We all want it NOW. But I doubt it'll be out even in 2013.John Funk said:That depends on if Diablo 3 is coming out this year or not.
Uhh. Mass Effect 3 must be really godlike to beat Portal 2.
We all want it NOW. But I doubt it'll be out even in 2013.John Funk said:That depends on if Diablo 3 is coming out this year or not.
I was going to say shitty writing, but New Vegas was pretty good at that (also not made by the same company).ciortas1 said:A shitty inventory system? Clunky combat? Horrid animations? Unkillable children? The conversation system?Kadoodle said:Portal 2 is running strong with a chain of positive reviews.
Many people are mentioning Skyrim; I warn you all with a riddle: What did Oblivion, Fallout 3, and Fallout New Vegas have in common that the latter suffered worst?
They are immersion breaking and that's why I don't like them either. And while I can't fault Rockstar for my not using the fast travel system I can fault them for making the alternative literally painful.Zing said:Mikeyfell said:GTA Vice City was fun. I exclude it from my incoming Rockstar bash.
The problem I have with Rockstar is moving around in their games.
A sandbox game is about getting from point A to point B, you spend maybe half or your time in transit. walking in a strait line is hard. Running in a strait line is harder. Sprinting in a strait line is impossible because you have to tap the A button and hold the stick forward while avoiding curbs and lamp posts and gum wrappers that people left on the floor. because hitting any of those will stop you cold in your tracks. Driving is even harder because they're all top heavy and fish tail somebody buttered the back tires.
The specific problems I had with GTA 4 were the story and the cellphone/Email mechanic. The story is too serious to take 20 minute brakes to go grief NPC's and you'll constantly have to answer a text message or reply to an Email or something just a mind-numbingly tedious that I don't even do that shit in real life. GTA 4 is the second worst game I've ever played
Red Dead Redemption was okay. it would have been better if they took out all those horse rides and insta-kill cougars because just like GTA getting from A to B is a pain in the ass.
Also nothing you could do in the sandbox part of RDR had any point what so ever. So Rockstar games give you no intensive to sandbox. They're both frustrating and pointless.
Long story short if Rockstar makes moving around not a pain in the ass L.A. Noire might be awesome.
Both GTAIV and Red Dead Redemption had simple easy methods of instant travel that made the game flow easily if you just wished to get from point A to point B. GTAIV had the taxi service which would instantly transport you to your destination, RDR had the campfire system which you could set up anywhere and instant travel to your destination.
Personally, I find those methods immersion breaking, but they definitely exist and you can't fault Rockstar for you not using them.
I constantly hear about the phone and email service in GTAIV, but I never had an issue with it. I simply ignored calls, it didn't affect the game if you were off mission and just shitting around.
But either way your main qualm seems to be with having to travel extensively, which in reality, you didn't have to do it at all.
I've heard this so fucking muchYou can't have played many games for GTAIV to be the "second worst game you've ever played".
Wikipedia said:Infiniminer heavily influenced the style of gameplay that eventually resulted in Minecraft
If Bethesda's making Skyrim I'll probably be happy with itLevi93 said:I never really had a problem with the movment systems in any of Rockstars games, my only real problem was that if you were to run into a wall the running and imation would continue breaking the immersion, other than that I actually think the movement systems in GTAIV and Red Dead Redemption mainly cause of the inclusion of the Euphoria engine (excluding Vice City and San andreas 'cause they dont use Euphoria), I know a lot of people don't like the Euphoria engine but I really really can't see why, I've had hours of fun playing around with the trial version of the engine.Mikeyfell said:*Snip.*
Although the phone and E-mail mechanic in GTAIV were really annoying.
As for Fallout New Vegas, yeah Obsidian made the game but Bethesda published it, the only thing that Bethesda did was give Obsidian the Gamebyro engine to make the game with.
Oh and Obsidian have a pretty bad history for releasing buggy games although I never relly found it difficult playing as anything but melee tank pre-patch before a lot of the bugs were fixed.
But overall I found New Vegas too be less linear than Fallout 3, mainly cause there were more minigames, missions, weapons and (IMO) a more interesting setting than Fallout 3, not to say fallout 3 is bad though, it was really good.
The only thing that I really didnt like in New Vegas was how the game started, the amnesia episode of Extra Credits nails this one perfectly, it's a pretty in depth RPG where we build a character how we want him/her to be, yet we are left without a back story, we are just plonked into the world, this is okay with games like Minecraft where there is no story, you pretty much craft your own(excuse the pun) but it just doesn't work in New Vegas where we have a pre-determined and really fleshed out story.
How on Earth did you do that??drummodino said:EDIT: Sorry I forgot about Skyrim :S
BUGS!!! Now wheres my cookie?Kadoodle said:Portal 2 is running strong with a chain of positive reviews.
Many people are mentioning Skyrim; I warn you all with a riddle: What did Oblivion, Fallout 3, and Fallout New Vegas have in common that the latter suffered worst?