Bethesda stopped making games, they're creating sandboxes for their modders, basically. It's a bit cynical to ask for full price for that but people keep buying their stuff so it works for them.
Gaming Mass Effect: Andromeda (PC, PS4, Xbox One)
- Thread starter Shane88
- Start date
I do think Skyrim was excellent at the time, to be fair, and paved the way for modern OWG's, it pretty much popularised them. But I doubt if I went back to it now I'd think it was great.
Skyrim was made of shitty side quests and pointless wandering around. It also gave us the abomination that is "radiant quests", which made Fallout 4 an even worse game.
Some positive responses on the gaming forum I'm on - so I'm confident I will enjoy it.Reactions actually seem pretty good. I'm tempted to reorder
This was my favourite franchise last generation so there's no way I can't be day 1. This is my first pre-order since 2011...
Will try to block out the animations and technical problems
Collect 5 nirnroot.
Collect 10 bear pelts.
Collect 5 salt piles.
What the feck was wrong with me for playing so much of that shite?
Collect 10 bear pelts.
Collect 5 salt piles.
What the feck was wrong with me for playing so much of that shite?
Skyrim had plenty of pointless stuff but I also remember spending hours upon hours clearing out a dwarven ruin during multiple treks to and from a village, turning all the ore into ingots, crafting stuff and selling it to make an absolute fortune and level a bunch of skills in the process. Not because anyone in particular asked me, just because I wanted to. There's an addicitive quality to their games I've yet to see anywhere else. Reducing the game to its most mundane side quests is missing the essence of what made it such a great experience back then. Games like Dragon Age: Inquisition had the side quests but missed the addictive factor.
Having said all that, I couldn't be bothered with Fallout 4 after trying it for a dozen hours or so. It felt like the magic had gone.
Main thing I remember about Skyrim was having to clear space in my inventory for all the iron daggers I was crafting.
Skyrim was the best game ever... For about 30 hours. The witcher blows it and every other open world game out the park. Still was a good game though
Skyrim was the most overrated game ever. No idea how it is with the mods, but without mods it was nothing special. Mediocre story, shit characters, 'large cities' with 5 citizens and awful repetitive side quests.
Now you can craft shit and do what you want there, but then you can do that in Minecraft too.
Now you can craft shit and do what you want there, but then you can do that in Minecraft too.
Well I enjoyed it for a few hundred hours. Nowadays, post-Witcher 3 it looks rather weak and unconvincing but that doesn't diminish the enjoyment I had when playing it. I thought it was fantastic for its time, but I doubt I'd enjoy it as much in 2017.
Nothing changed from 2011. Special Edition is almost unplayable with 50 mods and that's how many you need to make this game look like a legit Elder Scrolls experience... not to mention savegames getting corrupted on a most random occasions plus users on Skyrim Nexus reporting that official patch is also at fault.
Seems like all Bethesda's efforts are in ES:Online.
I'm legit starting to think the female mocap artist was just a bad actor.
That one's shopped, surely.
seems like a lot of people agree with this
for me it was excellent i would put it above ME and Witcher (Both of which i love too)
I think Fallout 4, Skyrim and especially Witcher 3 are all horribly overrated.
I'm a Dark Souls fanboy though. When you've played that for a long time, the combat in everything else feels horrible.
Back on thread, anyone from here bought ME4 yet? Is it as bad as most are saying?
I'm a Dark Souls fanboy though. When you've played that for a long time, the combat in everything else feels horrible.
Back on thread, anyone from here bought ME4 yet? Is it as bad as most are saying?
I can understand putting Skyrim above ME. They are totally different games, and people like different things.
But Skyrim above the third Witcher? How on Earth it is posible? TW3 has all the pointless wandering around like Skyrim, but it also has a very decent story, good set of characters, nice voice actors, good side quests and narrative choices that matter. Oh, and cities don't have just 5 people. It is a modern Skyrim with Dragon Age: Origins story, combining the good things of both. Superior in every aspect.
I think the original point about Bethesda games being more forgiven for bugs is because they are huge open worlds full of moving parts. A shopkeeper in Skyrim is a character that moves around, interacts with other things and can be killed. A shopkeeper in Mass Effect is a menu that speaks. Bioware games are static environments that you travel through. Bethesda games are full of moving parts. NPCs in Bethesda games all move around, have AI controlling them and interact with things. NPCs in Bioware games are static graphics and only do anything when interacting with them which either causes a cutscene, a menu or a soundbite to pop up.
They really shouldn't be totally forgiven for the bugs or given the amount of leeway they are, but bugs are more forgiveable in that sort of game than they are in a Bioware game.
They really shouldn't be totally forgiven for the bugs or given the amount of leeway they are, but bugs are more forgiveable in that sort of game than they are in a Bioware game.
Finally someone gets the original point I was making. You put it fantastically - thanks
I'd agree for the most part, but Witcher is genuinely fantastic in other areas. A little over rated by some, but you can see why. The other two are just turd.
Combat isn't really a strong point of the ME series either, the first annoyed a lot of people (I liked it though), but the sequels turned into dumbed mediocre shooters. I'd be interested to see what it's like in this.
Btw, mentioning Souls, believe it or not the combat in Zelda is clearly inspired by the souls games. Weapon types with different move sets, parrying, every single enemy having move sets and the a.i to mix them up...if you invest time in the actual combat it's very rewarding.
Whilst as you now, I agree overall with you on this, Skyrim does have large populated cities, in fact the characters are also generally much more interactive than those random lines of the Witcher's npcs. The smaller towns are less populated, but still largely more interactive.
Then again I never played vanilla properly, but I remember watching my mrs play the 360 version and didn't notice the towns being any more sparse.
I love new Zelda mate, been playing it a lot.
New goat simulator trailer showing off animations and romance on par with ME:A.
Anyone else think that Mass Effect 3 would've benefited from having the player get given an ending based on decisions across the trilogy, like what Witcher 3 did regarding Geralt/Ciri's fate?
The whole having to decide the fate of the galaxy right there at the end of the game made all of the previous decisions feel meaningless. At least Witcher 3's one made you feel like there were long lasting consequences based on your choices and interactions over the course of the game.
The whole having to decide the fate of the galaxy right there at the end of the game made all of the previous decisions feel meaningless. At least Witcher 3's one made you feel like there were long lasting consequences based on your choices and interactions over the course of the game.
Can't play it now anyway since Xbox Live is down.
fecking shambles
fecking shambles
when the ket hits you hard
Of course, but this is a problem pervading the RPG genre. I can cite more games from the top of my head which fall in the same trap (like DX:HR, Torment Tides of Numenera, Pillars of Eternity, just to name a few recent examples) than ones which get this right (like The Witcher series, mostly).
Still wasn't prepared for it.
The ridiculous thing is, the character faces for the actual fighting don't move at all!
They are quite a bit sparse IMO. Compare them to Novigrad.
I agree people being more interactive and each and every one of them having a job, a routine etc. But to be fair, I don't even know why they bother with it. Sure, you killing some guy might make his wife go to get woods herself and being killed by a bear, and that is hilarious when you read in some gaming website, but at least for me, it didn't make my experience more enjoyable. In contrast, going into the biggest city in the region, and feeling like you are in a village after it has been attacked by aliens and so most of its people were abducted made my experience less enjoyable. Also, the very shit (and repetitive) voiceacting in addition to my character being a mute made the experience less enjoyable.
Definitely yes (or for that matter BioWare's Dragon Age: Origins did a better job than Mass Effect 3 in that aspect). But, my biggest problem with the ending was that it just didn't make sense. The entire first game is about stopping Sovereign calling the Reapers from Citadel, the entire second game is stopping the Baby Reaper being created, because otherwise he would have gone to Citadel and get Reapers back. But then in the end of the third game you see that the guy who controls Reapers actually controls Citadel too, so what was the point of the first two games? Did Mac Walters actually played them or he just had a very bad memory? And of course, the entire 'rationalization' of Starchild about his motives being totally stupid, and he just changing his mind after he sees Shepard and giving the options (instead of you know, just ignoring Shepard and continuing the cycle). And yeah, the omnipotent Reapers being actually just mindless pawns.
Not having any choice is something that I would have been fine with (or at least, I would have been fine with if Casey Hudson didn't scream for two years how much choices will matter in the third game and how the number of endings would be bigger than in any other games). Having a genuinely awful ending, which made no sense in any shape, in addition to making the stories of the first two games pointless was something I wasn't fine off. Artist integrity and all that other shit, but I think that BioWare should have bit the bullet and totally change it (perhaps going back to Karpyshyn's original ending) and then have a look at itself before going for the new game. Instead, everyone decent left the company, and they promoted the biggest idiot on town to game's director.
FFS the is that "artwork" on that idiots head supposed to be hair?? looks like a can of shit coloured paint spilt on his head. Also the voice acting and script. "you hurt our friends and were going to hurt you" what the actual feck?? is this a script written for a hale and pace bar fight sketch??
they need to rename this "Mass defect"
Amen. I couldn't get past the clunky controls. As good as a story and graphics are, the fun stops when a character doesn't do what you want him to do.
maybe some hope in regards to the face animation for some?:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/insert...i-started-mass-effect-andromeda/#788c0d3d5e68
https://www.forbes.com/sites/insert...i-started-mass-effect-andromeda/#788c0d3d5e68
Maybe if you can't control him Geralt is just too much of a man and all around awesome hero for you Surely at least one face would have been animated early in production? How the hell could they have all sat around a table and think, wow that's exactly what we were looking for. Great job team!
Feel like the end of point 6 needs expanding upon.
In one of the updates they provided an option for smoother controls, though I realise you may have given up on it now.
Now now, its not past the watershed yet!