PDA

View Full Version : The Fire Extinguisher (How to think like a Deus Ex game developer)



Dead-Eye
1st Oct 2009, 08:33
Today I made a discovery. As I was thinking about Deus Ex today I happened to glance my eyes on a fire extinguisher and asked myself "How many time's have I seen someone use a fire extinguisher to knock someone out?". This lead me to realize how one can think like a Deus Ex game developer did back when they where making the game.

This is the thought that went through my head when I thought about just a fire extinguisher:
Ask yourself all the uses of a fire extinguisher:
*You can use it to put out fire's.
*You can use it to knock someone out.
*You can use it to blind someone monetarily by spraying it in their face.
*You can put a small one in your jacket.
*You can theoretically sell one if you have one.
*You can shoot off the nozzle to turn it into a short range torpedo.
*.etc

Also think about different types of Fire Extinguishers:
*There are red ones.
*There are white ones.
*There are big ones and little ones.
*There are type ABC
*Type D
*Type AB
*.etc

There are so many possibility's for a fire extinguisher that no one person can possibly predict them all and taking into consideration that a Fire Extinguisher is just one item in the game it really sets a sort of prospective for the game as a whole. I know that the Fire Extinguisher did not have as many uses in Deus Ex but keep in mind the game was limited by the Game Engine. Nowadays with physics and rag dolls I think the Deus Ex developers would have thought about this kind of stuff when they where making the fire extinguisher class.

When you allow for all sorts of possibility in a game the game becomes a lot more fun to play in it's own right. Take for example Saints Row 2 and why it is a much better game then GTA4. There is so much possibility in that game that something I've never seen before or never expected could happen happens all the time. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/312-Saints-Row-2

This is something that games like Gears of War, Bioshock and Call of Duty 4 are highly lacking in. It seems that the developers are so afraid that the player might play the game differently then how the developers intended the game to be played that they put up giant walls to make sure stuff like that docent happen. As such the games have virtually no replay value and are only fun the first time but are never fun again.

In my experience the games that are most memorable for there game play are games that have these huge ranges of possibility. I still remember running through a forest as a Chinese helicopter was shooting at me in Battlefield 2. It was loaded with seven guys flying right behind me on my footsteps but I turned around and shot the pilot in the head with a only a pistol and one bullet, getting all seven kills when it crashed. I also remember in Half Life 2 when I shot down a flying caterpillar thing battle tank thing (You know what I'm taking about) and it just happened to land right next to me almost killing me.

This is how developers should thing when making a video game. Even though it opens the doors to more bugs I would rather have a more dynamic game with crazy stuff happening then a bug free game. Even the bugs give the game a character that other games like Call of Duty 4 lack. A lot of bugs make the game more interesting.

Really if the game is not surprising it's own game developers then your not doing your job right. Just take care of the show stopping bugs and the bugs that brake the game. Other then that if a player throws a fire extinguisher in the water that happens to land on a rock with enough force to brake off the nozal making the fire extinguisher rocket back at the player, killing them. That's not a bug, that's fracking awesome!

Dazza
1st Oct 2009, 08:40
I agree. It definitely serves its purpose in keeping gameplay exciting, fresh and replayable. Games that become repetitive in their gameplay style become no fun. Plus having items, like fire extinguishers for example, with multiple player interactions/uses is always fun and entertaining. I hope EM definitely incorporate this sort of thinking when developing items.

minus0ne
1st Oct 2009, 10:27
I also agree and not in the least because of my love for interactivity with the game environment and items. I wouldn't call DX's interactivity limited (not even by today's standards), but it was especially well done for its time. The extinguisher would extinguish you if you were on fire but you could also use it as makeshift pepper-spray (also you could shoot it to the same effect). It was a great little example of giving you tools other than weapons to use, I hope DX3 can expand on this.

Blade_hunter
1st Oct 2009, 11:22
You aren't the only one to think about the multipurpose weapons / items ;) and it's good for me to see a post like that

A beer bottle

Replenish a small amount of health if it contains beer
A gift for NPCs
An improvised weapon melee and even ranged
A weapon part for molotov cocktails
A distraction item that you can throw to attract an enemy into a desired place
A joke item to to kill or knock guards second you put poison or sleeping pills

An aerosol

To blind enemies eyes if aimed at
Use it as an improvised flamethrower with a lighter in front of it
Use them as an improvised grenade.
A rocket by putting one in hot water

I have a ton of ideas about that ...

rokstrombo
1st Oct 2009, 12:42
I would like to see more interactivity and improvisation in Deus Ex 3 as well. One detail which I think detracts from a lot of first person shooters is that enemies have too many hit points. As hilarious as it was to hear the MJ12 Commandos exclaiming "Ooh! OOh! Oooh! OoOh! Ooh! Ooh! OOOH! Ooh! OOh! OooH! Yeeaaaarrghrrrr!" as they were gradually cut down by my silenced assault rifle, it didn't encourage a lot of confidence in my ability to do anything meaningful with a fire extinguisher or packet of soy food.

Similarly, it can be frustrating to waste an entire magazine of 10 mm bullets trying to take out a deployed LAM or gas grenade due to a virtual dice throw. If the player's reward for creativity is the depletion of their painfully hoarded inventory or enduring a 4 minute load time so they can retry, they will be less likely to appreciate the freedom provided to improvise and experiment. After so many years of first person shooters, this can make a game seem very mechanical.

Fortunately, the absence of weapon skills and a new hand-to-hand combat system seems to suggest that these two factors may not be such an issue in Deus Ex 3.

gamer0004
1st Oct 2009, 13:08
It's called "emergent gameplay" and it is typical of any Warren game.

mad_red
1st Oct 2009, 14:37
I'm still waiting for nethack to hit 3d.

Although I want to retain the visual style. I must remain an @, and my enemies must remain their respective ASCII characters. But we shall be glorious animated 3d ASCII characters.


After so many years of first person shooters, this can make a game seem very mechanical.

Yeah that's a case where skill-based aiming is pretty stupid. But you know the difference between "dumbing down" and "improving"? It's to strip away any complicating factors, like weapon skills or health packs, as opposed to ironing out the kinks and improving on the concept. It would be easy to fix a few annoying exceptions, but apparently it's even easier to strip away features entire, affecting the experience as a whole.

Laokin
1st Oct 2009, 20:11
I'm still waiting for nethack to hit 3d.

Although I want to retain the visual style. I must remain an @, and my enemies must remain their respective ASCII characters. But we shall be glorious animated 3d ASCII characters.



Yeah that's a case where skill-based aiming is pretty stupid. But you know the difference between "dumbing down" and "improving"? It's to strip away any complicating factors, like weapon skills or health packs, as opposed to ironing out the kinks and improving on the concept. It would be easy to fix a few annoying exceptions, but apparently it's even easier to strip away features entire, affecting the experience as a whole.

Dice rolls for accuracy for a super secret trained military man augmented and bred to be a weapon, is just silly.

That was the one part about Deus Ex that I absolutely hated. I like the other skill points, but the ones that effected aim to me broke immersion, it just doesn't make sense on paper or in practice. Was it a game breaker? Almost for me. I first played DX when it came out -- I downloaded the demo and my buddy was like "We have to get this game." Twenty minutes later I now owned this game -- the beginning of it really really made me hate the stat system. I never finished it. DX:IW came out. Despite the obvious flaws I completed that game immediately. My buddy than told me how much better the first game was, so now being older I went back to his GOTY edition and realized why it was a better game than IW. The intentionally crippling your accuracy was still a big draw back for me, obviously only until I maxed out the core weapons I used. At this point in time I realized why this too was bad design, since none of the weapons I maxed out behaved in any sort of realistic manner.

Rule number one in game design, never intentionally cripple the player for any reason. This is the only fault (not counting A.I. which was atrocious even for it's time) that I could come up with for the game. Resident Evil comes to mind. Resident Evil 5 is a pretty weak game. Why? Because what highly trained operative from ANY division can't shoot and move at the same time? I understand they crippled you to make the game harder and to keep the zombies slow, but this is just poor design. Send more zombies, make them do more damage (1 or 2 hits and you die) and allow you to move whilst shooting and problem solved.

Now, to take skill points out all together is just bad design as well, since the skills had no other adverse effects and only added to the depth of the game. It gave you the choice to max swimming as a stat or allowed you to have the aug aqualung. While the active aug might have been a better choice for a primarily water loving JC, swimming boosted you enough to pick up all the little secrets in the water with the combo of rebreathers. This is needed depth and warranted complexity.

Making the lock picks and multi tool the same tool was also an unneeded change. How does that multi tool unlock a lock that isn't digital anyway? Makes no sense. Removing lock picking as a stat was also bad design, as now anybody could get into everything, removing any penalty to choice, making choice a moot point as it wasn't any longer an important part of game play.

In short, RPG's always allowed for skills + attribute points. Aug's are skills, Skills are attribute points. Taking one away removes an amazing amount of depth to the game and allows for what is known for "cookie cutter" builds. Cookie Cutter builds are essentially the jack of all trades master of all, when it should be a master of none. It severely breaks balance making you generally overpowered making the objectives of the game absolutely trivial.

In short, I, as well as many others, are glad they removed the stats for aiming..... but on the other hand would much rather deal with the crutch than remove the rest of the attribute points all together. The obvious middle ground here is to just remove skill points associated with aiming, and leave the rest in... instead they opt to make both parties unhappy by making arbitrary changes that don't actual come with a benefit, only a penalty in the core design principles of what "Deus Ex" stood for.

You don't have to agree with me... and I'm not asking you to, but you should at very least assume that my proposition was at least... "fair."

P.S.

They could of just started with the aiming skill higher than it was at the beginning of the game and made the cap slightly lower. Deadly accurate is fine for one shot, but to have virtually no spray patterns is absurd. Maybe the concept of skill induced accuracy is fine, just in need of an overall "tweak." In short, at the start of the game one should have a reasonably effective proficiency with firearms and over time allowed you to become the deadliest person with a pistol within reason.

Maybe it was just slightly too harsh. This is my biggest gripe with Vampire: Bloodlines as well. Masquerade Redemption was such a much better game, it too -- had fire arms and flamethrowers, but still was a traditional RPG. Bloodlines tried to apply Deus Ex philosophy where it didn't belong (because they didn't do it properly, and in turn ruined the Intellectual Property and most importantly put Troika out of business. It sold merely 72,000 units, for such a "great" game this is remarkably low.)

Blade_hunter
1st Oct 2009, 20:41
I think people attack the wrong problem of the game, having stats that manage accuracy or at least how easy you can be efficient with a weapon, that even a part of an RPG even if it use the same FPS mechanics like Deus Ex use.
The only problem is on the aiming system itself.
It takes too much time to focus there is a lot of games who uses expandable crosshairs who perform much better than Deus Ex in that therms.
If it was much faster in the lower skills and kept some inconvenients but with a much reduced effect at the highest skills, you obtain a great and homogeneous action side and even keep a balance between all weapons.
The game will be tactical enough to don't be run and gun FPS, but quickly usable and much more realistic and fun for the combat.

Solving some problems via a removal of a thing that wasn't the problem isn't the right solution IMO, In the first rainbow six there is expandable crosshairs, this is even the first game to have it (the first I know)
this systems exists to remove the run and gun gameplay, because when you run you can't aim efficiently and waste a lot of ammo in the air even if your own ability to follow a target by painting the crosshair on the enemy is good.


Believe me or not but the aiming system of the game was the main flaw in therms of action.
There is some games who have skills and the weapons never needed an ultimate skill level to have satisfying weapons.
There is a too big canyon between the lowest skills and the highest, a quasi unusable aim and a quasi static aim.

I think we should return back to the main subject instead of talking about that here

Laokin
1st Oct 2009, 20:52
I think people attack the wrong problem of the game, having stats that manage accuracy or at least how easy you can be efficient with a weapon, that even a part of an RPG even if it use the same FPS mechanics like Deus Ex use.
The only problem is on the aiming system itself.
It takes too much time to focus there is a lot of games who uses expandable crosshairs who perform much better than Deus Ex in that therms.
If it was much faster in the lower skills and kept some inconvenients but with a much reduced effect at the highest skills, you obtain a great and homogeneous action side and even keep a balance between all weapons.
The game will be tactical enough to don't be run and gun FPS, but quickly usable and much more realistic and fun for the combat.

Solving some problems via a removal of a thing that wasn't the problem isn't the right solution IMO, In the first rainbow six there is expandable crosshairs, this is even the first game to have it (the first I know)
this systems exists to remove the run and gun gameplay, because when you run you can't aim efficiently and waste a lot of ammo in the air even if your own ability to follow a target by painting the crosshair on the enemy is good.


Believe me or not but the aiming system of the game was the main flaw in therms of action.
There is some games who have skills and the weapons never needed an ultimate skill level to have satisfying weapons.
There is a too big canyon between the lowest skills and the highest, a quasi unusable aim and a quasi static aim.

I think we should return back to the main subject instead of talking about that here


Your response is pretty much in line with my post script. IMO, the change for the aiming skills was merely too drastic. It is after all, a HYBRID of FPS and RPG, although Deus Ex pretended it wasn't a hybrid at all, instead, it tried to pretend it was all RPG and no FPS despite the viewing perspective. I believe everybody realized this including Harvey and Warren, which is why the sequel ending up being so fantastically bad. It seems that game developers don't believe in moderate changes, but, only the extreme. If one extreme is wrong, the other extreme must be right. The opposite extreme proved to be wrong as well, so in our 3rd itteration you would imagine they would try to come up with a balance between the two, instead.... they stick with the second extreme and make changes according to other game releases of completely different Genre.

This is what Fall Out 3 did beautifully. They Balanced the two gameplay extremes. What they failed at though, was actually providing a good narrative, a graphically pleasing world, broken animations and an arbitrary third person mode. They too, fell to one popular extreme, this being the grey brown fest of modern games.

Granted, a post apocalyptic world shouldn't be pretty, but it shouldn't be unsatisfying either. They needed more color in their pallet, and better voice acting, and better use of the plot line devices.

The overall gameplay of FO3 was in fact very similar to Deus Ex, but the rest of the game was very lacking.

*They even stole the ingenious health system from the first Deus Ex.*

Oh and yes, interactivity is crucial. More realistic ways to use things in the environment equals a more satisfying experience. It's really the same principle as to why puzzles are enticing. When you figure out a clever way to use something you get a greater sense of accomplishment which is important in extending the life of the "fun" factor in your game.

They need to come up with ways to make ordinary items impromptu tools with varying weights of effectiveness.

I.E.

Quake had the lightning gun, if you shot the lightning gun in water it zapped everything in it... including your self, which made you think about what weapon was best for water enemies under certain circumstances. Bioshock was actually the only other game that applied effect. It needs to be more than one thing though, I'd like to see physics actually be physics in games. If something is physically impossible (like shooting a propane tank to make it explode) than it shouldn't be possible in the game either. These are used for that cheesy generic movie feeling, which IMO, shouldn't apply to games. We as a people are smarter than that. Cars exploding in GTA 4? Wtf, the rest of the game took a much more realistic approach, so why did this seemingly arcade staple stick? When you flip a car, it might, keyword, go on fire. If there is an explosion at all, it's not flinging chunks of car and lifting it 20 feet off the ground, it's just a volatile flash fire ball, and that's all you should see. Crashing through cars and denting your ride should eventually damage the engine which would stall the vehicle outright... not explode it.

I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired of the sillyness that pursues in entertainment, it does nothing for us as a people, in fact it only causes harm.

Do you know most people believe shooting a barbecue tank will make it explode? Under the 100% correct circumstances it might, but 99% of the time shooting the tank will do nothing but make it spin and leak out gas. It only enforces stupid thinking, which I for one... do not support.

Dead-Eye
1st Oct 2009, 22:31
Yes emergent gameplay that's what I'm trying to say.

@Laokin: It is really annoying when not only your ability to aim is compromised by your own skill but the skill of your character as well. It worked in Deus Ex because the A.I. was usually unaware of your presence but it was really annoying when they where shooting at you and you couldn't do a thing about it until later in the game. It was nice in IW that aiming skills where voided but I agree the voiding all skills was a mistake. I really hated that hacking was an augmentation in IW. The fact that you couldn't have both Cloak and Hacking at the same time completely ruined the game in and of it's self for me, not to mention all of the other flaws of IW.

It seems EM is going the rout of having skill points applied through augmentations. I'm OK with this so long as I can have hacking and clock at the same time. Still it dose seem to take away a little from the fantasy that one can get from using skills.

A good example of emergent gameplay in Deus Ex that I can remember is when I learned that by releasing the grays in the Versalife lab you can make the MIB's attack the MJ12 troopers.

Laokin
2nd Oct 2009, 01:40
Yes emergent gameplay that's what I'm trying to say.

@Laokin: It is really annoying when not only your ability to aim is compromised by your own skill but the skill of your character as well. It worked in Deus Ex because the A.I. was usually unaware of your presence but it was really annoying when they where shooting at you and you couldn't do a thing about it until later in the game. It was nice in IW that aiming skills where voided but I agree the voiding all skills was a mistake. I really hated that hacking was an augmentation in IW. The fact that you couldn't have both Cloak and Hacking at the same time completely ruined the game in and of it's self for me, not to mention all of the other flaws of IW.

It seems EM is going the rout of having skill points applied through augmentations. I'm OK with this so long as I can have hacking and clock at the same time. Still it dose seem to take away a little from the fantasy that one can get from using skills.

A good example of emergent gameplay in Deus Ex that I can remember is when I learned that by releasing the grays in the Versalife lab you can make the MIB's to attack the MJ12 troopers.

That isn't really "emergent gameplay." That was a scripted event. Emergent Gameplay is when players find exploits in a game that serve as a skillful and unpredicted way for certain events to take place.

I.E.

Grenade Jumping in the original Team Fortress. They were designed to send other players flying around, they were never intended to be used on yourself. This later became incorporated into the game so subsequent versions all had specially tuned forms of grenade bouncing.

Interestingly enough, this is why off hand grenades were removed from TF 2 entirely.

Oh, and as for not cloaking and hacking.... that's primarily the reason why the biomods were hot swapable. Also, hacking shouldn't have been an augmentation at all... that was just silly reasoning.

ArcR
2nd Oct 2009, 02:04
It's called "emergent gameplay" and it is typical of any Warren game.

+1

I'm tempted to get the disney game he is working on. He claims it's dark and not what you would expect of disney.

SemiAnonymous
2nd Oct 2009, 07:33
+1

I'm tempted to get the disney game he is working on. He claims it's dark and not what you would expect of disney.

And based on those Epic Mickey images released a while ago, I'm fully prepared to believe him. I just want to see it first.

Ashpolt
2nd Oct 2009, 09:14
Agreed. If it looks like that Epic Mickey artwork, I'll buy it, bringing my sum total of Wii games up to...4.

Blade_hunter
2nd Oct 2009, 14:07
I think the emergent gameplay is the fact there is elements that could be used in an "unexpectable" way.
Using beer bottles as weapons, a chair as a shield, using explosions to send violently a random crate to somebody and kill him by this way, those thing I think are elements of an emergent gameplay

A little Edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergent_gameplay
I find something interesting about the Emergent gameplay and there is something about the Emergent narrative a thing that could interest some persons over here

ZylonBane
2nd Oct 2009, 18:55
This is my biggest gripe with Vampire: Bloodlines as well. Masquerade Redemption was such a much better game, it too -- had fire arms and flamethrowers, but still was a traditional RPG. Bloodlines tried to apply Deus Ex philosophy where it didn't belong
Oh, this must be why PC gamers are still playing, praising, and modding Bloodlines to this day, while Redemption is all but forgotten.

You're a loony. Pretty much everything you post is wrong.

Dead-Eye
2nd Oct 2009, 21:03
That isn't really "emergent gameplay." That was a scripted event. Emergent Gameplay is when players find exploits in a game that serve as a skillful and unpredicted way for certain events to take place.


How is it not "emergent gameplay" when by releasing the grays in the Versalife labs the MIBs will kill off all the MJ12 troopers? I exploited a bug in the game that served as a skillful and unpredictable way to get ride of all the MJ12 troopers before they even realized I was a threat. They didn't script that into the game it's just a bug in how the developers set up the AI for MJ12 Trooper and the MIBs and how they relate to one another.

Blade_hunter
2nd Oct 2009, 21:14
I didn't responded to this but I have to admit it is one form ;)

lumpi
2nd Oct 2009, 22:50
This is how developers should thing when making a video game. Even though it opens the doors to more bugs I would rather have a more dynamic game with crazy stuff happening then a bug free game. Even the bugs give the game a character that other games like Call of Duty 4 lack. A lot of bugs make the game more interesting.

I like this!

Seriously, f#&% polish, give me a game instead, that gives the player so much freedom even the devlopers might be surprised at how someone plays a certain scene. I'd accept a few bugs in return.

Let's not forget that Deus Ex itself had some serious, show-stopping bugs (most of them graphics- or performance-related, though) and nobody cares. The priorities are seriously skewed in modern game design.

JCpies
3rd Oct 2009, 18:49
Yeah Fire extinguishers are fun. i'm gonna try this now but does anyone know if they can stop the laser tripwires like the pepper spray?

Blade_hunter
3rd Oct 2009, 20:50
Yes, because it throws smoke, and it can also blind people like the pepper gun the only bad thing is the fact they are non reusable but in therms of effectiveness it's effective :)

ZylonBane
3rd Oct 2009, 22:45
Let's not forget that Deus Ex itself had some serious, show-stopping bugs (most of them graphics- or performance-related, though) and nobody cares.
"Show-stopping bug" does not mean what you think it means. Name one bug DX had that prevented playing the game.

mad_red
4th Oct 2009, 00:04
This sounds like the kind of creative yet balanced thinking that's needed. DX1 was trying something with the aiming system, and didn't get it spot on, but the question is: what is it trying to do?

Personally, I enjoyed the random chance to miss. It doesn't just encourage strategy - big weapon recoil can do that too. Instead DX1 takes it one step further: You have to rely on strategy, because you can't just unload your clips and hope for the best, but you're 'crippled' too, so that even your carefully aimed shot isn't guaranteed to land. This way your plan might fail, the guards might get suspicious and even sound the alarm - you'll have to react quickly, think quickly, etc. Although the emphasis is on strategy, your Klingon aiming skills ensure that strategy alone won't save you.

I say most computer games can benefit from a certain measure of randomness. Computer games have set parameters that only push your skills up to a certain point before it isn't fun anymore - the AI can only be so good, the odds only so unfair. You can improve many areas of gameplay before you go for the random-chance quickfix. But it in the end it's hard to build in creativeness in a computer program that keeps throwing you off guard. There's only so many scripted events for unexpected stuff to keep you on your toes. Random chance to miss is one way to compensate for that and challenge the player further - think of it as a random chance for your gun to jam. It's not the only way to do things, and like anything else it can be unbalancing if not properly tweaked. DX1 overshot the mark, but for me that's no reason to do away with the entire concept.

PS: This subject is related to the OT: basically, the more stuff you can do with the more stuff you can find in-game, the more random stuff becomes.

Laokin
4th Oct 2009, 02:00
How is it not "emergent gameplay" when by releasing the grays in the Versalife labs the MIBs will kill off all the MJ12 troopers? I exploited a bug in the game that served as a skillful and unpredictable way to get ride of all the MJ12 troopers before they even realized I was a threat. They didn't script that into the game it's just a bug in how the developers set up the AI for MJ12 Trooper and the MIBs and how they relate to one another.

I'm sorry, I misread it, I though you meant the obvious.... the grays fighting the MJ-12 and the MIB's. Wasn't even aware of that bug, always get rid of the MJ-12 Commandos by blowing an MIB guy up next to a scientist. (essentially the same thing happens... just didn't know releasing the grays did the same thing.)


Oh, this must be why PC gamers are still playing, praising, and modding Bloodlines to this day, while Redemption is all but forgotten.

You're a loony. Pretty much everything you post is wrong.


And secondly, I'll address this guy.

WOW. I didn't realize that people still playing the game today means the sales of it were better than 72,000.

Uhuh, exactly. Nothing I stated as fact was indeed "wrong."


Secondly, It's my opinion that the game was worse than the original, and many of my friends that were even into the PnP game agree.

Third off, Bloodlines launched November 16th of '04. Masquerade Redemption released 4 years prior to that.

This makes Bloodlines nearly 5 years old, making Redemption nearly 10. Oh and did I forget to mention people still play redemption?

"It uses a heavily modified Quake 2 engine and is a lot closer to the PnP game than bloodlines. The multiplayer is one of the best features, it has a "story teller" mode which is not unlike the dungeon master feature you get in NWN." -Zadock

http://forums.hexus.net/hexus-gaming/171327-vampire-masquerade-redemption.html

The fact of the matter is Redemption has been alive for nearly 10 years and still has players playing online till this day.

Bloodlines had to cancel the multiplayer portion of the game because Troika was going bankrupt from making terrible games.

It's no wonder why fans of Deus Ex like Bloodlines as well. But when talking about WhiteWolf fan's, your dead opposite. They tend to treat Bloodlines like the "IW" of the Vampire series.

White Wolf was the company that created the Vampire: The Masquerade PnP game. Essentially meaning the hardcore vampire fans found virtually nothing to be found in Bloodlines.

While it may of been a good standalone game like people argue IW was has nothing to do with it completely abandoning most of what made The Masquerade appealing to begin with. Not only was the game not up to "par" but the storyline and "lore" were also totally baffling.

As for the community modding it and making patches, you can thank Valve for that... being on the source engine helps. The game only sold 72,000 copies compared to Deus Ex's over 1 million sales.

Really puts your argument in perspective. So you may like it, but the general consensus is it's trash, and nearly any White Wolf fan will agree.

Also, I'd love for you to post reference links to any other time I was ever wrong on this forum. The only thing I ever proclaimed as being a fact that I was wrong on, has something to do with the thief series, and I was referencing Thief:DS and apologized for the confusion.

Opinion: A personal view, attitude, or appraisal. One in which cannot be wrong.

Fact: Something that actually exists; reality; truth. Something in which is absolute.

In order to be "wrong" you have to say something is a fact, and have it turn out to be nonfactual.

Learn the difference.

So I'll say this again, Bloodlines may be better in your opinion, but FACT says Redemption sold more copies.

Redemption Debuted #3 on the PC sales charts the week it launched. More successful than roller-coaster tycoon which was # 4 on that list... which sold a total of 2.2 million copies.

So I'll say it again, Bloodlines was trash. Launched broken and unfinishable (Patch 1.2 Fixed the game breaking issues [all most, still rare ones that exist today]) later to have skills that were in the MANUAL added INTO the game by the community. The game is absolutely unplayable without the community patch.

Also, you have been defeated.

Planet Vampire has more recent activity in Redemption forums than Bloodline forums. So your statement people still play Bloodlines and not Redemption is A.) Absolutely wrong, because people still play both... and B.) More people play Redemption than Bloodlines (which only makes sense seeing as it sold nearly 10x as well, meaning there are approximately 1000% more copies of Redemption floating around peoples houses than Bloodlines.)

K, thanks.

:whistle:

The difference between somebody like me and somebody like you... is I don't claim to know things or make statements that are absolute when I'm unsure. I do the intelligent thing -- research first.

Maybe you will learn something valuable from this completely trivial "argument."

It's in quotes, because it's technically not an argument -- your just making untrue statements... which makes you look foolish, not to mention you saying my posts are "usually" wrong, my posts are 99.9% opinion based. They usually talk about hypothetical in game development, I've had numerous upon numerous discussions with the obviously more intelligent members of this forum, you don't see any of them calling me "wrong" do you? That remainder, (0.1%) is when I am posting something that is factual, which is never wrong... because I think before I speak, if I realize I'm unsure or have any doubt to what I am saying... I do the logical: Don't say it, or research it first. Bar the occasional slip up... (In which I always agree that I was wrong, and apologize -- Unlike some trolls here.)

Although, I don't even know why I feel I need to justify myself to you.

Oh & P.S.

""Show-stopping bug" does not mean what you think it means. Name one bug DX had that prevented playing the game. "

Your wrong.

Something that is show stopping = an opinion in most context. Game Breaking, is when you can't complete the game. Show Stopping is something that stops the show. I.E. A broken side quest could be show stopping. (Not stopping you from finishing the game, but stopping you from finishing the "Show" which in this context is the quest that couldn't be completed, forcing you to skip important or not so important information.)

Although, even I, will tell you this is subjective... Ultimately meaning that the true meaning can only be found in the context of the statement.

In this situation, you assumed that he meant he couldn't complete the game -- he didn't say that, you did.


(Oh and yes, there are some [like getting stuck in the terrain, which I've only seen happen as a result to emergent gameplay] but you can always load a save from before it [provided you don't rely on autosaves] in which case you would have to start over... defining it as a "Game Breaking" bug. It doesn't have to be common or practical -- it just has to exist, and the circumstances definitely do.)

Ashpolt
4th Oct 2009, 02:24
^^ Let's not equate game sales with quality, shall we? If we do, Invisible War is better than Deus Ex, and Who Wants to Be A Millionaire? on the Playstation is one of the greatest games of all time.

ZylonBane
4th Oct 2009, 02:38
It's also cute how he keeps bringing up what PnP players think of Bloodlines, as if those twits are of any relevance whatsoever. On every gaming forum I frequent, whenever Bloodlines comes up it's always spoken of highly. Redemption, on the other hand, never comes up at all. Ever.

http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/7678/poster2152067.jpg

Laokin
4th Oct 2009, 02:39
^^ Let's not equate game sales with quality, shall we? If we do, Invisible War is better than Deus Ex, and Who Wants to Be A Millionaire? on the Playstation is one of the greatest games of all time.

Game sales do equal quality... to an extent. To say they don't is absolutely wrong.

Not to mention Bloodlines isn't a quality game, which is noted by the community that loves it, which is why they chose to attempt to fix it. If it was quality, they wouldn't of had to fix anything. That proves the issue of quality in itself. The game is really only tolerable after the community patch which has nothing to do with the game out of the box. There are trash loads of broken quests, missing items -- Key cards disappear from your inventory stopping progress of the game entirely for some characters, long load times and terrible performance (which can be absolutely compared to other source engine games, as a testament to quality.)

Not to mention that the word "quality" when referencing video games is absolutely subjective unless your talking about the amount of bugs or performance issues.

For instance, I can say that IW is a more quality game than Deus Ex. If we go off of what the actual word "quality" means, I'd be wrong... but if we are going based off of my opinion of the experience it supplied.... you can't argue it.

Also, IW was multi platform simultaneous release. Skewing the sales numbers higher than DX (Which was launched alone on PC and had no TV commercials until the playstation 2 launch of the game.)

Bloodlines and Redemption are both PC only games, Redemption had less advertising than Bloodlines AND sold more. How is that not the most glaring example of quality?

If you are talking about something subjective... as in taste of video games, then sales absolutely matters. It shows you what the general public liked better. You don't have to agree, but the greater population of people agree, making it a fact that more people preferred that title.

When you have numbers that are over a million for both games then you cannot determine with as much accuracy so assumption will then remain assumptions.

When you compare 72,000 to over a Million, it's totally obvious.

A game that sells 72,000 copies didn't even make the budget of the game back. They lost money making that game, they went out of business, the game was bug ridden and flawed... it most certainly is attributed to quality or lack there of.

The general public prefers Millionaire to Deus Ex.... Don't be upset that it's not YOUR truth, but it is the truth.

(Also, I wasn't comparing to games from different fan bases... I made a Direct comparison between two White Wolf Games. There for invalidating this argument.)

I will agree though, that Halo's sales compared to COD 4's sales don't show which one is of more quality... because they are pretty equally accepted by people in general. But again, 72k vs 1M+ is a strong argument in and of itself.

Laokin
4th Oct 2009, 02:44
It's also cute how he keeps bringing up what PnP players think of Bloodlines, as if those twits are of any relevance whatsoever. On every gaming forum I frequent, whenever Bloodlines comes up it's always spoken of highly. Redemption, on the other hand, never comes up at all. Ever.

It's quite funny that Bloodlines has a Cult Following, Deus Ex has a "Cult" following.

72k vs 1.5million +.

Which one is bigger?

Exactly.

Also, it doesn't matter what PnPers think, no it doesn't. In that regard, it doesn't matter what you think either. Once again, Redemption has higher recent posts than Bloodlines.

This means MORE people talk about Redemption than Bloodlines. So your argument is DEFEATED.

P.S.

I can make a picture like that for redemption as well.

Your entire argument is based on assumption and personal experience.

My entire argument is based on fact, and personal experience.

Assumption < Fact.

Plain and simple.

If I talk about Deus Ex 1 to people who play Deus Ex 1, chances are some of them will replay it.

If I talk about Redemption to people who play Redemption, chances are people will play it.

If I talk about Bloodlines to people who play Bloodlines, chances are.... people will play it.

People who like Bloodlines (haven't played or don't like redemption) so why would they bring it up?

More copies of Redemption were pressed. More copies of Redemption were sold. The game is 4.5 years older than Bloodlines, with a stronger and more active community. What do you presume is going to be left of the maybe 10,000 bloodlines fans in the next 5 years?

It's probably going to be smaller than it is right now -- which is TINY.

Redemption has custom campaigns and "Dungeon Masters" in online mode. The re-playability of this game is infinite.

Bloodlines has no custom campaigns, just a few community patches... and no social aspect to gaming at all. It's re-playability is finite.

Your logic is weak.

Essentially your saying "I disagree because when I talk about bloodlines with some one who has never played redemption, they say nothing about redemption, which means Bloodlines > Redemption."

This isn't logical at all, in fact -- it's naive.

http://forumplanet.gamespy.com/redemption_general_discussion/b50394/p1

There is your link, oh guess what new mod was released for redemption?

Age of Redemption 2009. What was Bloodlines latest mod? Oh that's right... it never had ONE(well it has, but none comparable to redemption in scale, they are more minor fixes and tweaks than complete and drastic mods) because there is no SDK, any mod is a hack and splice job. Nothing on the scale of total conversions and a totally new story complete with levels comparable to the length of the core bloodlines game....

I see a few that might be coming out..... they have made some progress, but nothing in comparison to Redemption, which is what the entire point of this is. Some one is also trying to get a multiplayer working..... as well. People also are trying to mod the game to be more like Redemption. I.E.

The Pen and Paper mod. Which makes changes of powers to mimic their function of the PnP game, which Redemption did out of the box.

What else is funny, there is more activity in the Redemption forums than there is here at the official DX 1, 2, 3 forums combined.

Good Job failing to realize your opinion contradicts FACT.

*edit*

I too, like Vampire: Bloodlines. I put it in the same category as Deus Ex, although DX > Bloodlines. This is because the games attempt to be the same Genre. Comparing the Bloodlines game to the IP it was used, and asking which Game licensing that IP people liked better, it's seriously a no brainer. Redemption. It's 4.5 years older than bloodlines has a community equal to or greater than bloodlines AND sold 1m+ compared to Bloodlines measily 72k. Once more, Troika went out of business. They only ever made 3 games and couldn't turn a profit. This also goes to show the quality of work that went on at Troika.

Troika is known for Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura.

Do you know what is most famous about this piece of work? Sierra came out and down right apologized to gamers for publishing this game. It only got worse every patch, to the point where Sierra stopped official support for the title with a public apology in the last patch of the game. Funniest thing is the game had great review scores, and it's approach was amazing.

The negative was, over half the skills in the game didn't even function. If you go the Machine route, your machines die in 1 - 2 hits and cannot be revived again for the rest of the game. On the plus side, it let you rob banks...

Troika was ambitious, the 3 games they produced were of fantastic potential. All 3 bug ridden and incomplete games.

You know what else is hilarious? All 3 stopped support for the game, and all 3 have unofficial community patches. How's that for a testament of quality?

Another fun fact, Journey to the Centre of Arcanum was the sequel to arcanum. It was cancelled because they had the engine pulled out from under them citing Vampire as a bad representation of what Valve's Source Engine was capable of.

Valve went into heated court battle with Sierra and won ultimately dooming Arcanum II.

So, even valve has my back on this one.

ZylonBane
4th Oct 2009, 03:45
He sure likes the sound of his own voice, doesn't he folks?

Oh, and I couldn't possibly care less about multiplayer. When it comes to games like Deus Ex, I think you'll find the majority of people around here agree.

Laokin
4th Oct 2009, 03:52
He sure likes the sound of his own voice, doesn't he folks?

He sure doesn't know how to admit when he's wrong, ain't that right folks?

By the way, your professional at being a jerk, and you just proved it with that statement.

puzl
4th Oct 2009, 10:59
It's quite funny that Bloodlines has a Cult Following, Deus Ex has a "Cult" following.

72k vs 1.5million +.

Which one is bigger?

Exactly.

Also, it doesn't matter what PnPers think, no it doesn't. In that regard, it doesn't matter what you think either. Once again, Redemption has higher recent posts than Bloodlines.

This means MORE people talk about Redemption than Bloodlines. So your argument is DEFEATED.

P.S.

I can make a picture like that for redemption as well.

Your entire argument is based on assumption and personal experience.

My entire argument is based on fact, and personal experience.

Assumption < Fact.

Plain and simple.

If I talk about Deus Ex 1 to people who play Deus Ex 1, chances are some of them will replay it.

If I talk about Redemption to people who play Redemption, chances are people will play it.

If I talk about Bloodlines to people who play Bloodlines, chances are.... people will play it.

People who like Bloodlines (haven't played or don't like redemption) so why would they bring it up?

More copies of Redemption were pressed. More copies of Redemption were sold. The game is 4.5 years older than Bloodlines, with a stronger and more active community. What do you presume is going to be left of the maybe 10,000 bloodlines fans in the next 5 years?

It's probably going to be smaller than it is right now -- which is TINY.

Redemption has custom campaigns and "Dungeon Masters" in online mode. The re-playability of this game is infinite.

Bloodlines has no custom campaigns, just a few community patches... and no social aspect to gaming at all. It's re-playability is finite.

Your logic is weak.

Essentially your saying "I disagree because when I talk about bloodlines with some one who has never played redemption, they say nothing about redemption, which means Bloodlines > Redemption."

This isn't logical at all, in fact -- it's naive.

http://forumplanet.gamespy.com/redemption_general_discussion/b50394/p1

There is your link, oh guess what new mod was released for redemption?

Age of Redemption 2009. What was Bloodlines latest mod? Oh that's right... it never had ONE(well it has, but none comparable to redemption in scale, they are more minor fixes and tweaks than complete and drastic mods) because there is no SDK, any mod is a hack and splice job. Nothing on the scale of total conversions and a totally new story complete with levels comparable to the length of the core bloodlines game....

I see a few that might be coming out..... they have made some progress, but nothing in comparison to Redemption, which is what the entire point of this is. Some one is also trying to get a multiplayer working..... as well. People also are trying to mod the game to be more like Redemption. I.E.

The Pen and Paper mod. Which makes changes of powers to mimic their function of the PnP game, which Redemption did out of the box.

What else is funny, there is more activity in the Redemption forums than there is here at the official DX 1, 2, 3 forums combined.

Good Job failing to realize your opinion contradicts FACT.

*edit*

I too, like Vampire: Bloodlines. I put it in the same category as Deus Ex, although DX > Bloodlines. This is because the games attempt to be the same Genre. Comparing the Bloodlines game to the IP it was used, and asking which Game licensing that IP people liked better, it's seriously a no brainer. Redemption. It's 4.5 years older than bloodlines has a community equal to or greater than bloodlines AND sold 1m+ compared to Bloodlines measily 72k. Once more, Troika went out of business. They only ever made 3 games and couldn't turn a profit. This also goes to show the quality of work that went on at Troika.

Troika is known for Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura.

Do you know what is most famous about this piece of work? Sierra came out and down right apologized to gamers for publishing this game. It only got worse every patch, to the point where Sierra stopped official support for the title with a public apology in the last patch of the game. Funniest thing is the game had great review scores, and it's approach was amazing.

The negative was, over half the skills in the game didn't even function. If you go the Machine route, your machines die in 1 - 2 hits and cannot be revived again for the rest of the game. On the plus side, it let you rob banks...

Troika was ambitious, the 3 games they produced were of fantastic potential. All 3 bug ridden and incomplete games.

You know what else is hilarious? All 3 stopped support for the game, and all 3 have unofficial community patches. How's that for a testament of quality?

Another fun fact, Journey to the Centre of Arcanum was the sequel to arcanum. It was cancelled because they had the engine pulled out from under them citing Vampire as a bad representation of what Valve's Source Engine was capable of.

Valve went into heated court battle with Sierra and won ultimately dooming Arcanum II.

So, even valve has my back on this one.

lol

gamer0004
4th Oct 2009, 11:00
Game sales do equal quality... to an extent. To say they don't is absolutely wrong.


The great works of literature have sold way less than Harry Potter. Does that mean the HP books are better?

Ashpolt
4th Oct 2009, 11:50
Words words words

Firstly, all your post said was that game sales show how great a proportion of the public liked it, and that's not the same as quality. You could argue that quality is 100% subjective, and so a higher general public opinion could be said to equal higher quality, but I'm not even going to bother refuting that on the ground that it's bollocks. The day Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is officially recognised as a better film than The Godfather because it had a better opening weekend is the day we may as well just all lay down and die.

Secondly, I'd even disagree with the point that game sales show public opinion, and say that all game sales really show is....drum roll please....how many people bought it, and that buying something is not at all necessarily linked with liking it. How many of the x million people who bought Who Wants to be a Millionaire on the PS1 will have been disappointed with it once they played it? Probably a lot more than would have been disappointed with Deus Ex. And also, how many people do you think are likely to class WWTBAM? as their favourite game, compared to Deus Ex? If you are determined to trump public opinion as a measuring stick of quality, then something like the user ratings section at Metacritic is a vastly better measuring stick than sales figures - but (surprise surprise) I wouldn't even agree with that.

tl;dr: sales figures =/= public opinion, and public opinion =/= quality, therefore sales figures =/= quality.

Jerion
4th Oct 2009, 12:55
While quality is mostly subjective, usually the public tends to agree about certain things regarding games. The notion that sales = quality isn't very accurate, but it's not out of the ballpark. Fact is, in this day and age, while some people will buy a game simply because of it's name, when a game has something clearly wrong with it, early buyers get the word out on the internet ASAP; sales of the game rapidly plummet. It's the same thing with movies. Now, this doesn't mean that every game that sells very, very well is a masterpiece. What it does mean is that the average bar for well-known games is far above "crap". This doesn't really apply to niche games, however- usually, while fine games, they simply don't appeal to or reach a wide enough audience to make lots of money.

Ashpolt
4th Oct 2009, 15:06
What you're saying rests on the assumption that all - or at least, a large portion - of game sales are educated purchases. Which they're not. Not everyone reads the internet for bug alerts or so on - a huge proportion of game sales come from "oh this looks cool!" in the shops, as would've have been the case with (my favourite example again) the people who bought "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?" - can you really imagine that the kind of people who bought that would've read about it on the internet? And do you really think they would have even heard if it had, for example, game crippling bugs?

And again, even if every game purchase ever made was an educated one, it's not necessarily linked to public opinion - think of how many people bought Invisible War, and then ask yourself how many of those people, though they probably had read about it extensively beforehand, would have been disappointed with it.

I'm not going to say that there's absolutely no link between sales and quality - as a very, very general rule, good games will sell well and bad games won't - but it's absolutely not a definite link, and sales absolutely cannot be used as proof of quality, or even a vague measurement.

Blade_hunter
4th Oct 2009, 15:34
A lots of games when they are under a movie / show / book license have a strong chance to be bought by the public who like those things even if the quality of the game is pretty much a crap, it works also with game sequels, and even games with a lot of advertisements.

Those features doesn't mean the product will be a crap but it happens so often in the video games :(

Laokin
4th Oct 2009, 20:49
What you're saying rests on the assumption that all - or at least, a large portion - of game sales are educated purchases. Which they're not. Not everyone reads the internet for bug alerts or so on - a huge proportion of game sales come from "oh this looks cool!" in the shops, as would've have been the case with (my favourite example again) the people who bought "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?" - can you really imagine that the kind of people who bought that would've read about it on the internet? And do you really think they would have even heard if it had, for example, game crippling bugs?

And again, even if every game purchase ever made was an educated one, it's not necessarily linked to public opinion - think of how many people bought Invisible War, and then ask yourself how many of those people, though they probably had read about it extensively beforehand, would have been disappointed with it.

I'm not going to say that there's absolutely no link between sales and quality - as a very, very general rule, good games will sell well and bad games won't - but it's absolutely not a definite link, and sales absolutely cannot be used as proof of quality, or even a vague measurement.

Apparently you don't know how to read.

Lets sum it up shall we?

A.) I made mention that in my opinion Bloodlines shouldn't have tried to be like Deus Ex, and should have been more like it's predecessor Redemption.

B.) Home boy comes on and says "Bloodlines = Best game ever, Redemption is trash nobody plays it... this is a FACT"

C.) I said, Interestingly enough, it sold nearly 1,000% better and had great review scores and has more people active on the official forums than bloodlines.

D.) I made the comparison to sales very loosely, and also stated that "Quality is subjective." Although, there is something to be said when a game that is being pushed as a Triple A release only sells 72,000 copies. It's also proven history that Troika made games without quality, as every single title they released was bug ridden and all share a few things in common. Extremely Low Sales, Dropping official support, Patches made by the community. (They only made 3 games total before filing for chapter 11. Sierra got into a legal battle with Valve over the license of the source engine for a sequel to one of their previous games. Valve cited Vampire as proof of lack of quality and defamation of the source engine as reasons why they revoked the license. Valve wins. Troika in court was proven to make games of "Low Quality.")

Those are all facts, which to be honest prove that Bloodlines isn't this end all be all game. Your simply just wrong. Say you can't compare sales all you want, but it doesn't make it true.

If two games come out, and release with the same score. Lets say 9.0, one sells 1,000,000 copies, and the other sells 70,000 copies... which one is going to have more people play it more than once?

This is OBVIOUS by mathematics and probability that the title with the million copies sold is going to have more total play throughs and subsequent play throughs than the copy that sold 72,000.

If you object to that, your obviously just a moron.

I never sat there and proclaimed Sales = Quality.

In other words, what you are saying is it's 100% impossible to determine if any game is better than any game, which is totally untrue. The only tools you have are critic reviews, sales of a game, + size of the community.

Better in general = More population find it appealing.

L2Read plz.

P.S.

I'd venture to say less people who purchased Millionaire for PS2, were disappointed. In fact, the people who purchased that game knew exactly what it would be. A trivia game, which is exactly what is was... 1:1 with the show minus real prizes.

Deus Ex, on the other hand.... people could purchase thinking it's a shooter and be overwhelmingly surprised it's nothing like they expected.

Trivia being not niche. RPG/FPS hybrids being niche.

The niche crowd has less fans, although strong and loyal, but less in numbers. Hence the term "Niche."

Another term for it, would be "Cult Following." It's obvious millionaire has more than a "cult following."

Also, your IW analogy is moot, and if you read... I already explained why. It had a bigger audience being on more platforms than it's predecessor. This skews numbers, the comparison made between the two would then have to be made into a proportional argument vs the target number of people. Either way, I'm sure IW sold worse than the original. IW was said to have poor sales (even if they total more than Deus Ex, because it was on more platforms than DX.) for it's estimated amount of units pressed.

Hence the reason Deus Ex as an IP almost died, as we are on our last leg here with DX 3, which is just irrefutable.
(For those that cannot read, this means the chance of continuing the franchise lies within the success of Deus Ex 3, if it performs terribly they will drop it all together.)

Ashpolt
4th Oct 2009, 22:00
Wow, for someone who's claiming I can't read, you sure didn't understand my post.



If two games come out, and release with the same score. Lets say 9.0, one sells 1,000,000 copies, and the other sells 70,000 copies... which one is going to have more people play it more than once?

This is OBVIOUS by mathematics and probability that the title with the million copies sold is going to have more total play throughs and subsequent play throughs than the copy that sold 72,000.

It's also going to have more people bin it in disgust. The key is in percentages, not total numbers.


If you object to that, your obviously just a moron.

*you're


I never sat there and proclaimed Sales = Quality.

Well you claimed that Redemption's higher sales were indicative of it being a better game than Bloodlines, so the inference is....


In other words, what you are saying is it's 100% impossible to determine if any game is better than any game, which is totally untrue.

I didn't say that in the slightest, I just said sales don't necessarily equal quality.


The only tools you have are critic reviews, sales of a game, + size of the community.

Even if that was true, size of the community and number of sales are not necessarily linked. A game can only sell a few thousand copies, and have a community of a few thousand people because such a high percentage loved it - and on the other hand, a game can sell bucketloads but have a tiny community because people who bought it mostly hated it once they played it.


I'd venture to say less people who purchased Millionaire for PS2, were disappointed. In fact, the people who purchased that game knew exactly what it would be. A trivia game, which is exactly what is was... 1:1 with the show minus real prizes.

Deus Ex, on the other hand.... people could purchase thinking it's a shooter and be overwhelmingly surprised it's nothing like they expected.

Disappointed was maybe a bad choice of word. Turn it on its head instead then (as I also mentioned before) and look at which game would have a higher percent of the people who bought it claiming it was a fantastic, 10/10 game, and I would be willing to bet Deus Ex would win.


Trivia being not niche. RPG/FPS hybrids being niche.

The niche crowd has less fans, although strong and loyal, but less in numbers. Hence the term "Niche."

Another term for it, would be "Cult Following." It's obvious millionaire has more than a "cult following."

Also, your IW analogy is moot, and if you read... I already explained why. It had a bigger audience being on more platforms than it's predecessor. This skews numbers, the comparison made between the two would then have to be made into a proportional argument vs the target number of people.

So you're saying factors other than quality affect sales numbers greatly? Congratulations, you've just defeated your own argument.


Either way, I'm sure IW sold worse than the original. IW was said to have poor sales (even if they total more than Deus Ex, because it was on more platforms than DX.) for it's estimated amount of units pressed.

Invisible War sold more, it was in the Square Enix corporate presentation that was posted on here a while back.

Blade_hunter
4th Oct 2009, 22:33
And there is the fact most fans of the previous DX bought DX 2 and weren't happy with, even if there is some people who liked it ...

Laokin
4th Oct 2009, 23:24
It's also going to have more people bin it in disgust. The key is in percentages, not total numbers.

The key is in percentages, one in which you are making up in order to support your argument.



Well you claimed that Redemption's higher sales were indicative of it being a better game than Bloodlines, so the inference is....

Congradulations, we have some one who knows how to quote mine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_quoting_out_of_context

You took my quote out of context and spun it to support your argument. Sales ARE indicative of quality on some level, they just don't prove one way or the other, on their own anything -- other than which game made more money.


I didn't say that in the slightest, I just said sales don't necessarily equal quality.

Which is precisely what I said, when I said it. Sales don't NECESSARILY equal quality. This statement alone means that sometimes.... THEY DO.



Even if that was true, size of the community and number of sales are not necessarily linked. A game can only sell a few thousand copies, and have a community of a few thousand people because such a high percentage loved it - and on the other hand, a game can sell bucketloads but have a tiny community because people who bought it mostly hated it once they played it.

No, because your ignoring the fact that if the game was of such high quality, in proportion it would have gained more sales. If 100 people buy my game and say it's the best game ever made, the chances of only those 100 people agreeing is astronomical. If 100 people like my game, that means 100/100 thought it was the best game ever made. In proportion that means 1,000/1,000 would agree as well. 1,000,000,000/1,000,000,000 would also.

Your point excludes that of logic. Logic says more often then not there is a disagreement. So if I released a game and it sold 100,000 copies... chances are my active community is going to be around 10%-14% of that margin. Somewhere between 10,000 and 14,000 may be inclined to believe. Sure while it's 100% possible every game I sold could be deemed by the owner as a masterpiece... it's ENTIRELY improbable. (Improbable means not likely to happen, which means it has no place in this argument.)




Disappointed was maybe a bad choice of word. Turn it on its head instead then (as I also mentioned before) and look at which game would have a higher percent of the people who bought it claiming it was a fantastic, 10/10 game, and I would be willing to bet Deus Ex would win.

This is once again subjective. Would I vote millionaire 10/10, yes. Why? Because it does EXACTLY what it's supposed to do... 1:1 with the real game. So rating a video game based on a game show that is exactly the same (rules, presentation... life lines.) I would have to give it the best rating it could get. Although I rated millionaire at 10/10 doesn't even mean that if I voted Deus Ex 8/10 that it's a better game. No, because the rating system has nothing to do with entertainment value. When rating a game, you rate based upon "Does X game do what Y game does Better? Does X Game do what it was supposed to do good?" If answered yes to both then the game is going to be high scoring.



So you're saying factors other than quality affect sales numbers greatly? Congratulations, you've just defeated your own argument.

No I didn't, since I specifically said, sales don't = quality necesarrily.... but that in cases when two games on the same exact playing field with a similar marketing campaign (read practically the same, since both games never had any sort of advertisement short of game magazines and website plugs) catering to fans of the same IP, at what point does sales not matter here? More people obviously prefer traditional RPG's over Hyrbids, which is PROVEN FACT by history. Hence the reason True Hyrbrid Genre games like bloodlines and DX are considered "Niche Crowds."

By default this means more people liked Redemption than Bloodlines. The sales are a testament to that. The community being bigger after it being nearly 10 years old.... is a testament to that. Bloodlines being only 5 years old and having a smaller community pretty much means less people liked it.




Invisible War sold more, it was in the Square Enix corporate presentation that was posted on here a while back.

Note I said it probably would of. Note, you don't understand why?

I already explained this if you knew how to read.

I:W had a potential player base of over 2 million people the day it launched. DX had a potential player base somewhere within 500-1 million players at launch. IW had television commercials and a full on media campaign, before launch. DX had none other than magazine articles and interviews by gaming websites, before and after launch.

More people were exposed to IW and more people were capable of playing it (since you have ALL xbox owners and ALL gaming PC owners.) Where as DX had just gaming PC owners, than later much after launch it launched for PS2, which just look subpar in comparison to other games on it's platform. (Because it was an old game ported, not newly created.)

This alone is common sense. They may have announced that it sold more than the original, but did they announce the proportions? No. Because IW still never met expectations. It simply had more exposure and more ways to play it. Not to mention you aren't scaling sales in proportion to potential player base.

Not to mention, my only argument is that Bloodlines wasn't a very good game. Not that it isn't now. The community patches have fixed a lot of things and make it MUCH more playable, this wasn't done by the people who created/published or sold the game, so it doesn't count for the game of being "Quality."

Redemption was pretty much bug free, commercially successful, was true to the PnP game, had great graphics and a good story... while managing to incorporate everything that bloodlines switched perspectives to incorporate whilst still maintaining a traditional Isometric style of gameplay. Also allowing your vampire to live over 800 years.

In comparison to a game that totally abused it's license, bug ridden to the point of game breaking status (you couldn't complete the game if you didn't spec in lock picking because key cards would disappear.) cutting aspects (skills) from the PnP game, because Troika couldn't get them to function correctly(later fixed and added in by the community.) If you picked Nosferatu, you couldn't get out of the first area. They sent you the cab told you to get in it and if you attempted to you received a masquerade infraction, and weren't allowed to travel. You had to go the sewers in which they never told you to. (Later half fixed by the community, if you travel by sewer, when you exit the sewer, it cuts to an in game cinematic of your nosferatu stepping out of the taxi.)

I mean seriously, on top of that... the fantastic multiplayer feature was cut entirely.... over 15 quests couldn't even be completed. Items disappeared at a very FREQUENT rate right out of your inventory. The performance was absolutely miserable. Certain conversations didn't play, or told you to do things that you can't even do in the game.

Anybody who plays Bloodlines WITHOUT a community patch, would agree that it's just a poorly developed game. It's just a fact.

It's totally subjective if you like it though, by all means... enjoy... but to ignore the very valid reason the majority of people who played it have for calling it abysmal, is quite absurd. Sure, the community has improved the quality of the game.... but it's still doesn't feel polished.

(By the way it's installed on my computer right now, I do -- LIKE -- the game, but it doesn't mean that it's not terrible. You can like something and hate something at the same time... I appreciate it because it does provide a similar to Deus Ex style game in a vampire world. Viewed from the outside not knowing it had anything to do with The Masquerade IP AFTER the community fixes... it's pretty = to IW, What does it do better than IW? Pretty much nothing, in fact in most cases it does things that IW did... worse.)

Also, if your not trying to say it's impossible to determine what game is superior to another game... apply that logic to Redemption vs Bloodlines and you will see that I'm right. Weather or not you prefer one over the other is absolutely irrelevant.

Laokin
4th Oct 2009, 23:33
And there is the fact most fans of the previous DX bought DX 2 and weren't happy with, even if there is some people who liked it ...

Also, good point... skewing the numbers of the sequel. Almost nobody who purchased Redemption purchased Bloodlines..... this is indeed a FACT based on numbers.

72k vs over 1 million. Potentially less than 1% of people who purchased redemption make up the TOTAL POOL of people who purchased Bloodlines. There had to be some that never played Redemption... which would mean LESS THAN .72% of the people who purchased Redemption purchased Bloodlines.

This is... fact.

Redemption being well received and loves by critics vs bloodlines not so well received and scorned by critics.

Ontop of Sierra losing a legal battle with valve (the engine provider for Bloodlines) based entirely upon quality of games Troika has released...

I really see no argument to be made. At all.

With that said, I officially withdraw from this argument as it has completely for NO REASON derailed this thread off of topic.

I said something was my opinion, and was flamed for it and enticed into a different argument all together, based upon irrationality.

It was not my intentions, so I will apologize for this getting out of hand, but I certainly wasn't the catalyst of the argument.

Simple fact is though, that my "adversary" completely ignores fact and bases his "factual" argument entirely on what is the most IMPROBABLE argument making up all his values and providing little to no actual fact to back up his argument.

I'm sorry, but -- I just win.

The only thing he did do well was point out my most obvious typo. "Your" instead of "You're." When in percentage to the amount of words that I typed... I think it's in general good nature to let a typo slide. This is just a result of him losing the argument, so he singles out things that have no relevance to the topic of conversation.

Not to mention nearly 95% of all people on the internet typing in forums ignore grammar almost entirely. Using "me" instead of "I" incorrectly placing comas and in general poor punctuation. Something in which I am guilty of, but even he lets slide.

/Laokin wonders why people resort to correcting only 1/99th of the errors that exist. Does it give them self gratification?

lumpi
4th Oct 2009, 23:54
"Show-stopping bug" does not mean what you think it means. Name one bug DX had that prevented playing the game.

Boy, it's been ages... but I remember the game simply not running on my graphics card back then. Some strange driver issue that kicked me out of the game as soon as the first level loaded. A graphics card that ran Half-Life and comparables just fine. Had to get a new one to play DX.

Ironically, on my brand new system, the game runs too fast (like 200% the speed). I have to tinker with settings or eventually use a program that slows down the system. It's something I haven't seen in any other game since the DOS years.

And that's just the really, really bad stuff. Deus Ex is a technical failure. The UT engine has always been a wrong choice and you can see and feel the limitations and hacks everywhere (deathmatch-bot AI movement for soldiers, whole level files are rewritten for savegames, etc...).

Even if you say that none of that is "show-stopping", DX surely isn't a technically sound game. But they pulled through anyway, giving you enough to motivate you to MAKE IT RUN.


It might be true, however, that this wasn't the op's original argument. I think it's more about being able to collect 50 cigarette packs for no reason and then finding some random stranger you can sell the hot tobacco ware to for 1000 bucks... You know "unimportant" stuff. Modern games design would disable cigarette pack hoarding in the earliest development cycle because "it does not add anything to the "non-lineary, dynamic, choice-driven gameplay experience we are aiming for"... with the team being shifted to something more useful... like pixel shader programming or "accessibility evaluation".

Jerion
5th Oct 2009, 00:02
Halo 2 sold more than Halo 1, yet Halo 1 is generally regarded as the better game. Just thought I should throw that out there.

This discussion seems to have gotten off topic. Way far off topic. And in less than two pages, no less! Impressive.

Ashpolt
5th Oct 2009, 00:39
The key is in percentages, one in which you are making up in order to support your argument.

Considering I didn't even state any percentages, this is obviously nonsense. Good start.


You took my quote out of context and spun it to support your argument. Sales ARE indicative of quality on some level, they just don't prove one way or the other, on their own anything -- other than which game made more money.

Which is precisely what I said, when I said it. Sales don't NECESSARILY equal quality. This statement alone means that sometimes.... THEY DO.

If sales go along with quality sometimes, and sometimes don't, then there's no causal link, it's just coincidence - which is what I've been saying all along.

Sometimes when I drive my car, it rains. Sometimes it doesn't. I can assure you, my car does not cause rain.


This is once again subjective. Would I vote millionaire 10/10, yes. Why? Because it does EXACTLY what it's supposed to do... 1:1 with the real game. So rating a video game based on a game show that is exactly the same (rules, presentation... life lines.) I would have to give it the best rating it could get. Although I rated millionaire at 10/10 doesn't even mean that if I voted Deus Ex 8/10 that it's a better game. No, because the rating system has nothing to do with entertainment value. When rating a game, you rate based upon "Does X game do what Y game does Better? Does X Game do what it was supposed to do good?" If answered yes to both then the game is going to be high scoring.

I would say a game has to do more than just "do what it's supposed to" to make it a good game. If a game proposed to display just a white, flickering screen for 5 minutes, and then did exactly that, it's not a good game.


No I didn't, since I specifically said, sales don't = quality necesarrily.... but that in cases when two games on the same exact playing field with a similar marketing campaign (read practically the same, since both games never had any sort of advertisement short of game magazines and website plugs) catering to fans of the same IP, at what point does sales not matter here? More people obviously prefer traditional RPG's over Hyrbids, which is PROVEN FACT by history. Hence the reason True Hyrbrid Genre games like bloodlines and DX are considered "Niche Crowds."

Please give me a source for this "PROVEN FACT."



Invisible War sold more, it was in the Square Enix corporate presentation that was posted on here a while back.

Note I said it probably would of. Note, you don't understand why?

Oh, really?


Either way, I'm sure IW sold worse than the original.


I already explained this if you knew how to read.

I:W had a potential player base of over 2 million people the day it launched. DX had a potential player base somewhere within 500-1 million players at launch. IW had television commercials and a full on media campaign, before launch. DX had none other than magazine articles and interviews by gaming websites, before and after launch.

More people were exposed to IW and more people were capable of playing it (since you have ALL xbox owners and ALL gaming PC owners.) Where as DX had just gaming PC owners, than later much after launch it launched for PS2, which just look subpar in comparison to other games on it's platform. (Because it was an old game ported, not newly created.)

I understand the point you're making (despite your ad hominem attacks) but it doesn't detract from the fact that you said - direct quote:


Either way, I'm sure IW sold worse than the original.

...And then it was more nonsense about Bloodlines vs Redemption, and I honestly couldn't give a toss about that example in particular, so I won't bother replying to it, I just dislike people using sales figures to back up opinions about game quality.

Oh, one more thing:


The only thing he did do well was point out my most obvious typo. "Your" instead of "You're." When in percentage to the amount of words that I typed... I think it's in general good nature to let a typo slide.

Absolutely agree, and most of the time I pay no attention to typos. But when it's in the same sentence as you calling me a moron, you're asking for the typo to be pointed out, really.

Laokin
5th Oct 2009, 05:40
Either way, I'm sure IW sold worse than the original. IW was said to have poor sales (even if they total more than Deus Ex, because it was on more platforms than DX.) for it's estimated amount of units pressed.

This is you getting caught quote mining and taking half a quote out of context to support your argument.

When I say Deus Ex sold worse I mean exactly that.... it didn't sell the expected number of copies, when Deus Ex did.

I absolutely stated that they could likely total more than the original, but it doesn't mean it "sold" better. This is because it had more exposure (media; commericals, magazines, internet articles, game store plugs etc... etc...) and more platforms to play it on at launch.

Oh and for traditional RPG's being more liked than any hybrid, you need look no further than it being a "niche" catagory, whilst traditional RPG's are not.

This makes it a fact. It doesn't mean that this fact can't change... but it definitely means we aren't there yet. We have maybe 3 or so Hyrbid games that are even known? System Shock 2 (one wasn't similar at all, I played one... which was the direct reason I never played 2, and it's too old for me to enjoy it now.) Deus Ex (IW doesn't count since everything that made it a hybrid was pretty well cut) and Vampire? Oh sorry, Fallout 3... so 4. Only 3 being successful, and one being critically successful, obviously being FallOut 3.

VS the 100,000 or so traditional RPG games that sold better than any one of your "niche" category games. Neverwinter Nights 1&2, Baldurs Gate, Ice Windale 1&2, Diablo 1&2, Divine Divinity/Beyond Divinity, Sacred 1&2, Titan Quest, Planescape Torment, Pool of Radiance, Fallout 1/2/Tactics, Might and Magic: The entire series, Fate 1&2, Knights of the Old Republic 1&2, The Witcher, Entire Ultima series, Phantasy Star, Dungeon Siege I&II, Mythos, Gothic, X-men Legends/MUA, Lionheart...all off the top of my head. So far I have only listed "Western" RPG's and none of them MMO games, if I were to include Japanese and Korean RPG's in the list, it would be uncountable.

Further more, your argument that sometimes you drive and it rains doesn't mean driving your car produces rain -- is about the WORST analogy I have ever heard. Sometimes things don't "necessarily" mean something, but that doesn't mean they never do. In the case of game sales, very commonly GOOD GAMES sell well. It's rare when a GOOD game doesn't move units. Period.

Your analogy is akin to saying a video card sometimes displays the image perfectly, sometimes with artifacts, It's silly of me to think that the artifacts are cause by the video card.

This is just a completely FALSE statement, as video artifacts can be from driver issues to heating issues, to damaged CPU's/PSU's/GPU's, memory related issues, Bad main board with fault DIMM sockets... it literally can be one of a thousand different things.

In NO WAY does this mean that the video card can't be responsible for producing video artifacts. You have zero facts to back up anything you have said.... point me to one "fact" that actually exists with provable evidence in your entire ramblings.

You can't, because you haven't brought any with you. All you have been doing is saying the contrary to my factual based thesis.

In short, your argument is equally pointless as the one I'm about to example.

I.E.
Me: Water is made up of 1 part hydrogen, 2 parts oxygen.
You: No it's not. That's like saying driving my car in the rain causes rain... my car cannot cause rain.

tl:dr

It's just nonsense. Your whole argument equates to "Because I said so." Never picking apart anything that I prove to be fact, or even refuting them.... just picking pointless side arguments that matter none to the point.

For starters, picking apart grammar, claiming absolute opinions as absolute facts, quote mining, and generally presenting no form to your argument. It's like you don't understand the core principles or functionality of a debate, or -- trolling.

example:

but it doesn't detract from the fact that you said - direct quote:

Notice how you said "Direct Quote" and only supplied half of it? Awfully convenient of you, eh?

Wonderful.

I literally can't believe I wasted all this time arguing with a brick wall.

:mad2:

P.S.

Niche - a specialized market. Miriam-Websters. Hybrid RPG/FPS are a Niche Market, meaning specialized.... not general, meaning smaller.

Smaller, means less people like it. FACT.

If you still don't agree, be wrong to yourself quietly. I apologized, and your didn't even accept it. You also admitted the only thing you did well was point out my typo. Meaning the rest of your argument was structured... not well, or how we say -- bad. Meaning your argument is a bad argument, also saying it's worse than mine, admitting that I'm correct.

I know this isn't what you meant, but it is what you literally said. This is not "quote mining" since your entire quote reads this.


Absolutely agree, and most of the time I pay no attention to typos. But when it's in the same sentence as you calling me a moron, you're asking for the typo to be pointed out, really.

See what I did there? Yup, I supplied a direct quote.

K, thanks.

/final end.

Jerion
5th Oct 2009, 05:51
Eta Kooram Nah Smech!

http://www.cre8asiteforums.com/forums/uploads/post-3012-1185415263.gif

Laokin
5th Oct 2009, 05:52
http://www.cre8asiteforums.com/forums/uploads/post-3012-1185415263.gif

Not for nothing, but what else do we have to do?


lol, Obviously I'm only half serious. Half, being the keyword.

We need moar materialz1!1!i!


Halo 2 sold more than Halo 1, yet Halo 1 is generally regarded as the better game. Just thought I should throw that out there.

This is true, but this is also for the same reason DX 2 sold better than the original. Pretty much solidifying the fact that sales don't always = better game.

This is not always the case.

Tribes being a great example of the contrary in practice. Tribes 1 sold the most, widely reguarded as the best game in the series, T:V(Tribes 3) selling the least...widely regarded as the worst game in the series.

Sales don't ALWAYS mean better quality... but as a rule of thumb more often than not it does. This isn't just for video games, video games are no different than any other industry. Shamwow's sell more then the fake ones... they are better. Sony sells more TV's than Viewsonic, Sony IS better. Sony sells more TV's than Sharp, which one is better? Could be Sharp, could be Sony. The key to note here is Sony sells MUCH more tv's than view sonic, Sharp sells MUCH more tv's than viewsonic.... Sony and Sharp are comparable in sales as well as quality in tv's, while view sonic is most notably worse than both.

Toika made less games than Ion Storm, Troika sold less as well.... Interplay same deal, but Interplay and Ion Storm are comparable as developers. Troika filed chapter 11 after 3 games that all had to be patched by the community because the publishers dropped support for troika games. Troika sold less game because they make worse quality games.

It literally is that simple.

Sales = Spot on with popular belief.... I'm sure it's just a coincidence..... :lmao:

Ashpolt
5th Oct 2009, 08:54
Nothing that you said in either of the posts since my last one has been either relevant to or correctly replying to what I actually said, Laokin, so there's no sense in me replying, save to clarify my original position in one short paragraph (because I know these long posts are even more tedious for everyone else than they are for us.)

All I was stating was that because good games sometimes sell badly and terrible games sometimes sell well, the link between sales and quality is so tenuous as to be irrelevant, and can't be used to prove or even support an argument about quality. If you're going to argue with that, well...go ahead, but I'm not going to respond anymore because all it's doing is leading to ad hominem attacks and straw man responses.

That's my piece. I'm out on this one.

ZylonBane
5th Oct 2009, 14:47
Ironically, on my brand new system, the game runs too fast (like 200% the speed). I have to tinker with settings or eventually use a program that slows down the system. It's something I haven't seen in any other game since the DOS years.
Disable CPU throttling. Enable vsync.

mad_red
6th Oct 2009, 21:56
All I was stating was that because good games sometimes sell badly and terrible games sometimes sell well, the link between sales and quality is so tenuous as to be irrelevant, and can't be used to prove or even support an argument about quality. If you're going to argue with that, well...go ahead, but I'm not going to respond anymore because all it's doing is leading to ad hominem attacks and straw man responses.

Yep. It seems Laokin is a believer of the myth that people tend to behave in the most rational manner possible. If that were so, the economy would be just fine at the moment.

Not to mention significant breakdown of the correlation when those aspects of the game that determine the quality do not have mass appeal. It doesn't matter how beautiful the shakespearean dialog, how deep the philosophy, etc. etc. No one is going to try to understand it, hence, no one is going to buy it. On the other hand, most people are entirely forgiving of a game so long as it has key features. Much like supernormal stimuli in the animal kingdom.