Mikeymoonshine

I'm just imagining if it had gone the way you are saying it should have. We would probably be listening to a bunch of people complaining about how it was leftist propaganda and "I don't want politics in my video games" ect ect. I don't think it's lacking in layers just because it's light hearted anyway. It makes all kinds of criticisms of capitalism. A lot of the things the board have done may seem silly but they are real things that real cooperations actually do.

Maybe the writers of the outer worlds know what communism is and that's what is at work here? I think the humour is ok, it's not like the game is a riot but it's funny in places. Though this claim that every character is coming out with one liners all the time is just not true. Most of the characters are not "comedy characters". I felt POE could have actually had more comedy to make it less bleak, especially the first one even though I think overall the first is a better game than the second

Safe and unimaginative how? You not liking the jokes does not mean the writing is "safe and unimaginative" it means you don't like the joke? Safe compared to what? Unimaginative compared to what? Where did the writers go wrong? How would you have done it? Most quests in video games can be considered "fetch quests" but there are plenty of quests that do not involve going and getting an item and almost every quest has some kind of plot, choices, tells a story ect. No the factions do not just boil down corporations vs rebels, but sure in a game that centres around that conflict most of the relevant factions are invested in that conflict somehow. Enemy Veriety could be better I agree, what RPG with big open areas is not filled with marauders or bandits or something like that though? At least this game does give you a reason for why there are so many. There could be some more interesting perks like New Vegas, that's a legitimate criticism. Calling the skill system "bare bones" is nonsensical though. A gun is still a gun, you can still use it with low gun skills. I do think there could be a whole lot of tweaking to the balance though the game is a bit too easy and supernova difficulty is more just annoying that anything. Seems like your issue with the writing is that you don't personally like the writing style. That's not the same as it being bad writing. Bad writing is plots that don't make any sense, characters that are one dimensional ect ect.

I think you missed that person's point. They were saying Bethesda games are mediocre these days. Cyberpunk is completely irrelevant to that point. Though if we are comparing. Obsidian didn't include third person because it wasn't in the budget to have two perspectives, CDPR didn't because of their "artistic vision". They have even removed all the cut scenes they made in third person and replaced them with first person ones apparently. So just like Outer World's we won't be seeing the character we made outside of a menu. I hope that game gets the amount of flack this one is getting for that. Disclaimer: I don't hate cdpr and will probably still get cyberpunk.

Obsidian likely had little or no say in the epic deal, its Private Division you should be mad at and to be honest they just did what was financially in their best interest. While I think that was a bad descisions it's epic offering these silly deals that are difficult to refuse because it's pretty much a gaurentee that you won't make a massive loss. I like the colour palette but I agree that a saturation slider would have been a good idea.

Well there would also be "go talk to someone" quests but sure all quests are basically fetch quests or similar. I was talking more about how the setups and twists of some of the quests in the game are a little clichéd. No more than any other RPG I can think of though. Some of the criticisms I've been seeing of this game are odd. Complaining about fetch quests implies "collect ten of random item that has nothing to do with anything to advance plot" there's nothing like that in this game I can think of. The closest is bounties I guess and even those quests provide exposition.

I'm sure I remember reading that they are open to making dlc for the game but there isn't any that was already being made or planned before release. It seems like it was very well received, I don't know if that translates to good enough sales for dlc but if it did I imagine they will make some.

Spoilers obviously for this part of the story. So In Roseway with the three scientists you can either give them their research or sell it to Gladys to complete the quests and with the other two there are ways to resolve their quests with them and still selling their research. This quest though it seems like you either give it back to him or the quest is marked as "botched" it just seems odd to me. Even though there are interactions for refusing to give it back to him or reporting him. You can even get the force pistol off him and sell the research but the quest still shows up as botched. Am I missing something or is this just how it is for this quest? It's not even that much of a bother to me I just find it odd that the other two have alternative ways to end the quest.

No, but I somewhat understand this criticism in that most of the quests in this game are pretty steroitypical RPG setups. I just don't think it matters, the focus here was on making the NPC's interesting, sending you to a location to explore and giving multiple ways of solving most quests. Still some of the quests could be a bit better.

I think it's accepting a quest that involves an NPC in that town.

I don't want to give the impression I hate mass Effect or bioware games in general. I don't, my issue was that rpgs are moving more towards that style. Opting for a more defined character and dumbing down RPG elements. Doesn't mean those games are bad but I do prefer to make most of the choices for what kind of role I play in a roleplaying game. I did kind of hate Fallout 4 though, it was just so boring to me. People criticising the wringing in this thread still seem very averse to making any kind of specific criticism. I feel like maybe their problem is to do with certain kinds of female characters that they dislike for political reasons but I try not to assume that kind of thing of people. If that is the case though, the entire game is not just one character that you personally dislike. Also I agree that despite Kotor 2 being one of my favourite games ever the early levels of the game are really quite bad.

If you mean me the OP mentioned Bioware and Bethesda games, I responded to several points of criticism not you or anyone else specifically. "Tumblr style writing" as a criticism says more about you than it does about the game in my opinion. When I said I don't want it to be like Bioware and Bethesda I meant in terms of how much the game let's you roleplay/how much control over your character it gives you. That's all I was referring to.

I don't understand how you can say this game lacks roleplaying compared to games like fallout 4. Seems like you think roleplaying is having a character who is already a well defined character to some extent like Shepard or Hawke. They said ages ago that there wouldn't be romance, it's a low budget game and they didn't want to half ass it. You can befriend at least one of your companions in their personal quest. Idk about the others because I've not done much of them yet. Not liking the humour is an opinion but it's an incredibly meaningless critique to say it's "try hard". There's no way to argue with it, I just don't agree. You can also be of the opinion that the writing is bad but it's a minority opinion. What is specifically bad about the writing compared to other games? Like pretty much all obsidian games it starts slow, the first area is a little slow and the story hasn't really gotten going yet. I'd say New Vegas did that part better but then Kotor 2 was a lot worse when it came to the first area not being as good as the rest of the game. So maybe play it some more? Or go play a bioware game and just accept that this isn't for you. These kinds of games with this level of stats, dialogue options, customisation ect aren't made very much anymore. I'm glad Obsidian is still making them, stop asking them to make their games more like Bioware and Bethesda games. They are just dumbed down compared to this.

I got it on ms store, I can relate to not wanting to use epic. I don't like being pressured into using someone's store like this, but it's not the dev's fault. You could always just use gamepass and then buy it on steam in a year's time.

I also only got a small download but that was a couple of days ago. I'll check if there is more available when I get home. Edit: I managed to preload by selecting "update" like someone above said but I had to go onto the main page for the game on the store to get that option.

I haven't heard many criticisms of the game that weren't things that were intentional and not to the critics taste or stuff that is a result of the small budget like the areas being a bit small. Some critics had some issues with combat but then some loved it. I heard one critic say the reputation system could have been more meaningful. All in all a pretty amazing result for this game.

Well they seem to be picking games that are getting a lot of buzz from the gaming communities. A lot of these deals are obviously very last minute as a few of these games were already announced as being on Steam before they became EIC exclusives. They want to attract dedicated gamers to their service, people who don't just play fortnite. As for being the service without all the trash, isn't gog already that service?

I really liked the start menu, the concept art in the loading screens, the environment and character designs in fact everything looked great. That city seems a bit empy, plus mostly only static npcs, I feel like that ruins it a bit. The quest looked interesting, the combat looked good but that character was very OP (i imagine that was just for the demo). Those companions seem ok but there isn't a lot to go on. It didn't feel that immersive to me like I didn't feel that interested in what was going on, maybe just because it doesn't have VO yet. So mostly good but they really didn't show a lot.

As many have already pointed out every time a comment like this comes up, obsidian probably didn't have a say in this. From the adverting it seems they were under the impression it would be on Steam and not be an epic exclusive.

Well that doesn't describe me at all but isn't forcing those gamers to use a platform they don't want to where they can't do all those things a bad thing? It's an entire year before this game comes to other platforms, that's pretty terrible for anyone who is invested in steam or gog or whatever else. That's why people are saying this is "anti consumer" because this isn't a move to attract more people to epic, it's a move to force more people to use epic or miss out.

Isn't this kind of thing just going to lead to more exclusives? This probably means less competitive pricing, no need to sell the product cheaper than the other store if your store is the only place the product can be baught. I'm really not a big fan of steam at all. Gog just seems to work better on my pc than steam ever did and steam is full of absolute trash which makes finding good games that are not already well known pretty hard. Maybe stronger competition will force steam to do better I guess? Somehow I doubt it.

Changed my mind, I may not bother with this one now.

It's interesting that we have the opposite opinion on this. I do think the ship was lacklustre and a lot of the features were not very good. As for the endless paths that was a crowd funding bonus thing. Deadfire had Fulvano's voyage as it's bonus (Dunnage, The Drowned Barrows, Ori O Koiki, Crookspur and splintered reef) A lot of good content there though then again without that content the game would feel a tad empty and the same can't be said for the endless paths. As I and others have said I found the micromanaging of the keep to be incredibly annoying where as the ship it's only slightly annoying. I do think you have a good point about resting bonuses and there could have been more ship upgrades available that did stuff like that. The ship does have things like merchants, visitors, other ship encounters ect they just are dotted around the map because it's a ship. I do think that a lot of them are not that interesting but they are nowhere near as awful as the repetitive and pointless stuff that happened at the keep. It's a shame the sea monsters goal was never reached though, it really feels like there should be more sea monsters in deadfire.

I'm not buying this on epic either. I just don't want to use it, I put up with origin for disappointing bioware games and I'm sick of that, not gonna do the same with epic. So it's ms store or waiting for me too. It's a shame I was hoping this would be on gog.

POE1 has a better main quest IMO, Deadfire's is short, Eothas and the gods are too vague and irritating as major players, the hunt for Theos was at least a compelling mystery. I think the feel of the POE1 is just better, Deadfire kind of feels like a pretty dark game that's trying to be more campy and joyful but fails. POE1 is a dark game with the occasional light-hearted or comedic moment. The companions are better in the first game because there isn't the terrible relationship system which basically just results in companions getting upset over anything you say that doesn't support their worldview. Pallegina and Maia are too faction focused and feel less like a unique person and more like cheerleaders for their faction, I think this is just because the game is so focused on factions but its a shame because Pallegina didn't feel like that in the first game. The companions in general are just meh in deadfire and a lot of the more interesting ones are just sidekicks eg Ydwin, Rekke, Vatnir, even Mirke and Fassina are better then Aloth and Xoti in deadfire. Aloth and Pallegina were both more interesting and less annoying in the first game and Eder is more or less the same but with a less interesting quest. I do think Tekehu is a great character though. Deadfire looks better (like really the art style in this game is amazing), The combat is more fun now it's been patched, it has portraits and VO for most characters which helps make a lot of the minor characters more memorable. I do like the factions on the whole, I had some problems with how they were handled but each have interesting characters and interesting quests. This is a lot better than any of the factions in the first game but then that game didn't focus the majority of it's content on factions. Deadfire has subclasses and multiclassing and this just makes character creation a lot more fun. Though it's a shame for casters (other than wizards) that you now can only pick two or three spells per power level. Neketaka is amazing as a main city where as POE1 has Defiance Bay which is ok but generic and Twin Elms which is an interesting setting but felt underdone. POE1 had better dungeon crawling but I kind of prefer the island exploration to having a mega dungeon and a few other large dungeons. The ship micromanaging > Caed Nua micromanaging though neither is the best thing ever the ship's feels a lot more rewarding if you bother with it. Loot is better in deadfire too, there's a lot more of it and upgrading it is better as well. I think I on the whole enjoyed the side quests in deadfire more but it's close, The DLC in deadfire is more varied but I would have preferred larger DLCs so I think it kind of matches the first game. Deadfire is just a more interesting setting, with more varied cultures and more memorable characters. Both games have different strengths but I'd say I prefer Deadfire considering everything.