Arcsquad12 posted:

So how about that Bethesda.net distribution platform then? Get your five dollar fishing mods right here!

PerpetualSelf posted:

Wah my $50 game that literally costs less than a full day's minimum wage is not 100% perfect wahhh

CJacobs posted:

That is a shame. I really don't like giving the main character a more established backstory than "grew up in a vault" or "was a courier". Fallout 3 had you play through your childhood and it was one of the best parts of the game, I feel, because it allowed you to shape your character's history. This game, from what I've read, just GIVES you a history and you have to shape the character around that. Which sucks.

Volkerball posted:

oh yes, games is definitely lacking in manbabies.

ShadowMar posted:

I hope they take out the lockpicking and hacking minigames and make them skill/perk checks instead.

They aren't fun in any game.

Yaos posted:

Might as well take it out completely since it's not fun at all to spam a door until it magically unlocks for you.

Alexander DeLarge posted:

Think the Bethesda.net thing is just a redesign of the website with some functionality for mods being shared across Xbox One/PS4

Yaos posted:

Your character's backstory is that you are a generic conservative living in the suburbs.

The worst part about Bethesda's conference was the lack of professional dancers and talk about "new experiences". Where were the little kid actors pretending to play a video game? Where was the forced dialogue between a man and a woman that have never talked to the opposite sex? Bethesda needs to get this fixed for next year.

Yaos posted:

Might as well take it out completely since it's not fun at all to spam a door until it magically unlocks for you.

ShadowMar posted:

I hope they take out the lockpicking and hacking minigames and make them skill/perk checks instead.

They aren't fun in any game.

crawlkill posted:

I have no problem with the changes? New Vegas was great. I have a problem with the setting, the narrative and the dialogue not being worth the storage space the take up on my computer, which is Bethesda's MO. that was a really weird assumption

SunAndSpring posted:

They could just do the New Vegas way of making it so you only have to meet a flat number to get a success, instead of the percent chance way Fallout 3 did things.

crawlkill posted:

I think variability in builds is a very good thing, personally. what made the good Fallouts special was never "I put enough points into Small Guns." the difference between two playthroughs in a game--any game that takes environmental decisions into account--should be the choices you make about the world. ultimately, -you will muddle through,- combat-wise, and there's no reasonable reason to lock you into one particular build. people who don't like respects don't have to take them.

SunAndSpring posted:

Looked at the house customization vid and saw there's a stand for the SPECIAL bobbleheads, and it does look like they've got bobbleheads for skills, as there's one for Barter in one of the menus. Of course, this could just unlock a perk for you called Barter, who knows. In any case, there's 7 spaces on the bottom rack for your SPECIAL stats, and about 13 spaces for other bobbleheads. So maybe they're sticking with the 13 New Vegas skills?

frajaq posted:

No Mods No Masters posted:

I don't think, in my own life, if I had the tunnel snakes' outfit, it would make me more perceptive. Sorry

khy posted:

Well I was having a difficult time understanding what you meant with the, and I quote, 'rape of what was my favorite IP' as you didn't go into much detail there. The single biggest and most glaring change moving from the isometric games was the sweeping gameplay changes that Bethesda made in making it more of a shooter but retaining the RPG elements, so naturally I assumed this was the sexual assault you referred to.

The setting seemed fine to me. The narrative, to me, seemed like it had problems (There were some fairly obvious plot holes) but not to the point where it was doing permanent damage to the series.

frajaq posted:

ShadowMar posted:

I hope skill/perk/etc checks don't have chances to fail like Fallout 3's speech checks, that was really terrible.

Volkerball posted:

it's not locking you into a particular build. it's just that with the way skill levels and perks worked, you could either specialize in a few things, or jack of all trades it and not exceptional in anything. if you wanted to be the max strongest at melee a character could be, it would detract a lot from what you could do in other categories, because you would be taking several perks and dumping a lot of skill points into melee and unarmed. it's kind of like how the special system works. you have x points, and that's it, aside from a few boosts you get throughout the game. how you spend them will define how your character will act and grow. if there was a route to having 10 in every special stat, then it would make restarting counter-productive and uninteresting no matter the circumstances.

ShadowMar posted:

I hope skill/perk/etc checks don't have chances to fail like Fallout 3's speech checks, that was really terrible.

Republican Vampire posted:

I think it's more likely that skills and perks have been reorganized into skill trees.

Anime Schoolgirl posted:

That and the "flat skill requirement" allowed for the best dialogue options in the game in the failure dialogue.

crawlkill posted:

whatever the case (I think I missed that part of the video), the way numbers increment is a wayyy overfocused topic by some RPG nerds. there are a few tabletop games where it's really interesting (Greg Stolze's Dirty World/Better Angels, where your numbers increment based on how horrible or self-denying a person you are!), but in CRPGs, what's important is how excited the player feels when they level up, more than the specific way that excitement is accomplished (one of my big problems with Pillars of Eternity, I just gave no fucks when I leveled).

I don't think I agree that 10-in-everything would make restarting/replays boring, though, -if- the path through the game were dynamic. in New Vegas, you could decide the course of basically every community you moved through. even with all options unlocked, ultimatums would be issued.

PerpetualSelf posted:

If that's your experience with Bethesda games you must no have played them much.

I bet you think Bioshock Infinite had good gameplay.

crawlkill posted:

yes, excuse me, I was using hyperbolic language unthoughtfully and understand how it could look absurd to someone who wasn't tuned to that wavelength. I think the Fallout 3 engine sucks, but lots of great games have been built in terrible engines. my complaint was purely about unmemorable characters, unmemorable locations, an uprooting of the "weird west" setting to dump the game in a soggy East Coast (some people might not agree that that's fundamental to Fallout, which is fine, but to me, it'll always be in a blistered orange desert). Fallout 3 alone might not to permanent damage to the series, but Bethesda has a long history of boring and overgrand plots, characters it's impossible to care about and inscrutable settings. Fallouts 1 and 2 had relatively poo poo combat (oh my god, the oil tanker basement, kill me now); they (and New Vegas) made up for it with a middling-strong sense of agency and conversations with personality. to my mind, those two elements are the core of the Fallout series, and they're Bethesda's weakest points (...along with all the other weak points).

khy posted:

I didn't play FO1/2 until after 3, so it could be argued that since I didn't experience California before the east coast it wasn't ingrained into my psyche that the game MUST be set out west.

khy posted:

FO3 was an improvement over Oblivion, and Skyrim was a big improvement over FO3.

crawlkill posted:

I was playing FO1 and 2 at single-digit age while living in Northern California, so you may understand why I'm more invested in that setting than you are.


I'm sorry, I flat-out disagree. they were all narrative and player agency zeroes. I remember not one single character from Oblivion. I remember one character from FO3, and that's only because 3Dog has been called out as being annoying all over the internet ever since. I never did get very far in Skyrim--all 50 hours I invested in it were frontloaded, trying over and over to understood what I did wrong, but I did notice that my 'thane' had no personality at all and would tend to get lost and disappear. that ain't no Myron. that ain't no Cassidy.

khy posted:

As for the rest, well... Bethesda's actually shown improvement upon its plots and characters. FO3 was an improvement over Oblivion, and Skyrim was a big improvement over FO3. I won't argue that in the past they haven't had issues with characters being a bit generic, but I would say that there are always a few in every game who stand out, and that number has been growing with each release. If you want to judge them by their history, you should take that into consideration as well.

crawlkill posted:

I was playing FO1 and 2 at single-digit age while living in Northern California, so you may understand why I'm more invested in that setting than you are.


I'm sorry, I flat-out disagree. they were all narrative and player agency zeroes. I remember not one single character from Oblivion. I remember one character from FO3, and that's only because 3Dog has been called out as being annoying all over the internet ever since. I never did get very far in Skyrim--all 50 hours I invested in it were frontloaded, trying over and over to understood what I did wrong, but I did notice that my 'thane' had no personality at all and would tend to get lost and disappear. that ain't no Myron. that ain't no Cassidy.

bhlaab posted:

What was Oblivion compared to Morrowind?

Anyway this seems like the exact opposite of what I want from a Fallout game so I'll probably buy it when it's $15-20 on a Steam Sale and hopefully Obsidian gets to make another good one.