L_K_M

stryker1800

L_K_M

d_unique

Example: "OH NOES, I HAS A DRAEMZ" - Martin Luther King

"WE FITE TEM ON TEH BAECHEZ !!!!!eleventy!!" - Winston Churchill.

mcderek3000

@dunetiger : the mekuri master: Yours, too.

Captain Impulse

I'm simply saying I don't stress "quantity" as much as "quality"... and I can see instances in which developers sell on quantity at the expense of quality. That games can have both isn't something I contest at all.

Merely saying that, if choosing between the two, I'd rather have a short game that was good than a long game that sucked.

__________________

@Captain Impulse: I wasn't really disagreeing with you, per se.

I was latching onto you saying you didn't understand the "I want games shorter" opinion and attempting to illustrate an instance in which it might make sense. (even though for this title, I'm in for the long haul, most likely)

I don't think quality and length are exclusive to each other any more than you do... at least not by some proven formula. But, that said, we have seen more than our share of RPGs during the last generation that seemed to be heading towards "length" without progressing "quality" a whole lot. As RPGs go, I'd personally like to see developers push the envelope in terms of presentation, interaction, etc... rather than focusing on sheer quantity of content. I don't mind "leveling", but RPGs seem to have stepped away from their tabletop role-playing roots quite a bit and become much more focused on the minutia than the big picture. That isn't to say they're all going south... just that the biggest trend seems kinda in the wrong direction to me.

Though I think there is still a common ground to be had with people who want "shorter experiences"...

I don't think that "shorter games" are necessarily what they should be asking for... but rather, they should be seeking "rewarding, self-containable experiences" within the whole of the game. For instance, I can understand someone wanting to play RPG "x", but having other worldly commitments that preclude him/her spending every night to stay on-story. Being frequently distracted by life is something that happens to me too.

It's not about wanting the game smaller, per se... but possible to be consumed in more defined chunks if one has a schedule that prevents the types of commitments that RPGs often demand.

We should be able to play 200 hour games over the course of 2 weeks or 6 months, without seriously trashing the experience for those of us that have to constantly interrupt the flow of the story with, yuck, "life".

Personally, I started FF7 4 times before I finally finished it for the first time... just because it was so hard to get back into the rhythm. If it was more friendly to being consumable in smaller bits (at least to someone like me) as well as in a long chunk... I might have finished it the first time.

dv8godd

Captain Impulse

If two games cost $60 and one offers up 100 hours of exploration and another offers 12 hours of cinematic experience (and I will say that I think 12 hour games are awesome) is this fair? What are we buying? Gameplay or presentation? It's not like a movie where you're presented with a single package that can only be consumed in one way (interpretation is not a factor here), so what's the criteria? While some people would say that Heavenly Sword should come out the gate at $30 'cause it's short, would you then pay $60 for an endless puzzle game? Conversely, shouldn't RPGs then be $100 or more? Don't most RPGs cleverly hide their game-time with loads of travelling, too?

Point is, gamers come to this hobby for different reasons and it makes developing these things a helluva sonofabitch to be successful. It also makes it a helluva sonofabitch to be a collector because you end up with a whole bunch of titles you own, but really can't play. Either way, you have a choice to pick up the game or not. The sooner you can fight compulsive behavior and make tough decisions on what to leave on store shelves, the better for you in the long run when you're dealing with... omg... real people.

I, of course, will be over here, crying myself to sleep on piles of cellophane-wrapped games, but I'll be doing it quietly.

dunetiger reads kotaku, seems pleased

Portal is a perfect example of great game play without length. What is lacks in length it easily makes up for in depth of game play. I'm a huge advocate for quality as well. I was simply making an example. Length and quality are not mutually exclusive.

In the end, as you said, it comes down to what an individual quantifies as value. Gamers will typically demand quality, but length need not necessarily be a factor, as some recent games (C0D4, Heavenly Sword, Portal, etc) have proven. But asking for LESS length specifically is damaging to the industry, as it hurts one group of gamers (those that want long games) without actually benefiting another. That's just catering to people with shorter attention spans.

Captain Impulse

Sunjammer

kipperminge

I'd rather have quality than quantity any day. That a game has "more" doesn't necessarily mean that all that extra is worth anyone's time. It may even detract from the quality of the core content if they're focused on a "80+ hours of gameplay" bullet-point on the box over top of making the game enjoyable and polished (something RPGs have become notorious for in recent years).

As for the analogy... If you're buying games as "all-you-can-eat buffets", then that's like purchasing on quantity over quality anyway... which may explain why you don't agree with the argument. It may not be the way you look at "value".

The argument is actually more like the difference between an all-you-can-eat buffet and a nice meal at a high-end restaurant. Most times I'd rather have a well portioned, quality meal than more lesser-quality food than I could possibly consume.

It's not that people want less for their money...
... it's just that some have different ideas of what constitutes "value".

That said...

I'd personally rather this title was 200 hours of high quality content than anything. But then, I've played probably 500 hours of the first two by now... but always as replays because the quality was so high.

dv8godd

I know I'm sounding cynical, I am really looking forward to this game, I just always see the corporate/marketing fluff for what it is and it annoys me.

Gwydeon

On topic, with 500 endings and this focus on improved realism through player/NPC activity, I hope they're not sacrificing game play or story. A pretty world to muck around in isn't fun if the rest of the experience is lackluster.

Captain Impulse

kipperminge

"Hey John, how about a game of Lucky Hit? Would you like to play Lucky Hit, John?"

For the record, I love Shenmue. That was a loving jab. ^_^

Captain Impulse

Captain Impulse

Ghede

kipperminge

kipperminge

kipperminge

Why do people assume playing games has to be a marathon? If you want to see a huge game to completion, play it in smaller chunks. Don't play for 8-12 hours straight; play for 2. It might take you longer, but you will still get there.

I can't believe there are gamers out there asking for less content. Boggles the mind.

Captain Impulse

Thorax

kipperminge

Sounds like:

We went with Oblivion's "it doesn't happen until your in the vicinity, time means jack" instead of our original "living world" style. Some fluff character interaction that will get repetitive and ignored 1/4 of the way though the game has been added to hide this.

Gwydeon

Sounds like

"We cut something we promised because of time constraints, and what we picked may not be the popular choice."

If my corporate-ese is still fluent.

Gwydeon

Flawless101

Brocklesocks

lol.

Oblivion was one of the best RPGs I have ever played. I loved how you could do your own thing, be what you wanted. The Spell system was pretty lame but I got a solid 150 hours+ from that game. I'll have to get a new video card to run this bad boy.

Majpain007

stevesan

Bethesda has no idea how to make an RPG. Elder Scrolls games have the absolute worst leveling system of any games I have ever played. And your power at end game is just ludicrous. Also, they don't seem to care about bugs. There are like 20000 between Oblivion and Morrowind. In fact, I'd say the Elder Scrolls games are some of the most flawed games ever created. They have more flaws than E.T. and Superman 64 combined. But they are just so fucking great! It's the environment. Make environments that big and detailed, add awesome spells and weapons, and just let players go nuts. I know Fallout 3 will be the same, and I can't wait for it.

jambe

adamfedoruk

This games gonna kick ass.

flukielukie

I just hope that Bethesda keep the easter eggs in some form - Finding weird-arse things in the middle of nowhere was one of Fallout's greatest charms. The crashed Federation shuttle, the Monty Python references, the subtle pisstake of Scientology, and The Brain - I remember these more than I do what happened in Vault 13 in Fallout 2, or how I got into the Enclave.

The little things have always been Fallout's charms - I still remember hearing Richard Dean Anderson & Charlie Adler playing voice roles in the game. Or what happens when you finish the first game with the Bloody Mess trait...

If anything, I hope that Bethesda keep this little touches in - If only as a nod to the old fans, or simply to lighten the mood at times. As long as they do that and not majorly screw anything else up, I'm content. :)

Side note, I have two words for anyone who thinks that Oblivion's quests were boring - Dark Brotherhood. ;) The Whodunit quest in particular was one of the most original & entertaining quests I've played in a long time.

Jonax

Of course, I'm sure it'll be divisive for lots of folks who call themselves hardcore Fallout fans, whether they are or not, no matter what Bethesda does. Such is human nature: some people would rather be upset about what a game is not than experience it for what it is.

If that happens to be Oblivion with guns, more or less... so what? Am I supposed to be pissed that time didn't stand still 11 years ago to deliver me a replica of the game I've already played 2-3 dozen times?

Anyone trying to force expectations on the title based on earlier games is likely to be disappointed on some level, which is why I'm personally giving the title a wide berth, even as a longtime franchise fan. I can understand not wanting things to be "screwed up" (as subjective as that is), but honestly, listening to some of the folks that call themselves fans on the Bethesda boards and elsewhere sometimes makes me ill to actually be a real one. I've seen some pretty hateful stuff from the "fans" that lacked any constructive value or sense that they were interested in giving it 10 minutes of play before passing judgment.

That they've listened to some of us at all is nice, considering, but I'm kinda glad they haven't let it run their lives. Because, well, it's not 1997 anymore... and I've played those games many times... I'm kinda enjoying the idea that it can be re-imagined in a new way, even if it's not quite as good as the first time.

If the only point was to do the same thing over again, we'd never have had Fallout 1+2 either. We'd have Wasteland 3+4. While that's not necessarily a bad thing, it's worth pointing out that F1+2 were pretty damn amazing on their own without needing the earlier tie-in.

Though I imagine if the internet were as pervasive through the early 90s as it is now, we'd have heard all kinds of "what's this more than 4 colors shit? why do I only control one guy? Isometric? But why isn't it top-down? 3d rendered conversations? ew! Interplay should have never given the project to Black Isle!"

I'll judge it when it's in my hands... based on what it is, not on rose-colored memories of what could not be. Excellent or mediocre, I'll at least appreciate the effort in trying to keep the franchise alive... because I'd likely have nothing at all if not for their attempt.

Besides, it can't possibly be as far from the original as the PS2 Brotherhood of Steel dungeon hack. :/

dv8godd

Oblivion had 11 voice actors for literally hundreds of roles. It got soooo repetitive. It really broke the immersion. More voice actors. That's the easiest thing I can think of that would have made it better.

el_gordo

Barf#1

Barf#1

OMGICANTWAAAAIIT

kidko

You can't just have the AI to convince the player. You need the NPC to actually do what's going on in his head. Fine, I see a librarian, but if all he's doing is staring off into space, then his AI means nothing.

Ping5000

Hopefully they change this for Fallout.

OGHowie

Can we also get a leveling system that doesn't require us to plan out skill advances to build our characters properly?

Lastly, modders will do this if you wont, but how about a setting that doesn't scale the entire world to your level?

Tiber

"I think that we do have a pretty good understanding what all of the different sections of our fan base are interested in, but it comes back to the thing of, you know, gotta make the game that we think is the best."

Well, if they have this understanding they claim they have, why the fuck are they not making a true Fallout sequel? They are raping absolutely everything to cater to OBLIVION fans.

So basically what he's saying to core FO fans is "Yeah, we understand what you want, but it's our game, and we can do whatever the hell we want, so fuck off."

Two_Headed_Cow

Lixie

So they're basically saying that they know what the fans want, but are not going to do it because it's not "what they think is best". Hines is such an asshole. He says they care about us FO fans so much but still doesn't listen to what we have to say one bit.

Two_Headed_Cow

But really want this game now... but I think most of "listening to the fans" is a wakeup call from all the good mods from Oblivion, and they don't want to be outclassed by them again.

Have you heard about joining the fighters guild?

Kaizuden

You'd better be fucking thinking of us core Fallout fans or we're going to find out where you live and kill your family before your eyes, you soulless bethesda crony!

*froth*

*snarl*

*twitch*

MagicApple

They don't care about Fallouts old fans at all. I know it's cyncial but what they are making is Oblivion with guns because they know it'll sell well.

Edmon

dropoff

What about the tongue in cheek humor? The gray morality scale that appears to be missing from this version ("Set" good and evil factions, super mutants gone, etc)..THOSE are what I'll miss. I'm willing to give them a chance but my hope is not high.

spinal77

nonpareil

Dont tell devs to make shit smaller just to suit your own needs.

Just dont do the extra shit in game and follow the main storyline.

Nobody forces you to do all the extra stuff or wander the world. Not to mention oblivion catered to those who bitch about SI WARLD 2 BEIG with the instant travel feature also. You know.

Witzbold

The nice thing about the Elder Scrolls series was that you didn't *have* to go and do everything, but more was there if you wanted it. If you just followed the main plotline, the game wasn't any longer than a standard RPG.

GTA IV is the same way, and can apparently be completed in around 35ish hours. All the extra content is available only if you want to pursue it.

I'm all for them making the world as big as possible, since that's how to add replay value to a single-player game.

elocanth

Antiterra

Witzbold

Less but more interesting missions work best and for the love of god make the experience system easier to understand than the Elderscrolls one.

dropoff

tribasic

I really want this one. :)

SAKY

Mr Fortitude

Guild_Navigator

Shocky