During the recent Xbox Developer Direct, we were treated to a deeper look at how Obsidian's upcoming RPG, Avowed, will handle player choice via a close look at a certain sidequest. But that left us wondering: what's the natural endpoint of a game emphasizing choice? Will Avowed have multiple endings?
The article is leading me to think we’re going to get another The Outer Worlds experience where your actions don’t really have an affect on the world until the very end.
I feel like Outer Worlds was their take on Fallout, and this is their take on The Elder Scrolls. From the video they put out the other day, I’m down to clown.
I don’t know. When I was helping factions it only felt noticeable when they showed up to help at the end.
I haven’t replayed it because it felt like there wouldn’t be a lot of deviation between paths I choose to take.
It’s kind of like Dishonored’s chaos level system that can result in additional enemies and a different ending. It makes it feel like more of an adventure game than an RPG.
This is all obviously subjective but when people were hyping it up to have Fallout New Vegas levels of choice I felt let down.
Same here. In fact the hype is the reason why it didn’t do well imo. It’s a fine game, nothing too wrong or bad about it, but they hype definitely killed. IGN kept advertising it as “Fallout in space” and “the Bethesda Killer,” and look where we ended up.
I really dislike the X is the Y killer angle. It’s such clickbait and immediately puts fans on the Y side on the defensive. It’s helping no one.
Unless it’s an indie dev I don’t even care what else a developer has produced previously. With such large teams there’s too many cooks in the kitchen and it only takes one of them to sour the game.
I don’t understand the hate for the outer worlds. It has great satire in it’s themes like the fallout games, the build diversity is there and gear is impactful, the story is pretty fun and interesting. It’s like people hate it because it’s not the massive open world of fallout new Vegas, but people tend to not realize or I guess forget, there was a stupid amount of just walking from point a to point b in that game only to get to a super linear quest line. The outer worlds does a great job of simplifying the world in a meaningful way. The terrible remaster of it doesn’t really help the game either though, it really should have been left alone.
I think it’s a matter of expectations. When people were referring to The Outer Worlds as “Fallout but in space” in the lead up to the games release I think that set the bar quiet high and don’t feel as if some of the themes you’d see in Fallout were there or at least weren’t presented in a similar way.
I don’t think many people hate the game. I spent over 50 hours playing it and beat the DLCs. I just don’t think it’s a game that I would go out of my way to recommend.
It’s like people hate it because it’s not the massive open world of fallout new Vegas, but people tend to not realize or I guess forget, there was a stupid amount of just walking from point a to point b in that game only to get to a super linear quest line. The outer worlds does a great job of simplifying the world in a meaningful way.
It’s been about three years since I played The Outer Worlds but I feel I feel like I recall the quests being broken up into regional chunks. There weren’t a ton of loading screens which was nice but I felt like it cut back on the amount of depth the world had.
People got so hyped up about “Fallout in space” that they just ignored what the developers were saying about the game. They straight up said that it wasn’t going to be a big open world like Fallout and it wasn’t going to provide as many hours of gameplay.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
The article is leading me to think we’re going to get another The Outer Worlds experience where your actions don’t really have an affect on the world until the very end.
Outer worlds definitely had choices mattering throughout. The very first mission defines how Spacer’s choice treats you for the rest of the story.
I feel like Outer Worlds was their take on Fallout, and this is their take on The Elder Scrolls. From the video they put out the other day, I’m down to clown.
I don’t know. When I was helping factions it only felt noticeable when they showed up to help at the end.
I haven’t replayed it because it felt like there wouldn’t be a lot of deviation between paths I choose to take.
It’s kind of like Dishonored’s chaos level system that can result in additional enemies and a different ending. It makes it feel like more of an adventure game than an RPG.
This is all obviously subjective but when people were hyping it up to have Fallout New Vegas levels of choice I felt let down.
Same here. In fact the hype is the reason why it didn’t do well imo. It’s a fine game, nothing too wrong or bad about it, but they hype definitely killed. IGN kept advertising it as “Fallout in space” and “the Bethesda Killer,” and look where we ended up.
I really dislike the X is the Y killer angle. It’s such clickbait and immediately puts fans on the Y side on the defensive. It’s helping no one.
Unless it’s an indie dev I don’t even care what else a developer has produced previously. With such large teams there’s too many cooks in the kitchen and it only takes one of them to sour the game.
I don’t understand the hate for the outer worlds. It has great satire in it’s themes like the fallout games, the build diversity is there and gear is impactful, the story is pretty fun and interesting. It’s like people hate it because it’s not the massive open world of fallout new Vegas, but people tend to not realize or I guess forget, there was a stupid amount of just walking from point a to point b in that game only to get to a super linear quest line. The outer worlds does a great job of simplifying the world in a meaningful way. The terrible remaster of it doesn’t really help the game either though, it really should have been left alone.
I think it’s a matter of expectations. When people were referring to The Outer Worlds as “Fallout but in space” in the lead up to the games release I think that set the bar quiet high and don’t feel as if some of the themes you’d see in Fallout were there or at least weren’t presented in a similar way.
I don’t think many people hate the game. I spent over 50 hours playing it and beat the DLCs. I just don’t think it’s a game that I would go out of my way to recommend.
It’s been about three years since I played The Outer Worlds but I feel I feel like I recall the quests being broken up into regional chunks. There weren’t a ton of loading screens which was nice but I felt like it cut back on the amount of depth the world had.
People got so hyped up about “Fallout in space” that they just ignored what the developers were saying about the game. They straight up said that it wasn’t going to be a big open world like Fallout and it wasn’t going to provide as many hours of gameplay.
https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/02/08/the-outer-worlds-wont-be-as-long-as-some-people-think