Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
502 replies to this topic



    Psycho Hillbilly of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 1026 posts
  • Location:North carolina
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
I think we can blame wow when they started doing the quest location answer thingies. Once they started showing where the quest items and locations to complete the quests, I started noticing alot of games join in.
Quest markers I believe they are called?



    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 879 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

"From my PoV, he says a lot of stuff, why I still prefer to play older over newer games. with the exceptions of few Indy gems. It's not nostalgia, the older games just forced you to use your brain more often. And the feeling which you got, when you did overcome some riddle or hard quest or boss, was much more rewarding than in today's openworld checkbox simulators with cutscenes."


games always sucked, difference is in the 80s and 90s there wasn't youtube

I disagree.



Back then the games cost the same as—or more than they do today... but back then they could only justify the price on their gameplay, humor, and story elements.  These days, there are developers that make interactive paintings, and call them games.  Even Todd Howard has openly admitted that they make games to entertain (coddle) the player rather than challenge them. Older games presented (and still present) challenge; and were not afraid of petulant players.


I've found shockingly few games in the last decade that hold my interest; The Witcher (1) is one of them. Toribash is one of them; magic sands (Java game) is one of them. The Disciples & King's Bounty series both held my interest a lot longer than I expected. Grim Fandango. Die By The Sword, Machinarium; (too short though). The FO3 GECK—but not the FO3 game. :(

I have Witcher 2 & 3 installed; both day one purchases. I am finishing the Dark Queen of Krynn series for the first time. I've never played Witcher 3—but for part of the tutorial; that was enough.  I'd play Blood over F.E.A.R. any day; all week long, if it was pick one or the other; and they are made by the same studio.  I played Dead Space for about 22 minutes; I haven't played it since. It was boring.  Grimrock 1 & 2, I liked. The Superhot demo, I liked; I'd be playing FO3 if FO3 had combat like Superhot.

Edit: (after Mamoulian War)
I liked Rune a lot, but Skyrim not so much at all; except for them hiring Max von Sydow. :thumbsup:
I'd have loved Skyrim —if it had had the combat* and level design aesthetics of Rune; they seem to have copied in ways that just didn't matter to it; leaving the important stuff out...

(... like they did with Fallout in FO3.)

*A point to mention about Rune's combat: Rune is not an RPG, it's a third person stabber/platformer almost akin to Golden Axe.

I would want to have combat be more skill based than twitch based, in an RPG.

Edited by Gizmo, 10 January 2018 - 05:28 PM.

  • Mamoulian War, Azdeus and Chilloutman like this



    Forum Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 2458 posts
  • Location:The Netherlands
  • Steam:funderbunk
Closing for length.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users