Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'NMA News and Information' started by Brother None, Apr 29, 2008.
Every other fucking thread degenerates into senior forum members having to defend their and NMA's behaviour.
The reputation was thrust upon NMA, rather than deserved. And it was mainly thrust upon the site by lazy individuals who couldn't distinguish between individual post-ers and some notional monolithic NMA-monster which apparently eats dissenters and throws intellectual faeces at innocent software developers.
I would also say that it didn't help that every criticism noted by Bethesda was smartly rebuffed with a stock answer about not being able to please everybody, and thereafter followed by a non sequitur about the march of technology and waffle about immersion.
As it is, the one thing that all of those journalists, along with the people who steer the threads to this inevitable conclusion, is that they argue with the complainant, rather than addressing the complaint. The thread can be happily chugging along with people expressing various and differing opinions when, suddenly, somebody comes along to complain that someone - on a messageboard of all places - was somewhat hyperbolic, possibly melodramatic. And therefore wrong and hypocritical.
Is there some special restatement of Godwin's Law for NMA? (The longer a thread continues, often beyond as many as five or six messages, the probability that somebody will claim that This is why newbies/outsiders feel intimidated... will approach one...?)
The proof that NMA isn't guilt as charged lies in the fact that new people post here often, many of whom disagree with each other (hence, that this isn't and never has been a circle-jerk) and, mainly, that there is no hostile editorial policy towards Bethesda. Positives have been treated positively, negatives are usually highlighted via consensus rather than dictated, and much of the news has simply been treated with qualified caution or optimism.
NMA is fairly catholic, all in all, which is why I still bother hanging around the place for arguments.
I'm not sure NMA's - whoever that is - behaviour would really merit a mention any more, were it not for the fact that every complaint is framed as prejudice. Honesty is the issue that cuts to the heart of this, because if Bethesda and most of the mainstream journalists surrounding them would simply address criticisms rather than dismissing them via slur and innuendo, then we wouldn't be in this situation.
Oh, and if the complaint stays the same, then it is because Pete keeps on saying the same things.
(Rant done. And maybe arguments like these are why newbies/outsiders feel intimidated...? Eh?...)
Damn you. How often do I have to explain that I'm NOT anymore? I'm anti-theist ffs.
Wait. That's not how you meant it, right?
As a writer and a musician, I believe in respecting a creator's vision and intent. If you are using someone else's creation, like Bethesda has done, at least be faithful and respectful to the source material. Instead, Bethesda seem to treat Fallout with the same philosophy they have used to develop the Elder Scrolls games. In doing this, I believe they have failed to realise what Fallout is about. In many ways, this situation reminds me of literary critics forcing their own agenda and ideology on a text instead of treating and analysing the text on its own terms. Similarily, it seems to me that Bethesda does not treat Fallout on its own terms, but rather through their own "Elder Scrolls" spectacles.
In short, I see it as Bethesda being in a situation where they think they have understood what Fallout is all about, but truly haven't at all because they treat Fallout from an Elder Scrolls perspective instead of treating it for what it inherently is. So I agree that the Star Wars analogy doesn't work; it would depend entirely on how respectful and/or understanding the new "owner" of the property would be to Star Wars and its aims and purposes.
Heh. Love it when someone uses that word in that meaning. It's so unusual.
Apropos, interesting thought experiment. If the Fallout license were thrown in your lap tomorrow, would you feel comfortable claiming to understand it and working on a sequel without consulting the original creators?
I know I wouldn't.
i suppose what bothers me most about this interview is that Gillen's previous previews/interviews/features have often been well-thought out and relatively comprehensive, while in THIS case he seems to have fallen into the trap that most other interviewers have. the whole question of "You're driven by love. Do you think that's something the very hardcore Fallout fans miss?" really miffed me.
but he MAY have used it as a segue into the following questions about "blanking out" criticism. either way, it wasn't very effective.
as for NMA being a "fanatic entity", i highly doubt it. ever since i've been reading the news about FO3 coming out, forum moderators are the first to ensure "moderation" when things seem to be getting out of hand, as they so often seem to.
good show, though. good show!
Hell no. I wouldn't even dare to tell the original dev team what to do. I'd probably get some former KGB guys to convince the former dev team to make a sequel and that's it.
Bethesda's vision of Fallout is a brand name to be raped for profit. It's just tacky. And they lie about it.
What you say is exactly correct, and it's this larger issue that motivates my interest. Either you view games as a potential artistic medium or you view them as just games. If you view them as more than just games, you ought to care about their integrity - or at least you ought to care about the integrity of the best examples.
Have I made up my mind? Yes. But it didn't start out made up, and I'm more than willing to be proven wrong. I want to be proven wrong. Please, prove me wrong. Unfortunately, I haven't seen one single argument that comes close to proving me wrong. After all this time I assume that's because there isn't one.
Attacking NMA for some perceived bias is not doing anything to make a case for Bethesda.
I've seen remarks on that phrasing and talked to Kieron a small bit on his blog, Rock Paper Shotgun, about why I think that thinking Bethesda - as a company - could be "driven by love" to make a 6 million dollar investment is pretty unlikely.
Regardless, Kieron asked a few questions here that other journalists purposefully avoid. For that, he should be applauded.
No, I would find that a rather arrogant approach. One cannot know a work of art better than the person(s) who created it. Nobody can know 'Paradise Lost' as well as Milton himself did. In such a hypothetical situation, having the original creators at your side during devlopment would certainly increase the whole team's understanding of what it's all about.
I agree that this is very much about integrity. Loss of integrity is also a symptom seen in the gaming industry at large. It always seems that when some "new" movement in art or entertainment arrives, it starts off dominated by passion and artistic integrity, which then gradually fades away as the market becomes so big that commercial interests start dominating. The result is that very little new and interesting is done.
Don't double-post, please. Use the "edit" button if you wish to respond to something you hadn't noticed before.
Pete Hines said:
Yeah. I'm sure thats exactly what the head honchos of ZeniMax and Bethesda were thinking. "I played fallout as a kid and loved it sooo much! I just have to protect it!" OR were they thinking "Lets make us some money."
Enjoy the pile of shit that Fallout 3 will undoubtedly prove to be.
Enjoy the experience with the harbored sycophants and people always willing to bend over for the company line.
I am done wasting my time, this is probably the last time I'll do so in order to educate the drooling masses on these forums.
Whatever Fallout 3 has become - YOU have earned it.
*gasp* ROSH! We missed ya, man! Love the post.
I agree with most of what you said, but the above line was pretty harsh. Chimps are very intelligent animals, and do not deserve to be compared to bethesda devs.
What strikes to me as something strange is the whole NMA hate. After all, this is a FAN site. And being a fan is about liking something, and that's what this community is. A bunch of people who liked (and still like) the Fallout series of games. Being negative about Fallout 3 is natural, after all it will be so much different than the other 2, considering it can be called a sequel at all. Saying "you shouldn't attach yourself to the good ol' Fallout games so much" breaks the whole concept of a Fallout fan by itself, but people are apparently too idiotic to realize this.
Also, the media also takes a standing point, supporting Fallout 3, when they just shouldnt. After all, they are there to criticize and judge, not to take sides. It should be impartial, after all they are what should be our sources of reliable information, and should not be corrupted and biased. People have an initial opinion about a subject (in this case Fallout 3) from the moment they first read about it, and are affected, maybe even without realizing, by such previews.
Of course that people are able to distinguish impartiality from partiality, someone could say, but thats not the case here. We're talking about people who know nuff about nuff (the console cattle as said Roshambo), and who are easily influenced due to the lack of criticism and proper analysis of such information. The problem is not only with Pete (although he IS a major problem, with the lies and all), but also the whole Beth ball licking. To me, such magazines and sites just favour the stagnant creativity of modern game makers.
My rant. Sorry for lacking english.
you know mal, don't apologize. your english is fine, your argument is clear, and i totally agree with you.
and roshambo, holy jeez
you're so freakin' on it's like no joke. it's too bad bethsoft can't get its head out of its ass and on a different track to possibly even consider that a game like the original fallout could still do well in this day and age WITHOUT excluding any particular demographic (console cattle included)
the more I read these articles and previews, the more i feel that this game is an enormous missed opportunity. an opportunity to rejuvenate RPG genre, an opportunity to pay homage to the fallout franchise, and most of all an opportunity to really enlighten gamers about what role-playing is all about. but damn it all
it's about the G*DDAMN MONEY
First, I don't think its idiotic to not want a bad game attached to a beloved franchise.
If a Reputable company had gotten the license for Fallout and was in the process of making a true sequel I'm sure NMA as a whole would rejoice. However Bethesda is known for its great leaps in the graphical areas of programing and its lack of solid programing otherwise. Not to mention their abuse of most IPs they get their hands on and their unrelenting PR that promises things that they just can't deliver.
I can't personally say that Fallout 3 is going to be a horrible scar on fallout like Fallout:BOS was but it doesn't look like its going to be a great rpg like the first two games were either. I could be wrong and this could be amazing. At the moment though it sounds like they gave fallout the first person shooter treatment and are hoping no one will notice.