I don't typically comment on content on the site - despite being a fan of Giant Bomb since its launch - but this news really hits me hard. To be blunt, Dan reinvigorated this site after Ryan's passing and his work ethic, his sense of humor, and his passion for games and the industry are all amazing qualities. Without a doubt, he's been the driving force behind the best content in the site's recent history - and what brought me back.
He'll be greatly missed, but I'm happy he's moving on to something he's excited about. Thanks for all the laughs.
Ben's introduction of the game is exactly what's wrong with PUBG winning:
"I think in a year with some of the best story-telling, some of the best map design, some of the best open-world design, some of the best moments, some of the best plot arcs, characters, style, music... to reward a game like PLAYERUNKNOWN's Battlegrounds, which is a good game... but look how few times we mentioned it in other categories. It doesn't have any style, it doesn't have music, it doesn't have any good art... This is one of the best years for video games for so many reasons, and if I list those reasons in my head, I'm going to be thinking about Odyssey, NieR, Cuphead. I want my kids to play Cuphead. I feel so passionate about these games, but Battlegrounds is just a shooter with some good shit in it."
PUBG is a game about "moments", as Alex describes it, and those moments are the metric for evaluating PUBG as a game. That's perfect, as long as it isn't to the exclusion of its other merits as a game; and as multiple people mentioned in this discussion, PUBG is blatantly buggy, technically unimpressive, literally devoid of music or story - a feature-bereft, "asset flip which has the distinction of winning big off a dollar scratch-off," in Jason's words.
All this considered, PUBG is competing with Cuphead, Super Mario Odyssey, Breath of the Wild (described on GOTY as, "one of the greatest games ever made"), and NieR. Contrast BotW and PUBG. As an example, Breath of the Wild drew direct inspiration from open-world games, but reinvented their conventions in a way which revitalized the genre. Like PUBG, it encourages players to personally form unique experiences; however, it achieves this through its design principles, manifested in the form of a meticulously-crafted game world. Add to this its evocative OST and art design, and you have a superlative game - even if it isn't for everyone, even if it's flawed. BotW isn't even my personal GOTY, I'm just using it as an example.
In contrast, PUBG is a highly iterative, the natural conclusion of the battle royale genre finally finding a broader demographic; Fortnite's comparable popularity is evidence that it is battle royale - not PUBG as a game - that is attracting people. Stardew Valley similarly experienced huge popularity because it was the PC platform's first exposure to a Harvest Moon-like game - except Stardew Valley was also a very polished game.While PUBG's gameplay loop of drop, loot, die, rinse & repeat is addictive, it's ultimately the personal experiences people insert into the gameplay experience which define it. The game that surrounds those experiences is, honestly, unpolished and unfinished.
Even in a year which wasn't absolutely amazing for games, even on a personal list in a year where half the staff had amazing personal experiences in PUBG - and half the staff clearly didn't - is this enough to merit getting GOTY? I just think it's bizarre that the unpolished, unfinished PUBG is held to a completely different standard from finished, finely-polished games.
Capcom Vancouver hesitance to decide whether it wants to appeal to the dreaded, "broader audience," or devotees of the series seems to have resulted in a the worst of both worlds. The original Dead Rising is one of my favorite 360 titles, so its a shame to see the studio deliberately trash almost all of the elements that defined the series - the timer, the psychopaths, and soundtrack - only to turn around and attempt to pander to "fans" with a Frank no one asked for.
The characters, aesthetic, tone, and gameplay were all sacrificed to appeal to an audience that never had an interest in Dead Rising - or as the lead developers put it, "people on the PAX floor." I'm looking forward to some discussion of this from the crew, considering Jeff seemed aware of this dilemma a while ago.
(But hey, remember to pay for the Overtime DLC - timer included - when it inevitably drops! Merry Christmas.)
@whitegreyblack: I've been watching a friend stream the game for the last four hours. From the first trailer, the soundtrack has been using songs from CONELRAD, a popular New Vegas radio mod (http://www.nexusmods.com/newvegas/mods/35061/), and they compose a solid chunk of the soundtrack. In those four hours, I've only heard three new songs, but multiples from Fallout 3 (at least 10) and CONELRAD (at least 7), so it seems like the soundtrack is mostly songs from the two with a smaller proportion being new.
@soundlug: I don't think it's disingenuous at all. What you should expect from an RPG isn't necessarily a large amount of content, but an amount of high quality content that interfaces well with the mechanics of the game. Personally, I'd rather play a Fallout 4 with 50 quests, a complex reputation and faction system that adds consequence to your choices and mutual exclusivity of content to encourage multiple playthroughs, and writing that adds depth to that quest content. Contrast that with a Fallout 4 with 100 quests, the karma system from Fallout 3 (which has been neutered so that it is more difficult to even be a "bad guy", according to reviews) some reputations, and the plot from 3 in the inverse, with a twist (I won't spoil). So I think you're right in saying that there's more "hollow stuff'", but it goes beyond that because the traditional RPG mechanics that make that stuff work well to begin with have been dumbed-down. It's why there's a Mass Effect-style dialogue wheel (it's easier), less emphasis on skills (it's easier), and why there's no level limit and content isn't blocked off to you by level (it's easier).
Bethesda has always sold their games on the platform of, "There's so much to do, and you can do anything!", but they don't address whether that content is worth doing or why.
The 50 and 100 are just for argument's sake. I've heard there's a pretty good number of quests in 4, but that most of the good ones belong to late-game factions.
@memu:Todd stated in an interview that Fallout 4's development cycle began by porting Skyrim to the Xbox One, so that should tell you all that you need to know. I don't think they directly claimed that it was a new engine, but the re-used animations (turning, punching) and sounds from Skyrim give a poor impression that suggests otherwise.
@xchairmandrekx:Yeah, it's a breath of fresh air to hear someone say that we aren't wrong for expecting a quality product, especially after all the time and effort, and presumably money (there isn't a budget online as far as I can tell, which is telling in itself) that went into it. Is it objectionable to expect quality from the industry's most well-known developer and publisher of open-world RPGs? Expecting to be let down means you're going to be let down.
@sippycupninja@xchairmandrekx The more likely reality is that Bethesda are the ones "dusting it under the rug", so to speak. When people praise this game whole cloth without taking the time to talk about some of its shortcomings honestly (as with Fallout 3; New Vegas experienced the inverse, with people claiming that the entire product was poor while ignoring its positive points, some of which were scrapped and repurporsed - such as the crafting system), it creates an issue: Bethesda realizes that they don't have to deliver a mechanically complex, rich RPG; rather, what people want is merely "more Fallout". You can see some of those comments on this quick look, too. People practically deify this game, Skyrim, and Fallout 3 because they came from Bethesda and not necessarily because the game mechanics, the writing and characters, etc. make a better RPG.
What does tower defense have to do with Fallout? Did it focus test well, is that why it's in the game? Why were the skill and SPECIAL systems, dialogue, character building, factions, and many other aspects of this game dumbed-down when there was nothing they took away from the experience except convenience for those who didn't want to dedicate time to understanding them?
They don't have to make a good, bug-free RPG because the biggest market for RPGs doesn't want them. It isn't unrealistic to expect a better game after all this time, and what we got is literally less - in terms of mechanics and arguably in terms of content.
Duke_Bilgewater's comments