You can feel it when you play Arcanum by Troika that the people who made FO great didn't really have what Obsidian has in mind. The only things the two games have in common are : super mutants, ghouls, energy weapons, power armor, that is to say, it barely touches FO on a superficial level, just like most fantasy games have to feature elves and orcs, NV features mutants and ghouls but that's about the end of what is Fallouty in NV. I feel there is a true dichotomy here because none of NV strengths were found in FO1. Important NPC and talking heads certainly didn't speak half as much as a follower in NV.įallout had dialogue that had plenty of skill checks but it didn't have talkative bullshit. Followers in FO1 hardly had anything to say. I don't remember ANYONE in Fallout 1 having as many things to say as Veronica for example.
I don't really see the purpose of trying to separate this into some kind of dichotomic idea of either liking story alone or liking gameplay alone. It is certainly true that most of New Vegas' weaknesses are in its game design, and most of its strengths are in writing. Like Fallout, it occasionally shines in moments of a wry, darkly humor look at humanity. Like Fallout, it focuses on a per-faction set of reputation and choice & consequences, while adding over-arching main story choices (an improvement). Like Fallout, it attempts to make your character build choices more relevant to the game world (though it fails at higher levels). I don't consider New Vegas the second coming, but the claim that it is completely divest of every single element that made Fallout good is spurious. New Vegas expands on that, but it's hardly new to the franchise. But there were talkative NPCs, and a lot of options to explore the background and history of NPCs and factions. You could remove all other options and they wouldn't even know the game lacks those options as long as you give them their Charisma check. Them people like to make it known how much they love RPG but truth be told, they don't want a real RPG, because they never make the choice to play anything but Charisma Boy. They make up for their life deficiencies by larping Charisma Boy who's loved by all their buddies inside of their computah. They don't want a game, they want a piece of interactive fiction, or visual novel. I think that to like NV you have to be one of those retards who still dirty their underwear over the thought of a Planescape Torment. The men who were responsible for that abomination should be HANGED!). The character system, the combat, the attractive setting, the no-nonsense sidequests (none of that one hour long trek across the wastes bullshit ala Return to Sender, what the fuck.
On the other hand, all the things that made Fallout great are clearly absent. None of the things people praise as good in New Vegas were good in Fallout. Story ? What story ? Get teh chip, fight teh mutant. The writing was to the point, compact, and there wasn't much in the way of talkative npcs. People who praise NV as a good Fallout game don't remember what made Fallout great. If we divided the codex into factions I'd say the biggest one would be the storyfagtion.
0 kommentar(er)
