Syraxis Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 they had to tear it apart and reorder everything in order to do so Or strip it down in its entirety.
Hurlshort Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Are you two just making stuff up? How does that make the game less successful?
Nepenthe Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Are you two just making stuff up? How does that make the game less successful? It's less 1337. And these guys are so 1337 they sh*t binary. You're a cheery wee bugger, Nep. Have I ever said that? Reapercussions
HoonDing Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 You do realize that in FO3, you can start with a base 25 skill in small guns and completely max the skill without ever spending an actual level up skill point on it. Even with a 1 in Intelligence it is theoretically possible to max out all skills in FO3... The ending of the words is ALMSIVI.
WILL THE ALMIGHTY Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 That's just sad. :/ "Alright, I've been thinking. When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade - make life take the lemons back! Get mad! I don't want your damn lemons, what am I supposed to do with these? Demand to see life's manager. Make life rue the day it thought it could give Cave Johnson lemons. Do you know who I am? I'm the man who's gonna burn your house down! With the lemons. I'm going to to get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that burns your house down!"
Purkake Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Anyone who has problems with having Int 1 and being able to max out your skills in FO3 needs a hobby, preferably multiple ones, now.
vault_overseer Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Anyone who has problems with having Int 1 and being able to max out your skills in FO3 needs a hobby, preferably multiple ones, now. No, it's an absolutely valid and easy to make point. It proves that the game mechanics are broken, that's a huge problem in an RPG.
Purkake Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Yet it doesn't make the game any less playable, just easier.
alanschu Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 I disagree that that proves the game mechanics are broken.
vault_overseer Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Yet it doesn't make the game any less playable, just easier. For some, it does, as it makes the game much less enjoyable. For some, it's a huge drawback and I can absolutely see where they're coming from. It doesn't bother me that much, but I can't say it doesn't bother me at all.
Nepenthe Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Anyone who has problems with having Int 1 and being able to max out your skills in FO3 needs a hobby, preferably multiple ones, now. I agree. Anyone who goes through the hoops of maxing their skills in FO3 with an int 1 character needs a couple of more. You're a cheery wee bugger, Nep. Have I ever said that? Reapercussions
Purkake Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 If for someone, the game is ultimately about the stats, they are doing it wrong. Nothing wrong with disliking it, but as I implied before, it's just nitpicking. And, for full disclosure, I did not like FO3 as a game.(it had nothing to do with being able to max out all my skills with Int 1, though)
Hurlshort Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 I pay very little attention to stats in single player RPG's. If you really are concerned with min/maxing and all that junk, go play MMO's where the entire game is designed around it.
vault_overseer Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 If for someone, the game is ultimately about the stats, they are doing it wrong. Nothing wrong with disliking it, but as I implied before, it's just nitpicking. And, for full disclosure, I did not like FO3 as a game.(it had nothing to do with being able to max out all my skills with Int 1, though) It's just one of many problems with the game. Obviously, on its own, it wouldn't be that big of a deal, but when combined with many other problems, its annoyance multiplies exponentially.
Purkake Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Then why did you say that it makes the game "much less enjoyable", on it's own it is totally irrelevant, just another nitpick to throw on the "Bethesda hate pile".
vault_overseer Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Then why did you say that it makes the game "much less enjoyable", on it's own it is totally irrelevant, just another nitpick to throw on the "Bethesda hate pile". Because it does, for some people.
Slowtrain Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 I don't think you can say it is a broken system, since Bethesda most likely intentionally designed it that way. SO it is working as intended, ie not broken. However, I would certainly wonder why one would spend time developing a skill system and then make design choices that render that skill system meaningless. If you don't want gamers to be limited be a skill system fine. Lots of great games don't have skill systems. But then why spend time devolping and implementing one in the first place? Notice how I can belittle your beliefs without calling you names. It's a useful skill to have particularly where you aren't allowed to call people names. It's a mistake to get too drawn in/worked up. I mean it's not life or death, it's just two guys posting their thoughts on a message board. If it were personal or face to face all the usual restraints would be in place, and we would never have reached this place in the first place. Try to remember that.
alanschu Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 However, I would certainly wonder why one would spend time developing a skill system and then make design choices that render that skill system meaningless. I still disagree that the system is "meaningless." It's pretty obvious what it does, and that if you spend points in a particular skill you'll get better at it. You don't start the game off with 100 in every skill, and on my playthrough I only hit 100 in small guns. If I metagame and/or am fully exploratory, then yeah, I'll have a lot of skill points. It's just the game rewarding a player for being thorough, it doesn't make the skill system meaningless.
Gorgon Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 The skill points are unbalanced, I think everyone agrees and Special points should not be purchasable every level. FO2 had some pretty funny dialogue options if you had 1 int. Personally I'm not a fan of point buy systems at all. I usually cheat so I can get my character the way I want. With FO3 there was just no need, it was mind numbingly easy once you had hamstered enough gear and enough levels. Na na na na na na ... greg358 from Darksouls 3 PVP is a CHEATER. That is all.
Slowtrain Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 However, I would certainly wonder why one would spend time developing a skill system and then make design choices that render that skill system meaningless. I still disagree that the system is "meaningless." It's pretty obvious what it does, and that if you spend points in a particular skill you'll get better at it. You don't start the game off with 100 in every skill, and on my playthrough I only hit 100 in small guns. If I metagame and/or am fully exploratory, then yeah, I'll have a lot of skill points. It's just the game rewarding a player for being thorough, it doesn't make the skill system meaningless. You don't really get that much better though. Except for those few areas which are hardlocked to skill level (trap disarming, lock picking) there really isn't much of a difference between a 40 skill and a 70 skill. Is there a difference between a 20 and a 100, yeah, sure definitely. Its not that huge though. And when you add to that how easy it is for any character to get all their skills high in the first place, I get confused as to why there is a skil system in the first place. It's not a bad thing to not have a skil system. So if you don't reaally want one, don't put one in. By You, I mean Bethesda, of course. Notice how I can belittle your beliefs without calling you names. It's a useful skill to have particularly where you aren't allowed to call people names. It's a mistake to get too drawn in/worked up. I mean it's not life or death, it's just two guys posting their thoughts on a message board. If it were personal or face to face all the usual restraints would be in place, and we would never have reached this place in the first place. Try to remember that.
alanschu Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 I disagree. But at the same time, I used VATS a lot, so the improvements that I saw from skill points were quite prevalent.
Slowtrain Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 With FO3 there was just no need, it was mind numbingly easy once you had hamstered enough gear and enough levels. Fo3 was most fun from about levels 1-5, then it crashed and burned in a hurry. By level 10 it was pretty numbing. For a variety of reasons. But even with a low int of 4 or 5 I pretty much had no need to spend skill points after level 10-12. Notice how I can belittle your beliefs without calling you names. It's a useful skill to have particularly where you aren't allowed to call people names. It's a mistake to get too drawn in/worked up. I mean it's not life or death, it's just two guys posting their thoughts on a message board. If it were personal or face to face all the usual restraints would be in place, and we would never have reached this place in the first place. Try to remember that.
Mamoulian War Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 With FO3 there was just no need, it was mind numbingly easy once you had hamstered enough gear and enough levels. I can say the same about FO1 and FO2... Sent from my Stone Tablet, using Chisel-a-Talk 2000BC. My youtube channel: MamoulianFH Latest Let's Play Tales of Arise (completed) Latest Bossfight Compilation Dark Souls Remastered - New Game (completed) Let's Play/AAR Europa Universalis 1: Austria Grand Campaign (completed) Let's Play/AAR Europa Universalis 2: Xhosa Grand Campaign (completed) My PS Platinums and 100% - 29 games so far (my PSN profile) 1) God of War III - PS3 - 24+ hours 2) Final Fantasy XIII - PS3 - 130+ hours 3) White Knight Chronicles International Edition - PS3 - 525+ hours 4) Hyperdimension Neptunia - PS3 - 80+ hours 5) Final Fantasy XIII-2 - PS3 - 200+ hours 6) Tales of Xillia - PS3 - 135+ hours 7) Hyperdimension Neptunia mk2 - PS3 - 152+ hours 8.) Grand Turismo 6 - PS3 - 81+ hours (including Senna Master DLC) 9) Demon's Souls - PS3 - 197+ hours 10) Tales of Graces f - PS3 - 337+ hours 11) Star Ocean: The Last Hope International - PS3 - 750+ hours 12) Lightning Returns: Final Fantasy XIII - PS3 - 127+ hours 13) Soulcalibur V - PS3 - 73+ hours 14) Gran Turismo 5 - PS3 - 600+ hours 15) Tales of Xillia 2 - PS3 - 302+ hours 16) Mortal Kombat XL - PS4 - 95+ hours 17) Project CARS Game of the Year Edition - PS4 - 120+ hours 18) Dark Souls - PS3 - 197+ hours 19) Hyperdimension Neptunia Victory - PS3 - 238+ hours 20) Final Fantasy Type-0 - PS4 - 58+ hours 21) Journey - PS4 - 9+ hours 22) Dark Souls II - PS3 - 210+ hours 23) Fairy Fencer F - PS3 - 215+ hours 24) Megadimension Neptunia VII - PS4 - 160 hours 25) Super Neptunia RPG - PS4 - 44+ hours 26) Journey - PS3 - 22+ hours 27) Final Fantasy XV - PS4 - 263+ hours (including all DLCs) 28) Tales of Arise - PS4 - 111+ hours 29) Dark Souls: Remastered - PS4 - 121+ hours
Slowtrain Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 I disagree. But at the same time, I used VATS a lot, so the improvements that I saw from skill points were quite prevalent. That's definitely a valid point. I tend to forget that because I never used VATS my impressions of FO3 are going to be somewhat different from people who used VATS a lot. Notice how I can belittle your beliefs without calling you names. It's a useful skill to have particularly where you aren't allowed to call people names. It's a mistake to get too drawn in/worked up. I mean it's not life or death, it's just two guys posting their thoughts on a message board. If it were personal or face to face all the usual restraints would be in place, and we would never have reached this place in the first place. Try to remember that.
Raithe Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 The major point I missed was the end sequence. You had no real feel for how you'd affected the surrounding communities/groups by the end of the game. At least, not beyond the "oo I was good and purified the water" or "oo I was evil and put in the anti-mutant goop". The slow but brief picture montage gave a few hints, but one of the key points to FO1 & 2 (at least to me) was the run off of the various groups, and how they developed in the years after the game due to what I did. I felt like there were serious consequences from my actions within game (and I could replay the game and make different choices, and it would be apparent in how groups survived/grew/became extinct). And that was what really seemed lacking from FO3. Maybe it was just that I played through the game, and was expecting to hear things like what happened with the Republic of Dave after you interfered with the election.. or how the former slaves you helped (or hindered) with the Lincoln monument turned out. Whether by running rampage through Paradise Falls changed the slavers/raiders in the area or not.. and then at the end.. boom.. or lack of boom. Even if you add the Broken Steel DLC, you don't have any real feeling of consequences from your actions. To an extent it was interesting to roll along with the central storyline, some of the side quests were fun in their way, and some amusing game time. A helluva lot better then Oblivion. But yeah, was lacking a certain something. "Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."
Recommended Posts