I am. Bioware is one of the top makers of games IMO. You may also disagree and think Obsidian is good (not saying they are not) but I just think in terms of quality the difference is huge.
What's a good RPG?
- Thread starter Ice
- Start date
-
- Tags
- rpg video games
I am. Bioware is one of the top makers of games IMO. You may also disagree and think Obsidian is good (not saying they are not) but I just think in terms of quality the difference is huge.
ourchair
Well-Known Member
Do your research.
Obsidian is pretty much made up of former employees of Black Isle Studios, and were therefore Bioware's former colleagues at Interplay and together Black Isle and Bioware co-developed every both Baldur's Gate I and II and their respective expansions.
Not that Obsidian's Black Isle alumni are any slouch at making RPGs by themselves. Their founding officers are:
Chris Avellone, who was behind games like Fallout 2, Planescape: Torment and the Icewind Dale series, as well as the Baldur's Gate console spin-off Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance. He also contributed to games like Lionheart and the Everquest console slasher Champions of Norrath via writing duties.
Chris Jones (not to be confused with Tex Murphy's Chris Jones) was the lead programmer and architect for Fallout's engine.
Darren Monaghan was a jack of all trades at Interplay/Black Isle who contributed lead quality assurance, programming and production management for such games as the Icewind Dale series, the Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance series, the Baldur's Gate expansions, Fallout and Planescape: Torment
And finally, there's Feargus Urquhart, AKA "The Man With The Hard to Pronounce Scottish Name" who is pretty much the head honcho for EVERY awesome RPG that Interplay/Black Isle put out in the late 90s.
To say that these guys put out a lousy KOTOR is fact. It IS a fact, even if it's a direct result of LucasArts jerking them around to meet a financial quarter.
To say that these guys COULDN'T put out a good KOTOR, because they're not 'as good' as Bioware? Utter nonsense.
I'm not saying these guys are perfect (hell neither is Bioware --- let's all admit that Baldur's Gate I just isn't as plain awesome as Baldur's Gate II OR Planescape: Torment) but to say that they don't have what it takes compared to Bioware is like saying that John Woo isn't qualified to direct a movie franchise that John McTiernan started, or that David Bowie isn't allowed to play Lou Reed's songs.
Last edited:
What research just look at Bioware's games then look at Obsidian's as Obsidian it doesn't matter who they were before or who some of them worked for.
It's like Pixar was part of Lucasfilm at one point. So when we talk about Pixar films on here should we mention Star wars? No. Star wars is great but I don't care that it was Pixar. Pixar I'll judge for Pixar's work.
Bioware IS a great company. You don't take a great company's work and hand it over to a rookie group. Sorry you don't. I know Bioware recommended them but that doesn't matter.
It would not be like "David Bowie doing Lou Reed's songs" That is sorry to say a stupid analysis as 1 David Bowie is great , 2 it would be a cover so a remake.
KOTOR was their baby in a way that they used new stuff they added to their later games. It had heart it had passion. It lost that man it really did. I know this s going to be one of those agree to disagree situations as we won't change our minds which is cool.
But the way I see it they took "Back to the future" and instead of having Robert Zemeckis direct it and write for it handed over to David Solomon to do number IV. Sure David Solomon has great work behind him in Buffy and other shows BUT on his own with out them to hand him a Robert Zemeckis film would just be a bad move.
ourchair
Well-Known Member
What the heck are you talking about? That analogy has nothing to do with what I'm saying.
Pixar was never involved in Star Wars other than developing technology that was used in the SFX of later releases, otherwise they have NOTHING to do with Star Wars. But if that's exactly the point you're trying to make then think upon this:
If you're insisting that talking about Pixar's work is talking about them as filmmakers, writers and storytellers and NOT the work of other people they were 'associated' with (i.e. LucasFilm) then that's exactly what I'm asking of Obsidian.
I'm not making stuff up about Obsidian. I'm not asking you to judge them for anything but work they have done. And a lot of that is work on some of the greatest PC RPGs of all time, and not just in some made up tiny capacity --- look at me! I was the guy who spell-checked all of Ray Muyzka and Greg Zeschuk's work! --- but in leading capacities.
I didn't say Bioware is not a great company. What I'm saying is that Obsidian is NOT a rookie group.SSJmole said:
I'm not asking you to change your mind on anything BUT your opinion of Obsidian Entertainment itself.SSJmole said:
If you insist that KOTOR belongs in the hands of Bioware, that it is their 'baby' then fine. It's an argument that doesn't necessarily conflict with "Obsidian has experienced and talented veterans of CRPG development"
If you insist that Obsidian can't make a better KOTOR than Bioware, then fine. It's ALSO an argument that doesn't necessarily conflict with "Obsidian has experienced and talented veterans of CRPG development".
You can deify Bioware all you want. I'm not saying you are wrong in saying they are great. At all. But that you insist on doing so at the expense of Obsidian is absurd.
To say that Obsidian is a bunch of 'rookies'?
ROOKIES?
Nonsense.
:lol: Can't argue with THAT example, to be honest.SSJmole said:
I just meant the company it's self as that names was a rookie in that 2005 when they made KOTOR II they only had about 2 years under them as they were formed in about 2002-2003 as Obsidian
Their work since has been good I'll admit that. Not as good as Bioware but sill great. However 2005 they were still new.
But maybe rookie was too harsh of a term. I mean ask me if they could do a good star wars game NOW and I'll say yes. If you had asked me in 2005 should they be making KOTOR I would have said no as they needed to establish the Obsidian name.
Maybe i'm just not explaining it right.
:lol:
ourchair
Well-Known Member
Well it was pretty obvious the first time that I wasn't talking about THAT. I was clearly talking about Obsidian before it was Obsidian. I'm not defending the nominal group of Obsidian, I'm defending the PEOPLE of Obsidian.
The point I was establishing was that Bioware and Obsidian's Black Isle alumni were basically all involved in the same great RPGs.
Actually to be fair, NONE of Obsidian's work has been as good as the work they've done in the past.SSJmole said:
For me, a situation like this, where one developer passes on the sequel chores to another company is a rather neutral one. There're just as many cases in which the team made a better game than the original guys as there're cases in which the inheritors totally ****ed up what was given to them.SSJmole said:
You know me better to know that if I argue with YOU, that I'm going to argue on the basis of facts and logic, and not for the sake of disagreeing, which sadly seems to be the way people have chosen to argue with you simply because your tastes don't match with theirs. (i.e. Mole's taste is not like mine, therefore he must be wrong)
I know and I wouldn't say this an argument just a friendly debate.
Ourchair said:
Neverwinter Nights 2 is pretty damn cool
ourchair
Well-Known Member
It's not a debate if your initial assertion's logic totally failed. (Which isn't to say that the other assertions --- namely that Bioware kind of rules --- were fails)
I'll agree or disagree when I actually have a system that can run it.SSJmole said:
I'll agree or disagree when I actually have a system that can run it.
Ah yes Ourchair and his Amiga 1200 of many colours :lol: joking my pc wouldn't play it either until I upgraded a lot of stuff for star wars galaxies (yes I'm that sad)
:lol: Didn't fail you just disagree but it's all cool
Last edited:
ourchair
Well-Known Member
I know, I was being sarcastic.
But in fairness, the general traits of RPGs have diffused themselves across all genres that it is actually pretty valid to call GTA an RPG in the sense that like many good games it has absorbed many of the traits of another genre --- in this case, RPGs --- in order to enrich itself.
GTA is not an RPG per se, but it does give you a large sandbox to express yourself as a player such that there's a big component of it that is RPG-like. In GTA you could just as well be a helpful ambulance-driving fella if the sociopathic ruffian path does not appeal to you or the main story track of an ambitious criminal climbing up the ladder is not your bag.
Some strategy games do the same thing --- incorporating statistically-based experience-reliant character development into 'hero' units or forcing the player to make moral decisions between what is practical to a mission over what is ethical.
A reverse example would be Diablo II, which supplants a lot of the game world expression with character expression. Instead of giving players a means to affect the world --- do you choose to raze the village for some phat lewt or do you save it and hope for deeper rewards from gratitude or unique prizes given only to the moral? --- the story-world is pretty linear and is pretty static in responding to the player.
Instead, Diablo II relies heavily on unique items and jewels and a very sophisticated ability tree and the game avatar is your sole expression of who you are... and it wraps this around an addictive strategy-game like playing experience with the a fast-paced rewards system --- the next new monster, new item, new gem, new level, new skill, a new thing every twenty minutes --- that resembles the tempo of an action game.
I haven't really thought this out clearly, but basically the best of games nowadays are trying to reach beyond their own genres in order to deepen and enrichen the play experience or at least give a fundamental twist that defines them as different from others. Hell, in terms of RTSs, nobody remembers pretty good games like KKND or Dark Reign because there was nothing that set them apart like the interlocking campaigns and factions of Starcraft or the muscle-like momentum of Command and Conquer's gameplay.
Friday
Well-Known Member
They're hard to find?
*eyes his copies *
...TO EbAY!
Why? I enjoyed them enough. Well, the first two, theres what, six now?
Zombipanda
My Boom-Boom's mostly gay
a dead RPG?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Ice
Teh Sexy Monkey Queen
Have you sold them yet? What system are they for?
Iceshadow
Well-Known Member
Hahaha!
Friday
Well-Known Member
PS1 and not yet. I'm giving them both a final play though before I let them go. Probably be done by the end of the week.
Gothamite
Well-Known Member
You develop skills and customise your character and his traits at your leisure and in the order that you desire, the game is free-roaming and you can do the missions mostly in any order you desire. The only way it could be more of an RPG would be if you could flat-out create and name your character (like in The Godfather).
ourchair
Well-Known Member
While I was being sarcastic, I wasn't disagreeing. :wink:
Gothamite
Well-Known Member
Ah. :lol:
Ice
Teh Sexy Monkey Queen
Anyone played the Star Ocean series? Seeing the Star Ocean 4 trailer was beyond awesome, and I've seen that Till the End of Time is available for the PS2 and was thinking of getting it.
Also, since The Last Hope is the 4th in the installment, are any of the other 3 (besides Till the End of Time) are available on the PS2 (or maybe even PS1?). I might get them all if they're worth it.
Also, since The Last Hope is the 4th in the installment, are any of the other 3 (besides Till the End of Time) are available on the PS2 (or maybe even PS1?). I might get them all if they're worth it.
One hell of a week, huh? Still waiting...
Last edited:
