-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Does anyone seriously believe the Todd Howard meme?
- Thread starter TheVoidDragon
- Start date
Why hasn't this video been posted?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvJtSx0_VlQ
Also I'm not usually into reading YT comments, but the first response is apropos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvJtSx0_VlQ
Also I'm not usually into reading YT comments, but the first response is apropos.
Rushersauce
Banned
I'll leave it at full of lies, then. Big as an ocean, shallow as a puddle..It's not anything like that though.
This was a bold-faced lie
Nothing Todd has said comes close to this. If you can point out an example with an article or video I'll shut up.
You having a well-known vendetta against Bethesda doesn't negate the silly statement of the OP, especially with no proof to back it up.
Psychoward
Banned
Do you have any evidence to back that up?
cjtiger300
Member
Hilarious
Rushersauce
Banned
Do you?
Psychoward
Banned
Todd Howard said:
http://www.pcgamer.com/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim-has-infinite-quests-says-howard/
This is what he said, and then sites blew it out of proportion and people started to develop unrealistic expectations. And he meant infinite in terms of neverending. Radiant quests weren't a problem until Fallout 4 where they used them as a crutch for unique quests.
Psychoward
Banned
So you're saying that Todd Howard is basically the embodiment of:
Both hilarious and accurate.
Rushersauce
Banned
I wouldn't call "do the same quest ad nauseum" as "infinite" or anything near that term.
Fuck technically.
Psychoward
Banned
He never used infinite, the site did. He said after the main guild storyline ended there would be randomly generated small tasks, is he wrong? Is that a lie?
I have found that what Todd Howard says seems to be true. But then you find the implementation and it's not done well. For example he said so many variations of guns and crafting in 4 and yes, there is. But when you actually get the game and look at it, you have very little variation in base guns and every variation in gun is one form of the base gun with mods. So yeah, there's a lot of variations in guns, but it really doesn't feel so cause in the end they are all pipe rifles. It feels like there are like 5 base guns and a ton of ways to mod them. Or for example the infinite quests. yes, there are. But since they are all generated and they just tell the computer to generate the same kind, it's all go find this for me at this dungeon. So in the end they all feel the same.
It's not that he lies, it's that he's good at making it sound really cool cause he'll only point out the selling points. And then you get the real thing and it's what he said but you realize it's not as good as he made it sound. So it's best to be a little wary when you get excited at what he says as it may not be as good as he makes it sound.
In short: it's like Bethesda gets good ideas but needs to implement them better. He gives you the idea they had. But then you find the implementation leaves a lot to be desired.
Though he outright lied when he said they made the dialogue choices so that you would know what you were responding when you picked it and you wouldn't be surprised cause your character said something entirely different than what you meant for them to respond. BEcause... honestly, the dialogue in 4 is awful about that. I've complained a little about Witcher being like that. But witcher felt like it was more that you can't completely avoid that when you don't show the full dialogue and I could still see how answering one way would get that. Even if I didn't expect the answer to be that way, it makes sense in hindsight at least. I've been totally shocked by what I pick and what my character says in 4 (how the fuck was I supposed to know she'd say that from those words?!). And I don't think Bethesda knows what sarcasm is because so many times I am like, "That's not sarcasm."
It's not that he lies, it's that he's good at making it sound really cool cause he'll only point out the selling points. And then you get the real thing and it's what he said but you realize it's not as good as he made it sound. So it's best to be a little wary when you get excited at what he says as it may not be as good as he makes it sound.
In short: it's like Bethesda gets good ideas but needs to implement them better. He gives you the idea they had. But then you find the implementation leaves a lot to be desired.
Though he outright lied when he said they made the dialogue choices so that you would know what you were responding when you picked it and you wouldn't be surprised cause your character said something entirely different than what you meant for them to respond. BEcause... honestly, the dialogue in 4 is awful about that. I've complained a little about Witcher being like that. But witcher felt like it was more that you can't completely avoid that when you don't show the full dialogue and I could still see how answering one way would get that. Even if I didn't expect the answer to be that way, it makes sense in hindsight at least. I've been totally shocked by what I pick and what my character says in 4 (how the fuck was I supposed to know she'd say that from those words?!). And I don't think Bethesda knows what sarcasm is because so many times I am like, "That's not sarcasm."
Hero Prinny
Member
Todd Howard is a man full of shit and what i personally find frustrating is that no games media ever calls him out on his bullshit when they interview him, instead they kiss his ass non stop, but such is the way of the world. Just gotta learn to accept it.
No, it doesn't. Unless you're actually counting "well, if you didn't do that Agatha quest, her picture won't show up" as a seperate ending than the one where you did everything the same plus that quest so the picture of Agatha and her violin shows up, which a normal human being wouldn't.
1. By that logic Spiderman 2 on the PS2/GC/XBOX also had infinite quests.
2. By that logic Fire Emblem 4 on the SNES should have been getting crazy praise in '96 for at least 300 endings.
3. By that logic GTA 1 on the gameboy had dynamic AI.
It just seems to me more that he gives you the ideas they had and implemented (but doesn't tell you how it's implemented) and they sound good in theory. And then you try the game and realize the implementation has issues and needs to be improved/changed. I could even see him honestly thinking this is great.
Actually, that's what I find frustrating about Bethesda games. They have good ideas but they could be so much better if they were implemented a lot better. It's what I love about New Vegas, Obsidian took what Bethesda did well and then fixed what they didn't. They got the implementation right and used the engine/game design's potential better for a good RPG (but, I think Obsidian is more focused on the RPG aspect where as Bethesda is trying to make a big playground for everyone with RPG not their first priority).
It's why I would totally love to see Obsidian do a Fallout based on Fallout 4's changes (and of course adding their own features
). I think they'd take what Bethesda did well and actually implement it well and I think they'd focus it more towards RPG (Which 4's changes could still be used to do a decent RPG). And I think there is potential in Fallout 4. Especially now with survival mode. Hell, I hear Far Harbor kinda shows some of that cause it sounds like Bethesda heard RPGs fans' cries and actually addressed them in that DLC.Though I will say vice versa happened with hardcore vs. survival. Bethesda took Obsidian's good idea and impleneted it a helluva lot better imho (and I in general am biased towards Obsidian's way of making Fallout).
he doesn't "technically" lie but when he gets all excited about something and states some remarkable, unbelievable fact about an upcoming game you know to temper your expectations and not expect anything mindblowing. im basically like " that sounds amazing!!! but Todd howard said it so im not expecting much"
That's just as bad if you ask me
I call it the Molyneux effect and it makes me lose a lot of respect for the person making these huge claims
Masterpiece? really? im not saying its terrible but buggy, with a lot of improvement needed in the combat category. Masterpiece should be relegated to flawless games, yeah? I have yet to experience a masterpiece developed by Bethesda. I mean, its a common thought to just expect a bunch of bugs in a new Bethesda game.
That's just as bad if you ask me
I call it the Molyneux effect and it makes me lose a lot of respect for the person making these huge claims
Masterpiece? really? im not saying its terrible but buggy, with a lot of improvement needed in the combat category. Masterpiece should be relegated to flawless games, yeah? I have yet to experience a masterpiece developed by Bethesda. I mean, its a common thought to just expect a bunch of bugs in a new Bethesda game.
elcuervo75
Banned
Todd Howard is my favorite person in the industry. Who doesn't pitch their games as best as they can? I think he is a genuine guy who tries his best to deliver us some awesome games that are truly worth our money and time.
Skyrim is such a masterpiece and I can't wait for the next Elder Scrolls
Skyrim is such a masterpiece and I can't wait for the next Elder Scrolls
deriks
4-Time GIF/Meme God
He's an oil man
https://youtu.be/eeG3I896mIo
https://youtu.be/eeG3I896mIo
Where's my balloon?!
Messofanego
Banned
Pestilence11
Member
crowphoenix
Banned
I mean, I enjoy his work, but those are technically true statements that can be very misleading. I, for instance, would not include minor differences in people at a location in a list of different endings, but it technically is.
RandomSeed
Member
Fallout 4 has infinite quests, and Preston Garvey is going to give you every last fucking one of them, if you want them or not. Submit to the Minutemen. Resistance is futile.
Todd Howard, Savior of the Universe
what does he have to do with dishonoured and doom (the only good games there)
Kremzeek
Member
I look at it from the perspective of everything he says is marketing PR-speak, which means half-truths and exaggerations.
I'm cool with it, since I have that expectation.
Bullshit they are. While technically true, he has a habit of embellishing the truth.
Is anyone saying otherwise? obviously hes talented, obviously those huge selling games have great stuff in them. Also, its obvious you have to take his huge claims with a grain of salt.
OverBlood 3
Banned
Pete Hines is just as bad with his 'Solid 30fps' comment.
He's a right fucking liar.
He's a right fucking liar.
TheVoidDragon
Member
To everyone saying what he said is only "Technically true", that doesn't seem right to me. What he said at the time seems pretty accurate to what appears in the game. Lets look at some of the quotes and some articles from then:
Infinite quests
http://www.wired.com/2011/11/skyrim-infinite-quests/
It specifically says it's about the number of things to do; the game has no limit to the number of quests you can do, which is how he said it would be. That is exactly how it is in the game. He didn't say anything about the content itself necessarily being never ending, his quote specifically relates to the amount of quests you can do and how many will be generated, regardless of what those quests actually contain.
Fallout 3 has over 200 endings
The original "over 200 endings" seems to have come from Destructoid who took his quote and stuck the title of "Fallout 3 will have over 200 endings, you will never have a life again" on it, but then 1 day later posted a new article updating it to say they were wrong and it isn't 200 endings, it's 200 permutations of one specific ending.
https://www.destructoid.com/update-...t-really-endings-but-permutations-77543.phtml
He's very clearly there talking about how what you do will cause a certain version of a thing to be included in the ending, not 200 completely separate and unique endings.
To me what he said seems exactly right. I don't see anything there or in the full articles that's been embellished or exaggerated beyond the usual stuff for a games developer, they're not suspiciously worded in a way that could be interpreted to be far, far better than what they are such as "There will never be repeating or similar quests!" some people seem to have expected. Yes, what was in the game may have been disappointing, but what he said matches up with how they are. Can someone please explain how those quotes are only "technically correct" in comparison to how they are in the game?
For the radiant AI, watching E3 2005 demo video there isn't anything i can see that stands out as wrong but it has been a very long time since i played any Oblivion. Can someone please point out what sort of thing this 'lie' involves?
Infinite quests
http://www.wired.com/2011/11/skyrim-infinite-quests/
It specifically says it's about the number of things to do; the game has no limit to the number of quests you can do, which is how he said it would be. That is exactly how it is in the game. He didn't say anything about the content itself necessarily being never ending, his quote specifically relates to the amount of quests you can do and how many will be generated, regardless of what those quests actually contain.
Fallout 3 has over 200 endings
The original "over 200 endings" seems to have come from Destructoid who took his quote and stuck the title of "Fallout 3 will have over 200 endings, you will never have a life again" on it, but then 1 day later posted a new article updating it to say they were wrong and it isn't 200 endings, it's 200 permutations of one specific ending.
https://www.destructoid.com/update-...t-really-endings-but-permutations-77543.phtml
He's very clearly there talking about how what you do will cause a certain version of a thing to be included in the ending, not 200 completely separate and unique endings.
To me what he said seems exactly right. I don't see anything there or in the full articles that's been embellished or exaggerated beyond the usual stuff for a games developer, they're not suspiciously worded in a way that could be interpreted to be far, far better than what they are such as "There will never be repeating or similar quests!" some people seem to have expected. Yes, what was in the game may have been disappointing, but what he said matches up with how they are. Can someone please explain how those quotes are only "technically correct" in comparison to how they are in the game?
For the radiant AI, watching E3 2005 demo video there isn't anything i can see that stands out as wrong but it has been a very long time since i played any Oblivion. Can someone please point out what sort of thing this 'lie' involves?
Psychoward
Banned
As this thread shows, people aren't interested in the specifics of what he said. They'd rather take his quotes out of context or use clickbait article titles to try and prove their point that he's a lying scumbag because that's more fun to do.
exmachina64
Banned
TheVoidDragon
Member
Something else along the same lines that i remember was how one Fallout 4 developer said something about how after 300 hours he was still finding new things in the game, and that was then taken completely out of context and i saw something like "Fallout 4 has over 300 hours of content!" on a gaming magazine cover, despite nothing suggesting it was even 1 play through and there was no indication of what he even classed as new things.
This really does seem like people just ignore what he's actually saying, make up their own thing based on just the general idea and then say it was a lie when that guess is wrong.
