233 réponses à ce sujet

[Elvis_Mazur]

I liked Skyrim's "the more you do it, the better you get at it", but I would miss Fallout 3 and New Vegas' leveling up system. Perhaps a mix between the two things would be a good choice? I don't see a problem with it.

[Druk-Qs]

Crossing my fingers for Obsidian developing.

[ObserverStatus]

PetrySilva wrote...
I liked Skyrim's "the more you do it, the better you get at it", but I would miss Fallout 3 and New Vegas' leveling up system. Perhaps a mix between the two things would be a good choice? I don't see a problem with it.

I'd prefer a mix as well, I'm  hoping for a skill system where you can level up your skills by performing tasks like in Skyrim, only the rate at which your skills increase is directly proportional to their corresponding SPECIAL stats. On the other hand, I think level progression and perks should stay the same.

Modifié par bobobo878, 12 janvier 2013 - 12:12 .

[naughty99]

One_Sunny_Place wrote...

Crossing my fingers for Obsidian developing.

It's not gonna happen, BGS has already started working on FO4.

I loved New Vegas, but Obsidian doesn't have experience developing this kind of huge AAA open world sandbox game from scratch. Perhaps after FO4 is released, they might hire Obsidian to make a new game using the FO4 toolkit, as they did with FO3 and New Vegas.

Modifié par naughty99, 12 janvier 2013 - 12:34 .

[M Hedonist]

How fitting that the voice of FO3's newscaster character is the first to tease FO4...

Modifié par Sauruz, 12 janvier 2013 - 12:21 .

[Jozape]

I wonder what loot we will be able to find at MIT. Bethesda better get creative.

[ObserverStatus]

Sauruz wrote...
How fitting that the voice of FO3's newscaster character is the first to tease FO4...

I would have preferred if he had done it in character.

[sympathy4sarenreturns]

This is Three Dog...owwwwwwwwwwww!!!...see you in a new Fallout game.

[Fisto The Sexbot]

One_Sunny_Place wrote...

Crossing my fingers for Obsidian developing.

Same here. Obsidian handled New Vegas very well... they just understand Fallout better than Bethesda.

[Galbrant]

I rather it be a joint operation between Bethesda and Obsidian If by unfinished mess in New Vegas by the countless gamebreaking bugs and glitches . Then yeah I agree the game was broken to the point I almost snap my disc in a fit of rage. But once most of the bugs and glitches have been repaired I thought the game was fantastic. The faction system was much better than FO3 Morality system New Vegas did the Companion system better even with a wheel that improves character interaction. And the Story wasn't predictable I didn't know to expect to see when I first met Mr. House or Caesar. And who could forget the quest beyond the beef? That certainly wasn't predictable.

I enjoyed both games in there own right I hope Bethesda though take some cues from Obsidian I'll be ****** if the faction system and companion wheel doesn't make a return.

[rjshae]

Fisto The Sexbot wrote...

One_Sunny_Place wrote...

Crossing my fingers for Obsidian developing.

Same here. Obsidian handled New Vegas very well... they just understand Fallout better than Bethesda.

Let's see what the critics had to say: metacritic (PC): Fallout 3 = 91/100; Fallout New Vegas: = 84/100. Hmm...

To be fair, there's a certain advantage to developing a game two years after the predecessor, and having much of the engine and content already tooled up. But I'm sure Obsidian also benefited from hiring former employees from Black Isle Studios. One would hope that the developers of Fallout 4 will also benefit from the lessons of its predecessor.

Modifié par rjshae, 12 janvier 2013 - 05:40 .

[Roflbox]

rjshae wrote...

Fisto The Sexbot wrote...

One_Sunny_Place wrote...

Crossing my fingers for Obsidian developing.

Same here. Obsidian handled New Vegas very well... they just understand Fallout better than Bethesda.

Let's see what the critics had to say: metacritic (PC): Fallout 3 = 91/100; Fallout New Vegas: = 84/100. Hmm...

Right and let's see what the critics had to say on Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3.

[Elvis_Mazur]

Jozape wrote...

I wonder what loot we will be able to find at MIT. Bethesda better get creative.

Medium-sized black holes launcher device.

Enjoy your killing while you see your enemies being ripped to shreds

[bussinrounds]

rjshae wrote...



Let's see what the critics had to say: metacritic (PC): Fallout 3 = 91/100; Fallout New Vegas: = 84/100. Hmm...

To be fair, there's a certain advantage to developing a game two years after the predecessor, and having much of the engine and content already tooled up. But I'm sure Obsidian also benefited from hiring former employees from Black Isle Studios. One would hope that the developers of Fallout 4 will also benefit from the lessons of its predecessor.

And.. Oblivion 94/100  

  Which tells you all you need to know about these 'critics'.   Most of them probably played the game for an hour or 2 and came up with some arbitrary #.  

  That's the thing about Beth's games too, they do seem pretty cool the first few hours.  But the more you play and learn about all the mechanics/design choices, the worse and worse they get.

[rjshae]

Roflbox wrote...

rjshae wrote...

Fisto The Sexbot wrote...

One_Sunny_Place wrote...

Crossing my fingers for Obsidian developing.

Same here. Obsidian handled New Vegas very well... they just understand Fallout better than Bethesda.

Let's see what the critics had to say: metacritic (PC): Fallout 3 = 91/100; Fallout New Vegas: = 84/100. Hmm...

Right and let's see what the critics had to say on Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3.

Yep. It speaks volumes for the biases of some gamers. I actually enjoyed DA2 because I didn't get hung up on the little things that seem to bother some people so much. Haven't played ME3 yet, but it did just win PC Gamer's game of the year award.

Modifié par rjshae, 12 janvier 2013 - 06:48 .

[Fisto The Sexbot]

bussinrounds wrote...

rjshae wrote...



Let's see what the critics had to say: metacritic (PC): Fallout 3 = 91/100; Fallout New Vegas: = 84/100. Hmm...

To be fair, there's a certain advantage to developing a game two years after the predecessor, and having much of the engine and content already tooled up. But I'm sure Obsidian also benefited from hiring former employees from Black Isle Studios. One would hope that the developers of Fallout 4 will also benefit from the lessons of its predecessor.

And.. Oblivion 94/100  

  Which tells you all you need to know about these 'critics'.   Most of them probably played the game for an hour or 2 and came up with some arbitrary #.  

  That's the thing about Beth's games too, they do seem pretty cool the first few hours.  But the more you play and learn about all the mechanics/design choices, the worse and worse they get.

Yeah, mainstream video game journalism is such a mess right now. I don't understand how people can find it remotely credible any longer. It actually took me a while to realize they were full of crap though.

[Addai]

bussinrounds wrote...

  Which tells you all you need to know about these 'critics'.   Most of them probably played the game for an hour or 2 and came up with some arbitrary #.  

  That's the thing about Beth's games too, they do seem pretty cool the first few hours.  But the more you play and learn about all the mechanics/design choices, the worse and worse they get.

Which is why so many people spend hundreds, even thousands of hours playing them.

[Addai]

Galbrant wrote...

I rather it be a joint operation between Bethesda and Obsidian If by unfinished mess in New Vegas by the countless gamebreaking bugs and glitches .

Bethesda did the QA for FNV.

But you can stop wondering and wishing, because it's not going to happen.

[Roflbox]

rjshae wrote...

Roflbox wrote...

rjshae wrote...

Fisto The Sexbot wrote...

One_Sunny_Place wrote...

Crossing my fingers for Obsidian developing.

Same here. Obsidian handled New Vegas very well... they just understand Fallout better than Bethesda.

Let's see what the critics had to say: metacritic (PC): Fallout 3 = 91/100; Fallout New Vegas: = 84/100. Hmm...

Right and let's see what the critics had to say on Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3.

Yep. It speaks volumes for the biases of some gamers. I actually enjoyed DA2 because I didn't get hung up on the little things that seem to bother some people so much. Haven't played ME3 yet, but it did just win PC Gamer's game of the year award.

I wasn't saying DA2 or ME3 are good. I was showing how critics and gamers don't share the same views. TOR was hailed as the WoW killer and the only critics have changed their mind because gamers refused to play such a crappy game. 

http://images.euroga...0x-1/quality/91

[bussinrounds]

Addai67 wrote...



even thousands of hours playing them.

   LARPers gonna LARP:wizard:

Modifié par bussinrounds, 12 janvier 2013 - 09:55 .

[naughty99]

bussinrounds wrote...

Addai67 wrote...



even thousands of hours playing them.

   LARPers gonna LARP
Role players gonna role play

Fixed that for you 

For your future reference, here is what that word actually means:

Live Action Role Playing: a form of role-playing game where the participants dress up in costumes and physically act out their character's actions

Role Playing Game: a game in which you play a role by doing what you think your character would choose to do

Role Playing: doing what you think your character would choose to do. For example: 
- responding to NPC dialogue in the way you think your character would respond
- going where you think your character would want to go
- making quest choices you think your character would choose
- allying with factions you think your character would want to join

Pen and Paper RPG: a role playing game played by a game master and a group of at least one or more players, using pen and paper to keep track of characters, events and locations, in which the game master plays the role of the NPCs and monsters

Videogame RPG: a videogame which incorporates some elements from pen and paper RPGs and provides at least a minimum framework for roleplaying

Modifié par naughty99, 12 janvier 2013 - 10:39 .

[Gatt9]

naughty99 wrote...

bussinrounds wrote...

Addai67 wrote...



even thousands of hours playing them.

   LARPers gonna LARP
Role players gonna role play

Fixed that for you 

For your future reference, here is what that word actually means:

Live Action Role Playing: a form of role-playing game where the participants dress up in costumes and physically act out their character's actions

Role Playing Game: a game in which you play a role by doing what you think your character would choose to do

Role Playing: doing what you think your character would choose to do. For example: 
- responding to NPC dialogue in the way you think your character would respond
- going where you think your character would want to go
- making quest choices you think your character would choose
- allying with factions you think your character would want to join

Pen and Paper RPG: a role playing game played by a game master and a group of at least one or more players, using pen and paper to keep track of characters, events and locations, in which the game master plays the role of the NPCs and monsters

Videogame RPG: a videogame which incorporates some elements from pen and paper RPGs and provides at least a minimum framework for roleplaying

Actually,  he is right.  Bethesda games in particular are LARPS,  not CRPGs.  The "Character" in a Bethesda game doesn't exist,  since he is undefined by either stats or skills in any significant way,  as in a Bethesda game everything centers around the Player's skill.  The "Character" in a Bethesda game has no real background,  no morality,  no motivations,  it's all derived from the Player.

As such,  it fails that condition in your post of "Character",  since what you see on the screen is an Avatar for the Player and his skill/morality/etc.  Which moves it right into LARPS per your definitions.

[naughty99]

Gatt9 wrote...

naughty99 wrote...

bussinrounds wrote...

Addai67 wrote...



even thousands of hours playing them.

   LARPers gonna LARP
Role players gonna role play

Fixed that for you 

For your future reference, here is what that word actually means:

Live Action Role Playing: a form of role-playing game where the participants dress up in costumes and physically act out their character's actions

Role Playing Game: a game in which you play a role by doing what you think your character would choose to do

Role Playing: doing what you think your character would choose to do. For example: 
- responding to NPC dialogue in the way you think your character would respond
- going where you think your character would want to go
- making quest choices you think your character would choose
- allying with factions you think your character would want to join

Pen and Paper RPG: a role playing game played by a game master and a group of at least one or more players, using pen and paper to keep track of characters, events and locations, in which the game master plays the role of the NPCs and monsters

Videogame RPG: a videogame which incorporates some elements from pen and paper RPGs and provides at least a minimum framework for roleplaying

Actually,  he is right.  Bethesda games in particular are LARPS,  not CRPGs.  The "Character" in a Bethesda game doesn't exist,  since he is undefined by either stats or skills in any significant way,  as in a Bethesda game everything centers around the Player's skill.  The "Character" in a Bethesda game has no real background,  no morality,  no motivations,  it's all derived from the Player.

As such,  it fails that condition in your post of "Character",  since what you see on the screen is an Avatar for the Player and his skill/morality/etc.  Which moves it right into LARPS per your definitions.

LARPing is something you can only do in real life, putting on a costume and physically acting out the actions of your character. You cannot "live action role play" your videogame.

When you are playing a pen and paper RPG, or a videogame RPG, you do not run around physically acting out your character or re-enacting battles etc. Some people use minis as a visual aid, but they are not spending their time swinging wooden swords at each other.

Role playing is simply considering your character concept and doing what you think your character would want to do. If you physically act that out with costumes and wooden swords, you could be considered to be LARPing.

If you tell your GM what you think your character wants to do, you are roleplaying in a PnP game.

If you make choices in a videogame based on what you think your character wants to do, you are roleplaying in a videogame.

[bussinrounds]

If the game acknowledges your actions and actually has mechanics for it, you're roleplaying, If you're just going around making up s**t in your head and the game doesn't acknowledge it/have mechanics for it, your LARPing.(acting)

The only difference between virtual LARPing in Skyrim and Live Action Roleplaying, is that one is done outside.

[naughty99]

bussinrounds wrote...

If the game acknowledges your actions and actually has mechanics for it, you're roleplaying, If you're just going around making up s**t in your head and the game doesn't acknowledge it/have mechanics for it, your LARPing.(acting)

The only difference between virtual LARPing in Skyrim and Live Action Roleplaying, is that one is done outside.

"Live action role playing" is taking the concept of role playing a character in a game and then physically acting it out in the real world.

Now you have invented a silly concept like "virtual" live action role playing, in other words taking it out of the real world and back into the game again?

Come on, bussinrounds, let's be honest here. I'm sure you know what role playing is, and you have been trying to make up some way to insult people who role play because calling people "filthy roleplayers" doesn't sound quite so insulting.