-block-block-block, but also about players who selected Long blade and Destructon as primary skills, yet keep dying every ten minutes. Brilliant balancing, that.False.
Probably.Subjective.
How is that ridiculous, pray tell? Oh, right:Patently ridiculous. It's almost like you're competing with yourself to see how much more idiotic you can make each additional phrase be.
Thanks for confirming my view of you as a piss-poor game designer. Weapon skills are an integral part of the game. If they have litle or no effect on the combat system, then obviously the person who designed the combat system fucked up.Which has absolutely zero effect on the quality of the combat system as it pertains to the subgenre of action-RPG.
Before you start putting words in my mouth, remove Todd Howard's dick out of yours.Furthermore, Oblivion's combat requires no more "reflexes" than stopping at a traffic light when it changes colors from about a quarter of a mile away. Timing is not particularly precise, and overall combat is actually pretty slow given the long stagger times. It does require you to think fast, but that's true of all real-time games. I'm sorry if you find that difficult.
Wipe Todd's semen off your eyes and read the first page of the thread, dumbass. The reviewer described Oblivion visuals as "next-gen" and you wholeheartedly agreed with him like the good little sheep you are.Straw man. I don't use buzzwords. It's easy to make people look dumb when you just make up stuff!
Gee, I never would have thought of that if you hadn't suggested it, moron! Oh, wait, you missed the fact that increasing the draw distance causes the frame-rate to slump into the single-digit zone and the game to freeze when loading an outdoor save.You have no idea what you were talking about. People apparently much smarter than you fixed the level of detail with far view distances about two days after release. Browse the .ini file some time, kid. Bethesda assumed people would want to sacrifice far-away quality in favor of better up-close quality. If you disagree, you're quite free to make all the necessary adjustments.
Which HDR? Oh, you mean the one that can't be activated simultaneously with full-scene anti-aliasing despite the fact there are no hardware limitations preventing it?Ah yes, let's poke fun at the low-quality option included for people with low-end machines while ignoring the inclusion of actual HDR.
I'm sure one can. Ignorami like you are the end-result.Nonsense. One can study game design without playing more than a handful of games, technically speaking (which, of course, is not true at all in my case).
Bull-fucking-shit. I gave a single phrase that I had "studied" game design. That by no means makes me a professional, nor did I ever claim such. In fact, I didn't even claim authority; I was appealing to authority to qualify my statement, and those authorities were the authors of the articles and textbooks I've read. I am an amateur game designer, but my only work in the field includes a web-based strategy game, a couple MUDs, and some RPGMaker trash from my teenage years. I'm under no false pretenses here.Ratty said:You are the one who claims to be a professional game designer
Garbage again. Never once claimed it was perfect, nor will I ever (because it isn't). I could rattle off plenty of faults, problems, and design decisions I disagree with. But then, I could do that about any game that isn't too simplistic to write about.Ratty said:yet is too inept to spot even the most basic blemishes in Oblivion
And as I pointed out, I was responding to your comment about the CRPG genre and related genres. If you meant "innumerable examples within the CRPG genre and other genres" to actually be "three or four action games," then you should have said so.Ratty said:As Section8 pointed out, the only games on your list that are even remotely comparable to Oblivion are Daggerfall, Morrowind and Gothic II
This continues to prove your narrow-minded elitist idiocy.Ratty said:Maybe so, but that doesn't make the word "twitchy" any less of an adequate adjective to describe combat in Oblivion
I created a light combat character with no magic skills, blades, and light armor. Combat is difficult for me, as it should be, but not impossible. As you say, I would expect indeed to find combat easier if I made a heavier combat character (at the expense of having these other things harder that I'm good at). If you're claiming that combat should be of the same difficulty for all character builds, then you're only proving even more the depth of your incompetance regarding basic game design concepts.Ratty said:And I suppose you base that claim on the fact that you created half a dozen diverse characters and tested the combat system with each and every one of them?
I don't know what game you're playing, but in my copy of Oblivion, weapon skills (and block skill) are quite important in the combat. Oh right, you have a mage. So you're talking out your ass again. Which is odd, considering that in the preceeding paragraph, you even spoke about high-Marksman characters downing enemies easily. Your brilliance, it blinds me.Ratty said:Weapon skills are an integral part of the game. If they have litle or no effect on the combat system, then obviously the person who designed the combat system fucked up.
Gee, you really got me there!Ratty said:Before you start putting words in my mouth, remove Todd Howard's dick out of yours
It's like middle school all over again!Ratty said:Wipe Todd's semen off your eyes
Pardon me for not writing a page and a half essay detailing specific words and phrases I would have not chosen to use. If that's the best you've got, just stop.Ratty said:The reviewer described Oblivion visuals as "next-gen" and you wholeheartedly agreed with him
Unless you balance it with tweaks like reducing grass density.Ratty said:Oh, wait, you missed the fact that increasing the draw distance causes the frame-rate to slump into the single-digit zone and the game to freeze when loading an outdoor save.
I thought you didn't care about such morons and simpletons. Maybe only when it's convenient?Ratty said:And what about the moronic XBox 360 owners who got suckered into buying Oblivion by Bethesda's lies?
Yet you agree the combat system is the best ever seen in an RPG (which is bullshit) and graphics are next generation (which, if true, doesn't bode well for the next generation)? What the hell are you trying to pull?Solik said:Garbage again. Never once claimed it was perfect, nor will I ever (because it isn't). I could rattle off plenty of faults, problems, and design decisions I disagree with. But then, I could do that about any game that isn't too simplistic to write about.
Better to be narrow-minded than feeble-minded. Care to explain why Oblivion's combat isn't twitchy? In juxtaposition with other CRPGs, mind you?This continues to prove your narrow-minded elitist idiocy.
No, just for players who choose combat skills as their primaries. I previously cited an example of an overpowered ranger and another example of a warrior-mage-thing who is having problems due to excessive difficulty. Obviously the combat system is balanced in favor of the ranger. Is that so hard to grasp?If you're claiming that combat should be of the same difficulty for all character builds, then you're only proving even more the depth of your incompetance regarding basic game design concepts.
How important, exactly? No, really, what do they affect? Damage? Speed? Awesome. And what about *chance to hit*? The most important combat stat in any RPG, action or otherwise, yet BethSoft decided to remove it for no reason other than giving Oblivion more mass appeal. Too bad they also managed to alienate hardcore TES fans - at least those who weren't already disaffected by shitty design in Morrowind and moved on to superior games like Gothic.I don't know what game you're playing, but in my copy of Oblivion, weapon skills (and block skill) are quite important in the combat.
I was relating other people's accounts, genius. Are they talking out of their asses as well?So you're talking out your ass again. Which is odd, considering that in the preceeding paragraph, you even spoke about high-Marksman characters downing enemies easily.
Hardly, unless your middle-school experiences normally involved people spewing their man-yoghurt into your face.It's like middle school all over again!
At least something we agree on.To clarify, I find the visuals to be great. I just think "next-gen" is a meaningless marketing phrase.
I don't care for them and in fact find this whole situation amusing. Think about it, XBox 360 is supposedly a "next-gen" console. The first next-gen game comes along and 360 already can't handle it properly. Pathetic.I thought you didn't care about such morons and simpletons. Maybe only when it's convenient?
Not joining the argument, but I chose long blade and destruction as my primaries (+ restoration and light armour), 15 hours in (two characters), and I've died once - locked up for a fucking misdemeanour, tried pickpocketing the guard and he mullered me. Some of the fights have been damned close, but it's the first TES (and yeah I played 'em all - finished Arena 'n Daggerfall, got bored of MW), where I use To Touch spells, not just fireballs; where the feeling of being in close quarter fighting is extremely well done.Ratty said:Oh, is it? And I suppose you base that claim on the fact that you created half a dozen diverse characters and tested the combat system with each and every one of them? Because I have been hearing *very* varying accounts. While some people complain about ridiculous lack of challenge even with a low-level character and poor-quality gear, others criticize extreme difficulty. I have heard about rangers who can mow down any monster with a single arrow shot, about mages (me, coincidentially) who have devised an unbeatable and highly sophisticated tactic which can be best summarized as block-block-block-fireball-block-block-block, but also about players who selected Long blade and Destructon as primary skills, yet keep dying every ten minutes. Brilliant balancing, that.
Well, don't forget, Bethesda have never been known for their great programming skills, they're crap at optimisation, bug hunting - or even writing their own engine. They're using, Gamebryo, Speedtree, Havok and Facegen. Their animations are at best ok (still got skating NPCs for Todds sake), and their much vaunted AI routines have been neutered for being buggy as hell. I'm pretty sure other developers will offer the 360 more pretty graphics.Ratty said:I don't care for them and in fact find this whole situation amusing. Think about it, XBox 360 is supposedly a "next-gen" console. The first next-gen game comes along and 360 already can't handle it properly. Pathetic.
Hey, say what you will, but Grandia has the best phase based combat I've ever seen.Naked_Lunch said:Are you serious? You don't play a lot of games, do you?Grandia III
Drain said:Well, maybe you should have explained what do you mean by intrinsic value before you used the term. As you can see, it is not a self-evident term. Intrinsic elements and defining elements are different notions for me, so combining them together like you did makes little sense.
DarkUnderlord said:Wait, they've made a Trailer Park Tycoon?
WHERE!?
Ratty said:I have been hearing *very* varying accounts. While some people complain about ridiculous lack of challenge even with a low-level character and poor-quality gear, others criticize extreme difficulty. I have heard about rangers who can mow down any monster with a single arrow shot, about mages (me, coincidentially) who have devised an unbeatable and highly sophisticated tactic which can be best summarized as block-block-block-fireball-block-block-block, but also about players who selected Long blade and Destructon as primary skills, yet keep dying every ten minutes. Brilliant balancing, that.
Solik said:It's like middle school all over again!
To clarify, I find the visuals to be great. I just think "next-gen" is a meaningless marketing phrase.
Depends on how you define "RPG." If you're talking about CRPGs, I would agree that it's certainly among the best (which stands to reason, since few of them focus much of their development effort on it). If you include console RPGs, well, I'd have to disagree. If you're talking action-RPGs, it's at least in the running for "best."Ratty said:Yet you agree the combat system is the best ever seen in an RPG (which is bullshit)
"Twitchy" is as empty a term as "next-gen," used by Everquest fanboys who can't stand the least little bit of challenge or skill required to play a game. Ask me a real question and I'll give you a real answer.Ratty said:Care to explain why Oblivion's combat isn't twitchy?
That's some seriously shallow proof. Story-time!Ratty said:I previously cited an example of an overpowered ranger and another example of a warrior-mage-thing who is having problems due to excessive difficulty.
They did something different! Oh noez! Lynch 'em all for not following the 35-year-old D&D formula!Ratty said:And what about *chance to hit*?
Of course I see flaws. There's plenty of them. I see the skating, the clumsy fade-ins, the RAI goof-ups, the original interface issues, the journal quest hints that are a little too helpful, the extreme ease of hitting your allies (or worse, their horses) in group fights, the really weird face coloring, the inability to wear clothes with armor, the limited hair lengths, the goofball-looking moons in the night sky, the too-easy and somewhat nonsensical persuasion minigame, the levelling issues, the bugs (got my first CTD last night), and so forth.dunduks said:Solik, the main question is whether can you see flaws in Oblivion or are you just blindly agreeing with everything Bethesda does?
Yep, that sounds like a very difficult combat build -- moderate damage, all close-range, and zero protection. I'd suggest he focus on speed and agility and try to avoid getting hit instead of going toe-to-toe (weaving out of range of attacks, countering after a missed heavy swing, etc). Also, get the Dodge perk ASAP.yipsl said:I just read a thread over at Blood and Shadows where a guy created a thief with no armor and blade. He could not survive. He was advised to rely on the guards to do his fighting for him against the Daedra in the early MQ to find Brother Martin and he was also advised to rely on bow more.
This view I simply don't understand. Oblivion marginalizes combat-related skills, forcing the player to rely on his reflexes and ignoring the basic CRPG premise that character skills rather than player skills determine the outcome of an action. On the other hand, there are games like Fallout and Geneforge as examples of well-balanced, slow-paced, thoughtful, tactically deep turn-based combat, in true pencil & paper RP style, with rolls and skill checks behind every action, the player deciding only how they will use the abilities at their disposal and the engine taking care of the rest - which is the whole point of roleplaying. Oblivion combat is so different it's incomparable and while I can understand how one may find it "fun", from roleplaying perspective it's horribly lacking, hence there is no way it can be considered "the best ever seen in a CRPG".Solik said:Depends on how you define "RPG." If you're talking about CRPGs, I would agree that it's certainly among the best (which stands to reason, since few of them focus much of their development effort on it).
I don't include them. "Console RPGs" are mostly adventure games.If you include console RPGs, well, I'd have to disagree.
Possibly, but I find Gothic combat objectively better, for reasons I mentioned in an earlier post.If you're talking action-RPGs, it's at least in the running for "best."
I tend to do the same. I actually elevated KotOR to my top 10 games list during my first run. Two runs later it would barely make the top 50.I may change my mind after playing more characters and looking back at it. I generally rate things higher when they're new and I'm actively playing them.
By "twitchy" I mean what I described above - relying on reflexes and button mashing rather than good, old-fashioned planning and tact."Twitchy" is as empty a term as "next-gen," used by Everquest fanboys who can't stand the least little bit of challenge or skill required to play a game. Ask me a real question and I'll give you a real answer.
You should have stopped right there.I couldn't believe it. I started to think you were right.
This is likely the reason - he uses no armor. While I agree an armorless character should have a harder time surviving battles, there is really no excuse for the gargantuan leap in difficulty.He may have no means of defense
The "formula" is used in just about every P&P RPG, because it's the most appropriate way of projecting characters' combat skills into their battle performance.They did something different! Oh noez! Lynch 'em all for not following the 35-year-old D&D formula!
You mean, more sensible *player* impact. Remember what we said earlier about roleplaying and character skills.Well, except it really isn't that new after all. In fact, just about every action-RPG, from Drakan to Gothic, nixed chance to hit rolls in favor of more sensible character impact on combat. The abstraction simply isn't necessary here.
Then why didn't you say so in the first place? Yeesh, first you agree with two reviews which sing a load of unwarranted praises and then, five pages later, list more flaws than I thought there existed.Of course I see flaws. There's plenty of them. I see the skating, the clumsy fade-ins, the RAI goof-ups, the original interface issues, the journal quest hints that are a little too helpful, the extreme ease of hitting your allies (or worse, their horses) in group fights, the really weird face coloring, the inability to wear clothes with armor, the limited hair lengths, the goofball-looking moons in the night sky, the too-easy and somewhat nonsensical persuasion minigame, the levelling issues, the bugs (got my first CTD last night), and so forth.
The issue here is that they are *there*, yet most reviewers neglect to mention them at all or fail to take them into account when rating the game. It's especially amusing how many critics devote about 80% of the review to salivating over the graphics and don't even discuss what I consider Oblivion's strongest point - namely, the potent development tools which ship with the game. That's just irresponsible.I just don't think they're as bad as people make them out to be. Most to all of them are pretty minor and rarely detract from the game (for me).
Solik said:Interesting to know that you have a better grasp of game design than professional game designers, reviewers, and critics. HOT TIP: You're part of a niche group. You do not hold Sekret Ultimate Truth on this.
This is simply not the case. It doesn't matter how good you are at the combat; if your character skills / equipment aren't comparatively up to snuff with your opponent, then you're probably going to lose. You'll still take damage when you block (and will stagger helplessly, too); your weak attacks will fail to stagger your opponent; you'll be unable to stun, disarm, knockdown, or paralyze; etc. I've seen the change by fighting the same (unlevelled) creature at multiple levels; at level 4, the basic Dremora-type almost owned me one-on-one. At level 11, I can easily demolish two of them. My player skills have improved a little bit, sure, but character improvements are far and away the prime factor.Ratty said:Oblivion marginalizes combat-related skills, forcing the player to rely on his reflexes and ignoring the basic CRPG premise that character skills rather than player skills determine the outcome of an action.
As I've said before, Oblivion requires very little in the way of reflexes to keep up with its combat system. It does require fast thinking, but you don't exactly have to be a master of hand-eye coordination. Tact is still needed. Your decisions include whether to block, attack, or dodge; which type of attack to do and how many to do (how far can you press before the opponent blocks and staggers you?); which spells and abilities to use and when; how to position yourself to take advantage of geometry and traps, particularly when fighting multiple opponents; and so forth. All of those decisions must be made in the context of the shape of your equipment, your ability to replenish items, the number of expected encounters remaining before you reach a safe area, your current HP / stamina / magicka, expected enemy HP, weapon attack speed, on and on. Admittedly, most of them are relatively simple decisions, but that's true about most RPG systems. That's why it's nice to have to make them fast -- it adds challenge to something that's normally simply dull.Ratty said:By "twitchy" I mean what I described above - relying on reflexes and button mashing rather than good, old-fashioned planning and tact.
Or shields, apparently. I could see a swashbuckler-type using a sword and no armor, but you'd need the Block skill at least. If not that, then protective magic. Something. As I said though, he may be able to use his other abilities to simply keep from getting hit much. Someone mentioned that you can leap over people's heads with 60-something Acrobatics and no armor. Could be an option.Ratty said:This is likely the reason - he uses no armor.
It's used in P&P RPGs because they are forced to abstract at quite a high level. Detailed video games can shift the abstraction to other areas.Ratty said:The "formula" is used in just about every P&P RPG, because it's the most appropriate way of projecting characters' combat skills into their battle performance.
Because I think the game is great despite them. Because there's plenty of other people already pointing out those flaws. Because if I were to write a review, I probably wouldn't even comment on most of them; I'd need a huge review spanning a good number of pages to justify mentioning them in accurate context of everything else.Ratty said:Then why didn't you say so in the first place? Yeesh, first you agree with two reviews which sing a load of unwarranted praises and then, five pages later, list more flaws than I thought there existed.
Gothic has far fewer NPCs that have a much smaller range of activities they need to engage in within a much smaller world. Nothing like this has ever been attempted on Oblivion's scale. I would not expect its AI to be as strong as a game with far fewer characters performing more focused, non-random actions.Ratty said:You mentioned Radiant A.I. which was announced as an almost revolutionary features, yet is often as stupid as Morrowind A.I. and its frequent cough-ups actually make it inferior to Gothic A.I. - which, by the way, premiered five years ago!
For some reason, this gives me the urge to scream "BUSH LIED! PEOPLE DIED! NO BLOOD FOR OIL!" In other words, it's entirely unfair and weakens your overall position.Ratty said:All this means BethSoft lied to the community, which is simply inexcusable.
I suspect even most poor professional actors are better at acting than I am.HardCode said:You see, not everyone working within a profession is actually GOOD at it.
Of course, equipment and various perks have great impact on combat, but this holds true for any action game with character stats. But by making the player skill a vital factor in combat, Oblivion blatantly contradicts the very definition of CRPG and strays into the area of action/RPG hybrids. While that doesn't mean its combat isn't enjoyable (well, I find it unenjoyable for a number of reasons, but I can see how many people might like it), it still makes it lacking from the standpoint of CRPG design.Solik said:This is simply not the case. It doesn't matter how good you are at the combat; if your character skills / equipment aren't comparatively up to snuff with your opponent, then you're probably going to lose. You'll still take damage when you block (and will stagger helplessly, too); your weak attacks will fail to stagger your opponent; you'll be unable to stun, disarm, knockdown, or paralyze; etc. I've seen the change by fighting the same (unlevelled) creature at multiple levels; at level 4, the basic Dremora-type almost owned me one-on-one. At level 11, I can easily demolish two of them. My player skills have improved a little bit, sure, but character improvements are far and away the prime factor.
It still requires more reflexes and allows for less tact than the average turn-based or phase-based combat system, which are norm for RPGs. In addition to this, I find the first person view disorienting in melee, lack of the ability to lock on a creature (Gothic-style) complicates matters when facing more than one opponent, while suicidal allies getting in the line of fire will cause even the most skilled marksman to snap, put away his bow and engage the enemies in melee. All these flaws mean it can be excruciatingly difficult to control the battle and emloy tactics efficiently, too often reducing it to mindless button mashing. That's what I mean when I say combat in Oblivion is "twitchy".As I've said before, Oblivion requires very little in the way of reflexes to keep up with its combat system. It does require fast thinking, but you don't exactly have to be a master of hand-eye coordination. Tact is still needed. Your decisions include whether to block, attack, or dodge; which type of attack to do and how many to do (how far can you press before the opponent blocks and staggers you?); which spells and abilities to use and when; how to position yourself to take advantage of geometry and traps, particularly when fighting multiple opponents; and so forth. All of those decisions must be made in the context of the shape of your equipment, your ability to replenish items, the number of expected encounters remaining before you reach a safe area, your current HP / stamina / magicka, expected enemy HP, weapon attack speed, on and on. Admittedly, most of them are relatively simple decisions, but that's true about most RPG systems. That's why it's nice to have to make them fast -- it adds challenge to something that's normally simply dull.
Of course, one can also argue that planning and tact aren't roleplaying. It's relying on the player's battle tactics instead of the character's. There have been several topics here about it. In the end, you have three choices. One, have fast real-time combat similar to Oblivion and Gothic. Two, have slower turn-based combat that relies more on planning and managing multiple characters. Three, let the battles play themselves. Two of those can be fun, but only one of them really relies just on character skills. Guess which are which.
In P&P roleplaying combat is typically turn-based (though phase-based isn't uncommon either) and thus combat is at least partially determined by the player's tactical ability. Since a CRPG is, by definition, an effort to actualize the style and mechanics of P&P roleplaying on computers, it's natural that a true, pure CRPG will utilize either a turn-based combat system or a phase-based combat system. While deviations and alternatives are certainly possible, a CRPG which features FPS combat is clearly no longer a CRPG, but a hybrid.It's used in P&P RPGs because they are forced to abstract at quite a high level. Detailed video games can shift the abstraction to other areas.
There is no indication that Gothic A.I. routines wouldn't work properly if cities were larger and NPCs more numerous and with a broader range of activities. Though I concur that it's up to Gothic III to prove or disprove the superiority of Radiant A.I.Gothic has far fewer NPCs that have a much smaller range of activities they need to engage in within a much smaller world. Nothing like this has ever been attempted on Oblivion's scale. I would not expect its AI to be as strong as a game with far fewer characters performing more focused, non-random actions.
Bethesda consciously tried to deceive its fans and I don't see why it's wrong to denounce them for it.For some reason, this gives me the urge to scream "BUSH LIED! PEOPLE DIED! NO BLOOD FOR OIL!" In other words, it's entirely unfair and weakens your overall position.
I wouldn't bet on it.I suspect even most poor professional actors are better at acting than I am.
It doesn't stray into it, it leaps in head-first. The developers themselves consider Oblivion to be an "action-RPG." That was their goal from day one. Actually, I think it always has been in Elder Scrolls, they just never bothered sitting down and making a really thick combat system; previously, it always felt obligatory and tacked-on.Ratty said:But by making the player skill a vital factor in combat, Oblivion blatantly contradicts the very definition of CRPG and strays into the area of action/RPG hybrids.
I seriously doubt it. At worst it was "We're going to have this," then later they realize "Shit, we can't do that... uh oh." More commonly, I think people just had crafted their own expectations based on incidental phrases or comments, then suddenly got mad when the game turned out a little different. This happens with all games, every time.Ratty said:Bethesda consciously tried to deceive its fans and I don't see why it's wrong to denounce them for it.
Yeah, let's say I've just bet you $100 I can redo my apartment, completely transform it by building carpeted levels into it. Upon closer inspection, I discover it's gonna be a ton of hard work, take a long-ass time for me to do, so I decide not to do it. Who wins the bet?Solik said:At worst it was "We're going to have this," then later they realize "Shit, we can't do that... uh oh."