What [not shmup] game are you playing now?

[Arino]

It does get hard though.

Ok I'm glad

[To Far Away Times]

I heard a lot of negative things about Fallout 4, but honestly I’m having a great time with it.

The new dog companion, building settlements and emphasizing the importance of in-universe junk items, the fantastic opening setpiece, the creative setup for the character creator… lots of really great ideas here.

Fallout 3 didn’t click for me the way Skyrim and Oblivion did, and I bounced of New Vegas quickly (since it was basically just a new story using Fallout 3 assets), which lead to me passing on Fallout 4 initially.

[guigui]

I heard a lot of negative things about Fallout 4, but honestly I’m having a great time with it.

The new dog companion, building settlements and emphasizing the importance of in-universe junk items, the fantastic opening setpiece, the creative setup for the character creator… lots of really great ideas here.

Fallout 3 didn’t click for me the way Skyrim and Oblivion did, and I bounced of New Vegas quickly (since it was basically just a new story using Fallout 3 assets), which lead to me passing on Fallout 4 initially.

FallOut 3 and 4 were mandatorily disliked by FO1 and FO2 fans, because it lost the turn-based, much of the choices and consequences stuffs, good writing, atmospheric universe of the 2 first games.

Having played FO 1, 2, 3 and 4, I can definitely confirm that 3 and 4 are not the same type of games, and imho not as enjoyable as 1 and 2. Havent tried 76 and later entries, but I know they follow the 3 and 4 directions.

New Vegas, however, somehow manages to catch the atmosphere, good writing, choices and consequences of 1 and 2, with the FPS aspect of 3 and 4. Note that you can play New Vegas with some kind of 3D turn-based combat system if yo want, not bad.

To me, FO1 and 2 are still the best games in the series, but I'd say that New Vegas is the one game to play if you dont want to go back all the way to FO1 and its DOS-esque interface.

[Sima Tuna]

Fallout 4's infinite leveling perk system and radiant questing sucks a fat chode, though. You can like the game as much as you want, so long as we agree those two things suck ass.

https://youtu.be/i9tn7ygaebE?t=94

[Air Master Burst]

building settlements and emphasizing the importance of in-universe junk items,

Settlement building is just an excuse to write fewer interesting locations and encounters, since there has to be a ton of empty space to build shit in.

Given how bad pipboy-based inventory management is, I think they should've gone the opposite direction with junk items. Then again, everyone apparently loves fucking crafting shit, so what do I know?

FallOut 3 and 4 were mandatorily disliked by FO1 and FO2 fans, because it lost the turn-based, much of the choices and consequences stuffs, good writing, atmospheric universe of the 2 first games.

I thought Fallout 3 did a much better job of capturing the atmosphere of Fallout 1 than Fallout 2 ever did, and If they hadn't biffed the main quest and ending so bad it would've had a much better reception from old school Fallout fans. New Vegas is a lot closer to Fallout 2's vibe, and while it was overall a better game than 3, I vastly preferred D.C. to Vegas and the NCR.

I don't know what vibe 4 was going for, but it sucked.

ETA ranking after thinking about it while smoking a bowl:

1
3
2
New Vegas
Tactics
4
Getting hit by a bus
76

[vol.2]

I thought Fallout 3 did a much better job of capturing the atmosphere of Fallout 1 than Fallout 2 ever did, and If they hadn't biffed the main quest and ending so bad it would've had a much better reception from old school Fallout fans.

My main problem with 3 was that it entirely lacks any challenge whatsoever. I just booted it up and breezed through everything the game threw at me by min maxing my character. At first, I thought I was just playing it wrong by doing all the combat in FPS mode, but the RPG system didn't make it any harder, it just made everything take a lot longer.

Also, the hour plus long unskippable intro sequence is fucking abhorrent.

Outside of that, I guess I had some fun running around blowing stuff up, but I never cared about the characters or any of the plot of the game.

[Air Master Burst]

My main problem with 3 was that it entirely lacks any challenge whatsoever. I just booted it up and breezed through everything the game threw at me by min maxing my character.

Yeah, lots of games feel too easy if you play them to see content in the most boring way possible. Fallout isn't meant for min/maxing, it's meant to be fun! My first play of Fallout 3 I made a mad scientist based on Pearl Forrester and just played everything the way I thought she would. I died a bunch. It was great!

[Daytime Waitress]

My first play of Fallout 3 I made a mad scientist based on Pearl Forrester and just played everything the way I thought she would.

In principle I approve, but hucking VHS copies of Final Sacrifice at super mutants sounds like a bit of a grind tbh

[vol.2]

Fallout isn't meant for min/maxing, it's meant to be fun! My first play of Fallout 3 I made a mad scientist based on Pearl Forrester and just played everything the way I thought she would. I died a bunch. It was great!

I guess I'm just not built to play games that way. lol. Too much trauma from trying to beat NES games as a kid maybe, but I view video games as something to beat, and whatever the developer left on the table is fair game. I never owned a game genie, and I don't endorse cheating, but whatever means are present to win should be taken advantage of. Obviously there are some game-breaking omissions that sometimes need to be considered, like the guns in Devil May Cry 2 (although it's such a crap game that it's not really worth playing anyway), but generally speaking, a game should be made to address different styles of play. It isn't my fault for playing the game in a way they didn't intend; the developers failed by not taking a major style of gameplay into account.

I mean, it's an RPG for crying out loud. How many RPGs out there basically require you to level hump just to get past the next dungeon? If you do even the slightest bit of level humping in FO3, and do a little bit of homework on perks, you can turn yourself into an unstoppable superman in no time. While I can see the attraction in that from a certain point of view (and I did finish the game, so I must have had some fun), I found it ultimately unsatisfying and it left a bad taste in my mouth. The super bad conflicted ending also didn't help anything.

[To Far Away Times]

I sunk another 8 hours in yesterday.

I can't say I've ever played a Bethesda game for the plot. That's definitely one aspect I wish they would improve upon.

But the way they build their open worlds can carry the whole experience. Compared to the dreadful Ubisoft towers and needless open worlds of many AAA games (here's looking at you Nier Automata), they are a generation or two ahead in terms of open world design. And it makes sense, they've been iterating and building upon this design and technology for decades, and they're the only studio that makes these persistent and interactive openworlds. It would be nearly impossible for someone to build a game from the ground up in 2024 that played like an openworld Bethesda game. For all the shit people love to give the Bethesda Gamebryo engine, most devs would kill for that tech and knowledge base.

Only BotW and Elden Ring have better open worlds, and only because they go for such different things.

[Air Master Burst]

I mean, it's an RPG for crying out loud. How many RPGs out there basically require you to level hump just to get past the next dungeon?

Fallout is very heavily based on tabletop RPGs (specifically 90s tabletop RPGs), where min/maxing is generally discouraged and actually playing a character is the order of the day. Baldur's Gate is the same way, but of course the ability to save scum in computer games kinda ruins the intended experience (no do-overs, roll a new character every time you die). It also conspired with 3rd edition D&D to ruin tabletop gaming for a decade and a half, but that's a while different issue.

Min/maxers at my tables always have a good time, but it's never the good time they were expecting to have. My favorite is when they take a level in both paladin and warlock, and suddenly find themselves in thrall to two very different patrons with frequently opposing goals. And they're both petty jealous!

[vol.2]

Fallout is very heavily based on tabletop RPGs (specifically 90s tabletop RPGs), where min/maxing is generally discouraged and actually playing a character is the order of the day.

I guess I don't think the TT format translates very well to single player CRPGs then. It's one thing when you're gallivanting with a WoW group and making jokes together, but a single player CRPG with lame-brained NPCs and a terrible story is something completely different. Maybe if they had been able to draw me into the story a little bit then I would have felt differently, but the lack of meaningful moral decisions makes the whole experience feel so empty to me.

Baldur's Gate is the same way, but of course the ability to save scum in computer games kinda ruins the intended experience (no do-overs, roll a new character every time you die).

You mean BG3? BG and BG2 are very challenging; you can get your ass handed to you if you don't pay very close attention to your stats and character development. Plus, you have a whole bunch of different NPCs to manage and they don't all get along, and the story is amazing. I haven't played 3, but I wouldn't be surprised if they neutered the combat.

It also conspired with 3rd edition D&D to ruin tabletop gaming for a decade and a half, but that's a while different issue.

Preaching to choir here. Me and my DnD buds never even touched the 3rd Ed BS. I still play 2e ADnD with an old group from time to time.

Min/maxers at my tables always have a good time, but it's never the good time they were expecting to have. My favorite is when they take a level in both paladin and warlock, and suddenly find themselves in thrall to two very different patrons with frequently opposing goals. And they're both petty jealous!

I do not play that way in a TT setting. When I have real people on the other end, it's entirely about the group experience. I do enjoy being "efficient," but in a TT game, that usually doesn't mean micromanaging stats as a (good) DM knows how to respond to what's going on in the room and isn't going to expect everyone to be grinding numbers in order to advance the plot.

It's a totally different enchilada. Different mediums behave differently, and what works well in one doesn't immediately transfer to another. The introduction of film is a really good example of this; the very first narrative films that were done commercially were essentially filmed stage plays. It wasn't until the language of film had time to develop that we started to see montage and mise en scène used to advance narrative and covey meaning to their potential.

You can obviously create a CRPG to behave like a TT RPG, but in doing so, you are not effectively leveraging the past 30 years of CRPG development as a unique art form, and it feel flat to me, neither here nor there.

I suppose you could create a virtual TT RPG where the other players were so realistic that it felt like playing an actual campaign, but I think that would be a completely different genre of game; something that aimed to emulate the ephemeral experience of the TT RPG rather than build on the language of the CRPG

[To Far Away Times]

I'm currently in three different D&D 5E campaigns. The only other format I've played is 3E.

Mrs. To Far Away Times is in all those campaigns, plus a pathfinder group and DMs one of our campaigns.

[Air Master Burst]

You can obviously create a CRPG to behave like a TT RPG, but in doing so, you are not effectively leveraging the past 30 years of CRPG development as a unique art form, and it feel flat to me, neither here nor there.

Well the problem is there were only like 10 years of development when Fallout 1 was made, and about half of that was basically just Ultima. It worked pretty well for the time, but then Bethesda decided to stick with the S.P.E.C.I.A.L. system, which is so 90s tabletop it hurts. Without the tactical combat there really isn't much left.

You mean BG3? BG and BG2 are very challenging; you can get your ass handed to you if you don't pay very close attention to your stats and character development

BG1 isn't particularly difficult as long as you avoid exploring before you get a chance to gear up properly, but I can see how it would be pretty rough going if you weren't already fairly familiar with AD&D.

I still haven't played BG2 out of spite for being so egregiously railroaded in the first chapter, but given the spells you have access to at that point I assume it's mostly a matter of deciding how to stack your plate at the cheese buffet.

BG3 is a glorious mess. Finally going proper turn-based is great, and it has some fantastic ideas, but they fucked themselves by going full voice acting. If you stick mostly to the traditional good route it'll be fine, but if you try to play too neutral, or evil, or even just get too creative you quickly run into game states they clearly didn't have time and money to add content for.

[Daytime Waitress]

You mean BG3? BG and BG2 are very challenging; you can get your ass handed to you if you don't pay very close attention to your stats and character development

BG1 isn't particularly difficult as long as you avoid exploring before you get a chance to gear up properly

I can kind of agree with that assessment, because the game's tendency to to brutally punish the player definitely encourages you to find workarounds to not get slapped every fight, at least until you reach the "range combat beats everything" realisation; and multiple playthroughs lead you to a blissful state of "I can get ankheg armor how early?".

But I can also remember the first fight outside the inn where you pick up Khalid and Jaheira - the first plot point of the game - absolutely wrecking my fourteen year old self lmao.

I still haven't played BG2 out of spite for being so egregiously railroaded in the first chapter, but given the spells you have access to at that point I assume it's mostly a matter of deciding how to stack your plate at the cheese buffet.

I dropped it aways after as I entered some godawful recursive load loop of:

- did the enemy mage cast Death?
- yes
- did it hit?
- yes
- load game

[Air Master Burst]

the game's tendency to to brutally punish the player definitely encourages you to find workarounds to not get slapped every fight, at least until you reach the "range combat beats everything" realisation;

Fighters, and melee in general, are already fairly weak in stock 2nd edition, and BG not having proper initiative really amplifies this. It also doesn't help that 2nd edition is a pretty lethal system even by mid-90s tabletop standards. Doing a full rest after every combat or two is pretty common for tabletop, but that gets untenable quick in BG because like 80% of the content is just fighting random stuff.

I can imagine trying to figure all this out without some tabletop experience was frustrating to say the least!

If you want an actual good translation of tabletop D&D, Temple of Elemental Evil is where it's at (I mean it's 3.5 rules so yuck but it's very faithful to 3.5). The Gold Box games are good too if you can handle the age.

Owlcat's Pathfinder games are supposed to be very accurate to tabletop too, but again, 3.5 rules so yuck.

[m.sniffles.esq]

FallOut 3 and 4 were mandatorily disliked by FO1 and FO2 fans, because it lost the turn-based

I couldn't (and still can't) understand why instead of that VATS thing, one couldn't just press the shoulder button and make every encounter turn-based, thus making both fanbases happy.

I mean, I guess the VATS thing there to begin with as not to alienate fans of the first two by making them play a total FPS, but I really don't understand the implementation of making it a kinda/sorta, one-sided turn based system. Why not just freeze the action, switch to a top-down view of the area, then proceed like a regular crpg? You can even make it possible to switch back-and forth if the player was so inclined.

[Lethe]

BG2 is probably even easier than BG1 strictly speaking, it just has more vertical complexity. Most attributes effectively do nothing, class power balance is nonsense, a lot of spells are useless while others are indispensable - typical warpig learning curve. And the enemy AI is not at all equipped to handle most anything the player can get up to.

IMO one of the most successful tabletop-essence-channelings is NetHack. Yeah it's solo character and confined to one big dungeon instead of a world, but it's like playing under a creative DM who will punish you for trying to brute-force. The kind of thing where valid tactics include confusing yourself to distort your magic effects, throwing corpses at enemies, and eating magic jewelry.

[vol.2]

I mean, I guess the VATS thing there to begin with as not to alienate fans of the first two by making them play a total FPS

I love FPSes. FO3 is just a terrible FPS. Bad enemy AI, no pacing, guns aren't particularly satisfying to shoot, and it completely lacks intensity. I didn't enjoy the FPS combat at all; it wasn't until I started used VATS that it got interesting to play, but then I just realized that victory is even more assured using VATS, it just takes a lot longer.

I think maybe if you look at the things that bother "people" about FO3, it comes down to the lack of a good coherent narrative and compelling moral decisions with consequences (like the first two games had in spades). If those things were there for me, I would have been sucked into the narrative of the world and that immersion would have got me invested in the characters and my character in a more realistic RPG way. That didn't happen for me, and I didn't (generally don't) enjoy empty sandbox experiences.

Maybe you did get sucked into the narrative where I didn't. Maybe you do enjoy empty sandbox experiences. All these things and more are possible.

[Sima Tuna]

Dark Sun: Shattered Lands is the actual best warpig nobody talks about. Amazingly elegant turn-based system that feels as fast as RTwP without actually being RTwP.

I agree that games like NetHack and Caves of Qud translate the feeling of classical rpg-ing in a way that most CRPGs don't. High-level DnD is shit, and I assume that's true for other tabletop systems too. But a proper roguelike (Brogue, Cogmind, Door in the Woods etc) has you spending the majority of gameplay in that low level power state. When you do finally reach mid or lategame power levels, the steamroll effect won't bother you as much because you'll be thinking, "holy shit, this might actually be the run where I beat this game." As opposed to BG2 or some other crpg, where becoming overpowered happens very early and is completely inevitable.

I do love BG1 though. I don't expect shmups players to understand why. Low level dnd is exciting for me every time. You have a very limited selection of available moves and need to use what you have appropriately. The game is very lethal at low levels and nobody can really tank until they get a couple levels into them.

[vol.2]

Dark Sun: Shattered Lands is the actual best warpig nobody talks about. Amazingly elegant turn-based system that feels as fast as RTwP without actually being RTwP.

It also had a sequel that's the same game engine. Veil of Darkness is another great top down isometric from SSI around the same time and has a great story. It's an early DreamForge game. They also did the Ravenloft games, Menzoberranzan (an early game set in the Icewind Dale area which uses a heavily modified and updated version of the Eye of the Beholder 3 engine), and Sanitarium.

[Air Master Burst]

Dark Sun: Shattered Lands is the actual best warpig nobody talks about. Amazingly elegant turn-based system that feels as fast as RTwP without actually being RTwP.

Somehow I always forget about this one despite having beaten it twice and Dark Sun being my favorite official D&D setting.

But a proper roguelike (Brogue, Cogmind, Door in the Woods etc) has you spending the majority of gameplay in that low level power state. When you do finally reach mid or lategame power levels, the steamroll effect won't bother you as much because you'll be thinking, "holy shit, this might actually be the run where I beat this game." As opposed to BG2 or some other crpg, where becoming overpowered happens very early and is completely inevitable.

The only real difference is that roguelikes have permadeath. BG1 would feel similar if you had to start over at every party wipe. Something like XCOM probably gets the closest to the actual feel of a classic tabletop campaign (especially pre-2nd edition and west marches), with characters occasionally dying and getting replaced with rookies.

High-level DnD is shit, and I assume that's true for other tabletop systems too.

Depends on the system, but frequently yes. Basic D&D isn't too bad at higher levels, and of course there are systems that don't do levels in the traditional sense like WFRP/Dark Heresy and FFG Star Wars.

[vol.2]

FFG Star Wars.

West End Games all the way baby.

[Air Master Burst]

FFG Star Wars.

West End Games all the way baby.

West End Star Wars is a nostalgiac favorite for me (I still keep my set at the family cabin), but FFG Star Wars dice are the best thing to ever happen to tabletop RPGs. My GM of decades converted his entire self-written sandbox world over to his own system with them after using them. Genesys is the generic version but it's basically the same stuff.

West End's sourcebooks were miles better, though. Always use those!

[Arino]

I am saving lives on SEGA's Model 3:

https://youtu.be/4T2Bl-0vWFM?si=zrpM35tv1b2s6tw8

WEEOOWEEOOWEEOOWEEOO

[Daytime Waitress]

I am saving lives on SEGA's Model 3:

https://youtu.be/4T2Bl-0vWFM?si=zrpM35tv1b2s6tw8

WEEOOWEEOOWEEOOWEEOO

The multiple tankers rolling were a great touch, but that ambulance yeeting itself into the water absolutely sent me.

[Arino]

I am saving lives on SEGA's Model 3:

https://youtu.be/4T2Bl-0vWFM?si=zrpM35tv1b2s6tw8

WEEOOWEEOOWEEOOWEEOO

The multiple tankers rolling were a great touch, but that ambulance yeeting itself into the water absolutely sent me.

Haha yeah! In stage 2 you keep seeing the mobsters' black van (from the intro of that stage) and how the police chase it through the city!

This game is not easy, after stage 1 there is no room for mistakes at all. I hope I can get past stage 3 today.

[Lander]

Amazing! The contrast between real-lives-at-stake medical drama and hyper-real arcade action world is primo. I love that they gave the passenger bus a DBZ boost bubble after it lands a sweet ramp off the St2 bridge

Reminds me a bit of Crisis City on the PS1 - that one has a similar '24/7 action' setting. Wish it was more common, shit's pure fun.

[BrianC]

Amazing! The contrast between real-lives-at-stake medical drama and hyper-real arcade action world is primo. I love that they gave the passenger bus a DBZ boost bubble after it lands a sweet ramp off the St2 bridge

Reminds me a bit of Crisis City on the PS1 - that one has a similar '24/7 action' setting. Wish it was more common, shit's pure fun.

Also reminds me a bit of Crazy Taxi and the 18-Wheeler games from Sega. Crisis City and these games also reminded me of the craziness in the Dynamite Cop/Die Hard Arcade series.

[it290]

I am saving lives on SEGA's Model 3:

https://youtu.be/4T2Bl-0vWFM?si=zrpM35tv1b2s6tw8

WEEOOWEEOOWEEOOWEEOO

As a Chicagoan I really appreciate the weird recreation of the city in this game, although I question the logic of picking up a kid from somewhere near Chinatown and taking him all the way up near Streeterville for treatment — Mercy Hospital is just a few blocks south of Cermak!