What’s this “again” business? Do you actually feel you’re entitled to a $1 unlimited access pass to their entire library for 2 weeks just to play their biggest release? If not, do you think it’s unethical or illegal or some other gripe?
I played Outer Worlds, Wasteland 3 and Halo: Infinite with that shit in the past years. I felt like I was literally stealing the games.
Oh neat I have been living under a rock and didn’t realize it was owned by Microsoft… so now there will never be a PS5 release. Does that mean all the old Bethesda games will be unavailable om PS5?
It doesn’t even look like you can get it on steam deck, this blows.
Well Steam says it will be in their library, I guess just not for Steamdeck? I was on the fence about getting one because I rarely use a non work computer, and won’t get a new one just for gaming.
I’m talking about GamePass, not Starfield. Gamepass only works on Microsoft OSes AFAIK, so you won’t be able to use it on anything it doesn’t control (i.e. macOS or Linux).
Like it’s not enough to lock me into a service by making a good service that I forget how expensive it is, instead they got to strangle you on the device side.
Hot take when dealing with trillion dollar monopolies there is nothing unethical of taking advantage of them. Also I say this as someone that got the $1 month once and then used it once and then never touched it.
That’s troubling. I’ve been playing the shit out of both GTA V and RDR 2 because they have the two best campaigns I’ve ever played. Especially RDR2. It was unique in its trajectory, in its beats…I really hope the follow ups, (however many years down the road those might be) won’t be affected too much by this. The writing made those games what they are.
I haven’t played baldurs gate, but I’ve been seeing a lot about it, mostly positive. Interesting, the news about that company. Being successful doesn’t usually call for a massive shakeup. But that’s capitalism for you. Fuck the workers, squeeze more out of those you keep. Classic.
As someone who has a very small selection of games they like, play God of War. I never played any of them before the 2018 game and I loved it. I start it again and play through like once a year to 100%. Only game I ever 100%ed.
Loved RDR and GTA but not much else has kept my interest anyway close to GoW except maybe Hitman.
Speculating but they’ve probably already wrapped up all the writing for GTA VI and planned to move on after that. Imagine with Houser leaving we’ll see a few more vets as they finish up their roles for VI.
When you walk into the drunk guys home for his money and kill him, but his son goes “pa, pa, pa…” I know it’s a video game, but I wasn’t expecting that. It was one of those moments where i can never forget. I felt like I actually hurt a person in my mind and kept thinking about it, still do. Absolutely the best game that brings you into the fold as a player.
I dunno, I’m not a huge gamer. I’ve had just FIFA and gta v on my console for years happily. Rdr2 is a newer purchase for me and I love it. But I don’t really like fantasy games, so I’m not really larian’s audience.
I like shooting and driving and open worlds. And soccer. I put off getting rdr2 for so long because I couldn’t drive. I regret writing it off because I was definitely wrong about it
I was saying I’ve been hearing good things about BG3 and saw they fired a lot of people to “streamline” the company. I was just deriding capitalism for that insane mindset
In related news, as part of its recently publicised cutbacks, BioWare has “let go of” Lukas Kristjanson, the lead writer behind Baldur’s Gate 1 and 2, and the writer of the first three Dragon Age games, Mary Kirby.
Oh it wasn’t Larian, that name was mentioned to me so I just assumed from the quote above without rereading. I dunno the connection between larian and BioWare, but they’re obviously releasing games together? Or sharing titles?
Gotcha, so Baldurs gate 1 and 2 were released by bioware it 1998 and 2000 respectively, the lead writer for those games was let go by bioware recently, Larian is a completely separate company that got the IP rights to do BG3 👍 I can see where the confusion came in lo Edit: More context in the development section of en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldur's_Gate_3
GTA V? Really? I absolutely hated the story in that, and I hated the characters. Here are some of my issues with it:
Trevor:
interesting epilogue, but otherwise pretty much no character arc
really wanted to see him try to take on the Los Santos gangs (DLC!)
Franklin:
largely just does whatever Michael says
wanted to start a dealership, but he kinda gives up once he makes it big (DLC!)
Michael:
arc was okay, but he didn’t seem like a good fit for main character, especially when Franklin gets the ending
All in all, I felt like the three character perspective was largely a distraction from the lack of actual storytelling. SA and IV didn’t have that, so they actually had a meandering plot with some character development to round it all out.
I haven’t finished RDR2 (it’s so long!), but I really loved RDR and heard that story for RDR2 is even better.
I mean, I’d argue that GTA V didn’t have the most emotional storytelling, but it wasn’t a character driven game like RDR2. The characters had the stories they did because they each opened up different avenues into different types of crimes. They didn’t focus on it. The characters were all insufferable. But that doesn’t mean the writing for the story itself wasn’t good. Yeah, the characters all kinda sucked, but the storytelling propelled the tension and wasn’t just some lame bullshit that felt like it needed to be there. The characters don’t develop that much, but the backstory was great, the intrigue and the vastness of the word made it great. That’s all writing. But you’re right, it couldn’t stand alone as a character driven story.
RDR2 on the other hand is a character driven story at its heart. You definitely need to play it because it’s incredibly well done. If you’re looking for good storytelling, emotional connections to the characters’ trajectories, and a great fuckin game, RDR2 is where you wanna be.
I’m not expecting RDR-levels of storytelling or anything, and the original RDR is way better than any of the GTAs in terms of storytelling and characters. However, GTA V felt like such a downgrade from previous entries.
GTA V starts out strong, with a fun heist sequence, which gets the player excited for more. And then the next thing we see is Michael at marriage counseling, and then we meet Franklin, who seems ready to take up Michael’s mantle. Then we see Trevor, who is now running drugs in the rural area, which is also pretty exciting. At the start, I was excited to see all three develop their individual storylines, with Franklin just getting into the underground, Trevor establishing himself as a drug kingpin, and Michael getting his last heist in.
But instead of that, Trevor and Franklin kind of give up on their arcs and they just focus on helping Michael with the heist. Why? Why doesn’t Trevor try to take over the drug trade in Los Santos? Why doesn’t Franklin try to start his own dealership? Or at least steal cars as side content? If they’re really interested in heists, why is there only about five of them? Why can’t I go do more after finishing the main storyline? What about Las Venturas, doing heists there would be a ton of fun!
To me, the storytelling really dragged once Trevor came to Los Santos, which was more than half of the game. In fact, I dropped it and came back about three times (restarting twice) because it was so uninteresting, until I finally forced myself to speed through the story just so I could cross it off my list so I wouldn’t feel the need to come back. I didn’t have the same problem with either GTA SA or GTA IV, and I even finished GTA IV after GTA V (played off and on on console before GTA V, then bought and played through on PC).
And the world felt small to me. I know it was physically bigger than every other GTA game, but it felt so much smaller than GTA SA, which was able to fit three cities and a rural area and still make them feel far apart (GTA V just had one city and a rural area), and it felt similar to GTA IV. I didn’t feel any desire to explore like I did with SA. The backstory was interesting, but I think it just highlighted how disappointing the rest of the story was.
In fact, I even like GTA III more than GTA V. It’s pretty janky to play today, but it still has that OG charm to it.
So I honestly don’t understand why it’s so loved. Nothing about it really stood out to me aside from the graphics and performance of the engine. I didn’t like the driving as much as IV (controversial take), the humor felt bland to me, and I didn’t find any of the side characters particularly interesting, except maybe Lamar, and he also largely gave up on his arc.
So GTA V is by far my least favorite of the series, so much so that I’m not looking forward to GTA VI.
I could almost see the "digital foundry can't share it" as not giving their review outlets preferential treatment over everyone else (because the technical breakdown is a separate thing), but the timeline is just not anywhere near sufficient, especially for a game of this scope.
I understand that Beth delayed the review codes, but I don’t quite understand why. The subtext of this article seems to suggest that they expect higher reviews from other outlets. Is that the case?
I'm kind of reading it like the Europe team did kind of a shitty job, considering they said some places got codes from the American team.
It's generally a hard balance to strike on when it's good enough for reviewers to get their hands on it with enough time to actually provide meaningful evaluations (because they genuinely are fixing shit up to and through launch. This is the same reason it's hard for reviews to provide a lot of information on general bugginess. They also play a lot of unfinished stuff that's actually cleaned up before launch). But there's no reason to give different reviewers codes at different times. It sounds like different divisions and one fucking up.
I don't think that the issue is the quality of their QA. Well, okay, maybe that's a factor, but I don't think that that was the big one for Fallout 76.
Some of the issues in Fallout 76 that they shipped with, they had to know they were shipping with. It wasn't that QA didn't turn up problems, but that they took too-ambitious a plan, ran out of time, and then didn't delay the release to fix all the broken stuff. Yeah, they did a lot of work to fix the game post-release, but by then, a lot of players had already been soured by the initial bad experience.
They did significantly delay the Starfield release, so I assume that they are trying to put this out in a more-sane shape.
While this headline is true, I don’t think it’s the fundamental reason for the game’s success. Having characters that feel alive is awesome, and part of what elevates BG3 over D:OS 1 and 2 for me. But what makes it great is the amount of control you have over the narrative; how the game responds to your choices. There is nuance. There are permutations. It ain’t perfect, but it’s a hell of a lot better than any rpg Bethesda ever put out (fite me).
A lot of Bethesda content is quasi-procedural. TES and FO maps are littered dungeons/encampments that are pretty formulaic. Re-used passage & room artwork, generic antagonists, just little opportunities to engage in combat mechanics. And they respawn periodically, so you can go back and get your mechanics fix.
Everything in BG3 is scripted. There are no random encounters, wandering mobs, or replayable dungeons. Everything in the game is there intentionally, and everything in the game has been hand crafted.
Yeah, this is true. I think Bethesda games have just felt really empty and lifeless to me for a long time. I enjoyed Morrowind a lot. Oblivion I played for a while, but never finished the story. Don’t even remember if I ever finished Skyrim, which was obviously massively popular. Same with their Fallout games, it’s just been diminishing returns for me. Different strokes, and all that, obviously, they just don’t have that secret sauce I crave.
I think part of it is that your character doesn’t have any personality; you’re some total cipher of a Chosen One, which makes it difficult to form an emotional connection to them, and by extension to any of the NPC’s. Some of their NPC’s have well-written dialogue, but I sure don’t remember any of them.
Bethesda's "good stories" have always been moreso the player's stories of cobbled together mechanics as a a result of their playstyle/current abilities, gear, and motivation.
Most of the time it might be rote open world questing with some enjoyable grind loop, but there are a lot of particular memories I love, like robbing the Red Diamond jewelry store in Oblivion's Imperial City, "casing" the place by day as a customer and purchasing a necklace, purely to experience the joy of breaking in at 3 AM and robbing it blind.
The joy and hilarity I felt when I came back the day after I'll always remember. Entering the store to see the shopkeep, beaming at his new customer, all of his shelves and cases completely fucking empty, as he vacantly grinned at me, buck naked as id stolen the clothes right out of his sleeping pockets.
I've stolen a lot of shit in that game, but that one was good. It's incredibly rare for me to remember Bethesda's actual character moments that fondly, as they've always come off plastic and rehearsed in some combination of writing, voice acting, and rigid animation. Sometimes they almost reach a good story, like some popular side quest chains, or Paladin Danse's personal quests.
So, I think these two games tell their best culminational "stories" in different fundamental ways, and I think it's neat how each one's best potential narrative, whether written or otherwise, is a marriage of the game's possibilities and the player's motivation and intent. But you're probably right, BG3 can tell a lot more, better stories than my idiotic repetitive Bethesda adventures, but I do like some pulp.
Yeah, I think you’re right, and maybe my waning enjoyment of that style of rpg says as much about my lack of imagination as anything else. I’m just a sucker for a story I can get caught up in, with characters that I can somehow relate to, and I’ve nearly always felt let down by Bethesda games in that regard.
Yayay! The game has run smoothly, mostly. But every few hours my GF and I restart our LAN to fix some stuttering. Also had some FPS issues with super large battles, but the game is SO DANG GUD that we don't even consider those speedbumps. Easily the best triple A in a long while.
I haven’t run into too many bugs in the game, but in combat it’s frequent for the game to have to sit there for several seconds thinking about what an enemy should do next. Hope that’s one of the performance improvements they’re working on.
I’m hoping they fix it so it will actually use all my power. Both my graphics card and processor sit at ~50% usage and low temp, while I drop frames when locked at 30fps. I’m still in act 1 but as it is now, I am concerned about when I reach act 3, since they say that is much harder on performance.
I went from pretty much a locked 60 to mid 20’s in act 3. 5900x 2080S and 32G ram with a nvme ssd. Put BG on pause for a few days while armored core kicks my ass. Hopefully the patch improves performance quite a bit. I don’t think I’m maxing out cpu or GPU either but haven’t really been monitoring it.
games
Aktywne
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.