|
CJacobs posted:You said he had lovely opinions and called him a bad person for what he thinks about factions and backstory in a video game. Yes, because hyperbole and overstating your stance on things is certainly not a thing people do! Thanks agaiin.
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 02:41 |
|
|
CJacobs posted:You said he had lovely opinions and called him a bad person for what he thinks about factions and backstory in a video game. In fairness, judging by the old XCOM threads, MisterBibs is one of the worst posters I have seen in my entire life.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:*** Even the subway system, which this thread taught me people had issues with. I disagree with pretty much the entirety of your post, especially with how you think complete blank slate player characters with open-ended backstories don't work in Fallout because that is complete and utter bullshit of the highest degree, but I'm just going to ask why you're so baffled that people dislike having to go through tons of subway tunnels that all look exactly the same. The Colonel fucked around with this message at 21:38 on Mar 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
I wanted to post "stopped reading here" and just post a weird opinion, but my morbid curiosity got the best of me and I read the whole thing. And holy crap dude, FO3 is definitely your game, that's fine, go play that. It's okay to not like NV because it isn't for you, but to say "FO3 did things right, NV should have taken some tips from bethesda, also the subways aren't bad what are you talking about" is pure  distilled into a paste and applied to my temples.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Beyond the story, I was also unimpressed wih the way the player was funneled through a single ideal route. It's hard for me to muster up any motivation to do another play-through because unless I pull up the console to kill all the Cazadors on the straight path, I'm generally going to have to go through the same route that I did last time*. Open-world gaming 101: If I see a landmark in the far-off distance and say "I want to go there", and something gets in my way of getting there, something is dangerously wrong**.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
The Colonel posted:I disagree with pretty much the entirety of your post, especially with how you think complete blank slate player characters with open-ended backstories don't work in Fallout because that is complete and utter bullshit of the highest degree, but I'm just going to ask why you're so baffled that people dislike having to go through tons of subway tunnels that all look exactly the same. Utter bullshit? The first three games defined your character's core existence and how it relates to the world in general. You might have been better/worse at punching/shooting, but you were always a Vault Dweller/Tribal whose motivation to quell the mutants/save your village/find your dad. Like it or not, you were objectively not a Blank Slate Character with an Open Ended Backstory. The only things you can change are the trivialities. People in this thread kvetched because Lonesome Road had the audacity to explain that you've been a courier for some time. This is the sort of defining background stuff that main characters in Fallout have always had. Without that stuff that connects the character to the setting, the core motivation of the Mojave's fate is weakened. As for the subway thing: I have the worst sense of direction in the world, and navigating the subways was incredibly easy. Them looking the same helped: been down one, I know exactly how to get around. Mortimer posted:but to say "FO3 did things right, NV should have taken some tips from bethesda, also the subways aren't bad what are you talking about" is pure Wouldn't you want to take tips from the folks who took a dead-and-buried game series and managed to define/introduce the series to a public (I refuse to consider it a redefinition or reintroduction, that implies that the audience had a definition or introduction in the first place), to overwhelming positive response? Edit: vvv Exactly the point. In Fallout games, the main characters have back stories. MisterBibs fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Mar 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
I think people were only upset about LR's background deal because up until that point you were a blank slate that could be whatever you wanted, and the dialog choices provided that opportunity really well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
There's a good quote I heard a few years back that I can verify after moving to DC. "Fallout 3 did the metro subways perfectly: drab, impossible to navigate, and full of scary people." The subways really weren't too confusing in 3, the biggest problem is quote:Them looking the same helped: been down one, I know exactly how to get around.  ) and provide really boring "shortcuts" to different areas. As much as I wouldn't like to quote myself, quote:FO3 is definitely your game, that's fine, go play that.  MisterBibs posted:In Fallout games, the main characters have back stories. Fallout games also tend to have stories and worlds that make sense. Sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:I disagree strongly with this. If you see a landmark in the far-off distance and say "I want to go there" you should be able to go there. That doesn't necessarily mean that it should be easy. Walking to the giant deathmountain belching fire with a bunch of signs saying "here be dragons" should not be a walk in the park just because you're level 1 and the dragons haven't spawned yet. Things can get in your way. They just shouldn't be utterly insurmountable. Yes, this means that some things will be practically insurmountable for low-level, low-gear, low-whatever characters. That's okay. Absolutely. Adventure without risk is Disneyland. I really love the New Vegas feel of waking up under the irradiated bridge, seeing the radar dish atop a far off mountain and thinking 'I've a hankerin' to go there,' put your hat on, dust off your eye bot and heft your rifle. If the going gets tough, you can grit yer teeth and press on, figure that this deserves some ponderin' and a smarter route, or you can jus' turn on your heel and head back to the saloon for a glass of warm milk. The joy of an open world is deciding to be the idiot who goes into Deathclaw Gulch, or to be the booksmart s.o.b who decides to come back with a sniper and a grenade launcher, and it's the dangers of a post-apocalyptic world that make it fun to run around in. Likewise, even if you think all the options for the new ruler of New Vegas suck - them's the breaks. You pick the one closest to a 'good' outcome and then you come into this thread and then speculate about how cool it would be if you could have engineered a Council of Wise Elders ending of No Bark, Rhonda and the lottery winner at Nipton that everyone shoots.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
I liked how New Vegas simultaneously made you a big deal, and yet another nobody in the greater scheme of things. Yes, you're hot poo poo when it comes to the conflict between the Legion and the NCR, but your "world changing saga" is about who gets possession of a lump of rock, and the affiliation of the large amount of people who will inevitably die. Even going the wild card route means you'll basically be in charge of Vegas, a city that only means something to certain people. Looking around the world, you can see that most people really don't care. Nobody could give two shits if the Legion or NCR hold the dam, because all they're trying to do is survive, from the lowly trading towns to the isolated super mutant refuge. The world has largely moved on. The once mighty Enclave are now reduced to a band of old farts who have to be dragged out of retirement and are basically doing it because they want to look cool in the eyes of the only link to the normal world they really care about. The Super Mutants aren't rampaging Even the Brotherhood of Steel couldn't give a poo poo about the petty politics of the world, and that's fine. Fallout 3 was a pretty dumb regression in a lot of areas. It's no surprise that New Vegas is the true sequel to the original fallouts, as so much more thought was put into it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:The world has largely moved on. Someone probably said this earlier, but the first two Fallout games didn't say "Post-apocalyptic" on the cover. They said "Post-Nuclear". It's absolutely significant that most of the first two games were not predominantly spent skulking through ruins and hosed-up areas, the focus is on the communities that form in the aftermath.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
Mortimer posted:Uness you REALLY want to hear why everyone in this thread thinks you have a bad opinion I don't mind the discussion. Reading the thread, there were plenty "  My friends liked 3 more than NV " cycles*; at least you now have someone who thinks that in-thread.  Don't get me wrong, I didn't hate the game. It's just didn't hit me the way 3 did. NV felt like a tale of what happens when you define a series for the audience that will consume it, only to give it back to the folks who want to develop it for the folks who used to consume it. * Usually tied into the "There must be an elaborate conspiracy that caused FO3 to review higher than NV" cycle. MisterBibs fucked around with this message at 22:58 on Mar 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
I know we like to rag on Fallout 3 in comparison to New Vegas, but I would like to say something I actually preferred to NV was its sendoff of Harold compared to NV's for Marcus. Harold's questline felt more like an actual farewell/resolution to his story, while Marcus' one quest seemed like an excuse for the group to hang out with Michael Dorn again. Not that there's anything wrong with finding an excuse to hang out with Michael Dorn, of course. Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 22:57 on Mar 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
I will say one thing. He's right that there isn't quite the compelling transition to why you care about the Dam conflict that FOs 1 and 2 had with their respective goal changes. I mean, it worked for me because I was interested in the Mojave, but seriously, would would a lot of Couriers care?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
I think Marcus was done really well. There's really no reason why Marcus reappearing should be a big deal. As far as he's concerned, he's just doing what he always did: Looking after Super Mutants. Harold kind of had me rolling my eyes, as there was really no function to him reappearing other than to say "Hey, we really do know what Fallout is about! Look! It's Harold, a quirky character from the originals! Ain't that amazing!" It was a nice surprise to see Marcus again, but there should have been no fanfare. As far as the courier is concerned, it's the first time he's ever met Marcus, and he's just another Super Mutant. The "Jacobstown" connection was a classy move and a nice reference for people who've played the previous games without the crassness that Harold came with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
I really enjoyed Fallout 3, probably more than NV. For me it had more of a bleak post-apocalyptic atmosphere than NV, which I liked. Bear in mind F3 was the first Fallout game I played so I had no preconceived notions about what it 'should' be like. I can't wait for Fallout 4, what's taking so long?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
Have you played F1 and F2? You should if not. They're somewhat unforgiving and the isometric perspective sucks these days but once you get into them hoo boy you'll be wrapped up for a while. Also: F1 backstory: You are a vault-dweller, you need to find thing for the vault F2 backstory: You are a tribal, you need to find thing for your tribe F:NV backstory: You are a courier. You got shot in the head. You need to find out why seems far more concise and consistent compared to: F3 You are a vault dweller, here's your best friend, here's an (intentionally clumsy) allegory for a dictatorship, daddy ran away , you are exiled, finally go find daddy.honestly, best thing I ever did was leave a savegame right before that 'change your character' prompt right before you exit to the wasteland. gently caress vault 101 and it's intro to creative writing bullshit handholding backstory
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
JawKnee posted:Have you played F1 and F2? Yeah, I jumped into them after I finished 3. Loved them, definitely preferred 1. Again, I found the atmosphere more foreboding and bleak in the first one and thus enjoyed it more. New Vegas definitely 'feels' like more of a Fallout game than 3, I noticed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
Frankston posted:Yeah, I jumped into them after I finished 3. Loved them, definitely preferred 1. Again, I found the atmosphere more foreboding and bleak in the first one and thus enjoyed it more. I agree with you - I've always felt F2 had way too much wacky crap stuffed into it, which is in part why I don't really get the complaints that F3 is too disjointed. On the other hand, Fallout 1 is a very sparse game, in retrospect.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 00:04
|
|
|
I loved the poo poo out of FO3 when it was released, mostly because here is a new game in my second favorite franchise ever. After NV the flaws really stand out. I still enjoy it, and I love point lookout, but NV finishing up the story from 2 so well. I feel NV closed that chapter of the story so they are free to go somewhere else.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:I will say one thing. He's right that there isn't quite the compelling transition to why you care about the Dam conflict that FOs 1 and 2 had with their respective goal changes. I mean, it worked for me because I was interested in the Mojave, but seriously, would would a lot of Couriers care? Probably revenge for getting shot in the head, for one. Once you have the chip feel free to give it to House and promptly gently caress off. The game doesn't really care if you do or don't do the main quest, it's as sandbox-y as you want it to be. I thought it was a surprising change of pace from FO3's "YOUR DAD IS MISSING YOU HAVE TO FIND HIM. (This is someone you care about)"
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
Twenty new posts in the NV thread! I guess it either had to be about Dead Money, Fallout 3 or House supremacy.MisterBibs posted:** Yes, I've read rope kid's assertion that you can totally go the North Path, you just have to 'earn it'. Has that justification ever been more than "we want you to take another path so you can see our stuff"? Seriously? The starting town gives you two different, easy ways to grab a stealth boy (the schoolhouse safe, killing Joe Cobb) and you only need one to walk right past the deathclaws on I-15. I did it on my first character two hours into the game, because I saw Vegas in the distance and wanted to check it out. It literally required me to understand some basic game mechanics from Fallout 3. So yes, as cliche as this is, you are really bad at video games.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
I like how to Mister Bib, having one or two finite details about your character completely destroys the concept of "open ended backstory" and blank slate character. You're totally open to define your character with the sole limitations of "born in vault 13/born in arroyo + descendant of Vault Dweller". Literally nothing else in FO1/2 is required for your own character. You're really not at all limited by that, unless you really want to be like a desert raider in them by backstory instead of actually playing the game. There's plenty of room in the game to justify any action and mentality you want your Vault Dweller or Chosen One to have. Do you not really understand what these words mean?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 00:52
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:** Yes, I've read rope kid's assertion that you can totally go the North Path, you just have to 'earn it'. Has that justification ever been more than "we want you to take another path so you can see our stuff"? We wanted sections of the Mojave Wasteland to feel sharply more challenging than others to add a sense of danger to how the player explored and to give them a sense of accomplishment when they surmounted a difficult obstacle. When a player talks about how they hopped north of Goodsprings, crept along murdering cazadores, dropped down into Bonnie Springs and took pot shots at Jackals while the raiders got torn apart, then rolled in amid the wreckage to find Love and Hate -- I think that is a much more interesting story than hearing how they moved from A to B to C along our crit path. But if there's no tension or challenge to it, there's not really much to tell.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 01:23
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:I will say one thing. He's right that there isn't quite the compelling transition to why you care about the Dam conflict that FOs 1 and 2 had with their respective goal changes. I mean, it worked for me because I was interested in the Mojave, but seriously, would would a lot of Couriers care?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
well at least this way i get to update my ignore list
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:Seriously? The starting town gives you two different, easy ways to grab a stealth boy (the schoolhouse safe, killing Joe Cobb) and you only need one to walk right past the deathclaws on I-15. I did it on my first character two hours into the game, because I saw Vegas in the distance and wanted to check it out. It literally required me to understand some basic game mechanics from Fallout 3. I'd totally buy that if the Cazadors stayed in the Tribal Village, weren't on the road, and (to borrow from WoW terminology) leashed to that location. Because God save me, I tried that route legitimately (even with SBs), and the enemy placement consistently interfered with my fun. SpookyLizard posted:You're totally open to define your character with the sole limitations of "born in vault 13/born in arroyo + descendant of Vault Dweller". Literally nothing else in FO1/2 is required for your own character. Yes, that's why I said that the only things you can influence are trivialities. You can punch better. You can be good at science. But you're still a Vault Dweller. You know indisputably where you grew up and who you grew up with, creating an attachment to the setting. NV? You're a dude who moves poo poo around. This guy shot you. Hey revenge! Once you've done that, please please please continue to be attached to the setting enough to continue the plot, even if we've completely forgot to give you a motivation to do so. Blank Slate characters work in TES because the threat that the game provides is always big enough that regardless of origin, it's going to be a problem that only you can complete. This is why the plot shift didn't work for me in NV; the game gives me no motivation to get involved further, because there's nothing of the Given Character to do so. I'm just a Courier. rope kid posted:If we were actually concerned about you seeing "our stuff", we would not have designed the game around skipping huge sections of the crit path, killing literally any and every non-child NPC you come across, and having three+ routes to take to the end of the game. Except that you seemingly forgot this when designing one of the main paths the player can take. One of the paths through the game has enemies that I can't defeat when I'm reasonably expected to be there. If the path is not for my level, why is it there? Deathclaw City isn't next to V101 for a reason. rope kid posted:We wanted sections of the Mojave Wasteland to feel sharply more challenging than others to add a sense of danger to how the player explored and to give them a sense of accomplishment when they surmounted a difficult obstacle. Ghostcrawler's "No Elevators To Everest" reasoning behind arbitrarily interfering with my enjoyment of the game for e-peen holds little value to me. The accomplishment is in the destination. The journey must reward that choice. Otherwise, it's just an impediment to my fun. rope kid posted:When a player talks about how they hopped north of Goodsprings, crept along murdering cazadores, dropped down into Bonnie Springs and took pot shots at Jackals while the raiders got torn apart, then rolled in amid the wreckage to find Love and Hate -- I think that is a much more interesting story than hearing how they moved from A to B to C along our crit path. I completely agree. I'd love to have an interesting, engaging story about the enemies I fought and killed on the way to BS or wherever, never once having to say "But the guys who made it put overlevelled mobs in the way, so I had to use console commands until I figure out how to make a mod to remove them". rope kid posted:But if there's no tension or challenge to it, there's not really much to tell. There usually wasn't much to tell when you saw your little red dot navigating around in F1 and 2. Navigating around rarely posed interference. And when it did? It was annoying. Edit: I'd love to try It's, but since the devs decided invisible walls were better than ensuring Cazadors didn't wipe out quest givers, it's likely I won't. MisterBibs fucked around with this message at 02:41 on Mar 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
lol you're an idiot and bad at games my enjoyment no one else here had to use console commands Install the IWS mod and give up at ever playing this game again, because you suck JawKnee fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Mar 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
okay you made a mod to get rid of deathclaws and cazadores, you are the epitome of yeah it's neat you think animals should "leash" back to their location, it's too bad this isn't an MMO. and the game gives you a motivation immediately, you know, that whole "You were shot in the head and a guy took your stuff" I dunno man, you seem pretty dead set on not enjoying this game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
Mortimer posted:okay you made a mod to get rid of deathclaws and cazadores, you are the epitome of Just to be clear, I'm going to make a mod that eliminates the Cazadors from the North Path exclusively, since they have no place so close to the starting area and my house mod requires me to navigate there. I like them both once I have gear that let's me deal with them. Which is when they are acceptable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
But guuuuuuuuuys I need to get to my houuuuuuuuuse gently caress off lol "The game should only present me with challenges when I'm good and ready to face them" Do you also prefer beige colored decor?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Except that you seemingly forgot this when designing one of the main paths the player can take. One of the paths through the game has enemies that I can't defeat when I'm reasonably expected to be there. If the path is not for my level, why is it there? Deathclaw City isn't next to V101 for a reason. quote:Ghostcrawler's "No Elevators To Everest" reasoning behind arbitrarily interfering with my enjoyment of the game for e-peen holds little value to me. The accomplishment is in the destination. The journey must reward that choice. Otherwise, it's just an impediment to my fun. quote:There usually wasn't much to tell when you saw your little red dot navigating around in F1 and 2. Navigating around rarely posed interference.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 02:50
|
|
|
I think we can all agree though that Cazadores are the worst thing mankind has ever imagined.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
What exactly did he say that is wrong? It's pretty obvious cheesing your way through the difficult paths breaks the game on all levels, and leads you initially into a pretty barren part of the map where you can't hope to get what is going on due to missing out on lots of narrative and world info. It only makes sense if you are doing it on your x-th playthrough, and then it can hardly be considered an organic part of the game. Saying the northern passage is there because we totally wanted to give you a freedom to experience the world in innovative ways and on your own terms is like saying the noclip in Doom was there to allow players escape the confine of maps.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 02:54
|
|
|
gently caress Cazadors.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
Using the stealth boys that were put into Goodsprings and sneaking past enemies you can't beat is like, in the game. As in, it's a choice you make with gameplay mechanics. Equating that with using console commands is absolutely absurd.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
Fag Boy Jim posted:Using the stealth boys that were put into Goodsprings and sneaking past enemies you can't beat is like, in the game. As in, it's a choice you make with gameplay mechanics. Equating that with using console commands is absolutely absurd. It's an option you could technically take, but from the perspective of a novice player there's literally no reason for him to do that, and even if he did it on a whim he would end up stranded in the middle of the world having bypassed the entire exposition highway. It's a speedrun tactic that requires advance knowledge, not something that makes sense from the roleplaying perspective of this RPG.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 03:00
|
|
|
Fallout 3 is worse than New Vegas because Fallout 3 didn't have Ropekid singing folk music. Seriously though, there are like ten billion post-apocalyptic games, but Fallout has always been, "so yeah, the old world kinda ended in nuclear fire...now what?". It's always been about how the communities that people build grow, change and adapt as the world does. We've seen how ideologies have changed as the timeline progresses - sure, you can hoard old tech, but what happens when the people around you relearn knowledge about machinery? Sure, you can make a democratic republic, but what happens when you face a hostile civilization founded on an entirely ideology? Sure, you can turn your back on the old world and start a tribe, but what happens when people who haven't abandoned the old world make contact? Sure, you can be a genius bigshot in the old world, but what role will you play in the new one? It's about communities, and what happens to them. People scraping around eating beans and either being ultra good or generic raiders who are evil for no reason isn't what Fallout is really about. Individuals shape the Fallout world, but communities define it. OldMemes fucked around with this message at 03:05 on Mar 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 03:03
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:It's an option you could technically make, but from the perspective of a novice player there's literally no reason for you to do that, and even if he did it on a whim he would end up stranded in the middle of the world having bypassed the entire exposition highway. It's a speedrun tactic, not something that makes sense from the roleplaying perspective of this RPG. The "exposition highway" contains less actual main plot than you might have remembered. The bulk of it is optional quests like Come Fly With Me, or exploring Helios One, or freeing Primm that you really can do anytime (after all, a lot of the quests send you back there anyway). I mean, it makes sense in the main story to try to follow Benny's trail, but this is also a game that is perfectly functional if you ignore most of the main story.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 02:41 |
|
|
steinrokkan posted:What exactly did he say that is wrong? It's pretty obvious cheesing your way through the difficult paths breaks the game on all levels, and leads you initially into a pretty barren part of the map where you can't hope to get what is going on due to missing out on lots of narrative and world info. I don't think I've ever suggested what we did was a new and innovative. We were trying to make exploring the world feel like it had an element of danger to it that was stronger in F1 and F2 than F3. And again, getting to New Vegas does not require either following the crit path or console-commanding north of Goodsprings. Another very common way for people to shortcut the standard crit path is to go east through Scorpion Gulch. This is significantly easier than going NW or NE from Goodsprings and puts you near Helios One.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 03:06
|
|