I'd hate to kill all the optimism for TES V: Skyrim, but I have extremely low expectations for it. Despite the fact that Oblivion was one of the most critically praised games ever, I felt that it was INSANELY overrated and the Bethesda hype machine didn't fulfill a lot of the promises that they made. It was mediocre, at best, with design decisions that ranged from questionable to pants-on-head retarded. Nearly every dungeon/Ayleid ruin/fort looked and felt nearly identical - very few locations had any real character. This was made even worse by the atrocious level-scaling, which really killed any sense of exploration. Level-scaling isn't always a terrible idea when done with restraint, but considering the way that it was handled in Oblivion was absolutely awful. No matter where you go, you will never encounter an enemy that will curbstomp you at level 1. Also, consequently, you will never find any cool loot at level 1 due to the scaling. This is some ridiculous pandering to the casual crowd. The AI was absolutely idiotic, and really fell short of the expectations that Bethesda set. The devs promised the Radiant AI would be able to think all on its own, yet they basically just stand around looking at walls, and have disconnected conversations that make no sense. They can't notice if their friend's head is gone (a problem in Fallout 3 as well), even if they die ten feet away from them. Combat was mediocre too - most of the special moves were not particularly helpful at all since they left you open for too long, and level scaling led to the retarded situation where if you're level 30, you need to hit a wolf with at least a dozen arrows before you can even put the fucker down because they now have more hit points. It's idiotic design that punishes the player for getting stronger; the game is easier at level 2 than it is at level 50. Hell, you can complete the whole game at level 2! On the more creative/storyfag end, a lot of the exploration is killed by the fact that Cyrodiil was so incredibly bland. It's just the same damn bloom-filled meadow everywhere. Apart from the areas around Bruma, Cyrodiil looks all the same. Originally, Cyrodiil was meant to be a place with architecture reminiscent of the Byzantine Empire with cities that looked like Venice, and the surrounding areas were going to be jungle. Of course, having a LOTR knock-off is far more profitable so they went with that instead. Quests are mostly shit too, as you have zero freedom to do things in your way and the world has no consequences for any of your choices. You can become leader of the Fighter's Guild, Dark Brotherhood (the only good part of Oblivion, btw), Thieves' Guild, and Mage's Guild and nobody will bat an eyelash. There are a few bright spots in the quests, but for the most part, it boils down to "go here, kill this" or fetch-style quests. The Dark Brotherhood quests are thankfully much better, but that's about it. As an easy, relaxing adventure game, I'd see how somebody would like it - but I have no fucking clue how some people have been giving the game the BEST GAEM EVAR praises that it has been getting. tl;dr - Oblivion is incredibly overrated and riddled with flaws and broken gameplay mechanics that most gaming sites have completely ignored. Keep your expectations reserved - likely, TES V will be mediocre at best. They'll probably get rid of the level-scaling since everybody hated it, but that still leaves broken gameplay mechanics (chameleon suit, anyone?), dreadful AI, cut-and-paste dungeons, samey looking landscapes, repetitive combat, a lack of choices or any consequences, and linear quests that are mostly uninteresting with the exception of the Dark Brotherhood. Don't believe the hype.
I don't disagree with your assessment of Oblivion. I remember going back and playing Morrowind, it's expansion packs, and the user-made DLC instead of playing through Oblivion a second time as an evil character (like I do with most RPGs). However, I am not so quick to dismiss Bethesda with TES V. Looking at Fallout 3, they learned to fix most of those issues (most - not all). The level scaling in Skyrim will probably be similar to Fallout's, as well as the world design (i.e. player ability to change the difficulty on the fly coupled with dynamic dungeons and unique locations). They built Fallout 3 on the same engine as Oblivion and they learned that they still need to create 75% of the world by hand and only use the computer to fill in the gaps. Look at the dynamics in the Wasteland between DC/Arlington regions and the western areas around Raven Rock. I feel Fallout 3 will be more representative of Skyrim than Oblivion or any previous TES games. You do bring up a good point about the city design not looking like it was supposed to and shitty quests. There is no defending it; Bethesda failed completely in both areas. However, Fallout 3 didn't, which leads me to believe they learned from their mistakes.
My wife bought me the Wii version of GoldenEye for Christmas. I'm loving it so far. Very fun game. And in terms of nostalgia, I'll never touch the N64 version again. Anyone else playing it?
So is Oblivion the magic/sword/gold version of FallOut? Or vice versa? Same general mechanics and system?
Pretty much. Couple of big differences: -The leveling system is kind of awkward. Basically each skill is tied to an attribute, and when you create your character you pick 7 key skills. Raising your key skills is how you level; for every 10 points you raise in any combination of your key skills (you raise your skills through use and they're independent of your level, except for your key ones) you gain a level the next time you rest. It gets complicated if you want to optimize your character because you have to be very careful about what skills you raise. -For the most part enemies are normalized to your level, so as you get stronger they do too. It's not absolute, as enemies have their own minimum and maximum level ranges, but in general the majority of the enemies you face will be at or near your own power level. -There's no VATS or an equivilent so combat is always in real time. -Since Oblivion came before Fallout 3 the voice acting isn't as good. Personally I liked Oblivion better than Fallout 3 because I liked the setting better and I really disliked the VATS combat system.
Re: Oblivion My oldest son plays this game. For HOURS. Everytime I walk by, he is talking to some creepy cat woman or some green guy with fangs. Or he's walking somewhere. That's ALL I ever see. You talk and/or walk, I guess. Not much combat or excitement. I've even tried to sit down and watch only to be felled by a surprise (and much appreciated) nap. I've mentioned before that I started to play Fallout 3 at work but just kind of shrugged and left it alone. After all, "it is JUST like Oblivion!" Fantastic. My lack of health insurance has left me with little defense against my insomnia without the aid of Ambien but thanks to Bethesda, I'm fucking covered!!!! And I'm a Zelda fan! Presumably, I should appreciate the Old-World atmosphere of the Elder Scrolls games but I find them cliched and boring. *hangs head in shame* I have no point to this rant really. I'm just biding my time until Dead Space 2, Skyward Sword, Mortal Kombat, LBP2 and Uncharted 3 comes around and until Super Meat Boy hits the Virtual Console. Oh, and until the 3DS finally makes its appearance. (Disclaimer: I have been working my ass off for weeks now because of the Christmas season. I am sleep deprived and half drunk so only take half of what I say seriously. Thanks!)
Ahhhhh MOTHERFUCK.... I knew I should have bought that shit during Steam's Before-Christmas sale. Dammit!
Oh EUREKA! Sale is still going on! <a class="postlink" href="http://store.steampowered.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://store.steampowered.com/</a> Dead Space for 7 bucks. Amnesia: Dark Descent for 7 bucks. SMB for $7.50! Hubby just took the 36" LG flat screen he got for free from work and repurposed it into a computer monitor so now would be the perfect time to dip my hand into some PC gaming. My son would love Plants Vs. Zombies (which is on sale for 4 bucks).
I picked up Company of Heroes and one of the expansions from the Steam sale. Forgot how much I love this game. Playing through the single player at the moment, then maybe I'll jump into some skirmishes.
I asked this in the Tech Help thread too but you guys might be more suited to help me: How do I determine if I can play a certain PC game? I downloaded a demo for Amnesia: Dark Descent and when I try to launch it, it gives me a bunch of options (sound, video) and no matter what I do, it gives me this message: FATAL ERROR: Renderer #0 could not be initialized. Make sure your graphic card drivers are up to date. Check log file for more information. Is this something I can just update or am I completely screwed? The Penumbra demo worked a few weeks ago but hubby just changed the monitor. Is that the problem? How do I find out what drivers I have and how to update them? I am adept at console gaming and can set up and reprogram my VCR (ha, ha) but I am a drooling retard when it comes to computers so please be gentle. Thanks for any guidance you can give! *edit* The Penumbra demo still works.
I'm not sure if this goes here, but it is certainly pertaining to video games so... I just discovered that it is possible to mod ps3s. Something called a ps3 jailbreak or ps3break. It does what a modchip does for a 360 but its a usb stick. Is there anything about it I should know? Is it worth purchasing? Will I be able to play online with it or has Sony had some sort of firmware update?
So, even though I haven't plugged in my Wii for about 5 months I couldn't resist getting Goldeneye, a golden retro controller, and some shirt for $40 from Wal-Mart today. Link for those interested If it's even 1/10th as fun as the original it's a great purchase.
Maybe he just likes walking around. While that is the best way to "discover" caves, buildings, creatures, etc., you can also fast travel. You can also ride a horse in Oblivion - there is no equivalent mode of transport in Fallout. The scenery in Oblivion is much more pleasing to the eye than Fallout (which is a lot of bombed out building, rocks, rubble and dirt in shades of greys and browns). While the voice acting is better in fallout, I thought that Oblivion had a more developed story line.
Both storylines are terrible and poorly developed, IMO. Oblivion for being yet more cliched "Chosen One" bullshit, and Fallout 3 for being a really lame version of the plots of Fallout 1/2 (Find what the Super Mutants are doing, Find the G.E.C.K.) but without a fraction of the non-linearity, great sense of humor, solid writing, and ability to approach objectives in a multitude of ways (as well as really providing consequences for your actions). Plot-wise, it doesn't make sense that there is the urgent threat of a demonic invasion, yet the player can solve it at his leisure. A plot with a sense of urgency doesn't mesh well with an open-world game that is based on exploring. It is very contrived that even though the gates of hell are opening, you can still decide to just become guildmaster of the Mage's Guild instead. What would have been really cool is if you put off the main quest, that if you travel to towns along the way, you find them in ruins like you do Kvatch. That would have been innovative and cool. However, it seems that Bethesda's design philosophy was to make things as casual-friendly as possible, so the world never responds with providing consequences to player actions (unless it's to level scale loot and enemies). Bethesda can't seem to put together a main questline to save their lives - instead we get railroaded even harder than a BioWare game. (I like some Bio games, but c'mon, recall how many times in Mass Effect where multiple dialogue options all lead to Sheperd saying the exact same thing). They have some nice side quests here and there, particularly in Fallout 3, but their main quest lines for Fallout 3 and Oblivion were dreadful. As far as the scenery in Oblivion - yeah, it looks nice, but it gets tiring looking at the same meadow everywhere. Fallout has a much more distinctive style that many games must have looked at for influence (BioShock, for one). Fallout is instantly recognizable, while Oblivion's style could be confused with any number of Tolkien-influenced fantasy games.
Fallout 3 was indeed much better than Oblivion. The locations in Fallout 3 were far more memorable to explore. I can scarcely remember a single place in Oblivion, but places like Underworld and Rivet City were very memorable. There was also far more variety, as you said. My PC for some reason can't run New Vegas, I keep getting an error message, but I'm really eager to play it soon, especially because a lot of the folks making it were involved in the original games. Other things that kill my optimism are the fact that I am very skeptical of Bethesda's ability to make a decent main storyline. It tends to be really linear and there are very few opportunities for actual role-playing. In Fallout 3, it was particularly annoying because you had to sit through a ton of shitty writing along the way. The main quest pretty much nosedives in quality after Tranquility Lane. I also don't like Bethesda's reliance on essential NPC's. Spoiler That conversation where you finally meet John Henry Eden was pathetic. You could basically steer him away from genocide just by saying "lol killing people is wrong!!!11!" and immediately he decides to self-destruct. It was basically a shitty attempt at recreating the conversation with The Master in Fallout 1, but nowhere near as cool. Also, some of the locations in Fallout 3 were kinda retarded. I thought that the Superhero quest, while relatively well-designed, was stupid because nobody would really give a fuck about that in a post-apoc world. Little Lamplight was really stupid too - the Brotherhood of Steel can barely hold back Super Mutants, but a bunch of fucking kids can? Gimme a break. I wouldn't mind them so much if they weren't so goddamn annoying and essential NPC's. Btw, if you like playing as an evil character in RPG's, I urge you to try out Neverwinter Nights 2: Mask of the Betrayer if you have a decent PC. It's an expansion pack to the original game (which IMO was shit, don't bother with it), but the expansion is truly excellent. The gist of the story is that you find yourself the unlucky recipient of a curse when you awake in Rashemen, a land where spirits walk among men, witches rule the land, ancient hags plot in sunken towns, and shadow versions of reality are a portal away. This curse forces you to devour spirits for sustenance, is incredibly addictive, and gives you great power and abilities, but also devours you from within if the hunger isn't sated. The evil path is all about fully unleashing your gift and becoming a malevolent personification of hunger. What pisses me off in most games is being evil means being a thuggish, obnoxious douchebag. In Mask, it means being a truly manipulative, deceitful, horrible person. Spoiler Remember how in Fallout 3 in Little Lamplight you could find that little girl and sell her into slavery? The evil options in Mask are along those lines... and in many cases, far worse.
In my 20+ years of playing RPGs, I've pretty much come to the conclusion that a strong, compelling storyline and non-linear sandbox style playstyle are on the opposite ends of a continuum. Maybe it's just the way I play them, but if I'm given the near-absolute freedom to do what I want like in Oblivion or Fallout, I find that I couldn't care less about the main storyline; I'm all about exploring everything around me and building up my character. Whereas a game like FFIV, linear as it is, is going to live and die by its storyline in terms of being a memorable game. I think another thing that subtracts involvement from a storyline is character customization. I always feel a disconnect from the storyline whenever I can customize my character from scratch; It's like how integral can the main character be to the plot of the main character is just a blank slate?
Opposite ends of the spectrum is an understatement, its damn near impossible. In an open environment, there would have to be 100s of combinations of dialogue, texts, and quest varieties for one NPC to reflect what else you've done in the game. If you pop into the COD Addicts thread, I had a little discussion about FPS shooters, character development (RPG-style) and exploration as this guy was bashing the Modern Warfare 1/2 single player. You either are going to have a serious on-rails story experience because that is what it is, or you going to have an exploration experience because that is what it is. Also I have to agree with the character customization, it's going to be very hard to do that unless they pull some Mass Effect type of shit which was done well, but limited. On the other hand, the problem with the FallOut 3 exploration is that so much shit looked the exact same, but at the same time, the world lent to everything have the same look so fuck.
But that's the thing - you don't get that near-absolute freedom to do anything you like in Fallout 3 and especially Oblivion. Sure, you can walk anywhere you like, but the quests themselves are extremely linear. It's more like go anywhere, do nothing. In Oblivion, no matter what, you are helping Martin Septim fight the Mythic Dawn and close down the Oblivion gates. No matter what, you are helping the Mages fight against the Necromancers in the Mage's Guild. The one questline that does allow for some freedom (Dark Brotherhood) is a linear storyline, but is much better than the other two because in this case, you at least can either complete it through stealth for extra rewards instead of brute force, and there are optional objectives sprinkled throughout to provide a challenge. The whole reason there are essential NPC's in Fallout 3 and Oblivion is precisely because their quests are so linear and don't allow for ways of completing them other than a single way. Furthermore, quests themselves are unconvincing because they rely mostly on the "Kill X of Y" or "FedEx Quest" model, and that's never interesting. It's no surprise that the best side quests buck this completely. But without character customization, it isn't an RPG. I don't want to get into a huge argument about what is and isn't an RPG, but suffice to say, if I have little to no control over my character's skills and abilities (like say, any FPS ever) then it isn't. It's why we don't call Halo an RPG just because you play the role of Master Chief. That would be pretty absurd. It's not a mutually exclusive thing - you can have a character relevant to a particular storyline, but one who is also customizable. You are rarely in a situation where you are just a complete random guy like in Oblivion. Lots of games have done it. In Fallout 1, you're a Vault Dweller who was unlucky enough to be picked out to head out to the Wasteland and find a water purification chip for the Vault. In both Knights of the Old Republic games, the main character has a very extensive and plot-relevant backstory. In Planescape: Torment you play an amnesiac immortal in search of his identity, and you find out the history of your past incarnations. In any case, I only brought up the storyline thing because Misanthropic mentioned that he thought Oblivion had the more compelling storyline compared to Fallout 3. My response was just to say that I felt both of them sucked in that regard, but particularly because they provided no freedom in how you could approach quests at all. I hear that New Vegas greatly improves on this and provides consequences, ability to ally yourself with factions and multiple endings, though I haven't played it yet. Really, the only differences in the main storyline of Fallout 3, regardless of whether you were a total dick or a nice guy, was the ending slides.
On the topic of GT5, if anyone has it: From lvl25 onward, the game showers you in credits. That's all fine and dandy, except by that point you don't particularly need them. You need experience to level up. What does this mean for you? Well, I'm almost 30 A-spec which means I've got quite some cash sitting around being worthless. Christmas was 2 weeks ago, but fuck it, I'll hand out some gifts. Who wants a Ferrari?