• nesc@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Good, there already are a lot more fallout then neccessary.

      • YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        2 days ago

        4 was not all that great despite the QoL improvements. We have enough mediocre fallout, but I would give up an ovary for a New Vegas 2.

        • nesc@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          f3 was fine-ish and f4 complete shit, in my opinion, storywise. Bethesda fallout and Obsidian fallout live in different universes. Bethesda universe is static with all known elements that return and rerurn and return again sloghtly remixed, Obsidian one returns to f2 theme of post-post-apocalypse where nations fight for resources. Bethesda fallouts are better games, while Obsidian one is a better story.

          • hzl@piefed.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 day ago

            I would honestly love to see a Fallout with the sort of gameplay in 4 with a story more in the style of New Vegas. The dialogue tree in 4 left a lot to be desired, the plot didn’t leave as much room for player choice as it might have, and there were lore elements that weren’t consistent with previous games, but the combat was great. And honestly, it was much more open-world than 3 in a way that felt more like the other installments. Fallout 3 was a lot of being hedged in by limited options in the ruins of DC and a lot of very samey subway tunnels. The environments of 4 had a lot more variety and let the player roam more.

    • thorhop@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      In a world where smartphones were invented in the 1920s…

      “Flame wars… flame wars never changes…”

  • ThrowawayOnLemmy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    2 days ago

    Oh that’s really cool! I’ve been watching his YouTube content off and on for what feels like years at this point. Hope he has fun.

  • commander@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Hopefully he’s still weird. People often lose a lot their teenage/young adult fantasizing as they age. It’s not a bad thing. It’s just I feel the major thing missing from modern RPG writing is that they’re not idiosyncratic enough. Worlds written that cater too much to modern (American) sensibilities, slang - anachronistic. I like when it’s written like an all star dungeon master really going hard into the lore of the desert bandits 3000 years of traditions

    • Agent Karyo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      You definitely need a little bit craziness and unpredictability to make a truly landmark game.

      This might be an unpopular opinion, but I think truly good games (the ones that go down in history) need a certain amount of jank. Not jank for jank’s sake, but because something new, that makes you go “wow”, cannot have the same true and tried game design/gameplay approaches that have been done before.

      Just look at the classics, they are considered milestones, but they have a lot of issues:

      • F01 / F02 - It is very easy to mess up your build, but the flip side of this is you have a living world where you can play as a slaver, play as a character with development disabilities and discover a whole new approach. Even if you’ve played the game many times and are comfortable with older CRPGs, the early game can be a slog. I find I constantly have to kite and use cheese tactics in the first ~20% of the game.
      • VTMB - Combat was generally subpar, especially if you went with weapons. Many abilities/skills were unbalanced. Late game was subpar.
      • Deus Ex - Early to mid-game combat is a bit of a slog and considered unpolished by modern standards (but the flip side is that you feel the progression). Some of the stealth gameplay can feel a bit cheesy. I would argue weaponry is unbalanced. Arcanum - Picking the industrial direction resulted in much more tedious and difficult gameplay than going with magic. Both real-time and turn-based combat was shit.
      • Morrowind - For some of the quests, I literally had to almost try a “point and click adventure” approach to figure out how to complete it. I was never a fan of the combat in Morrowind.

      And yet I strongly prefer this approach (and modern versions such Space Wreck, Age of Decadence, Colony Ship, Consortium, New Vegas, UnderRail) to Obsidian’s recent output (let alone Bethesda with Starfield and Fallout 3).