Jump to content

Video Games: Dawn of Waaaaagh!


Werthead

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, briantw said:

I thought Mass Effect 3 was pretty great up until the last act when it completely shit itself and nothing you did actually ended up mattering, but I found Inquisition to be very boring after about ten hours.  It was fun at first because it was pretty and a new Dragon Age game, but once the initial charm wore off it just seemed like Operation: Fetch Quest.  Like, I'm the leader of the fucking army.  Why am I out here picking flowers?

Sure. Edmonton's had problems of their own, but the point is that it's a different studio.

And ME3 didn't have a bad last act, it had a bad last 10 minutes. The game could've literally just ended with Shepard and Anderson dying together as they watch all the Reapers explode with the Crucible activating, and it would've been a near-perfect ending. 

As for DA:I, I agree; but that's a flaw that most open world games have failed to solve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Fez said:

Sure. Edmonton's had problems of their own, but the point is that it's a different studio.

And ME3 didn't have a bad last act, it had a bad last 10 minutes. The game could've literally just ended with Shepard and Anderson dying together as they watch all the Reapers explode with the Crucible activating, and it would've been a near-perfect ending. 

As for DA:I, I agree; but that's a flaw that most open world games have failed to solve.

True.  Some games handle it better than others, though.  Witcher 3 has some issues with it as well, but at least in the context of that game world it makes a lot more sense, as Geralt's profession generally involves helping people kill mythical creatures for cash, and when he picks flowers and herbs he actually uses them to craft the potions he uses as a witcher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem isn't the teams, it's the talent. A lot of the best guys at BioWare are gone. The guy who created and led development of Dragon Age walked out in a rage after being told that Dragon Age II would be a quickie console action game which had to be made in 9 months, and the series never recovered. Several of the guys who worked on the golden age period of BioWare quit and made The Banner Saga instead, the first two games of which comfortably dump over BioWare's output since at least Mass Effect 2 (and that's being generous). Trent Oster, who did a lot of auxiliary and support work in the early going, founded Beamdog and devotes his time to resurrecting the spirit of the early Infinity Engine games. The two doctors who founded the company quit years ago. Lots of individual writers have scattered all over the place.

Even allowing for the team issue, BioWare 2017 simply isn't the same company as in 2009 when Dragon Age: Origins came out, let alone the BioWare that made their best two games (Baldur's Gate II and Knights of the Old Republic). They company is dead and not coming back. What we have left is a company which has been left a formula and is pumping out content in that formula in rote fashion to increasingly bland and sterile results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they reached that point years ago. The problem is that films, books and even TV shows can be sold on the name of their writers, showrunners or actors, but video games are made by much larger teams of people, often with job descriptions and overlapping responsibilities that can be hard to parse. Although there are video game designers whose names make people sit up and take notice, they're very much in a minority, so it's hard to use their names instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dawn of War III is out this week (appropriately). Early reviews say the gameplay is great and the multiplayer solid, but the SP campaign is very lacklustre and the game has removed the cover mechanic, which is pretty baffling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Werthead said:

I think they reached that point years ago.

Definitely. Which is why I think it's silly to go "person X left the company, they're never going to make a game as good as Y again". That's not to say individual talent doesn't count, but from the outside it's often very hard to tell what someone's contribution was beyond very specific stuff (e.g. writer X wrote character A and quest B).

 

Andromeda is not a bad game. It has issues, as all of Bioware's games have had. Only they tend to keep trying new things while sticking to some basic core principles (reasonably well developed supporting cast, central plot with lots of optional side content) so that every game has different issues. And every game is a betrayal of everything the company has stood for in the past, an abomination in the eyes of gods and men as well as a personal insult to the fan reviewer and their family. I remember people refusing to get the ToB expansion for BG2, because that messed with the perfection that was the base game, nevermind that said game needed fan-made fixes to address some of its issues that were never dealt with in official patches. When BG2 originally came out some people were up in arms about how the map was reduced to a handful of areas instead of the open world in BG1 that let you wander around and discover side content that way. DA2 was the worst thing ever, a sign of EA killing the company (and most of its issues were definitely down to publisher demands), but nowadays it's not unusual to see people refer to it as their favourite Bioware game, and why can't they make games like that anymore, dammit, etc.

 

That's obviously partly nostalgia, partly people having different preferences, and unless something obvious like the animation issues in MEA comes along for everybody to latch onto, complaints about what exactly is wrong with the latest game tend to vary. Too action-y - too slow; too big - too small; too much diversity - not enough diversity; not up to current technical standards - too much focus on graphics etc.

 

Thinking about it, I believe the core formula works extremely well for me, so I can usually roll with the issues I have with any particular game and focus on the stuff that it does well. In the case of Andromeda, that's one of the better cast of characters, plenty of humour and the best action gameplay Bioware has ever provided (barring possibly Shattered Steel, which I never played).

I'm still having plenty of fun discovering small side stories because I'm enjoying experimenting with the gameplay. If combat in this game was as boring or annoying as in ME1 or DA2 I'd probably be extremely bothered by the fact that many of these sidequests have the same structure of 'find 3-4 apparently randomly distributed objects on one of the planets, then proceed to a final place to finish up'. As I said in an earlier post, none of this side content is as bad as the worst of Inquisition, but considering that there's so much of it that the generously sized maps feel somewhat overstuffed, I am wondering why the hell at least half of these weren't cut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Werthead said:

The problem isn't the teams, it's the talent. A lot of the best guys at BioWare are gone. The guy who created and led development of Dragon Age walked out in a rage after being told that Dragon Age II would be a quickie console action game which had to be made in 9 months, and the series never recovered. Several of the guys who worked on the golden age period of BioWare quit and made The Banner Saga instead, the first two games of which comfortably dump over BioWare's output since at least Mass Effect 2 (and that's being generous). Trent Oster, who did a lot of auxiliary and support work in the early going, founded Beamdog and devotes his time to resurrecting the spirit of the early Infinity Engine games. The two doctors who founded the company quit years ago. Lots of individual writers have scattered all over the place.

Even allowing for the team issue, BioWare 2017 simply isn't the same company as in 2009 when Dragon Age: Origins came out, let alone the BioWare that made their best two games (Baldur's Gate II and Knights of the Old Republic). They company is dead and not coming back. What we have left is a company which has been left a formula and is pumping out content in that formula in rote fashion to increasingly bland and sterile results.

I think that's overstating things.

DA2, DA:I, and ME3 are still three of the best story-driven AAA games to come out in the past decade, even with their flaws. And The Banner Saga games are not remotely comparable games to them. I love both TBS games; but I beat the first one in 7 hours and the second one in 12 hours. The only gameplay system that matters is the combat; the caravan stuff doesn't actually. Most of the characters barely qualify as such, and the plot is primarily driven through narration. There's a fantastic plot and atmosphere to those games, but they are at such a smaller scope than Bioware's games that there's no comparison.

And modern Infinity Engine games feel dated as hell now. Ignoring writing entirely for a second, the moment-to-moment gameplay in Bioware games feels fun and is easy to learn. No its not as good as games dedicated entirely to the gameplay, but its far better than their old output and all these throw-back games. Take the new Shadowrun games, those are games I do like more than Bioware's games, but even there I'd admit Bioware's have more fun combat and exploration (Shadowrun has better dialog trees though, which are also gameplay).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just finished the Trespasser DLC of DA:I, and therefore the real ending of the game... and I'm just mind blown. That was, story-wise, the best thing in the Dragon Age games (although I haven't played all the DLCs in the previous ones). And the game experience was great too, certainly better than the boring exploration of open-world maps too big to be reasonably fun. I wish they had followed the same concept for the main game. Even for the story, Corypheus is just a shitty boring evil antagonist, compared to <SPOILER> in Trespasser. Very few encounters with the antagonist in a game left me with such a huge impact. Loved all the twists on the mythology, and the nuanced tragic character.

I was thinking to never buy a Bioware game again before the full-DLC edition (GOTY or whatever), but for DA4, if they ever make it, I might not hold... The cliffhanger is already killing me, and I hope the story lives up to the expectations of Trespasser. They can't do worse than Corypheus, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pliskin said:

I just finished the Trespasser DLC of DA:I, and therefore the real ending of the game... and I'm just mind blown. That was, story-wise, the best thing in the Dragon Age games (although I haven't played all the DLCs in the previous ones). And the game experience was great too, certainly better than the boring exploration of open-world maps too big to be reasonably fun. I wish they had followed the same concept for the main game. Even for the story, Corypheus is just a shitty boring evil antagonist, compared to <SPOILER> in Trespasser. Very few encounters with the antagonist in a game left me with such a huge impact. Loved all the twists on the mythology, and the nuanced tragic character.

I was thinking to never buy a Bioware game again before the full-DLC edition (GOTY or whatever), but for DA4, if they ever make it, I might not hold... The cliffhanger is already killing me, and I hope the story lives up to the expectations of Trespasser. They can't do worse than Corypheus, right?

I love this DLC, and it definitely sets things up for DA4 in a very interesting way. I'm hoping they'll allow that story to be a more personal one, less of an END OF THE WORLD FOREVER vibe. I liked a lot of the open world stuff in DA:I, but god knows the game would have been much better if they had cut about half the zones and sidequests and gave us more content like Trespasser.

Still chugging along with MEA. I've finished all the main planets' main quests and raised their viability, and so I've been doing a lot of the loyalty missions, allies and relationship quests, and even the main quest (gasp!). Although I do think some of the planets were very fun (Kadara comes to mind, and Arakis-I-mean-Elaaden and Havarl were fun to explore), this is really where the game shines. The writing tends to be better in the loyalty missions, you get important choices that can really define your Ryder, and the worldbuilding here is top notch- I've even been doing a couple of quests about tensions within the Kett that make them actually interesting villains. To anyone struggling with the game, I really recommend focusing on these missions. The never ending planet sidequests will still be there even after the game is over, I'm sure, if you want to do them then.

Overall, I agree with @Fez and @Jon AS rather than @Werthead about modern Bioware. Sure, maybe some of their best writers and most talented developers have left the company. But I still respect Bioware for constantly trying new things. Ok, maybe it doesn't always work (Andromeda is overall probably my least favourite Bioware game since Jade Empire). But I don't buy that they've been on this never-ending decline since BG2 or since EA bought them. DA2 was rushed, but it and DA:I have much better writing than Origins, IMO. Mass Effect 2 is my favorite Mass Effect game and possibly my favourite Bioware game, but I don't think ME3 was the giant step down for the series that many claim it is, ending warts and all. Maybe you could say that Bioware is stretched too thin now, working on Mass Effect and Dragon Age and a new IP and TOR, with the result that each game feels less coherent than they used to. But Bioware is still one of my favourite developers, and they've released some of my favourite games of the past ten years. I see no reason to give up on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree that bioware are in decline either. But that's probably because I never put them on a pedestal like some do. They've always been massively inconsistent.

There was Neverwinter Nights, though Bioware would say they released a toolset rather than a game, but the base campaign was awful. Jade Empire was lackluster and never grabbed me at all. DA2 was oddly paced with horrible combat. DA:I (some may disagree with me here) had cheesy as hell writing and seemed like one overlong fetch quest, and again had horribly oversimplified combat (at least the mobs weren't spawning everywhere though I guess). And ME3 was a big step down from ME2 and had that ending.

Now we've got ME:A, which is a massive tonal shift and has some terrible writing, but at least has the best gameplay / action of the series once in combat. I'm still on the fence whether if I care enough about the plot to be bothered finishing the game though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually really, really enjoyed Jade Empire. It was a fun game, even if it was a beat 'em up with dialogue trees rather than an RPG (there's no inventory to speak of and nothing to spend money on). From that angle it was a really solid game with a unique, colourful atmosphere and a pretty good plot twist. I've been disappointed they never went back to the same world again.

I think BioWare do their best work in the 20-30 hour space. More than that and they start to feel bloated (like DA:I and ME:A, and DA:O to a certain extent). But BG1, KotOR, ME1-3 and Jade Empire are all paced to perfection for that length of gameplay. The exception to this is BG2, which was a hell of a lot longer than 30 hours, but they made that work with the depth, richness and variety of the quests and characters, which they simply cannot replicate now (with modern 3D technology it'd take them 10 years to come close, hence just throwing in big areas and lots of MMORPG-lite fetch quests...although The Witcher 3 appears to have been in the same arena so maybe it was more possible).

I'd be happier with BioWare if they just went a bit smaller with their games. They made a conscious decision (or it was made for them by EA) that they had to be competing with Bethesda and that's really not where BioWare's strengths lie. In fact, Bethesda understand the limitations of the open world format and work within them. You can often polish off the main quests in their games in 10-15 hours if you go all-out on it and they have tons of side-content which is often better than the main quest. They do character and dialogue worse than BioWare though, so it's a case of the developers playing to their strengths, which BioWare has not been doing.

Quote

DA2, DA:I, and ME3 are still three of the best story-driven AAA games to come out in the past decade

I think this is pushing it, although Dragon Age 2  was certainly an excellent conceptual experiment (and the most interesting thing BioWare has done, possibly ever, even if it was born out of adversity).

It does depend on what you are looking for from an RPG though. For a mixture of production values, character, gameplay and storyline BioWare still have a good balance, but the problem (especially with the Frostbite games) is that they now have a shitton of bloat sitting on top of it and their writing is not as good as it was previously. Other games tend to be much better than BioWare in one or two of these areas but not all of them.

Bethesda games work far better as open-world titles and have better gameplay, but are weaker in character and storyline.

Many of the recent Kickstarted RPGs and their completely destroy BioWare when it comes to writing, dialogue and character but tend to have much less production value and more repetitive gameplay. Tyranny, arguably the least of the recent bunch of isometric RPGs, is still streets ahead of anything BioWare have done in the story and character space since at the very least Mass Effect 2, and Torment: Tides of Numenera and Pillars of Eternity are far better in that area. But their combat is indifferent, at best, and unnecessarily fiddly (the combat system used in PoE and Tyranny really needs to be fine-tuned and made more interesting). You also have Divinity: Original Sin, which has more interesting gameplay (especially physics/spell interaction, which is often mindblowing) but the story is much weaker than most BioWare games. But then D:OS was basically an extended demo for D:OS 2, which has a much more interesting team of writers on board, so that may change.

I think there have been several games which have done better than BioWare. Fallout: New Vegas has one of the most interesting array of characters and a really twisted story which is extremely reactive to your actions (on a real fundamental level, not the surface level BioWare employs). The game was bugged to fuckery and gone when it came out, though, and the production value of the game is lacking compared to Bethesda's own games, let alone BioWare. And of course you have The Witcher 3, which is basically squatting where BioWare used to live with a gauntlet thrown down to them to do better. I'd be interested to see if BioWare have been paying attention (given that The Witcher 3 has apparently comprehensively outsold Dragon Age: Inquisition, EA certainly has).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Werthead said:

[text]

That's more fair. I definitely wish Bioware returned to the 20-30 hour game space as well; DA:I and ME:A have far too much bloat. But if they did return to the ME2/ME3/DA2 formula, I'm not really looking for any other changes since I stand by what I said about those games. They have every element that I like in story-focused games, up to at least 'acceptable' levels of quality. And there's few other games that can say that. There's lots of games that do a few or even many of those elements better than Bioware, but not many get all of them. Bethesda sure can't; though Obsidian showed with Fallout: New Vegas that it is possible with those games. The Witcher 3 can, but it had its own flaws, so I'd put it on par; not 'better than.'

As for the Kickstarted RPGs, I've played almost all of them, and been somewhat-to-extremely disappointed with all of them. Even the writing is generally much weaker than Bioware. The problem with almost all the games (Pillars of Eternity, Tyranny, etc.) is that they do setup these interesting, detailed worlds; and then proceed to do nothing interesting with them. All the writing is focused on world-building instead of a plot. And the characters may have their own interesting backstories to reveal (depending on the game), but are usually almost completely separated from the goings on in the game as well. This is assuming they even try to have a plot and characters, and aren't entirely focused on gameplay. But I'd say those gameplay-focused ones are actually better, since at least there's some fun to be had in Divinity: Original Sin, Wasteland 2, etc.

There are exceptions, like the Shadowrun and The Banner Saga games, but even there the budget seams are so overwhelming on display at all times. I have not played Torment: ToN. I've learned my lesson and am waiting for a deep discount before giving it a shot.

 

Speaking of story-driven games though, one other one that seems excellent is Nier: Automata. Its not really comparable to these other games (although who knows, I'm only 4 hours in and at varying times its been an arcade shooter, a 2D platformer, a 3D platformer a twin-stick shooter, a 2D fighting game, a 3D character action game, and a bullet hell; it'd wouldn't be surprising at all if some of the character conversations started being super dialog-tree heavy), but its quite a thing so far. I did not much like the original Nier at all. I'm really liking this. Its fun to play, while the writing is somehow hitting a perfect combination between "weird and unsettling" and "playful and goofy."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23.4.2017 at 4:10 PM, Pliskin said:

They can't do worse than Corypheus, right?

I have really high hopes for the villain Trespasser sets up, but one thing I've learned is that you can always do worse.:P

20 hours ago, Werthead said:

I'd be happier with BioWare if they just went a bit smaller with their games.

The problem is that the last time they did that with DA2 they got a pretty scathing reaction. So the next DA game was almost the exact opposite of DA2 and it got a lot of critical acclaim and sold extremely well.

 

I'd disagree that PoE or the Witcher games blow Bioware's output away. The characters and story in PoE didn't engage me enough to actually motivate me to finish the game (kind of a rarity for me; with long video games I at the very least tend to fall for the sunk cost fallacy), and the Witcher franchise may be a series of fantasy RPGs, but it's pretty damn far from the Bioware style 'customisable main character with a gang of followers'.

 

Since we're on the subject, what is it that people tend to associate with Bioware games? As I said, to me there's mostly the core characters and the combination of linear story with plenty of optional content (which in their own IPs includes an impressive amount of worldbuilding).

Other than that, the games they have put out are a pretty diverse bunch.

E.g. the exploration of big, open maps in Inquisition and Andromeda is in some ways as much a throwback to the BG series as DAO's combat was, but I'd say you can't really draw a straight line from BG to NWN to KOTOR to JE to ME in terms of gameplay. The presentation has gotten more cinematic as technology improved, but they tried a lot of different things, creating games with various strengths and weaknesses along the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

64 hrs of game time, and I think I'm done with Andromeda. Finished the main story and all the major missions. Have only a bunch of tasks left and a couple of small missions. 

The highlights for me:

  • Great environment graphics, combat graphics (for the most part)
  • The Tempest and its crew. Cora is probably the dullest character among the squad mates, and I ended up romancing her, so it was all good in the end.
  • The size of each world - plenty of stuff to do. Havarl is still my least favorite of the planets
  • I liked the main story, particularly the ending, which had a lot of throwbacks to ME1, with a bit of ME2 and ME3 in there.
  • I liked the Ryder family secrets plot, even though I was very slow in getting through it.
    Spoiler

    I guess we'll find out who the Benefactor is in the sequel? The Illusive Man is the primary suspect. And I enjoyed hearing about the Reapers. Probably the thing I would be most excited about in a sequel is to see the Initiative at large learn about the Reapers.

     

  • The hints at what we'll get in the sequel:
    Spoiler

    a great war with the Kett Empire and the Quarian ark (possibly with a Reaper presence). Or is the Quarian ark going to be a DLC for this one?

     

Are any major characters liable to die in this one? Because I got through the whole thing unscathed.

Spoiler

Even Captain Dunn survived there at the end. I sided with Sloane on Kadara. The only recurring character that died was PeeBee's nemesis, forgot her name.

All in all, I got my money's worth out of it, but I agree that it merits less repeats than the OT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Corvinus said:

The size of each world - plenty of stuff to do. Havarl is still my least favorite of the planets

I thought Havarl was a nice change of pace from the other planets, and reasonably small.

2 hours ago, Corvinus said:

The hints at what we'll get in the sequel:

Pretty sure that was featured so prominently because it's planned as DLC.

2 hours ago, Corvinus said:

Are any major characters liable to die in this one?

I think you found the ones who can die. Seems that Bioware might have learned the lesson that only potentially killing off major characters creates a lot of headaches for any sequel.

 

One thing I'm really liking a lot in my replay are the various remnant Vaults, both major and minor. They're basically classic RPG dungeons, combining some combat, puzzles and exploration in a way none of the earlier games did.

If it wasn't for the boring random loot system you could even put cool stuff in them for the player to find.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm nowhere near the end of Andromeda... I just looked at the Time Played and realized I've already got 46 hours in.  (Which is more than I usually put into a game these days.)  So far, I've finished everything on Eos, Havarl, and Voeld.  That still leaves an awful lot of game for me... 

By and large, I like the game.  Driving around in the Pathfinder with the characters has some great interaction.  There was the series where Jaal is sleeping and it pisses Peebee off until she pretends to have sex with Ryder that I really liked and I also liked Drax and Jaal.  The conversation string where they compare fighting the Thresher Maw to Jaal having his heart broken and Drax just kind of quietly agrees was surprisingly good. 

Now that I have multiple skills, I like the combat quite a bit as well.  I was going with a lot of Vanguard action, but then I read about a Soldier build that uses Overload as a combo primer and Concussive Shot as a detonator with Turbocharge to take things down quickly I have hardly changed professions since.  I've also fiddled with an Infiltrator build that I have fun with as well.

The problem is the same that I have with other open world games.  Things are just too spread apart and while I was chasing down every last hexagonal waypoint on those three worlds, I was never going there organically.  I was just going because there was a dot telling me to do it.  The game does suffer because of it and I think the story thus far has suffered for it because the game can't maintain a sense of urgency while I'm heading from the SouthEast corner to the NorthWest corner to track down some lost drones, but that's a problem I have with all open world games.  The set pieces I have come across have been very good.  Honestly, the Kett base on Eos was every bit as good from a gameplay/combat standpoint as just about anything in the original trilogy.  Other parts really miss the mark, the hidden Angaran AI on Voeld had some potential, but felt tacked on and the choice I had to make really didn't have much weight because I wasn't invested in it.  The best comparison I have is the Project Overlord DLC where you build up everything about the Archer family and you already have background with the Geth.  When it comes down to making the decision to either keep David plugged in or send him off to Grissom Academy, you really feel like you have to be a sadistic asshole to make the first choice.  In this one, I had no background with the AI and therefore no real reason to feel strongly either way about the choice.  Just very weak in presentation, but strong in concept.

I assume that as I move forward from here, I will continue to chase those hexagons on my map because that's what I do... In the end, I think its a game that has the bones of something really enjoyable underneath but those bones have been scattered to the winds and its hard to recognize the skeleton they mean to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Rhom said:

I'm nowhere near the end of Andromeda... I just looked at the Time Played and realized I've already got 46 hours in.  (Which is more than I usually put into a game these days.)  So far, I've finished everything on Eos, Havarl, and Voeld.  That still leaves an awful lot of game for me... 

By and large, I like the game.  Driving around in the Pathfinder with the characters has some great interaction.  There was the series where Jaal is sleeping and it pisses Peebee off until she pretends to have sex with Ryder that I really liked and I also liked Drax and Jaal.  The conversation string where they compare fighting the Thresher Maw to Jaal having his heart broken and Drax just kind of quietly agrees was surprisingly good. 

Now that I have multiple skills, I like the combat quite a bit as well.  I was going with a lot of Vanguard action, but then I read about a Soldier build that uses Overload as a combo primer and Concussive Shot as a detonator with Turbocharge to take things down quickly I have hardly changed professions since.  I've also fiddled with an Infiltrator build that I have fun with as well.

This was pretty much my build over 90% of the game. I was actually getting annoyed that I kept racking up skill points near the end, because in my mind I was still playing like the old games (or other RPGs) basically stick with one class, and didn't care to have other skills. For a time I switched Overload for Flak Cannon, or Flamethrower, but I finished the main story with the overload. And in the end, shooting everything is still the best way to take things down, so Turbocharge is a must. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am feeling bad that I put ME:A down. I think once I finish Nier I'll be ready to go back to it as my main story-driven game to play. 

59 minutes ago, Rhom said:

 So far, I've finished everything on Eos, Havarl, and Voeld. 

That's what you think. Throughout the game you'll come across new quests taking you back to the old planets; long, long after you've hit 100% on habitability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...