Bioware or Bethesda?

Mr Freeze

Bioware for me...by a long shot.

Loved Oblivion, Hated Fallout 3. And Bethesda published a few muck titles recentely, Wet and Rogue Warrior.

Loved KOTOR back in the day, and Mass Effect and Dragon Age are 2 amazing titles, especially Mass Effect. Roll on ME2.

Burning Eclipse

While I love Morrowind, and to a lesser extent Oblivion, and think Fallout 3 is a gem... It has to be Bioware. Mass Effect is excellent. It has technical issues coming out of it's ass, but there really are 2 different games in there depending on how you play it, without even taking character classes into account. Jade Empire is a great game also; John Cleese puts in a great cameo, not to mention KotOR... Oh Bastilla!! Storytelling in Bioware games is just better I think. Loved Morrowind's story, and while Oblivion was better in almost every area for me, the story was crap in comparison! Crap!!

So yes, Mass Effect really clinches it for me

hooradiation: Exactly... Don't like the questions - 'Time to shut you up'!

One thing I will say for both developers is that their artistic vision and direction far outstrips their technical prowess. The huge loading times and embarassing texture pop-in in Mass Effect, the Fallout 3 DLC being largely broken, KOTOR freezing, Oblivion causing console locking, the slowdown in Jade Empire, the horrible slowdown in Morrowind...

Oh, thinking about it a bit more, Bioware write far superior characters! Plus they got Jed Bartlett for Mass Effect 2 = Automatic win

Vyse

Hard one to call. Two of the best games I've played of the last decade were Knights of the Old Republic and Oblivion. I think Bioware just about swings it.

NeoKubrick

CKWPORT wrote: »

Bioware for me...by a long shot.

Loved Oblivion, Hated Fallout 3. And Bethesda published a few muck titles recentely, Wet and Rogue Warrior.

Bethesda Game Studios didn't develop Wet or Rogue Warrior. Bethesda Softworks published those two games. Bethesda Game Studios have developed the Elder Scrolls series (though, credit is given to Bethesda Softworks to all titles before Morrowind, because Bethesda Game Studios didn't formally exist), and Fallout 3.


It's a difficult choice, but it has to be Bethesda Game Studios. If I had to pick one game from both of the developers' catalogue to play for the rest of my life, I'd be stuck between Morrowind or Oblivion. Morrowind was the North Star: you started guiding your experiences of other games by it. BioWare's games are great, too, but you always have had to accept their major flaws to enjoy their games; you could never change the rules to make a better game like you essentially could with Bethesda's. The gameplay is always an obstacle in a BioWare game, not an experience. With Morrowind, Oblivion, or Fallout 3, the gameplay is an experience; those games are truly role-playing.

koneko

Seifer wrote: »

It's insulting to Bioware to even compare them.
Baldur's Gate 1 & 2 are up there with the best games of all time.

This is nearly word for word what I was thinking.

Also, JRPGs blergh.

Monotype

I prefer Bethesda games (the ones I've played at least), but I think they also have better respect for their customers than Bioware, as they don't do stupid activations and rubbish like that on their games.

Kiith

Monotype wrote: »

I prefer Bethesda games (the ones I've played at least), but I think they also have better respect for their customers than Bioware, as they don't do stupid activations and rubbish like that on their games.

Activations?

Monotype

Kiith wrote: »

Activations?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_effect#Digital_rights_management

Causes annoying problems for windows users, consoles are probably unaffected.

Kiith

Ahh ok, i only played the Steam version of Mass Effect. While DRM can be annoying, i understand why companies still use it. Though thats an argument for another thread :pac:

leninbenjamin

After a long time away from it, I've given the RPG genre another go recently. The Bioware ones i've lined up for the Christmas hols' but a few hours into a Bethesda's Obivion and I'm finding it repetitive. Good story line, nice aesthetics and some decent dialogue (although it's a bit too long winded for me) but the combat so far is really uninspiring.

I probably haven't been playing enough to be able to say this definitely, but considering the last RPGs i played were in the mid 90s, Oblivion from 2006 so far (6 hours or so) has introduced nothing new so far.

TomCo

I vote for Black Isle to be added to the poll.

abelard

What I wouldn't do for a new Baldur's Gate game. *swoons*

BeansBeans

leninbenjamin wrote: »

After a long time away from it, I've given the RPG genre another go recently. The Bioware ones i've lined up for the Christmas hols' but a few hours into a Bethesda's Obivion and I'm finding it repetitive. Good story line, nice aesthetics and some decent dialogue (although it's a bit too long winded for me) but the combat so far is really uninspiring.

I probably haven't been playing enough to be able to say this definitely, but considering the last RPGs i played were in the mid 90s, Oblivion from 2006 so far (6 hours or so) has introduced nothing new so far.

The Oblivion gates are bloody repetitive all right. Oblivion is one of my favourite games ever. But I think you get the most out of it if you treat it like another sandbox game like say Star Wars Galaxies, Finamous or eh you know.
I had the most fun really just messing around in the game world annoying NPCs and then doing a quest and going back to thieving and stuff like that . Long time since ive played it, im thinking im gonna buy it again.

HAving said that i bought the ps3 version to layp it again when i got my PS3 baaaaad idea. It was absolutely horrible on console, but the GOTY PC edition is only €19 off game

Right enough mindless rambling. :rolleyes:

Valmont

Sarky wrote: »

It'll be a long long time before I forgive Bethesda for Oblivion.

Why exactly? Oblivion is one of my favourite games only topped by Morrowind, Bioshock and Mafia.

I didn't like Fallout3 that much but I still voted Bethesda because I found Oblivion and Morrowind to be far superior to the Bioware offerings (I still really liked Neverwinter nights).

Valmont

Interesting posts. I don't think anybody could confidently back up any assertion that Bethesda is extremely inferior to Bioware; I voted Bethesda but I knew that Bioware would be ahead.

You may not have liked it, but there is no denying that Oblivion is a great RPG game (yes, it has issues, but what RPG doesn't).

markfla

KOTOR and mass effect were class, really like oblivion but couldn't take to Fallout 3.....dissapointed by the graphics...I know rpgs are inferior to other genres but I was expecting something a bit more polished.....having said that the best soundtrack is definitely Fallout 3....the old tunes really set the retro/distopian mood:)
"I don't want to set the world on fire"

Jilm

Valmont wrote: »

You may not have liked it, but there is no denying that Oblivion is a great RPG game.

It really isn't.

BeansBeans

Aah it really is.

Sarky

Valmont wrote: »

Why exactly? Oblivion is one of my favourite games only topped by Morrowind, Bioshock and Mafia.

Oblivion was drop-dead gorgeous, but that was really it. The plot was a huge step backwards, the characters were rubbish (everyone was irritating AND a bug-eyed freak), and various little bits and pieces just ruined the immersion completely. Why couldn't you fly anymore? Why were all the dungeons and towns so samey? Why was the Imperial City, the jewel of Cyrodil and capital of a vast kingdom composed of maybe 50 people, half of whom were guards? Why was getting out of character creation and into the actual game so bloody tedious? Why were there still too many f*cking mudcrabs? Oh, there's a truckload of side quests you can do, but they're jammed in there to distract you from the rubbish story. Morrowind almost didn't have side quests at all, it had dozens of MASSIVE quests, all some way intertwining with the really really huge one at the centre of it all. The world was much more original, as opposed to a cut'n'paste 15 square miles of trees and meadows.

Oblivion just has no soul, plain and simple. A pretty exterior to distract you from the fact that it's dead inside, a shallow, hollow experience.

I didn't like Fallout3 that much but I still voted Bethesda because I found Oblivion and Morrowind to be far superior to the Bioware offerings (I still really liked Neverwinter nights).

Fallout 3 was a big improvement on Oblivion. The characters were much better, the visuals were far more varied, the plot was more interesting, the world more immersive. It captured a lot of the essence of previous Fallout games, something Oblivion failed to do.

For me, Bioware always get the immersion right (ie they HAVE some). They always get a story that's good enough to make you want to finish it (Oblivion had me bored to tears with the first gate. Man, Hell is BLAND). They do great dialogue. I don't care about getting the most xp and having the top-tier special ability. When I want an RPG I want to be able to immerse myself in something and see my choices through to the end. I want purpose. This sandbox stuff is all well and good but it has to be done right. Morrowind, and Fallout (not so much 3, I think) got it dead right.

Bioware games are usually more linear, yes, but it works. If I wanted to pay €40-50 to entertain myself I'd buy a stack of porn.

NeoKubrick

Sarky wrote: »

Oblivion was drop-dead gorgeous, but that was really it. The plot was a huge step backwards, the characters were rubbish (everyone was irritating AND a bug-eyed freak), and various little bits and pieces just ruined the immersion completely. Why couldn't you fly anymore? Why were all the dungeons and towns so samey? Why was the Imperial City, the jewel of Cyrodil and capital of a vast kingdom composed of maybe 50 people, half of whom were guards? Why was getting out of character creation and into the actual game so bloody tedious? Why were there still too many f*cking mudcrabs? Oh, there's a truckload of side quests you can do, but they're jammed in there to distract you from the rubbish story. Morrowind almost didn't have side quests at all, it had dozens of MASSIVE quests, all some way intertwining with the really really huge one at the centre of it all. The world was much more original, as opposed to a cut'n'paste 15 square miles of trees and meadows.

Oblivion just has no soul, plain and simple. A pretty exterior to distract you from the fact that it's dead inside, a shallow, hollow experience.


Fallout 3 was a big improvement on Oblivion. The characters were much better, the visuals were far more varied, the plot was more interesting, the world more immersive. It captured a lot of the essence of previous Fallout games, something Oblivion failed to do.

For me, Bioware always get the immersion right (ie they HAVE some). They always get a story that's good enough to make you want to finish it (Oblivion had me bored to tears with the first gate. Man, Hell is BLAND). They do great dialogue. I don't care about getting the most xp and having the top-tier special ability. When I want an RPG I want to be able to immerse myself in something and see my choices through to the end. I want purpose. This sandbox stuff is all well and good but it has to be done right. Morrowind, and Fallout (not so much 3, I think) got it dead right.

Bioware games are usually more linear, yes, but it works. If I wanted to pay €40-50 to entertain myself I'd buy a stack of porn.

What's more amusing than Sarky's wide-of-the-mark and utterly wrong criticisms is imagining his petulant tirade if he had actually understood the major flaws with Oblivion.

The plot of Oblivion was a huge step backwards? From where was the series placed that Oblivion's plot was considered a step back from said position? You clearly haven't played and finished either Morrowind or Oblivion, and I say that because that's the only reasonable explanation to explain why anyone would claim Oblivion was a step back. Here's the plot: bad guy is terrorizing world, and recruiting followers and you, the unnamed champion have to convince the world to unite to destroy this evil. Now, is that Oblivion's or Morrowind's plot? You're having trouble answering that, because it's actually both. So, it's not logically possible to claim it's a step-back when Oblivion's plot was roughly the same as Morrowind's. You can criticize Oblivion for a stagnating rehashed plot, but, then, Elder Scrolls series has never been about the quality of its constructed narrative; in fact, the player has the option to simply choose not to participate in the main quest, at all.

Morrowind had a lot of side-quests, too. I don't know what evidence or criteria you're basing that statement on that it "almost" had none. You don't remember looking for a fork at Dagon Fel? You don't remember looking for any of the artifacts littered around Vvardenfell? You don't remember escorting a priest to the Ghostgate et cetera? There were a lot of side-quests in Morrowind. Elder Scrolls series' side-quests are a choice, not a distraction; you can choose which side-quests you want to complete and be part of your character's narrative (i.e. don't want to be a thief, don't join the Thieves' Guild).

Morrowind's 'Get you off the boat' sequence was much more tedious than Oblivion's sequence where it introduced the King and the plot: it put you right into the gameplay straight away, which forced the player to learn how to survive before exposing him/her to the larger and dangerous world outside and the reward at the end was an escape to that world. That was an improvement the series had made, and good game design.

Oblivion's world wasn't any more cut-and-paste than Morrowind's world. The majority of the map in Morrowind was Ashlands: grey nothingness occasionally broken up by a pool of lava. That was with a game which had a limited draw-distance relative to Oblivion's. Oblivion's map was very impressively designed: it has a lot of variety - subtle and obvious. The towns aren't the same at all: Bruma is different to Anvil; Chorol is different to Bravil et cetera. Oblivion has just as much variety in dungeons as Morrowind. Again, I don't know what evidence you're basing all these implied claims on.

Mudcrabs? Cliff-racers? Case-closed. It's pedantic, but you couldn't fly in Morrowind, either. You could use a levitate spell to lift you up and let you run on an invisible barrier, which was absent in Oblivion.


And, I actually prefer Morrowind to Oblivion. Oblivion had three significant flaws: (1) its leveling-system, (2) random loot, and (3) repetition and reuse of the same voices. They weren't game-breaking flaws, and they weren't enough to regulate Oblivion below Morrowind.

hooradiation

Oh hey, is it time to pretend your utterly subjective views on a game are law?

Man i love it when that happens, it's not irritating in the slightest!

Nevyn

why bioware is better then Bethesda for me can be summed up with one phrase

"Go for the eyes Boo!, go for the eyes"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ozv1RcQJAHA

humanji

Any game that has a miniature giant space hamster is an instant winner for me.

I voted for Bioware too as I've enjoyed their games a lot more than Bethesda's games. I love both companies games, but with Bioware I'm always wanting to know what's going to happen next. With Bethesda I just feel like I'm playing a game to get to the end. They just don't pull me into the plot as much as Bioware games.

Vegeta

I am glad this debate has continued.

I have only experience of console titles (bar Morrowind) so my opinion is somewhat limited, is Bauldrs Gate 2 on the xbox a different game to the one on the PC??

Anyway, of the games I have played from both, Fallout 3 wins hands down for me (mainly because of V.A.T.S). If they could take that exact formula and put it on a Tolkein or Erikson fantasy world then I would be very happy.

Mass Effect, had a solid entertaining story and a great character in Shepard but that was it. Combat was good but nothing to right home about, enjoyed combat in kotor more, side stories were horrifically boring (actually lost interest for a long time over these but Burning Eclipse and Mr. K convinced me to give it a go and just finish the main story), the mako is dreadful, extremely linear, scripted on the rails RPG.

Actually all BioWare games I have played are like this. Every environment is segmented, isolated, requires a load screen to get there and can only be approached one way.
The only choice in the games is usually the dialogue which consists of
A) The right thing to do
Middle of the road
C) Smart, cutting retort
D) Punch reporter in the face

Then Oblivion had some serious bloopers as mentioned already like the levelling and the loot grrrrrr


I think I prefer the characters and plot in a BioWare game but their mechanic just seems dated to me now and I prefer the sandbox worlds of Bethesda games.

Burning Eclipse

Vegeta wrote: »

Actually all BioWare games I have played are like this. Every environment is segmented, isolated, requires a load screen to get there and can only be approached one way.
The only choice in the games is usually the dialogue which consists of
A) The right thing to do
Middle of the road
C) Smart, cutting retort
D) Punch reporter in the face

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eeruIZ0T44

Nevyn

ffs

I played mass effect, did it as a female char enjoyed it, never batted an eyelid about the gender of the targets I was taking out;
But really to say you enjoyed the game cos you got to hit a woman in it?
Thats just sad.

Burning Eclipse

Thaedydal wrote: »

ffs

I played mass effect, did it as a female char enjoyed it, never batted an eyelid about the gender of the targets I was taking out;
But really to say you enjoyed the game cos you got to hit a woman in it?
Thats just sad.

ffs my hole.

I have a female character in Mass Effect too. I respect the fact that the option is there to punch a reporter, regardless of gender. My male Shepard was a paragon. It was my female Shepard who punched the reporter. And I didn't bring the gender of the reporter into it, you did. So cut the crap.

Nevyn

I don't have an issue with the choice in game to hit the reporter who happens to be female by the player what ever gender they are playing.

I didn't bring the gender of the reporter into it the person who made that youtube clip did and relishes the fact saying getting to punch her in what they termed as a falcon punch was worth buying the game for. That's sick imho.

sink

Vegeta wrote: »

is Bauldrs Gate 2 on the xbox a different game to the one on the PC??

Baldurs Gate 2 was only ever released on PC and Mac. Perhaps you are confusing it with Baldurs Gate: Dark Alliance 1 & 2 which were developed exclusively for consoles and not by Bioware. Dark Alliance was a completely separate story and the gameplay was completely different being far more simplistic and dumbed down.

Burning Eclipse

Thaedydal wrote: »

I don't have an issue with the choice in game to hit the reporter who happens to be female by the player what ever gender they are playing.

I didn't bring the gender of the reporter into it the person who made that youtube clip did and relishes the fact saying getting to punch her in what they termed as a falcon punch was worth buying the game for. That's sick imho.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi32lasxcXs

The quality on this one isn't as good, but this is how the scene played out for me.

I have google'd falcon punch and it has another meaning that I wasn't aware of, a very unpleasant one. So now I certainly see where you're coming from. Apologies, and I'm in agreement... For the record, I was taking the first definition here as the given, but the third is something entirely different.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Falcon%20Punch