It's still faster paced, and Todd has really been emphasizing how great an FPS it is.
It's been a while, but I seem to remember them saying the exact same thing about Fallout 3. Todd says alot of things.
It's still faster paced, and Todd has really been emphasizing how great an FPS it is.
I think the bigger problem with 3D is that they took things too literally - in a small village Shady Sands there are like 30 npcs and 5 houses, but that doesn't mean there are only 30 people in the entire village. In Megaton, which is one of the biggest prospering towns in entire Capital Wasteland there are like 20 npcs and one brahmin (and an atomic bomb). It's not as easy to take it as collusive, when looking at it in first-person perspective. Also, people without armor absorbing bullets like a sponge and limbs exploding from a 9mm... maybe it's just me, but it was all better in 2D, because you knew it was just an illustration, not as literal.the biggest problem with a switch to 3d is a lack of tools to easily implement an event
It's still faster paced, and Todd has really been emphasizing how great an FPS it is.Well combat looks like it has the things Project Nevada had (namely wuick grenade button, sprinting, bullet time to replace VATS) along with quick melee alternate attacks. Enemies now have more dynamic animations (at least the animals) and well the weapon modding looks interesting along with the Armor having individual HP. Altho if the AI is as stupid as it was in Vanilla 3/NV then that won't mean much I admit.
Size is definitely an issue with 3D games. I think Daggerfall is the only RPG that implemented a world in a realistic scale, meaning that towns are realistically sized with sizeable distances in between and so on. But it's hard to implement, and using procedural generation like Daggerfall is almost inevitable.
I am aware of this, that's why New Vegas locations are so small and have so few npcs running around. But it's still switching to 3D's fault. And of course there are other problems, for example big locations would be a pain to go through - running back and forth in Freeside is already tiresome.As for the limited number of NPC's in Bethesda's games, that has nothing to do with how they "translated" 2D isometric games to 3D, but is a consequence of their severely limited game engine. It simply can't handle any larger numbers of people without using hardware resources weaker PC's and consoles lack.
Was Gamebryo even meantto be used for Open World games? Does anyone else use it for such a game? I mean people say it looks ugly but Catherine ran on Gamebryo and it was a beautiful game (on account of it being smaller scale).
Size is definitely an issue with 3D games. I think Daggerfall is the only RPG that implemented a world in a realistic scale, meaning that towns are realistically sized with sizeable distances in between and so on. But it's hard to implement, and using procedural generation like Daggerfall is almost inevitable.
The funny part is, I mean I can only talk for my self but I had always the feeling back than that we would one day get the technology which allows us to have the same size, but with better graphics and some more. Or a game like Fallout or if you want Baldurs Gate giving you real dynamic storytelling, NPCs, AI and a huge living world.
Interesting that the "technology" they use today doesn't allow them really to make worlds bigger than one of Daggerfalls towns ... and probably with much less NPCs as well.
Infact beacause most of the stuff has to fitt on the "TV" and more importantly also requires voice acting the writting has to be as short as possible as well.
Pretty much everything is taking a step back in favour of "visual" fluffs ...
Was Gamebryo even meantto be used for Open World games? Does anyone else use it for such a game? I mean people say it looks ugly but Catherine ran on Gamebryo and it was a beautiful game (on account of it being smaller scale).
Size is definitely an issue with 3D games. I think Daggerfall is the only RPG that implemented a world in a realistic scale, meaning that towns are realistically sized with sizeable distances in between and so on. But it's hard to implement, and using procedural generation like Daggerfall is almost inevitable.
Yeah. World map travel is probably the best way to do this rather than making A) a bigass world that costs incredible man-hours to generate or fancy procedural generation or B) makes the player walk for hours. I have some insight into this, I have made some map mods for the ArmA series. My latest creation is a 30x30km map generated from high-quality material from the National Land Survey of Finland. Basically, walking around it is a pain in the butt. You need vehicles for that kind of scale, and vehciles radically change the gameplay. A world map travel system allows the player the joy of exploration and discovery without creating the need for massive worlds. Of course, the modern generation of gaming seems to prefer the microcosm style approach where everything is next door in the same worldspace because it is supposedly more realistic.Size is definitely an issue with 3D games. I think Daggerfall is the only RPG that implemented a world in a realistic scale, meaning that towns are realistically sized with sizeable distances in between and so on. But it's hard to implement, and using procedural generation like Daggerfall is almost inevitable.
Kind of ironic, is'nt it? The company that made that game, makes some of the most cramped games I've ever encountered. I really wish they'd use the real worldspace to actually make some interesting locations and use a travelmap to move between locations like the classics.
Yeah, the paradoxal thing with Bethesda's games is that, from a role-playing perspective, there is too much freedom, since the only way to give the player all that freedom is for it to come without any sort of consequences. As you say, Geralt can't run around murdering innocent civilians since in CDProject's games there would be severe repercussions to doing that, making the game unplayable as a witcher. In Fallout 3 you can nuke the biggest town in the Capital Wasteland and Daddy Neeson's only reaction will be expressing some disappointment with you -- he'll still love you, though, don't worry! -- even though he's spent his entire life trying to save just those people. Freedom without consequences turns a game into GTA, which can be fun and all, but it isn't (and can never be) a role-playing game. RPG's need meaningful choices.I think they do putt effort in to their work. They are not stupid after all, Todd and his fellow developers know pretty well what sells, and more importantly how to sell it. That's the point. I would guess that they spend a lot of time and money on marketing, research and such. And it turns out, Fallout 3, Skyrim, Oblivion etc. offer to a lot of people exactly what they want. Mindless fun with a sandbox experience. I mean thinking about it, there is no surprise that *THIS is a very big selling point of F4. Playing your male character in a red female dress fucking things up with his teddy-bear luncher ... that's really what it is at it's core. Compared to a game like The Witcher 3 where you simply can't harm an NPCs, because for a Witcher, for Gerald in particular, it doesn't make sense from a role playing persepctive. - This is also a difference between Fallout in general and a game like The Witcher, Fallout offers you a lot more freedom here. But the issue is that Fallout 3 and most probably 4 concentrate way to much on the "whacky" part of it rather than offering people actually a great way to role play in different ways. The sad thing is that you can't probably even play a psychopath because the "important" characters will be immortan again and forget all your crimes after 2-3 days ...
Yeah. World map travel is probably the best way to do this rather than making A) a bigass world that costs incredible man-hours to generate or fancy procedural generation or B) makes the player walk for hours. I have some insight into this, I have made some map mods for the ArmA series. My latest creation is a 30x30km map generated from high-quality material from the National Land Survey of Finland. Basically, walking around it is a pain in the butt. You need vehicles for that kind of scale, and vehciles radically change the gameplay. A world map travel system allows the player the joy of exploration and discovery without creating the need for massive worlds. Of course, the modern generation of gaming seems to prefer the microcosm style approach where everything is next door in the same worldspace because it is supposedly more realistic.
That being said, I had a lot less problems with FO3s DC wasteland than New Vegas Mojave Desert or Skyrim, because in the Mojave or Skyrim it really shatters your immersion when an entire province is an hours walk across, whereas one bombed out city and it's outskirts is a lot more plausible.
But seeing how people think that casualization is actually a good thing nowadays and preorder games by the boatload it's not like the yare doing bad moves.
People have just gotten dumber it seems. Man that second Videogam Crash can't come any faster? We have all the ingredients of the first one + penny pinching and predatory business models, what else do we need?
To be fair, one hour in real time is equal to 12.5 days in in-game time (one hour is about five minutes in Fallout 3, NV, and Skyrim). Maybe that's still a little short, although you can bike from NYC to LA in 10 days and I assume a bike and a horse move at about the same speed (I'm also assuming the U.S. and Skyrim are of similar size). It also only takes ten hours two walk from Las Vegas to the Hoover Dam, and New Vegas is basically centered around Vegas rather than trying to cram in huge swaths of Maryland and Virginia around D.C., so it's inevitably a little smaller.That being said, I had a lot less problems with FO3s DC wasteland than New Vegas Mojave Desert or Skyrim, because in the Mojave or Skyrim it really shatters your immersion when an entire province is an hours walk across, whereas one bombed out city and it's outskirts is a lot more plausible.
A proliferation of useless consoles that all play the same games? Poor critical reviews in addition to just one small Internet community complaining about how stupid everyone else is? Video games are about as healthy as they've ever been, the whole sexism issue aside. What we can hope for, more realistically, is that some developers value story and role-playing elements more than cool set pieces and action in an RPG, and Bethesda throws fans a bone by letting Obsidian either work with them on Fallout 4 (unlikely since a lot of people seem to think Fallout 3 was wholistically better for some reason) or that they can develop their own Fallout game every once in a while.But seeing how people think that casualization is actually a good thing nowadays and preorder games by the boatload it's not like the yare doing bad moves.
People have just gotten dumber it seems. Man that second Videogam Crash can't come any faster? We have all the ingredients of the first one + penny pinching and predatory business models, what else do we need?