It can easily be summarized as I don't think anyone but perhaps me and one other person on this forum thinks Bethesda can create anything of any merit whatsoever.
I believe so and don't like the absolute denial of even a slight of competence from any of Bethesda's employees ever, in the future, present and past, but you're putting them like if they shit rainbows and cure cancer by being oh-so-special, doing what the actual average studio does with way more fuckups.
I wonder really how many gamers on this board took time to really just wander around Fallout 3 soaking up the atmosphere and details versus just running from quest to quest.
Nobody, everyone *totally* came in planning to hate it even before knowing what the franchise was at all. Details being some skeletons in funny shapes and the quests enduring some *hilarious* dialogue or killing some *fascinating* trash mobs before getting a generic weapon with a different name than usual at best, shitall at worst, to repeat that until you get bored and turn it off, or gather the strength to do the campaign.
Thanks for that but I'd be interested in a bit more on the GTA V business because I actually don't know that much about it. Only the basics.
GTA(V) Online is, putting it simply, Rockstar's first MMO. While I don't particularly care for it, nor city sandboxes in general, it's remarkable that it's been out for so long with continuous support, new content and allowing for a great custom content creator community, and be a pretty good extrapolation of the game to the multiplayer aspect (shark cards and take two's mess nonwithstanding). In fact, as games of this decade go, it's the only one of such status along Warframe. Both sure qualified for the "Ongoing" game award more than Overwatch, that's for fucking sure.
I saw Graves say that this is detrimenting from GTA VI but it's pretty clear they are different teams, one with QA and post release support, while another section is in current development of it.
With DLC you can join the Pitt Raiders or Rebels, you can also join Reilly's Raiders, become a slaver at Paradise Falls, become a Regulator, or become President of the Republic of Dave.
The chart didn't count DLC for either, but those are one-off quests and gimmicks, like marriage in Skyrim or becoming ZE JARL. There's no interplay between those factions, and you have one quest at best. Hell, I even bet that "becoming a slaver" doesn't even flag you as a complete bastard forever like it did in Fallout 2, doesn't it?
For me the appeal of Fallout 3 is that it's a game which makes me feel like what I'm doing has consequences
If only there was a game (series) that did that! :biggrin:
One of the things I find troubling on the forum is the fact it generally is a place where gamers refuse to subject any of their stories to any form of literary criticism. Game as an artform is only going to become something worse pursuing if we have games that tackle deep subjects (Pillars of Eternity for example) or deep characterization. It's something inhibited by the lowest common denominator of game design philosophy which is being discussed here.
However, as much shit as Bethesda gets, it's actually fairly good about inserting deeper subject matter into its published games.
Take Wolfenstein II.
Fallout 3 is a game which people say I'm inserting "headcanon" too but the game makes a statement about with its use of imagery, themes, locations, and interactions. These things may or may not be deliberate as literay criticism does not depend on an author's intents but its value as a work of art is unchanged.
And when people analyze what the end product is...I think people benefit.
That¡s fine and dandy, but... It doesn't mean anything. That can apply to ANYTHING that causes some kind of experience, even when not directly related to the object, event or piece of media. Fallout 3 is art, expressive and subjective in experience, yes. As nigh all games. But that doesn't mean that it does so well. And no, game design is a huge part of the, you know,
GAME. If it wasn't for it, games wouldn't be good games, they'd be good movies, good books, good shows.
What I can see is that Fallout 3 is an important game for you, that you appreciate deeply. But that's about as far from being objective as we are from the next habitable planetoid. I think all of us have a game that we have close to out hearts like that, be it because of the game itself, the moment where we played it; shortly, that mean to us. But surprise, they do have a pretty big chance of being terrible. To The Moon is one of the few games that have managed to make me cry and I can very confidently say that forcing someone fully conscious to play it would work very well as a torture method. The Legend Of Zelda: Spirit Tracks for the DS was the first title of the series I played, along all my school time friends while we all beat it at once, sharing our experiences and knowledge about the game, fantasizing about that Hyrule and its inhabitants. It so happens that it's one of the weakest titles in the series, even only considering the 2D titles. Pokémon nonwithstanding, Dragon Quest IX was my first (J)RPG to try. The personal involvement I had was one of the hugest I've had in any story, but it turns out it's a quite generic "let's kill the literal antichrist", the memorable party members were replaced with all customs, it was grindy as all hell and if you didn't have had the chance of getting the post-release updates, you had like 33% less content unless you cracked or emulated the game.
I could go on, but it's a part of enjoying videogames to sink in the experience. It's a wonderful thing only they really can do. Be it feeling like living and breathing that world, being in the "zone" in an action game, role-playing with friends, coordinating tactics for either your squadron of fellow players or controlled units. Imagining the endless expanse of space, or the dense maps.
Literature isn't about wanking over whatever work there is. In any competent work, no matter how shallow, the themes WILL be intentional. However, if not represented well enough, and that's NOT juding a 50-100 hour game on two lines at the end, it makes it either a minor example of such because, simply put, it doesn't accomplish what it went for. And yes, that cheecky unnecesary game design also plays out here. Sure, you can have YOUR own conclusions or interpretations as the human that you are. But there are grades of pulling it out of your ass, as my lit teacher used to say.
As you yourself said, you possibly can't praise Bethesda for what they LITERALLY haven't done. They didn't pay attention to that world with as much care as you did. They didn't flesh out the characters for what you say to be anywhere beyond your head. They didn't add further consequences but throwaway lines and a repetitive radio quote variable being thrown into the pool. As Prone said, it's amazing that you can buy so much the fiction, to the point of envy.
One good solid game for this year which have the quality that can save SP games is Horizon Zero Dawn, very likely the GoTY of 2017. Trust me, I'm not fanboying it or anything, I don't even have a PS.
https://www.polygon.com/2017/12/6/16741668/game-of-the-year-2017-goty-horizon-zero-dawn-ps4
Seen about it, pretty cool, albeit the story doesn't really know what it wants to do and the gameplay is an odd mix of Far Cry and even more RPG elements. I'm not even on the ALL SURVIVAL GAMES ARE SHIT REEE train and admittedy I didn't really care for it. You can only play so many of those before reeaching a kind of sandbox fatigue. Currently the one taking my time is The Long Dark, mentioned it in the pointless list.