Kendo 2 Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 Good Lord NO. Anyway, Obsidian sold the Fallout franchise so they are dead in the water. The ONLY reason NewVegas happened was part of brokered deal between Bethesda and Obsidian. There was a one-time payout of $1,000,000 plus and that's the end of Obsidian's involvement. Nothing happens now with the franchise unless Bethesda allows it. Even if Bethesda does say 'okay make NV2' it will be on an already out dated Creation Engine and it will probably use FO4 assets (think NV and FO3). Fanboy drama aside, it won't be a cutting edge game. It will be yet another Bethesda/Obsidian substandard outing.
Sacremas Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 Good Lord NO. Anyway, Obsidian sold the Fallout franchise so they are dead in the water. The ONLY reason NewVegas happened was part of brokered deal between Bethesda and Obsidian. There was a one-time payout of $1,000,000 plus and that's the end of Obsidian's involvement. Nothing happens now with the franchise unless Bethesda allows it. Even if Bethesda does say 'okay make NV2' it will be on an already out dated Creation Engine and it will probably use FO4 assets (think NV and FO3). Fanboy drama aside, it won't be a cutting edge game. It will be yet another Bethesda/Obsidian substandard outing. Fallout New Vegas sold 3.82 million units on the x-box, 2.90 million units on the PS4, and 1.12 million units on the PC, that's 7.84 million copies sold (not counting the DLCs), and it's got an 84 rating on Metacritic. I think the odds are much greater that Obsidian is working on a sequel RIGHT NOW than a sequel not coming along at all with those numbers in mind. Thinking otherwise is just pure denial man. And Obsidian didn't "sell" the fallout franchise because they never had it to begin with, Interplay owned it, Obsidian did a bid for it to save Van Buren (80 % of it's plots ended up in New Vegas, because a large part of Obsidan's staff actually worked on Van Buren before leaving Interplay, which was to have been Fallout 3 oriignally), as did several others, Bethesda obviously outbid them, yet still teamed up with them to let them make Fallout New Vegas and sorta kinda get Van Buren out, and New Vegas was a success. Obviously Obsidian is dead in the water after that.
Sacremas Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 Ooh, I didn't know that! I never returned there in the few plays I blew it up. I usually just cheated and got both houses.
Kendo 2 Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 I get the feeling that some people who play Bethesda games don't play ones from other companies. If they did, they would start recognizing ideas from better games being incorporated into Bethesda releases. The big battles for the cities in Skyrim's Civil War quest...yeah, I saw that already done in The Witcher 2 and they did it better. The newest 'thing' for Bethesda now will be half-assed cut scenes during dialogue in FO4. Yeah, I've been seeing that in UbiSoft and Warner Bros. games for 5 years now; and Bethesda is just now catching on. I can hardly wait to see FO4's 'Diamond City' and its 20 or so inhabitants. In Witcher3 there are than many NPCs in one tavern. juss sayin' New Vegas was a success. Obviously Obsidian is dead in the water after that. Yeah but that Fergus guy over at Obsidian has this pipe dream about New Vegas 2. Anyway, I couldn't care less about who invented Fallout, game lore, fan base loyalty or anything else. The game being GOOD is what's important, but I know Bethesda's track record and they always come in second or third. Game awards are bought and sold. They are meaningless, especially when a Bethesda game is in the running. It's never an award for GOTY, it's a Bethesda coronation. If we do see Moira Brown in FO4 (if you blew up Megaton) it will be as a Ghoul. If you blew up Megaton and went back you'd have found Moira Brown turned Ghoul after the explosion. At first she denies it but quickly accepts it and heads off to find a Ghoul community. otherwise no idea where she may end up if at all. Bethesda Solution: If they use her, she's a ghoul with a bullshit backstory and lines about 'something happened in the DC Wasteland I don't want to talk about.'
GrimReaper Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 I can hardly wait to see FO4's 'Diamond City' and its 20 or so inhabitants. In Witcher3 there are than many NPCs in one tavern. juss sayin' It's the price you have to pay for quality. Bethesda NPCs are fully interactive. They have their own inventory which you can manipulate. They have their own daily (or even monthly, if you go back to Oblivion) schedule and they react to the environment the are in. They can even pick up stuff you throw out of your inventory and keep it for themselves or give it back to you, depending on their personality. Meanwhile, NPCs in the Witcher are literally just randomly generated husks that serve absolutely no other purpose than creating the illusion that the city is populated. You can't interact with them and they don't do anything.
Nixea Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 They could go the Dragon Age route and add a bunch of filler mannequins to give off the illusion that there's more people around. They did that in FO3 with all the random "Megaton Citizen" and whatnot, though those were already more complex than the static, quiet filler DA ones that I remember from Origins.
Sacremas Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 I get the feeling that some people who play Bethesda games don't play ones from other companies. If they did, they would start recognizing ideas from better games being incorporated into Bethesda releases. The big battles for the cities in Skyrim's Civil War quest...yeah, I saw that already done in The Witcher 2 and they did it better. The newest 'thing' for Bethesda now will be half-assed cut scenes during dialogue in FO4. Yeah, I've been seeing that in UbiSoft and Warner Bros. games for 5 years now; and Bethesda is just now catching on. Yeah totally, those UbiSoft and cash-in cows, I mean Warner Bros games were truly innovative on that. Good for them. Wait, err, 2005? Hm. As for Witcher 3, I got good news for you if you are such a fan, CDProject Red just released the modding tools for that, so mods can be made. Just saying... Of course they did team up with Nexus to do it. Shit. (Sorry, low blow. ) ALso my steam library consists of 409 titles, I have about 20 games installed currently, including Witcher 3, Dragon Age 3, etc. Moddability of Skyrim keeps me coming back all the time however. But one Mask of the Betrayer quality release by Obsidian, and Fallout 4 could go fuck itself.
Kendo 2 Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 Meanwhile, NPCs in the Witcher are literally just randomly generated husks that serve absolutely no other purpose than creating the illusion that the city is populated. You can't interact with them and they don't do anything. Not true. Every NPC I clicked on had their own lines and facial expresssions. NPCs like 'peasant', 'bandit', 'farmer', etc. And if you kill them they have Loot (just can't take what they're wearing). And I didn't hear the same voice types or dialogue repeated. Even if your 'husk' thing was true, it is better than Bethesda's empty towns and cities with NPCs that have NO interaction. Click on them , they say one of their three lines (that every other NPC has) and that's it. Yeah and instead of 2000 NPCs like that in CK Projekt town we get 10 in a Bethesda one...and the story sucks. I wish I hadn't played TW3, because now when I play FO4 I'm going be like "Really Bethesda? AGAIN." I had high hopes, but not anymore.
Sacremas Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 Dammit, sorry about the Jade EMpire, you can of course 2 years further back. And Bioware's thing (and note that one year later Obsidian did the exact same thing in KotOR 2) traces back in turn to JRPGs. Bioware was techniaclly doing the same thing as above way back in Baldur's Gate in 1998, as multiple characters could have conversations in the same way they do in Fallout 4. Of course at the time it was a isometric perspective and it was kinda hard to see the difference between characters, and the only part of cutscene was just the camera POV centering on each character that was speaking, but technical limitaitons and animations aside, it's sitll basically the same thing. Bethesda is just really slow on the up-take. To be fair their writing sucks ass, if they ever did a romance with an NPC it would be cringe worthy, Serana in Dawnguard represents the best they got and she's.... so full of holes you'd think all the daedric lords gangbanged her at once rather than just Molag Bal. I have like three mods installed only to fix her dialogue, and another 4 for her alone to fix the rest of her that Bethesda bungled. FoxFingers did such a massively better job than Bethesda's wriitng team with the actress's lines it's award worthy. Rest of the game... main quest is bad, especially when compared to the likes of Morrowind, Dark Brotherhood was better in Oblivion, Thieves Guild is so horrible and nonsensical it's painful to play, Companions is so forgettable I'd just cruise through it, Civil War is a fucking MESS, and Dawnguard (I haven't played Dragonborn yet) has a storyline that's just so bad and nonsensical on so many levels of just following the quest markers because your Dovahkiin was born without a brain it's to weep from. All in all... I fail to see the point in pointing out the faults in Bethesda's games. I mean, isn't that what we're here to fix? Likewise pointing out how Bethesda's games are crap hardly undermines Obsidian's games, rather the opposite. Bethesda does one thing really good, and that's the world itself, the dugngeons, the little details all around, the rest is horrible. Best parts of Skyrim is raiding the dungeons or wandering the wilderness looking at placed ruins, best parts of Fallout 3 is likewise wandering the wasteland, crawling through the tunnels, when the storyline comes along with the Enclave and forces you to follow it my interest plummets massively, I delay that as long as possible, and I prefer not to do the DLCs at all except to rush for the gear due to how structured they are. FNV had awesome characters, a better storyline, much better DLCs... and a horribly flat and boring world you get tired of within the first couple of hours playing it. If it wasn't for mods like A World of Pain and Sexout I probably wouldn't have spent as much time with FVN as I did.
GrimReaper Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 Not true. Every NPC I clicked on had their own lines and facial expresssions. NPCs like 'peasant', 'bandit', 'farmer', etc. And if you kill them they have Loot (just can't take what they're wearing). And I didn't hear the same voice types or dialogue repeated. Even if your 'husk' thing was true, it is better than Bethesda's empty towns and cities with NPCs that have NO interaction. Click on them , they say one of their three lines (that every other NPC has) and that's it. Yeah and instead of 2000 NPCs like that in CK Projekt town we get 10 in a Bethesda one...and the story sucks. I wish I hadn't played TW3, because now when I play FO4 I'm going be like "Really Bethesda? AGAIN." I had high hopes, but not anymore. https://youtu.be/QIeEZeKN8JE?t=7m7s Randomly generated husks right there. I don't consider ambient chatter something that's very interactive. In Bethesda games, NPCs are persistent. They have their inventory and their daily schedule that is there even if you are not. Skyrim was worse in that regard than Oblivion though, because in Oblivion, you could actually kill people with a poisoned apple if you took the food from a table and replaced it with said apple, because NPCs took the food from the plate that was in front of them and ate it. Oblivion also had monthly and weekly schedules for NPCs, for example Quill-Weave travelled from Anvil to Chorrol every month to visit her friend. http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Quill-Weave And of course that NPCs wear what you see them wearing, making their whole inventory available if you steal from them or kill them. A bandit wearing iron armor and shooting you with iron arrows fired from a hunting bow will have exactly that on them when you kill them. People react if you're stealing from them, people react if you run around with your weapons drawn or spells in your hand, they react if you make a mess of their homes or stores, they react if you drop stuff from your inventory. Meanwhile, Witcher has ambient chatter and facial expressions. So much interactivity there, wow. It's a matter of taste, really. I want a sandbox first and foremost, so fewer NPCs are better for me if you can actually interact with them. You kill them, they're gone, you steal from them, they won't have that weapon you just stole from them anymore and will be defenseless if you pick a fight with them afterwards. They're smart enough to pick up weapons if there are any available, though. That's way more important than NPCs who are just there to serve as a simple decoration to not make the world look as empty and meaningless as it actually is. In terms of open world, Skyrim > GTA 5 or The Witcher, at least for me.
Buddy Christ Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 The thing I don't get is, why the negativity and hostility towards Bethesda has to be spread into this thread about Fallout 4. I mean, wasn't the rant thread not enough for it? We even have a Witcher 3 thread in general gaming to praise it as much as one wants and people got told off for daring to say anything against it.
Guest endgameaddiction Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 There's always been a feud against FO3 and FNV fans, Bethesda followers vs Interplay followers. Or there's been a feud against Fallout and TES fans against Bethesda because they have a reputation of making really bad quality games. The issue that stands out the most to me is Bethesda ignoring their fans after the nonstop criticism given upon them for making such games. I have to say they deserve every bit of negative comment about them because their broken games have been a rinse and repeat. They are so capable of being much better but they continue to provide us with these mediocre games. Basically treating us like second class consumers. Which is why I stated in a previous post (rant thread) that I don't know how they get away with this. But truth is, money talks. And if people are providing Bethesda with money purchasing their games, what do they care? They got what they wanted. Their toolkit is what compensates them and gives them more than enough reason to slack off making games because they leave up to the rest of the people to do their dirty work.
Sacremas Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 Well Skyrim on a 360 doesn't really play all that bad, same with New Vegas bugs after they got fixed for the console versions. That's a huge part of the problem ever since Morrowind, as my sales numbers for FNV showed the games sell more on Consoles (they're played longer on PC though, not many console players keep playing Skyrim still, though it's pretty high in demand for backwards compatibility for the XBone). A lot of the dirty edits and crappy stuff really only becomes apparent as you start modding the game, then you have to clean it, an unmodded Skyrim doesn't care one fukwit about the bad edits in Hearthfire DLC etc, it's not going to affect the game at all unless you mod it. Maybe keeping the dirty edits makes it easier for them to work with on the creation kit that they are using for it. This is why I'm kinda expecting the whole mods for consoles thing to either change the whole thing, or be a horrible disaster. Importing mods to an X-BOne that doesn't have a FOEdit or whatever they call it to clean the masters? Next you'll have console users screaming to Bethesda that their game is broken. Or they've taken this into account and changed the whole system. Mods for consoles and mandatory updates via Bethesda.net may end up killing Nexus easily, if cracking the game is the only way to mod it like we do Skyrim now.
Guest endgameaddiction Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 I would say console gamers buy the game for two reasons. 1) They have no idea what Bethesda is about, or 2) they accept their fault products and still play it anyways. Most PC gamers who buy their games more than likely mod their games which is the reason why we have given their games such a long life span. I would say those who buy and play their games on PC without modding it is a small number. We both know that if Bethesda games had no toolkit provided (for free because lets face it, why the hell would I purchase a toolkit on top of purchasing a broken game? that's like hiring me as an employer only to pay me their minimum wage of 0USD) for their games, they would be history. Even probably to the point that they would probably just go console support only. Edit: And with that said, seeing as how Bethesda is introducing modding for console, it wouldn't surprise me tomorrow if they decided to ditch PC all together and go console exclusive with modding. This would completely rule out adult mods (in their favor) and give then substantial over mod control. Because we know these games are bought more on console.
Sacremas Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 They're never going to leave out PC gamers entirely, not as long as there are actual PCs and we don't all end up with glorified netboards ten years from now. I have a friendlist on Steam of about a dozen people that was in the same guild I was in back in my SWTOR days, pretty much all of them play Skyrim and I*ve helped a few of them mod their games, but at least three out of the dozen refuses to use mods at all, one of them even plays the vanilla game quite oftne, unmodded with no ENB even. And like I said the demand is high for Skyrim to be compatible for the X-Bone, and that'll be a version of SKyrim without even the High Resolution DLC, and it's actually in high demand. We'd like to think we're the majroity of people playing these games, but judging from numbers we may just be the loud minority.
Kendo 2 Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 I would say console gamers buy the game for two reasons. 1) They have no idea what Bethesda is about, or 2) they accept their fault products and still play it anyways. Most PC gamers who buy their games more than likely mod their games which is the reason why we have given their games such a long life span. I would say those who buy and play their games on PC without modding it is a small number. We both know that if Bethesda games had no toolkit provided (for free because lets face it, why the hell would I purchase a toolkit on top of purchasing a broken game? that's like hiring me as an employer only to pay me their minimum wage of 0USD) for their games, they would be history. Even probably to the point that they would probably just go console support only. Edit: And with that said, seeing as how Bethesda is introducing modding for console, it wouldn't surprise me tomorrow if they decided to ditch PC all together and go console exclusive with modding. This would completely rule out adult mods (in their favor) and give then substantial over mod control. Because we know these games are bought more on console. Nah, they'll make it for PC too because PC mods are where they get 'their' ideas for the next game. And yeah, the only reason Bethesda games are what they to PC players is because they can be modded. Seriuosly, who the fuck buys a Bethesda game for the combat mechanics, cinematics, or story? Fucking no one, that's who. Without being able to add content people would call Bethesda games the shit they really are. Modding is their only saving grace...and with every game release since Morrowind they take more and more away from modding. I wouldn't be shocked at all if FO4 is more restrictive than any previous games. Time will tell, but I'm backing off of my stance of buying it as soon as its released. Gonna wait until after the new GECK comes out and see what's what.
Buddy Christ Posted August 18, 2015 Posted August 18, 2015 My playtime for FNV is 106 hours, unmodded. Can't tell my Fallout 3 playtime, I imported a retail version from the UK back then, since it was cut here. Skyrim clocked in at threehundredfortysomething hours unmodded. So some people do not buy them because they can be modded I actually installed my first mod for Skyrim last year, shortly before I joined LL.
Guest endgameaddiction Posted August 18, 2015 Posted August 18, 2015 Very true. I was just over speculating. I myself am holding back until I see what goes on. I'll keep my eyes on youtubbie vids on reviews and gameplay and how modding is.
BringtheNoise Posted August 18, 2015 Posted August 18, 2015 I would say console gamers buy the game for two reasons. 1) They have no idea what Bethesda is about, or 2) they accept their fault products and still play it anyways. Most PC gamers who buy their games more than likely mod their games which is the reason why we have given their games such a long life span. I would say those who buy and play their games on PC without modding it is a small number. We both know that if Bethesda games had no toolkit provided (for free because lets face it, why the hell would I purchase a toolkit on top of purchasing a broken game? that's like hiring me as an employer only to pay me their minimum wage of 0USD) for their games, they would be history. Even probably to the point that they would probably just go console support only. Edit: And with that said, seeing as how Bethesda is introducing modding for console, it wouldn't surprise me tomorrow if they decided to ditch PC all together and go console exclusive with modding. This would completely rule out adult mods (in their favor) and give then substantial over mod control. Because we know these games are bought more on console. That would have to include one major thing.... The Creation Kit would actually need to work properly on Consoles (and with a controller, not keyboard and mouse controls). If not then mod would never be able to be created... I wonder how long it will be before the CK gets controller support? The major problem with the previous games from Beth is they were created for 64bit Risc Processor Xbox 360 (IBM PowerPC base core processor with ATI video chip) and PS3 (IBM PowerPC base core processor with Nvidia video chip)..... then the games were converted over to x86-32 and DirectX 9.0c (PC users). Now the games are being made for x86-64 (Xbox One, and PS4 - both AMD x86-64 8 core cpu's with ATI video chips inter-graded) .... Quck convert over to x86-64 and DirectX 11 (they probably just turn off the XBox One's BS software locks in the code to make it work on Windows 7, 8, and/or 10). It is easier to Port from current gen consoles to the PC then from previous gen consoles.... Probably because at the core the current gen consoles are PC's. Hopefully with the 3 major systems they are aiming for being based on x86-64 it will be easier to kill bugs. The major difference is going to be how much more a modern PC can push the engine -vs- the current consoles (as the 8 cores only do 2 ipc, and the gpu's are about equal to a Radio R7 270 give or take). The consoles sacrificed performance clock speed wise to maintain the small form factors they needed for set top box systems.... High end PC's don't have that issue and usually have more horsepower at the cpu and gpu levels.... take a high end i7 and pair it with a top of the line AMD or Nvidia card and they smoke the consoles performance wise (and now the code for all 3 is on par with each other due to them all being based on the same infrastructure. I'm actually hoping to see PC's get back a large amount of the gamer's due to the consoles having the stupid shit like xbox live gold (If you know history it would remind you of AOL ISP service as Live is not the internet, but just a small chunk of the internet that is isolated from the rest of the net... most stupid users can't tell the difference).... Irony you have to pay for Gold service, after you pay for your ISP service to connect to the internet in the first place??? I think Sony has something similar for online gaming.... PC's just have the internet and your ISP... no bullshit middleman. Damn I went off subject on that one somewhere.... oh well... Back to the subject at hand, kinda I guess.... Yeah if Beth gets the CK working on the consoles with a controller (fuck, think about naming items in the ck with a controller.... that would like totally suck ass)... They might be able to drop PC support. But most of the mod's will probably be created on PC, then streamlined by Beth before offered to the consoles.... Still anything that would do Script Extending, or ENB settings that can't be packed into a BSA/ESP set will not make it to the consoles.... so any mod that relies on components like a FOSE/F4SE will not be able to run properly on a console.... so sorry so sad. And we still don't know how the inner workings for the kf/hkx animation files are layed out and if we'll be able to add animations from the get go (not replace but actually add), or if something like FNIS will be needed for adding animations in FO4?
afa Posted August 18, 2015 Posted August 18, 2015 I thought they already came out and said the CK will be a PC only thing. The only difference is that they will try to let console user use mods created on the PC.
GrimReaper Posted August 18, 2015 Posted August 18, 2015 There's always been a feud against FO3 and FNV fans, Bethesda followers vs Interplay followers. Or there's been a feud against Fallout and TES fans against Bethesda because they have a reputation of making really bad quality games. The issue that stands out the most to me is Bethesda ignoring their fans after the nonstop criticism given upon them for making such games. I have to say they deserve every bit of negative comment about them because their broken games have been a rinse and repeat. They are so capable of being much better but they continue to provide us with these mediocre games. Basically treating us like second class consumers. Which is why I stated in a previous post (rant thread) that I don't know how they get away with this. But truth is, money talks. And if people are providing Bethesda with money purchasing their games, what do they care? They got what they wanted. Their toolkit is what compensates them and gives them more than enough reason to slack off making games because they leave up to the rest of the people to do their dirty work. First things first: If you say that you don't like Skyrim, I believe you, it's a matter of taste, really. But I have to disagree with your statement that Bethesda doesn't listen to their community. If anything, they are the company that actually does that the most. They monitor the modding communities and what people generally like, dislike or ignore about their games. For example, Morrowind was really hard to get into, you were just thrown into the world and the game said 'Have fun, but not too much, because you can really fuck up your game' - killing the victims of the corprus disease in a certain location for example could more or less break your game because an important NPC refused to speak with you if you did. So Bethesda made the main story a lot less obscure and protected important NPCs with the essential status. Maybe not the best idea after all, but they did listen. In Oblivion, people moaned about that the whole world leveling with them, so Bethesda tweaked that by making encounter zones - they have a minimum and a maximum level associated with them, meaning you won't find Draugr Overlords in Bleak Falls Barrow, but you might find one or two stronger draugr depending on when you visit that location. A draugr dungeon might have a level range from 20-40, meaning that if you go through that dungeon at level 1, draugr will be level 20, if you visit at level 30, the enemies will be 30 and if you visit the location at level 80, enemies inside will be around level 40. That gives them some room to work with while also presenting the player enemies that are way weaker or way stronger than him. Again, they listened. It was also that people complained about the static NPCs in Oblivion having almost no idle animations, resulting in everyone just standing around. Bethesda fixed that in Skyrim by giving NPCs an animation for everything. They sweep the floors, they cheer, they listen to music, work the forge, cut wood, etc. Violence and kill move mods were very popular for Oblivion, so guess what they implemented in Skyrim? More blood, more gore and dismemberment via kill moves. On the other hand, players mostly ignored the intricate schedules the NPCs had, so that went out of the window. Why bother wasting money on something nobody even notices? And now, for Fallout 4 for example, they went crazy with how you can build your home/town. Housing mods and Hearthfire were a big success, so it's something they expand upon. The settler mods for FO3 and the Tundra Defense mod for Skyrim were a huge success, so they implement defending your settlement against random attacks, too. They may not listen to you specifically, but oh boy, they do listen.
Sacremas Posted August 18, 2015 Posted August 18, 2015 In Oblivion, people moaned about that the whole world leveling with them, so Bethesda tweaked that by making encounter zones - they have a minimum and a maximum level associated with them, meaning you won't find Draugr Overlords in Bleak Falls Barrow, but you might find one or two stronger draugr depending on when you visit that location. A draugr dungeon might have a level range from 20-40, meaning that if you go through that dungeon at level 1, draugr will be level 20, if you visit at level 30, the enemies will be 30 and if you visit the location at level 80, enemies inside will be around level 40. That gives them some room to work with while also presenting the player enemies that are way weaker or way stronger than him. Again, they listened. Brilliant post, but you're wrong here, you CAN easily meet Draugr Overlords in Bleak Falls Barrow, the final boss will be one if you're aorund level 10 when you enter, Overlords are crappy, Deathlords are stornger, and I have met Deathlords as well. I've never been high enough level here ot see if you can get a Dragur Death Overlord as the holder of the Dragonstone, but I did get a Draugr Wight Overlord once, doesn't count though because he's from Revenge of the Enemies... but that doesn't actually change encounter areas, just provide higher level enemies to meet like Cursed Draugr and Draugr Champions, so in theory a Death Overlord can spawn in Bleak Falls. As far as I know base Skyrim levels with you, but most enemies can only reach a certain level, IIRC 30ish, where in comparison Housecarls only reach 50, and even Dragon Priests cap at 80 or so (look them up in TES5Edit). Without changing the encounter areas at all (I have mods like SkyRe Encounter Zones and Morrowloot that does), by adding High Level Enemies you can meet level 100 bandit lords in the cave right outside Whiterun. I'm uncertain if there however are minimum level areas, if they are they're probably in Forsworn areas... but I don't think so, I wiped out the Blackblood Marauders on level 2, and they're up outside Solitude. As far as I know even Alduin levels with you, it's perfectly viable to complete the main quest on level 10ish. My guess is Fallout 4 will follow this exact same pattern, simply because this makes the game much more accessible and actually completely open world, as opposed to just a world where you can't go some areas or get murdered (Cazadores north of New Vegas starting areas and Deathclaws in the middle forcing you to go around the fucking map to make it seem bigger to reach New Vegas ring a bell? In Fallout 3 it's perfectly possible to go directly from 101 to Rivet City, fuck Megaton and Three-dog, the Yao-Guai den and the town filled with Deathclaws are basically the only areas you need to prep for). Encounter Zones areas murder Alternate Start mods as well, as starting anywhere except in the Helgen/Riverwood area will be suicide.
GrimReaper Posted August 18, 2015 Posted August 18, 2015 Brilliant post, but you're wrong here, you CAN easily meet Draugr Overlords in Bleak Falls Barrow, the final boss will be one if you're aorund level 10 when you enter, Overlords are crappy, Deathlords are stornger, and I have met Deathlords as well. I've never been high enough level here ot see if you can get a Dragur Death Overlord as the holder of the Dragonstone, but I did get a Draugr Wight Overlord once, doesn't count though because he's from Revenge of the Enemies... but that doesn't actually change encounter areas, just provide higher level enemies to meet like Cursed Draugr and Draugr Champions, so in theory a Death Overlord can spawn in Bleak Falls. As far as I know base Skyrim levels with you, but most enemies can only reach a certain level, IIRC 30ish, where in comparison Housecarls only reach 50, and even Dragon Priests cap at 80 or so (look them up in TES5Edit). Without changing the encounter areas at all (I have mods like SkyRe Encounter Zones and Morrowloot that does), by adding High Level Enemies you can meet level 100 bandit lords in the cave right outside Whiterun. I'm uncertain if there however are minimum level areas, if they are they're probably in Forsworn areas... but I don't think so, I wiped out the Blackblood Marauders on level 2, and they're up outside Solitude. As far as I know even Alduin levels with you, it's perfectly viable to complete the main quest on level 10ish. My guess is Fallout 4 will follow this exact same pattern, simply because this makes the game much more accessible and actually completely open world, as opposed to just a world where you can't go some areas or get murdered (Cazadores north of New Vegas starting areas and Deathclaws in the middle forcing you to go around the fucking map to make it seem bigger to reach New Vegas ring a bell? In Fallout 3 it's perfectly possible to go directly from 101 to Rivet City, fuck Megaton and Three-dog, the Yao-Guai den and the town filled with Deathclaws are basically the only areas you need to prep for). Encounter Zones areas murder Alternate Start mods as well, as starting anywhere except in the Helgen/Riverwood area will be suicide. You're right. I was thinking about the Draugr bosses that sometimes carry around ebony bows that can oneshot you, depending on armor and health. That would be Death Overlords, I think. Blackblood Marauders are essentially just bandits without names that tell you their strength. They start as low as level 1 and go up to level 25, the same as regular bandits: http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Blackblood_Marauder http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Bandit But yeah, there are minimum levels in Skyrim. There's a draugr crypt north of Markath on the edge of the map that's filled with Draugr Scourges and Wights, even if you go there at level 1. I personally like when there are locations that will outright murder you, makes you anticipate the moment when you are strong enough to finally beat those fuckers. I went to that crypt I mentioned at a very early level, got murdered left and right and left. The moment when I was high enough to beat the enemies was something I really like about RPGs. I agree though that FNV did a bad job with that - the cazadores up north aren't much of a problem, but as you said, the cazadores beyond goodsprings and the Deathclaws at the quarry are just there to force you to circle around the whole map to reach New Vegas. Bad world design imo.
afa Posted August 18, 2015 Posted August 18, 2015 Microsoft worked hard to separate the xbox from the PC, they went after specifically not letting keyboard and mouse to work with the XBox for games. Although with the whole "last console" thing I wonder how that'll actually play out. Some minimal level mob in Skyrim prevent you from skipping ahead too easily. Frost Trolls and bears are some commonly fix spawn that sort of acts as a gate to progress (High Hrothgar is a good example). But a good part of the areas near town aren't too difficult at level 1. Wolves, Forsworn, Bandits all have level 1 variants. Falmers and Dwarven are higher. There's one Frost troll near Dawnstar, but pretty avoidable. NPC schedule is still present in Skyrim. NPCs sets up shop, hang around town in the day time, go to inns at night, and then return to house or inn for bed time. There are some exceptions however. You can argue that the Civil war musical chair with yarl and their steward is also part of it. There's also the burning festival in Solitude plus Khajiit caravan across different hold.
Guest endgameaddiction Posted August 18, 2015 Posted August 18, 2015 @GrimReaper I do like Skyrim. To an extent anyways. But the problem with Skyrim is that when I hit a bug that becomes a game breaker it really kills it for me. It's like I want to really delve into the game and really admire it, but somewhere down the line a bug ends up killing that mood. I'm not familiar with TES games to be honest, and I should of clarified that when I speak of experience it's mainly Fallout and Skyrim. The things you have mentioned have been changes they've made to tone the game down to a more playable state. Either by improving it or nerfing the player. I don't consider that a bug, and those kind of improvements are always acceptable when it comes to mobs in the world being too difficult for a level 5 player and such. And that's where mods come in. Usually to do three things. bring balance to the game or... introduce a cheat god mode weapon or stats And when it comes to that, it jots down to people's personal preferences. The same when it comes to immersion and lore-friendly mods and mods that are not lore-friendly. How one decides to play their game is totally up to them and no one else. My concern is the amount of bugs in a game that still exist after all the patches have been made. Even patches that have fixed one thing and broke something else. I don't expect a 100 bug free game because that literally is impossible, but taking the time to polish out the bugs is what we ask for. And if I have to wait another 6 months to a year for them to polish most of them out, I'll wait. It's about delivering a quality product. Or a product that may be faulty but people working on it to get it fixed. The downfall of that is constant patches end up breaking mods and they have to constantly be updated with the latest patch and script extender. As K2 said a while back, I myself am holding on to hope with Fallout 4 hoping that they really have taken all this time to really work out as much bugs as possible. I don't deny that I bitch and moan about bugs and I will probably buy Fallout 4 if it's not restricted on modding through some form of DRM locked system with their tool kit making their plugins distribute only through Bethesda.net. But the truth is, the ability to mod their games have kept those games alive, but also popular as there's still people new to Fallout 3/NV and even getting into Skyrim for the first time. Yes, there's people who do play these games without mods both on console and the pc platfor, but without the toolkit and the amount of freedom we are able to mod these games, I don't think the pc version would have survived this long without it. Not with their bad reputation for making really bugged out games. Even after the final patch. It's thanks to us we have done what we've done with mods for their games that it's also gained a popularity to those who are on console to jump onto the wagon and buy the PC version to experience the game in a whole new way, This has given not only Bethesda extra revenue, but also Valve for their sales they are known about. All we ask is for a little extra effort into removing as much bugs as possible to make the game more stable. If it wasn't for the script extender team and the creators of the unofficial patches for Fallout and TES games and even Fore who went above and beyond to make custom animations possible for Skyrim, we would be sitting ducks having to settle what we have until some out there would reach out and do those wonders. Bethesda should compensate them for their strong efforts for what they've done and continue to do.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.