The reason why people hate Obsidian Entertainment

[TheMagicLemur]

Jesus, calm down, fanboy.

I don't hate Obsidian, but they have a SHITLOAD of bugs in their games.

Generally they have interesting stories and concepts. I love New Vegas and Alpha Protocol, but if I had a dollar for every time those fucking games froze up or got me stuck to the point where I had to reset, I could buy a new car in cash.

 

[Adam28]

If there are any unlucky developers in the world, it has to be Obsidian. KOTOR2 was rushed thanks to Lucasarts and Obsidian even came out and said they wanted more time to work on the game, anyone who has played it would know that the game would of been even better than it was if complete. Then there is Fallout: New Vegas which used that cursed Bethesda engine meaning there was bound to be bugs in the game, I wouldn't be surprised if they got less time to work on the bugs due to inexperience with the engine and probably a shorter time frame. Other than that, New Vegas was a lot better than 3, especially in terms of the story.

Well they are the only two Obsidian games I have played and that is the impression I have got.

 

[mcpeepants232003]

I agree with everyone that Obsidians stories are good. How the heck could Ts play any of there games and not notice the awful bugs that they have in their games? I lost Rex and the eyebot on Fallout New Vegas and never was able to recover them(even with the vault glitch)/.

 

[CJ1145]

I read halfway through the first post and OP, I can already tell you've got some issues with the thought of people who don't like Obsidian being thinking human beings.

The reason that I hate their games is not because of bugs. I respect them for the fact that they try their hardest to bring their games out, and that it's usually not their fault (with the exception of New Vegas, FUCK THEM for that screw-up) that the games are released buggy and unfinished.

The reason that I hate them? I hate them for their disturbing hard-on for making sure happy endings are impossible.

Allow me to make this clear: I love complicated morality. I love stories where the good guys aren't 100% good, and the bad guys are relate-able, with understandable motivations and sympathetic personalities.

What I hate, however, is when you get so obsessed with blurring the lines of good and evil, you forget you're supposed to be telling a story. Let's start off simple: The end of Neverwinter Nights 2.

Spoiler: If you somehow have not beaten this game yet, don't click this.

Rocks Fall, Everyone Dies is NOT how you end a game. People were so pissed at the end of Fallout 3 originally, when no matter what you were doomed to die if you wanted to be a good person, even though the reasoning was pulled straight out of the asses of the writers.

This is no different. The game, while not the ultimate in storytelling (and indeed I had plenty of other problems with the story that I won't go into here) was at least enjoyable up until that point. But all the fun I'd had drained away as I watched that slideshow. All the characters I'd spent time actually enjoying and learning about, now all crushed under rocks because herp herp de derp we wanna be deep? Please inform me the benefit of that decision whatsoever.

Let's move on to KotOR 2, or as I like to put it "Play KotOR 1 as written by the creators of Neon Genesis Evangelion". Seriously, how much of that game's script was spent on making up half-assed philosophies? Even the completed parts of the game felt woefully under-developed, because instead of trying to build up a story, and letting us learn about these characters' motivations, Obsidian made the decision of just having them TELL US all their worldviews in dozens of various monologues.

Kreia is by far the worst. From an hour in, it's already blatant what is going on with her, yet they build it up as the big twist of the game, on par with the revelation of the fate of Revan in the first game. And the viewpoints expressed by her are flat-out depressing, even worse than what would happen in reality.

What's that? Giving a beggar money for helping you? Watch his life crash around him. The game repeatedly bashes it into your skull that being good and altruistic is for idiots and little kids. My biggest problem, though, is that you are not allowed to prove her wrong.

I would probably be on the opposite fence here, praising the game to no end if there was at least the OPTION of letting your character say "No, being good is right, and I'm going to prove you wrong." and then letting you follow through with it. But they don't. Even when you try to protest, both Kreia and the script say "You're so naive, let me show you even further why you're wrong."

Really, being light-side has no tangible benefits story-wise. You don't even get the consolation of improving people's lives, as the game goes to great lengths to inform you of how little a difference you make. THAT is the sort of thing I mean by a hard-on for gray morality.

Jeez, I kind of went on for a bit didn't I?

 

[AlternatePFG]

However regarding new Vegas i found it to be one of the single most clustered games ever created, there was no major motivation simply characters not knowing what they wanted. And honestly are you telling me kill the guy who try ed to kill you then either complete what he wanted or don't isn't an unoriginal, black and white stamp of a storyline?

I like how you completely ignored the main conflict between the major and minor factions in the storyline, considering that was by far the majority of the game.

 

[Athinira]

Kotor 1
Aside from that big plot twist near the end, this is a completely generic Star Wars story

1. The Sith appear from nowhere with a strong army and overwhelm the republic and the Jedi

2. Some unexpected twist that is completely out of the control of the good guys happen that slowly turn the tide( Malak betraying Revan )

3. The Republic wins and everything goes back to normal

Note: All the time the Jedi as perfect monks who are completely calm and certain of their victory because they are good and the Sith are bad and the light side is stronger etc

This part tells me that you haven't grasped the critique of Obsidian games AT ALL.

When you break it down, most stories are fairly generic and uninteresting, and can often be summerized in very few sentences. What matters more than the story, however, is how it is told. It's the journey, the experience getting us through the story that matters most, including narrative, how the characters develop etc. And in that regard, Obsidian games are a big fat failure to put it mildly.

In Kotor 1, the experience is you playing as Revan (without you knowing) gradually discovering your own personality and hand in events, while piecing together your place in your universe and trying to stop the Siths plan at the same time. It's not a terribly interesting story, but it's believable, and the characters and the quest is at least interesting.

In Kotor 2, the story MIGHT be better on script, but it's a mess gameplaywise. Basically, you have to find 3 jedi masters, and to get to those 3 jedi masters, you have to fight through several conflicts that are only tangentially related to the plot and really lacks credibility. At least the Star Maps in Kotor 1 gave a sense of devices there were meant to be hard to discover, but i can think of so many holes in Kotor 2's plot on how to get around and contacting the jedi masters. What's worse, i have played through the game several times, and i still haven't grasped Kreia's motivations again. Some games fail to give their villains proper motivations, but Kotor 2 is an example of a game who gives its villain a proper motivation, but characterizes the villain so badly that it's difficult to grasp what it's all about. Sure, i got that she wanted to learn something from the protagonist, but exactly what (and why she so badly needed to learn it) is left unexplained. What's more, her "betrayal" (if you can even call it that) came out of the blue, and wasn't in any way related to the quest for the 3 jedi masters which takes up most of the game.

So in short: Obsidian might create good stories, but their storytelling and ability to create an immersive believable world with believable characters is to terrible it doesn't even matter.

 

[dibblywibbles]

personally I love their games except for the bugs. New vegas would've have been the greatest if it wasn't for the bugs. it was a shift back towards the fallout series that I grew up with. Grey morality, interesting choices, robo dogs...loved it.the old world blues dlc is probably the best add on I've played for any game. so I guess I have no idea what you're talking about. It's for those reasons I like obsidian. it's the damn bugs and the rushed aspect of kotor 2 that bothered me. Fallout isn't a black and white game it was always a game about choices. Sometimes having no clear good choice in he process. fallout 3 is the bastardization of the series in my opinion(but still fun!). so I guess what I'm saying is why you don't like obsidian is the reason I love those guys. just need a more polished product.

 

[AlternatePFG]

Oh, come on. Don't try and tell me that New Vegas had a compelling story in any way. Every conflict is solved within minutes of dialogue (and hours of walking around). It gets even less compelling when you have 100 speech since everyone just fucking agrees with you, no matter what. Oh, I see you just blew up their other base and killed their family. Just tell them that they suck, they will agree and like you even more. The only time you even have to think about anything is with Benny, and with Mr. House. 2% of the game, tops, makes you even care. And by the time those options come around, it is more like 0%.

First off, I was never referring to the story being compelling at all. I'm just saying, if you want to call Fallout 3 more grey than New Vegas, don't leave out a majority of the game for comparison. Second, I really have no idea of what examples you're referring to from New Vegas.

 

[DustyDrB]

However regarding new Vegas i found it to be one of the single most clustered games ever created, there was no major motivation simply characters not knowing what they wanted. And honestly are you telling me kill the guy who try ed to kill you then either complete what he wanted or don't isn't an unoriginal, black and white stamp of a storyline?

I like how you completely ignored the main conflict between the major and minor factions in the storyline, considering that was by far the majority of the game

Oh, come on. Don't try and tell me that New Vegas had a compelling story in any way. Every conflict is solved within minutes of dialogue (and hours of walking around). It gets even less compelling when you have 100 speech since everyone just fucking agrees with you, no matter what. Oh, I see you just blew up their other base and killed their family. Just tell them that they suck, they will agree and like you even more. The only time you even have to think about anything is with Benny, and with Mr. House. 2% of the game, tops, makes you even care. And by the time those options come around, it is more like 0%.

I found Benny and the mysterious delivery the courier was making to be a compelling first act motive. It wouldn't be good for it to last the whole game, but it provides enough intrigue to get you to New Vegas, where things really expand.

And the faction system makes it so you can't do what you just said. There is a point where people don't forgive you, and will outright attack you when they see you. I know, because I can't go to Vegas with my current character without the NCR picking a fight with me (and I never attacked one of them this playthrough until they started to attack me).

 

[Zhukov]

PhhtHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAhahahahaaheheheheeehheee... hehehehee...heh.

...

Yeah, you're totally right! People hate Obsidian's stories because they're just too good! All that uniqueness overwhelms their poor little minds and they can't cope, so they just dismiss those awe-inspiring tales. Well... thank goodness we have you on hand to show us the light!

*sigh*

My only experience with Obsidian's storytelling is Alpha Protocol. It was a boring and convoluted spy story, utterly devoid of any intellectual weight or emotional engagement. It was populated by a cast of colourless and forgettable characters, only one of whom I can remember. Anyone who tries to tell me that that was an example of good storytelling will promptly be dismissed as a gibbering idiot, in much the same way I would dismiss someone who tried to tell me that horse manure is good food.

 

[AlternatePFG]

Oh, you hate me? Let me go fetch something stupid for you and then talk to you a bunch with the speech option so you suddenly love me. Don't worry, though. You'll have a lot of time to think about it when I'm walking through the stupid desert for 6 hours.

You can't do that though. They'll attack you on sight if your reputation is low enough, doing sidequests for them still won't raise your reputation enough for them not to shoot you on sight if you're vilified. You can play the entire game without pissing off any faction until the end, if you pick the independent route. The game is meant to be like the old Fallout games where you can play through the game being mostly diplomatic, how is that a bad thing? Those points you put into speech could have just as well be put into any other skill.

I'd hardly call the casino's cut and pasting, but the strip was definitely disappointing.

 

[cgaWolf]

I have no issues with the story OE tells, in fact, i think they're quite good.

What i have a problem with is that Obsidian takes (or gets thrown) good franchises, and makes average games. While they may be ok storywise, they fumble on UI & obvious fanservice gameplay stuff (and i don't mean pantyshots).

Taking NWN2 for example, i liked the story, and stuff like the castle & the court of justice scene were fairly well done; but the user interface was clunky, and game handling was badly optimized - it felt laggy, and that had nothing to do with the machine i was running it at the time.

Another example is DS3 - the franchise was fairly solid, even though DS2 should have been better than it was, and procided to tell their story, and forgot how those top down kill everything that moves, loot, rinse & repeat games work. Yeah, for casual players it's neat to sit down, play the game on easy, and have the ability of a friend grabbing a controller and play the second character. For more dedicated players however, it's unacceptable that harder modes don't give better loot, or that, although i can DIDO (drop in drop out) in multiplayer, i can't bring my persistent character, and take anything back. Holding mousebutton to move is also idiocy in a game like DS, that's just lazy porting. Also, New Game+ is a no go, again, idiocy at the design stage for a lootwhoring game.
Those flaws have nothing to do with storytelling, neither the way it's told, nor the actual content of the story, and everything to do with at best average, but usually subpar game-design.

Now figure out the time at which DS3 was released. People are getting itchy for a game like this again, Sacred 2 & Torchlight are a bit old by now, Dragon Age & Witcher series don't exactly qualify, neither do the MMOs. In a time, when there has been no relevant release in the sector for 2 years, and Diablo 3 is a year off, OE takes the DS franchise which is perfectly setup for the one-more-level/item crowd, and manages to release a game designed in such an ignorance of what players& fans want, that even though everyone's just waiting for something like it, and there's no competition far & wide, the game bombs.


World/Story wise, OE is ok. UI & Gameplay wise, the best you can hope for, is that they change nothing from the original, because if they do, it's pretty much bound to be unimaginative, and follow design practices that have been outdated 10 years ago.

 

[synobal]

I don't hate obsidian, in fact I think they make good games I just wish they took more time to fix bugs and do polishing work on what they develop. I know a lot of times that's not in their control but still it doesn't change the fact that most their stuff is buggy and unpolished. They make gems just gems in the rough.

 

[AlternatePFG]

But you can do that. I had every faction at least approving of me through sidequests, enough so that they wouldn't attack me on site. I had both the legion and the NCR handing me fucking medals in a cake by the mid-point.

The bad thing is that Fallout is basically a 30-40 hour Debate Team simulator where you sometimes get to enter extremely poor combat scenarios that are so forced that it makes rape look like recess.

That's only if you're playing independant though. You pick a side and stick with it eventually through the main plot, there will get a point where the other side will start shooting you, no matter what reputation you had with them by that point. You can be diplomatic with both sides, but you don't have to be.

 

[Sovvolf]

Can't say I hate Obsidian, haven't really kept a close look on their track record. The only game I knew they made was KOTOR 2... Which I honestly liked up until the end part which felt extremely rushed (it was, to get it out for Christmas) otherwise, can't think of many games I've knowingly played done by them.

 

[Da Orky Man]

Who says that? I much preferred New Vegas, though I must say both KotOR's were excellent.