Yeah he’s right, the 2010s saw a flood of open world video games that all claimed to be bigger and better than ever before, but very few of them had any substance. That said, I’ve just started playing the Outer Worlds and it feels like Obsidian weren’t ambitious enough. There aren’t enough choices, especially in dialogue, and it often comes down to being mean or being nice. The planets are small so I only spend a few hours on each of them, and I don’t have much of an impression of them.
Anyway if you’re making a big open world game movement needs to feel fun, because that’s what you’re doing between objectives. Riding a horse works in the Witcher and Red Dead Redemption 2, and climbing and paragliding works in Breath of the Wild. Skyrim and Fallout 4 have terrible movement mechanics but there’s something new and interesting to see every 30 seconds, so its not that bad. This is because the thing Bethesda are best at is designing a handcrafted world, so why the fuck did they randomly generate Starfield’s world. What were they fucking thinking
Yeah so much of the game is just a sightly more fleshed out fetcb quest. Go get this book for the vicar and he’ll be your companion isn’t a good quest, Obsidian. It’s still better than Bethesda quests because Obsidian can actually write interesting characters who are at least flavourful quest givers.
Also I’ve started playing the Witcher 3 and I’ve noticed that a lot of quests seem to have two stages: one where you set out on the quest to fulfill the mission, and another where you realize your original mission wasn’t the full story. Like when you go to find someone’s brother who was wounded in war, then you find him hiding with a deserter from the other side. A lot of side quests feel like they have a built in gotcha moment as part of a formula
Yeah he’s right, the 2010s saw a flood of open world video games that all claimed to be bigger and better than ever before, but very few of them had any substance. That said, I’ve just started playing the Outer Worlds and it feels like Obsidian weren’t ambitious enough. There aren’t enough choices, especially in dialogue, and it often comes down to being mean or being nice. The planets are small so I only spend a few hours on each of them, and I don’t have much of an impression of them.
Anyway if you’re making a big open world game movement needs to feel fun, because that’s what you’re doing between objectives. Riding a horse works in the Witcher and Red Dead Redemption 2, and climbing and paragliding works in Breath of the Wild. Skyrim and Fallout 4 have terrible movement mechanics but there’s something new and interesting to see every 30 seconds, so its not that bad. This is because the thing Bethesda are best at is designing a handcrafted world, so why the fuck did they randomly generate Starfield’s world. What were they fucking thinking
Dont forget grappling, gliding and parachuting around the Just Cause games. They rarely felt like a slog.
Oh yeah definitely, I could spend so long in Just Cause 3 just flying around because it felt so good
Fetch Quest: The Game
Yeah so much of the game is just a sightly more fleshed out fetcb quest. Go get this book for the vicar and he’ll be your companion isn’t a good quest, Obsidian. It’s still better than Bethesda quests because Obsidian can actually write interesting characters who are at least flavourful quest givers.
Also I’ve started playing the Witcher 3 and I’ve noticed that a lot of quests seem to have two stages: one where you set out on the quest to fulfill the mission, and another where you realize your original mission wasn’t the full story. Like when you go to find someone’s brother who was wounded in war, then you find him hiding with a deserter from the other side. A lot of side quests feel like they have a built in gotcha moment as part of a formula