MonkeyLungs Posted June 13, 2011 Posted June 13, 2011 I'm glad that Obsidian made New Vegas. They made some great improvements in their version of the new s*** fallout. Hardcore mode was sweet and the faction gameplay was very welcome. I would have greatly preferred a fully modern isometric turn based experience that just took the original Fallout gameplay and REFINED it instead of REBOOTING it. It seems like a cheap tactic to me though overall ... to just take an old idea and not really stay true to it but adapt it for the NewFans. Why not just make up something original if you aren't going to honor the gameplay of the originals? Are people really that tapped for ideas? Don't you get paid to think? To be fair this may be slightly out of the developers hands but it still seems strange.
HoonDing Posted June 13, 2011 Posted June 13, 2011 Why does this discussion remind me of a certain game? Fallout 3 changed gameplay, but at least moved the setting to the East Coast. Dungeon Siege 3 takes place in exactly the same setting as the first game (Kingdom of Ehb) and even re-uses some locations, along with changing gameplay. I can imagine the butthurt is even greater this time. The ending of the words is ALMSIVI.
Vilhelm Posted June 13, 2011 Posted June 13, 2011 Fallout 3 changed gameplay, but at least moved the setting to the East Coast. Dungeon Siege 3 takes place in exactly the same setting as the first game (Kingdom of Ehb) and even re-uses some locations, along with changing gameplay. I can imagine the butthurt is even greater this time. I don't see a lot of difference between moving the physical location or moving the backstory forwards 150 years. You're fighting with strawmen here.
Flouride Posted June 13, 2011 Posted June 13, 2011 Fallout 3 changed gameplay, but at least moved the setting to the East Coast. Dungeon Siege 3 takes place in exactly the same setting as the first game (Kingdom of Ehb) and even re-uses some locations, along with changing gameplay. I can imagine the butthurt is even greater this time. Isn't Ehb pretty much the only place people have even seen in DS games. It's quite easier to move a Fallout game from one place to another since they are actual places that everyone knows. Not to mention then we would be reading tons of people going "why call it DS it's not even located in Ehb!!111" Hate the living, love the dead.
HoonDing Posted June 13, 2011 Posted June 13, 2011 Isn't Ehb pretty much the only place people have even seen in DS games. It's quite easier to move a Fallout game from one place to another since they are actual places that everyone knows. Not to mention then we would be reading tons of people going "why call it DS it's not even located in Ehb!!111" DS2 and its expansion took you across the entire continent of Aranna. Ehb is west of Aranna. The ending of the words is ALMSIVI.
brandysnap Posted June 13, 2011 Posted June 13, 2011 its off topic, but sacred 2's map pwns all in modern arpgs.
Renevent Posted June 13, 2011 Posted June 13, 2011 I liked the first Sacred better...but yes...that map is just sick.
brandysnap Posted June 13, 2011 Posted June 13, 2011 I liked the first Sacred better...but yes...that map is just sick. sacred was also enormous. you felt you had been playing for days non stop and then looked at the map and saw the pathetic dotted area you had actually explored. it was thoroughly demoralizing lol
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now