Will Obsidian make another FO?

[Korin]

I do not care who does it but whoever does do FO4 needs to make a story that is both expansive and immersive.

They also need to not pack in hundreds of quests just for the sake of having quests. And the quests they do pack in should be arranged better than:

- Go to these three locations and talk to these three people. When you come back, I'll send you out to three more locations where you can talk to three more people.

- I have three people I want you to kill, so I'm going to give them to you one at a time, even though they're all in the same general area and have you go back out repeatedly.

 

[Mapex]

Actually, Bethesda has already confirmed that they're going to use a new upgraded iteration of Gamebryo for their next title.

...maybe that means shadows?

Sigh. It also means more buggy games.

You got it wrong. It won't be licensed to outside companies, but this just means that it won't be used in games not published by Bethesda. Even if they switch to id Tech, if Bethesda contracts Obsidian to make another game for them, they would be able to use it.

Good to know. I somewhat addressed that in the last sentence of my post as well.

 

[DasCryborg]

I do not care who does it but whoever does do FO4 needs to make a story that is both expansive and immersive.

They also need to not pack in hundreds of quests just for the sake of having quests. And the quests they do pack in should be arranged better than.

Agreed!

 

[yester64]

I have to admit that even with playing through most of the franchise, i can not comprehend why Fallout3 was all that bad.
Sure it broke with the presentation and perhaps the story, but it made it very visual how horror looks.

Today with all the mass audience it will be hard to sell a real rpg to the masses.
This combination of rpg and action serves well. Normal people will not immediately get turned off if presented with a rpg.

I play right now New Vegas and i starting to love it. But i can not really connected to my character, since the character does not really have a story.
The wastelands are partly empty and you wander around and will not necessary see any enemy.
So far i love it even with all the glitches that are present. (One quest does not even close after finishing).

I love both Fallout, old and new. What i mostly enjoyed is to read the messages in the terminals.
One difference i see, ok thats gross, in fallout 2 i was able to sell myself for caps. Doesn't seem to work here.

The world is believable to some degree. But seriously. This universe has robots, but in all houses is not even a console to a tv.
That you can wander around for hours is a huge plus for me. I really played for over 50 hours fallout3 just wandering around. But i wished there were also landmarks you will remember like the glow from fallout1.

I also wished that the NPC's were able to tell a story. This is what i liked about Bioware games. The character were a little more alive.
My NPC's doesn't have any bigger story then the one told at the beginning.

I wonder if there will be ever the multiplayer Fallout and how it will be.

 

[nad02s]

I hope not, let it die.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

I also wished that the NPC's were able to tell a story. This is what i liked about Bioware games. The character were a little more alive.
My NPC's doesn't have any bigger story then the one told at the beginning.

I believe you mean PCs, because the NPCs in FONV definitely had a fair amount of background and story.

As for PCs telling a story... Well, the story you've told is all in the ending slides. The Bioware approach is actually a step away from the traditional RPg approach in that it's more linear and confined in what the devs think you should or shouldn't be able to do. IMO, it's the player who should be telling the PC story, not the character.

Then again, that approach CAN work well like it did in the Witcher, but I really don't support the idea that Bioware does a good job with their writing.

Today with all the mass audience it will be hard to sell a real rpg to the masses.

This forum has been over this argument a million times since the FO3 release, and the idea is basically that

a) that's not really true; and
b) a game doesn't have to target the "masses"; there's a plenty of niche games that are very successful and, well, RPGs have traditionally been niche games.

I wonder if there will be ever the multiplayer Fallout and how it will be.

http://fonline2238.blogspot.com/

 

[Vrede]

One difference i see, ok thats gross, in fallout 2 i was able to sell myself for caps. Doesn't seem to work here.

There is one situation when... looking for a certain robot... you can... feel a little used... if you're lookin for that, hehe.

Obsidian did the best they could with Beth's limitations. NV is far above anything that Beth can ever come up with. I'd grow a little respect for Beth if they would admit Fallout isn't really their field of expertise and give up the whole game making over to Obsidian.
They could stick to promoting/selling and it would be a perfect combination.

 

[Bad_Karma]

The Bioware approach is actually a step away from the traditional RPg approach in that it's more linear and confined in what the devs think you should or shouldn't be able to do. IMO, it's the player who should be telling the PC story, not the character.

Well that really only depends on what you're calling 'classic'.
Classic like in 'golden age of rpgs' with SSI with ADnD licence, Origin and early Ultimas. Because in this times you didn't really have lot of choices, and often you didn't even hace a single PC with any backstory but you got to play groups of people with a backstory like: "An adventure group heart of a treasure/great evil/anything and found each other in a tavern".
Or Classic like in "silver Age" where games starting more and more being centered around a single PC and getting more and more choices for you to make - Amberstar, Ambermoon and such comes to mind - so Amiga500 times so to say.
Or even classic 'bronze age' like with Fallout 1 or Baldurs Gate... when darker undertones where added and choices and options really on a all high.
Or classic like in... well let's just call it 'steel age' for now, where we got Bloodlines, M&M9, Morrorwind...
Than again i wouldn't say these definitions hold their ground that good because we allways had games strolling away from what was 'normal' at their times and we often had co-existing games a golden age game in silver age or the otherway round. And we're also ignoring JRPG's when saying that having a single well defined character with nearly no choices would be a non classic approach.
Not to forget that games like Dungeon Master from around the 80's actually were Action RPG's long before we got real 3D and so that's also not an new invention but classical.

I don't see Bioware having worse writer than the ones who wrote Alpha Protocol. And for me Kotor I > Kotor II, NWN I + Addons > NWN II + Addons.
So for me it's just a matter of tastes.

b) a game doesn't have to target the "masses"; there's a plenty of niche games that are very successful and, well, RPGs have traditionally been niche games.

I really doubt anyone backed the statement that RPGs have allways been niche games on the computer by numbers. But yeah, it's quite possible to make money by not appleasing to the masses. Modern point and click adventures seem to still make enough money for some companies and they are obviously not 'mainstream' titles.

That all said, i love good games and a good story. But who's developing that game and with which engine is not a major thing i'm looking for. That said i still give some credit to developers who're doing a good job. But even Firaxis didn't have enough credit from me (even though i loved every single Civ game till 5) for me buying the new installment which seems to be a mess for me.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

Well that really only depends on what you're calling 'classic'.

If you wish to go down this path, we could even look at the PnP origins of cRPGs, where you character was basically a blank slate you could choose to role-play whichever way you want. Frankly, that's the way I like my cRPGs as well. There can be backstory, but it shouldn't overwhelm the influence of the player's decisions.

I don't see Bioware having worse writer than the ones who wrote Alpha Protocol. And for me Kotor I > Kotor II, NWN I + Addons > NWN II + Addons.

TBH, I didn't play any of the KOTORs cause I don't like Star Wars, and I haven't gotten to NWN2 yet. NWN1 was pretty uninspired though, with Shadows of Undertide being the only one where the writing actually impressed me. And as far as their recent games go, DA:O's writing was pretty fucking horrible.

 

[yester64]

One difference i see, ok thats gross, in fallout 2 i was able to sell myself for caps. Doesn't seem to work here.

There is one situation when... looking for a certain robot... you can... feel a little used... if you're lookin for that, hehe.

Obsidian did the best they could with Beth's limitations. NV is far above anything that Beth can ever come up with. I'd grow a little respect for Beth if they would admit Fallout isn't really their field of expertise and give up the whole game making over to Obsidian.
They could stick to promoting/selling and it would be a perfect combination.

Haha.. you know what i meant. I think fallout2 might be not possible today with options like that.

 

[Bad_Karma]

If you wish to go down this path, we could even look at the PnP origins of cRPGs, where you character was basically a blank slate you could choose to role-play whichever way you want. Frankly, that's the way I like my cRPGs as well. There can be backstory, but it shouldn't overwhelm the influence of the player's decisions.

That's exactly what i'm saying - if you talk about classic it's all about on what period you're looking at. Going to PnP you could also go to Wargames, where Gigas started off...
So all it's for me really just subjective if someones not sticking to the classic way.
I would say i also prefer games where i can influence the outcome, but i don't shun 'JRPGs' when i like the story

TBH, I didn't play any of the KOTORs cause I don't like Star Wars, and I haven't gotten to NWN2 yet. NWN1 was pretty uninspired though, with Shadows of Undertide being the only one where the writing actually impressed me. And as far as their recent games go, DA:O's writing was pretty fucking horrible.

I didn't play DA:O or ME so i can't judge these - maybe they have gotten worse. But as said i think it's often also a matter of taste.

 

[yester64]

Fallout 3 really isn't a terrible game, though I wouldn't say it's great either. Poor writing, world design and game engine aside, it actually does some things, like visual storytelling, very well, and the world was compelling enough for me to explore for several hundred hours (albeit using mods to change things up). The question is always, is Fallout 3 a good Fallout game? In that case, most people here would argue the answer is a firm no, both because it deviates so strongly from the tone, gameplay style and lore of the first two games, and because it simply isn't up to the same standard of quality.

True. I think the presentation was great. But the original fallouts were better without the visuals just from the story.
What i liked, and still sticks with me, is the opening in fallout 3. Hasn't absolutely do to with the story, but the song with zooming out and seeing the destruction was pretty cool.
I'll guess its more the visuals than the story.

Action RPGs have always sold more - just look at Diablo, Torchlight, Dungeon Siege, and BioWare's more recent games. That's simply the nature of making a more complex, nuanced experience - you're going to limit your audience if you make things too hard for the average player to get into. However, this logic only really works if we're talking about big-budget games. With the right management and scope for the game, a new "old-school" RPG could be both very cheap to make and very profitable, while still remaining faithful to everything hardcore CRPG fans love about the genre. Design doesn't cost money; cutting-edge graphics, bullet points like online multiplayer and celebrity voice actors do.

I don't mind to play an 'old school' rpg, but i think any developer may choose the more mass appealing approach.
Personally, i think that these days of old are gone. Now everything has to fit to PC and consoles a like. Not that i think its good, but i think that how it is.
I would rather buy the old school if there were one.

I guess all I can say is "keep playing". The companions in New Vegas all have their own side-quests with different triggers and starting points, most of which factor into the main quest line. You probably won't be disappointed with the likes of Boone or Veronica.

So far, i played over 30 hours and still wasn't on the strip or hoover dam.
Yes, the NPC do have a life and story, but it is limited somewhat. What i meant was perhaps like in DragonAge your NPC got a different story to tell everytime you went to the camp after finishing the main quest. I thought that was pretty cool. Like a story that continues over the course of the game.
I do have Boone with me and he takes care of the shooting most of the time. Good NPC for me.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

Yes, the NPC do have a life and story, but it is limited somewhat. What i meant was perhaps like in DragonAge your NPC got a different story to tell everytime you went to the camp after finishing the main quest. I thought that was pretty cool. Like a story that continues over the course of the game.

The timespan of the two games is completely different though, so that's not possible. Overall, NV isn't much of a "party game", it's more of a loner-game, so NPCs and NPC banter are largely complementary not requisite. But, as sea said, all the recruitable NPCs have a pretty detailed background and story.

I would say i also prefer games where i can influence the outcome, but i don't shun 'JRPGs' when i like the story

I have lost interest in most JRPGs after playing through a few famous ones, cause all the other ones are too similar and gameplay is largely lacking. But I do like Japanese RPG-hybrids, SLGs, tactical games etc. because they don't stick to one gameplay style and seem to come up with something new every time.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

I'd probably be more into them if I had a console to play on.

Well, yeah. Although there's a plenty of decent PC titles as well, they tend to be more obscure.

Very little of innovation in JRPGs comes out great in the end, but at least they aren't afraid to experiment, so I guess I more or less agree with your statement. The western market seems to be way more concerned with OMGGRAPHIXORRZ to come up with anything fresh.

 

[Korin]

To be honest, Japanese RPGs are where the vast majority of the innovation has been going on in the last several years. Games like Persona show that you can do really interesting things by using unconventional settings, characters, etc. However, Japanese RPGs, outside of Final Fantasy, are for the most part niche titles that don't get the respect or recognition from the West that they often deserve. It's true that many are a dime a dozen, but there are a lot of semi-obscure gems that go overlooked and, in my opinion, could do far more to advance the genre than any of the latest games by BioWare and Bethesda. I'd probably be more into them if I had a console to play on.

I would like to find a good JRPG but they all seem to be the same. The last ones I tried were Magna Carta 2 and Eternal Sonata... just excruciating to play through. What JRPGs would you recommend?

 

[Stanislao Moulinsky]

Did you play Persona 4?

 

[Ausdoerrt]

So all it's for me really just subjective if someones not sticking to the classic way.

Fair enough. Hack'n'slash and technical limitations aside, though, I think that roleplaying has been an integral part of western cRPGs for a long time, and define anything that deviates from that as "not sticking to classical way". But you are correct, interpretation of the past can be as subjective as anything else.


@korindabar: [spoiler:e4abb60ca3]Be aware that Magna Karta series is Korean and thus a bit different from the Japanese JRPG-style games.

I'm afraid I couldn't offer you any good new JRPG suggestions since I don't own a console, and the PC releases are pretty rare these days. I'll say though, JRPGs can get tedious because of streamlined gameplay and overly persistent random encounters. If that's what's dragging you down, maybe try some games with non-traditional battle systems.

For a few not-so new recommendations. I really enjoyed Falcom's Xanadu NEXT, a sort of different spin on Diablo with JRPG elements. Unfortunately, it's never been released outside Japan though I hear a fan patch may be in progress.

Eien no Aselia is great, although it's more of a VN/TBS hybrid than an RPG. Still, it's a must-play, especially with the English patch released at http://dakkodango.com/ A translation for the sequel is in the works, although I'm proud to have played the living bejeezus out of that game without one.

I really enjoyed the game system in Sengoku Rance, but again it's more of a strategy game. I also hear some people find the story content and presentation offensive

For something less great but more accessible, try Last Remnant, it's a step up from Square's other works, because the battle system is way better than the tired ATB.

If you're up for an oldie, have a spin of Valkyrie Profile for PSX, it's one of the best JRPGs I've played. It's also a lot shorter than most JRPGs, making its length a bit more manageable. Besides, the story's great. (I know there've been remakes and sequels, but I know nothing of those).[/spoiler:e4abb60ca3]

EDIT: put "spoiler" tags on JRPG discussion as to not drive the thread way offtopic.

 

[Korin]

Did you play Persona 4?

No, I'd try it though.

For a few not-so new recommendations. I really enjoyed Falcom's Xanadu NEXT, a sort of different spin on Diablo with JRPG elements. Unfortunately, it's never been released outside Japan though I hear a fan patch may be in progress.

Eien no Aselia is great, although it's more of a VN/TBS hybrid than an RPG. Still, it's a must-play, especially with the English patch released at http://dakkodango.com/ A translation for the sequel is in the works, although I'm proud to have played the living bejeezus out of that game without one.

I really enjoyed the game system in Sengoku Rance, but again it's more of a strategy game. I also hear some people find the story content and presentation offensive

For something less great but more accessible, try Last Remnant, it's a step up from Square's other works, because the battle system is way better than the tired ATB.

If you're up for an oldie, have a spin of Valkyrie Profile for PSX, it's one of the best JRPGs I've played. It's also a lot shorter than most JRPGs, making its length a bit more manageable. Besides, the story's great. (I know there've been remakes and sequels, but I know nothing of those).[/spoiler]

EDIT: put "spoiler" tags on JRPG discussion as to not drive the thread way offtopic.

Once I finish up Morrowind I might actually try to find one of these.

 

[Thomas de Aynesworth]

Will Obsidian make another FO?

I certainly hope so, otherwise this cat sacrifice would be for nothing.

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

Will Obsidian make another FO?

I certainly hope so, otherwise this cat sacrifice would be for nothing.

Honestly man, that is not funny.