That’s never happened to me yet. But I would hope we just have to start the level again from the beginning (without checkpoints) and we lose the progress we made on it for that attempt, á la Crash Bandicoot. I doubt they would make you start the whole game again like the original Kao the Kangaroo (if you don’t manually save), that would be brutal.
Outer worlds was received perhaps even better and was more popular than Avowed is currently. People’s memories are fuzzy I guess but Outer Worlds was a genuine GOTY contender.
Yeah that doesn’t track at all with what I remember people saying, and what I remember thinking myself.
I distinctly remember people citing the repetitive gameplay, short campaign, shallow choices, etc. I’m not sure why it was ever a GOTY contender, but there simply never was any way it would ever beat a game like Sekiro. It’s likely that “new Obsidian RPG” drove any hype surrounding the game.
Edit: Disco Elysium came out in 2019, that fact alone tells you that Outer Worlds being a contender was uhh… if not fraudulent, then certainly questionable.
I’m sorry but I genuinely don’t care what game journalists think. Their opinions are about as valuable as mud, and at least I can grow plants from mud.
Every single discussion I see searching up on Google ‘is Outer Worlds good’ are sponsored reviews from people who got the game for free, or B average reviews from people who got the game for dirt cheap. When I find what real people have to say about Outer Worlds, it’s almost unanimous that it was bad.
Don’t apologize for having an opinion. Just apologize for discounting the ones that don’t agree with yours. It’s listed as very positive on Steam and sold very well. Your hyperbole about everyone saying it was bad is provably wrong.
Been playing it on XSX via Game pass. As an original Kickstarter of the Pillars of Eternity game, I’d say it’s phenomenal. The transition in genres was masterful, and I have the same feeling of commanding a squad except I’m down in the actual instead of watching it from birds eye view. The dialogue choices have been satisfying and, playing on Hard difficulty, the combat feels like a genuine fun challenge. I’ve put about fifteen hours into it, and only recently made it to the first city after roaming the wilds to see how many three skull challenges I could tackle before following the main quest. I hope for a lot of content! If they even match PoE1 in story length I’ll be a very satisfied gamer.
Tried it with a Nvidia card. The graphics were oddly blurry and grainy, especially anything in shadows, no matter the settings. Couldnt get past that. I’m not going to play potentially dozens of hours of nausea simulator.
In my experience, there are actually a lot more dialogue choices based on your skills, which I really liked—it makes me feel more connected to my character. So I’d say there’s more role-playing depth than Skyrim, but at the same time, the action feels better too.
I really enjoy the combat; it’s not easy, even on medium difficulty. If I’m not careful, I can die pretty quickly, which makes it more fun and engaging for me.
The only downside is that the world feels smaller than Skyrim. In Skyrim, I had this feeling that the world was endless, but in Avowed, it feels more limited. However, that’s fine—not every game can be a legend like Skyrim for me! :)
This is a genuine question and not me trying to be snarky or anything: how’s that possible? Was there any meaningful role playing in Skyrim at all?
To me the system simplification of Skyrim went so far that the only real role you could play was the dragonborn - not your specific one but a generic dragonborn who could be anyone and everything at the same time. Maybe my definition of role playing is outdated as I feel it should include choices and consequences (like blocking or limiting access to some content) so I’d be grateful if you could expand on that.
Again, I’m not trying to suggest you’re wrong or anything, I’m just curious about your perspective (or something more about what you’ve read).
I think what I read was actually about oblivion rather than Skyrim, but I’m not sure if that changes your questions or not. I agree that the Skyrim character did feel like a genetic dragonborn. The guild quests especially made it feel that way. (I’m the head wizard, but also chief fighter dude and captain of the thieves guild… What?)
I guess for the role play aspect I prefer games to more narrowly define the main character and tell the story from there rather than leave it up to me to decide who the character becomes. A Plague Tale is a great example of this type of story telling, but of course it isn’t at all comparable to an open world game.
Change from Oblivion to Skyrim would definitely affect my question. I do think the former had more “my kind” of role playing so the initial thought would be more understandable for me.
Thanks for the answer. I get what you mean about playing as more defined main characters, it definitely has it’s benefits over more open-ended approach.
There’s never been much content blocking in elder scrolls. You could always master every skill even in Morrowind. Morrowind had a few exclusive guilds, but even Skyrim had a couple. Role playing in Skyrim is self imposed.
Guild exclusivity is actually what I had in mind. Sure, there’s nothing that significantly changes the main quest in TES games (and I think I misremembered how much blocking is there in previous titles) but that still counts for me personally. Self-imposed role play is fine in general (I do it all the time in games in fact) but I still think that lack of reasonable requirements for some (optional?) content makes the world feel more generic and player-focused than I’d like.
No, there wasn’t - Skyrim is the video game equivalent of makeup on an otherwise uninteresting individual. Might seem pretty at first, but the lack of depth or meaning dulls any beauty.
I’m a huge fan of pillars of eternity and so far this game is great… seeing the screenshots I was worried it wouldn’t “feel” like PoE but 100% feels like it to me.
Though I will likely not be playing the game, I have seen a lot of people running into performance problems, crashing, and just bugs in general. You aren’t the only one.
I think a lot of my creativity is stunted because I don’t generally notice these issues in rockstars games until someone points them out lol. I think it would be pretty cool if they gave people more choice and options
To me, this is different choices in player autonomy/agency. No player is truly autonomous in a game world, but giving the player choices and having the choices have outcomes that actually impact the gameworld makes it feel like it’s your own agency making the choice.
For example, why would I eat the fish in Nier Automata? Doing so kills me. Why would they give me the option to have a game-ending early on in the game based on eating a fish? Because in giving you the choice to do so, they’ve given you a level of autonomy. They let you find out for yourself what the consequences are, and the consequences make sense in the context of the game world.
Rockstar is bad at respecting player agency, but you know what the worst was in my experience?
Hogwarts Legacy. (Note: I pirated this trash to not give Rowling any money)
Right off the bat, at the beginning of the game, you’re meant to follow your Professor through a dark seemingly endless empty space. If you leave the side of your Professor, nothing terrible happens, just big red scary words cover the screen saying you’ve failed because you lost track of the Professor.
In a game that actually respects player agency, you wouldn’t just be like “Hey, you’re doing THIS MISSION WRONG” (which is basically what the message said in nicer terms), you would give the player an actual event showing why it was dangerous.
What would be so hard about animating a shadowy horror coming out of the shadows and snatching you, instantly killing you? At least then you have learned why you shouldn’t venture alone. Because there are scary monsters in the dark and they could kill you! This respects the players agency by allowing them to explore but also giving them clear limits that fit the theme of the world in which they exist. There’s definitely scary horrors in Harry Potter, and a myriad of things that could kill a new student. We don’t see any of them, just big all caps “YOU’RE DOING IT WRONG!”
The game would pose further issues, like not being able to jump over obstacles that your character is clearly jumping higher than. Invisible walls is another thing which disrespects player agency and breaks world immersion.
It’s been a while since I played it, but the whole game was crammed to the gills with these kind of wag of the finger “we didn’t tell you to play that way so don’t” instead of using compelling story-based reasons to keep people from doing those things.
Yeah. Use it at the Bunker and it blows up the Bunker. I love all the endings that are like, “I don’t know why she did that.”
Also apparently it’s a real last ditch move that doesn’t actually kill you. I didn’t know that until just now when I looked it up. I thought it was just an interesting thing where the game let you blow yourself up. Also, it apparently leaves you with tattered clothes.
I’m reminded of the abyssal words in Elden Ring’s expansion. There are signs that tell you “Don’t let them see you!” and “You have to hide and run!”. You find an area with some tall grass and some creepy eye-monsters. And sure enough, if they see you they come running at you. They’ll knock you over, grab you, and explode your head.
Clearly you’re supposed to sneak by them.
But…
spoilerYou can also parry their attack, and then just kill them. Or just fucking book it and run past them, but that’s way harder.
bin.pol.social
Aktywne