"What are you doing?"
A game shouldn’t be considered “rock-solid” because a ton of dedicated and skilled fans make the game fun to play.
Why not?
Also, not "fun to play". FUNNIER..
The game isn’t rock-solid, the modders are.
Do their mods run without the game? And while at that, are all mods good, stable, logical, lore-friendly, etc, etc?
The entire showerthought must be in the title
Your question belongs more to Ask Lemmy or No Stupid Questions I think.
In addition: what appeared earlier on this planet? Kids or cartoons?
I prefer Fallout: Tactics to vanilla F:NV.
If not for DLCs that offer something wildly different in their own separate maps, I'd call it the worst Fallout game I've been playing...
I don't get that "shallow" part.
In Bethesda's worlds there's always something going on, something new to discover, something new to learn... Providing you put an effort to pursue that. These games don't force themselves upon the player, they leave helluva room for breathing, caring about whatever small goals you may set upon yourself, but that's not "bad", isn't it?
I never understood the hate Bethesda's open world sandboxes get. Give them a few months of time for patching & modding and they become rock-solid games to enjoy for decades. I don't expect Starfield to be anything less and I hope it will be far more than that.
By the way... OSIRIS: New Dawn and SpaceBourne 2 - have you tried either?
I never said that individuals are "good/bad". I said they approach the game with either good faith or bad faith, which is radically different to what you're talking about.
time will tell
So we can agree that we're discussing and juxtaposing against each other very vague things, that might as well turn out to be completely false?
Extinction event level but not really, (...)
Much like the predicted scenario of allegedly upcoming climate disaster, correct?
If the group consists of people who come there in good faith and are determined to have fun, no Session 0 is needed. Whatever problems will arise on the way, are going to be dealt with in mature way.
And if the group features bad faith actors, then no amount of discussion prior to the game will prevent a disaster from happening.
I'm conflicted about Ulfric. One the one hand, he seems to be archetypical liberator, revolutionary against tyranny. So are his followers - people who want to live according to their own ways, enjoying life, minding their own business...
But things he does and the state of the city under his control are abhorrent. How can a liberator not care about children starving on the streets of his citadel? What wrong did all those non-humans did to him to deserve the scorn?
...this seems like an argument for what you were talking about. Bethesda may not provide deep, elaborate, very difficult stories, but by all means, they are memorable and they feature SOME depth.