Fallout: New Vegas - "Wittier" Than FO3

[JemyM]

As have been mention, I didn't judge Obsidian on KOTOR2 alone, but NWN2 as well. And we shouldn't forget the quality of Lionheart if we talk Black Isle.

Hell, remember Fallout 2 before the patch?

Granted, these games are large and complex. There are plenty of examples of unfinished RPG's out there. Still I enjoy Obsidians games a lot since they offer great depth... but great depth + bugs have sunk quite a few companies I used to love, which makes me worried about Obsidian. I would love to have Obsidian around as the "deeper" version of Bioware.

 

[DArtagnan]

If only business wasn't so very affected by the hype factor.

Once, just once, I'd love a game to come out completely unexpected with absolutely no information prior to release.

To catch me off guard and surprise me, like the old days

Back then, you could pick up a game pr. random in a shop - and all you really had to go on were the pictures on the back of the big box. Then again, I was much easier to please back in the day.

Sigh...

 

[Davion]

I would love to have Obsidian around as the "deeper" version of Bioware.

My thoughts exactly! I'm crossing my fingers for Alpha Protocol, I have a feeling that it'll make or break Obsidian.

 

[Badesumofu]

Care to know why your wrong? Name a single available company that could have done it?

That makes no sense, it's not relevent.

We all are, but fault is something different. It was lucas's obscene time frame of development to make a GREAT AAA RPG SW title, which lucas definatly needed, on average the ones lucas makes are not very good.
What was lucas's idea? Get a very good RPG developer to make a very good game, in 18 months for console and PC, right?

That's a total cop-out. Obsidian shouldn't have agreed to that timeframe then. Or they should have cut some content. Feargus has actually said pretty much that, himself. What you're doing, is your taking an agreement that was made between Obsidian and Lucas, and acting as though Lucas are 100% responsible for the terms of it. That's a rather large fallacy.

The problem is perception, of course they bit of more than they could chew, what they intended was making a great AAA RPG for SW and lucas didn't think it was important enough to give them and extra 1 or 2 months.

Blame who you want, guys.
Not to mention lucas came to them, Bioware was busy and Obsidian was the only one who could do it.

If they had the time, obviously they are talented and experienced enough to do it.

So you're saying that if a developper fails to meet the terms of their agreement, it's the publisher's fault? Obsidian are just as responsible for the terms of the agreement as Lucas.

Where is the evidence for the claim that no one else could do it? Bioware didn't want to, and they reccomended Obsidian, so Lucas took their advice. What's the basis for the claim that no one else could have made a sequel to KOTOR?

What's the basis for the claim that if they had had time they could have done it? How much time? Why is it obvious? What's the basis and reasoning behind this claim?

I actually really liked KOTOR2, and MOTB as well. The problem with KOTOR2 wasn't just bugginess, the game was clearly ufinished. That's entirely the developper's fault. What they did make was very good, though. I think they have the talent, and I am very hopeful about New Vegas.

 

[txa1265]

Fault and absolution are way different, Obsidian could do everything right within their control and things can still go wrong, which they did becasue of lucas.

And your proof? The documents that show a firm timeline showing that Obsidian said that given the design and resources they could complete a perfect product in 20 months, with LEC saying 'well, you have 18 so we'll just ship what you have'?

Seriously, have you ever worked on a project with any sort of scope? Obsidian was approached, and was able to do due diligence and based on their work with Bioware came up with an agreement on what they could deliver - and failed to deliver on that agreement. That is THEIR part of the problem. The fact that LucasArts didn't say 'well, let's hold for 6 months to get this right' is THEIR part of the blame.

But since you're so convinced, I'm sure there are insider LucasArts documents about how they wanted to screw Obsidian and further muddy their own name as a publisher ... since that was the outcome.

 

[DArtagnan]

Isn't it a fact that we just can't know either way?

We don't have access to inside info - afaik.

From my point of view, Obsidian was never very good at finishing and polishing, but they're a lot more ambitious in ways that I enjoy - than most others.

I'd rather have an unpolished Obsidian CRPG - than a polished-to-death Bio/Beth/Bliz CRPG. That said, they need to actually finish their game to make it all worthwhile - and obviously KotOR 2 wasn't.

But that's me.

 

[EvilKoala]

I'd rather have an unpolished Obsidian CRPG - than a polished-to-death Bio/Beth/Bliz CRPG. That said, they need to actually finish their game to make it all worthwhile - and obviously KotOR 2 wasn't.

I agree with the polished/unpolished part. But I still think KoTOR2 was superior to the first, despite having that lacklustre ending. No way in hell is a bad game going to ruin the fun I had in the first and second part of the game.

Remember Divine Divinity? Remember it's beginning? Yeah, that sucked. Remember the ending? Yeah, that sucked so hard that I didn't even complete it across four playthroughs. Do I like DD? I love it. Same with Risen.

Things like the ending of Divine Divinity, KotOR2 and Risen leave you disappointed when you finish it. But I can't forget about the great times I had with these games before the final part kicked in.

 

[Coldcall]

I can accept a few bugs from any game which is ambitious and i would accord that caveat to Bethesda, who at least have tried to create proper open ended RPG gameworlds.

Considering how massive Morrowind and to a lesser extent Oblivion were, i think its odd people complaining about the few bugs.

In fact i rather have unpolished but innovative, to boring but polished as in ME2 from Bioware, who have really dissapointed me with their new direction.

 

[Coldcall]

I agree with the polished/unpolished part. But I still think KoTOR2 was superior to the first, despite having that lacklustre ending. No way in hell is a bad game going to ruin the fun I had in the first and second part of the game.

Remember Divine Divinity? Remember it's beginning? Yeah, that sucked. Remember the ending? Yeah, that sucked so hard that I didn't even complete it across four playthroughs. Do I like DD? I love it. Same with Risen.

Things like the ending of Divine Divinity, KotOR2 and Risen leave you disappointed when you finish it. But I can't forget about the great times I had with these games before the final part kicked in.

I thoguht Divine Divinty was actually very good, even for the quirkiness. In fact i may break it open again as i see barely anything modern worth playing.

 

[DArtagnan]

I agree with the polished/unpolished part. But I still think KoTOR2 was superior to the first, despite having that lacklustre ending. No way in hell is a bad game going to ruin the fun I had in the first and second part of the game.

Remember Divine Divinity? Remember it's beginning? Yeah, that sucked. Remember the ending? Yeah, that sucked so hard that I didn't even complete it across four playthroughs. Do I like DD? I love it. Same with Risen.

Things like the ending of Divine Divinity, KotOR2 and Risen leave you disappointed when you finish it. But I can't forget about the great times I had with these games before the final part kicked in.

That's where we differ.

To me, the ending of a game means A LOT - because it's what ties it all together. It doesn't nullify what fun you've had - but like an unfaithful lover, you very quickly change your mind about the person as a whole, and though great times were had - the whole picture isn't as wonderful as it once seemed.

Risen was nearly ruined for me because of this, and I consider the overall experience much less fulfilling because of the last 1/3 of the game.

This is especially true in story-based games, because the story can't just be a premise or a middle-act. In fact, the last half of Bioshock made everything about the story mean nothing and cut my enjoyment literally in half. I'm not saying it would have been a great game with a more coherent story, but it would certainly have been much better because then at least it did something for me beyond merely setting up something intriguing and without closure.

 

[Dez]

And your proof? The documents that show a firm timeline showing that Obsidian said that given the design and resources they could complete a perfect product in 20 months, with LEC saying 'well, you have 18 so we'll just ship what you have'?

Seriously, have you ever worked on a project with any sort of scope? Obsidian was approached, and was able to do due diligence and based on their work with Bioware came up with an agreement on what they could deliver - and failed to deliver on that agreement. That is THEIR part of the problem. The fact that LucasArts didn't say 'well, let's hold for 6 months to get this right' is THEIR part of the blame.

But since you're so convinced, I'm sure there are insider LucasArts documents about how they wanted to screw Obsidian and further muddy their own name as a publisher … since that was the outcome.

Its trivial to discuss whose fault it was. The only thing which matters is that it would have been a wiser decision to let obsidian finish the game as it was clearly at beta stage. After all kotor 1 was a massive hit worldwide (the most successfull sw game ever?) and kotor 2 was a hyped game too. By forcing kotor 2 out of door unfinished they lost lots of money long term.

As far as I can recall LEC wasn't in huge economical crisis at that point to justify their hasty behaviour.

 

[EvilKoala]

I thoguht Divine Divinty was actually very good, even for the quirkiness. In fact i may break it open again as i see barely anything modern worth playing.

Don't misunderstand me. I love Divine Divinity. I just said I thought the first and last dungeon sucked. And I still loved it.

That's where we differ.

To me, the ending of a game means A LOT - because it's what ties it all together. It doesn't nullify what fun you've had - but like an unfaithful lover, you very quickly change your mind about the person as a whole, and though great times were had - the whole picture isn't as wonderful as it once seemed.

Risen was nearly ruined for me because of this, and I consider the overall experience much less fulfilling because of the last 1/3 of the game.

This is especially true in story-based games, because the story can't just be a premise or a middle-act. In fact, the last half of Bioshock made everything about the story mean nothing and cut my enjoyment literally in half. I'm not saying it would have been a great game with a more coherent story, but it would certainly have been much better because then at least it did something for me beyond merely setting up something intriguing and without closure.

I perfectly understand where you're coming from. As opposed to you, the way I think about a game is often formed by the parts I enjoyed about it. Maybe I'm just an overtly nostalgic person, but whenever I think about replaying KoTOR2 I think about the great times I had with the game, and then I only remember the bad parts when I actually reach them.

It could be that I remember all these games as better than they actually are. This is most likely due to the number of disappointing games I played lately. I think this happens to a lot of other people aswell. I mean, the last part of the original Gothic wasn't very good either, was it? And was the boss battle at the end really that good? Hardly. But still, people these days can't help but remember it as one of the best RPGs of all time, perhaps because they WANT to remember it as a perfect game.

I'm currently having the exact same feeling towards Dragon Age (which I played BEFORE Risen). While I was playing it, there were I lot of things I didn't like, and I was constanty whining about it. But about two months after I finished I started to wonder, "Wasn't I just being overtly critical? Did the game really have that many flaws? You know, it's was actually a pretty awesome game! Let's replay it!". That's just how my mind works.

Or I could just be more tollerable towards game-killing endings :lol:

 

[JemyM]

I agree with DD. First and last dungeon was bad, the middle game still made it great.

 

[DArtagnan]

Don't misunderstand me. I love Divine Divinity. I just said I thought the first and last dungeon sucked. And I still loved it.



I perfectly understand where you're coming from. As opposed to you, the way I think about a game is often formed by the parts I enjoyed about it. Maybe I'm just an overtly nostalgic person, but whenever I think about replaying KoTOR2 I think about the great times I had with the game, and then I only remember the bad parts when I actually reach them.

It could be that I remember all these games as better than they actually are. This is most likely due to the number of disappointing games I played lately. I think this happens to a lot of other people aswell. I mean, the last part of the original Gothic wasn't very good either, was it? And was the boss battle at the end really that good? Hardly. But still, people these days can't help but remember it as one of the best RPGs of all time, perhaps because they WANT to remember it as a perfect game.

I'm currently having the exact same feeling towards Dragon Age (which I played BEFORE Risen). While I was playing it, there were I lot of things I didn't like, and I was constanty whining about it. But about two months after I finished I started to wonder, "Wasn't I just being overtly critical? Did the game really have that many flaws? You know, it's was actually a pretty awesome game! Let's replay it!". That's just how my mind works.

Or I could just be more tollerable towards game-killing endings :lol:

Who knows why, but I consider your position a fortunate one

 

[Zygo]

And your proof? The documents that show a firm timeline showing that Obsidian said that given the design and resources they could complete a perfect product in 20 months, with LEC saying 'well, you have 18 so we'll just ship what you have'?

Marin County, Calif. — May 4, 2004 — LucasArts today announced its official 2004 Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3) lineup, which features Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic II: The Sith Lords, the follow-up title to last year's award-winning role-playing game. The original KOTOR™ was released in 2003 and earned widespread acclaim throughout the interactive industry, including more than 35 "Game of the Year" awards. The Sith Lords will be officially unveiled at E3 2004 and will be released for the Xbox video game system from Microsoft and for the PC in February 2005.

When was the game released again? How many months different between Nov 2004 and Feb 2005? There ain't a single doubt that LA moved the date up by three months, it's there in black and white, and in the best case scenario Obsid had six months notice of that three month cut (or in other words, at best, they lost a minimum 1/3 of their remaining time). It's just that unlike others Obsidian have not run around blaming everyone else under the sun for the bugs which in turn mean they still have goodwill from said publishers.

Sheesh. The amount of high horse riding in this thread from people… Obsidian established its own, non publisher QA team precisely because of the problems they had with KOTOR2 (and NWN2)

 

[txa1265]

When was the game released again? How many months different between Nov 2004 and Feb 2005? There ain't a single doubt that LA moved the date up by three months, it's there in black and white, and in the best case scenario Obsid had six months notice of that three month cut (or in other words, at best, they lost a minimum 1/3 of their remaining time). It's just that unlike others Obsidian have not run around blaming everyone else under the sun for the bugs which in turn mean they still have goodwill from said publishers.

Sheesh. The amount of high horse riding in this thread from people… Obsidian established its own, non publisher QA team precisely because of the problems they had with KOTOR2 (and NWN2)

OK, but then there was also another announcement a couple of months later that the XBOX release date was now in December.

Please don't get condescending - no one is denying LucasArts role in all of this, but for some we also don't want to forget that the state of release of KotOR 2 and NWN2 (i.e. buggy and unpolished at release) is of some concern. I love their stuff and am hopeful they can deliver a product that befits the excellent talent at the studio.

 

[bobisimo]

The only thing which matters is that it would have been a wiser decision to let obsidian finish the game as it was clearly at beta stage. After all kotor 1 was a massive hit worldwide (the most successfull sw game ever?) and kotor 2 was a hyped game too. By forcing kotor 2 out of door unfinished they lost lots of money long term.

I'll say up front I agree with you 100%. And I think you are absolutely right. But it still bugs me and that's why I blame Obsidian. If I tell you to make me something specific within 18 months and you tell me after 18 months that you're not done yet but it's OK because you made me something way beyond what I asked for, I'm going to be disappointed in you. Granted, I share blame in this example because I should have been closely involved in the month-to-month details of your endeavor, especially since I'm funding it.

But post-mortems like these are most useful when they provide lessons for the future.

As has been said, Obsidian claims to have learned from their mistakes with scope -- which is believable since they are admitting the problem. And they have shown, to some degree, that they have learned with their recent expansions. That all leads me to believe that their future remains bright. And that's a good thing because Obsidian is a great, desperately needed developer.

 

[Hedek]

Storm of Zehir felt like a rushed and unfinished product too -although I liked it a lot. Was it Atari's fault?

 

[Zygo]

I didn't think SoZ felt unfinished, personally, it was just rather limited in scope. It would have made a fantastic platform for DLC/MoW type mini expansions if it had been integrated in NWN2 from earlier. I don't recall having a single bug in it either, though I know there was at least one serious one originally (MOTB voices)

Please don't get condescending - no one is denying LucasArts role in all of this, but for some we also don't want to forget that the state of release of KotOR 2 and NWN2 (i.e. buggy and unpolished at release) is of some concern. I love their stuff and am hopeful they can deliver a product that befits the excellent talent at the studio.

I did sound rather confrontational, it wasn't intended as such.

I pretty much entirely blame LA but that is at least partly because I saw a bunch of posts which ended up deleted at Obsid's forums saying that they were forbidden from doing bug fixing on the PC version prior to its release, or a content patch post release, both by LA. So far as I am concerned Obsidian did at least try and fix the problems and have tried to make sure they don't recur, and I have no doubt that they extra three months would have fixed most of the really obvious ones- certainly the droid factory and probably a lot of the Malachor Mess. I also have no doubt that Obsidian was not in a position, as a new company, to say no to LA on the release date change if they even had the option to, meaning that at some stage they had to try and cram X months projected work into X-3 months at short notice. And that's a recipe for problems even under the best of circumstances.

 

[txa1265]

I pretty much entirely blame LA.

As a Star Wars PC game fan I am pretty much willing to toss blame at LucasArts if the milk in my fridge spoils at this point ...