227 réponses à ce sujet

[ObserverStatus]

Reaffirms my feelings about Neo-bethesda tho. They are too shallow, how many player elements can be used as a reaction in a bethesda game? In skyrim I could join every guild without anyone batting an eye. It looks like their current philosophy is going for density rather than an actual concrete system. I will say this though, they have an outstanding crafting framework to work with.

Perhaps Fallout 4's crafting system will be outstanding, but I wasn't terribly fond of Skyrim's. It seems like ever since Minecraft, every game dev and their moms have been developing crafting systems of their own, but what made Minecraft's fun is that it never forces the player to make anything they don't want. Sitting around for 5 hours making iron daggers just isn't my idea of a good time.

[malloc]

Perhaps Fallout 4's crafting system will be outstanding, but I wasn't terribly fond of Skyrim's. It seems like ever since Minecraft, every game dev and their moms have been developing crafting systems of their own, but what made Minecraft's fun is that it never forces the player to make anything they don't want. Sitting around for 5 hours making iron daggers just isn't my idea of a good time.

Well now comes in the framework right, they already have the system in place. If they can build on top of that they would be extremely good., I remember the morrorwind magic system that was extremely robust by allowing users to mix and match different spells to create their own if I am not mistaken.

[ObserverStatus]

Well now comes in the framework right, they already have the system in place. If they can build on top of that they would be extremely good., I remember the morrorwind magic system that was extremely robust by allowing users to mix and match different spells to create their own if I am not mistaken.

I do like the what I've seen of the weapon crafting system so far, seems to have taken some cues from Blacklight Retribution. Never played Morrowind though, so I'll have to take your word for it.

[malloc]

I do like the what I've seen of the weapon crafting system so far, seems to have taken some cues from Blacklight Retribution. Never played Morrowind though, so I'll have to take your word for it.

I just hope they up their reactivity game.  I would rather have exclusive guild missions or lockouts than an ability to join everything. Cheapens the roleplaying imo. I have a rule which says, if the game does not react to your decisions, you are probably larping.

 

 

[BabyPuncher]

Look, I'm a big proponent of ''to each his own'' and all that.

 

But, I'm sorry, this is simply wrong. Objectively wrong. Fallout 3 has mediocre writing at best, **** one at worst.

 

Is that right?

 

And what is it that NV does supposedly so well, exactly?

[Br3admax]

Reaffirms my feelings about Neo-bethesda tho. They are too shallow, how many player elements can be used as a reaction in a bethesda game? In skyrim I could join every guild without anyone batting an eye. It looks like their current philosophy is going for density rather than an actual concrete system. I will say this though, they have an outstanding crafting framework to work with.

The thing is, why would anyone care? It's not like people advertise that they are in the Thieves Guild or the Dark Brotherhood, plenty of which had people from the College and the Companions of all things. You could try to make a case for the College and the Companions, but as you can get into that just by existing for the MQ, it kind of falls short. Finally, I see the argument, "Because I can, I did so it's terrible," pretty often around here. It's kind of lulzworthy, honestly, and it's not neo-Bethesda. I did the same thing in Morrowind and it was pretty ignorable. 

[malloc]

The thing is, why would anyone care? It's not like people advertise that they are in the Thieves Guild or the Dark Brotherhood, plenty of which had people from the College and the Companions of all things. You could try to make a case for the College and the Companions, but as you can get into that just by existing for the MQ, it kind of falls short. Finally, I see the argument, "Because I can, I did so it's terrible," pretty often around here. It's kind of lulzworthy, honestly, and it's not neo-Bethesda. I did the same thing in Morrowind and it was pretty ignorable. 

It's part of roleplaying. Imagine if I was playing arcanum and I went to join the dark elves without any consequences from the light side elves? It would be extremely anti climatic. It is also a lazy design in my opinion because good design to me is when an RPG system tracks down decisions that are made by the player character. It adds a layer of immersion. Shallow RPGS don't allow me to use my skills to express expertise, you know how many times I have played an RPG which gives me level 10 in fire but doesn't give me the ability to express that in a conversation? Why have a dialogue system if you are not going to reflect my character build in the dialogue? That is how I feel about the current bethesda model. They are extremely great at building worlds do not get me wrong but the recitativity of the world suffers at that. Imagine how many times you could have used your class specialization in Mass effect dialogue?

[BabyPuncher]

 Imagine how many times you could have used your class specialization in Mass effect dialogue?

 

Unless it's a cosmetic dialogue option, that's really a very bad idea. And even cosmetic dialogue needs to be done with care.

[malloc]

Unless it's a cosmetic dialogue option, that's really a very bad idea. And even cosmetic dialogue needs to be done with care.

The idea is not to give you a cosmetic dialogue but to bring in your specialties into the available dialogue. You do not have to pick it.  My Hawke is a spirit mage that resurrects people in combat but cannot use that ability in dialogue. I use dialogue because bioware completely detaches dialogue and world interaction.

 

Also, are you saying most of fallout new vegas was bad idea? Because they did implement the game on a very similar mind-frame. Decisions that you make when building your character can influence to give you advantage,

[BabyPuncher]

The idea is not to give you a cosmetic dialogue but to bring in your specialties into the available dialogue. You do not have to pick it.  My Hawke is a spirit mage that resurrects people in combat but cannot use that ability in dialogue. I use dialogue because bioware completely detaches dialogue and world interaction.

 

Also, are you saying most of fallout new vegas was bad idea? Because they did implement the game on a very similar mind-frame. Decisions that you make when building your character can influence to give you advantage,

 

New Vegas did not do anything like that. It had a speech skill. I have no problem with speech skills, which the player can increase throughout the game. In addition, the player is able to understand that the speech skill is going to be used for persuading people immediately. But it did not screw the player over for a permenent decision the player made before the game even started, not penalize the player for not magically able to divine the consequences of the choice.

[malloc]

New Vegas did not do anything like that. It had a speech skill. I have no problem with speech skills, which the player can increase throughout the game. In addition, the player is able to understand that the speech skill is going to be used for persuading people immediately. But it did not screw the player over for a permenent decision the player made before the game even started, not penalize the player for not magically able to divine the consequences of the choice.

You are wrong. I have used black-widow trait in dialogue, I have used an intelligence of a certain level in dialogue, heck just the other day I used science to interact with an object. These occurrences had nothing to do with speech. Speech is different from dialogue. Speech is an attribute in the game, dialogue is part of the system.

[Br3admax]

It's part of roleplaying. Imagine if I was playing arcanum and I went to join the dark elves without any consequences from the light side elves? It would be extremely anti climatic. It is also a lazy design in my opinion because good design to me is when an RPG system tracks down decisions that are made by the player character. It adds a layer of immersion. Shallow RPGS don't allow me to use my skills to express expertise, you know how many times I have played an RPG which gives me level 10 in fire but doesn't give me the ability to express that in a conversation? Why have a dialogue system if you are not going to reflect my character build in the dialogue? That is how I feel about the current bethesda model. They are extremely great at building worlds do not get me wrong but the recitativity of the world suffers at that. Imagine how many times you could have used your class specialization in Mass effect dialogue?

Yeah, but Beth writes the lore, and if other people in game do it, there's no reason you shouldn't be able to. The Companions aren't the Jedi to the College's, the Thieves Guild's, or the Dark Brotherhood's Sith, so there's really no point here. There's no reason this should come up in conversation either. It may be an intimate thing that you discuss with certain people, but that's not relevant to either Obsidian or Bethesda, as there are far too many branches for this work, and neither have tried to do that, which makes me wonder why you brought this point up. You bring up skills, where would that be applicable where it already isn't? You call them, "shallow RPGS" but honestly, Fallout 3 did the system much better than New Vegas in that area with a percent checker instead of a threshold. I honestly feel like most of the actually valid vaults with Beth games, imo, which get glossed over are covered in piles and piles of, "I don't like this," or "I heard this was bad, and it was so much better before." All that besides, I'd hate to have to live in a world where I can have one career, and that's it, for life. And literally no one cares about your job. No one. Unless you are sharing money with them. Not to agree with Not-David, but putting in one offs and a bunch of gimmicks is equally shallow. I also don't think my ME class specialization could ever be used in Fallout or the Elder Scrolls...

[malloc]

 You call them, "shallow RPGS" but honestly, Fallout 3 did the system much better than New Vegas in that area with a percent checker instead of a threshold. 

 

from a limit perspective it could be argued. Limit this value to make dialogue available but from element reactivity I totally disagree. Let us put this in perspective. How many elements from new vegas could influence an outcome in new vegas?

 

-Guilds

-Traits

-Skills

-One would even go as far as the gear. They are situations which the world has interacted differently because of what I am wearing.

 

Could you make a point to say fallout 3 achieves the same level of world interactivity or reactivity?

 

Reactivity to me is the main line between roleplaying and larping. When the world does not react differently to any of your decisions(such as neo bethesda) you are larping. No two ways about it. The world does not acknowledge anything you do and will not be subjected to change. 

 

When the world reacts to decision you have made, you are roleplaying. Example ,  Arcanum. Big game, open world for it's time but one of the most reactive games ever created. At one time I was given a mission to massacre a whole city in the name of joining a guild. I got 3 layers of reactivate. 

1) From the guild dynamic.

2) From the important people I killed in that city

3) From the people that know what I did

 

From a gameplay perspective it rewards you with actions committed and the way the world changes.

 

Isn't it weird how as a dragon born you do this stuff and only the guards know? don't you find it immersion breaking? For your feats all of your actions should be travelling like wildfire. You are the new dragon born but only the guards know about it! Isn't that weird?

[The Love Runner]

Fallout 3 is a good starting point and my personal favorite.

[Garryydde]

[Liamv2]

It the article talking about all the characters or just the protagonists?

[Patchwork]

It the article talking about all the characters or just the protagonists?

 

And if it is just the protagonists then it's split between the male and female VAs. 

[Akrabra]

Look, I'm a big proponent of ''to each his own'' and all that.

 

But, I'm sorry, this is simply wrong. Objectively wrong. Fallout 3 has mediocre writing at best, **** one at worst.

I would say that objectively bad writing is grammar, spelling errors and use of proper language, while subjectively is if you enjoy it or not. So actually I wouldn't say that the writing is objectively better in New Vegas, but i think more people enjoy it which would be subjectively. Does that make any sense?.

 

Fallout 3 does lack alot of gray in their quests compared to New Vegas, but most of the sidequests in Fallout 3 are very well constructed and actually has some underlying choices in them. And for people thinking that Bethesda can't do gray, look at Skyrim. 

[Akrabra]

And if it is just the protagonists then it's split between the male and female VAs. 

13000 lines each, and they are recording their last session in July. You are free to join our Fallout 4 thread on the forum for all the juicy info.

[Patchwork]

13000 lines each, and they are recording their last session in July. You are free to join our Fallout 4 thread on the forum for all the juicy info.

 

I probably will closer to release, I'll be on the hunt for spoilers then, but for now I'm happy not knowing. 

[Simfam]

No, and no and no. Because there are 3 Beth games that are superior to New Vegas, in my opinion ofc. 

 

My enjoyment of games comes from their writing.

 

So of course I'd prefer NV to any Beth game ever.

 

 

I would say that objectively bad writing is grammar, spelling errors and use of proper language, while subjectively is if you enjoy it or not.

 

Nah, there are conventions that are present in which you can evaluate any given form of narrative.

 

Good stories are objective.

 

Whether you prefer one type of good story to the next is the subjective part.

 

For example:

 

Legend of the Galactic Heroes is a great story.

 

But X might not like that type of story.

 

Yet X can't deny that LOTGH is a good story because of what it does etc etc...

 

He can still prefer Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood, another great story, as his kind of stuff tho'

[The Devlish Redhead]

I know it's a minor thing but what I didn't like about Fallout New Vegas was that you had to walk everywhere.... 

 

The world was huge and it took forever to get places.  No vehicles was a bit of a sore spot for me..

 

Yet even thought walking was the thing in 3 as well I liked that one more..

[Commander Rpg]

Spoiler

 

It's very sad, seems more like a thing about numbers and "I have a longer penis than you".

 

First thing, they didn't create Baldur's Gate, they were just a side team. They did create Planescape: Torment, which has a great written part (script, dialogues etc.) but a terrible and bugged gameplay, Neverwinter Nights 2 (TWO, not the first), which is a fail on mostly every aspect of the game itself: avaricious in terms of PC resources, badly programmed, outdated graphics e poor models; the first campaign is plain and resembles what you call a "Bethesda branded storytelling", the second campaign is praised for the written part only (same) because the programmed game is puking matter.

They also created Kotor 2, which was unfinished (maybe not their fault) and buggy (totally their fault, it's their trademark), surely inferior to the first Kotor made by Bioware.

Icewind Dale has nearly zero story and dialogues, so I wouldn't choose it to make comparisons.

 

Obsidian has a fame for bugs and sure for few (not many) good games they have made, when they aren't so horrible on the gameplay part. This means Fallout 1 and 2 are good games, PS:T is mediocre (5/10) due to its bad programming and lack of effort put in the gameplay part, Kotor 2 is unfinished stuff, MotB does have a good written campaign but runs on NWN2 which is really bad, and finally Icewind Dale is a good game as a hack&slash, not for story or dialogues.

 

Storyline

 

To sum the image, but being honest, you should say: FNV has more than few kinds of endings, all obtainable (if you have the patience) just siding by words with the local tough representative, and spending a lot of hours travelling around in every dump place you can find. This is not inventive, it is just adding more beef to the cooking grill instead of making it more tasty.

 

Factions

 

Honest talking: FNV has a lot of factions, that's undeniable, although you can't join all of them (that would be a little too much to render with the endings, it'd become a mess), and they haven't a real charm as the factions in Planescape (the rpg game) have. I don't say they aren't good, but they are a bit overrated.

 

Content

 

Numbers, numbers, numbers.

Sometimes it's more fitting to have a bit more of quality and less of quantity, that sums my comment on this part. I love how the guy who made the pic underlined the fact that NV has "interesting characters", and F3 doesn't have any interesting character, as axioms, just to go begging the question on how FNV is advanced and F3 sucks.

It's fun to observe it underlines NV has more weapons (as if I cared to have 100+ more weapons in that game, Fallout 2 has less than 150 weapons and it's still a great game).

Minigames can be fun, if you know how to structure them, here are sometimes fun but not really, it would have been better to tie all of them to something factual; they don't add any real value to the game. I remember playing F2 with a gambler and I rarely used those mini-minigames as a source of fun, because aside giving you money, you couldn't do anything else with them, and that's how they were intended, to waste some time to have some cash, not to add anything.

 

Hardcore mode...

 

How do I say it? It can be a nice thing for a restricted number of players, but surely it doesn't provide any real challenge that isn't finding all the water and food you need. On the gaming side, it's fairly useless.

F1 and 2 didn't have this stuff and I appreciate it, because if I wanted to play a damn rpg game I'd play those, not The Sims 4.

[Iakus]

I know it's a minor thing but what I didn't like about Fallout New Vegas was that you had to walk everywhere.... 

 

The world was huge and it took forever to get places.  No vehicles was a bit of a sore spot for me..

 

Yet even thought walking was the thing in 3 as well I liked that one more..

Both games had fast travel once you discovered a location.

 

I mean, yeah Fallout 2 had the Chryslus Motors Highwayman (and the trunk space was certainly useful for carrying extra stuff) but you still had to travel everywhere via the world map, just faster.  And it ate through energy cells and microfusion cells to operate.

[Br3admax]

from a limit perspective it could be argued. Limit this value to make dialogue available but from element reactivity I totally disagree. Let us put this in perspective. How many elements from new vegas could influence an outcome in new vegas?

 

-Guilds

There aren't any "guilds" in Fallout NV of any kind. You're a freelance courier, and really the only sides you can actually join are House and the Brotherhood of Steel, and the Kings, and only one of those actually influences the story. Sure you can have a reputation that comes into play pretty rarely, but as that's a part of the main quest, and has so little impact on the story in anyway, despite what your chart says, meh. 

-Traits

Happens in Fallout 3. 

 

-Skills

Also happens in Fallout 3. 

 

-One would even go as far as the gear. They are situations which the world has interacted differently because of what I am wearing.

No, the gear just hides your faction reputation in disguises that make sense in so limited a scenario that even the game stops caring about them pretty early on if you actually follow the story. The world shouldn't automatically accept you just because you but on a uniform anyway. Especially with people who supposedly know you. 

 

Could you make a point to say fallout 3 achieves the same level of world interactivity or reactivity?

 

Reactivity to me is the main line between roleplaying and larping. When the world does not react differently to any of your decisions(such as neo bethesda) you are larping. No two ways about it. The world does not acknowledge anything you do and will not be subjected to change. 

You're severely overstating the world reactivity in Fallout NV. Fallout 3 also has a bunch of one off and throw away lines from all npcs to talk about how to world changes slightly in the Oblivion-copy fashion that it is. Though this too makes no logical sense in a world where you want authenticity, but yet for some reason expect every random person to not only hear about what you've done, but then to also form an opinion on it, as if this world, or any other Beth world, as Twitter suddenly appear, along with smart phones and the like, and you're just the flavor of the month.

 

"Courier crosses the wastes again, and it was definitely this specific Courier. Not that one, this one." -the Radio News Vegas Broadcast that never actually happens to make your request make sense.

 

 

 

 

When the world reacts to decision you have made, you are roleplaying. Example ,  Arcanum. Big game, open world for it's time but one of the most reactive games ever created. At one time I was given a mission to massacre a whole city in the name of joining a guild. I got 3 layers of reactivate. 

1) From the guild dynamic.

2) From the important people I killed in that city

3) From the people that know what I did

 

From a gameplay perspective it rewards you with actions committed and the way the world changes.

 

Isn't it weird how as a dragon born you do this stuff and only the guards know? 

I expect it weird for every random peasant in Skyrim to not only know what I look like, but then not write a history book about it. I expect a few people close to me, who actually do imply they know in typical, "This may happen in this video game," fashion, and nothing more. Especially with events no one actually knows about. 

 

don't you find it immersion breaking? 

Which goes onto my second point, in a world without any form of telecommunication or anything besides a vague portrait, why should literally anyone actually know not only what the Dragonborn looks like, but also every single thing they've done?

For your feats all of your actions should be travelling like wildfire. You are the new dragon born but only the guards know about it! Isn't that weird?

What's immersive breaking, is someone knowing suddenly every detail about what I just did minutes after I did it, when they should be growing crops and tanning leather like proper peasants. It's also great how they recognize me without meeting me in any shape or form, and how I also randomly talk to all people on the street. Real immersive. None of that is weird at all.