PsychoMachina Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 I have Wasteland 2 and its a game that requires a lot of patience. Had to fight a giant toad, lost half of my men and nearly all of my ammo. Looked on the corpse and all I found was some crappy frogs tongue. Wasn't expecting a treasure trove but still... I lost half my men Does anyone know if Wasteland 2 is worth getting. The director's cut is 50% off at Steam. Original fallout had better controls than W2 . They did horrible job with unity engine, playing that game was pure pain and I had to abandon it after some time. Maybe they fixed it, but god I don't want to go through that again to check it. I have a feeling the experience will be no different for me. I guess I'll watch some LPs to see if it appeals to me. I still have yet to play Witcher 3 and for my post-apocalyptic cravings I have my eyes on the Metro Redux games and STALKER: Call of Pripyat (not post-apocalypse, but whenever I think of Metro I also think of STALKER). Interesting enough, I found my old, unused copy of Saboteur (PC) so I might check that out.
Hamguy31 Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 Lost its edge? no. They took advice from EA by creating shitty games and and hyping it to hell and making a killing off the hype and forcing its slave modders to fix their shit.
vram1974 Posted December 23, 2015 Author Posted December 23, 2015 Lost its edge? no. They took advice from EA by creating shitty games and and hyping it to hell and making a killing off the hype and forcing its slave modders to fix their shit. Holy shitballs, making a killing is right. Jesus fuck https://medium.com/steam-spy/preliminary-results-for-steam-sales-in-2015-43bb49a767bd#.mrv50ttgb They rape Witcher 3 despite being a consensus inferior product
Aria Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 Someone at reddit said that the new style of dialogue feels immersive because: "In real life I don't know what I'm going to say before it comes out of my mouth." This is bethesdas audience in a nutshell now. There are zilions of people out there who let others tell them whats good and not and are going to defend it to the death, thats what the whole hype of FO4 was about anyway. And i agree, they never been good on the rpg part even in their older games, but atleast they were trying, there were skills, you could make spells, you could experiment, although the execution was never good, there was some depth. Now they simply follow pure business decisions, create open world game, copy in the most popular stuff that sells, show middle finger to the lore and swim in money. You can bet TES6 is going to follow FO4 example to the detail.
Mondo80 Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 I just came out and hasn't had a major patch or mod tools or DLC yet. Give. It Time.
vram1974 Posted December 23, 2015 Author Posted December 23, 2015 I just came out and hasn't had a major patch or mod tools or DLC yet. Give. It Time. It's a finished product. Patches can't fix a lack of RPG elements. Modders will likely fix it up. And the DLCs might also be an improvement. FONV had some decent DLC.
Leito86 Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 Disappointed that the game didn't win GOTY although understandably so due to design choices and the competition. In retrospect, maybe it's a good thing that the game didn't get GOTY. Maybe BSG will actually look back at their previous games and figure out why those games received GOTY awards.
AlleyCa7 Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 Disappointed that the game didn't win GOTY although understandably so due to design choices and the competition. In retrospect, maybe it's a good thing that the game didn't get GOTY. Maybe BSG will actually look back at their previous games and figure out why those games received GOTY awards. Agreed. I hope it was a bit of a reality check on their part. They are now hiring and are opening a new office. I hope this gives them the manpower to go back to more in-depth rpg type gameplay, maybe build a NEW engine, just generally get their shit together. Don't get me wrong though I still logged about 170 hrs in FO4 before going back to Skyrim.
vram1974 Posted December 23, 2015 Author Posted December 23, 2015 Disappointed that the game didn't win GOTY although understandably so due to design choices and the competition. In retrospect, maybe it's a good thing that the game didn't get GOTY. Maybe BSG will actually look back at their previous games and figure out why those games received GOTY awards. Agreed. I hope it was a bit of a reality check on their part. They are now hiring and are opening a new office. I hope this gives them the manpower to go back to more in-depth rpg type gameplay, maybe build a NEW engine, just generally get their shit together. Don't get me wrong though I still logged about 170 hrs in FO4 before going back to Skyrim. I logged 114. I tried going back to Skyrim but after 114 hours with only 3 CTD I spent about 1-2 hours debugging constant crashing bullshit and load order and oh god I hate it sooooo much lol. Getting Skyrim load order without CTD is a bit like in the old days when you had bunny ears for the TV and you tried to get the channel just crystal clear. You'd fiddle with the ears 10 times more than watching the TV. I'm going to play Pillars of Eternity for a week or so, see if there are any crazy computer sales after Christmas, and if so I'll buy a better rig to handle 1440p Skyrim.
quin666 Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z28V9To0sKE Four hours of gameplay. Hell of a lot more but my Shadow play like act up from time to time. Beth good at two things two things only. One is open world games, two is glitchs. Modders fix 95% Beth games from start to finish. Any new titles come out in future be rinse and repeat formula. Beth game no mods get 6.5/10, Beth game with mods get 10/10. Beth good at RPG making? Laughable.
sullix Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 In my opinion Bethesda never could make a good RPG out of the Fallout series. I played F3 some time ago so I may miss some details, but overall it didn't seem as interesting (or complex) as side quests in F2. Although F2 was all about side quests (I think veterans can agree that the main "quest" was more of an excuse to leave that boring village). [some spoilers ahead] Whole F4 feels as if someone tried to cut one or two towns from F2. Excluding problems with quests that bring the player to other towns, that so narrows the narrative elements that the results are as they are in F4. It kinda feels as if during the development Bethesda decided to cut out all the possible quest givers other than in Diamond City or Goodneighbor. I mean, you got Combat Zone, perfect place to blend in with the raiders, talk with some, maybe hear some interesting stories - nope, they just go hostile on you because each raider personally now each other, right? Then you got robot races. Damn Interplay would never pass up an opportunity like that to let the player gamble their caps away, maybe buy or put up their own robot in the races. But Bethesda? Nope! Everyone goes hostile, deal with it. Deep down I just have this feeling, those places were supposed to be more complex, but at some point of development someone decided they need to cut the costs and ship F4 asap. At least the failed cashing-in-on-player-made-mods would suggest it. Luckily, there are some thing that were probably finished before the cuts, like all the additional assets in the Institute. I must admit I was impressed to witness the entire synth-creating process. Others like the power armor usage, improved animations, settlement management, that sweet little cover system - improvements in good direction, but not everything seems finished and it doesn't quite seems memorable like buttering up to the First Citizen to become Captain of the Guard or buying the Highwayman and taking it for the first ride. Speaking of, you would think that with working power armor frames they could at least implement working motorcycles. But maybe that's why the game area is becoming more and more small.
Aria Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 In my opinion Bethesda never could make a good RPG out of the Fallout series. I played F3 some time ago so I may miss some details, but overall it didn't seem as interesting (or complex) as side quests in F2. Although F2 was all about side quests (I think veterans can agree that the main "quest" was more of an excuse to leave that boring village). [some spoilers ahead] Whole F4 feels as if someone tried to cut one or two towns from F2. Excluding problems with quests that bring the player to other towns, that so narrows the narrative elements that the results are as they are in F4. It kinda feels as if during the development Bethesda decided to cut out all the possible quest givers other than in Diamond City or Goodneighbor. I mean, you got Combat Zone, perfect place to blend in with the raiders, talk with some, maybe hear some interesting stories - nope, they just go hostile on you because each raider personally now each other, right? Then you got robot races. Damn Interplay would never pass up an opportunity like that to let the player gamble their caps away, maybe buy or put up their own robot in the races. But Bethesda? Nope! Everyone goes hostile, deal with it. Deep down I just have this feeling, those places were supposed to be more complex, but at some point of development someone decided they need to cut the costs and ship F4 asap. At least the failed cashing-in-on-player-made-mods would suggest it. Luckily, there are some thing that were probably finished before the cuts, like all the additional assets in the Institute. I must admit I was impressed to witness the entire synth-creating process. Others like the power armor usage, improved animations, settlement management, that sweet little cover system - improvements in good direction, but not everything seems finished and it doesn't quite seems memorable like buttering up to the First Citizen to become Captain of the Guard or buying the Highwayman and taking it for the first ride. Speaking of, you would think that with working power armor frames they could at least implement working motorcycles. But maybe that's why the game area is becoming more and more small. Yeah i agree some of the parts i seen were looking good, the synth creation part for sure, power armor also...my guess is, the people in charge never let the devs finish most of the game, just tell them to make bare bones and rest goes into hype and knowing the modders will do the job for them.
vram1974 Posted December 23, 2015 Author Posted December 23, 2015 I started Pillars of Eternity tonight. Quite a fun game, reminds me of BG. Felt pretty easy and I got cocky, wiped out by a cave bear lol. Very very good RPG. Of course, it's isometric though. No bouncing boobs here.
sullix Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 I started Pillars of Eternity tonight. Quite a fun game, reminds me of BG. Felt pretty easy and I got cocky, wiped out by a cave bear lol. Very very good RPG. Of course, it's isometric though. No bouncing boobs here. I can probably guess which cave bear that was (got my ass handed to me too) Can't say PoE filled the old RPG's considerably big shoes well, but at least they aimed high. Unfortunately Obsidian have it's own problem with RPG content. As for Bethesda, I liked how they stopped trying to imitate F and F2 in regards of character progression/leveling, but disliked how they simply picked the Skyrim perk model, and obviously didn't put two thoughts in balancing it. In old Fallout games you could at least run with up to five companions if your character's survivability sucked (although, let's face it, most of the times it was like babysitting "Marcus no, don't fire that minigun in burst when Goris is nearby" " Sulik, put that f*cking hammer down and pull out that H&K P90c I gave you!" "Vic, stop running back and forth and just use that bloody stimpak". The only hope I still have (since the next Elder Scrolls game will be probably as streamlined as F4, or even more) is that this cutting down on content won't become a habit. I can't imagine Skyrim with only Whiterun and Graybeards, and that's how pretty much F4 ended up.
Loogie Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 Someone at reddit said that the new style of dialogue feels immersive because: "In real life I don't know what I'm going to say before it comes out of my mouth." This is bethesdas audience in a nutshell now. There are zilions of people out there who let others tell them whats good and not and are going to defend it to the death, thats what the whole hype of FO4 was about anyway. And i agree, they never been good on the rpg part even in their older games, but atleast they were trying, there were skills, you could make spells, you could experiment, although the execution was never good, there was some depth. Now they simply follow pure business decisions, create open world game, copy in the most popular stuff that sells, show middle finger to the lore and swim in money. You can bet TES6 is going to follow FO4 example to the detail. Here's my prediction for the next two Bethesda games: Elder Scrolls 6 will have a voiced protagonist, and your dialog option wheel will simply read, "Yes, No, Later, Info." Fallout 5 will also have a voiced main character and no dialog options - each conversation with a quest giver will basically be a cutscene. Disappointed that the game didn't win GOTY although understandably so due to design choices and the competition. In retrospect, maybe it's a good thing that the game didn't get GOTY. Maybe BSG will actually look back at their previous games and figure out why those games received GOTY awards. There's no official "game of the year" award and virtually every magazine and Youtube channel that covers games awards one. The only difference between you giving something a game of the year award and IGN giving one is more people read IGN.
Kendo 2 Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 Well, there is an official Game of the Year Awards and it is what everyone in the industry strives for and pays attention to. If IGN decreed that FO4 was their game of the year and if Bethesda were to slap the 'Game of the Year' moniker on FO4 box because of it, there would be a huge backlash; not only on-line but also from the industry. So there is in fact an official GOTY award and people do recognize it. Any other Game of the Year would be like The National Inquirer having their own Academy Awards and expecting people to recognize their choices and not the official nominees.
abeman Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 I started Pillars of Eternity tonight. Quite a fun game, reminds me of BG. Felt pretty easy and I got cocky, wiped out by a cave bear lol. Very very good RPG. Of course, it's isometric though. No bouncing boobs here. I tested sword coast legends last weekend when it was free to play, it was rather decent lite-rpg. Ill get that when it gets little cheaper. Not sure if beth ever had edge on rpg-gaming, Feels like playing with legos except you have too few pieces and what you have is same shape and colour... But i still find them better than witcher 3, its not a bad game at all but i just got tired of playing Geralt. 76h played, havent finished it and no desire re-install it. i did restart once with different play-style in mind but meh. And controls felt like you are driving around with tri-cycle just like in dragon age 3. Best thing about it was that devs had more balls and less self-censorship than your average developer.
Vacaliga Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 Well, there is an official Game of the Year Awards and it is what everyone in the industry strives for and pays attention to. If IGN decreed that FO4 was their game of the year and if Bethesda were to slap the 'Game of the Year' moniker on FO4 box because of it, there would be a huge backlash; not only on-line but also from the industry. So there is in fact an official GOTY award and people do recognize it. Any other Game of the Year would be like The National Inquirer having their own Academy Awards and expecting people to recognize their choices and not the official nominees. While all that is true, it has only the official award for two years now, and the GOTY stamp have been thrown around for a lot longer than that, so it's only understandable that there is some confusion going around, even more so considering who is in the jury and advisory panel, making it the industry awards by the industry and not what could be called the peoples or consumers choice.
Kendo 2 Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 Previously it was Spike TV with their VGA. Since that incarnation was valid so is the new one hosted by The Game Awards. There is no confusion. As far as fans and consumers deciding what it the best game is; in 1985 the top grossing movies were things like Back to the Future, Rambo and Rocky 4. Other movies released in 1985 were The Killing Fields, Amadeus and Ran (all Academy Award winners). Fans and consumers are sheep that follow hype and big names, not quality products. If dumb fans and revenue were the determining factors then FO4 would be game of the year; even though everyone knows the game is shit and it wouldn't deserve the award.
Kaz Aanh Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 It should be a FOTM ( Flavour of The Month ) award.
Vacaliga Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 @Kendo 2 Perhaps I misspoke or you misunderstood or both, in any case, I didn't mean to suggest that awards given prior to 2014 were somehow invalid, but merely that the term 'Game of the year' were and still are missing a certain for the lack of better term official sound, in the same way if say the Oscar awards were simply called best movies. and further, since so many sites and internet personalities/YouTubers have their own little lists going around and that is where the confusion can start to come around. Here is IGNs as an example: http://www.ign.com/wikis/best-of-2015/Game_of_the_Year with the line that sticks out being "The nine games listed below are IGN's nominees for 2015 Game of the Year. We'll announce our winner in January, " And they do this even though they had a seat on the 'official game awards' panel. So when the term 'game of the year' is being used so loosely often not even hinting that an official award of that name even exists it can become even harder to keep track of. if everyone referred to their top movie list as Oscars, movies would have the same problem.
afa Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 Award shows are just award shows, don't put too much thoughts into them. As much as I understand the appeal of the concept behind the Game Award and appreciate people putting it together, the showmanship and publicity aspect of it should not be ignore for better or for worse. Depending on who you ask some might say D.I.C.E. award is a bigger deal for the industry. There's no stopping Bethesda putting a GOTY tagline on their games for whatever reason. Also if you really get down to it what does Game of the Year really mean, what was its meaning all these years past.
RitualClarity Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 Does anyone know if Wasteland 2 is worth getting. The director's cut is 50% off at Steam. It is fair. The game is very retro top down RPG. The main thing I came away with the 24 hours I played it was it was very stable. I can't tell you if the game is great as I got it on sale and wasn't sure if I liked that type of game. I can take that type of game or leave it.
DoctaSax Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 If dumb fans and revenue were the determining factors then FO4 would be game of the year; even though everyone knows the game is shit and it wouldn't deserve the award. I quite like playing it, actually. Just another dumb fan, I guess.
Kendo 2 Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 Just another dumb fan, I guess. Depends on if you would vote with your heart or your conscience, I guess.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.