| Forum Index > General Games |
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On June 16 2015 01:15 Disengaged wrote: I've never played any Fallout games but Fallout 4 just might be my first and only. I don't intend on playing the old games because I don't care enough lol ? fallout 1 was really good, one of the best pc video games of all time. | ||
|
Disengaged
United States6994 Posts
On June 16 2015 01:30 wei2coolman wrote: ? fallout 1 was really good, one of the best pc video games of all time. Oh, I have no doubt about that but its just that I most likely wouldn't have the time/patience to go through the old games. I could just watch playthroughs on youtube though | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On June 16 2015 00:11 wei2coolman wrote: Crysis never pulled any punches. That comparison is really stupid. Crysis' alpha/beta footage was a one-level tech demo because the graphics were the selling point of the game. The gameplay was secondary. So at the alpha/early beta stage, all the tech had to be there, but the gameplay didn't really matter yet because that's not what the audience was looking for. For Fallout, it's the opposite--the only thing that people will be looking for in an alpha/beta build is gameplay mechanics--there needs to be a sufficient amount of the world built to showcase all of them--so of course they're going to skimp on getting graphical optimization and high-quality assets into the current beta build. I still have no expectations for this, seeing as it's a Bethesda game, but this is still a really bad reason to criticize the game, lol. On June 16 2015 01:33 Disengaged wrote: Oh, I have no doubt about that but its just that I most likely wouldn't have the time/patience to go through the old games. I could just watch playthroughs on youtube though A Let's Play doesn't really capture the essence of what makes Fallout good, because someone else is making all the choices. Maybe it's just me, but 2d graphics from like 1995 onward don't really deter me because 2d art and interface design were sufficiently developed by that point anyway (Starcraft still looks just fine, for example). 3d graphics is a different story because early 3d graphics look awful and have aged terribly, but 2d graphics have long since passed the point where this should be an issue. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
| ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On June 16 2015 01:44 TheYango wrote: That comparison is really stupid. Crysis' alpha/beta footage was a one-level tech demo because the graphics were the selling point of the game. The gameplay was secondary. So at the alpha/early beta stage, all the tech had to be there, but the gameplay didn't really matter yet because that's not what the audience was looking for. For Fallout, it's the opposite--the only thing that people will be looking for in an alpha/beta build is gameplay mechanics--there needs to be a sufficient amount of the world built to showcase all of them--so of course they're going to skimp on getting graphical optimization and high-quality assets into the current beta build. I still have no expectations for this, seeing as it's a Bethesda game, but this is still a really bad reason to criticize the game, lol. A Let's Play doesn't really capture the essence of what makes Fallout good, because someone else is making all the choices. Maybe it's just me, but 2d graphics from like 1995 onward don't really deter me because 2d art and interface design were sufficiently developed by that point anyway (Starcraft still looks just fine, for example). 3d graphics is a different story because early 3d graphics look awful and have aged terribly, but 2d graphics have long since passed the point where this should be an issue. it wasn't intended to be a comparison in regards to games, it was supposed to be a comparison between philosophy of companies doing releases back then compared to now. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On June 16 2015 02:17 wei2coolman wrote: it wasn't intended to be a comparison in regards to games, it was supposed to be a comparison between philosophy of companies doing releases back then compared to now. Explain. As people posting before you mentioned, it's not reasonable to expect them to show the highest graphical settings for the game at E3, because realistically it's not a priority for them at this point development-wise. To which you provided Crysis as a counter-example when graphics were pretty much the only priority at an equivalent stage of development because it was THE selling point of the game. I'm not sure what "philosophy" you're trying to point out at all. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On June 16 2015 02:46 Plansix wrote: I would also point out that Crysis was most famous for people not being able to run it at the highest setting with even high end PCs. That is the very essence of not delivering if no one can run it. Quite literally the only selling point of the game was the graphics (the game was good in other ways, but the graphics were pretty much the only part that Crytek ever even tried to market to people). Wei2, you've repeatedly used Crysis as an example of how game development used to prioritize high-end graphics more when 1) Crytek's one-dimensional focus on selling their title on the basis of it's graphics was already anomalous, even at the time, and 2) the only genre market where that would ever work is the first-person shooter market, not to mention the financial feasibility of developing tech that's only usable by <1% of your installed base is even lower than it was when Crysis was under development. | ||
|
Unleashing
Denmark14978 Posts
| ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On June 16 2015 03:35 Unleashing wrote: I'm still wondering why bethesda cut all the good and fun CRPG aspects of their franchises. Were there any to begin with? Even the best aspects of Bethesda's good games were not the CRPG elements. | ||
|
Unleashing
Denmark14978 Posts
On June 16 2015 03:42 TheYango wrote: Were there any to begin with? Even the best aspects of Bethesda's good games were not the CRPG elements. They're cutting the skills and skill distribution and traits from fallout 4 and then forcing it into a skyrim-esque perk system. I don't know about you but i like skill distribution and it's a big part of the series' replayability for me. It's one of the things that diversified my playthroughs. I also hate the dialogue wheel and i'm hoping it's console exclusive, but probably not. I hate having to fucking GUESS what my character is going to say from 3-4 keywords. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On June 16 2015 02:55 TheYango wrote: Quite literally the only selling point of the game was the graphics (the game was good in other ways, but the graphics were pretty much the only part that Crytek ever even tried to market to people). Wei2, you've repeatedly used Crysis as an example of how game development used to prioritize high-end graphics more when 1) Crytek's one-dimensional focus on selling their title on the basis of it's graphics was already anomalous, even at the time, and 2) the only genre market where that would ever work is the first-person shooter market, not to mention the financial feasibility of developing tech that's only usable by <1% of your installed base is even lower than it was when Crysis was under development. Going through a list of 2006-2008 releases, I don't remember any of the releases where publishers were like "oh hey, here's a shitty beta in game cutscene, in which graphics haven't improved since the first re-release of franchise from 7 years ago." | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On June 16 2015 03:44 Unleashing wrote: They're cutting the skills and skill distribution and traits from fallout 4 and then forcing it into a skyrim-esque perk system. I don't know about you but i like skill distribution and it's a big part of the series' replayability for me. I agree with you in concept, but Bethesda is so poor at designing skill systems that are meaningful and engaging that in my mind not having one at all isn't really much of a downgrade. If anything, it's Bethesda realizing what they're shit at designing and therefore just cutting it rather than putting a badly designed version into the game. On June 16 2015 03:44 Unleashing wrote: I also hate the dialogue wheel and i'm hoping it's console exclusive, but probably not. I hate having to fucking GUESS what my character is going to say from 3-4 keywords. This is the same thing. Perhaps Bethesda figured out that writing isn't their strong point, so they trimmed down the amount of shit dialogue their writers have to write. Their target audience just skims for meaning rather than reading anything anyway, so the extra effort is wasted regardless. On June 16 2015 03:52 wei2coolman wrote: Going through a list of 2006-2008 releases, I don't remember any of the releases where publishers were like "oh hey, here's a shitty beta in game cutscene, in which graphics haven't improved since the first re-release of franchise from 7 years ago." I mean, that's a poor comparison given the relative advancement of graphics between 2000-2007 and 2008-2015 due to spending money on it becoming less and less financially feasible as the incremental cost gets higher and higher, and the console market is more and more necessary to make a game profitable. But look, for example, how poor Starcraft 2 beta screenshots/footage looked compared to the finished product. | ||
|
Yacobs
United States846 Posts
On June 16 2015 03:42 TheYango wrote: Were there any to begin with? Even the best aspects of Bethesda's good games were not the CRPG elements. Yes and no. Bethesda's RPG systems have always been terrible and highly abusable. However, there was a benefit to abusing their systems. For example, being able to make a god-like character in their early games who can just reflect back all enemy spells while flying through the air infinitely. It's not challenging but it can be fun -- their games provided freedom. Their new games have gotten progressively more and more restrictive. Oblivion was the beginning of this when they removed the ability to fly. They also removed the ability to climb walls, removed a lot of the neat spells that you can use in the spell builder and so on. In Skyrim you've got their crappy RPG systems... and no ability to have fun in spite of that (except for mods, of course). It sounds like Fallout 4 will yet again move toward that boring, streamlined approach. Modern Bethesda thinks it's more fun to watch an instant replay of a bullet exploding someone's head than anything emergent, unexpected, and interactive happening. | ||
|
Unleashing
Denmark14978 Posts
On June 16 2015 03:53 TheYango wrote: I agree with you in concept, but Bethesda is so poor at designing skill systems that are meaningful and engaging that in my mind not having one at all isn't really much of a downgrade. If anything, it's Bethesda realizing what they're shit at designing and therefore just cutting it rather than putting a badly designed version into the game. This is the same thing. Maybe Bethesda realized how shit their writers are so they used a dialogue wheel to reduce how much of their eye-bleedingly bad dialogue you have to read (their target audience just skims for meaning rather than reading anything anyway, so the extra effort is wasted regardless). Even if the dialogue is shit i'd still rather read it than having to guess at what it means. Same with the skill system, the skill system from for example fallout 3 is still to be preferred imo than a skyrim-esque perk system. Because from the way i'm seeing it they're taking the franchise and just dropping the RPG aspects almost completely. Which makes me sad because the RPG aspects is what made me fall in love with the series to begin with way back. I want to be able to create and diversify my character. The fact that my character is already locked into the role as a middle aged father/mother with a wife/husband already doesn't sit well with me because my character is essentially already given a form of personality without me influencing it at all. But well, maybe if we're lucky they'll let obsidian make another fallout game and let them bring it back to being a real RPG. Because i honestly think some of the new crafting and ideas could be fun, but i'd like all of it together with RPG aspects and an immersive story and world. Edit: I should probably add that i think i'll have some fun playing FO4 almost surely. But it just doesn't seem like it'll be a good fallout game(imoimo) from what i'm seeing so far. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On June 16 2015 03:59 Unleashing wrote: Even if the dialogue is shit i'd still rather read it than having to guess at what it means. Then you do more reading than the vast majority of people who actually play these games, because as far as I can tell, most people skim the dialogue choices for the one closest to their general attitude and pick it without reading closely what's being said. For that kind of player, the dialogue wheel encompasses the extent to which they're engaging with the dialogue anyway. On June 16 2015 03:59 Unleashing wrote: But it just doesn't seem like it'll be a good fallout game(imoimo) from what i'm seeing so far. Fallout 3 wasn't a good Fallout game--it was more like TES Gaiden than anything. Absolutely none of this should surprise or disappoint you coming from Bethesda. | ||
|
Unleashing
Denmark14978 Posts
On June 16 2015 04:04 TheYango wrote: Then you do more reading than the vast majority of people who actually play these games, because as far as I can tell, most people skim the dialogue choices for the one closest to their general attitude and pick it without reading closely what's being said. For that kind of player, the dialogue wheel encompasses the extent to which they're engaging with the dialogue anyway. It's honestly one of the reasons why i wish that in general these kind of games went away from having all characters being voiced. Having super important story-relevant characters voiced is alright, but, i'd prefer if generic NPCs had no voices because it A: Gives the devs much more room to just have the NPCs say whatever you want and create more text and lore and tidbits to explore. B: Helps mods and user-made quests blend more seamlessly into the world without them having either have bad amateur voice acting or doing the entire quest through text and notes which is limiting. C: Allows devs to create much more NPCs that you can chat with ontop of their more varied/plentiful dialogue options. I like interacting with NPCs and immerse myself in the world like that. On June 16 2015 04:04 TheYango wrote: Fallout 3 wasn't a good Fallout game--it was more like TES Gaiden than anything. Absolutely none of this should surprise or disappoint you coming from Bethesda. I'm not surprised or disappointed, but i still wish for something more. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
| ||
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On June 16 2015 04:11 TheYango wrote: Amusingly, Bethesda was the company that started the trend of "VOICE ALL THE THINGS!" with Oblivion. and do it with ~three people of all the things wrong with Oblivion, the fact that craig sechler's voice was fucking everywhere was the worst imo | ||
|
LaNague
Germany9118 Posts
Its so obvious, i dont know how noone saw that and said "guys? thats horrible, we cant do that" | ||
| ||
|
|
OSC
BSL 21
Cross vs Dewalt
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
OSC
Solar vs MaxPax
ByuN vs Krystianer
Spirit vs TBD
OSC
Korean StarCraft League
OSC
OSC
OSC
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
