Jump to content
Inigima

Video Games: It's On Like Donkey Kong

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Ferrum Aeternum said:

Oblivion was a much smoother combat experience, which was very exciting at the time. But compared to MW the game felt smaller and more limited even though the explorable land mass was actually larger. The Oblivion Gate dynamic also bored me to death. Felt like a lazy substitute for actual creative plotting. Oh, and the "fully voiced" game contained about 20 voice actors, which for me was unintentionally comic. 

Overall, Skyrim was a much better game and one I spent a great deal more time messing around in (and still do to this day). But Morrowind had much more depth to its story than the other two, plus a feeling of raw exploration and natural progression that hasn't been topped yet by any subsequent Bethesda game IMO. 

I'd forgotten this. The fully voiced dialogue bugged me for awhile because it limited dialogue options, but the horrendous voice acting and low number of voice actors really ruined the immersion. Skyrim was better at this (not a ton, but good enough).

These are areas where the Witcher 3 really outshines the competition, I guess. Great voice acting, cities and towns feels alive and have atmosphere. Part of it is that the developers realize we don't have to talk to every person in every town. At first, I thought that choice (of not being able to talk to every NPC) would be limiting, but it actually was an example of streamlining that helped open world games. It made you realize how many people you walk by in every day life without talking to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Werthead said:

Yup. I'd say the order was Morrowind > Skyrim > Oblivion. I count Daggerfall and Arena as out of the question as they are too archaic and different to the later games.

(for their other series it's more like Fallout: New Vegas > Fallout > Fallout 2 > Fallout 3 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fallout 4)

Fallout over Fallout 2? That seems like a bold choice. Otherwise I fully agree.

I think the big thing about Morrowind was that even though actual combat was pretty subpar (though it didn't seem it at the time), it allowed such a freedom of character building, exploration, and movement. You could do stuff like permanently levitate high above the ground, or jump insane distances; and the world felt so unique and interesting. There were also a ton of mods that made all sorts of improvements to the game, including much more advanced AI scripts for NPCs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rampage reviews rolling in finally (never a very good sign having them come out just a day or 2 before release). Again the video game review curse not broken. But there's a chance 2018 will have the best and 2nd best reviewed video game adaptation movies ever. And then there's Ready Player One being a movie about a video game. So things aren't all bad.

But I also remember Prince of Persia sitting at about 60% on Rotten Tomatoes with early reviews for a while and people actually believing it would break the curse, but it ended up on 36%. So I have a feeling Rampage will only go down from its current 53%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i never played Morrowind so can't comment there. Got a 360 and Oblivion was one of the first games I got next to Gears. Had a blast with Oblivion. If I somehow had a time log that recorded the days, hours, minutes, and seconds I put into every game I ever played I can guarantee Oblivion would be in my top ten. The bugs created some funny situations in combat, but I think it made the game unique. One of my favorite quests of all time is an Oblivion classic, Whodunnit?

I agree that while Skyrim was gorgeous to look at, the gameplay, quests, voice acting, is stale. This also hit me while playing Fallout 4. Same ole shit. Seems like a Bethesda issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, l2 0 5 5 said:

i never played Morrowind so can't comment there. Got a 360 and Oblivion was one of the first games I got next to Gears. Had a blast with Oblivion. If I somehow had a time log that recorded the days, hours, minutes, and seconds I put into every game I ever played I can guarantee Oblivion would be in my top ten. The bugs created some funny situations in combat, but I think it made the game unique. One of my favorite quests of all time is an Oblivion classic, Whodunnit?

I agree that while Skyrim was gorgeous to look at, the gameplay, quests, voice acting, is stale. This also hit me while playing Fallout 4. Same ole shit. Seems like a Bethesda issue. 

I'm the same.  Never played Morrowind and my first PS3 game was Oblivion.  I fell in love with the series at that point.  It was the first game I played like that, 1st person RPG, that I could just go anywhere.  At the time I was playing mostly turn based RPG's and Madden.  Never did beat the game due to stupid AI at one point that I couldn't keep alive, but I will say it had one of my all time favorite expansions, The Shivering Isles.

I love Skyrim, but the world itself feels very empty.  Nothing you do seems to make a difference.  It did fix the weird level up design of Oblivion in which you had to be careful what skills you leveled so you didn't screw yourself over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Far Cry 5 has absolutely the most dogshit excuse for an ending of any game I've ever played. It's hilariously, hilariously awful. This game was written by some kind of edgelord 15 year old probably self-pleasuring himself with how dark he's being.

Absolutely jaw-dropping. Far Cry 3 and 4 had issues in writing and tone but they also got over themselves (4 especially). 5 is fucking ridiculous.

It also means that Far Cry 6 is going be:

Some kind of crappy

Fallout clone.

Unless they retcon the ending, which is possible.

4 hours ago, A True Kaniggit said:

Between Fallout 3 and New Vegas. I'd say New Vegas has the better gameplay. While Fallout 3 had the better story. 

...Fallout 3 had a story?

Quote

 

Again the video game review curse not broken.

 

WarCraft was a perfectly okay, popcorn-disposable slice of hokum. I mean, we're still waiting for a video game movie that's "actually pretty good" (I have hopes for the Firewatch movie, if it happens) rather than "okay", but they've not all been unwatchable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Fiddler said:

I'm the same.  Never played Morrowind and my first PS3 game was Oblivion.  I fell in love with the series at that point.  It was the first game I played like that, 1st person RPG, that I could just go anywhere.  At the time I was playing mostly turn based RPG's and Madden.  Never did beat the game due to stupid AI at one point that I couldn't keep alive, but I will say it had one of my all time favorite expansions, The Shivering Isles.

I love Skyrim, but the world itself feels very empty.  Nothing you do seems to make a difference.  It did fix the weird level up design of Oblivion in which you had to be careful what skills you leveled so you didn't screw yourself over.

Oblivion was like a really warty version of Morrowind, for you guys who didn't play the latter. Most fans I think were annoyed with it at the time for things like the level scaling and some of the cheap production elements, but it was a fine game with problems whereas Skyrim is just a cold and detached experience.

Speaking of cold and detached, I think the best winter experience I've had from a game had to be the Tomb Raider sequel from a few years back. I'm trying to think of another game that actually made me feel cold and snowbound and I'm really struggling. That's weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After thinking about it for a while I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Far Cry 5's ending is vastly worse than Mass Effect 3 or Fallout 3's (before it was patched). I'm actually impressed at how monumentally Ubisoft managed to fuck this up. Wow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Werthead said:

...Fallout 3 had a story?.

Compared to New Vegas? Where you are a UPS driver who, upon surviving a gunshot wound to the head while OTJ, ends up completely overhauling the political structure of the territory you work, in your pursuit of delivering a package?

Tom Hanks wouldn't have done as much. 

Edited by A True Kaniggit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:

Compared to New Vegas? Where you are a UPS driver who, upon surviving a gunshot wound to the head while OTJ, ends up completely overhauling the political structure of the territory you work, in your pursuit of delivering a package?

Tom Hanks wouldn't have done as much. 

What about Kevin Costner then?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ramsay B. said:

What about Kevin Costner then?

 

Only if Morgan Freeman is around to help. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:

Compared to New Vegas? Where you are a UPS driver who, upon surviving a gunshot wound to the head while OTJ, ends up completely overhauling the political structure of the territory you work, in your pursuit of delivering a package?

Tom Hanks wouldn't have done as much. 

That does make sense though. Someone tries to kill you, you decide to find out why and you have to decide what to do about it. And unlike Fallout 3 or 4, your choice about what you choose to do has massive resonance and consequences.

Also, the idea that you are just a nobody is put to rest in the DLCs, where you find out how your life intertwines with that of Ulysses, the main antagonist of the DLCs, and you discover why he's obsessed and furious with you (and there's a nice meta-statement to how you were just a random NPC in someone else's RPG that kind of went badly wrong for them).

New Vegas's story is actually pretty damn good, with a lot happening under the hood and incredible freedom given to you: if you want to go off and murder the main bad guy like 30% of the way through the game, there is nothing stopping you, if you can pull it off, and the story adjusts.

Fallout 3, on the other hand, has you following your dad out into the wasteland, getting involved in stuff that has nothing whatsoever to do that until right at the end when you get to fight with Optimus Prime and the inexplicably noble and good Brotherhood of Steel (I get the impression Fallout 3's writers had never played FO1 or 2, only heard about them by hearsay) and then you have to go and commit suicide for absolutely no discernible reason.

The ending to Fallout 3 was so bad they had to retcon it out of existence in the DLC, which is definitely a problem that New Vegas did not have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

Speaking of cold and detached, I think the best winter experience I've had from a game had to be the Tomb Raider sequel from a few years back. I'm trying to think of another game that actually made me feel cold and snowbound and I'm really struggling. That's weird.

The Long Dark is good at that if you haven't tried it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This reading of the ending of Far Cry 5 actually sounds half-convincing, which isn't necessarily a good reason to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, Werthead said:

That does make sense though. Someone tries to kill you, you decide to find out why and you have to decide what to do about it. And unlike Fallout 3 or 4, your choice about what you choose to do has massive resonance and consequences.

Also, the idea that you are just a nobody is put to rest in the DLCs, where you find out how your life intertwines with that of Ulysses, the main antagonist of the DLCs, and you discover why he's obsessed and furious with you (and there's a nice meta-statement to how you were just a random NPC in someone else's RPG that kind of went badly wrong for them).

New Vegas's story is actually pretty damn good, with a lot happening under the hood and incredible freedom given to you: if you want to go off and murder the main bad guy like 30% of the way through the game, there is nothing stopping you, if you can pull it off, and the story adjusts.

Fallout 3, on the other hand, has you following your dad out into the wasteland, getting involved in stuff that has nothing whatsoever to do that until right at the end when you get to fight with Optimus Prime and the inexplicably noble and good Brotherhood of Steel (I get the impression Fallout 3's writers had never played FO1 or 2, only heard about them by hearsay) and then you have to go and commit suicide for absolutely no discernible reason.

The ending to Fallout 3 was so bad they had to retcon it out of existence in the DLC, which is definitely a problem that New Vegas did not have.

I remember FO 3 like this:

Genius scientist Liam Neeson is on the verge of a major breakthrough that will improve the lives of thousands. However, unable to deal with the death of his wife, he takes his newborn child somewhere safe and abandons the project. Years later he finally decides to go back and finish the project, leaving behind his child.

You, the child, then go on a quest to find your father, and once you find him you help him finish the project. I didn't have to commit suicide since I had a companion that could survive radioactivity.

This story to me makes more sense than Super FedEx Soldier nation building. (I never had that DLC you mentioned, so going off the base game of New Vegas The Couriers actions are odd)

Edited by A True Kaniggit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

Speaking of cold and detached, I think the best winter experience I've had from a game had to be the Tomb Raider sequel from a few years back. 

Oh definitely! I'm actually playing this game right now. Some things about the first reboot were better, but I love the environments in this one. I cringe ever time Lara has to jump in water (though I like the animation of her wringing her hair out after for some reason). I also noticed that there is a costume where she wears a henley sweater and no jacket; what kind of monster would make her wear that?!

The later stages of Journey have some really effective use of snow, especially in conjunction with the multiplayer.

Edited by Alcibiades

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fallout New Vegas, to me, had a better story than Fallout 3, but I liked the setting of Fallout 3 better.  Moving through the bombed out ruins of Washington DC was fantastic.

The problem both 3 and 4 had is that you can't build an RPG around your character desperately trying to find someone and give them all these side quests to do.  It never makes sense why in 3 I stopped looking for my dad to help research a book.  This was especially egregious in 4.  At least in New Vegas, a lot of the side stuff seemed to flow along the path you are on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, A True Kaniggit said:

I remember FO 3 like this:

Genius scientist Liam Neeson is on the verge of a major breakthrough that will improve the lives of thousands. However, unable to deal with the death of his wife, he takes his newborn child somewhere safe and abandons the project. Years later he finally decides to go back and finish the project, leaving behind his child.

You, the child, then go on a quest to find your father, and once you find him you help him finish the project. I didn't have to commit suicide since I had a companion that could survive radioactivity.

This story to me makes more sense than Super FedEx Soldier nation building. (I never had that DLC you mentioned, so going off the base game of New Vegas The Couriers actions are odd)

Clearly you did not play the game at release. This was not an option.

Also, the basic plot of Fallout more or less makes sense, but the world doesn't. Not just in the sense of how it doesn't connect properly to the lore established in earlier games, but also just in basic worldbuilding. For instance, it's been 200 years since the bombs dropped, yet most survivors act like its something that's happened within living memory. Except for a handful of locations that for no discerenable reason do acknowledge that it's been a long time. And the writing is mostly just awful (a handful of quests are decent) all over the place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Fez said:

Clearly you did not play the game at release. This was not an option.

Also, the basic plot of Fallout more or less makes sense, but the world doesn't. Not just in the sense of how it doesn't connect properly to the lore established in earlier games, but also just in basic worldbuilding. For instance, it's been 200 years since the bombs dropped, yet most survivors act like its something that's happened within living memory. Except for a handful of locations that for no discerenable reason do acknowledge that it's been a long time. And the writing is mostly just awful (a handful of quests are decent) all over the place.

Moira Brown and the Wasteland Surivial Guide don't do it for ya?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Werthead said:

Far Cry 5 has absolutely the most dogshit excuse for an ending of any game I've ever played. It's hilariously, hilariously awful. This game was written by some kind of edgelord 15 year old probably self-pleasuring himself with how dark he's being.

Absolutely jaw-dropping. Far Cry 3 and 4 had issues in writing and tone but they also got over themselves (4 especially). 5 is fucking ridiculous.

It also means that Far Cry 6 is going be:

 

  Hide contents

Some kind of crappy

Fallout clone.

 

Unless they retcon the ending, which is possible.

...Fallout 3 had a story?

WarCraft was a perfectly okay, popcorn-disposable slice of hokum. I mean, we're still waiting for a video game movie that's "actually pretty good" (I have hopes for the Firewatch movie, if it happens) rather than "okay", but they've not all been unwatchable.

The Secret of Monkey Island had a good film adaption. Ok, they called it Pirates of the Carribean, but still.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×