By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
pokoko on 19 November 2015
Edit Thread
Mummelmann said:
HoloDust said:


You can be against it all you want, it's your view on things and it's valid for you, but there is a very good reason why on core c/W/RPG sites like RPGCodex Fallout 1/2 are in top 3, with Fallout NV being 8th - and it has absolutely nothing to do with nostalgia goggles. For reference, so that no one thinks there is Bethesda hate there, Morrowind is in 7th place.

I completely understand how Bethesda's versions appeal more to mass market, especially FO4 that is even further dumbed down as RPG from FO3 - game is still decently fun and it certainly has its audience, it's just moving away from RPG elements that originals had and that FO3 at least tried to preserve to some degree.

IMO, right move be to try and bring all the missing stuff form FO1/2 into Bethesda's vision, but I guess that would be too much work or too niche for their current mass market status.


It's the same story with the TES games; the more RPG elements they remove, the more popular it gets. I can understand it from a business perspective but for RPG fans, it's not really fun when games get more and more shallow. Mass Effect is another prime example, and Dragon Age as well, Diablo 3 went down the same path and the community nose-dived after only a few months where D2 remained relevant for more than a decade online.
The massive budgets force developers to aim for the lowest (or at least lower) common denominator to gain more sales from the so called "broader audience", so this is a self-preptuating cycle that will probably get worse in the coming years.

The number of good, proper RPG releases is going down and down, which is a shame since modern gaming machines have the potential to house games with both good looks and depth. Writing has taken a backseat to production value.

Heck; Fallout 4 doesn't even have skills any longer, so every character can use every armor and weapon. Some say it's appealing because you avoid missing with your build, I say it takes a lot of the point away from RPG's as a genre; custom characters with varied skills, strengths and weaknesses are a part of essential ingredients that make the meal complete. I don't care how much you can morph your characters face, which you'll only see in the (poor) dialogue sequences anyway, this is not what RPG's should be about and it doesn't add any depth to the actual game, it's just more visual filler.
Your actual stats have little bearing on the gameplay in Fallout 4 (the SPECIAL stats) and might as well be removed as well.
Fallout 4 is basically a re-skinned Skyrim and it's painstakingly obvious that these series are being developed in tandem, this takes away from them both in the end and I would like it if they tried to make them more different instead of both aiming down the middle.

Don't get me wrong, there are still good RPG's being made, but the masters of old (looking at you, Bioware and Bethesda) have lost it recently. This is one of the main reasons I loved The Witcher 3 so much; it wasn't like every other RPG, and this is, ironically, the main arguments for why a lot of people didn't like it. Yes, you're forced to play as a character the author and developer made, but you flesh him out and TW3 actually has more customization than F4 due to the system itself actually having consequences that affect gameplay a great deal.
I would much rather play an RPG with template characters from the box that can be tailor-made than make my own L'Oreal model with the exact right beard stubble and perfect ear lobes that can do what all the other L'Oreal models can right from scratch.
The "moral" or "good/bad" system in Fallout 4 and similar titles is also laughable, same with Mass Effect, yet another point where The Witcher 3 destroys the competition.

I do like Fallout 4, as I liked New Vegas, but as an RPG, it had shed weight and depth in favor of, well, pretty much tinkering with gear (which isn't nearly as fantastic as it sounded at first), terrible base building and L'Oreal model creator 1.0. Throw in more superficial things, remove depth, that's how to make an RPG today, apparently.
Luckily, games like Pillars of Eternity and The Witcher 3 show that not only are there developers that are willing to go a different path; there is also a market for these games.

I'm going to disagree with you pretty much every way possible.  Like, on a fundamental level.  Not that you're wrong about what you like but rather that your ideas about RPGs are not absolutes.

Basically, it sounds like what you're saying is that for you to enjoy an RPG, the developers have to tightly define your playstyle and tell you what choices you can make.  That's fine.  Those can be good games.  However, it's every bit as valid and, for me, enjoyable, when the developer allows you to use your imagination.  Personally, I'm not using metal armor because my character wouldn't.  I'm not using mini-guns or rocket launchers unless I'm in power armor.  I'm using non-automatic rifles.  I'm using my charisma.  I'm focusing on picking locks and hacking.  This is the character that I'm creating on my own and I'm doing it because that's what I want, not because I'm following a path laid down by the developers.  The SPECIAL chart is a guide that gives you focus but it never feels frustrating because you can't get to something that changes everything.  I think that's perfectly fine as an RPG and, honestly, pretty awesome.