I completely agree. I wish video game developers would make games because they love to make games, not to just make money.
Jimquisition: How Skyrim Proves The Industry Wrong
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Im not comparing Skyrim to CoD because of the gameplay mechanic of die and retry. I compare Bethedsa to activision for slapping a somewhat fresh coat of paint onto an existing well selling formula and letting the fans irrationally herald it as the single greatest advent since the exact same thing was released this time last year. I am sorry, but If you cant see something smacking you in the face like a purple rubber dildo Nothing I will do will make that easier. Just because one is unable to comprehend what they read does not make it illogical or incomprehensible for everyone especially when all it takes to start a verbal blood war is simply to imply (not even directly say) something that poses anything from the TES series in a less than glorious light.
I stand by what I say. Skyrim didnt prove the industry wrong. The witcher 2 might have done what Jim Suggested. Dark Souls might have done what Jim suggested, but outside of selling CoD level well, Skyrim did nothing positive but reinforce many of the negatives the industry faces right now. Sorry, I disagree with Jims (or any TES/Bethesda fanboy for that matter) rose colored glasses view of skyrim.
I stand by what I say. Skyrim didnt prove the industry wrong. The witcher 2 might have done what Jim Suggested. Dark Souls might have done what Jim suggested, but outside of selling CoD level well, Skyrim did nothing positive but reinforce many of the negatives the industry faces right now. Sorry, I disagree with Jims (or any TES/Bethesda fanboy for that matter) rose colored glasses view of skyrim.
I'm...going to go buy Skyrim now. Like, right now. Bethesda owes you a marketing fee, Jim. I've been on the fence about this game and I'm always looking to get into new genres that I've never tried before. Thank you Jim for helping me make an informed decision.
I was sold at the "single player game with many hours of game-play and no multi-player" part.
I was sold at the "single player game with many hours of game-play and no multi-player" part.
Well, Skyrim is one of those games that encourages you to use your imagination instead of relying on predetermined imagination of developers. You are who you want to be. And it definitely has atmosphere. You just need to allow yourself to be immersed without expecting the game to tell you want to do every step of the way. It's kinda old school in that way.theriddlen said:
I'm not even a fan of the Elder Scrolls series, but even I can appreciate what Skyrim represents, for the reasons Jim has outlined. Also, y'know, the fact that it's not even an FPS.
So, now that a big-name, big-profile, A-list title has done all this, is there a chance other publishers might start following suit?
So, now that a big-name, big-profile, A-list title has done all this, is there a chance other publishers might start following suit?
its not always the industry that wants to put MP all the time in to games, its the people who say a game is only good if it has MP.
i read in few forums that people complained about mirrors edge for example, because it has no MP or even shadow harvest, people said they will not buy it because it has no MP or co-op. so as mass effect. these are the once who should really get blamed for being such retards.
im not saying jim is wrong, he is absolutely right, just want to point out.
sometimes i do enjoy some MP games and i do enjoy playing MW3 so far. every now and then playing it is alright. but still doesnt beat a good SP game like half life.
its good to hear that skyrim is doing well and does not follow other companies with the MP stuff, but it still will not convince me to get it because i was never in to this fantasy and magic stuff.
i read in few forums that people complained about mirrors edge for example, because it has no MP or even shadow harvest, people said they will not buy it because it has no MP or co-op. so as mass effect. these are the once who should really get blamed for being such retards.
im not saying jim is wrong, he is absolutely right, just want to point out.
sometimes i do enjoy some MP games and i do enjoy playing MW3 so far. every now and then playing it is alright. but still doesnt beat a good SP game like half life.
its good to hear that skyrim is doing well and does not follow other companies with the MP stuff, but it still will not convince me to get it because i was never in to this fantasy and magic stuff.
No.Sylocat said:
At best, they will try and copy it, including online, online passes, restrictive DLC and many corners cut.
Lesson not learned, in short.
You are correct, sir. I hereby award you +5 internets.Adam Jensen said:
I just hope Bethesda allows the same freedom in the next Fallout game. Being railroaded into a single backstory kills any chance of actually creating a character that's your own.
I found some of them interesting. While it may have been great if all dungeons were related to side quests that was something I didn't quiet like. Because I would have to check if some were in oblivion to see if I could just do it for the sake of exploration or If I should wait at the risk of missing a vital part of a side quest. Besides for those with lake of motivation it can convince them to try out a few dungeons they had added without a specific quest. Going towards that even some who had no relation just had interesting stories you can discover and make of what you will from bodies or journals.NameIsRobertPaulson said:
There's a few variations of dragons that are unleashed as you advance at levels. Despite the fact I'm a level 38 I have had some close calls with dragons. Granted the starting ones (Blood Dragon And Normal) Are Easy.
I don't see them doing that at least as a complete DLC in itself. More so what would be the motivation for people who play it on the PC when they can just make more spells using the tool set.
That's because they wait for major bug fixs for the console (At least from what I Heard) The amount of updates they can do is limited, or costs a lot more money. The good thing is that they are actively preparing to help.
I beg to differ, what mistakes they made should be taken into account in order for future games of the same type or their next game. Things that did well should also be taken into account in order to even improve of keep within the game.
But that of course is a contrast opinion to yours, In a attempt to share view points from different angles.
All hail Jim, but eh keep your pants on brother.
It really is nice to see that dedication and quality paid of for Bethesda. Unfortunately parts of the industry will probably learn the lesson that they need to copy Skyrim to be successful. We can hope more developers will focus on doing their own thing, and create a good market based on that.
It really is nice to see that dedication and quality paid of for Bethesda. Unfortunately parts of the industry will probably learn the lesson that they need to copy Skyrim to be successful. We can hope more developers will focus on doing their own thing, and create a good market based on that.
Great review, however the thing to consider is that the game industry's criticisms are based on some other factors as well.
For one, you have to ask how much Skyrim took to develop compared to some of those big shooter games, and how many copies it needed to move before it became profitable in comparison to some of these other games raking in the dough.
What's more the gaming industry is all about maximizing profits, not just making a profit, but the biggest profit possible, hence why they decide to strangle people for every possible thing they can, and focus on relatively easy and cheap multiplayer modes to sustain the game, multiplayer is the future not so much because it's actually what players want, but because it's cheaper than creating tons of single player content with a lot of voice acting, innovation, and scripted events.
Skyrim is doubtlessly a success, but I'd imagine a lot of people are going to look at it and decide that they could make more money by investing in other types of games than to try and emulate what it did. At the end of the day is Bethesda going to wind up making more profit off of this game than someone who invested a similar budget accross a couple of shooter games?
I think the issue is simply that Bethesda might be selling out to an extent by aiming their games at an increasingly casual audience by reducting their complexity, but at the same time they are still interested in making the games they want to make, and the fans want, rather than immediatly running after whatever is making the most money right at the moment.
That said, it remains to be seen what is going to happen with Bethesda. You'll notice they have started publishing shooters... like Rage. While Rage seemed to get a very mixed response it remains to be seen if that's a trend that is going to continue and if Bethesda decides it's better to try and publish or create shooters rather than work on new products.
As far as "Saint's Row 3" goes, I have been playing it due to getting irritated in Skyrim due to some bugged quests... namely Velehk Sain's treasure, I found the island for it but have literally spent hours wandering around trying to get the thing to spawn before deciding "F@ck this" and taking a break for the last few days before I put my fist through
my monitor. I'm hoping a patch will fix it soon, as something like this makes me concerned about proceeding due to what else might be glitched, etc.
I do tend to agree that SR3 is small in scope compared to the previous games, and seems to largely be recycling a lot of the basic material from SR2 without adding in anything new. I was hoping it would be as much of an improvement on SR2 as SR2 was from SR1, but really it's nothing that impressive. It's fun, but to be honest I've become wary of purchusing SR4 should they release one.
At any rate, I plan to return to Skyrim shortly, and so far it's definatly my nominee for game of the year. It's the ONLY game that didn't fall short of it's promises. I don't care for some of the simplification and specific design choices, but I knew about most of that beforehand, and otherwise it's actually exceeded a lot of my expectations. Fix some glitched quests, maybe beef of Destruction Magic a bit (easpecially at early levels) and rebalance a few of the monsters (ie I don't think a couple of high end bears should be tougher than a Dragon if they fight. The Dragons are fine as they are, but some of the monsters need to be nerfed a bit).
Also, very nice Plushie Skyrim Hat, I have no idea where that came from.
For one, you have to ask how much Skyrim took to develop compared to some of those big shooter games, and how many copies it needed to move before it became profitable in comparison to some of these other games raking in the dough.
What's more the gaming industry is all about maximizing profits, not just making a profit, but the biggest profit possible, hence why they decide to strangle people for every possible thing they can, and focus on relatively easy and cheap multiplayer modes to sustain the game, multiplayer is the future not so much because it's actually what players want, but because it's cheaper than creating tons of single player content with a lot of voice acting, innovation, and scripted events.
Skyrim is doubtlessly a success, but I'd imagine a lot of people are going to look at it and decide that they could make more money by investing in other types of games than to try and emulate what it did. At the end of the day is Bethesda going to wind up making more profit off of this game than someone who invested a similar budget accross a couple of shooter games?
I think the issue is simply that Bethesda might be selling out to an extent by aiming their games at an increasingly casual audience by reducting their complexity, but at the same time they are still interested in making the games they want to make, and the fans want, rather than immediatly running after whatever is making the most money right at the moment.
That said, it remains to be seen what is going to happen with Bethesda. You'll notice they have started publishing shooters... like Rage. While Rage seemed to get a very mixed response it remains to be seen if that's a trend that is going to continue and if Bethesda decides it's better to try and publish or create shooters rather than work on new products.
As far as "Saint's Row 3" goes, I have been playing it due to getting irritated in Skyrim due to some bugged quests... namely Velehk Sain's treasure, I found the island for it but have literally spent hours wandering around trying to get the thing to spawn before deciding "F@ck this" and taking a break for the last few days before I put my fist through
my monitor. I'm hoping a patch will fix it soon, as something like this makes me concerned about proceeding due to what else might be glitched, etc.
I do tend to agree that SR3 is small in scope compared to the previous games, and seems to largely be recycling a lot of the basic material from SR2 without adding in anything new. I was hoping it would be as much of an improvement on SR2 as SR2 was from SR1, but really it's nothing that impressive. It's fun, but to be honest I've become wary of purchusing SR4 should they release one.
At any rate, I plan to return to Skyrim shortly, and so far it's definatly my nominee for game of the year. It's the ONLY game that didn't fall short of it's promises. I don't care for some of the simplification and specific design choices, but I knew about most of that beforehand, and otherwise it's actually exceeded a lot of my expectations. Fix some glitched quests, maybe beef of Destruction Magic a bit (easpecially at early levels) and rebalance a few of the monsters (ie I don't think a couple of high end bears should be tougher than a Dragon if they fight. The Dragons are fine as they are, but some of the monsters need to be nerfed a bit).
Also, very nice Plushie Skyrim Hat, I have no idea where that came from.
I play as them in Third Person??? You defiantly can play in a third person mode that is very usableMB202 said: