Jeff played a bit of it during one of those steam request streams I think.
-
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.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Giant Bomb 18: Everything is always a surprise on some level
- Thread starter BUNTING1243
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Jeff played a bit of it during one of those steam request streams I think.
LurkerPrime
Member
Jeff played a bit of it during one of those steam request streams I think.
This must be it, since GB was my first exposure to TFtB around release. Completely dismissed it at that point... but I'm glad I got it eventually.
The first episode of King's Quests and Blues and Bullets were very good as well. Sounds like the next B&B episode will release in December.
Yeah, right. And of course, Contradiction. I guess Her Story counts, too, but I dunno if I can dig it.
Thinking about it, I haven't heard anything about King's Quest or B&B. The QL of KQ didn't do much for me, and B&B... I'm honestly only on board with it because of Doug Cockles (aka witcher Geralt); maybe when it's on sale some day, and finished.
But, yeah, the adventure game GotY awards (in general) are going to be great to see this year. So many worthy contenders. And for GB specifically, I'm really curious where they'll land (if at all) for the staff.
stump sock
Member
I kinda think that's a good thing if handled correctly, because having your choice to be not so black and white is always a good thing. Though considering Bethesda's calibre of writing...
That's the thing, the reason I don't agree is that they're all SO extreme. I'm torn between a middle ground ending that I agree with and experiencing an actual interesting ending.
yeah with some degree of subtlety it would be alright but since every ending requires (non-specific endgame spoilers)
you to kill every single person in one or two of the other factions
anyway, I think I found the most broken gun in the game, and it's a semi-auto shotgun with exploding shells. every pellet explodes for an additional 15 damage, which doesn't sound like all that much, but it kills legendary deathclaws on hard in three shots. I can shoot down vertibirds with one shell.
LurkerPrime
Member
If you mean Tales From the Borderland, be aware it's currently 50% off on Steam. Dunno if that's the lowest price out there or anything, though.Fuck it I'll buy it and stop watching Austin's stream.
Also consider Life is Strange if you don't have it. LiS evangelised me.
Twin Tails
Member
The first episode is free on xbone. Rest of season is $10.
If you mean Tales From the Borderland, be aware it's currently 50% off on Steam. Dunno if that's the lowest price out there or anything, though.
Also consider Life is Strange if you don't have it. LiS evangelised me.
Yeah I just picked it up for 14$ CAN on Steam.
I already have LiS since before release actually (I worked on that game) but never really had time to play it. Now that Vinny is playing through it I'll experience it that way instead.
LurkerPrime
Member
Good work.Yeah I just picked it up for 14$ CAN on Steam.
I already have LiS since before release actually (I worked on that game) but never really had time to play it. Now that Vinny is playing through it I'll experience it that way instead.
Also, regarding the bolded: Whoaaaaa.
I dunno what you did on LiS, but I bow before you. It's a real gem of a game. Thanks for your work.
Glitchesarecool
Member
I've only got Axiom Verge and Dying Light on my wishlist right now, and both are on sale. I really wonder if I should wait until Winter Sale or just get them now. I can't imagine the prices would drop much between now and then, right?
Piston Hyundai
Member
I've only got Axiom Verge and Dying Light on my wishlist right now, and both are on sale. I really wonder if I should wait until Winter Sale or just get them now. I can't imagine the prices would drop much between now and then, right?
Dying Light is absolutely worth 20 dollars.
Good work.
Also, regarding the bolded: Whoaaaaa.
I dunno what you did on LiS, but I bow before you. It's a real gem of a game. Thanks for your work.
Heh thanks... Up until early september I was working for Eidos-Montréal in the QA Department doing technical stuff (haven't tested games in years now). E-M is doing the QA for all Square-Enix Europe games so I worked on LiS, Just Cause 3, Deus Ex, Tomb Raider, etc.
Since September I actually moved to another big studio in Montréal so now I'm working on other great franchises.
stump sock
Member
I feel like I know the answer I'm gonna get from this thread but I want to buy a game on sale
so
Dying Light or Life is Strange?
also Cocksucking Motherfucking Rogue Warrior is $2.50 so I kinda want to grab that too
so
Dying Light or Life is Strange?
also Cocksucking Motherfucking Rogue Warrior is $2.50 so I kinda want to grab that too
LurkerPrime
Member
Life is Strange. It's fate--you don't have a choice.
Dying Light's Season Pass is going up by $10 soon, also. (So it's theoretically 33% off right now)
Dying Light is absolutely worth 20 dollars.
Dying Light's Season Pass is going up by $10 soon, also. (So it's theoretically 33% off right now)
Piston Hyundai
Member
I feel like I know the answer I'm gonna get from this thread but I want to buy a game on sale
so
Dying Light or Life is Strange?
also Cocksucking Motherfucking Rogue Warrior is $2.50 so I kinda want to grab that too
Dying Light is absolutely worth 20 dollars.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Life is Strange. It's fate--you don't have a choice.
Dying Light's Season Pass is going up by $10 soon, also. (So it's theoretically 33% off right now)
I'm happy I got my season pass from that gamestop glitch @_@ where if you brought the game you got the season pass.....
stump sock
Member
Dying Light is absolutely worth 20 dollars.
hah yeah that was a pretty convenient post to see after hitting Submit Reply
this is actually what I'm leaning towards btw
I was trying to think about the opening to New Vegas and I couldn't remember it at all beyond helping defending a town from raiders. I couldn't remember the vault bit at all and decided to look it up. And no wonder I couldn't remember it, you don't start off in a vault.
I hate all the 'I want Fallout 4 Obsidian sequels' that plague FO4 threads because I think Bethesda has it in them to make a good Fallout game and I wouldn't imagine Obsidian getting their own engine out in any reasonable hour to make a game to go with it so I think it's more of a symbiotic relationship than a leaching one where 'based God Obisidan is the only good one' but stuff like that, a lot of the faction stuff in New Vegas does make me go 'Why can't Bethesda ever do anything different with the main story? Why is it always the world savior who comes out of the vault?' Why can't the main character be a ghoul? The syth stuff is some of the more interesting stuff I've seen done in the modern Fallout games but characters like Strong and Cait are so painfully boring and cliche compared to characters like Nick and Hancock. It's like you can see the creative side of Bethesda constantly battling with the cliche focus tested side and anything truly creative or risky will never make it into the main story because they don't want to stray from their formula.
I want Fallout: Hong Kong
I hate all the 'I want Fallout 4 Obsidian sequels' that plague FO4 threads because I think Bethesda has it in them to make a good Fallout game and I wouldn't imagine Obsidian getting their own engine out in any reasonable hour to make a game to go with it so I think it's more of a symbiotic relationship than a leaching one where 'based God Obisidan is the only good one' but stuff like that, a lot of the faction stuff in New Vegas does make me go 'Why can't Bethesda ever do anything different with the main story? Why is it always the world savior who comes out of the vault?' Why can't the main character be a ghoul? The syth stuff is some of the more interesting stuff I've seen done in the modern Fallout games but characters like Strong and Cait are so painfully boring and cliche compared to characters like Nick and Hancock. It's like you can see the creative side of Bethesda constantly battling with the cliche focus tested side and anything truly creative or risky will never make it into the main story because they don't want to stray from their formula.
I want Fallout: Hong Kong
Piston Hyundai
Member
hah yeah that was a pretty convenient post to see after hitting Submit Reply
this is actually what I'm leaning towards btw
It's fantastic. Also, don't get Rogue Warrior. I was gifted it as a joke and I couldn't actually ever get it running.
Antiwhippy
the holder of the trombone
Is dying light less boring than dead island.
Because dead island is pretty fucking boring.
Because dead island is pretty fucking boring.
Dying Light didn't really click with me when I played it, I heard it gets better the further you get in but I guess I didn't get far enough. I also wasn't really looking for that kind of open world game at the time.
Is dying light less boring than dead island.
Because dead island is pretty fucking boring.
https://youtu.be/m6SfYy-4N5k?t=29s
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Dying Light is alottttta fun
9/10
9/10
LurkerPrime
Member
The problem with Bethesda RPGs in a nutshell? Obsidian had to implement a dialog system in New Vegas. In other words, they're way too attached to the light'n'fluffy open world "do whatever you want" aspect of their games.I was trying to think about the opening to New Vegas and I couldn't remember it at all beyond helping defending a town from raiders. I couldn't remember the vault bit at all and decided to look it up. And no wonder I couldn't remember it, you don't start off in a vault.
I hate all the 'I want Fallout 4 Obsidian sequels' that plague FO4 threads because I think Bethesda has it in them to make a good Fallout game and I wouldn't imagine Obsidian getting their own engine out in any reasonable hour to make a game to go with it so I think it's more of a symbiotic relationship than a leaching one where 'based God Obisidan is the only good one' but stuff like that, a lot of the faction stuff in New Vegas does make me go 'Why can't Bethesda ever do anything different with the main story? Why is it always the world savior who comes out of the vault?' Why can't the main character be a ghoul? The syth stuff is some of the more interesting stuff I've seen done in the modern Fallout games but characters like Strong and Cait are so painfully boring and cliche compared to characters like Nick and Hancock. It's like you can see the creative side of Bethesda constantly battling with the cliche focus tested side and anything truly creative or risky will never make it into the main story because they don't want to stray from their formula.
I want Fallout: Hong Kong
You can be a peasant, a hero, an outlaw, or all of them at the same time. Therein lies the problem.
Antiwhippy
the holder of the trombone
You can be a peasant, a hero, an outlaw, or all of them at the same time. Therein lies the problem.
What's wrong with being robin hood?
LurkerPrime
Member
...Dammit. Walked right into that one.What's wrong with being robin hood?
I guess because you're never Robin Hood, but a peasant, a hero, and an outlaw, just in specific places. They never really mix; you'll hear snippets of the whole all the time. The root problem is that their games are never designed to actually figure out what the player is, but rather play along with whatever the player does.
broncobuster
Banned
Fallout 4 doesn't punish you enough for role playing a decent human-being. After thirty hours I happened on a single event wherein acting selfishly is encouraged.
Mister Negative
Member
yeah with some degree of subtlety it would be alright but since every ending requires (non-specific endgame spoilers)it's fucking stupid. like, how is that not the clumsiest way to write that as possible? terrible writing.you to kill every single person in one or two of the other factions
anyway, I think I found the most broken gun in the game, and it's a semi-auto shotgun with exploding shells. every pellet explodes for an additional 15 damage, which doesn't sound like all that much, but it kills legendary deathclaws on hard in three shots. I can shoot down vertibirds with one shell.
I had a sense it was heading that direction so I looked into it and confirmed that my feelings were correct, which is why I feel reluctant to finish the main story now.
Ending spoilers for multiple factions:
I feel like the best case is to side with the minutemen, but that would involve destroying the institute and everything that it could do to help people. ut if I join the institute and (apparently) become leader of it after a time, that would be a great way to help the wasteland using all that technology, but that would involve completely destroying the railroad. I don't WANT to side with the institute, but it seems like siding with them is the only way to save all that work.
BUNTING1243
Banned
Fallout 4 doesn't punish you enough for role playing a decent human-being. After thirty hours I happened on a single event wherein acting selfishly is encouraged.
at a certain point down the main story you have to make a pretty fucked decision. it's actually a really hard choice that i had to walk away from and think about the implications of for a while.
You can be a peasant, a hero, an outlaw, or all of them at the same time. Therein lies the problem.
Except you're not really, especially in the case of FO3&4. You're railroaded into a backstory that is at odds with their game design and you're pretty much railroaded into their non-reactive faction stories with unsatisfying outcomes.
The reason FO threads always end up being about Obsidian, is because people have written off Bethesda. Everyone is well aware that Bethesda totally has the capability to do complex quests, they have the capability to write well. What they don't have is the willingness to make their game work with good RPG mechanics, good quest design and good writing.
Personally I thought that they would give it a go this time, after hearing some of Todd Howard's comments about writing. I shouldn't have believed him.
stump sock
Member
...Dammit. Walked right into that one.
I guess because you're never Robin Hood, but a peasant, a hero, and an outlaw, just in specific places. They never really mix; you'll hear snippets of the whole all the time. The root problem is that their games are never designed to actually figure out what the player is, but rather play along with whatever the player does.
or like yarrr the BoS hates mutants, but nobody says a word about you bringing Strong onboard their airship. or Diamond City hates ghouls but nobody actually cares if you bring Hancock with you
game is chock fucking full of things that you'd think would cause interesting system interactions except that they didn't even try to acknowledge any of them outside of stray lines of dialogue
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Except you're not really, especially in the case of FO3&4. You're railroaded into a backstory that is at odds with their game design and you're pretty much railroaded into their non-reactive faction stories with unsatisfying outcomes.
The reason FO threads always end up being about Obsidian, is because people have written off Bethesda. Everyone is well aware that Bethesda totally has the capability to do complex quests, they have the capability to write well. What they don't have is the willingness to make their game work with good RPG mechanics, good quest design and good writing.
Personally I thought that they would give it a go this time, after hearing some of Todd Howard's comments about writing. I shouldn't have believed him.
Nobodies written off Bethesda though. It still sells well, and it's still an incredibly fun game, and there are parts of stories(Sidequests mainly) that are amazing. It's just that there's a minority that can't accept that and therefore have a need to go and shit on a game incessantly.
Mister Negative
Member
or like yarrr the BoS hates mutants, but nobody says a word about you bringing Strong onboard their airship. or Diamond City hates ghouls but nobody actually cares if you bring Hancock with you
game is chock fucking full of things that you'd think would cause interesting system interactions except that they didn't even try to acknowledge any of them outside of stray lines of dialogue
You have to balance between allowing the player to play freely and allowing the world to be immersive.
When I first started traveling with Hancock, I remember fast traveling to diamond city for the first time and hoping I didn't get attacked or snubbed for having him there with me. I'm happy that I wasn't, because it would be really annoying to have to stop traveling with a companion in order to interact with people at a settlement.
Except you're not really, especially in the case of FO3&4. You're railroaded into a backstory that is at odds with their game design and you're pretty much railroaded into their non-reactive faction stories with unsatisfying outcomes.
The reason FO threads always end up being about Obsidian, is because people have written off Bethesda. Everyone is well aware that Bethesda totally has the capability to do complex quests, they have the capability to write well. What they don't have is the willingness to make their game work with good RPG mechanics, good quest design and good writing.
Personally I thought that they would give it a go this time, after hearing some of Todd Howard's comments about writing. I shouldn't have believed him.
I think that more describes Oblivion/Skyrim more than Fallout.
Nobodies written off Bethesda though. It still sells well, and it's still an incredibly fun game, and there are parts of stories(Sidequests mainly) that are amazing. It's just that there's a minority that can't accept that and therefore have a need to go and shit on a game incessantly.
Hence why I said they have the capability. If the game was only those small stories (and many more of them) then a different conversation could be had. For every good little vignette they have a Ghoul in a Fridge.
stump sock
Member
You have to balance between allowing the player to play freely and allowing the world to be immersive.
When I first started traveling with Hancock, I remember fast traveling to diamond city for the first time and hoping I didn't get attacked or snubbed for having him there with me. I'm happy that I wasn't, because it would be really annoying to have to stop traveling with a companion in order to interact with people at a settlement.
two solutions:
- you can't take Character X into certain situations to keep the story consistent. they go back to base or something
- you don't make such a big deal about certain people not being welcome certain places if you're not actually going to do anything about it
at a certain point you either make your game with your dumb grimdark shit and actually make it make sense or you just let it be fully silly so it doesn't matter. the game can't pick a tone so it's frustrating to an awful lot of people.
LurkerPrime
Member
or like yarrr the BoS hates mutants, but nobody says a word about you bringing Strong onboard their airship. or Diamond City hates ghouls but nobody actually cares if you bring Hancock with you
game is chock fucking full of things that you'd think would cause interesting system interactions except that they didn't even try to acknowledge any of them outside of stray lines of dialogue
Oh, so many games have companion-related problems. Most of the time devs just ignore it, which is a shame. Other times they try to account for it, such as disguises or "wait over here" cues. Sometimes they even try to avoid it, like in Mass Effect 2, there were sweeping rewrites to accomodate one of the most unique companions (though overall it still doesn't work well). But overall it's just disappointing.
Thinking about it, and this is probably because it was focused and small, but New Vegas' Dead Money DLC handled companions really well. Very immersive and well-realised, even if they might as well not exist once you leave.
Overall, I think the core issue is that companions aren't really treated as their own persons, but accessories; once they're with you, they have no real mind of their own. A startlingly small amount of games with companions/party members/etc try in any way to have them react to the player, let alone show their own free will. Off the top of my head, Dragon Age: Origins did a great job, even going so far as allowing companions to permanently leave you depending on your actions and choices. Can't think of much else currently, though.
Designing around the writing is key for it to work. For a long time, I felt that Obsidian was the only one doing this. It's only recently with this explosion of narrative-driven adventure games, and CD Projekt's the Witcher, that other devs have really started to follow in Obsidian's footsteps.Except you're not really, especially in the case of FO3&4. You're railroaded into a backstory that is at odds with their game design and you're pretty much railroaded into their non-reactive faction stories with unsatisfying outcomes.
The reason FO threads always end up being about Obsidian, is because people have written off Bethesda. Everyone is well aware that Bethesda totally has the capability to do complex quests, they have the capability to write well. What they don't have is the willingness to make their game work with good RPG mechanics, good quest design and good writing.
Personally I thought that they would give it a go this time, after hearing some of Todd Howard's comments about writing. I shouldn't have believed him.
And I love it.
One thing I really liked about Dragon Age: Origins is you can TRULY fuck with people and drastically change the outcome of the game. Even ignoring just how fucked up the things you can do are, you can straight up change major parts of the world at the end. A lot of it is addressed in text at the end, but at least it's something that tantalizes your imagination because you've developed this character that has developed this world. My Warden in DA:O was a thousand times more interesting character than Hawke in 2 because of the things I did.
That kind of gameplay is the constant minority of games. The kind of writing or gameplay that doesn't even ask you to use your imagination, the kind that plays with you enough and gets enough of a reaction that you go 'Man, I wonder what did happen after the game ended.' And little things like unique dialogue based on your party or origin that are actually significant or reveal things that are interesting about the world that you wouldn't have known about before, that doesn't exist. All that lore is just shoved into dialogue tapes or computer terminals to keep feeding you dull as fuck present bread crumbs.
That kind of gameplay is the constant minority of games. The kind of writing or gameplay that doesn't even ask you to use your imagination, the kind that plays with you enough and gets enough of a reaction that you go 'Man, I wonder what did happen after the game ended.' And little things like unique dialogue based on your party or origin that are actually significant or reveal things that are interesting about the world that you wouldn't have known about before, that doesn't exist. All that lore is just shoved into dialogue tapes or computer terminals to keep feeding you dull as fuck present bread crumbs.
You have to balance between allowing the player to play freely and allowing the world to be immersive.
When I first started traveling with Hancock, I remember fast traveling to diamond city for the first time and hoping I didn't get attacked or snubbed for having him there with me. I'm happy that I wasn't, because it would be really annoying to have to stop traveling with a companion in order to interact with people at a settlement.
Or you make it totally reactive and have consequence. Give you real perks for having a Ghoul in tow. But then also give you real penalties as well.
Or we could just ask Bethesda to treat the lore that *they* created with the attention it deserves. The last time they did that was in Morrowind.I wanna see Obsidian make an Elder Scrolls side story game, but then again I've always preferred TES to Fallout. They could do incredible things with the world, lore, and factions in Tamriel.
EmCeeGramr
Member
I find it really weird that the Elder Scrolls games continue the exact same "you're a blank slate character, where you come from or how you ended up in this adventure is up to you" philosophy they've always had, despite the games always being about an agent of the Emperor or the subject of a prophecy... but then in their modern take on Fallout, a series heavily inspired by tabletop gameplay, in which traditionally you're just some unlucky shmuck in a nasty world free to do as you wish, Bethesda's decided to make the player more and more narrowly defined as a "character," like a Commander Shepard or Adam Jensen.
It's always about Obsidian in Fallout threads because they made an amazingly well written game in New Vegas. People know this franchise can do better than just the standard Bethesda bad writing.
Plus Fallout 4 wasn't as big a jump over Fallout 3 as people imagined it would be. So if it's a symbiotic relationship between Bethesda and Obsidian, where Bethesda is responsible for establishing the base of the game like the engine, new systems, how it plays, then they have done a bad job on their end.
And this is coming from someone who really likes Fallout 4 and put nearly 90 hours into it.
Plus Fallout 4 wasn't as big a jump over Fallout 3 as people imagined it would be. So if it's a symbiotic relationship between Bethesda and Obsidian, where Bethesda is responsible for establishing the base of the game like the engine, new systems, how it plays, then they have done a bad job on their end.
And this is coming from someone who really likes Fallout 4 and put nearly 90 hours into it.
Mister Negative
Member
Or you make it totally reactive and have consequence. Give you real perks for having a Ghoul in tow. But then also give you real penalties as well.
Or we could just ask Bethesda to treat the lore that *they* created with the attention it deserves. The last time they did that was in Morrowind.
There are certainly better ways to go about it, I'm just saying that I, and a lot of the playerbase, were probably glad to not be inconvenienced by their choice of companion. If it was a pros/cons situation, I'd definitely be more in favor. As it is right now, I don't think there's any reason to choose one companion over another in Fo4 except for a preference for someone's personality.
Which is why Hancock is the only choice.
I find it really weird that the Elder Scrolls games continue the exact same "you're a blank slate character, where you come from or how you ended up in this adventure is up to you" philosophy they've always had, despite the games always being about an agent of the Emperor or the subject of a prophecy... but then in their modern take on Fallout, a series heavily inspired by tabletop gameplay, in which traditionally you're just some unlucky shmuck in a nasty world free to do as you wish, Bethesda's decided to make the player more and more narrowly defined as a "character," like a Commander Shepard or Adam Jensen.
The joke has been run into the ground already, but the whole
- Fallout 3: "I need to find my dad."
- Fallout 4: "I need to find my son."
- Fallout New Vegas: WHERE'S THAT SONUVABITCH THAT SHOT ME IN THE HEAD
thing raises a good point. I think the reason that people have such a fondness for NV is that your character truly is a blank slate. You got shot in the head, and it's up to you to deal with everything from that point onwards.
With 3 and 4, you're kind of funneled into being a certain type of person. Obviously you can ignore it and be as bad or as good as you want, but I think with Fallout 4 especially there's a real effort by the game to make you care about finding your son, and be the character that cares about that. If you want to just explore the wasteland as a badass piece of garbage, it makes the whole intro sequence where you're shown to be a lovely family man kind of irrelevant.
Edit: I think even Fallout 3 makes more of an effort to give you a blank slate than 4 does. There are actually choices to be made in that intro sequence, 4's is just take your family that you unquestionably love and go. I mean, every dialogue wheel in 4 is just choosing between being sad about your wife and son or being angry about your wife and son.
I find it really weird that the Elder Scrolls games continue the exact same "you're a blank slate character, where you come from or how you ended up in this adventure is up to you" philosophy they've always had, despite the games always being about an agent of the Emperor or the subject of a prophecy... but then in their modern take on Fallout, a series heavily inspired by tabletop gameplay, in which traditionally you're just some unlucky shmuck in a nasty world free to do as you wish, Bethesda's decided to make the player more and more narrowly defined as a "character," like a Commander Shepard or Adam Jensen.
Right down to having a single defined voice. I'll freely admit I'm a New Vegas guy, but at least that game doesn't have the tonal dissonance between the free open world to explore at your own pace but having a very urgent and personal objective. You're just some fucker who got himself shot. Wanna find the asshole who shot you? Here's a lead. Wanna expressly stay away from the dude who shot you? The Mojave is open to you. It's a much better start.
but then in their modern take on Fallout, a series heavily inspired by tabletop gameplay, in which traditionally you're just some unlucky shmuck in a nasty world free to do as you wish, Bethesda's decided to make the player more and more narrowly defined as a "character," like a Commander Shepard or Adam Jensen.
The problem is a bit worse than that. The MC in Bethesda FO is stuck in limbo, they're never as defined as those two examples but neither are they a blank slate. This leads to a massive disconnect.
Bethesda's choices of things to work on and add into a sequel to Fallout 3 is straight up bizarre. Nothing feels natural to include. People liked customizing their homes in FO3 and New Vegas and Skyrim so clearly they want to establish settlements and play a busted down shoestring and paperclipped together management simulator? People liked to establish their character so we should put in a voice acted protagonist that still has the same 'video game protagonist' meant to represent you so that voice always feels off because it's not you? We put mini-games in for some reason? We also put in an armor crafting system and random RNG loot elements because people like Diablo and surely they come to us for the same thing?
A lot of the new stuff in Fallout 4 just makes me ask, 'but why?'
A lot of the new stuff in Fallout 4 just makes me ask, 'but why?'
EmCeeGramr
Member
You have to balance between allowing the player to play freely and allowing the world to be immersive.
When I first started traveling with Hancock, I remember fast traveling to diamond city for the first time and hoping I didn't get attacked or snubbed for having him there with me. I'm happy that I wasn't, because it would be really annoying to have to stop traveling with a companion in order to interact with people at a settlement.
So, funny thing
In the original Fallout 3 (aka Van Buren), the first companion you'd be able to find was "the Hanged Man." He'd be hanging from a pole by his neck, but still alive and covered in bandages as if he'd been burned. If you cut him down, he'd refuse to tell you anything about himself other than hint at a connection to Caesar's Legion. He'd also be a super-powerful companion, the strongest combat-oriented companion in the game by far. And you find him right at the start, how lucky!
However, if you've played New Vegas (and especially Honest Hearts), you've probably realized that this guy is secretly Joshua Graham, aka the Burned Man in New Vegas, aka one of the co-founders of the Legion and Caesar's former right hand man, aka one of the most hated and feared people in the entire Southwest. Every tribal NPC or village will fucking hate you, NPCs in towns will be terrified of you, and cause super difficult negotiation situations when he pisses off someone you're talking to.
And Obsidian can fall short of a bonus again.
Kinda their own fault on that one. It had a very short development time of 18 months which they agreed on. Turns out rushed games can have a bunch of technical issues which impacts review scores.
I reall do hope they do Fallout again.
So, funny thing
In the original Fallout 3 (aka Van Buren), the first companion you'd be able to find was "the Hanged Man." He'd be hanging from a pole by his neck, but still alive and covered in bandages as if he'd been burned. If you cut him down, he'd refuse to tell you anything about himself other than hint at a connection to Caesar's Legion. He'd also be a super-powerful companion, the strongest combat-oriented companion in the game by far. And you find him right at the start, how lucky!
However, if you've played New Vegas (and especially Honest Hearts), you've probably realized that this guy is secretly Joshua Graham, aka the Burned Man in New Vegas, aka one of the co-founders of the Legion and Caesar's former right hand man, aka one of the most hated and feared people in the entire Southwest. Every tribal NPC or village will fucking hate you, NPCs in towns will be terrified of you, and cause super difficult negotiation situations when he pisses off someone you're talking to.
as much as I love New Vegas seeing Fallout 3 as it was originally envisioned would have been amazing
- Status
- Not open for further replies.