quote:Originally posted by Mucus: That system kinda broke down with Nemesis being bad and Star Trek(2009) being good though.
No, the new Trek is essentially a reboot. The curse is over. And as far as the old series, Nemesis was go. . . it was goo. . . nevermind, it sucked, you're right.
Posts: 1204 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, I'd like to know the answer to that question too just in case it pops up on a Steam daily sale.
Assume I've played Fallout 3, found it fun, but underwhelming with little desire to replay it. However, I still found, say Dragon Age Awakening worth playing after Dragon Age. Is New Vegas compelling enough for me to take a look at, or is it a "skip" such as with what I thought was the consensus with Dragon Age 2?
Edit to add: And assume I'm going to play it on PC
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
My wife and I both played Oblivion, were kind of meh, both loved Fallout 3, and both hated New Vegas. Some of the critics liked it, but IMHO it was terrible.
The content was boring. The desert landscape was blah and really spread out. And it was RIDDLED with bugs. On the PS3, it was essentially unplayable, the bugs were so bad.
Posts: 1204 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
New Vegas just seemed like a REALLY long expansion to Fallout 3. The systems were the same, the weapons were the same, only the story was different. It's worth playing through once, though I would skip the majority of the optional quests.
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oooh, New Vegas, what an interesting topic!
From a technical standpoint, it was terrible. If you hate bugs and the like... yeah, don't play New Vegas. But then, what are you doing playing Bethesda games in the first place?
From a gameplay perspective, however, I thought New Vegas was actually a significant improvement over Fallout 3. I'm probably in a minority here.
I think New Vegas' superior gameplay is reflected in... leveling of zones (in that they were much less leveled, and there were many more areas you could just die if you were too low level) the HP of enemies (in that they had far fewer, so there was less of a grindy "shoot this super mutant master in the head thirty times before he dies" feel) and Survival mode (where you have to eat, drink, and sleep to stay alive, and limb damage is harder to heal).
Now, the rub here is that New Vegas isn't really a Bethesda product, it's an Obsidian product (who apparently have even worse testers than Bethesda!), so the lessons Bethesda learned from Fallout ≠ lessons learned from New Vegas. Which makes me sad.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: If you don't like bugs you probably shouldn't be playing a Fallout either, they're practically an homage to Fallout 1 and 2
How good were the story and quests in New Vegas? Any memorable characters?
New Vegas was pretty boring. Fallout 3 kept me entertained and playing until the end, and I even bought some DLC for it, but not Vegas. It was just too much of the same.
I like what they are doing with Skyrim. The fact that they are upgrading the look, the new game engine, allowing you to duel-wield, and they're fixing third person, and all of the other updates, everything is looking great. This is the game that New Vegas should have been. I think a big reason for New Vegas being so mundane is that they simply used the same exact engine as Fallout 3, which is probably why it looks like the same game. From what I remember, that was the biggest complaint.
Well, that and the bugs. My computer crashed at least once a session. It got so bad I simply had to stop playing the game after a while.
Posts: 1324 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: Oooh, New Vegas, what an interesting topic!
From a technical standpoint, it was terrible. If you hate bugs and the like... yeah, don't play New Vegas. But then, what are you doing playing Bethesda games in the first place?
aaaaahahaha. Sadly true! In the case of Obsidian and the bugs, I think it was an invariable consequence of having to use Gamebryo as a game engine. It's hard to fault the testers. They likely deserve a little bit of pity; case reproduction in that horrid game engine during development had to have given them nightmares.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In New Vegas, I played to 15 hours and my savegame corrupted (irrevocably) . . . twice. Apart from the REST of the bugs, that's a dealbreaker. I wanted my freaking money back.
Then again, they say the PS3 had the worst of the bugs.
Posts: 1204 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The only game that ever corrupted my save was Ratchet and Clank: Tools of Destruction. I was so angry when that happened. I'd put in about 15 hours and then it was just gone. I never played it again.
It's really lame when you buy a game, expecting it to work the way it's supposed to, and then it fails you completely. Thankfully, I've never had an issue with a game I bought for the 360, although I'm sure that's not the case for everyone.
Posts: 1324 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
The characters were so much more memorable, and interesting. The landscape felt less like a giant landfill, and more like a wasteland getting back on its feet. I felt so much more invested in the story than I ever did in FO3's.
Whereas I played maybe 30-50 hours in FO3, I played 50-60 hours over maybe 8-10 characters in New Vegas.
(Probably the most I've put into any game, ever.)
ETA: I was not bothered by the bugs that I encountered, but then again, I never encountered any of the game-breaking bugs others have harped about.
Posts: 1574 | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: Oooh, New Vegas, what an interesting topic!
From a technical standpoint, it was terrible. If you hate bugs and the like... yeah, don't play New Vegas. But then, what are you doing playing Bethesda games in the first place?
aaaaahahaha. Sadly true! In the case of Obsidian and the bugs, I think it was an invariable consequence of having to use Gamebryo as a game engine. It's hard to fault the testers. They likely deserve a little bit of pity; case reproduction in that horrid game engine during development had to have given them nightmares.
Well, Obsidian sort of has their own rep of releasing half-assed buggy games that might have been amazing if they hadn't been rushed into release (KOTOR 2, I'm looking at you) but you're right, it's cruel of me to blame the testers. And being forced to use Bethesda's engine can't have helped. If you give a drunk chef a knife that is designed to stab him in the chest whenever he tries to use it, you can't exactly blame him or even his boozing when you get a dead guy instead of a great meal. Okay that analogy sort of got away from me, I hope my point was clear anyway.
PS: Back to my previous derail... Samp, I actually wasn't trying to really criticize you. I genuinely read most of your exclamations as smug and snarky, and I wasn't even complaining. Heck, when I agree with you (as in this thread) I find it hilarious and adorable. And even when I disagree with you, I usually find it funny, if aggravating. I was just curious if you have a similar mannerisms in your spoken conversations. So... yeah, no apology necessary, I was just curious. But if this derail really bothers you and you have no interest in discussing it, I apologize, and I'll drop it.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Yeah this actually happens with more than just Ackerman and Gilbert. I've seen several meat puppets around New Vegas. The best one was a corpse that had been so obliterated there was no intact body, just lots of meat in the rough shape of a guy.
So... yeah. Bugs!! Also every single time I play New Vegas I see at least one radscorpion stuck in the ground/falling through the world. Literally every time, no exceptions. These kinds of bugs just sort of amuse me in a vaguely sad way. The ones that are really frustrating are the ones that break quests or kill saves, as has been mentioned. Though I've never lost a New Vegas save, unlike some.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: So... yeah, no apology necessary, I was just curious. But if this derail really bothers you and you have no interest in discussing it, I apologize, and I'll drop it.
It would be hypocritical of me to subject others to likewise criticisms in tone and then be all like ugh why am i under the microscope today???
But the response is also serious given that you have an easier time with understanding tone than most here. I think.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Your use of exclamation marks to denote smug snark seems fairly unique.
When inventing a tone for me in your head, try reading it as something other than "smug snark."
*snort* Samp, he's hardly the first and he won't be the last to interpret your tone that way. I can't speak to whether it's a majority opinion or anything, but enough people think so (and have said so) that they're hardly inventing it-communication is a two-way street.
I read it like T. Rex in Dinosaur Comics saying "Today is a good day I think!"
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah I have to say I'm probably reading it wrong. In the Thailand Underwater thread Samp said "Yeah it's terrible!" in pretty much the same way as always, and he wasn't being smug or snarky.
I think smug and snarky are probably the wrong words for what I meant anyway. It just seems like a very distinctive style.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, Todd Howard's in-game wife committed adultery.
I don't know about you, but if I was an NPC in that game, I wouldn't cheat on the man who is basically equivalent to the god of Tamriel. You don't just get divorced, or even killed by your angry spouse. You get deleted from cyberspace existence.
Much safer to cheat with other married NPCs.
Posts: 684 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:9. - Character, Leveling, Stats & Skills * 10 playable races to choose from. * In-depth character customization that allows to change your character physique, give them a beard, and other more detailed changes to your characters body. * No More Class Selection - Your class is now determined by which skills you choose to progress and what weapons/spells you choose to use. * There are 18 skills, down from 21. * 4 skills are removed: Mysticism, Hand-to-Hand, Acrobatics & Athletics. * Armorer is replaced by Smithing. * No Major/Minor Skills to choose from, so every skill increase will contribute to a level-up. * No Birth Signs. * Attributes have gone down from 8 to 3: Health, Magicka and Stamina * Advancing a skill from 30-31 will contribute more to a level-up than advancing a skill from 10-11, making it better to focus on a smaller range of skills. * You gain a perk every level. * When leveling up, you can pick stamina-, health- or magic boosts. * There's a soft level-cap at 50, but you can still level-up after this, but you'll gain no perks. (Highest possible level is estimated to around 75) * Leveling is faster than in previous games. * 5 Magic Schools: Destruction, Alteration, Conjuration, Restoration & Illusion. * There's a total of around 280 Perks (Including Ranks). * Perks will, among other things, decrease the sound of your footsteps, Disarm enemies, give you access to Unique Special Moves. * You can Sprint, which drains Stamina. * Backwards running speed has been reduced, and you can no longer outrun NPCs while running backwards. * There are three Archetypes: The Warrior, The Mage & The Thief. (You will not choose these, they are merely there for categorizing.) * Each Archetype have a crafting-skill. The Warrior: Smithing, The Mage: Enchanting, The Thief: Alchemy. * Sprinting while wearing heavy armor drains Stamina faster. * Your speed is governed by your stamina attribute and your equipment. Racial speed is the same, so a khajiit will run at the same speed as an Orc.
posted
It seems... remarkably dumbed down. It's almost like they just deleted anything that allowed you to break/be broken by the Oblivion leveling "feature."
The Major/Minor skill distinction being removed confuses me. It seems that by making them all major (in essence), they're going to make it possible - though less easy - to level yourself horribly again. My normal play method is to screw around and do non-combat stuff in the beginning of the game. Sounds like that's not a good idea in Skyrim.
Posts: 1069 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, they did say that advancing a higher level skill a step will contribute more to leveling than a lower-level skill. Depending on how it's implemented, you're unlikely to, say, level up four times in an hour because you use Conjuration a great deal (I remember in Oblivion, leveling Conjuration was absurdly easy, compared to other skills-I learned it the hard way early on, heh. Theoretically it made sense because you'd use those spells less per fight than other magic, but it was off the chain.)
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swampjedi: It seems... remarkably dumbed down. It's almost like they just deleted anything that allowed you to break/be broken by the Oblivion leveling "feature."
Why wouldn't that be a good thing?
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If it's just as dumb, only in a way that doesn't feel like you accomplish things through what choices you make. Or if the right choice is way too obvious.
We'll see. There's still a lot there. And a more direct game, featuring a lot of play styles and viable options in general sounds cool.
All I know is that the art direction is a lot better than any other Bethesda game.
Posts: 1407 | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I remember thinking the art in Oblivion-aside from NPCs-was pretty damn good. *shrug*
I was wondering if anyone has seen the videos floating around right now, of the first 15-20m of the game? Being a poor fool when it comes to resisting stuff like that, I watched it-there are dome spoilers, but they're the sort that were unsurprising, know? I find it hard to say whether someone wi be better or worse off for having watched it. Without giving away anything that isn't widely known, it takes you through the beginning 'you're a prisoner' bit-why you were taken prisoner, and how you came to get loose.
In particular I was curious if any knowledgeable people had watched it, because some folks-comment reply stuff, really-are claiming it looks like Bethesda either lied or really exaggerated their claims of making a new engine for the game.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: I remember thinking the art in Oblivion-aside from NPCs-was pretty damn good. *shrug*
I was wondering if anyone has seen the videos floating around right now, of the first 15-20m of the game? Being a poor fool when it comes to resisting stuff like that, I watched it-there are dome spoilers, but they're the sort that were unsurprising, know? I find it hard to say whether someone wi be better or worse off for having watched it. Without giving away anything that isn't widely known, it takes you through the beginning 'you're a prisoner' bit-why you were taken prisoner, and how you came to get loose.
In particular I was curious if any knowledgeable people had watched it, because some folks-comment reply stuff, really-are claiming it looks like Bethesda either lied or really exaggerated their claims of making a new engine for the game.
I didn't see anything that was related to radiant whatever-their-calling-it-now. I could be wrong though.
The first 25 minute leak has gotten me even more hyped for the game. (But there it is strange it seems he was forced to play nord?)
Posts: 1574 | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think so-he was only referenced specifically as a Nord after he picked. As for their story system, there wouldn't be much call for it anyway at that stage-intros are often tightly scripted.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swampjedi: It seems... remarkably dumbed down. It's almost like they just deleted anything that allowed you to break/be broken by the Oblivion leveling "feature."
Why wouldn't that be a good thing?
Overly simple IS better than totally broken. I'd have preferred they fixed it instead of totally getting rid of it, assuming that was possible.
Posts: 1069 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: I don't think so-he was only referenced specifically as a Nord after he picked. As for their story system, there wouldn't be much call for it anyway at that stage-intros are often tightly scripted.
No, at about the four minute mark he tries to change to an Orc but then immediately switches back to a Nord. It didn't look natural, and the Orc image/character never shows up.
quote:Originally posted by Swampjedi: It seems... remarkably dumbed down. It's almost like they just deleted anything that allowed you to break/be broken by the Oblivion leveling "feature."
Is this in reference to the weaker attribute system? I do find that part a bit disappointing, but overall the system seems to have some things going for it.
I like the sound of the perk system in theory. Leveling in Morrowind and Oblivion was a slightly bland affair. The idea of being able to pick perks and spell ranks that actually change the effects* seems an improvement.
*Are spell levels part of the perk system or their own thing? I wasn't entirely clear on that.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's my understanding that a particular kind of magic's skill level will make those spells more powerful, and you need varying degrees of skill to unlock the different perks which make them *much* more powerful, more than just incrementally. Some of the effects I've heard about, but this is all second-hand, are things like summoning up two creatures instead of one, automatically absorbing a percentage of spells cast on you, or being able to place magical traps at a greater distance.
I really enjoyed the perk system in Fallout 3 (though I understand that's been a staple of the Fallout games since the beginning?). I'm looking forward to it here, though half of the fun was the descriptions, as well as the secret perks.
posted
Yep! Interestingly, there is a strong parallel between several leveling design features of the original Fallout games and 3rd Edition D&D. Linear, rather than exponential, XP requirements are a big one, and getting a perk (feat) every 3 levels is another. I've always wondered if that was coincidental or not.
Obviously Fallout 3 modified the "perk every 3 levels" mechanic a bit.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swampjedi: It seems... remarkably dumbed down. It's almost like they just deleted anything that allowed you to break/be broken by the Oblivion leveling "feature."
Why wouldn't that be a good thing?
Overly simple IS better than totally broken. I'd have preferred they fixed it instead of totally getting rid of it, assuming that was possible.
as far as I can see, they're getting rid of the stuff that simply doesn't work better than what is being put in its place.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So far from what I've heard, it does sound like (and I admit my hopeful bias here, heh-difficult to maintain skepticism for a big fan) they've learned a lot about things that were mediocre or outright crummy in Oblivion-more than once I've seen quotes from various developers mentioning how many players would simply restart the beginning of the game, in the dungeon, caves, and sewers because there was hardly any way to know, "OK, this is actually a really bad build," without dropping quite a few hours in the game.
I don't see why anyone would object to taking a radically different approach to that! In theory I like building characters and complex choices and such as much as anyone-in pen-and-paper or PBEM RPGs, for instance, I often get really into that (more than a few people over at SR can attest to how irritatingly over-the-top I can be in that respect).
In practice, though, in video games I'm trying to think of games that do that really complex 'choose a dozen out of scores' options that aren't punitive. I look at the RPGs I've enjoyed most in video games that also involve 'character sheets', and few of them had as many choices-and ways to screw up-as Oblivion did. Whereas in, say, Fallout 3, DAO, Mass Effect, and others-you didn't need to min/max to have an effective (from a gameplay) character except at the higher difficulty levels.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I consider it likely that they have really learned the lessons they need to have learned. What they've ditched already (and what they've replaced that with) speaks to that regard.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't remember the press all that much surrounding Morrowind after it was released, as I didn't play Morrowind that much. I am curious, what were fan reactions after Morrowind, compared to after Oblivion?
It certainly seems like there were a lot more complaints after Oblivion versus Morrowind. More importantly, it seemed like the complaints towards Oblivion were a lot more focused on game-breaking elements, as opposed to more minor complaints.
If there was a bigger uproar after Oblivion, then it would make sense that they are more motivated to really pay attention to its flaws, whereas after Morrowind, maybe they just focused on making it "bigger and better", so to speak, without realizing the importance of really working out the bugs and making sure the game played smoothly.
It's kind of like the mentality that often ensues after a successful blockbuster movie. "Ooooh, this movie was uber popular, therefore, we need to make a sequel and do more of the same, but make it X times bigger and put X times more of the same in there, and therefore, they MUST like it X times more!"
Bethesda has skated a while on the fact that it offers a unique open-ended game world that gives you tons of freedom, and people love this. So they buy it despite the fact that it has more bugs than your average game. Maybe (not getting my hopes up too much yet) they have learned this time around that they need to make the whole game well, not just throw together a bunch of cool ideas, graphics, features, and open-endedness that end up making the sum of the whole less than its parts.
Posts: 684 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
If I remember correctly, Morrowind was even more fragile than Oblivion. It didn't take me long to put together a set of armor that made my character unkillable, and able to jump miles at a bound. It did take me a few times to learn how to game the system, though.
Posts: 1069 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't mind those so much, actually-I ended up thinking of them as cheat codes more than anything, really.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Morrowind's Alchemy is one of the most hilariously game-breaking skills in the history of gaming.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't remember Alchemy well enough to comment from Morrowind-but it had a couple of busted features in Oblivion, too-the wheels could be taken even further off the tracks of the game economy right out of the tutorial with Alchemy, and visiting just a few locations with lots of agriculture.
Not that the wheels wouldn't come off one way or another eventually.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: I don't remember Alchemy well enough to comment from Morrowind
In Morrowind, the effects of an alchemy potion scaled with the int stat. Alchemy could make a potion to boost int, which also scaled with a player's current int. There was a vendor with an unlimited supply of int potion mats.
I remember making once a boosted strength potion with this exploit. Melee hits would kill pretty much everything in one shot, but each swing would eat the full durability of the weapon.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, you basically sit down with a bunch of materials and you craft an int potion. Let's say you're just good enough at alchemy to make a potion that will boost your int by 10 points for 20 seconds. Now you make another int potion with your new intellect score. It will be a little bit better with your new int score, so it's boosting your int score by, say, 12 points for 30 seconds. Then you drink that potion and make a third one. 16 points for 45 seconds.
Cut to a little while later, your intellect is somewhere in the tens of thousands of points from an original average of 40-50 (game max usually 100). You can then make yourself some 'basic' stat boost potions which increase stats by ungodly amounts and last for durations which cross into months of real-time play. Charisma scores that let you resell items to merchants for a profit, speed scores that let you cruise across the land at warp speed, and you can also give yourself persistent effects like levitation, magic absorb 100%, whatever, go nuts
It's just a fondly recalled oddity of morrowind and the way things are 'balanced' in elder scrolls games.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Huh. I coulda sworn they specifically said werewolves weren't in-I wonder if that was just some trickeration?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
