OMG! More famous voices for Oblivion

[Zli]

'Big Name Actors' in games, are simply Marketing. Not gaming.

This is absolutely true. P.S. = Star Trek = a giant fanbase, S.B. = LotR = well, 'nuff said.

The only question is, did the money used to bring them come from the development or the marketing budget. 'Cause if it's the first one, and if they paid a lot, they should ask the marketing to give them back their money.

 

[Twinfalls]

'Big Name Actors' in games, are simply Marketing. Not gaming.

This is absolutely true. P.S. = Star Trek = a giant fanbase, S.B. = LotR = well, 'nuff said.

The only question is, did the money used to bring them come from the development or the marketing budget. 'Cause if it's the first one, and if they paid a lot, they should ask the marketing to give them back their money.

You see, regardless of which budget it's from, it's money which could have been spent on development. Why aren't there crossbows and throwing weapons? Not enough development resources. Money. Money needed for the extra artists/designers/testers to implement these, and other features cut 'for lack of resources'.

Worse though, is what happens next. See, as Bethesda have bought into this big-name-voice-acting thing, other studios will be forced to compete with similar names. The public will come to expect bigger names. A downward spiral, all at the expense of actual gaming content. Just like movies. It's not just Beth's doing, of course. It didn't start here and now, of course. Yes there have been 'names' in games before, hell, I played Wing Commander back in the day. But don't try and tell me Fallout had ANYTHING as stupidly, unnecessarily 'big' as Patrick Bloody Baldy.

Every little piece has its place in the puzzle. Arena, Daggerfall didn't need 'names'. This is NOT a good step forward for gaming.

 

[Zli]

You see, regardless of which budget it's from, it's money which could have been spent on development. Why aren't there crossbows and throwing weapons? Not enough development resources. Money. Money needed for the extra artists/designers/testers to implement these, and other features cut 'for lack of resources'.

Worse though, is what happens next. See, as Bethesda have bought into this big-name-voice-acting thing, other studios will be forced to compete with similar names. The public will come to expect bigger names. A downward spiral, all at the expense of actual gaming content. Just like movies. It's not just Beth's doing, of course. It didn't start here and now, of course. Yes there have been 'names' in games before, hell, I played Wing Commander back in the day. But don't try and tell me Fallout had ANYTHING as stupidly, unnecessarily 'big' as Patrick Bloody Baldy.

Every little piece has its place in the puzzle. Arena, Daggerfall didn't need 'names'. This is NOT a good step forward for gaming.

But would a hollywoodization of games be that bad? If movie people got into gaming, it would potentialy be a very good thing. Sure, there's Hollywood crap (along with a gem every couple of years or so), but the thing about it is that it's crap that sells well. And to get critical acclaim, the studios syphon that money into 'artistic' projects (which in gaming term would translate to more money & time for design, if less overall). Not to mention the independent scene, which couldn't possibly make a dent in gaming right now since the mainstream itself is too small. And thankfully, unlike the movies, independent games aren't just about gay cowboys eating pudding.

Furthermore, movie people know the importance of extended shelf life. A service for downloading older titles (6+ months) could become the Blockbuster of gaming. That way, you wouldn't have to calm all over ebay to find a copy of Daggerfall that sells for 50$ just because it a collectorz edition.

But if it stops at Big Names (which I hope it won't), then you're right - it's only downhill from there.

edit: Plus, and I just remembered this, most people who bought a game because of a Big Name, unlike, erm, 'hardcore' gamers, won't put up with buggy games. The devs will have much less wiggle room.

 

[DarkSign]

edit: Plus, and I just remembered this, most people who bought a game because of a Big Name, unlike, erm, 'hardcore' gamers, won't put up with buggy games. The devs will have much less wiggle room.

That makes no friggin sense. If someone buys a game based on a name...then obviously they are more interested in superficial things like the sound of a voice, not the actual gameplay.

They will just buy it to hear the voice, then chunk it when it doesnt work.

I do agree that the money could have been spent in better places.

 

[Zli]

edit: Plus, and I just remembered this, most people who bought a game because of a Big Name, unlike, erm, 'hardcore' gamers, won't put up with buggy games. The devs will have much less wiggle room.

That makes no friggin sense. If someone buys a game based on a name...then obviously they are more interested in superficial things like the sound of a voice, not the actual gameplay.

They will just buy it to hear the voice, then chunk it when it doesnt work.

I do agree that the money could have been spent in better places.

No, they are people who think that a game has good gameplay just because it has a famous voice. They don't buy the game just to hear a voice, but they do think it's a guarantee of quality. But most of them can't be bothered with bugs and patches and stuff like that...

 

[Data4]

Just have this to say about Sean Bean: If he's the heir, then the story is officially spoiled. Sean Bean is a good actor, but all his roles are the same. Guy starts out good. Guy gets greedy. Guy doublecrosses the protagonist. Guy becomes main villain. Guy dies (or gets arrested, because "someone has to go to jail") in the end. (Note the slight variation in LotR)

*sigh* Typecasting sucks.

-D4

 

[TheGreatGodPan]

Soul Reaver had good voice actors. Those are the guys the game industry should be chasing after, the ones good at voice-acting. Do you know who the highest paid voice actor in history is? Cameron fucking Diaz for Shrek fucking 2. They could have easily got a lower paid voice actor who would sound more like Diaz than Diaz does, but they didn't because they wanted people to know that Cameron fucking Diaz was in the movie.

 

[kathode]

You see, regardless of which budget it's from, it's money which could have been spent on development. Why aren't there crossbows and throwing weapons? Not enough development resources. Money. Money needed for the extra artists/designers/testers to implement these, and other features cut 'for lack of resources'.

That's not really how it works. We can't just purchase more features for more money. We've got a very large team already. You don't just get features fully formed because you decided to throw people at them. Problems don't get solved just by throwing money at them. If they were, games would never get delayed or have bugs. But they do both those things regularly. The reality is the more features you decide to implement, the more risk it represents because the more systems you have that can potentially interact, creating more and more cesspools of unanticipated bugs. EA throws hundreds of people at their games. Do you think their games are better for it? Do they have more features than other games in the same genre just because they have the biggest teams? Hell no. The money used for development comes from the game's budget that is established very early. We would never revise our design docs to remove features or content because we wanted this or that actor. The idea is so ludicrous to me that I laughed out loud.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Did you just call Todd a liar?

 

[kathode]

No

 

[Vault Dweller]

The game is shorter because the enhanced graphics will require more time while the development time and budget remained the same

Todd Howard, circa Sep 2004

 

[Roqua]

When are you guys going to release daggerfall as abondonware? Mine is way to scratched to work anymore and it just seems plain silly to buy a game that is now older than Oblivian's target audience.

Daggerfall handsdown has the greatest sp chargen of any crpg game. What happened? Its like if Rodan started to sculp round balls and everyone was getting excited about it. Or if a great composer who desided to make a teeny bopper song to get into the top 10 charts. Greatness should be built upon, not destroyed.

 

[kathode]

The game is shorter because the enhanced graphics will require more time while the development time and budget remained the same

Todd Howard, circa Sep 2004

I think you would have to try pretty damn hard to stretch that one-off quote into him saying "Money solves every development problem." I know you do try hard, though. I admire you for it.

(note: part of this post is a lie. You get three guesses).

 

[kathode]

Its like if Rodan started to sculp round balls and everyone was getting excited about it. Or if a great composer who desided to make a teeny bopper song to get into the top 10 charts.

It's more like if ten years after you played a game you looked around and said things like "everything was better when they were just screens full of text." You and I would then proceed to agree to disagree and that would be that. At least I would hope.

I don't know if we'll put Daggerfall out or not. I think the issue is that there's some licensed components in the engine, but I'm not entirely sure. We had to wrangle the lawyers quite a bit to put Arena out there. They're quite good at being wrangled, too.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I think you would have to try pretty damn hard to stretch that one-off quote into him saying "Money solves every development problem."

It doesn't have to go that far, but surely you'd agree that time and money do affect development, and would explain better than anything else why there are no xbows or mounted combat. Unless, of course, it's some clevar marketing ploy to release those features later in an expansion.

I know you do try hard, though. I admire you for it.

Thanks. A little appreciation is all I'm asking for.

 

[Chefe]

hello world

 

[Roqua]

I'm not knocking you guy's business sense. You guys really do know the pulse of the market, your strengths, and how to conduct business. If you guys catered to me you would be out of business probably.

I just reread the intro in Daggerfall's manual, and how much sense that makes (not getting better at picking locks by killing, etc). I remember reading it as a kid on the way home from the mall, all excited and anxious to play DF. I remember spending hours creating characters, making everything perfect, playing forever, detecting a weakness, and doing it again. Getting nervous at the start of each new dungeon. It was my mind vs. the game.

I was again excited many years later when morrowind was released. And everything I really loved about DF was missing or "streamlined' into me not liking it. And now it seems what was left that i did like of morrowind will be missing in Oblivian.

If I was the CEO of bethesda and I took my fiduciary duties seriously i would be doing exactly what you guys are doing. It makes no sense at all to cater to a niche market when you can't increase the sticker price enough to make up for the loss of opertunity costs. You had a choice between making a lot of money and a lot less money and you guys made the right choice in my opinion financially. But artisticly I disagree whole heartedly.

In 100 years no one will be talking about or watching whatever the top grossing movies last year are. But Dogville, a movie that not many have seen or is even remotley popular now, will be talked about and seen in 100 years. Time will make it popular and a must see classic for those who value art over flash.

Of course, making a classic that will still be popular in 100 years will not put food on your table today, thats why I'm a not an artist.

 

[Elwro]

Its like if Rodan started to sculp round balls.

Offtop for anyone who cares: this is Rodan. This is Rodin.

 

[Naked_Lunch]

Heck, I can't tell the difference.

 

[Twinfalls]

Gah. Sick of re-iterating. My main suggestion - that big-name voice-acting is contributing to a spiralling culture of marketing displacing gaming content, seems to be ignored in favour of nitpicking over budgeting. Whatever.

Put out Daggerfall, Beth. You'd be loved. Even more if you added 640*480, filtering, and a size limit on dungeons. Daggerfall's graphics - its artwork especially - are mighty fine, and would look very pretty given a decent chance.

 

[DarkSign]

Its hillarious to say that more money doesnt equal more product. Provided you have the money to pay for the next level of production (i.e. another 10,000 bottle filling machine, another 2 million dollar bottle cap opener), money does mean more product.

Let's say you've got a gold mine and you start off with 2 workers that produce at the rate of 40 lbs of gold per day. Are you seriously saying that having 20 workers would yield the same or less gold (assuming that efficiency was at a similar level...another problem that money can fix)?

"If they were [fixed by money], games would never get delayed or have bugs."

Your mistake in this analysis is that we didnt say money fixed problems, we said that it produced more products. But while you're at it, more money would pay for either a higher level of Q&A or more testers. If you deny that, you'd have to have as your fundamental premise that your Q&A workers cant do their job. Merely using the fact that games have bugs doesnt prove that money doesnt produce more product.

Now let's throw an argument your way. Lets say you have one pot of simple tomato soup to be cooked. Of course paying 5 chefs to make that one pot would be overkill. The extra money wouldnt yield any results...but only if you assume that you only want one pot!

Player entertainment is important so I might see fudging for something that would entertain more than eeking out 5% better gameplay.

I just happen to think that the entertainment value from all those salaries is less than having a more fully functional game.

 

[Twinfalls]

Just a quick correction Darksign - that was Kathode, not MSFD.

 

[Sol Invictus]

When you address the wrong person in a conversation with a rebuttal, your whole argument falls to shit.

 

[DarkSign]

Not really. Only a dumbfuck would think that.

Since the meat of my argument was vs a theory, not a person (I know you like to make ad hominem attacks, but I save those for tastier people)...then either the logic stands or it doesnt.

Sorry to ruin your peck-down Sol, but my argument still stands.

EDIT: Am I the one screaming that Oblivion is being delayed when every other person hasnt seen the same release date as you? Uhm no. For someone who says that the release is posted "OMGZ EVEREEWURE!!!" I havent seen you prove that with one screenshot or link.

 

[Chefe]

hello world