Random video game news... renewed!

[Sven_]

1 hour ago, HoonDing said:

Avowed will sell millions. It's not like the Xbox beggars can be choosers.

Judging by everything shown so far, I'm going to stay with my prediction that Obsidian will be doing Fallout spinoffs in a few years time. Even if they manage to ramp up the excitement until release -- Fallout is just another level of popularity. Obsidian't aren't averse to doing Fallout stuff. And Bethesda just cannot provide two (or rather three) IPs by now themselves anymore. Dev cycles have become a bit of a joke themselves -- even BG3 was 6-7 years in active development, bespite the "DOS reskin" meme still going 'round. Contrast to that just 12-15 years ago -- Bioware managed to pump out the entire Mass Effect trilogy PLUS two Dragon Age games PLUS DLC for a single generation of console hardware still. And they weren't alone.

Even if Bethesda were to object -- master MS for sure won't. 11/11/11. Fallout 4: GOTY 2014 edition. Need I say more.  
 

Edited Saturday at 12:22 AM by Sven_

[Wormerine]

9 hours ago, Sven_ said:

even BG3 was 6-7 years in active development, bespite the "DOS reskin" meme still going 'round. Contrast to that just 12-15 years ago -- Bioware managed to pump out the entire Mass Effect trilogy PLUS two Dragon Age games PLUS DLC for a single generation of console hardware still. And they weren't alone.

hah Bringing BG3 as an example is an odd one, as the scale and complexity of the title makes its development cycle not that surprising - that they continue building on the same engine as D:OS, and kept studio identity didn't make it for quicker development. "D:OS reskin" complaints are complaints about creative direction, not reuse of code or assets - at least as far as reality is concerned.

I think there is something to be said for simpler titles like Mass Effect or Dragon Ages, but also there is little direct comparison between the two. And even if Obsidian gets keys to Fallout, I somewhat doubt they will suddenly pull off a massive AAA RPG - they just don't seem build to do massive productions. And in my book it's a good thing, but I am not sure how kindly wider public would take to Fallout on a scale of the Outer Worlds. Or Fallout not being moddable  - and for that Obsidian would probably need to use Bethesda's engine, might might be tricky unless Bethesda does Fallout5 first.

I also would like to mention that there was a far smaller jump from Fallout3 to Obsidian Fallout, than there would be Fallout4 to Obsidian fallout, or likely whatever Fallout5 turns out to be.

And if I was in Obsidian shoes I would also be weary of becoming "Bethesda support studio". They have their own thing going on, and I think it would be wisest course for them to keep it going. If they do Fallout, I think it would be beneficial to really differenciate it from Bethesda releases.

Edited Saturday at 09:58 AM by Wormerine

[Lexx]

Tbh, for me BG3 is too big already. Those 100+ hours behemoths are a tough sell on me now. I'd rather have a shorter game with way more story branching. Imo this is what Outer Worlds did well. Or Alpha Protocol back in the days.

[Wormerine]

18 hours ago, Lexx said:

Tbh, for me BG3 is too big already. Those 100+ hours behemoths are a tough sell on me now. I'd rather have a shorter game with way more story branching.

Did you try it? I don't think length is a problem in this case - it is a big game, but there is no padding. While Outer Worlds was much shorter, it did start to overstay its welcome for me, especially with DLCs, and in spite of many complaints I made about BG3, that is not something I can accuse them off.

I don't mean to oppose that mid size titles have a lot of appeal, and shouln't be forgoten about, just that comparing BG3 to Dragon Ages or Mass Effect is a bit riddiculous. Yes, FromSoft spend more time on their DLC to Elden Ring, than on any other DLC for their previous titles - but the end result isn't comparable either (whenever it is good or bad is another discussion).

Edited Sunday at 11:14 AM by Wormerine

[MrBrown]

7 hours ago, Wormerine said:

Did you try it? I don't think length is a problem in this case - it is a big game, but there is no padding. While Outer Worlds was much shorter, it did start to overstay its welcome for me, especially with DLCs, and in spite of many complaints I made about BG3, that is not something I can accuse them off.

The padding in BG3 was all those empty containers you had to shift through to find the ones with something in them.

Remove those, halves the game time.

[Wormerine]

2 minutes ago, MrBrown said:

The padding in BG3 was all those empty containers you had to shift through to find the ones with something in them.

You know the highlight feature tells you which ones are important - a much needed improvement from D:OS2 that would highlight every single irrelevant object.

While I never run into an issue myself of sifting through containers looking for trash, I do think it tappes into another issue I had - the Ultima inspired systemic design not quite having a point in BG3. Systemic design is only interesting if it leads to emergent gameplay - and while BG3 definitely has that, it also has fairly little of it, considering how many systems they have. All containers being physical objects that can be moved and opened is something I don't think contributed much. Yeah, you can stack them up to climb things - but there are so many easier ways of getting places - superman jump including.