For PC gaming news and discussion.
PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
- 1 user online
- 175 users / day
- 474 users / week
- 1.22K users / month
- 2.99K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 6.67K Posts
- 51K Comments
- Modlog
Hopefully he’s still weird. People often lose a lot their teenage/young adult fantasizing as they age. It’s not a bad thing. It’s just I feel the major thing missing from modern RPG writing is that they’re not idiosyncratic enough. Worlds written that cater too much to modern (American) sensibilities, slang - anachronistic. I like when it’s written like an all star dungeon master really going hard into the lore of the desert bandits 3000 years of traditions
You definitely need a little bit craziness and unpredictability to make a truly landmark game.
This might be an unpopular opinion, but I think truly good games (the ones that go down in history) need a certain amount of jank. Not jank for jank’s sake, but because something new, that makes you go “wow”, cannot have the same true and tried game design/gameplay approaches that have been done before.
Just look at the classics, they are considered milestones, but they have a lot of issues:
And yet I strongly prefer this approach (and modern versions such Space Wreck, Age of Decadence, Colony Ship, Consortium, New Vegas, UnderRail) to Obsidian’s recent output (let alone Bethesda with Starfield and Fallout 3).