I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

For all Bard's Tale IV discussion that does not fit elsewhere, suggestions, feedback, etc. No spoilers allowed.

Moderator: Bard Hall Bouncers

svdp
Acolyte
Posts: 80
Joined: January 14th, 2016, 2:25 pm

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by svdp » February 28th, 2019, 3:42 pm

"I'm not sure where you got that idea; feels like words are being put into my mouth."

Well, no. You said that the bards' tale may be considered a good game, but that it's not a good sequel. This implies, that for you being a "good sequel" is something else as being a good game. That in turn implies that, even if it was a dull game, but it would be according to your imagined idea of a sequel, you could find it a good sequel - and thus perform its task - even if it was not providing any enjoyment.

I'm fully aware it's not an or-or question: you could have both a "good'" game, and a "good" BT-sequel. Only, the point is, that you made a distinct difference between it, yourself. Thus, you have to acknowledge it's possible, in principle, to have a game that is a good BT sequel without it being a good/enjoyable game. Following your reasoning, this would fulfill the "task" a game needs to fulfill, as a sequel. I simply do not concur. The real task of a game is to provide enjoyment, period. This is regardless whether it's a sequel or not.
Last edited by svdp on March 1st, 2019, 2:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

svdp
Acolyte
Posts: 80
Joined: January 14th, 2016, 2:25 pm

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by svdp » February 28th, 2019, 3:56 pm

BlakeStone wrote:
February 24th, 2019, 9:27 am
Staehrminator, add me to your count of people who love this game.

I'm a backer and I just finished the game yesterday.
It was a sequel and it was a good sequel.
I played without auto mapping and used graph paper along with grid movement. I loved it.
It really took me back to 1985 when I played the first Bard's Tale on a 8088 processor.
The story line was a true sequel and the music was awesome with all the ear worm magic, great job to all involved at inXile.

Not sure why there's so much anger from other backers. A good argument for a forum ignore button.
My thoughts exactly. I can understand that people are disappointed because the game doesn't fulfill all there imagined expectations. What I can not comprehend, is that they refuse to see it's exactly those expectations that cause the disappointment, and NOT the game itself.

If it were not due to the a priori expectations of the individuals involved, and the game was generally bad, then even backers like us would say so. It's not like we have problems giving critique, after all. And far from us to say it's a perfect game as it is - there were certainly things that could have been improved on. However... We find it a good game, and a reasonable sequel - while others do not. But it's clear this is due to the expectations they assumed it had, in front. I would argue - as I did - that if one manages ones' expectations and be reasonable in ascertaining what constitutes a sequel - and not "a sequel that concurs what I had in mind" - and what is a "good game" (aka, giving enjoyment), the BT 4 can be both considered a sequel and a good game.

svdp
Acolyte
Posts: 80
Joined: January 14th, 2016, 2:25 pm

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by svdp » February 28th, 2019, 4:18 pm

"Why, then, do you care enough about other people's opinions to call them whining, if you're accepting of the fact that people are going to have differing opinions. Why bother to say anything at all?"

Because saying an opinion, and whining, are not the same things. One whines when one is whining - obviously. One is not whining merely by expressing an opinion. It's only the MANNER in which one is expressing it, that can, or can not, constitute whining.

I'm not sure why you would equate giving opinions and whining as being the same. It's perfectly possible to accept the fact people have different opinions, and yet call people who are whining, whiners. Only if one does not see any difference between giving opinions, and being whiny about it, would your objection in this make any sense.

But I, for one, make a difference.

As for bothering: it's because, contrary to some, maybe, I consider that opinions have some objective value, but only in as much as they're being substantiated by logical arguments, rationale reasoning, and factual grounding. And, of course, using reciprocity of argument. I am, thus, not a proponent of the currently in-vogue attitude of claiming all opinions are equal. Yes, all "mere" opinions are equal... equally worth nothing, that is. The value of an opinion is directly related to the substantiation it gets. And that's exactly why I bother to express my views on it.

This, to answer your last, specific question, thus.

svdp
Acolyte
Posts: 80
Joined: January 14th, 2016, 2:25 pm

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by svdp » February 28th, 2019, 4:50 pm

"Can you back up your certainty with a statistical breakdown of what was most complained about?"

I've gone over the first 200 comments viewable on the kickstarter site of BT4... 3 of them explicitly mentioned it "not being a sequel". statistically speaking - even though I didn't check the 12000 comments, this bodes not well for anyone claiming a 'majority' has complaints about specifically that issue.

"What's your definition of a sequel?"

That would be, of course, the dictionary definition of a sequel, because if one let every person use his/her own definition, there's no end to it:

"a published, broadcast, or recorded work that continues the story or develops the theme of an earlier one."

Now, the story has been continued, and the theme developed - maybe not as one expected or liked, but it was. Hence, it was a sequel.

"there was a general consensus on this board about what would constitute a real sequel and what was delivered did not meet those criteria."

Really? Can you point me to the page where it was established that a majority of all players of BT 4 had a general consensus on a particular idea of what a "real" sequel of BT 4 would be, and what criteria it needed?

I think you are mistaken and confounding some miscontent + some whiny commentators on this forum, as a valid representation of all players of BT4, and mistaken those opinions - even if it were a majority on this forum - as a global indication of a "general consensus" on the matter. It's common knowledge that whiners and complainers have more tendency to keep nagging on a forum than those who are content or pleased with it, or are neutral about it. The latter don't bother - or at least, do it less - to incessantly make comments about it. In every given sample of comments and reviews, thus, the whiners/complainers will be over-represented in a given forum. Hence why, statistically spoken, one can not deduce a "majority" from a forum when it does not adequately represent the larger community one claims it represents.

For your point to have any merit, one would have to have a poll on the vast majority of players, where they express their dissatisfaction with the game as not being a "real sequel" as the major cause for their disappointment, and where that group would have a majority. THEN one could claim "most" players or "a general consensus" was reached, for that particular issue. As far as I'm aware, that has never been done, and can't be shown. Hence, it is speculation, based on a sample of comments of people that do not represent nor reflects the broader community as a whole, statistically speaking. In fact, the general approval rate is between 6.7 and 7.1. It seems difficult to argue, let alone prove, thus, that "a general consensus" of a "majority" exist on this matter. Maybe you mean a consensus of a group of like-minded individuals... but hat ain't a general consensus.
Last edited by svdp on March 1st, 2019, 2:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3730
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by Gizmo » February 28th, 2019, 8:02 pm

svdp wrote:
February 28th, 2019, 3:25 pm
"This would have been better as the first line in your post; as opposed to the last, after a series of assertions."

No, you have to end in beauty. ;-)
But when you end a post like that, you appear as trying to force the last word, by casting rebuttals as being an unreasonable continuation. That's like socking someone, and then shouting "Can't we all just get along?—please?—What's wrong with you people!?". :?
It's always extremely difficult to please a crowd which has nostalgic goggles...
There is no such thing as nostalgia goggles when you have the original artifact at hand, and can compare them 1:1. Nobody here is fondly recalling the golden days —when games did things so much better than now... What they are saying is point for point what is unrepresented in the recent game.

As I read it, you arguments would seem to allow for a non-platformer Super Mario sequel with no music; and to chide the fans for their unfulfilled expectations. Am I wrong?
"correct sequel" is arbitrary, because everyone has his own opinion on what constitutes a 'real sequel'.
No one's opinion matters in this respect.

The problem I have with your argument, is that the originals exist, one can trivially compare them with the new game, and find it lacking. To say that everyone has their own idea of truth in this case, seems akin to debating if stepping on a tack will hurt—because everyone has their own pain threshold, and their own idea of what 'hurt' means. :roll: Tacks hurt, you don't need to debate it. Find me a person who prefers puncture by thumb tacks to tickling, and I'll concede your point. (Yes, I am sure they exist if one really searches for them; and they are nuts.)
The truth is: this IS the sequel, and this IS not a bad game. It's only not the sequel some people wanted, nor is it deemed a good game by some with low tolerance and "other" expectations.
What I would like is to read a selection of what positives BT4 has (in your opinion) that make it a good Bard's Tale sequel to you. I think this might clear things up rather quick.
svdp wrote:
February 28th, 2019, 3:42 pm
...You said that the bards' tale may be considered a good game, but that it's not a good sequel. This implies, that for you being a "good sequel" is something else as being a good game. That in turn implies that, even if it was a dull game, but it would be according to your imagined idea of a sequel, you could find it a good sequel - and thus perform its task - even if it was not providing any enjoyment.
...
Thus, you have to acknowledge it's possible, in principle, to have a game that is a good BT sequel without it being a good/enjoyable game. Following your reasoning, this would fulfill the "task" a game needs to fulfill, as a sequel.
Yes—exactly.
I simple do not concur. The real task of a game is to provide enjoyment, period. This is regardless whether it's a sequel or not.
Not if it is the wrong kind of fun.

I will put it to you this way... Consider a Fast and the Furious sequel lacking any car scenes; same characters, lot's of humor and action—no vehicles. It follows the format of the Breakfast Club, and takes place in the county lock up.

Point: There is no point in making a sequel of an unrelated product, other than cashing in on the name. We've seen this with Bethesda, and it's become difficult to think otherwise of BT4.
*That doesn't slight the game itself; if it was lacking the numeral 4 in the name, then there would be no issue;
it could even be welcomed...like BT:R.

(Assuming of course, that it had been independently funded, or crowd sourced as a spin-off! ;) )
I would rather claim the reverse. There are scant examples of objective arguments to claim it's not a good game (or even a "sequel'), and those few provided, have some serious flaws in it, as attributed above. Now, purely on the subjective side, there is no resolution possible, ever - because of the inherent quality of subjective feelings and appreciation.
I'd say that this just confirmed several of my previous assertions.
Last edited by Gizmo on February 28th, 2019, 8:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

svdp
Acolyte
Posts: 80
Joined: January 14th, 2016, 2:25 pm

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by svdp » March 1st, 2019, 1:44 pm

"Yes—exactly."

Well, we seem to agree on that part, then. For me, that stance is simply absurd, however. It's like claiming the primary task of a Boeing 777 isn't flying people around, but is being a sequel to the 747 - because the company said it would be a sequel... but you don't find it a "real sequel" because the airplanes don't look alike enough, and thus it's no good.

"Not if it is the wrong kind of fun."

"Not if it's the wrong kind of flying."

See? Doesn't make sense.



Also: it's the second time you say that about Bethesda, but even there I can't follow you. Sure, I deplore them becoming greedy the more they become a big company (and the managers take over) - they might become like EA at this rate - but as of yet, their games, both Fallout and especially TES were fantastic games. GREAT games, giving me sometimes 1000+ hours of enjoyment - which, again, I DO consider the primary goal and task of a game. I have the strong feeling you're making the connection between the old fallout and Beth's one, and again do not consider it a sequel, because it doesn't look enough like the old game. Apparently, recreating the lore, worldbuilding and atmosphere is of little importance to you in regard to being a sequel; I have the distinct feeling the actual gameplay must be the same as well. What you want of a sequel, I think, is actually rather something like a remastered version of the old games - albeit with a different story, mayhaps. But with that stance, one could never introduce something truly novel in anything that has the nominator "sequel" in it. At least, not to any major degree, or you and no doubt others would start the same line of reasoning again. I think that line of reasoning is too limited, and inherently creates expectations that override the observational facts and more objective reasoning, like even when seeing the demo of how it will look, or what is *actually* written about it, one still somehow thinks it's going to be the same and play the same. And then you get comments - don't know if it was you or another here - saying: they should at least have made it an isometric game for a sequel. At which point I thought: wait... didn't he SEE the demo? Did Inxile claim it *would* be an isometric game? All these things have no factual basis, and just come about because they saw the word "sequel" and then filled everything in according to their own ideas about it, not with what was actually said and shown about it - and when the result didn't corroborate with what they imagined, one speaks of "treason" and being "scammed" by Inxile. No such thing. It's just them being disappointed because it didn't fulfill their self-imagined expectations of it. And I'm not even deriding those feelings of disappointment - provided one isn't whiny about it - I'm just saying they should be aware the source of that disappointment lays in their own mind, and not in the fact the game isn't enjoyable or can't provide fun.

Anyway, I guess it's true we'll never agree on this, because the basic premise we start with, is just too divergent. Still want to thank you for the fairly civil debate, even though it's a topic with highly emotional tension. Often this kind of discussion devolves rather quickly into personal namecalling or flamewars, etc. I'm also aware my comments aren't the most diplomatic, but as I said: I'm just being direct with my comments when pointing things out; it's never personal. And yes, I did say some people are whining - because some are - but I never said anyone with complaints about the game are to be considered whiners per definition.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9788
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by Drool » March 1st, 2019, 2:52 pm

Lanatir wrote:
February 27th, 2019, 11:56 pm
So, 5 months after release, of more than 30k people, 50 still play this game. So, this leaves 2 options. Either, the game is absolutely terrible, or it is not a real sequel. And since most reviewers even agree on the fact that it isnt that terrible....
Eh. Not exactly.

I have games that I've backed and never really played. Those numbers don't necessarily prove anything except that people, on average, have massive Steam libraries full of games they've never played. My Steam library has 285 games in it. I've maybe played 20%?

BT4 is on my pile of games I'd like to get around to, but it's competing against 284 other Steam games, half a dozen Origin games, and probably 30 or so GOG games. And life. Granted, if the game was a barnburner, it'd probably be higher on the list to focus on, but Half Life 2 was supposed to be freaking amazing and I've never even installed my copy, let alone played it.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

svdp
Acolyte
Posts: 80
Joined: January 14th, 2016, 2:25 pm

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by svdp » March 1st, 2019, 3:15 pm

Drool wrote:
March 1st, 2019, 2:52 pm
Lanatir wrote:
February 27th, 2019, 11:56 pm
So, 5 months after release, of more than 30k people, 50 still play this game. So, this leaves 2 options. Either, the game is absolutely terrible, or it is not a real sequel. And since most reviewers even agree on the fact that it isnt that terrible....
Eh. Not exactly.

I have games that I've backed and never really played. Those numbers don't necessarily prove anything except that people, on average, have massive Steam libraries full of games they've never played. My Steam library has 285 games in it. I've maybe played 20%?

BT4 is on my pile of games I'd like to get around to, but it's competing against 284 other Steam games, half a dozen Origin games, and probably 30 or so GOG games. And life. Granted, if the game was a barnburner, it'd probably be higher on the list to focus on, but Half Life 2 was supposed to be freaking amazing and I've never even installed my copy, let alone played it.
Yeah, I think he went a bit wild with making correlations, let alone implying causality to it. In another post I've already indicated some problems with his numbers/statistics/conclusions - though, of course, it's appreciated that he tried to elevate the debate to a more objective level and measurement.
It basically comes down to: buying != playing, not playing anymore != not liking, and not liking != not liking because it's not a sequel.


Like you, I have hundreds of games - I've only installed a fraction of them, and I only played a fraction of that fraction. And I've ended BT 4 and enjoyed it greatly... but I've finished it now, and I don't plan on re-playing it immediately - I have so many other things to play and do as well, after all. In fact, for an RPG it's quite normal to have a huge drop in players, once one has finished the game. I think I might start afresh with different characters and different skill-sets when the DC comes out in June, but there is not much incentive to redo a just finished game - with the same quests and puzzles fresh in my mind, thus - while I have still loads of other games to play as well. And I hardly think I'm the only one in that regard.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3730
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by Gizmo » March 1st, 2019, 3:25 pm

svdp wrote:
March 1st, 2019, 1:44 pm
"Yes—exactly."

Well, we seem to agree on that part, then. For me, that stance is simply absurd, however. It's like claiming the primary task of a Boeing 777 isn't flying people around, but is being a sequel to the 747 - because the company said it would be a sequel... but you don't find it a "real sequel" because the airplanes don't look alike enough, and thus it's no good.
I am not sure that we do. I am agreeing precisely with your assessment of the other person's logic, and your [derived] conclusion on the lines of their reasoning. Yes, I would accept a good sequel that was a bad game, and not the reverse. What that means is that it should have been its own (great) game, and not impostering as a sequel.
"Not if it is the wrong kind of fun."

"Not if it's the wrong kind of flying."

See? Doesn't make sense.
Yes it does. Flying without a plane or parachute is definitely the wrong kind; and not a preferred situation. ;)
(You have dismissed the careful example without so much as a thought to its meaning.) :(

*But both could be fun while they last... but definitely the wrong kind of fun.
Also: it's the second time you say that about Bethesda, but even there I can't follow you. Sure, I deplore them becoming greedy the more they become a big company (and the managers take over) - they might become like EA at this rate - but as of yet, their games, both Fallout and especially TES were fantastic games.
Doesn't matter in the least. Their games have merit for what they are mechanically, but they bear little relation to the series—outside of the use of a few nouns.

Ask yourself if a game like "Wheel of Fortune" could pass muster as an official Elder-Scrolls sequel.
(Go passed the superficial place setting; you can dress it up however you like.)
I have the strong feeling you're making the connection between the old fallout and Beth's one, and again do not consider it a sequel, because it doesn't look enough like the old game. Apparently, recreating the lore, worldbuilding and atmosphere is of little importance to you in regard to being a sequel; I have the distinct feeling the actual gameplay must be the same as well.
I wish they had, they didn't; not in any aspect.

The game lacks the base core principles of the series, and the established gameplay, and presents a world 300 years post war—that looks like 30 years post war. The Fallout world setting is their future as assumed by their pop 50's culture—not a future obsessed with emulating their pop-50's culture. There were pro-reviewers that thought FO3 was set in the 1950's.

What you want of a sequel, I think, is actually rather something like a remastered version of the old games
I have never read of anyone asking for this of FO3; and have never expected or wanted that myself... However, that doesn't qualify any and all (even an excellent) games to be a Fallout sequel. By you logic (and I hate this silly expression, because the user most often has no idea,—and warps it to aid their own point), based on what I have read (and you can refute)... I think you would accept a Dig Dug clone if it had Vaults, Power Armor, The Enclave, and FEV—and providing that you thought it was fun. Tell me that you don't consider Fallout Shelter a legitimate contender for Fallout 5. And if your answer is 'no' then I'd like you to explain in detail why you think it is not.

The issue is one of superficial appearance and function. Like how some people buy a replacement dog, that looks the same, and they name it the same—and to some them it IS the same, such that they might actually forget they did it. It serves the [limited] function they want out of it; which is extremely sad and unfortunate for the dog IMO... though it gets a home, and gets fed. :|
*Point being it is not the same, and if one looks deeper, they will see personality differences, quirks, and habits that are not at all like Fluffy.
(This is clearly not 'Son of Fluffy'; and FO3 is practically a Cuckoo chick in the nest.)

If all someone wants is a Fallout themed hiking simulator, they can't go wrong in choosing FO3, but they should not expect it to have the heart and soul of the series, nor offer the same narrative depth, style of play, or mechanical integration of the PC.; each hallmarks of the series, and expected to appear in some fashion in any sequel. FO3 is a costume solo LARP sim. By and of itself, is great for what it provides, but it's a one-trick hollow husk of a Fallout game. Because it has only the superficial appearance... and offers nothing else from the series.

It's like if Disney had produced "George Orwell's Animal Farm II", and it used its standard boilerplate; producing a film with all of the landmarks and characters having a new adventure (even the deceased ones—now strangely not), and a script with the depth of a Gummy Bears episode; sure... the kids would love it.

svdp
Acolyte
Posts: 80
Joined: January 14th, 2016, 2:25 pm

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by svdp » March 1st, 2019, 3:57 pm

"Flying without a plane or parachute is definitely the wrong kind"

That's not flying, it's floating. ;-) No-one claims the main task of an airplane is to float straight down. :-)

Ah well... I think we've expressed our ideas about it thoroughly, and can add little more that hasn't already been said.

It's not like I can't understand what you're trying to say, but it's just the measurement to which you uphold your criteria that seems rather unsubstantiated - well, unless in a purely subjective context. If one is going to extremes, and for instance say: "Well, would you consider it a BT sequel if it was a WW2 FPS shooter but they named it "Bards' tale 4"?"... well, no. But every position can be made absurd if you bring it to extremes. The problem with your criteria as, for instance, having "soul", is, that it is impossibly vague, and inherently arbitrary, and can be used by anyone, every time, if that person feels it's not "soul"-like enough - which makes it superfluous as an argument.

If one uses that as a criterium and find it a valid argument, and one guy says Fallout 3 had soul, and the other says it has not, then both have exactly as much validity, which means both are right, even they express completely opposite claims. Well, good luck with any such debate, then.


Edit: "There were pro-reviewers that thought FO3 was set in the 1950's."

They must have somehow overlooked the flying robots, then. ;-) Or their knowledge of the 50ies must have been deplorable. :-p

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3730
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by Gizmo » March 1st, 2019, 4:18 pm

svdp wrote:
March 1st, 2019, 3:57 pm
"Flying without a plane or parachute is definitely the wrong kind"

That's not flying, it's floating. ;-) No-one claims the main task of an airplane is to float straight down. :-)
Yes... but of course this is what comes of [us or any] taking the tangent path of trying to pick a apart analogies—as if that would disprove any point; analogies need not make sense, they need only cast the issue in a different light. To clarify—even with nonsense [if need be]. One could make an analogy with Smurfs, but good luck trying to disprove anything by asserting they don't exist. :D
It's not like I can't understand what you're trying to say, but it's just the measurement to which you uphold your criteria that seems rather unsubstantiated - well, unless in a purely subjective context. If one is going to extremes, and for instance say: "Well, would you consider it a BT sequel if it was a WW2 FPS shooter but they named it "Bards' tale 4"?"... well, no. But every position can be made absurd if you bring it to extremes.
One can never know the other's line between subtle and hammer-strike. If you are open to subtle, that's great.
The problem with your references as, for instance, having "soul", is, that it is impossibly vague, and inherently arbitrary, and can be used by anyone, every time, if that person feels it's not "soul"-like enough - which makes it superfluous as an argument.
Because you choose for it to be. It was not meant to convince of anything, it was meant as a warning for those who might actually have hope of it delivering on the implied promise.

Try this: Apply that same quote as a warning against FO:76 to FO3 players.
(And of course we, needn't bother that FO:76 is not a sequel of FO3; but I bet a lot of people assumed it was.)
If one uses that as a criterium and find it a valid argument, and one guy says Fallout 3 had soul, and the other says it has not, then both have exactly as much validity, which means both are right, even they express completely opposite claims. Well, good luck with any such debate, then.
And they are both talking about something else than the other. The same quote of praise can be given to Opera and Grunge-metal.

The key is to view the position of the other from given examples, interpret their statements as supporting their own argument (even if you don't believe a word of it) and, then not waste time disputing tangents, and what you can surmise they never meant. (This also might reveal what they value, and one can shape their argument towards that.)

We are each perceiving the other as missing a fundamental understanding; but not the same one.
(Like two people assembling the same jigsaw puzzle [together], each with a different image in mind.)

Dork Mage
Scholar
Posts: 212
Joined: May 13th, 2013, 5:58 pm

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by Dork Mage » March 1st, 2019, 8:26 pm

svdp wrote:
March 1st, 2019, 1:44 pm
Well, we seem to agree on that part, then. For me, that stance is simply absurd, however. It's like claiming the primary task of a Boeing 777 isn't flying people around, but is being a sequel to the 747 - because the company said it would be a sequel... but you don't find it a "real sequel" because the airplanes don't look alike enough, and thus it's no good.
Actually this is a good analogy: the 777 is NOT a "real" sequel of the 747 - it lacks a upper deck.

BT4 may be a "good" RPG-lite but it lacks the game play elements of BT1-3 which makes it NOT a "real" sequel.

ETA: fixed quote ~thebruce0

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3730
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by Gizmo » March 1st, 2019, 9:32 pm

svdp wrote:
March 1st, 2019, 1:44 pm
Well, we seem to agree on that part, then. For me, that stance is simply absurd, however. It's like claiming the primary task of a Boeing 777 isn't flying people around, but is being a sequel to the 747 - because the company said it would be a sequel... but you don't find it a "real sequel" because the airplanes don't look alike enough, and thus it's no good.
What's interesting here, is that 700 series Boeing jets are named in advance (and not all names are used yet), and that the component numbers have meaning that can indicate class & features. Also some were custom orders (built with certain tasks & services in mind).

The 737 is a medium range twin engine, the 747 a four engine long range; with the 767 a twin engine. These are not meant as incremental improvements, or an implied continuance. These are product codes...and yeah, this is picking apart a tangent; but I think that in this case, it serves well as a reverse analogy. Because the names of these games are not —supposed to be— product codes.

Let's as example consider a Book 1, 2, and 3 of a generic adventure series. Each book could take place in a different millennium, and yet the author could string a common thread through each, and have them be a matched set... Not unlike Warhammer & W40k actually. But if one was a western, the other a medical thriller, and the last was a biography... it wouldn't matter if they were all about the same characters over the course of a few months... The books don't fit together. There is no familiar homecoming for the returning fan; just a couple familiar names. Do you think that ALL Nintendo games with Mario are sequels? [Rhetorical of course ;)]
____

In the case of Warhammer there is a great example, in that they have a dozen IP games, that span the gamut from RTS to FPS, to turn based, to third person hack-n-slash. They all include more than enough franchise material to qualify as sequels by many opinions I've seen posted in favor of FO3, and other [contested] titles. And yet most aren't, and the companies don't push them as such—but it isn't because they don't. One cannot rationalize Spacemarine as a sequel to Dawn of War, or Space Hulk: Tactics as a sequel to Space Hulk: Deathwing—and these two are even based on the same sub-game.

None of these Warhammer games offer even loosely related gameplay unlike most of the TES games, and most of the Bard's Tale games, most of the Fallout games... and generally most any sequel I've seen; and the same studio made Spacemarine as made Dawn of War.

As a last bit, would you consider an "Eye of the Beholder IV" that played like Mage's Tale or Torment to qualify just for having the name, some of the same monsters, and set underneath the city of Waterdeep? Would the merit of these games give them a pass? If not, do you still give Bethesda a pass?

svdp
Acolyte
Posts: 80
Joined: January 14th, 2016, 2:25 pm

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by svdp » March 2nd, 2019, 7:55 am

And thus the debate continues... ;-)

"If not, do you still give Bethesda a pass?"

As of yet, I gave them a pass, even for Fallout, though I'm actually more of a TES-fan. It's difficult to speculate whether or not I would with some game or another compared to another kind of game. I guess I would already have an idea whether I would 1)like it, and 2)find it a sequel (for myself) before I bought it, and in extremis, I would find out when playing it. But it's clear I have a far greater tolerance then you, in this respect. I have no problems with other playing-styles or added aspects that are completely novel. As for the "soul"; well, that's an individual assessment.

"Actually this is a good analogy: the 777 is NOT a "real" sequel of the 747 - it lacks a upper deck."

And there we have it. If Boeing says it's a sequel, and it's a sequel within the numbering of the line they have, and it performs the same main task and is a continuation of the line (it's a replacement of the 747), then it can be considered a sequel. (Not saying it is all that, but it was meant as an analogy.) You saying it has no upper deck has nothing to do with it, and exactly makes the point I was trying to make: why would the upperdeck matter? What if someone else says it's not the upperdeck that makes it no "true sequel", but the fact they use other engines, or the wings differ, etc.? If it was a parachute, yes, you could say it's not a sequel, because it does not perform the same main task, and it's not even an airplane - just like an FPS wouldn't be an RPG.

I've tried over and over to explain this, but the fact is and remains, that there is NO objective standard to speak of a "true" versus an "untrue" sequel. The fact one doesn't find it such, is purely based on your own expectations and mind. That would be true even if Inxile had made a WW2 FPS as a sequel: then that *would* have been the sequel. It would be one where I would not think of as a sequel, true, but even then I would accept that this is because of my own expectations, but I would *not* complain (well, certainly not whine) about it of Inxile having "scammed" or 'lied' to me, if they had shown a demo of a WW2 FPS and/or told you what they envisaged for it, purely because I saw the word "sequel".

If you are already aware a "true sequel" does not exist except in your own mind, and thus is subjective to each individual, then you should pay extra attention to what is shown and said, not less. If you don't like what you see or hear - and it being a "true sequel" is more important for you than it being a sequel that gives enjoyment, don't buy it. I had quite a good idea what they were going for, fairly at the earliest start; I have no extra-ordinary powers of deduction, but I DO tend not let my own wishful thinking (in seeing the word "sequel" for instance) get the better of me. and the difference of this more open, but also more objective mentality is, that I don't feel cheated, and I've enjoyed it immensely, and the lore, worldbuilding and atmosphere were close enough to be considered a fairly good sequel apart from it being a fairly good game.

Thus, what you consider a parachute (or a parachute having the same task as an airplane, which is not true and why I said your stance, to me, comes over as absurd), I consider as an airplane that basically performs the same tasks as the older airplanes before it. Is it the same? No. Aren't there things one would have liked to see that weren't in there? No doubt. But there is a difference between "I would like to have seen this or that feature" and claiming it's the "wrong kind of fun" because it didn't deliver on ones' own assumed expectations.

I think I saw a list in one of your(?) posts, gizmo, where you had a whole set of things that you would have wanted in the game. Now, don't get me wrong: with most of it, I was thinking; yeah, that would have been cool. And In could probably add some more. But at the same time, I was thinking: those are details and don't go to the core-issue at all. Even if all were in it, you still could lack a "soul". Even if none were in it, you could have a "soul". It just depends on what someone thinks a "soul" of a game is, or needs to be.

The game is not perfect, and there a lot of improvements I can see as well, but ultimately, that has nothing to do with the concept of a "true sequel". And you can't argue with vague, inherently subjective elements like that - well, I mean, one can, but they're also inherently worthless, since they can always be applied, even for contrary statements and claims. For instance, you say the game is not atmospheric; I found it to be very atmospheric. Well, then. I used the same argument as you. For you it's apparently a major factor to it being a true sequel. So your claim is, that it's not a true sequel. If I use reciprocity of argument, that means I can claim, with as much validity, that it IS a true sequel.

Well, there you go. Apparently, when we follow your subjective stance, we're both right, even with totally opposing claims. It's... I mean, it's senseless to try to debate anything in that regard. The only thing one can say about it, then - as I did numerous times - is to acknowledge, since both claims can be considered true when using vague and subjective criteria - that the issue is in the individual and his expectations one had, NOT in the game itself.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3730
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by Gizmo » March 2nd, 2019, 8:53 am

svdp wrote:
March 2nd, 2019, 7:55 am
If you don't like what you see or hear - and it being a "true sequel" is more important for you than it being a sequel that gives enjoyment, don't buy it.
This is turning a blind eye to the damage. [IE. If you don't like Highlander 2 & 3, just pretend they didn't happen.] Such works deteriorate the value of the whole.

*Like as with the original TMNT IP, that went from this:
Image


...to this:
Image

Which has become almost universally accepted as the TMNT concept.
Just as the Fallout IP is become recognized to mean this:
Image
Thus, what you consider a parachute (or a parachute having the same task as an airplane, which is not true and why I said your stance, to me, comes over as absurd),
I didn't consider the parachute as meaning anything other than "Not having one in freefall is bad"; this isn't allegory, and not everything stands for something else.
I consider as an airplane that basically performs the same tasks as the older airplanes before it. Is it the same? No. Aren't there things one would have liked to see that weren't in there? No doubt. But there is a difference between "I would like to have seen this or that feature" and claiming it's the "wrong kind of fun" because it didn't deliver on ones' own assumed expectations.
Isolated differences are inconsequential, we are talking about fundamental design schism. As in planes that run on different fuels, and some that lack cabin pressurization.
I think I saw a list in one of your(?) posts, gizmo, where you had a whole set of things that you would have wanted in the game. Now, don't get me wrong: with most of it, I was thinking; yeah, that would have been cool. And In could probably add some more. But at the same time, I was thinking: those are details and don't go to the core-issue at all. Even if all were in it, you still could lack a "soul". Even if none were in it, you could have a "soul". It just depends on what someone thinks a "soul" of a game is, or needs to be.
Yeah... the problem is that the 'soul' is within the series whether one can nail it down and identify it or not... but if you omit everything, then you don't have it—regardless. BT4 did not omit everything, but do you really think of a few character and place names as the soul of the series?
For instance, you say the game is not atmospheric; I found it to be very atmospheric.
Think about that. Really think about that. There is atmosphere, but what kind? Do you distinguish between the atmosphere of Ultima, Stonekeep, Skyrim, and Betrayal at Krondor? Or between Planescape and Forgotten Realms? Between Fallout and Stalker, Underrail? How about BT3 and BT:2004? And on that note, do you consider BT:2004 a valid sequel candidate, had they chosen to name it BT4?

Well, then. I used the same argument as you. For you it's apparently a major factor to it being a true sequel.
That's because at minimum it is disingenuous not to be, but in the extreme cases it's fan abuse.
So your claim is, that it's not a true sequel. If I use reciprocity of argument, that means I can claim, with as much validity, that it IS a true sequel.
Please do; itemized. I would very much like (and have previously asked) for detailed example other than "I liked it" and "I thought it was fine". What I want to know is how do you justify the use of a non-descriptive label... for what aspect [besides a few nouns] from the Bard's Tale is in BT4? (Same goes for FO3&4 if you'll oblige.)

_noblesse_oblige_
Master
Posts: 1191
Joined: July 13th, 2015, 7:18 pm

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by _noblesse_oblige_ » March 2nd, 2019, 5:49 pm

svdp wrote:
February 28th, 2019, 3:56 pm
BlakeStone wrote:
February 24th, 2019, 9:27 am
Staehrminator, add me to your count of people who love this game.

I'm a backer and I just finished the game yesterday.
It was a sequel and it was a good sequel.
I played without auto mapping and used graph paper along with grid movement. I loved it.
It really took me back to 1985 when I played the first Bard's Tale on a 8088 processor.
The story line was a true sequel and the music was awesome with all the ear worm magic, great job to all involved at inXile.

Not sure why there's so much anger from other backers. A good argument for a forum ignore button.
My thoughts exactly. I can understand that people are disappointed because the game doesn't fulfill all there imagined expectations. What I can not comprehend, is that they refuse to see it's exactly those expectations that cause the disappointment, and NOT the game itself.

If it were not due to the a priori expectations of the individuals involved, and the game was generally bad, then even backers like us would say so. It's not like we have problems giving critique, after all. And far from us to say it's a perfect game as it is - there were certainly things that could have been improved on. However... We find it a good game, and a reasonable sequel - while others do not. But it's clear this is due to the expectations they assumed it had, in front. I would argue - as I did - that if one manages ones' expectations and be reasonable in ascertaining what constitutes a sequel - and not "a sequel that concurs what I had in mind" - and what is a "good game" (aka, giving enjoyment), the BT 4 can be both considered a sequel and a good game.
I see you found the ability to use quote tags for someone with whom you agree. Hopefully, you will also have the courtesy to use them when quoting people you disagree with.
cmibl<enter>

_noblesse_oblige_
Master
Posts: 1191
Joined: July 13th, 2015, 7:18 pm

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by _noblesse_oblige_ » March 2nd, 2019, 5:56 pm

"Why, then, do you care enough about other people's opinions to call them whining, if you're accepting of the fact that people are going to have differing opinions. Why bother to say anything at all?"

Because saying an opinion, and whining, are not the same things. One whines when one is whining - obviously. One is not whining merely by expressing an opinion. It's only the MANNER in which one is expressing it, that can, or can not, constitute whining.
Do you have examples of the whining you're talking about?
Did you ever consider that you what you consider to be whining is subjective and not as "obvious" as you think it is?
As for bothering: it's because, contrary to some, maybe, I consider that opinions have some objective value, but only in as much as they're being substantiated by logical arguments, rationale reasoning, and factual grounding.
So you consider what other people consider to be real sequel to be entirely subjective, yet consider some opinions to be objective?
cmibl<enter>

_noblesse_oblige_
Master
Posts: 1191
Joined: July 13th, 2015, 7:18 pm

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by _noblesse_oblige_ » March 2nd, 2019, 6:05 pm

"Can you back up your certainty with a statistical breakdown of what was most complained about?"

I've gone over the first 200 comments viewable on the kickstarter site of BT4... 3 of them explicitly mentioned it "not being a sequel".
The first 200 comments on the Barrows Deep KS site? That was way before the game was released and people were still hoping that inXile was going to make an actual sequel. Try looking at the comments on Steam after the game was released.
"What's your definition of a sequel?"

That would be, of course, the dictionary definition of a sequel, because if one let every person use his/her own definition, there's no end to it:

"a published, broadcast, or recorded work that continues the story or develops the theme of an earlier one."
Yes, and you still think Barrows Deep is somehow a Bard's Tale sequel in light of that definition? :lol:
"there was a general consensus on this board about what would constitute a real sequel and what was delivered did not meet those criteria."

Really? Can you point me to the page where it was established that a majority of all players of BT 4 had a general consensus on a particular idea of what a "real" sequel of BT 4 would be, and what criteria it needed?
Why do you keep putting words in my mouth? Where did this "majority of all players of BT 4" come from? Barrows Deep hadn't even been released when the consensus was formed. And no one said anything about a majority of all players of anything. What you were told was that of the people actively contributing in this forum, trying to help inXile establish a reasonable course towards a BT sequel, this group did form a general consensus.
cmibl<enter>

svdp
Acolyte
Posts: 80
Joined: January 14th, 2016, 2:25 pm

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by svdp » March 5th, 2019, 8:17 am

_noblesse_oblige_ wrote:
March 2nd, 2019, 5:49 pm
svdp wrote:
February 28th, 2019, 3:56 pm
BlakeStone wrote:
February 24th, 2019, 9:27 am
Staehrminator, add me to your count of people who love this game.

I'm a backer and I just finished the game yesterday.
It was a sequel and it was a good sequel.
I played without auto mapping and used graph paper along with grid movement. I loved it.
It really took me back to 1985 when I played the first Bard's Tale on a 8088 processor.
The story line was a true sequel and the music was awesome with all the ear worm magic, great job to all involved at inXile.

Not sure why there's so much anger from other backers. A good argument for a forum ignore button.
My thoughts exactly. I can understand that people are disappointed because the game doesn't fulfill all there imagined expectations. What I can not comprehend, is that they refuse to see it's exactly those expectations that cause the disappointment, and NOT the game itself.

If it were not due to the a priori expectations of the individuals involved, and the game was generally bad, then even backers like us would say so. It's not like we have problems giving critique, after all. And far from us to say it's a perfect game as it is - there were certainly things that could have been improved on. However... We find it a good game, and a reasonable sequel - while others do not. But it's clear this is due to the expectations they assumed it had, in front. I would argue - as I did - that if one manages ones' expectations and be reasonable in ascertaining what constitutes a sequel - and not "a sequel that concurs what I had in mind" - and what is a "good game" (aka, giving enjoyment), the BT 4 can be both considered a sequel and a good game.
I see you found the ability to use quote tags for someone with whom you agree. Hopefully, you will also have the courtesy to use them when quoting people you disagree with.
That depends. If something is relatively short or argued in a compact matter, to which I can respond as one element, than yes. If it's long or if myriads of arguments are used, I prefer not to do so, and choose those elements I think need further nuance or response.

That's all there is to it, so having long toes about it won't change anything.

User avatar
TZODnmr2k5
Initiate
Posts: 17
Joined: March 31st, 2019, 8:11 pm

Re: I'm one of the 2 people who genuinely love this game

Post by TZODnmr2k5 » April 7th, 2019, 1:01 pm

This IS a proper sequel as it's been more than a decade since BT3, and in that time technologies have changed/advanced drastically, and it would be unrealistic for them to limit themselves for their next game by sticking with an outdated format...

That said, I would have loved to have seen a grimrock-styled featured format, but other than the horrid optimization, I'm pretty enamored by this game as is, otherwise I would have gotten a refund! Plus, they included a grid-styled movement system for all of us grid-heads to froth over! :mrgreen:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest