|
KittyEmpress posted:FO3 is written in a way that's a lot more 'engaging' at the surface. Gamers are trained to look at characters they've met for five seconds and based on backstory go 'yes I do actually care about them'. This is what happens with your Dad in FO3, and that natural reaction we're trained to have makes it seem to have a much larger motivation behind it than NV. This is a good point, and I have to say, F3 does make it work here and there- again, see Liberty Prime.
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 06:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 01:25 |
|
|
CommissarMega posted:This is a good point, and I have to say, F3 does make it work here and there- again, see Liberty Prime. I remember laughing at Liberty Prime's lines, but I think I prefer avoiding giant robot commie killer, just because that's a bit beyond what I like. Though Yes Man and having an army of normal sized robots didn't bother me. Like a lot of things, Liberty Prime was a lot Bigger than what NV's equivalent was (which I guess would be the final 'take the dam' mission.) It's one of the many things that makes me think that FO3 was basically perfectly crafted for people who want a basic 'epic' story in a game. Hell yeah, end the game with a giant robot ranting about communism, lets go kill things! YEAH MAN WE'RE SAVING THE WASTELAND. NV doesn't give you much in way of that. I'm not sure 'thoughtful' is the right word for it, but it's definitely less over the top. Edit: Also FO3 had literally the worst DLC ever. Broken Steel was alright, but gently caress Operation Anchorhead (shooting gallery: The game!) Point Lookout (Haha hillbilly humors. Also, bullet sponges, the game!!!) and Mothership Zeta (Bullet Sponges x 1000000 that never end) KittyEmpress fucked around with this message at 06:53 on Mar 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 06:45
|
|
|
CommissarMega posted:One way of looking at it is that Caesar's philosophy is predicated on it being the bestest ever philosophy, which does not quite work IRL as he'd like it to. I'm not sure. I'll out myself and say that I genuinely think Caesar made a few good points about the kind of rulership the wasteland "needs". Obviously the rape and pillage stuff is just literal cartoon villainy crap, which is disappointing that Obsidian thought necessary to include, but it is hard to argue with a lot of the other stuff he says when other couriers and people talk about how safe legion territory is. That's the kind of 'not clear-cut choices' that I think most of y'all are talking about, and I'm right there with you that this is usually preferable over "save world" vs. "kick puppy." But his entire character and philosophy is just entirely at odds with the burden of player agency that video games necessarily demand. Again, I don't believe he'd trust the future of his empire to you; I don't believe he'd work with a female courier; and I don't believe he wouldn't just send a loving guy to make sure you blew up the bunker like you said you had. Of course, it'd be a real short game if you eliminated all those things.  That's why I think that entire plot arch really belongs in a novel or film or something, rather than being shoehorned into a video game where it just doesn't work nearly as well. And, like, House really had no contingency plan for the courier saying "gently caress you, buddy?" Really?KittyEmpress posted:The one thing I can commend FO3 on is that it's written really basically. No argument here. All Bethesda games are badly written; but we're talking about video games, not novels or film--and impressions aren't always made in the same manner across all mediums. Other than the irredeemably god-awful wreck that is Ulysses, I would say that, sure, NV has spots of decent writing. But for me it was just never fun. The mojave feels like an artificially planned space, a space made specifically for me, a video game player, to gently caress around in. That kills my enjoyment of it. FO3, despite its playskool level writing, was fun. And not fun in a Bro jock COD way as so many of you say, but fun in a way that the place itself felt alive, real. The capital wasteland is an actual location that I can still visualize in my head even when the game is turned off. I certainly don't play the thing to have my mind blown on a narrative level. But NV failed to do that for me as well, because I don't believe its story was suited to its medium. And god drat is the mojave a boring rear end place. quote:Bethesda games in general are... pretty poor on choices in terms of main stories. Bethesda is good at one thing, and one thing only: creating a sense of place, a living, breathing atmosphere; in my opinion they do it better than anyone else in gaming. Maybe that's more important to me than it should me; maybe I'm a dumb bro jock gamer. But I think games should, above all else, be fun and enjoyable to play, and I just never got to that point with NV. Hell, my favorite game of all time is Silent Hill 2, and honestly that has so many moments of objectively terrible writing, along with hideous tank-controls that haven't aged well at all, and yet I still love it because it all felt believable and engaging to me, enough so that I still think of the story and its impact on me, years after the fact. At this point I'm rambling, but let me just put it this way: I think I would enjoy a well-edited novel of NV far more than I did the video game. Chillmatic fucked around with this message at 07:08 on Mar 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 07:02
|
|
|
Chillmatic posted:Bethesda is good at one thing, and one thing only: creating a sense of place, a living, breathing atmosphere Really? I mean, you look at Oblivion or FO3 or Skyrim (I can't speak to Morrowwind or Daggerfall, since I didn't play those) and they're really less places and more constellations of barely-interrelated locations, a high number of which are linear dungeons. To me, at least, the Mojave from New Vegas feels like a place; Skyrim, Cyrodil, and the Capital Wasteland feel like a collection of setpieces.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 07:08
|
|
|
See, I have the opposite opinion of FO3 being 'real'. FO3 to me felt like a bunch of poorly stitched together landmarks that have no sense of impact or reality in any of them. Megaton is probably the 'best' setpiece in the game as far as content that wasn't a straight real world landmark goes, because it's a big scrap city. Even that, with the giant bomb in the middle specifically so players can be 'evul' and blow it up, felt like it was specifically staged. That's actually my main complaint about FO3's 'civilizations'. They all feel really... contrived and disjointed. Rivet city has no means of self-reliance besides a tiny amount of indoor crops, as well as being in the most dangerous part of the wasteland. It feels like Bethesda went 'okay, so we have a town that was built in the middle of dud nuke's impact site. Now where?" "How about on a sunken battleship?" "AWesome!" Honestly the /slaver/ and Big Town felt the least 'set piece' to me, because they were obviously just old buildings 'repaired' with post-War supplies. And Big Town had the issue of being a set piece for EVIL SUPERMUTANT KIDNAPPING AND RAIDING. I've heard a lot of people claim Oblivion and Skyrim feel really impresive and alive too, and I've never understood that. It's always felt like barely connected set pieces for a bunch of different novels.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 07:12
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:Really? I mean, you look at Oblivion or FO3 or Skyrim (I can't speak to Morrowwind or Daggerfall, since I didn't play those) and they're really less places and more constellations of barely-interrelated locations, a high number of which are linear dungeons. To me, at least, the Mojave from New Vegas feels like a place; Skyrim, Cyrodil, and the Capital Wasteland feel like a collection of setpieces. We'll just have to agree to disagree. But in New Vegas it just felt like everything revolved around me and my choices, to a ridiculous extent. Skyrim, Oblivion and FO3 all had worlds that, to me, felt like they existed independently of my player character. I suppose I can see why someone might prefer the "i'm literally god and everything ever has to do with me and my decisions" approach--but it's just not for me. edit: though for the same reasons I mentioned above, I agree entirely that the bomb thing in megaton was incredibly stupid and "video-gamey". Chillmatic fucked around with this message at 07:15 on Mar 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 07:13
|
|
|
Chillmatic posted:We'll just have to agree to disagree. But in New Vegas it just felt like everything revolved around me and my choices, to a ridiculous extent. Skyrim, Oblivion and FO3 all had worlds that, to me, felt like they existed independently of my player character. I suppose I can see why someone might prefer the "i'm literally god and everything ever has to do with me and my decisions" approach--but it's just not for me. But... that's more of a thing for FO3? I mean FO3 you are literally a god. You are omnipotent in terms of your decisions. If you decide to play a Good karma character, every quest you take ends with a good result. There are no bad results unless you pick to be evil. Everything in the world revolves around your ability to pick up a quest, do it perfectly, and then hey, everything's better. New Vegas you're super competent, but even going for the 'best' endings you still have negatives. Sure, the NCR is a democracy - there's also people who are fleeing as far as to vegas because they can't make ends meat with the NCR's taxes as high as they are. Sure, House is mostly benevolent, but he's a dictator who kills anyone who dissents without even a thought of anything else. Your complaints seem more focused on things that are wrong with FO3 than New Vegas?? Edit: Though, the main quest in Fallout 3, up until Broken Steel starts basically, does make most of the important NPCs think you are a chump, unlike New Vegas, where by the time you hunt down Benny everyone is like woah drat. That actually annoyed me back when I played FO3 the first time, because I had my 'dad' and his stupid not-girlfriend doctor and the Brotherhood of Steel all questioning my competence, while I did all the work. 
KittyEmpress fucked around with this message at 07:19 on Mar 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 07:16
|
|
|
I honestly think "Kick Puppy" vs. "Save World" options can work in games, but they need to make the "evil" option actually tempting to the player. In too many games the evil option will get you a reward, but the good option will get you an even bigger reward, which completely confuses me; why does the player need to be bribed into being a good person? Preferably, the evil reward would provide an immense reward (at the expense of doing something terrible to characters you might care about), while the good reward would be selfless and provide no gameplay-wise reward (the real reward being that you helped out characters in the game that you care about). When a game offers an immensely better reward for being a good person, I end up feeling like the developers have no faith in me being good and liking their characters, and have no faith in their own writing ability making me like their characters. Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 07:25 on Mar 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 07:18
|
|
|
Chillmatic posted:We'll just have to agree to disagree. But in New Vegas it just felt like everything revolved around me and my choices, to a ridiculous extent. As I recall, this is part of Obsidian's RPG philosophy- to make the player feel like they're having an actual effect on the game world through their choices. And hell, it's a perfectly good thing to dislike, it's just that most of the posters in this thread prefer that to a static world, or one that moves towards its own conclusion regardless of what you do (I'm one of them). A prime example of this is in Oblivion, where you're a spectator to the endgame (or so I recall), and someone does all the awesome stuff. Chillmatic posted:I'm not sure. I'll out myself and say that I genuinely think Caesar made a few good points about the kind of rulership the wasteland "needs". Obviously the rape and pillage stuff is just literal cartoon villainy crap, which is disappointing that Obsidian thought necessary to include, but it is hard to argue with a lot of the other stuff he says when other couriers and people talk about how safe legion territory is. Again, Caesar believes this is necessary- the values of modern civilization led to the bombs, and revitalizing them in the wasteland makes very little sense. Caesar being Caesar, his solution is to go full on reductio and remove everything save the most primitive value, that the strong have power over the weak. This way, he wants a whole new set of values to arise, values that hopefully won't lead to more nukes. Chillmatic posted:But his entire character and philosophy is just entirely at odds with the burden of player agency that video games necessarily demand. Again, I don't believe he'd trust the future of his empire to you; I don't believe he'd work with a female courier; and I don't believe he wouldn't just send a loving guy to make sure you blew up the bunker like you said you had. I don't know; like I said, Caesar's not the kind of guy who'd turn down any possible advantage, his philosophy be damned- if he truly believes, he's still flexible enough to allow some outliers, and if he doesn't, why should he give a poo poo what tools he uses? I don't know; based on what I've seen and how he allows the Legion to operate (especially with respect to the frumentarii), he'd be absolutely willing to do and let the Courier do all you've said. CommissarMega fucked around with this message at 07:25 on Mar 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 07:18
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I honestly think "Kick Puppy" vs. "Save World" options can work in games, but they need to make the "evil" option actually tempting to the player. In too many games the evil option will get you a reward, but the good option will get you an even bigger reward, which completely confuses me; why does the player need to be bribed into being a good person? Preferably, the evil reward would provide an immense reward (at the expense of doing something terrible to characters you might care about), while the good reward would be selfless and provide no gameplay-wise reward (the real reward being that you helped out characters in the game that you care about). Honestly, you normally don't need anything to make the evil option tempting for most people. I've watched a lot of streams of Fallout 3/New Vegas, and a lot of them choose to do bad things not because of any rewards but because they find doing bad things funny. More of a thing with Fallout 3, where most streamers of it seemed to nuke Megaton because it was funny. Edit: actually, there's one comical time that I forgot where doing the good thing in FO3 isn't perfectly happy yay. Letting the ghouls into Tenpenny Tower. Though seeing as everyone living in it were evil, self righteous, pompous assholes besides like... two, 
KittyEmpress fucked around with this message at 07:27 on Mar 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 07:22
|
|
|
Do you guys want to watch a 16 minute video on how NV has a more cohesive and believable world than FO3? I'll bet you do https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvwlt4FqmS0 edit: Was streaming even a big thing when FO3 came out?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 07:25
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:Honestly, you normally don't need anything to make the evil option tempting for most people. I've watched a lot of streams of Fallout 3/New Vegas, and a lot of them choose to do bad things not because of any rewards but because they find doing bad things funny. More of a thing with Fallout 3, where most streamers of it seemed to nuke Megaton because it was funny. And that does work for some people, but I'd wager the majority of gamers would usually go for whatever gave them more shiny stuff.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 07:27
|
|
|
CommissarMega posted:And that does work for some people, but I'd wager the majority of gamers would usually go for whatever gave them more shiny stuff. My favorite example is Bioshock, where the evil choice gives you more Adam... until the Sisters bring you your reward for being good. Over and over.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 07:29
|
|
|
Mortimer posted:Do you guys want to watch a 16 minute video on how NV has a more cohesive and believable world than FO3? Not really when it came out, but when NV came out, Fallout 3 was streamed a lot by people who either thought it was better than New Vegas, or just didn't own it yet. Edit: My first JustinTV account was registered in 2009 to watch game streams. What the gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 07:30
|
|
|
Mortimer posted:Do you guys want to watch a 16 minute video on how NV has a more cohesive and believable world than FO3? Not really, no, if only because this argument comes up every 10 pages and I've already read thousands more words than I ever wanted to about it. But here we go anyway. It's not because I favor one side of the argument over the other; I do really like Fallout 3 but I also like Fallout NV. I, personally, don't think one is better than the other because why would my judgement of a video game in comparison to another in the same series even matter? NV is a sequel, of course it's going to build on the mechanics of its predecessor. That doesn't make it better than FO3 or make FO3 worse, it's just that that is how sequels to video games work, otherwise people would have called it more of the same which on a fundamental level, it has to be. It's an open world video game that highly emphasizes the fact that you can go anywhere and talk to anyone and shoot anything. The writing quality in both games varies very widely across its span and you can't sum it all up in a single sentence as "this game has good/bad writing". That isn't to say that NV is a rehash of FO3, only that they function in an incredibly similar way which makes comparisons like this-one-is-better-than-that-one useless. If you can back the claim up then yeah that's fine but many people resort to "New Vegas is just better *sticks fingers in ears* LA LA LA" and then insult people for liking FO3 and for some reason everyone thinks that's the right choice. But that sure won't stop people from bickering about it for days on end! CJacobs fucked around with this message at 07:59 on Mar 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 07:51
|
|
|
Chillmatic posted:Bethesda is good at one thing, and one thing only: creating a sense of place, a living, breathing atmosphere Morrowind was 12 years ago, dude. Get over it already 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 07:55
|
|
|
Bethesda's writing in FO3 varied from "What, are you loving kidding me?" to "That was kinda cool/funny, I guess". Obsidian's writing was much stronger throughout, with both a higher average level of writing competency and Obsidian's "bad" level of writing being right around Bethesda's "good" level. I think the thing that illustrates it best is how they dealt with sequence breaking. In Fallout 3 if you broke sequence and found your dad before the point in the plot you were supposed to the game just assumed you had seen the previous parts of the plot even though accidentally finding him while wandering was perfectly possible and actually a semi-common experience. New Vegas actually has NPCs respond differently during interactions with them depending on whether or not you met them when you were "supposed" to while following the main path, even though you have to go out of your way not to. It's a small thing, but it illustrates how much more consideration Obsidian put into their writing. If you're making an open world RPG and don't consider what will happen when players take advantage of the open world, you've failed at writing it effectively.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 08:10
|
|
|
CJacobs posted:Not really, no, if only because this argument comes up every 10 pages and I've already read thousands more words than I ever wanted to about it. But here we go anyway. Hey you might enjoy the video that speaks to your concerns. Who's sticking their fingers in their ears now If you honestly think FO3 has good writing I'd love to see some examples of it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 08:33
|
|
|
CJacobs posted:Not really, no, if only because this argument comes up every 10 pages and I've already read thousands more words than I ever wanted to about it. But here we go anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 08:35
|
|
|
Mortimer posted:Hey you might enjoy the video that speaks to your concerns. Who's sticking their fingers in their ears now Well, for one, I've already seen the video and I do agree that New Vegas' writing is higher quality overall; that's just how I feel about it, it doesn't make it objectively true. A person could make an argument that FO3's writing is better and that wouldn't make it true either. But that still makes zero difference to me as to whether it is a better game or not. Nothing makes any difference to me in particular as to which game is better because I don't care enough to write a huge novel in an internet post box to justify it. I don't like either game better because they are both good and bad. All video games are good and bad and everything is a weird gray color to me because I value video games on my personal experience with it and not what someone else says about it. If I liked FO3 better than NV I'd say that and I wouldn't have to justify it because I just do and that's fine. When people say "FO3 is better than NV" they mean "I like FO3 better than NV" and vice versa. Oh well. Trick Question posted:Two things being similar makes them easier to compare, not harder. I really don't understand this argument. Do you really care, though? CJacobs fucked around with this message at 08:48 on Mar 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 08:40
|
|
|
A Fancy 400 lbs posted:Bethesda's writing in FO3 varied from "What, are you loving kidding me?" to "That was kinda cool/funny, I guess". Obsidian's writing was much stronger throughout, with both a higher average level of writing competency and Obsidian's "bad" level of writing being right around Bethesda's "good" level. I think the thing that illustrates it best is how they dealt with sequence breaking. In Fallout 3 if you broke sequence and found your dad before the point in the plot you were supposed to the game just assumed you had seen the previous parts of the plot even though accidentally finding him while wandering was perfectly possible and actually a semi-common experience. New Vegas actually has NPCs respond differently during interactions with them depending on whether or not you met them when you were "supposed" to while following the main path, even though you have to go out of your way not to. It's a small thing, but it illustrates how much more consideration Obsidian put into their writing. If you're making an open world RPG and don't consider what will happen when players take advantage of the open world, you've failed at writing it effectively. I was fooling around in FO3 and found this neat vault with a really high amount of effort and uniqueness put into it for just another one-off setpiece and oh what that's the start of the endgame, that's my dad, no need to go bother with that Three Dog guy or those awful subways? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 08:52
|
|
|
quote:But that still makes zero difference to me as to whether it is a better game or not. Nothing makes any difference to me in particular as to which game is better because I don't care enough to write a huge novel in an internet post box to justify it. I don't like either game better because they are both good and bad. All video games are good and bad and everything is a weird gray color to me because I value video games on my personal experience with it and not what someone else says about it. Yeah, man. Two games on the same engine, in the same genre, in the same setting. Such a shame there's no way to compare them exept for ~^*personal experience*^~ You like one game better or don't, you don't know why, cool. Some people know why or want to talk about it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 08:54
|
|
|
CJacobs posted:Well, for one, I've already seen the video and I do agree that New Vegas' writing is higher quality overall; that's just how I feel about it, it doesn't make it objectively true. A person could make an argument that FO3's writing is better and that wouldn't make it true either. quote:Do you really care, though?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 08:56
|
|
|
Chronojam posted:I was fooling around in FO3 and found this neat vault with a really high amount of effort and uniqueness put into it for just another one-off setpiece and oh what that's the start of the endgame, that's my dad, no need to go bother with that Three Dog guy or those awful subways? I know, right? It's one of the things that's put me off Skyrim- I couldn't help but think I’d explore some neat ruin and BAM! Endgame. That, and it seemed to be nothing more than an endless round of “Enter ruin, fight dudes, exit ruin with loot”. On the upside, I bought it when it was at a 75% (or some similarly ridiculously low) discount, so no big loss.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 08:56
|
|
|
Trick Question posted:If you don't want to read opinions about videogames, and you don't want to write opinions about videogames, I don't fully understand what you're doing here. Sorry people don't feel the need to put qualifiers on their opinions sometimes. Someone asked for my opinion indirectly and I gave it. My opinion is that I don't get why people care so much which game is better. Well see ya. *ollie 180s away on skateboard in VATS* Mortimer posted:Trying to defend FO3 (for some reason) by saying ... "You don't have to have reasons for liking things better" is maddening. Oops sorry I'm doing it right now aren't I!! (I don't give a gently caress) CJacobs fucked around with this message at 09:04 on Mar 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 08:59
|
|
|
But that's the thing - you can argue writing is better. You can judge stories and writing for logical sense, obviously if a plot begins by saying "A = B" then turns around and says "A = C, A != B" that isn't good writing. You can rate writing based on grammar and prose, or on the verisimilitude of dialogue between characters. Trying to defend FO3 (for some reason) by saying "They're too similar" or "Rating writing is impossible" or "You don't have to have reasons for liking things better" is maddening. It reminds me of that 90's Apple Jacks commercial https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggHae3QNvCc Why do you kids like apple jacks WE JUST DO gosh parents don't understand why I like liberty prime so much, beats the hell out of that boring cowboy desert CJacobs posted:Someone asked for my opinion indirectly and I gave it. mbt fucked around with this message at 09:02 on Mar 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 09:00
|
|
|
Mortimer posted:But that's the thing - you can argue writing is better. You can judge stories and writing for logical sense, obviously if a plot begins by saying "A = B" then turns around and says "A = C, A != B" that isn't good writing. You can rate writing based on grammar and prose, or on the verisimilitude of dialogue between characters. Trying to defend FO3 (for some reason) by saying "They're too similar" or "Rating writing is impossible" or "You don't have to have reasons for liking things better" is maddening. But there are people for whom such things don't really matter all that much- or at all, period. It shouldn't be a crime or mark of inferiority to enjoy F3 over NV, just different taste. I prefer NV overall myself, but I will go to my grave proclaiming the awesomeness of the Liberty Prime scene.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 09:09
|
|
|
CommissarMega posted:But there are people for whom such things don't really matter all that much- or at all, period. It shouldn't be a crime or mark of inferiority to enjoy F3 over NV, just different taste. I prefer NV overall myself, but I will go to my grave proclaiming the awesomeness of the Liberty Prime scene. The second battle of hoover dam isn't great, but at least it's got some tension in it and an actual cool boss battle that lasts a few moments at the end. I don't know if anyone has said this but the main story missions in Bethesda games aren't very good, and furthermore
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 09:22
|
|
|
CJacobs posted:Someone asked for my opinion indirectly and I gave it. My opinion is that I don't get why people care so much which game is better. Well see ya. *ollie 180s away on skateboard in VATS* good thing you realize you're a moron
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 09:24
|
|
|
Trick Question posted:I don't know if anyone has said this but the main story missions in Bethesda games aren't very good, and furthermore I liked the change of pace and the momentary focus on environmental interaction and dialogue over combat in Tranquility Lane. I'm not sure I should praise it for anything other than the fact that it broke up the comfortable cycle Fallout 3 falls in after 10-15 hour though, because it doesn't really dovetail nicely with the rest of the game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 09:28
|
|
|
FNV isn't as good as people in this thread say, and FO3 isn't as bad. Most importantly both have lots of stupid videogamey poo poo in them script-wise - in the end it's just genre fiction after all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 09:39
|
|
|
FO3 is, however, objectively a total pile of poo poo from a coding and modding perspective. The fact that you have to actually play it on the FNV engine from the get-go for it to actually be stable for 200+ hours of play says something about both Bethesda's programming and Obsidian's programming.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 10:02
|
|
|
Trick Question posted:That puts us at odds, then, because I loving hated that bit. I hated that the robot was the same joke repeated N times, I hated that it completely ruined the tension of the climactic confrontation, I hated that the gameplay of that entire bit was basically just waiting for the robot to kill things and following it around - just hated the whole thing. I might even hate it more than the ending itself. Fair enough, I'll fully admit I liked the whole spectacle of the thing. What can I say- in the scope of F3's railroad (which is why it's inferior to NV, in my opinion), Liberty Prime was a well-furnished luxury carriage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 10:25
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:The fact that you have to actually play it on the FNV engine from the get-go for it to actually be stable for 200+ hours of play says something about both Bethesda's programming and Obsidian's programming. Are you talking about Tale of Two Wastelands? How well does that work?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 11:19
|
|
|
Nobody Interesting posted:Are you talking about Tale of Two Wastelands? How well does that work? Pretty well, aside from a puzzling balance/design decisions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 11:28
|
|
|
Chillmatic posted:We'll just have to agree to disagree. But in New Vegas it just felt like everything revolved around me and my choices, to a ridiculous extent. In FO3 the radio station is all explicitly about you. In New Vegas it's about the effects you have, but never mentions you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 11:48
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:In FO3 the radio station is all explicitly about you. In New Vegas it's about the effects you have, but never mentions you. I think the only concession is when he mentions a courier who's been shot in the head. I like to think that's House at work, though. He made Mr. New Vegas, after all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 12:50
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:I think the only concession is when he mentions a courier who's been shot in the head. For a long while I thought that Mr New Vegas was the doctor who revives you at the start of the game. Then I read that they're not even the same voice actor 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 12:51
|
|
|
I also noticed another little detail (god this game is full of them) When you get to Novac and meet Victor, if you ask him about Novac he says "It's nice enough, but I get this feeling that makes my skin crawl. Watch yourself." I'm guessing that's a subtle attempt from House to get you to move on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 12:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 01:25 |
|
|
Chillmatic posted:I'm honestly confused at how apoplectic people get while defending this game. I mean yeah, the guy isn't listening and has clearly made his mind up about cazadore placement or whatever, but eesh, you'd think he insulted someone's mother. Is this left-over NMA angst or something?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 12:56
|
|
