Your opinion is worthless

Norzan said:
What makes the argument of chance to hit even more bad is that Fallout 3 used it since the character's chance to hit was based on their weapon skill and other factors.
Click to expand...
Yeah I forgot about this. It's almost like Morrowind levels of disconnect really. But if the shot lands, it lands in Fallout 3. I think that's the real determining factor for Morrowind at least. People see the sword swing and it says "You missed" and they go but I didn't miss I clearly hit them!

I'll give that OG Fallout has clunky and sometimes a little confusing user interface. There's a lot of menus and buttons and sometimes you're like wait what's this one do again? Oh yeah I can right click here to change this. How do I get to the targeted attacks?
That makes sense. It is a bit confusing to play at first.

For Morrowind, I'll give that it is weird to play something that looks action based but it turns out that it's almost like a RTwP game but without the pause. You can move whenever you want, swing as fast as a weapon's attack rate and your stamina allows, etc. but you cannot dictate when attacks land and you cannot raise your shield. It's creates dissonance in my opinion but that doesn't make the systems it's using bad. It just makes it initially confusing.
 
Fallout 1 and 2 are clunky compared to say...Fallout Tactics. Gee I guess that is the way the franchise should have went instead of generic FPS looter.
 
She means that she is a zoomer that came to the site because she liked Fallout 3, never played isometric RPG's, so she thinks they are "dated" because they came out when she was born.
 
TorontoReign said:
She means that she is a zoomer that came to the site because she liked Fallout 3, never played isometric RPG's, so she thinks they are "dated" because they came out when she was born.
Click to expand...

I was born the year after Fallout 2 released. But still, it's a weird argument even then because isometric RPGs are experiencing something of a renaissance right now anyway and even if that weren't the case, dice based mechanics are hardly outdated considering as I said, tabletop is more popular than ever.
 
Atomic Postman said:
I was born the year after Fallout 2 released. But still, it's a weird argument even then because isometric RPGs are experiencing something of a renaissance right now anyway and even if that weren't the case, dice based mechanics are hardly outdated considering as I said, tabletop is more popular than ever.
Click to expand...

Being born after 98 isn't the issue but it can color your opinion if you only played shitty console games.
 
TorontoReign said:
Being born after 98 isn't the issue but it can color your opinion if you only played shitty console games.
Click to expand...

I can see that. I first played F1/F2 when I was 14 (I joined this site when I first started playing IIRC) and remembered really struggling to get into the game. It's very alien if you've grown up on a diet of post-2007 AAA games.

Thing is that if you just read the manual, it becomes crystal clear. That's what I did when I was 13 and I overcame the hump pretty much immediately.
 
Like my younger brother has grown up using the internet but not owning a computer due to cell phones.
 
Atomic Postman said:
I was born the year after Fallout 2 released. But still, it's a weird argument even then because isometric RPGs are experiencing something of a renaissance right now anyway and even if that weren't the case, dice based mechanics are hardly outdated considering as I said, tabletop is more popular than ever.
Click to expand...
Nooooooo you gotta understand this:
Morgan_ said:
I don't have a hard time playing it it's just old and has it's issues.


Fixt. You can insinuate I'm dumb if it makes you feel better I just think Fallout 1 and Morrowind have their issues due to them being old. Icewind Dale didn't have the same gameplay issues na dneither did Divinity, or again, Xcom. It's just difficult to get right.
Click to expand...

It's totally dumb and old and dated, fuck off oldheads!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Seriously still waiting to understand what Fixt changed so drastically in the combat calculations to make it "playable."
 
You can't play a game modded or it sucks so all Bethesda games are shit.
 
TorontoReign said:
You can't play a game modded or it sucks so all Bethesda games are shit.
Click to expand...
Hey, I never modded Daggerfall, and I played it a lot, before my eyes got stupid.

EDIT: All of this discussion about old style gameplay and new one reminded me of a Wasteland 3 thread I read on Steam before the game was released.
I know Morgan's not saying the same as this guy at all, I just got reminded of it:
I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but seriously. Name one good reason why this chance to hit, or chance to succeed is any better than the other game mechanic that the players have to actively do something good in order to achieve the successful outcome.

You know, like one of those first person shooter games, where the players have to rely on their own skill of aiming and shooting, rather relying on their 95% chance to hit the target.

There's literally nothing good will come out of it from this mechanic. It only exsits to frusrate the players. Why the challenges that the game gives you have to be related to their *luck*? Shouldn't the game actually test your ability to do stuff in the game? Like how well you could land a hit from a far and such? That's how I want my game to be; "You missed the shot because you, the players were sloppy." NOT "You missed the shot because you were unlucky."

The only reason I see why there are still these RNG driven CRPG, is because that's probably the easiest way to make a game. Just write some chance to hit calculations and boom. Combat is done. You don't have to create a hitbox for each and every single actors in the game, so how simple is that? Plus, the gamers will envy the game as; another attempt to reincarnate the glorious days of classic CRPG! and whatnot. That's just a bitter laugh to me.

It was nice to see that the company is working on a new installment to the series, but it was also a big dissapointment to see the game will be basically the same in terms of RNG mechanics from the previous installments. I bet the game's gonna be another RNG festival where the players would yell "How did you missed/failed that?!" when they were manipulated by none other than a machine rolling a dice. Which is a big shame.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Risewild said:
Hey, I never modded Daggerfall, and I played it a lot, before my eyes got stupid.

EDIT: All of this discussion about old style gameplay and new one reminded me of a Wasteland 3 thread I read on Steam before the game was released.
I know Morgan's not saying the same as this guy at all, I just got reminded of it:
Click to expand...
Lmfao that review is like it was written perfectly as a mockery of people who can't stand dice rolls.
 
Eshanas said:
Oh gods I'm in a discord with this fucking - ugh. She drives everyone out of the channel about fallout along with a contrarian tag along. But you just call her a shill enough, she fucks off to the safety of Fallout Reddit where she'll be coddled. Today's hot take is that NV was a spin off, everyone just ignored her eventually.
Click to expand...
I consider myself a nice person, but that bitch is the Hillary Clinton of the Fallout subreddit. She says a lot, but awful little comes out, and what comes out sounds headless and empty. Yet people mindlessly upvote her shit cause it zounds good...
 
JustAShcookius said:
I consider myself a nice person, but that bitch is the Hillary Clinton of the Fallout subreddit. She says a lot, but awful little comes out, and what comes out sounds headless and empty. Yet people mindlessly upvote her shit cause it zounds good...
Click to expand...
From what i gleaned from her Fallout Reddit threads, she has basically the same syndrome as a lot of Bethesda Fallout fans have and that is to shit on anything that is not made by Bethesda and elevate everything made by Bethesda. How they go about doing that? They create the "common enemy", that thing that gets praise from a lot of people, even fans of the old games. In this case it's New Vegas. It's so transparent that is pretty pathetic. And you bet your ass that if New Vegas was made by Bethesda in the same exact way as it was made by Obsidian and it was getting shat on by internet reviewers and old fans, they would be defending it to the high heaven.

Maybe it's just a conspiracy theory but that's what it feels like it. They criticize New Vegas and the first two games for things the Bethesda Fallouts are far more guilty of, but for some reason it's fine on the latter.

And here's the thing: i don't mind if they hate New Vegas or Fallout 1 and 2. By all means, do it if you truly believe it. But don't do it for bullshit reasons like trying to make the whole ordeal into a "us vs them" which is stupid, or trying to elevate one game over the other while at the same time being completely hypocritical by criticizing one game for a specific thing, but the game they are giving praise is far more guilty of that criticism and yet it's fine there for some reason.
 
I generally hate religious fanatics regardless of the thing they worship.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top