At some point during the past few years, the word "linear" became a bad word in gaming. The completely ludicrous sales of the Grand Theft Auto III, GTA IV, and everything in between probably contributed to this but whatever the cause, developers are now obsessed with giving players freedom. Open-ended gameplay is a good thing in theory because allows the player more control over his gameplay experience but the concept is so badly executed in many of these so-called "open-world" or "sand-box" games that it makes me long for the days of choice-less side-scrollers.
If you are looking for an awesome RPG, look no further. Steam is offering a significant discount on its Fallout Franchise Bundle.
"You can get all Fallout games in a bundle at a significant 20% discount on Steam. Individually, all these games add up to $244.91. With the discount, you can get them all for $195.91. That is $49 less than the original price. Quite a significant discount for such a popular franchise."
😊 😂 🤣 😐 - But why?
Just wait for a sale and get most if not all of it for a fraction of that price.
20% off...lol
The games were just on a real sale over the last week or two for the show promotion. Fallout 4 was $10, 3 was $5, NV was cheap as heck too.
So what the heck is this
The original games have been given out for free by Amazon for GOG and Epic, 76 is free now on Amazon if you have prime, Epic has also given out new Vegas for free and 4 has gone down to pretty cheap prices. 194 bucks is a total ripoff when you can get these games individually for less. Don't forget cd keys might sell em for a dollar less at times too. Come on man, us cheapskates won't touch anything near or above 100 lolz
The artist behind Fallout 4’s Deathclaw reveals just how bad things got back when Bethesda took over the series
People are stupid I get it. No one should feel unsafe,
But I think they need to talk about why they cut so many corners during the development process and why none of their games ever look current. And why they think all of this is okay while they charge full price.
As much as Bethesda deserve criticism, that's not really relevant to the reveal of Fallout 3 in 2007.
Usually, you have good comments but this isn't one of them. It just rides the mob. We can do both condemn the actions and not let them use it for other things.
I can say I received a death threat and everyone needs to shut up. People are not honest and will use horrible things to their advantage.
Yeah, but thats not the result of laziness, incompetence, or a bad engine. Thats what happens with their type of open world games. Its hard for people to find a point of comparison because no one makes games like Bethesda does.
No problem. I'm not here to convince you. I'm only stating an actuality. What your words do if we look at them like events.
Bethesda's post-apocalyptic RPG remains an unabashed classic, more than a decade and a half on from its launch.
For me its the fact that I could put hundreds of hours into it and still find areas I missed in my earlier runs. It was also my first FO and despite what I had to put up with at times such as overall crashs and killing my orginal PS3 with the YLOD it's still my favorite entry to this day.
Tons of reasons
But my silly little one…hunting for unique weapons and armour
Something Fallout 4 just didn’t really have as much because they replaced most of it with randomly generated customised weapons. Even Elder Scrolla doesn't do it as well.
I remember during my first playthrough of Fallout 4 back in 2015 I somehow got an automatic combat rifle that shot explosive rounds by defeating a legendary creature. Unfortunately that was the only playthrough I ever got that weapon. It's a shame because it was absolutely epic!
Sense of exploration. That was why older Bethesda games were so good. They might have had glitches, broken mechanics, meh visuals, etc., but they were some of the best around when it came down to the sense of exploration. You could go wherever you wanted and you would find something cool; it might have been a faction, a weapon, an enemy and much more. And that is what they are lacking now. Skyrim still had a lot of that, but Fallout 4 dropped it by focusing on an interconnected world and more randomly generated rewards. Fallout 76 just kept that trend and added multiplayer, and Starfield went even further in killing it by creating a whole universe with parts completely isolated from each other.
I think the retrospective of Fallout: New Vegas' existence has somewhat diminished the view of Fallout 3 in the eyes of many, but it getting out of the vault in Fallout 3 was, for me, the most remarkable experience I've had in a videogame.
I was 12 when it came out, and I remember I just saw the score it got in Gamemaster magazine (remember those!? 😅), and I just went to the shop and bought it with my pocket money.
Not knowing anything about the game, I thought the whole thing was going to be about growing up in a vault, especially given that I'd spent about 2 hours in it....I literally could.not.believe it when you got out and it was just this wasteland on every direction. Amazing.
Probably because these Bethesda games were hand crafted so that exploration meant something. Unlike Starfield where this sense of exploration is replaced with the illusion of scope and procedurally generated worlds. A player can always appreciate when they wonder into an unforgettable new encounter by accident or stumble across a new questline that becomes their favourite. Just like a player can always tell when they're ploughing through filler on auto pilot, that they'll forget the moment some resource numbers go up and nothing worth remembering occurred.
I mean, in Fallout 3 you could nuke an entire town as a SIDE QUEST. In The Elder Scrolls Oblivion and Skyrim, the Dark Brotherhood questlines were my favourite in any RPGs and you could completely avoid them if you didn't care for them. In The Witcher 3 side quests take you on ridiculously dark and mysterious storylines that are some of the best I've played in RPG history. There's a reason why people still talk about KOTOR to this day. Difference between a developer creating something or just padding a game world with stuff.
There were some side quests that could yld have been developed into an entirely separate game. Some great writing there.
Nice article. I'm not a huge fan of open-world games (though I do like a few) because many of them end up being a chore. They pack in a ton of content without any organization. They pack in a ton of missions without any emotional connection. They pack in a bunch of characters that the player doesn't care about. Open-world games are the epitome of "quality sacrificed for quantity". There are a few exceptions, yes, but for the most part open-world games suck. I'd rather spend my time beating Half Life 2, Bioshock, and MGS4 all in the same time I'd have to spend beating one open-world game with an inferior storyline.
He makes a good point, what I wanted in games like KOTOR is that when I made a choice it affected everything around me (missions, people reactions). If I was a Sith I wanted to destroy everything, not do the same mission.
Ideally I would like to see choices have branching paths to different storylines. The replay value would be immense.
eg: Player has a choice to be friends with this guy or not. He chooses friends and the next choice is they are being attacked. Stay and fight or run away.
If he runs away - he is seen as a coward and his friends want revenge.
If he stays and fights - he is seen as a hero and becomes a soldier.
That is just a basic example of what I am looking at.
infamous is gonna blow crackdown out of the water. ps3 exclusives ftw.
Gothic 1 and 2 were my favourite open-world games. The worlds were large enough to offer some fun exploring while at the same time having the "hand-made" feel to everything, unlike the usual cut-and-paste job of open-word games. The faction system was also great in the way it affected the game. Too bad Gothic 3 was such a disappointment, hopefully Gothic 4 will get it right again.
A lot of what this articles says makes sense. I think that the problem is the level of modelling (character motivation, temperament, interactions) required to make the consequences work realistically, would be pretty phenomenal - and would the game sell so much better to justify the additional cost or delay to market?
It seems that they are trying to do this with The Outsider, but that has taken years already and is still not due until December 2009.