What video game are you playing?

[wizards8507]

I hate teaser trailers that don't tell you a damn thing about what the game actually is.

 

[ACamp1900]

I think it'd be super cool to be in the Allegheny Mountains in a more rural Fallout... could be far creepier.

I'm going to assume it's a online builder as discussed earlier though. That would also explain the rural setting. That has next to zero appeal for my tastes.

 

[IrishLion]

Any one have any E3 predictions? Or rather, whats on your E3 want list.

My current 'To Play' list:
AC: Origins
AC: Syndicate
God of War
Red Dead 2 (whenever that comes out)

So, I'm hesitant to invest myself in E3 and make my wishlist longer when I realistically won't get to any of the announced games until after they've been released and their prices start dropping (probably)...

HOWEVER. I'm curious about the new Pokemon RPG game for the Switch. If it looks good enough, I'll put a Switch on my Black Friday shopping list and then grab the first new-gen Pokemon RPG.

Also curious to see if the Switch Pokemon RPG's will be released as two separate versions with version-specific creatures as they always have been, or if they change the formula at all.

 

[ACamp1900]

There have been rumors of a Castlevania coming to Switch... that's may be the only thing that could get me super hyped for a new release. Red Dead is obviously up there but I'd mark my calendar if they announced a classic horror, nod to the OG Belmont Casltevanias and made it pretty much like Breath of Wind.... I'd cry.

 

[Andy in Sactown]

I think it'd be super cool to be in the Allegheny Mountains in a more rural Fallout... could be far creepier.

I'm going to assume it's a online builder as discussed earlier though. That would also explain the rural setting. That has next to zero appeal for my tastes.

Vault 76 was set to open 20 years after the war in rural Virginia; where the first couple games were 100-200+ years later. You're essentially the first ones to step out into the post-apocalyptic wasteland.

It sounds like it's going to be a proper Fallout game, but how they're going to pull off the persistent online component should be interesting.

 

[ACamp1900]

Vault 76 was set to open 20 years after the war in rural Virginia; where the first couple games were 100-200+ years later. You're essentially the first ones to step out into the post-apocalyptic wasteland.

It sounds like it's going to be a proper Fallout game, but how they're going to pull off the persistent online component should be interesting.

Okay, makes sense... where did you hear/see this?

 

[Andy in Sactown]

Okay, makes sense... where did you hear/see this?

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/mkh9vcEAMgI" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

We should know a lot more after their E3 panel on Sunday.

 

[ACamp1900]

We should know a lot more after their E3 panel on Sunday.

Thanks, reps. I'm not questioning anything the guy shares but how would he gather all that from the trailer? Just uber-fan? It sounds like it'd be a cool concept but I hope there is the ability to just play the game offline like all the others... we shall see.

 

[Andy in Sactown]

Thanks, reps. I'm not questioning anything the guy shares but how would he gather all that from the trailer? Just uber-fan? It sounds like it'd be a cool concept but I hope there is the ability to just play the game offline like all the others... we shall see.

It was a little analyzing the trailer, studying the fallout wiki (there's a lot of information tucked away inside the terminals in the previous games), following industry insiders on twitter, Kotaku, etc. There's no shortage of fallout geeks spending hours figuring all this out.

 

[nlroma1o]

My current 'To Play' list:
AC: Origins
AC: Syndicate
God of War
Red Dead 2 (whenever that comes out)

So, I'm hesitant to invest myself in E3 and make my wishlist longer when I realistically won't get to any of the announced games until after they've been released and their prices start dropping (probably)...

HOWEVER. I'm curious about the new Pokemon RPG game for the Switch. If it looks good enough, I'll put a Switch on my Black Friday shopping list and then grab the first new-gen Pokemon RPG.

Also curious to see if the Switch Pokemon RPG's will be released as two separate versions with version-specific creatures as they always have been, or if they change the formula at all.

AC Origins is Awesome. I took my time through it and put in just alittle over 100 hours.

In regards to Pokemon on Switch. It sounds like new core Pokemon RPG isn't coming out until end of 2019. However, they will be release 2 side by side Pokemon Lets Go games, one being Lets Go Pikachu and the other Lets Go Evie. These 2 games are due out November. They are inspired by the mobile Pokemon go game and per the Director of all things Pokemon, these games are supposed to be entry level Pokemon games for kids on switch who have never played a pokemon game before. And it sounds like there are going to be some pokemon go link so you can pull stuff from the mobile game into the switch game. Not sure what exactly this game is, but I will probably just wait until the new RPG comes out in 2019.

 

[IrishLion]

AC Origins is Awesome. I took my time through it and put in just alittle over 100 hours.

In regards to Pokemon on Switch. It sounds like new core Pokemon RPG isn't coming out until end of 2019. However, they will be release 2 side by side Pokemon Lets Go games, one being Lets Go Pikachu and the other Lets Go Evie. These 2 games are due out November. They are inspired by the mobile Pokemon go game and per the Director of all things Pokemon, these games are supposed to be entry level Pokemon games for kids on switch who have never played a pokemon game before. And it sounds like there are going to be some pokemon go link so you can pull stuff from the mobile game into the switch game. Not sure what exactly this game is, but I will probably just wait until the new RPG comes out in 2019.

Yeah I was reading about those. I don't really have interest in them. I've got Pokemon Go on my phone, I don't need to play it on a console when I get home, too lol.

My question about "2 games" was if the late-2019 RPG gets released as two separate versions like Red/Blue, or if they're taking their new "core" RPG's in a new direction as single-entity releases.

 

[IrishInFl]

Here's my E3/Nintendo Treehouse Predictions and wants:

Predictions:

Nintendo: Metroid Prime 4 gameplay
New Super Smash Bros.
More info on the Pokemon game

Sony: Last of Us part 2
More VR games

Microsoft:Halo 6
?

Studios: Elder Scrolls 6
More Beyond good and Evil 2
Anthem

What I want:Final Fantasy VII remake info
Final Fantasy XVI
Konami starts making AAA titles again
Saints Row 5
A not shitty Mass Effect

 

[wizards8507]

Is Koon around? Phantom Pain is free on Gold this month and I'm curious if I should grab it.

 

[greyhammer90]

Is Koon around? Phantom Pain is free on Gold this month and I'm curious if I should grab it.

Not Koon, but I do like Metal Gear and have played a lot of Phantom Pain. It has a 93 metacritic score and is free. You should definitely grab it.

 

[wizards8507]

Not Koon, but I do like Metal Gear and have played a lot of Phantom Pain. It has a 93 metacritic score and is free. You should definitely grab it.

rip muh hard drive.

 

[nlroma1o]

Yeah I was reading about those. I don't really have interest in them. I've got Pokemon Go on my phone, I don't need to play it on a console when I get home, too lol.

My question about "2 games" was if the late-2019 RPG gets released as two separate versions like Red/Blue, or if they're taking their new "core" RPG's in a new direction as single-entity releases.

I would assume its going to be the standard 2 game release. They are coming out with the 2 Let Go games, so I don't see why we should assume the RPG wont be a 2 game release.

How different has the 2 games been each generation? I haven't really played pokemon since gold and silver. And back then i just remember there were specific pokemon you could catch in one version but not the other. But wasnt the story the same?

 

[nlroma1o]

Is Koon around? Phantom Pain is free on Gold this month and I'm curious if I should grab it.

Phantom Pain was free on PS Plus a few months ago. Its definitely worth downloading. I have only played a few of the early missions and its fun as hell. Im going to try and get to it soon.

 

[IrishLion]

I would assume its going to be the standard 2 game release. They are coming out with the 2 Let Go games, so I don't see why we should assume the RPG wont be a 2 game release.

How different has the 2 games been each generation? I haven't really played pokemon since gold and silver. And back then i just remember there were specific pokemon you could catch in one version but not the other. But wasnt the story the same?

I'm not super clear on everything as I just recently started playing the newer generations of games (I hadn't played anything but Blue and Silver for a long time, until I picked up HeartGold and Alpha Sapphire for my 3DS two years ago), but there are still version-exclusive Pokemon, and it goes deeper than it once did. It's not just a set of 6-10 Pokemon that you can catch in one but not the other; there are a lot more "legendary" Pokemon that are exclusive to each release, as well.

The stories between versions are more different than they once were, but not by much.

It's really just a ploy to get people to buy both games so they can complete collections without needing to trade, so I'm curious if they'll continue that now that they can charge $60 for a release. Expecting people to spend $120 every two years to complete their collections is quite the jump.

 

[ulukinatme]

I think it'd be super cool to be in the Allegheny Mountains in a more rural Fallout... could be far creepier.

I'm going to assume it's a online builder as discussed earlier though. That would also explain the rural setting. That has next to zero appeal for my tastes.

Vault 76 was set to open 20 years after the war in rural Virginia; where the first couple games were 100-200+ years later. You're essentially the first ones to step out into the post-apocalyptic wasteland.

It sounds like it's going to be a proper Fallout game, but how they're going to pull off the persistent online component should be interesting.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I think it's really important to reiterate this: Anyone who spends the next two weeks expecting Fallout: 76 to be a new traditional single-player RPG will be VERY disappointed <a href="https://t.co/gUmNYtDXDS">https://t.co/gUmNYtDXDS</a></p>— Jason Schreier (@jasonschreier) <a href="https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/1001832458164285442?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 30, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Yeah, change what worked in the past...ask how that worked out for Gran Turismo Sport Fallout 4 has the lowest User Score among all the major Fallout games, and I imagine a lot of that has to do with the departure from some of the tried and true RPG elements that the past games had. Obviously we don't know enough about Fallout 76 yet, but lately I'm becoming disappointed with Bethesda's direction with this franchise. We want more Point Lookout, less Workshop bullshit. Don't try to be Minecraft when you're the mother ****ing Fallout.

 

[ACamp1900]

Ha, I liked FO4 so much more than FO3... at least for my enjoyment. I also really liked the settlement building and such.

 

[greyhammer90]

Ha, I liked FO4 so much more than FO3... at least for my enjoyment. I also really liked the settlement building and such.

FO4 was a really good open world shooter, it just wasn't a Fallout game. For this reason I'm very excited for their upcoming RAGE reboot. It looks like its going for the same thing, without the franchise baggage.

I've also been concerned with the recent direction of Bethesda, which is trending away from systems driven games that are fun to experiment in and towards streamlined experiences.

 

[ACamp1900]

FO4 was a really good open world shooter, it just wasn't a Fallout game. For this reason I'm very excited for their upcoming RAGE reboot. It looks like its going for the same thing, without the franchise baggage.

I only played FO3 and FO4 so I guess I don't get it...

FO4 was such a better game. I honestly don't get what FO3 had that was so sorely missing from 4... but maybe some of what 3 had played out better in other Fallout games like Vegas or whatever??

 

[greyhammer90]

I only played FO3 and FO4 so I guess I don't get it...

FO4 was such a better game. I honestly don't get what FO3 had that was so sorely missing from 4... but maybe some of what 3 had played out better in other Fallout games like Vegas or whatever??

Yeah you've played the two "least Fallout" Fallout games ever. I can totally see why Fallout 4 would only feel like progression to you.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

Yeah, change what worked in the past...ask how that worked out for Gran Turismo Sport Fallout 4 has the lowest User Score among all the major Fallout games, and I imagine a lot of that has to do with the departure from some of the tried and true RPG elements that the past games had. Obviously we don't know enough about Fallout 76 yet, but lately I'm becoming disappointed with Bethesda's direction with this franchise. We want more Point Lookout, less Workshop bullshit. Don't try to be Minecraft when you're the mother ****ing Fallout.

Agreed. They really need to stop working on Fallout and put all of their muscle behind the next Elder Scrolls game because that's most important!

I need more Skyrim-esque games in my life. The only game comparable was Witcher 3 (W3 had better mechanics, etc) but Skyrim blew my mind when it first came out. Absolutely massive terrain.

 

[ACamp1900]

I think it was ulk and I who went back and forth about 3... I really didn't enjoy that game much. Of all the open world games we all know, GTA, FO, ES, RDD, Dead Rising/Island etc... FO3 was easily my least likable edition of any of those games... it took a lot to get me to try 4 because I really felt I wasted a bunch of time trying to get into 3 and it just never happened.

I still like 4 though.

 

[nlroma1o]

I was always under the impression that Fall Out 3 was the pinnacle of the series. Does FO3 not carry over the systems and exploration allure from the original 2?

 

[greyhammer90]

I think it was ulk and I who went back and forth about 3... I really didn't enjoy that game much. Of all the open world games we all know, GTA, FO, ES, RDD, Dead Rising/Island etc... FO3 was easily my least likable edition of any of those games... it took a lot to get me to try 4 because I really felt I wasted a bunch of time trying to get into 3 and it just never happened.

I still like 4 though.

3 was a decent game but a lot of flaws were overlooked to excuse its transition to first person open world. Then New Vegas by Obsidian came along and everyone was like "Oh THIS feels more like Fallout!" Then 4 came out and it was pretty clear that Bethesda had no interest catering to Fallout fans and wanted to create something much more mainstream.

The whole idea of Fallout is to roleplay a made up character. If I want to be a cannibalistic nueroscientist with a penchant for nuclear weapons who grew up as a feral kid in the Wasteland, I should be able to roleplay convincingly as him if I select stats and make choices that conform with his character. That's the whole "thing" of Fallout, along with ironic retro-futurism. FO3 was only serviceable at this but still gave you some choice. FO4 was terrible though. Voiced protagonist that HAD to be an American veteran, a loving husband, with a child he cares about, and who lived a suburban lifestyle 200 years ago. Add to this that his dialogue options were laughably limited and you really couldn't control much about your character at all except for what weapon he preferred.

I was always under the impression that Fall Out 3 was the pinnacle of the series. Does FO3 not carry over the systems and exploration allure from the original 2?

There's lots of people who prefer the old school fallout in a big way. If the "modern" fallout is your thing the general opinion is that New Vegas holds the crown because Obsidian is an amazing RPG developer.

 

[ACamp1900]

FO4 .... Voiced protagonist that HAD to be an American veteran, a loving husband, with a child he cares about, and who lived a suburban lifestyle 200 years ago. Add to this that his dialogue options were laughably limited and you really couldn't control much about your character at all except for what weapon he preferred.

From my perspective I just wanted a good game with replay value and a good story... FO4 delivered that much more than FO3 imo. It's odd hearing about the customization and such as being a huge deal breaker considering the format of the first two games (It's hard wrapping my mind around that being such an impactful part of a game that essentially looks like Diablo). I get it though, it'd be hard to imagine an Elder Scrolls game where you're character is decided for you from the get go.

 

[nlroma1o]

3 was a decent game but a lot of flaws were overlooked to excuse its transition to first person open world. Then New Vegas by Obsidian came along and everyone was like "Oh THIS feels more like Fallout!" Then 4 came out and it was pretty clear that Bethesda had no interest catering to Fallout fans and wanted to create something much more mainstream.

The whole idea of Fallout is to roleplay a made up character. If I want to be a cannibalistic nueroscientist with a penchant for nuclear weapons who grew up as a feral kid in the Wasteland, I should be able to roleplay convincingly as him if I select stats and make choices that conform with his character. That's the whole "thing" of Fallout, along with ironic retro-futurism. FO3 was only serviceable at this but still gave you some choice. FO4 was terrible though. Voiced protagonist that HAD to be an American veteran, a loving husband, with a child he cares about, and who lived a suburban lifestyle 200 years ago. Add to this that his dialogue options were laughably limited and you really couldn't control much about your character at all except for what weapon he preferred.



There's lots of people who prefer the old school fallout in a big way. If the "modern" fallout is your thing the general opinion is that New Vegas holds the crown because Obsidian is an amazing RPG developer.

Thanks for the info. I've never played the original 2 Fall Out games. I had about 40 hours into FO3 before I gave up and let my brother borrow the game and then never saw it again. I had a friend who loved New Vegas and I watched him play a bit of it but never got hands out with it myself. And when FO4 came out in 2015 I was all up in the Witcher 3. Is there a way to play the original 2 games easily?

 

[ulukinatme]

Thanks for the info. I've never played the original 2 Fall Out games. I had about 40 hours into FO3 before I gave up and let my brother borrow the game and then never saw it again. I had a friend who loved New Vegas and I watched him play a bit of it but never got hands out with it myself. And when FO4 came out in 2015 I was all up in the Witcher 3. Is there a way to play the original 2 games easily?

GOG or Steam have the first two Fallout games I believe. I still have my old disks, but I bought the Steam versions of Fallout 1, 2, and Tactics on sale just so I'd be able to easily install them on Windows 7 going forward.

Grey pretty much hit the nail on the head when it comes to Bethesda's Fallout games. Many people came into the franchise for the first time during Fallout 3, and it was a decent game, but 3 and 4 are probably the least "Fallout" games in the series when you get down to brass tacks. New Vegas was done by some of the original Fallout creators using Bethesda's engine, and it very much felt like a return to the RPG style that made Fallout 1 and 2 popular.

New Vegas was awesome, it brought back all the old RPG elements that were missing from 3, it brought back the multitudes of decisions and directions in questing that let you play the game how you wanted to play it. It's extremely limiting to do a "roleplaying" game when the game forces you to make the same decisions without any options. It's also boring and doesn't add anything to replay value. Fallout 3 and 4 were very much like that, you're often forced to take certain paths, whereas in the original games and New Vegas there are often several different factions you can choose from, and dozens of possible endings for each faction depending on what choices you made while playing! I don't know how many times I've replayed New Vegas because I wanted to see what would happen if I sided with a different group, or if I decided to let someone live and someone else died. That stuff still happens in Fallout 3, but you rarely get those options, and in Fallout 4 almost all of your dialogue choices equate to "But thou must!" and they force you to do something anyway.

I would say I probably did enjoy 4 more than 3 when all is said and done, but it's a narrow gap. The settlements were neat at first, but it soon became tedious building up your 20th location and keeping them all defended. When I think back to Fallout game mechanics, settlements aren't one I'll remember fondly as something that defined the franchise. There's no attachment to random, unnamed NPCs with no backstory, personality, or flavor...and there's a LOT of those bland vanilla NPCs in Fallout 4.