As a Fallout fan I wanted more New Vegas, not more Fallout 3. This game just seems dumber in every possible way, from tone to story to mechanics.
So combat that actually works and feels like a proper game is "dumber"?
Now I've seen a couple of claims that this is stripped down from New Vegas and somebody is gonna have to explain that one instead of just trying to throw it out there like it's automatically true because I don't understand the position at all.
Exactly, I mean gameplay and systems wise it's just a completely different beast. So people saying it's mechanically worse w/o examples really make me confused. I understand the "dumber" RPG stuff, but the shooting, VATS, crits, dialogue, crafting, perks, power armor, etc. are all COMPLETELY different than the last two. People don't have to like it, but to pretend like this game has no depth is ridiculous.
Also people in every thread whining about graphics and it not being written by Obsidian confuse me greatly. Fucking, we knew this shit since day one. This game looked not up to W3 and it's a Bethesda game. They're not going to try and emulate a different devs writing style. It's set on the East Coast. 3's story was bad, but Bethesda is good at tone and making a desolate random world. NV lacked (yes, yes it's better than 3 still. Don't shoot) in that respect imo, too populated.
Not saying there isn't a time or place to take about what a game could be, but it's just annoying to see "muh graphics" "muh Obsidian" in every thread.
It's okay to have complaints, but like this is shit we've known for months. It's not a revelation. It's okay to not like things, but complaining and being upset about what isn't there when we've known it for months now seems unnecessary.
@hayt: Oh trust me you will. Same-sex romance has been confirmed for a while and there's like SEVERAL eligible partners (no robomancing tho :/). I'm excited.
@edgaras1103: Mass Effect 2 is when the series got more serious about the third-person shooting. It's only around 25 hours. Also, it's not fantasy, which I feel like several members of the crew kind of don't vibe with in the first place.
I also think Bethesda RPGs should be considered a class of their own, because they are able to appeal to such a wide demographic. The first person combat, focus on exploration, and easy to digest character building/dialogue choices line up more with the crew's sensibilities. Not to say I don't enjoy Bethesda's work (I'm foaming at the mouth for Fallout 4), just that they have a broader appeal.
When people reference the crew not being into RPGs, the most recent and glaring example was the GOTY podcast last year. No one was really into Dragon Age, Divinity got the shaft from a majority of the staff, etc.
I think MGS V is a strong contender, because all of the west coast boyz have actually finished and still seem mostly positive. I really hope they all get to play through Fallout and it becomes a contender tho! Especially after 3 got shafted during GOTY discussions back in 2008 (Fuck GTA IV). :/
@sinjunb: I mean I don't know if you go on on Reddit (which I believe they mentioned last week), but there IS a huge fan group saying things along those lines. Also, have you heard of hyperbole? It makes reading interesting! You're doing it, I'm doing it. It's fun! I wasn't even specifically mentioning you. There are several people who claimed they were dropping the show only to come back here. Sure, they might not have said what I said in jest, but not listening to a podcast because they don't like this game you enjoy is pretty extreme in and of itself. As I said in my previous post, I love anime, jrpgs, and Yoshi's Island. ALL things they've talked shit about, but I understand their personalities and realize they shit I'm into isn't for everyone.
Maybe instead of trying to discredit my opinions by claiming I'm "making shit up" you could respond to my speculation of WHY people might not respond to The Witcher 3 as strongly as others. And how dropping it for a bit could lower one's tolerance for some of it's flaws in gameplay, flow, and quality of life/UI. I would love to dialogue about why the Witcher 3 doesn't appeal to everyone, but if you're going to try to invalidate any points I was trying to make, because I made a goof about the extremism of the fanbase. I don't think it'll end up being very constructive or enlightening.
@sethmode: It's already happened lol. Protip: If you claim to be outraged and swear on your ancestor's grave to not listen to a future episode of a podcast, only to come back and COMMENT the next week... Maybe make a new fucking account? At least TRY to appear to stick to yr guns, my dawgs.
Also, I think everyone's is misinterpreting Jeff's Witcher 2 comment. He isn't saying Witcher 3 only appeals to Witcher 2 fans. He's saying the W3 fanboys screaming "IF YOU DON'T PLAY THRU THE WITCHER 3 IT'S LIKE YOU'VE NEVER HAD SEX" are exactly the same as the fanboys around W2's release. The Witcher 3 is a great goddam game, but it is not a requirement for all humans forever.
The guys' all have interesting tastes and have been working in the industry long enough to have very specific turn-offs. It's okay. We all knew GOTY season was going to be MGSV and Just Cause talk anyways. The guys aren't big into 80+ rpgs and even less into the fantasy variety.
I'm really into anime and Jeff calls me a jerk! I am not outraged, because... he's probably right. The guys talk shit about "niche" stuff all the time. The Witcher 3 doesn't appeal to everyone. Dropping a game after having a large gap between sessions is normal. It makes any weaknesses even more glaring.
I mean straight up, if you're not invested in the lore there's not a lot keeping people there. The draw is the world and story, not the gameplay. IMO the core storyline isn't even that amazing. The characters, side stuff, world building, etc. is what brings people in, but most of that is built upon the books.
I think The Witcher 3 doesn't necessarily have the narrative hook to keep newcomers going. It's more about being Geralt in this world with all these characters you already love. The game does jack-all to tell you about the significance of Lilac and Gooseberries. We have to think about the others' perspective and context. I read the first two books and played Witcher 2, so I'm already invested in the world. Someone new isn't and might not do enough outside reading to familiarize themselves with it. Then you have to go further and think, is what's only in the game enticing to everyone? I think the game truly shines when you have the context of the world building that already occurred in other pieces of media, but that's a lot of fucking effort and homework you're asking people to do. Time is valuable and all that.
@dubiouscomet: Word! Yeah, I have a feeling people not familiar with other space exploration/mining/truck sim games are going to be very disappointed with this. It's unfortunate that Sony is trying to hype this game up as the 2001 of video games, when it most likely will only really be enjoyed by the kind of weirdos that enjoy looking at planets wizz by, while carrying a hold full of moon gems (weirdos like me!).
I'm especially excited because it'll give me a chance to break out my HOTAS again after I got tired of E: D
Now we need an EU4 Playdate. Please keep supplying me with funny and insightful anecdotes/gameplay/interviews from the world of Paradox, Austin. It's my favorite. The CK2 Playdate is what got me into Paradox and back into strategy games as a whole. Thank you so much. 1luv.
iggypoptart's comments