Oh, Crimson Desert's main quest is a lot more engaging than that of the average Bethesda game. I couldn't name you a single thing that happened in Fallout 4's or Skyrim's. And the only thing I remember about that of Fallout 3 is that the climax involved a giant robot and at the end you had to sacrifice yourself for no reason.
Right which makes my point for me cause people didn't seem to have this issue of getting bored of skyrim cause the main quest was plain and generic cause the game had so much else to do. They just opted to do it in its case.
I didn't pay much attention to Skyrim's reviews because I took Oblivion on faith and found it to be utter garbage so whenever someone tried to shove the game at me I told them to jog on. And by the way, even back in 2011 when it came out, that recommendation was almost always accompanied by a list of mods; because Bethesda cannot make a game engaging on its own to save their fucking life it seems.
Even in open world games, the critical path is the path I'm most interested in because that tends to be the story, a big attraction to the RPG and Action RPG genre. So at least some ground work should be laid within the first few hours to generate some interest in the main questline if only to provide an incentive for the player to return to it once their current bout of side questing has come to an end.
If they didn't care to enjoy it - a statement that to me makes no sense - then I'd argue the game in-fact sucks for the player and no amount of browbeating or promises of improvement in another six to seven hours will ever work.
Good thing the game isn’t an rpg or arpg then. It’s more of an open world dmc. Combat and exploration are the core engagement.
You think reviewers are excited about every game they have to review as part of their job? I think it’s more of the exception that they’d be excited and care about enjoying a game as opposed to the rule. Typically most of their reviews are a job to them. Something they rush out under stress to earn a living.
The expectations are much higher if it does though, so knowing that it’d better be good. The problem with Bethesda games in general seems to be that despite having both big money and notoriety, it takes modders doing things for free to breath some life into them after the pub already made its money.
Well, you know what they say, you start off saving cats, you end up killing gods. And the god killing wouldn't be as satisfying if you couldn't look back on the cat saving and realize how far you've come.
Straight up, I think Bethesda's been running on fumes for a long time. I understand why Morrowind is great, even though it was never exactly my bag. I admire how ambitious Oblivion is and how involved some of its quest design is, even though it already showed Bethesda's big weaknesses, main quest and character writing. Skyrim was Oblivion with almost everything interesting streamlined away and worse quests. Fallout 3, 4, and Starfield are just kind of a meme, honestly.
I don't think Bethesda was ever good, except in one aspect and that was the ability to make huge worlds. Much like Crimson Desert actually where the game is wide as an ocean but deep as a puddle. The scope for these titles is incredible, but the content in which you explore and exist within that world is minimal. Bethesda's gameplay has never once been anything i would ever call "good", at best it works kind of. They've never had deep RPG systems, complex mechanics, incredible storytelling, nothing but a big world has ever truly been great about anything Bethesda has ever done.
The game did well without them at last.I checked the developers aren't championing that crowd either. You know how the aw work at this point. The parasites that latch and leach off of anything, just so they can always be heard, or act as if they're fighting a winning battle of some kind that will never end, no matter how much they claim to be. Fuck them and ignore them. Play this game for the right reasons or don't play this game for the right reasons. Whatever decision, don't do it because of these fools.
Yeah.
He didn't say that, he said that he empathizes with the people who criticized it and wishes he there would have been more time to fill in some gaps, but they chose to polish up the gameplay instead. The story's good, but yes, it could have used more direct exposition and relied less on optional documents, memory fragments (basically the games version of audio logs) and the glossary to relay it. But it's far from actually bad.
I'm not sure that's a problem, in fact I think it's a design feature.
The game is either worth your time or not, I don't understand the idea of waiting for it to be discounted. Sure, if you are currently playing another game or more interested in playing other games first and by the time you'd get to wanting to play, in this case, Crimson Desert, it would be cheaper because it isn't new anymore.
I'm glad to see you have upped your standards. I am still a gameplay over story person, but if a story's good, I am not gonna cry about it. I don't blame you on waiting for a discount, and there's nothing wrong with that. Don't let anyone else tell you differently. I've gotten plenty of games at a discount for one reason or another. Not All the time but I was usually happy to get the game if deemed it worth my time.
What is there to understand about waiting for a discount. Discount = cheaper. You like paying more money for things? Some games (or movies or whatevers) are of varying degrees of interest. Crimson Desert is not worth my time now or $70. Maybe in the future, when it's $20, it will be worth it. Maybe it will never be. I think most people logically make decisions on their entertainment purchases like this.
Guilty. But to be fair, this is the first time in literally over a decade that I jumped on a game at full-price. What's sad is, I bought it a couple of weeks ago, and have literally played it all of 10 minutes. I've booted it up three times, even re-started two of those times, trying to get my head in the game, but am simply overwhelmed with all the mechanics is tries to throw at you, and trying to pay attention to the dialogue and story, ugh. I feel like I've been spoiled by FROM worlds that introduce you to the basics, then throw you to the wolves to explore and experience at your own pace. I'm 10 minutes in, and already there's factions, names to remember, allegiances I'm supposed to be invested in by virtue of buying the game and controlling a non-player created character, etc. It sounds really dumb on my part, but I will jump in in earnest at some point, hopefully it's well before any substantive discount to make me look like even more of a jackass, i.e.: I hope to update this thread with my own progress well before the shine has worn off and the rest of the world has all but forgotten about it, and I have to dig 3-4 pages into the forum to find this topic again..
Can't you return it? < 2 hrs on Steam? Or did you buy it digital on Playstation or Nintendo?
I understand wanting to pay less for things obviously. With video games, the game being worth my time to play is far more important than the price. I'm not going to play a game that is free that I don't feel is worth playing. Video games as a hobby are such a low cost hobby (assuming you're not playing those microtransaction based games) that I honestly don't care much about the price. What hobby on a per hour cost is cheaper than video gaming? Going to see a movie is at least a $5/hour; at least $10 for a movie and they are about 2 hours on average. If Crimson Desert (or whatever open world type game like it) is entertaining you for 50-100 hours, then you ain't beating that cost per hour doing anything else regardless if you paid $70 or $20 for the game. Saying a game isn't worth $70 but you'd buy it for $40 just seems really dumb to me.
