What are you playing right now? VI

[Varrok]

Oh yes. I hate immortal children. And I hate F3 for making an immortal children village and all of its idiocy

[FrustratedAssassin]

They actually had killable children until super late in development, but they wanted to avoid any controversy from the kind of people who would call a game a "child murder simulator".

I mean, they've even gotten criticism for mods that allow you to kill children in Skyrim, and they weren't even involved in any way in those.

[Varrok]

They didn't get enough criticism for not allowing the player to kill children

[Crashpunk]

EDIT: Damn FrustratedAssassin. Your a quick one

To be fair. If children were kill-able in a modern video game, it would of caused a uproar. I'm unsure if Fallout 1 and 2 caused any problems, But they were released in a less pissy, over sensitive world so I doubt it.

Quoting Emil Pagliarulo via the Fallout Wiki.

"We don't want to cross lines like killing kids (we actually never got as far as even putting kill-able kids in any builds of the game)... For us, that was a line we certainly didn't want to cross, and we think that was the right decision. It wouldn't have been socially responsible, at least in the case of Fallout 3."

It should be an option in my opinion. Give the player more freedom. Something which I definitely agree with that the new Fallout, Elder Scrolls games dropped the ball on.

That being said, The first mods to come out for a Bethesda game is usually for Kill-able Children. So go nuts.

[Vexen]

Oh yes. I hate immortal children. And I hate F3 for making an immortal children village and all of its idiocy

I wholeheartedly agree.

A little off topic, I've been playing FO4 less and less. It doesn't feel the same. It's too dumbed down. I don't feel like I'm affecting the game world at all. Bethesda has completely watered it down. I was concerned when they significantly changed the mechanics. I liked it when I was thrown into the game world with little to no instruction, and then left to explore the in-game mechanics. The quests HAVE no markers in the first fallouts, and left it up TO YOU to solve problems. They hold your hand too much, in the newer ones, in my opinion. I enjoy freedom, and for that reason, I feel that fallout 1 and 2 are the better games in the series.

[Holy Sock]

Eh, I felt the originals could have been a little more helpful in that regard. They're fun games, with an interesting world and a fair amount of humour but they can be difficult to navigate.

[Alf Shall Rise]

I never got anywhere in Fallout 1 because of that reason. Though a big part of it, I think, is that it's just more of a time commitment with a game that doesn't actively hold your hand, and I just didn't feel like spending that much time on it.

[Varrok]

The world of Fallout 1 is not that big, and the game usually does point you in the right direction. Just not in an idiot way of "here's a marker. You need to go there to win. Do you understand? The big marker, on your map and compass."

[Holy Sock]

I suppose it would come down to a case by case basis. Is there really much gained, if a quest involves going to another town and talking to someone without a map marker? I know Fallout 1 has very few locations but if you've got about 50+ locations on a map it's just a way to to streamline the process a bit. The real determination of quality would be what happens when you get there rather than aimlessly wandering through the Wasteland South until you come across the town.

[Varrok]

It matters, as it's just one step further into making game more schematic. See, you can complete main Fallout 1/Fallout 2 quest in more than one way. The game doesn't neccessarily tell you where to go, but you can ask around random people and some will help you pinpoint the possible locations. And you don't even have to visit some, even if they contain the main quest item you seek. There are just a few instances of those in the game. It makes you want to explore more instead of going in straight line to a fucking marker. Also, I don't remember any quest in F3 and F4 that made you go to a place A *or* a place B. Even if it did, that would be pretty pointless, because the player will simply choose the closest location.

[Holy Sock]

I haven't played any of the Fallout games for quite some time so there's only so much I can say without replaying them and taking note of their main mission structure. But with world's as large as Fallout 3 or New Vegas it seems that the idea of traversing all quests with no map markers would just add to player frustration rather than create a more immersive experience. It may be more schematic but it feels like an area of gameplay that doesn't need to be complex. Otherwise you're going to have players constantly checking their quest log, or constantly checking every location on the map with 50+ locations. You're going to get players who are unsure how to proceed trying to talk to every possible NPC. You're gonna kill momentum for players just trying to do the main quest.

It's kind of just an artificial way of stalling time without getting into the meat of a quest. If the [layer knows they have to talk to someone in another location having a map marker just helps them get there faster. It's more schematic but I don't think that's an inherently negative thing in this case.

[Varrok]

New Vegas is really small. Fallout 3's world is vast but empty and boring.

Also, travel in F1/F2 is quite fast (and in F2 you can get an actual car)

[Holy Sock]

But there's like 187 locations in New Vegas compared to Fallout 2 which has 22 locations. Sure, a lot of them aren't going to tie into tonnes of quests, a lot of them are going to be smaller points of interest, but when you're building a large open world like that map markers seem like a good way to keep things manageable for your playerbase.

[Varrok]

Fallout 1/2 have fewer big locations + tons of random encounters. These are like smaller locations in F3. So it's not like the world is significantly smaller in the earlier games

[OANST]

These statistics made me fall out of my chair.

[Holy Sock]

I think in terms of traversing the world it is. Those random encounters just sort of create a challenge or pique the players interest whilst travelling. But the interaction is minimal and doesn't relate to any quests.

I think it's a similar argument to GPS in open world games like GTA. It certianly makes things easier for the player - and an argument can be made that they don't really get to know the city as well - but the majority of players are going to be consulting the map often - particularly as these games get much bigger. It keeps players in the game and keeps momentum going. I know Arkham Knight would have been even more frustrating if I had to keep checking I was going into the right direction in my Batmobile. I think when you've got worlds this big things like GPS and map markers create a smoother gaming experience. The real challenges lie elsewhere but I don't think traversing the map really needs to be one of them.

I haven't played Fallout 4 but the Mass Effect like dialogue system, on the other hand, seems like a step away from what makes Fallout a unique and immersive experience. It's not an inherently bad system in itself but it seems to be replacing a more interesting system that was almost a highlight of the franchise.

[OANST]

I don't think Holy Sock heard what I said. I said it made me FALL OUT of my chair. FALL OUT. Of the chair. You should all be experiencing fits of laughter right.....about.......now.

[Varrok]

Please, never share that kind of jokes with Bethesda. They might seriously include them in their future games.

[OANST]

I share them only with you. Because of love. Or hate. I forget which.

[Holy Sock]

It just took me too long to write my masterful reply so I missed the joke. Sorry, OANST.

[Nate]

Can people please leave the general Fallout discussion to the/a Fallout thread? I'm too lazy to split the posts in this thread out, so I'll just leave them be for now. But further discussion should be elsewhere.

[OANST]

If you guys can't do this you run the risk of having a FALLing OUT with Nate.

I'm so sorry. I really am.

I think I have Tourettes.

[Varrok]

I'm playing Skyshine's BEDLAM. It's really great, it's very similar to FTL in many ways. Bought at discount price, played for 13 hours so far. Recommended.

[Vexen]

Sven's Coop 5.0 is coming out this friday on steam. All aboard the hype train.

[Holy Sock]

I'm playing the Binding of Isaac: afterbirth because I can't stop and I'm addicted. I'm not sure I enjoy it anymore; I just play it.

[Crashpunk]

270 hours on Isaac and counting. It's one of my favorite games ever now.

Afterbirth was such a good piece of DLC.

[Holy Sock]

I've got 480 since I started playing it. I just do it to kill time. I think I need to get off the computer in general....

[Shade667]

Edit: Just remembered this is NON oddworld...

[Job McYossie]

Edit: Just remembered this is NON oddworld...

and now OANST will love you

[Mr. Bungle]

So I finished Undertale (Neutral + Pacifist endings) and am ready to agree with everyone's praise. Especially for that music

Should I even bother with the Genocide run though? What's it offer to the story that the other modes don't?