Quantcast
The Outer Worlds announced for Switch

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - The Outer Worlds announced for Switch

Cerebralbore101 said:

$377 dollars for a Panasonic Q though. 

Yeah my bad. Those weren't Xbox exclusives. No excuse for lack of games on Xbox. Just an explanation. OG Xbox wasn't a very good system. Lack of games and all that. 

Low sales cause lack of games, and vice versa. Never been to a Sony-Only forums. Been a Nintendo fan since the N64 and only got a PS2 in late 2005. 

Sony paid off Squaresoft? Source? 

Sony bought Square stock in order to financially aid them which in turn gave them some influence in the company they further bought more in 2001 for further aid, it's also said that Sony gave Square a huge discount in license fees and such to help sway them from going to Sega. When Square merged with Enix they no longer needed any financing plus the the merger reduced Sony's influence over Square so the shares were sold see below.

https://uk.ign.com/articles/2014/05/13/why-sony-sold-all-its-square-enix-shares-revealed



Around the Network
Bofferbrauer2 said:
pokoko said:
Going to wait for some reviews on this. Fallout: New Vegas was kind of a mess with a lot of badly thought-out "RPG systems" that took away player freedom. It was like they shoehorned in everything they could think of without regard to how well it worked. Hopefully, this will be more refined and intelligent.

I would consider New Vegas as the only playable Fallout game under Bethesda. 3,4,76 just ain't Fallout. Or much of an RPG, for that matter.

I don't know if you played the previous Fallout titles (1+2, most notably), but if you did, then you would know that New Vegas was more like a return to sources, literally so even: The Devs were also the people who made Fallout 1+2 in the first place. They mostly just put things from those games back in that Bethesda cut out in 3.

I don't care if they're like the first two games in the slightest, I only care if I like playing them.  Doesn't matter to me if they mimic old RPGs, either.  I don't go into a game thinking, "if this isn't like earlier games then I refuse to enjoy it."  I have no idea why you are unable to play Fallout 3 or Fallout 4 because I had a blast with both, just as I did with New Vegas.

I have 800+ hours in New Vegas but I'm not going to deny that it was a flawed game, especially with regards to "RPG" elements like karma and the terrible faction system.  Thankfully, there were a multitude of mods to make them less annoying and nonsensical.  I went back and played New Vegas after I beat Fallout 4, which did a lot to remove my nostalgia glasses.

Hopefully Obsidian has learned some lessons or I'm going to wait and see if mods come to the rescue again.



Cerebralbore101 said:

$377 dollars for a Panasonic Q though. 

Yeah my bad. Those weren't Xbox exclusives. No excuse for lack of games on Xbox. Just an explanation. OG Xbox wasn't a very good system. Lack of games and all that. 

Low sales cause lack of games, and vice versa. Never been to a Sony-Only forums. Been a Nintendo fan since the N64 and only got a PS2 in late 2005. 

Sony paid off Squaresoft? Source? 

https://www.polygon.com/a/final-fantasy-7

Tomoyuki Takechi
President and chief executive officer, Square

Sony basically gave us the best deal they were giving to any publisher. And they did a lot of public relations work and marketing on their dime. They gave us a great deal to help convince us to come over. … I can’t talk about the details, but one thing I can say is that Sony went very low on the per-unit royalties that we had to pay.

Shinichiro Kajitani
Vice president, Square USA

When we made the decision to go with Sony, for about 10 years we basically weren’t allowed into Nintendo’s offices. From a consumer’s point of view, it was good to have two companies competing with each other because prices wouldn’t rise and it would be better for them. But from a business perspective, our main interest was making sure that Sony won and Nintendo lost, basically, because that would be better for us.

[Note: In October 2001, then Square president Hisashi Suzuki said in an interview that Nintendo became especially frustrated not when Square left, but later when Square helped convince others, such as Enix, to leave as well. Suzuki declined an interview request for this story.]



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

pokoko said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

I would consider New Vegas as the only playable Fallout game under Bethesda. 3,4,76 just ain't Fallout. Or much of an RPG, for that matter.

I don't know if you played the previous Fallout titles (1+2, most notably), but if you did, then you would know that New Vegas was more like a return to sources, literally so even: The Devs were also the people who made Fallout 1+2 in the first place. They mostly just put things from those games back in that Bethesda cut out in 3.

I don't care if they're like the first two games in the slightest, I only care if I like playing them.  Doesn't matter to me if they mimic old RPGs, either.  I don't go into a game thinking, "if this isn't like earlier games then I refuse to enjoy it."  I have no idea why you are unable to play Fallout 3 or Fallout 4 because I had a blast with both, just as I did with New Vegas.

I have 800+ hours in New Vegas but I'm not going to deny that it was a flawed game, especially with regards to "RPG" elements like karma and the terrible faction system.  Thankfully, there were a multitude of mods to make them less annoying and nonsensical.  I went back and played New Vegas after I beat Fallout 4, which did a lot to remove my nostalgia glasses.

Hopefully Obsidian has learned some lessons or I'm going to wait and see if mods come to the rescue again.

Apart from the bugs, horrid tech and being so dumbed down I can hardly qualify them as RPG anymore. Especially 4 is more a looter shooter than a real RPG anymore. But hey, the dumbing down helped with selling the franchise to casuals, so the sales exploded.

Since I went through most of the world-building with 1,2, Brotherhood of Steel and Tactics, that part wasn't new to me. In fact, the changes they made was more eerie to me most of the time. Like that constant 50's soundtrack (1+2 had just the wind howling and sometimes ticking of Geiger counters outside of towns. 50's music was only used in intro videos). Power Armor only really was a thing only for the endgame (unless you made a very specific run in Fallout 2, and even that one only works through excessive save scumming), same with the most powerful weapons. What's left was the gameplay and that was pretty much boring to me. Like I said, to me, they're pretty much the original looter shooters. New Vegas fixed the game, not broke it, as far as I'm concerned, it made Fallout an RPG again.

As for Obsidian having learned their lesson, have a look at Wasteland 2, and judge.



I totally missed this somehow.

I wondered what Virtuous had been up to; they've done some solid work on Switch ports like Starlink and Dark Souls, but this looks to be on a whole other level so I'm very interested to see how it turns out. Apparently it's a UE4 game, and Switch has shown good results with this engine before, albeit usually at the cost of a lower resolution. 

If it turns out well, I might even pick it up.



Around the Network
Bofferbrauer2 said:
pokoko said:

I don't care if they're like the first two games in the slightest, I only care if I like playing them.  Doesn't matter to me if they mimic old RPGs, either.  I don't go into a game thinking, "if this isn't like earlier games then I refuse to enjoy it."  I have no idea why you are unable to play Fallout 3 or Fallout 4 because I had a blast with both, just as I did with New Vegas.

I have 800+ hours in New Vegas but I'm not going to deny that it was a flawed game, especially with regards to "RPG" elements like karma and the terrible faction system.  Thankfully, there were a multitude of mods to make them less annoying and nonsensical.  I went back and played New Vegas after I beat Fallout 4, which did a lot to remove my nostalgia glasses.

Hopefully Obsidian has learned some lessons or I'm going to wait and see if mods come to the rescue again.

Apart from the bugs, horrid tech and being so dumbed down I can hardly qualify them as RPG anymore. Especially 4 is more a looter shooter than a real RPG anymore. But hey, the dumbing down helped with selling the franchise to casuals, so the sales exploded.

Since I went through most of the world-building with 1,2, Brotherhood of Steel and Tactics, that part wasn't new to me. In fact, the changes they made was more eerie to me most of the time. Like that constant 50's soundtrack (1+2 had just the wind howling and sometimes ticking of Geiger counters outside of towns. 50's music was only used in intro videos). Power Armor only really was a thing only for the endgame (unless you made a very specific run in Fallout 2, and even that one only works through excessive save scumming), same with the most powerful weapons. What's left was the gameplay and that was pretty much boring to me. Like I said, to me, they're pretty much the original looter shooters. New Vegas fixed the game, not broke it, as far as I'm concerned, it made Fallout an RPG again.

As for Obsidian having learned their lesson, have a look at Wasteland 2, and judge.

Really, I just don't care if people don't want to call it an "RPG" because it doesn't meet their narrow criteria.  I've spent way more time actually role-playing in Fallout 4 because of the settlement building but, for a certain group, "RPG" doesn't actually mean role-playing, it means following an old "choose your own adventures" formula that manages their experience for them.  I really, really, really hope that group of people loves this game and leaves Fallout behind because they are one of the worst fandoms in all of gaming.  I'm pretty sure I own Fallout 1 but I haven't played it because I just plain don't want to be associated with that crowd.  They're toxic.

The weird thing is that New Vegas is barely different from Fallout 3.  New Vegas just makes you dress up a lot to answer questions--or, if that fails, level up a bit and come back.  Big deal.  You say "dumbed down" as a way to put down something you don't like but the old style of "RPG" is just handholding for people who want a rigid structure of choices set down by the developer rather than deal with using their own imaginations.



So with this we know what pretty much all the main Switch porting studios are doing currently; Virtuous is on this, Panic Button is on Doom Eternal, and Iron Galaxy are on Dauntless. That just leaves QLOC, the guys behind Hellblade and Dragon's Dogma. I hope they take on more Switch projects, their work on Hellblade in particular was exemplary.



curl-6 said:

So with this we know what pretty much all the main Switch porting studios are doing currently; Virtuous is on this, Panic Button is on Doom Eternal, and Iron Galaxy are on Dauntless. That just leaves QLOC, the guys behind Hellblade and Dragon's Dogma. I hope they take on more Switch projects, their work on Hellblade in particular was exemplary.

Maybe we'll hear something about them in the next direct, who knows.



Cerebralbore101 said:
Damn! Switch has the best 3rd party support since GameCube!

Every Nintendo console since Gamecube has had better third party support. Even the Wii U and 3DS.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Jumpin said:
Cerebralbore101 said:
Damn! Switch has the best 3rd party support since GameCube!

Every Nintendo console since Gamecube has had better third party support. Even the Wii U and 3DS.

3DS has better 3rd party support than Gamecube for sure. But that's a handheld. I was mainly talking about home consoles. GameCube got a lot of AAA multiplat titles. Wii U did not get that many of them. Wii U had the worst 3rd party support IMO. 



The sentence below is false. 
The sentence above is true.