I was excited for this game because of Obsidian but it seems like it is getting good to great reviews just about everywhere. Excited to see what they will do with a sequel given they have Microsoft money now. All they have said is that it won't be open world because they want the player to explore multiple worlds. That was today on IGN
No open world is a good thing. Open worlds destroy the design of a majority of games that include them, because most developers lack either the knowledge or the resources to make proper use of them.
Not everyone is CDProjekt Red, and they should stop making half-assed attempts to copy them.
"To give you an example for unrealistic behavior, basically all of the companions join your team in a heartbeat"
Is there a Role playing game where the characters don't join you right away if you want? I mean, "maybe" this can be explored but in a game where you have multiple characters, all designed to be companions, it might just be more work than not to make each one coy in a certain way.
you mean like baldur gate? with there is severals chars and some would only jaoin you if you did a quest for then or would never because your allignment are oposed? or they won't join because they are in another faction you are enemy with?
from what I see today, is since graphics are the main thing, story and writing are being left as a 2nd or even 3rd hand they jsut don't want to spend on it, even more if they have VA, they wnt the VA to be used in the game since they paid him to talk
I still think a awesome gameplay topples everything in a game, but in a SP a good story goes a long way
I recall all (well those I remember) the companions in Baldur's gate joining you until you pissed them off.
The two evil guys you meet at the start, Minsc and Jaheira, and Khalid for examples. Sure, I guess there are others you might have to do something for but I certainly can't remember them.
I think meeting companions and have them join you happens more often than not in these games.
Quayle too come to think of it. He just offers to join you.
quayle just jump with you because he wanted to enter baldur gate and had problems? to enter alone, the 2 from start was a crazy double who you could ignore, but baldur gate had some interesting way with the story on making then yes some just feel like oh he is the main char I want to join him, some have at least some lore to join you, jaheira and her husband would never join without the other, and only because they know your foster father, minsc would become a enemy IF you killed his sorceress duo or refused to save her he wouldn't join, I mena at the very least there is some lore behind and there is a chance to make then not join you, based on your choices, I guess in a game that is the very least we can expect.
its not like grredfall the captain join you because her admiral order him to join, and you never know why he did, or why he would let the native girl join you just because she was the daughter of a tribe lider and trusted her to fight his side
"Main story wastes potential with clear roles of good and evil"
Too bad...I love RPG where you can follow a gray line.
And I'm not a fan of FPS view /:
"Obsidian draws an interesting, pragmatic take on the typical dystopia."
Which for me is why every Sci-Fi game, TV and film starts with a yawn. Outside of Star Trek Discovery I don't think I have seen anything in the last five years which is not set in a dystopia.
'Would you like dodgy corporation chips with your dystopia sir?' It is all so predictable, that's not to say this game won't have anything new, but you could be radically, astonishingly new by not being set in a dystopia in the first place.
I like the look of Outer Worlds, will no doubt get it (though it says on steam release is 2020 which puzzled me), at least it won't have 'relationships' and 'we have to talk' the other bane of Sci-Fi which every writer now seems to fall back on rather than moving ahead with a plot.
Why can't relationships be part of the plot? I mean, books and movies have them. And it's a role playing game so talking seems to be part of the whole package.
I was thinking of TV and film when referring to the overuse
of relationships as padding in SF, I can think of few games where it has been
an issue, Life Is Strange springs to mind. But in the future who knows?
"Obsidian draws an interesting, pragmatic take on the typical dystopia."
Which for me is why every Sci-Fi game, TV and film starts with a yawn. Outside of Star Trek Discovery I don't think I have seen anything in the last five years which is not set in a dystopia.
'Would you like dodgy corporation chips with your dystopia sir?' It is all so predictable, that's not to say this game won't have anything new, but you could be radically, astonishingly new by not being set in a dystopia in the first place.
I like the look of Outer Worlds, will no doubt get it (though it says on steam release is 2020 which puzzled me), at least it won't have 'relationships' and 'we have to talk' the other bane of Sci-Fi which every writer now seems to fall back on rather than moving ahead with a plot.
Why can't relationships be part of the plot? I mean, books and movies have them. And it's a role playing game so talking seems to be part of the whole package.
I was thinking of TV and film when referring to the overuse
of relationships as padding in SF, I can think of few games where it has been
an issue, Life Is Strange springs to mind. But in the future who knows?
As a player, and a Mass Effect player in particular, I appreciate romance options. They're a major factor in how I roleplay my character. And why shouldn't they be? Reproduction is quite literally one of the most basic, essential human motivations.
"Obsidian draws an interesting, pragmatic take on the typical dystopia."
Which for me is why every Sci-Fi game, TV and film starts with a yawn. Outside of Star Trek Discovery I don't think I have seen anything in the last five years which is not set in a dystopia.
'Would you like dodgy corporation chips with your dystopia sir?' It is all so predictable, that's not to say this game won't have anything new, but you could be radically, astonishingly new by not being set in a dystopia in the first place.
I like the look of Outer Worlds, will no doubt get it (though it says on steam release is 2020 which puzzled me), at least it won't have 'relationships' and 'we have to talk' the other bane of Sci-Fi which every writer now seems to fall back on rather than moving ahead with a plot.
Why can't relationships be part of the plot? I mean, books and movies have them. And it's a role playing game so talking seems to be part of the whole package.
I was thinking of TV and film when referring to the overuse
of relationships as padding in SF, I can think of few games where it has been
an issue, Life Is Strange springs to mind. But in the future who knows?
As a player, and a Mass Effect player in particular, I appreciate romance options. They're a major factor in how I roleplay my character. And why shouldn't they be? Reproduction is quite literally one of the most basic, essential human motivations.
Some systems are better than others. Romance for its own sake is entertaining and all but I really like "friendship" systems as in FO4 for example, where you get useful perks when you unlock their top loyalty rating.
It sounds like Obsidian did something similar to Fallout here.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
"Obsidian draws an interesting, pragmatic take on the typical dystopia."
Which for me is why every Sci-Fi game, TV and film starts with a yawn. Outside of Star Trek Discovery I don't think I have seen anything in the last five years which is not set in a dystopia.
'Would you like dodgy corporation chips with your dystopia sir?' It is all so predictable, that's not to say this game won't have anything new, but you could be radically, astonishingly new by not being set in a dystopia in the first place.
I like the look of Outer Worlds, will no doubt get it (though it says on steam release is 2020 which puzzled me), at least it won't have 'relationships' and 'we have to talk' the other bane of Sci-Fi which every writer now seems to fall back on rather than moving ahead with a plot.
Why can't relationships be part of the plot? I mean, books and movies have them. And it's a role playing game so talking seems to be part of the whole package.
I was thinking of TV and film when referring to the overuse
of relationships as padding in SF, I can think of few games where it has been
an issue, Life Is Strange springs to mind. But in the future who knows?
As a player, and a Mass Effect player in particular, I appreciate romance options. They're a major factor in how I roleplay my character. And why shouldn't they be? Reproduction is quite literally one of the most basic, essential human motivations.
Some systems are better than others. Romance for its own sake is entertaining and all but I really like "friendship" systems as in FO4 for example, where you get useful perks when you unlock their top loyalty rating.
It sounds like Obsidian did something similar to Fallout here.
My favorite implementation is Persona, in which building friendships gives you tangible, fun combat and non combat benefits (such as increased store inventory, discounts, the ability to capture Personas above your level, etc.), and then you have the option to make the relationship either romantic or platonic at the end. It's a great system.
I plan on giving it a try, but since the game doesn't support modding, I see no long term future for it. I mean none of the Bethesda games would be what they are today without the mods. I now this isn't a Bethesda game, but come on...
I plan on giving it a try, but since the game doesn't support modding, I see no long term future for it. I mean none of the Bethesda games would be what they are today without the mods. I now this isn't a Bethesda game, but come on...
The difference being that this game, unlike Bethesda's mediocre drivel, doesn't need mods to be good.
"Obsidian draws an interesting, pragmatic take on the typical dystopia."
Which for me is why every Sci-Fi game, TV and film starts with a yawn. Outside of Star Trek Discovery I don't think I have seen anything in the last five years which is not set in a dystopia.
'Would you like dodgy corporation chips with your dystopia sir?' It is all so predictable, that's not to say this game won't have anything new, but you could be radically, astonishingly new by not being set in a dystopia in the first place.
I like the look of Outer Worlds, will no doubt get it (though it says on steam release is 2020 which puzzled me), at least it won't have 'relationships' and 'we have to talk' the other bane of Sci-Fi which every writer now seems to fall back on rather than moving ahead with a plot.
Why can't relationships be part of the plot? I mean, books and movies have them. And it's a role playing game so talking seems to be part of the whole package.
I was thinking of TV and film when referring to the overuse
of relationships as padding in SF, I can think of few games where it has been
an issue, Life Is Strange springs to mind. But in the future who knows?
To me, stories are about people and people are about relationships. whether that's friendship, rivalries, family, or romantic, a story needs to have examples of how we interact.
To that point, there aren't supposed to be romantic relationships at work but they happen.
That's because, when people interact in a certain way they can and do grow closer.
My thought in the end is that maybe it should be a game option. Along with difficulty or "story mode." Enable or Disable romantic options. This way people who aren't interested in such things don't have to see them. Especially since some people have huge issues seeing certains types of relationships depicted.
Then again, the developers can't please everyone.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
"Obsidian draws an interesting, pragmatic take on the typical dystopia."
Which for me is why every Sci-Fi game, TV and film starts with a yawn. Outside of Star Trek Discovery I don't think I have seen anything in the last five years which is not set in a dystopia.
'Would you like dodgy corporation chips with your dystopia sir?' It is all so predictable, that's not to say this game won't have anything new, but you could be radically, astonishingly new by not being set in a dystopia in the first place.
I like the look of Outer Worlds, will no doubt get it (though it says on steam release is 2020 which puzzled me), at least it won't have 'relationships' and 'we have to talk' the other bane of Sci-Fi which every writer now seems to fall back on rather than moving ahead with a plot.
Why can't relationships be part of the plot? I mean, books and movies have them. And it's a role playing game so talking seems to be part of the whole package.
I was thinking of TV and film when referring to the overuse
of relationships as padding in SF, I can think of few games where it has been
an issue, Life Is Strange springs to mind. But in the future who knows?
To me, stories are about people and people are about relationships. whether that's friendship, rivalries, family, or romantic, a story needs to have examples of how we interact.
To that point, there aren't supposed to be romantic relationships at work but they happen.
That's because, when people interact in a certain way they can and do grow closer.
My thought in the end is that maybe it should be a game option. Along with difficulty or "story mode." Enable or Disable romantic options. This way people who aren't interested in such things don't have to see them. Especially since some people have huge issues seeing certains types of relationships depicted.
Then again, the developers can't please everyone.
Aren't romance options kind of optional by default? I mean, there is no need for an enable/disable toggle when the player has the option to just... not engage in romance.
As I see it, these sorts of controversies are just x type of player being mad that y player has accomodations being made for their tastes. And that's hardly limited to just romance options either. You add something as important and benign as an easy mode, and you'll inevitably have some outspoken group of assholes whining that games are catering to babies now.
Honestly, I would say support this game and other developers that take a stance like this when it comes to micro-transactions. I would even consider games that dont have a shop but day one DLC as micro-transactions since who's to say that it wasn't going to be made into the 'full game' experience? The publishers? Day one DLC only makes it look like part of a game was sold but dont worry, you can always buy the rest if you fork out more.
Unfortunately, we live in a world where hard data influences development and regardless what people say/think about a game, if its pulling in massive amounts of revenue, it will continue to be made. Developers need to SEE that there is a market for stuff like this so it can be worth having both 'morals' and making enough money to support themselves/their families.
Honestly, I would say support this game and other developers that take a stance like this when it comes to micro-transactions. I would even consider games that dont have a shop but day one DLC as micro-transactions since who's to say that it wasn't going to be made into the 'full game' experience? The publishers? Day one DLC only makes it look like part of a game was sold but dont worry, you can always buy the rest if you fork out more.
Unfortunately, we live in a world where hard data influences development and regardless what people say/think about a game, if its pulling in massive amounts of revenue, it will continue to be made. Developers need to SEE that there is a market for stuff like this so it can be worth having both 'morals' and making enough money to support themselves/their families.
Reason I decided to get SW in November. People say that EA needs to change but unless people buy their games that don't have a cash shop or greedy tactics they are never going to do so. Sad thing to is a lot of games that come out from EA that are like that do terribly. Its the games that do have greedy tactics that do well for EA for some reason.
you should only buy good games not games who have the bare minimum of decency, star wars being good... it bring some outcast vibes, but I ahrdly think it would deserve a launch buy date, a special black friday sale I could think about
"Obsidian draws an interesting, pragmatic take on the typical dystopia."
Which for me is why every Sci-Fi game, TV and film starts with a yawn. Outside of Star Trek Discovery I don't think I have seen anything in the last five years which is not set in a dystopia.
'Would you like dodgy corporation chips with your dystopia sir?' It is all so predictable, that's not to say this game won't have anything new, but you could be radically, astonishingly new by not being set in a dystopia in the first place.
I like the look of Outer Worlds, will no doubt get it (though it says on steam release is 2020 which puzzled me), at least it won't have 'relationships' and 'we have to talk' the other bane of Sci-Fi which every writer now seems to fall back on rather than moving ahead with a plot.
Why can't relationships be part of the plot? I mean, books and movies have them. And it's a role playing game so talking seems to be part of the whole package.
I was thinking of TV and film when referring to the overuse
of relationships as padding in SF, I can think of few games where it has been
an issue, Life Is Strange springs to mind. But in the future who knows?
To me, stories are about people and people are about relationships. whether that's friendship, rivalries, family, or romantic, a story needs to have examples of how we interact.
To that point, there aren't supposed to be romantic relationships at work but they happen.
That's because, when people interact in a certain way they can and do grow closer.
My thought in the end is that maybe it should be a game option. Along with difficulty or "story mode." Enable or Disable romantic options. This way people who aren't interested in such things don't have to see them. Especially since some people have huge issues seeing certains types of relationships depicted.
Then again, the developers can't please everyone.
Aren't romance options kind of optional by default? I mean, there is no need for an enable/disable toggle when the player has the option to just... not engage in romance.
As I see it, these sorts of controversies are just x type of player being mad that y player has accomodations being made for their tastes. And that's hardly limited to just romance options either. You add something as important and benign as an easy mode, and you'll inevitably have some outspoken group of assholes whining that games are catering to babies now.
While "I" agree with you, there are people who get very miffed if not offended at such things.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Honestly, I would say support this game and other developers that take a stance like this when it comes to micro-transactions. I would even consider games that dont have a shop but day one DLC as micro-transactions since who's to say that it wasn't going to be made into the 'full game' experience? The publishers? Day one DLC only makes it look like part of a game was sold but dont worry, you can always buy the rest if you fork out more.
Unfortunately, we live in a world where hard data influences development and regardless what people say/think about a game, if its pulling in massive amounts of revenue, it will continue to be made. Developers need to SEE that there is a market for stuff like this so it can be worth having both 'morals' and making enough money to support themselves/their families.
Reason I decided to get SW in November. People say that EA needs to change but unless people buy their games that don't have a cash shop or greedy tactics they are never going to do so. Sad thing to is a lot of games that come out from EA that are like that do terribly. Its the games that do have greedy tactics that do well for EA for some reason.
you should only buy good games not games who have the bare minimum of decency, star wars being good... it bring some outcast vibes, but I ahrdly think it would deserve a launch buy date, a special black friday sale I could think about
I mean you kind of proved my point here. A lot of people are treating the game this way from what I have seen. So the game won't sell as well as EA hopes. It will sell well obviously but not as well as the dozens of other games people complain about for their greedy tactics that people gobble up on day 1.
I know I'm thinking about it. I want to see more proper story-driven, linear masterpieces like God of War 2018, and the only way to encourage that is to buy them.
Honestly, I would say support this game and other developers that take a stance like this when it comes to micro-transactions. I would even consider games that dont have a shop but day one DLC as micro-transactions since who's to say that it wasn't going to be made into the 'full game' experience? The publishers? Day one DLC only makes it look like part of a game was sold but dont worry, you can always buy the rest if you fork out more.
Unfortunately, we live in a world where hard data influences development and regardless what people say/think about a game, if its pulling in massive amounts of revenue, it will continue to be made. Developers need to SEE that there is a market for stuff like this so it can be worth having both 'morals' and making enough money to support themselves/their families.
Reason I decided to get SW in November. People say that EA needs to change but unless people buy their games that don't have a cash shop or greedy tactics they are never going to do so. Sad thing to is a lot of games that come out from EA that are like that do terribly. Its the games that do have greedy tactics that do well for EA for some reason.
you should only buy good games not games who have the bare minimum of decency, star wars being good... it bring some outcast vibes, but I ahrdly think it would deserve a launch buy date, a special black friday sale I could think about
I mean you kind of proved my point here. A lot of people are treating the game this way from what I have seen. So the game won't sell as well as EA hopes. It will sell well obviously but not as well as the dozens of other games people complain about for their greedy tactics that people gobble up on day 1.
I know I'm thinking about it. I want to see more proper story-driven, linear masterpieces like God of War 2018, and the only way to encourage that is to buy them.
That is the other thing as well. The people who want the story-driven games aren't really saying that heavily monetized games like Fifa/Madden/what-have-you can't exist (well some of them anyway), they just want there to be a place for both without monetization being the defining factor. That is kind of the weird dynamic that a company like SE has created for themselves. They have heavily monetized games (and even try to slip in some extra, i.e. Deus Ex), but they usually circle that funding into other projects. If they didn't, they would've gone out of business a long time ago. I'm not saying that's an excuse or it should make it okay, but it would be sad if Final Fantasy games stopped being made. They've probably delayed announcing FFXVI due to PS5 (which they do have a long relationship with the platform).
"Obsidian draws an interesting, pragmatic take on the typical dystopia."
I like the look of Outer Worlds, will no doubt get it (though it says on steam release is 2020 which puzzled me), at least it won't have 'relationships' and 'we have to talk' the other bane of Sci-Fi which every writer now seems to fall back on rather than moving ahead with a plot.
Comes out on Epic store (let the hate begin!) and Microsoft store (included for free with Game Pass), with a 1 year delay until Steam due to Epic/Microsoft exclusivity.
Articles author seems to have some strange notion that corporations can be anything -but- EVIL... I'm hard-pressed to find any large ones that aren't. It's the basic nature of the malignant beast.
Articles author seems to have some strange notion that corporations can be anything -but- EVIL... I'm hard-pressed to find any large ones that aren't. It's the basic nature of the malignant beast.
That is a myopic view of things. There's nothing wrong with making a business and getting it so large that it becomes a corporation.
There are many people in business who have morals and many who don't, just like physicians, many have morals, and many don't. I wouldn't judge all corporations as bad just because they make money.
Examples, of course, I don't know the full details, but I'd suspect Dell Corporation may be ok, perhaps, Starbucks, maybe NVIDIA is good, I think Google treats its employees very well.
Overall, saying all corp are evil, is a ridiculous statement. Let's say you start a business, it becomes so successful, that you make it go public, and then all of a sudden some keyboard warrior is saying you're evil because you are large corporation.
Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
I am so tired of devs blatantly copying the same old new skin,it creates no reason at all to buy these new games because they are not new,just a new skin.
Currency..upgrades...points to spend..zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz yeah we need a new skin doing this.
The only positive i see is the different locations to explore.Funny though that IGN also used the phrase..."colorful art style",actually very odd.There is no colorful,i find it weird both used that phrase because it is an expected art style also taking nuances from Fallout and a similar design we see from other Obsidian designs.
That is another peeve of mine,devs not able to allow a game to stand on it's own two feet using it's past successes to help sell the product.Boring pew pew guns,an area of design i have not been impressed with since Unreal and Quake gave us some NEW type of firepower.
Except one very big problem,one i have mentioned often..NO VIDEO.I went over to IGN and they have a pretty good video giving me a way better idea of what the game looks like and is about.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Umm if people want realistic relationships in games I don't think they will ever find them, people change their minds and what they want at 15 25 35 45 55 65 75etc can be really differant . That seams kinda sad to me and makes me wonder if they are missing it in their real life Familey Kids Wife Friends Drug buddies? just kidding. I wonder how maney gamers have that on the wanted list for their games.
Forgot a Pro: No Microtransactions. Seems to be a rarity these days.
It doesn't deserve a "pro" for that any more than it deserves a "pro" for not erasing your hard drive. There are certain baseline expectations for a game and it shouldn't be praised for meeting them.
Comments
Not everyone is CDProjekt Red, and they should stop making half-assed attempts to copy them.
Too bad...I love RPG where you can follow a gray line.
And I'm not a fan of FPS view /:
I'll buy It later then ^^
I was thinking of TV and film when referring to the overuse of relationships as padding in SF, I can think of few games where it has been an issue, Life Is Strange springs to mind. But in the future who knows?
It sounds like Obsidian did something similar to Fallout here.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
To that point, there aren't supposed to be romantic relationships at work but they happen.
That's because, when people interact in a certain way they can and do grow closer.
My thought in the end is that maybe it should be a game option. Along with difficulty or "story mode." Enable or Disable romantic options. This way people who aren't interested in such things don't have to see them. Especially since some people have huge issues seeing certains types of relationships depicted.
Then again, the developers can't please everyone.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
As I see it, these sorts of controversies are just x type of player being mad that y player has accomodations being made for their tastes. And that's hardly limited to just romance options either. You add something as important and benign as an easy mode, and you'll inevitably have some outspoken group of assholes whining that games are catering to babies now.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Comes out on Epic store (let the hate begin!) and Microsoft store (included for free with Game Pass), with a 1 year delay until Steam due to Epic/Microsoft exclusivity.
There are many people in business who have morals and many who don't, just like physicians, many have morals, and many don't. I wouldn't judge all corporations as bad just because they make money.
Examples, of course, I don't know the full details, but I'd suspect Dell Corporation may be ok, perhaps, Starbucks, maybe NVIDIA is good, I think Google treats its employees very well.
Overall, saying all corp are evil, is a ridiculous statement. Let's say you start a business, it becomes so successful, that you make it go public, and then all of a sudden some keyboard warrior is saying you're evil because you are large corporation.
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
Hoping for a GoG release as well.
Currency..upgrades...points to spend..zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz yeah we need a new skin doing this.
The only positive i see is the different locations to explore.Funny though that IGN also used the phrase..."colorful art style",actually very odd.There is no colorful,i find it weird both used that phrase because it is an expected art style also taking nuances from Fallout and a similar design we see from other Obsidian designs.
That is another peeve of mine,devs not able to allow a game to stand on it's own two feet using it's past successes to help sell the product.Boring pew pew guns,an area of design i have not been impressed with since Unreal and Quake gave us some NEW type of firepower.
Except one very big problem,one i have mentioned often..NO VIDEO.I went over to IGN and they have a pretty good video giving me a way better idea of what the game looks like and is about.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
It doesn't deserve a "pro" for that any more than it deserves a "pro" for not erasing your hard drive. There are certain baseline expectations for a game and it shouldn't be praised for meeting them.