Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Interview NMA's big to-do about nothing posted as advertised

Sol Invictus

Erudite
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Messages
9,614
Location
Pax Romana
That's only because the market was smaller back then, Role-Player. You can't really say that FPS's today are 'more successful' than they ever were before, either. In terms of sheer profit, yes - but in terms of market dominance? No. The same applies to RPGs, for the most part. Bioware is the only company on the PC market to ever truly extend the influence of RPGs into the RTS/FPS dominated mainstream.

It just so happens that Bioware owns most of the RPG market, as well. Hence the reason why it looks as if RPGs are becoming more mainstream, when in fact it's only Bioware's games which manage to reach out.

p.s. page 12!
 

Sol Invictus

Erudite
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Messages
9,614
Location
Pax Romana
Unfortunately, Exitium was wrong, because public opinion is made out of many individuals opinions that are the same. Shame on you for repeating that.
The majority of the public disagrees with you on your assessment of NWN being crap (Which I think it is, short of HOTU). It could be that they have no taste in games, which I suspect. But the mainstream market loves it, hence the reason why I am correct. The market is not made up of your clones.

Windows is a success, commercially or otherwise. I mean, I love Windows! It has its share of issues, but I wouldn't trade it for Linux in a million years. Slashdot can go fuck itself. Besides, just because one component of Windows (e.g. IE) is a failure, doesn't mean the rest of it is. You realize what system Firefox runs on mainly, right? Here's a hint: It isn't Linux or Unix.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,035
Exitium said:
I also don't see what's so non linear about TOEE
Few posts later...
Who give's an ape's shit if the game was non-linear. It wasn't exactly high on replayability either.
Thank you

You know what else is non-linear? Minesweeper.
And posting stuff on the internet forums

Oil prices are higher than they've ever been
Who said that they went there to give American cheap oil? It's about oil SUPPLIES.

Strategic interests? That's laughable, considering that the US has satallites and long range missiles
Why do you think they support Israel?

Military contracts? I suppose it's a success for military contractors and corporations
And that was my point, that there are different points of view that could judge a situation differently.
 

Volourn

Pretty Princess
Pretty Princess Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Mar 10, 2003
Messages
24,924
"Same thing. Next."

Are yous tupid? Nah. You can't be. You are VD. You said that I said that talent is all that matters when what ia ctually said was talent was more important than money. That is NOT the same thing. Not even close. Next.


"So, the fact that Iply paid for 4 years of development and Atari basically published a finished product is irrelevant?"

Last I checked, Interplay wasn't around for all those patches, and support; were they? No.


"I posted some quotes before."

*yawn* Don't be stupid. They were very irrelevant quotes.


"public opinion is made out of many individuals opinions that are the same."

Of course you are purpsoefully ignoring the fact the most of the public liked NWN. That most of the public use Windows AND like it. You try to make it seem that the minority can detemrine what makes a success or a fialure which is bogus and you know it.


"Now there ARE dwarves, and elves, and halflings."

You lie, lie, lie. There are dwarves, humans, elves, and a mystery race. No halflings. Why do you lie? And, the dwraves and elves are different from their D&D counterparts which fits BIO's "dwarf like and elf like" comments. Next.
 

Sol Invictus

Erudite
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Messages
9,614
Location
Pax Romana
Supporting Israel proves my point. It's a lot more costly to maintain a stronghold in Iraq than it would be to simply give Israel money for its military. Marines aren't exactly dying by the dozen in Israel, either. Try telling the families of the dead marines that the war is a success.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,035
Exitium said:
The majority of the public disagrees with you on your assessment of NWN being crap (Which I think it is, short of HOTU). It could be that they have no taste in games, which I suspect. But the mainstream market loves it, hence the reason why I am correct.
I never said nor argued that success or failure is defined by the majority. In fact, that was my entire point, that such definitions are subjective, depending on the group. Since a group that thinks that NWN was crap exists (RPG Codex), its opinion shouldn't be disregarded just because it's a minority one. Considering, like I said, that many magazines have mentioned NWN negatively in their HotU reviews, such opinion is growing and may become a majority one day, which wouldn't change a fact that many people enjoyed the game.

Windows is a success, commercially or otherwise. I mean, I love Windows! It has its share of issues, but I wouldn't trade it for Linux in a million years. Slashdot can go fuck itself. Besides, just because one component of Windows (e.g. IE) is a failure, doesn't mean the rest of it is. You realize what system Firefox runs on mainly, right? Here's a hint: It isn't Linux or Unix.
The point, once again, was that there are people who think that MS has failed to make anything decent. Personally I don't have a problem with MS and use their soft daily without any problems (but I use Firefox and Tbird), but there are people who make good points about Win, overall performance, vulnerability, and lack of any innovation and new features. They represent a reasonably large group that dislikes MS and it's possible that eventually they will take a large portion of business away from MS, forcing public to accept their opinion that MS failed.

Supporting Israel proves my point. It's a lot more costly to maintain a stronghold in Iraq than it would be to simply give Israel money for its military. Marines aren't exactly dying by the dozen in Israel, either.
Well, that (a stronghold in Iraq) wasn't a possibility before, was it? It is now.

Try telling the families of the dead marines that the war is a success.
Again you are with the dead marines. Yes, of course, it was horrible that people died, there is no justifications for their families, and I'm not trying to justify war at all. I'm trying to show you, and I did, since you've accepted that the military industry profited on the war, that different groups define the same event differently. Not that such a point should be explained, but ...
 

Volourn

Pretty Princess
Pretty Princess Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Mar 10, 2003
Messages
24,924
"Try telling the families of the dead marines that the war is a success."

I didn't know WW2 was a failure.


"Since a group that thinks that NWN was crap exists (RPG Codex), its opinion shouldn't be disregarded just because it's a minority one."

Not really disregarding the 'Codex opinion here (though I love to, lol); but ssaying that a relatively small group like the Codex shouldn't be allowed to have the power tod etmerin what was a success or failure. Sure, as a group; NWN failed for the Codex. That's fine to say and *would* be true.That still doesn't make the game a failure. No matter how you wish it were so. Period.
 

Sol Invictus

Erudite
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Messages
9,614
Location
Pax Romana
Vault Dweller said:
I never said nor argued that success or failure is defined by the majority. In fact, that was my entire point, that such definitions are subjective, depending on the group. Since a group that thinks that NWN was crap exists (RPG Codex), its opinion shouldn't be disregarded just because it's a minority one. Considering, like I said, that many magazines have mentioned NWN negatively in their HotU reviews, such opinion is growing and may become a majority one day, which wouldn't change a fact that many people enjoyed the game.
It's true we have a voice, and that we are heard, but the majority speaks louder than we do, and they govern the majority of the market without having to shout their opinions.
The point, once again, was that there are people who think that MS has failed to make anything decent. Personally I don't have a problem with MS and use their soft daily without any problems (but I use Firefox and Tbird), but there are people who make good points about Win, overall performance, vulnerability, and lack of any innovation and new features. They represent a reasonably large group that dislikes MS and it's possible that eventually they will take a large portion of business away from MS, forcing public to accept their opinion that MS failed.
No. Microsoft haters consist of a very, very tiny minority of people with very large e-penises, all of whom reside at Slashdot. Their voice is very loud, but nobody actually gives a shit. See: SomethingAwful's various comments on "Lunix" and "E-penis". Windows has succeeded. Linux is a mess. It's got more support issues than Windows ever did, no matter what people say. Try getting any new games to run on it.

Well, that (a stronghold in Iraq) wasn't a possibility before, was it? It is now.
Just like Afganistan? What good is another Alamo?

Again you are with the dead marines. Yes, of course, it was horrible that people died, there is no justifications for their families, and I'm not trying to justify war at all. I'm trying to show you, and I did, since you've accepted that the military industry profited on the war, that different groups define the same event differently. Not that such a point should be explained, but ...
It succeeded from certain industrial points of view, mainly the industries that supply the war effort. It was not a military success, with so many dead marines, nor was it a political one (political suicide for Bush), or an economic one. Much less a diplomatic one. The world hates the United States more than ever now.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,035
Volourn said:
Are yous tupid? Nah. You can't be. You are VD. You said that I said that talent is all that matters when what ia ctually said was talent was more important than money. That is NOT the same thing. Not even close. Next.
Ok, let me add something then: Same things for all intents and purposes in the context of the discussion. Next.

"So, the fact that Iply paid for 4 years of development and Atari basically published a finished product is irrelevant?"

Last I checked, Interplay wasn't around for all those patches, and support; were they? No.
Wow, good point, 'cause making and testing a few patches = paying for 4 straight years.

"I posted some quotes before."

*yawn* Don't be stupid. They were very irrelevant quotes.
Are there any other kinds when you are involved?

"public opinion is made out of many individuals opinions that are the same."

Of course you are purpsoefully ignoring the fact the most of the public liked NWN. That most of the public use Windows AND like it. You try to make it seem that the minority can detemrine what makes a success or a fialure which is bogus and you know it.
I'm not ignoring the opinions of majority, I specifically picked these examples that show that there are other opinions.

"Now there ARE dwarves, and elves, and halflings."

You lie, lie, lie. There are dwarves, humans, elves, and a mystery race. No halflings.
No halflings, huh? Well, I guess they can't use the name. Don't worry, there will be little guys, or tiny dudes, or something.

Why do you lie? And, the dwraves and elves are different from their D&D counterparts which fits BIO's "dwarf like and elf like" comments. Next.
The point was that they weren't going to use the standard names, but then did.
 

Sol Invictus

Erudite
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Messages
9,614
Location
Pax Romana
Volourn said:
"Try telling the families of the dead marines that the war is a success."

I didn't know WW2 was a failure.

It was. Ask any historian. It was the worst disaster ever to happen to mankind. WWI being the worst disaster to ever happen to mankind, before it. Sure, we got back up on our feet, but if it wasn't for Hitler and the Japs, we would have never had to go to war. Wars are usually always disasterous.

War. War never changes.

1096925862232.gif
 

Volourn

Pretty Princess
Pretty Princess Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Mar 10, 2003
Messages
24,924
"Same things for all intents and purposes in the context of the discussion."

No.


" 'cause making and testing a few patches = paying for 4 straight years."

Yes.


" I specifically picked these examples that show that there are other opinions."

No one, espicially me, were arguing that EVERYONE liked NWN. What nutjob if you think otherwise. Just ebcause some people disliked it; does not make it a fialure. If that were the case, every game ever made is a fialure because every game has its detractors. Be it FF, BG, or even your precious FO. What a lameo.


"The point was that they weren't going to use the standard names, but then did."

Huh? That's your beef. Tha theyd ecided to go basics and isnetad of calling the dwarf like race roofilorons instead of dwarf? Hahahahaha. You'll complain about anything when it comes to BIO, huh? Hahahahaha. They also never said 100% what their races before the FAQ came out. What a goomba.

Exitium: You said it depends on the goal. Well.. The goal of the Allies in WW2 was to stop Germany from conquering Europe and to put an end to the Holocaust (though that was secondary) and theya ccomplished both gaosl. Their goals were met so the war was successful.
 

Diogo Ribeiro

Erudite
Joined
Jun 23, 2003
Messages
5,706
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Should I keep raging on, frothing over a point I clearly don't have? Sorry, I don't play that way, even if I find myself among those that do on a regular basis.
 

Sol Invictus

Erudite
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Messages
9,614
Location
Pax Romana
The goal of the Allies was to stop Germany from conquering Europe only with the addition of the United States. World War 2 was long under way before the addition of the Americans and all the Europeans were doing was trying, in futility, to defend themselves against the German invasion. In Asia, the Commonwealth was desperately trying to fend off the Japanese invasion, but it wasn't until America entered the war that the tide had turned towards the side of the Allies.

Russia only wanted to take over Poland (which they did, together with Germany) and the Americans were trying to maintain some sort of enclave before the bombing of Pearl Harbor occured.

Nobody gave a shit about the Jews. When they dissapeared, nobody cared. It is only out of convenience that the Jews were liberated from their concentration camps. Allied intelligence knew of their existence, knew of where those camps were located, but even as Germany was being taken by the Allies, they were not rescued. Innumerable Jews were slaughtered by their Nazi captors to eliminate 'proof' of their existence when the Nazis would eventually surrender. Nobody cared.

WW2, as everyone should know (but for some reason fail to) encompasses the period from 1939 to 1945. It encompasses the widespread Nazism throughout Germany and their aspirations to take over Europe. It covers the atrocities, the battles and bombardments in which entire cities were left in rubble (see: Warsaw, Berlin, etc). Yes, it's true that the Allied Front (of which many battles were failures - like Operation Market Garden, while others like Operation Overlord a.k.a. D-Day were successes) was an overall success, but the war itself was the appaling result of mankind's failure as a whole.

It would be nice to believe that America was fighting for some abstract higher ideal, some sense of righteousness. Some desire to free the European people from the evil tyranny of Hitler. But was that really the case? Absolutely not. America's government went to war with the Axis for its own self-preservation, and for future financial interests. It's the same with Iraq and Afganistan. Wars might be considered a success for military industries (though not the military itself) and for politicians who line their pockets with campaign funds donated by those industries, but as a whole, wars are always a failure. I don't think that there's even been a modern war fought for the sake of the greater good. For doing what's right. Not even the American war for Independence was fought for any higher ideal, despite what history books will lead you to believe. What it comes down to, really, is how local lords, generals and politicians wanted more power, free of the British rule. If you know history, you would know that General George Washington was a very high ranking general in service of his majesty the King. He was a bastard, and he squandered a LOT of money during his reign as the President of the United States. Coffee money amounting to 200,000 dollars. Which would amount to millions of dollars today.

War. War never changes.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,035
Exitium said:
It's true we have a voice, and that we are heard, but the majority speaks louder than we do, and they govern the majority of the market without having to shout their opinions.
Still our opinion on games exist and there were, are, and will be games made for us. We are the reason that the Fallout license had any value.

Windows has succeeded. Linux is a mess. It's got more support issues than Windows ever did, no matter what people say. Try getting any new games to run on it.
Win is not the only product. There are IE, Outlook, MW Office, Front Page, etc. Those are easier to compete with.

It succeeded from certain industrial points of view, mainly the industries that supply the war effort. It was not a military success,... nor was it a political one
And now let's take a look at what we started from:
Success and failure are not a matter of fucking opinion, VD. You just can't generalize a subject and say 'it's subjective about whether it succeeded or failed'.
You did good today, Exitium, you've learned a lot.

It was not a military success, with so many dead marines
I thought that a military success is determined by whether or not one side wins?

(political suicide for Bush), or an economic one. Much less a diplomatic one. The world hates the United States more than ever now.
They hated US for a long time even before Iraq, so there is nothing new here.


And now, it is with great regret that I announce that I must go and get some work done. I will be back, obviously, and comment on every post made in my absence. This is one of the best threads evar. It just a huge fucking pile of all kinda issues, even politics and history. It doesn't get any better then that. :lol:
 

rob

Novice
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
40
Location
closer to the north pole thant to my hometown
quote
This is one of the best threads evar.

indeed, vd, ex and volourn, you are my heroes!
I was missing a thread like this in the codex, lurking the forum does not get any better than that.
keep up the good arguing!
ps
this is honestly meant as a compliment
 

Whipporowill

Erudite
Joined
May 18, 2003
Messages
2,961
Location
59°19'03"N 018°02'15"E
The US is at it's most impopular right now, so while not always loved - it's sure been better. About 80% of the europeans would like Kerry to run the US rather than Bush, and then it's not about what kind of politics Kerry stands for, rather than what Bush has made the US look to us.
 

Sol Invictus

Erudite
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Messages
9,614
Location
Pax Romana
I thought that a military success is determined by whether or not one side wins?
Would you say that the United States won the Vietnam war with 58,000 dead, even if they beat the NVA into submission?
 

Volourn

Pretty Princess
Pretty Princess Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Mar 10, 2003
Messages
24,924
"Would you say that the United States won the Vietnam war with 58,000 dead, even if they beat the NVA into submission?"

Though the US killed more Vietnamese than the Vietnamese killed the US; the US did not accomplish their goal and the Vietnamese did so therefore the US lost.


"The US is at it's most impopular right now, so while not always loved - it's sure been better."

Meh. US bashing has been a habitual pasttime for many coutnries in Euprope and elsewhere for a very long time - way before Bush was even on the horizon. This idea that somehow Bush = the reason for that is just plain silly. The hatred is just more pronounced 'cause for one of the few times an Amerikan President was honest enoiugh to say we are the US, we are the super power, we will no longer be bullied into not doing what we think is best for US.

Afterall, Euprope has always looked down upon the US as a piece of shit nation of no class neanderthals. That is not new. Even Britian though they helped and the war still have the same 'ol arrogant stance towards their 'allies'.
 

Whipporowill

Erudite
Joined
May 18, 2003
Messages
2,961
Location
59°19'03"N 018°02'15"E
Simply not true Volourn, there's a more open anti-americanism in Europe than ever before. During the 80's the US was quite popular and Clinton kept international affairs smooth - which isn't the same I can say for Bush. Making enemies isn't how you fight terrorism, unless you decide to nuke everyone, as they can't fight back.
 

Volourn

Pretty Princess
Pretty Princess Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Mar 10, 2003
Messages
24,924
"Simply not true Volourn, there's a more open anti-americanism in Europe than ever before. During the 80's the US was quite popular and Clinton kept international affairs smooth"

I may have been a very young simple midned small town Kandian kid back then; but no; I still rememebr the constant Amerikan bashing back then. I know 'cause it was mostly 'Kandains are cool; Amerikans are bastards'. Meh. Not exactly my defintion of popularity.
 

Whipporowill

Erudite
Joined
May 18, 2003
Messages
2,961
Location
59°19'03"N 018°02'15"E
Let's say that the US was looked up on as a big brother - not always right, not always wrong - but pretty cool, although you wouldn't admit it openly. Now it's more like a schoolyard bully - might makes right and all that. I'm not saying that the US was super-popular, but in Europe it was more of a love-hate relation. The EU and US has lately been on quite different opinion on things.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom