Games
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
The Outer Worlds is such a great experience. It's so full of life and character, and it was the first time in a while that I felt attached to NPCs. Looking forward to the sequel.
It’ll remain the only game I ever started a new game the second after finishing the campaign I played through it 3 times within the first week.
Only complaint is it was short and obviously had some funding concerns.
It was the closest thing to Fallout since Bethesda ruined the series.
Knowing it's not too long makes me want to pick it up again. I started it around the time I picked up BG3, and didn't want to main 2 RPGs. I could do for a shorter one now though.
It felt like fallout 4 should have.
But I played it around release and never did a second play through, it just didn't seem to have the same depth that made early fallout great and so replayable.
Which isn't a horrible thing. Look at great series and not many have amazing first games, it can take a minute to find your feet, and I'm pretty optimistic about OW2 now.
Like, I'm sure at some point I played fallout 1, but I can't remember and FO2 I've got to be triple digit full games.
My own impression was the opposite -- I didn't like OW at all, felt that it missed what made Fallout click, and enjoyed FO4 a fair bit. OW felt like a slog to me.
-
OW's perk system is really boring, in my book. None of the perks change gameplay much, just tweak numbers slightly. Interesting perks that affect how you play is a big chunk of Fallout.
-
OW had pretty much everything you run into in a city. Outside of cities, you pretty much just ran to a waypoint and back. There was virtually nothing to stumble across -- running into encounters that opens up new content is what makes me feel like I'm constantly discovering new things.
-
While in theory the game is open-world, there was little reason to backtrack in OW. I went through it pretty much in order; it played pretty linearly.
-
The weapons were pretty underwhelming to me. The weapons within a class all work pretty much the same way. You don't have a whole lot of variety. The unique weapons one gets aren't all that potent, and generally, any weapon you get will only be used for a short time before it becomes obsolete. The weapons just don't have a major impact on play.
All that being said, hey, maybe OW2 will be an improvement. There's nothing there that's somehow fundamental to the series.
I liked it quite a lot but all of these criticisms are more than fair.
I'd also like to add that while, in theory, it had multiple story branches in practice I'd find it hard to side with the Obvious Capitalist Baddies because they don't practice disaster capitalism, or late stage capitalism, they practice idiot capitalism, which, sure, in the metaphorical sense has some value especially considering modern climate concerns but doesn't leave a lot of room for even someone that wants to RP a ruthless greedbag.
You don't need to believe in even enlightened self-interest to see their path, besides the "betraying your savior" angle, is a slow suicide fighting over dwindling resources.
It was especially disappointing because Obsidian made New Vegas. We know they can do a Mr House, or even a Caesar's Legion, some baddies that at least have a good recruitment spiel to make you want to see their storyline if nothing else.
But, also, maybe they just figured that so many people missed the point of Caesar and House, hit them over the head this go around? Time is becoming a factor.
There was something crucial missing from Outer Worlds to make it a great game, and I really hope they find it for 2.
I try to keep preaching, Outer Worlds and New Vegas were written by different people. Marketing pushed the connection because of the shared studio, but the actual creative teams didn’t have much overlap.
Leonard Boyarsky wrote Outer Worlds, and if you look at his previous credits the structure for big choices makes more sense.
It’s not a bad difference, but it is very different writing from New Vegas, and people going in expecting New Vegas are going to be disappointed.
Sure, but that's why Tim Cain coming in is great news, because at the end of the day I think what a lot of people really want is New Vegas 2: IN SPAAACE.
Tim Cain isn’t “coming in”. The first Outer Worlds game was Tim Cain’s baby along with Boyarsky. It’s not a shock he’s working on the second one.
Tim Cain didn’t work on New Vegas.
The second game is likely going to diverge further away from New Vegas, not become more like it.
Ah, you're right, I had recalled it being the other way around.
It'll be an instant improvement if they just put the damn crosshair in the middle of the screen.
I don't remember a crosshair being an issue, was it like not there or something and I didn't realise?
It kept the lowered offset console crosshair (like Halo had) for the PC version, which is unplayable imo. There was an ini file you could edit to move it to the middle, but was funky with some weapons, so I had to quit.
Ah I've never minded when games have slightly lower crosshairs. Probably due to the amount of halo I played as a kid. In fact on MCC on PC I was annoyed that it was centered by default haha
I didn't even know that was a thing and didn't notice it in OW. Funny how something most people don't notice is "unplayable" for others.
Its fine on controller, I played tons of Halo with it, but for mouse and keyboard it's horrible. A really odd or lazy design decision for the PC version, my guess is they probably couldnt be bothered adjusting it, Xbox was their main market.
I played on PC with m+kb.
I played loads of Halo too and even if I was to go on Xbox now and play, the crosshair wouldnt bug me, it works on controller, but when I use mouse and keyboard it needs to be in the middle of the screen.
I actually compiled my thoughts into a review, but TLDR is that I found the setting and characters so good that they propped up a mechanically bland experience.
I liked your take. I enjoyed the setting and writing very much so I was willing to put up with fine but bland gameplay.
Huh? That game is among the least lively in its genre. Even Cyberpunk2077 NPCs were more immersive.
Damn. It really seems like people either freaking loved this game, or just thought it was pretty mid.
I don't know what it is about the game, but it just didn't really do it for me.
Edit: I think it has something to do with the game being extremely bleak (aside from some companion quests), even if you choose to all the good choices. The ending is basically "everyone lived happily ever after once you solved the mystery," but it doesn't really feel like you're accomplishing anything throughout the game. Even vanilla Fallout 4 makes it feel like you're actually making a difference in the game world as you progress through the story.
For me it felt like it said all it had to say on the first planet, and kept singing the same note for the rest of the game. Low weapon variety, non existent stealth, and not much ambience to see on the way to locations like fallout. It's the starfield before starfield, but at least I finished outer worlds.
Getting 2 a few months after release to see if they improved, this news makes me hopeful it's closer to classic fallout.
The set and setting were nice. I kind of liked the story.
For me, ultimately, I had the same criticism of it as a lot of people have for starfield- it felt like a bunch of small rooms connected by a spaceship door. All of the planets were in this weird middle space where they were both too big to feel efficient and well crafted, but too small to feel truly open. So at the end of it, I was left feeling like it was a chore to get from point a to point b.
That's a fair criticism and one that I agree with.
I remember being surprised at the end. Like it was just suddenly over and didn't feel like that at all. I liked playing through the game but it didn't leave much of an impression on me.
This is exactly it for me. Everything else was really enjoyable -- but then it just suddenly ends. There's no freeplay after completing the main story. They went so far as to show a text warning, stating the game is about to end, and you have to confirm to proceed. After that, the only way back in is to load a previous save. I really wanted that unstructured exploration time, like you get after finishing the main story in Skyrim/Fallout/etc.
!Also, I think the "slideshow" style presentation for the ending contributed to this problem. A nice cinematic ending would have had way more weight and felt less tacked-on for me.!<
I noticed this too!! Some seem to really love it too.
It's funny because I enjoy the premise but it's just didn't fullfill my need as a shooter, adventure or rpg, it got like 75 percent there though, so I'm really hoping the second one will be awesome.
I couldn't enjoy this game. The world wasn't very believable to me. The whole thing is "corporations dumb", which to me got old very fast.
It's either just "corporations bad" or "corporations are the only way to survive and thrive"
Which is also bullshit.
The Outer Worlds 2: String Bean Thoery
Didn't fully like the first game, it doesn't even hold a candle to fallout, the worlds are awfully flat
Fuck Microsoft.