That's the exact reason why I like Bioware over Bethesda's products because of the story and structure. I can't focus on long not structured like Morrowind.PatrickXD said:I might be biased, because my experience with Bioware is limited to the Mass Effect's and Dragon Age whereas I've been playing Morrowind for about 8 years now but I don't like Bioware games. They are too restricted and I find the huge overbearing plot really saps the fun factor from the games.
That could ether be the single greatest or single worst idea ever. On that note, I think they should go for it.Alexandria Pajak said:they should combine for the same reasons, and then hook up with Steam
Okay, they can polish MOST of a game. And for every mistake they've made, Bethesda has made at least three.mindlesspuppet said:Mako.Phlakes said:Bioware because they can polish a game.
Well primarily it was the fact that it didn't work. Shame on me for playing the game before this miraculous patch (which I'm still skeptical about.) came out, because the game froze constantly, and I had other problems as well, like not getting any sound 80% of the time I started the game up.MrJKapowey said:Sorry, but what was so bad about F:NV?rockyoumonkeys said:Eh...both are great, but Bethesda loses points for having their name attached to the abomination known as Fallout New Vegas. I know they didn't develop it, but they still published it.
Bioware's games are great, but I think I still enjoyed getting lost in the worlds of Oblivion and Fallout 3 enough to even the scales.
I liked the story and the chars and the faction interaction. It was even made by the guys who made 1+2 so no studio fanboyisms.
Thank you.Durxom said:I'm going to say neither and go with Obsidian. They make better games in each's respective franchises than the companies can do themselves. They also could have probably fixed the massive disappointment that Mass Effect 2 was too :/
One: Preordered off Amazon, ONE bug, in 70 hours so far. What was that? a body starfished (or whatever the technical term is for limb stretching)rockyoumonkeys said:Well primarily it was the fact that it didn't work. Shame on me for playing the game before this miraculous patch (which I'm still skeptical about.) came out, because the game froze constantly, and I had other problems as well, like not getting any sound 80% of the time I started the game up.
So yeah, maybe that fact took me out of the game when I had to get up every 20 minutes to do a hard-reset of the system, or how I started to FEAR doors because of the potential for infinite load screens. That'll certainly distrupt the flow of the game.
But it just felt SMALLER than Fallout 3. So much time is spent in and around New Vegas, that the whole "apocalyptic wasteland" effect was somewhat dulled and it's just a bunch of somewhat dirty casinos or hotels.
Now granted, I didn't play much of the first two games, so the fact that it's "more like them" is lost on me, but I don't really buy that as a good reason to defend it anyway. A game should be good for its own reasons, not because it's more like something you enjoyed ten or fifteen years ago.
Fallout 3 worked fine for me. First time I played it (on PS3), got one freeze in like 90 hours, just near the end. Played it two more times on the 360 with the DLC, no freezes. No problems. So I guess it's even sadder that a "bunch of fanboys" made a better Fallout game than the original developers? Hmmm.