- Location
- The Hague
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Controversial gaming opinion: video games are good.
Doesn't it also give you a couple of options to lie to him about your background, even though you as the player don't even know it yourself?
Does it? You can give Duncan a (really vague) explanation of what you did to get thrown in prison. I don't think it was a lie so much as choosing your characters history.
Huh, I vaguely recall some options having [LIE] in front of it. Could be misremembering, though.
Unless the game is KOTOR II, which is a special case, I am against first runs of games being modded. When I played FO3 & NV and Skyrim, everyone told me to mod them. I couldnt but that isnt the point. If a game cant stand on its own, it is a bad game and not worth playing in the first place.
well yeah, that's the point. "The game itself is shit, but mods make it amazingly fun." It's not "You should mod this awesome game" it's "This shitty game works amazing as a mod template".Unless the game is KOTOR II, which is a special case, I am against first runs of games being modded. When I played FO3 & NV and Skyrim, everyone told me to mod them. I couldnt but that isnt the point. If a game cant stand on its own, it is a bad game and not worth playing in the first place.
My controversial opinion is that this is a good description of New Vegas.
@Hykal94, attackMy controversial opinion is that this is a good description of New Vegas.
*puts on crash helmet*![]()
Frankly if someone willingly purchases a game they view as shitty then they lose any ground to stand on when complaining about its flaws, because by doing that they are voting with their wallets and rewarding the game company for doing something they view as wrong.well yeah, that's the point. "The game itself is shit, but mods make it amazingly fun." It's not "You should mod this awesome game" it's "This shitty game works amazing as a mod template".
Not in the case of Fallout, because no one else is doing the things Bethesda does. You can't just go buy a good alternative to deeply flawed games. If what you want is to explore a wide-ranging fantasy world or the post-apocalypse in an open world with power armor and actual surviving landmarks and the general feel of Fallout's mechanics without the rampant flaws, you're just...kinda fucked. There's nothing else like it. You can either have a flawed version of what you want, or nothing.Frankly if someone willingly purchases a game they view as shitty then they lose any ground to stand on when complaining about its flaws, because by doing that they are voting with their wallets and rewarding the game company for doing something they view as wrong.
Hmm, a compelling point.Not in the case of Fallout, because no one else is doing the things Bethesda does. You can't just go buy a good alternative to deeply flawed games. If what you want is to explore a wide-ranging fantasy world or the post-apocalypse in an open world with power armor and actual surviving landmarks and the general feel of Fallout's mechanics without the rampant flaws, you're just...kinda fucked. There's nothing else like it. You can either have a flawed version of what you want, or nothing.
Okay, it's like...I argue Fallout 4 is a shitty game because of the horribly implemented story and the conflict between gameplay and narrative incentives, right? I still played Fallout 4 for literally 100 hours before I got so angry I quit. Because the implementation of Fallout fulfills a need I have that no other game matches. The chance to explore America in first person post-apocalypse, see what's sprung up since, play with mundane weapons and weird sci fi ones, build up my equipment and my character, roleplay how intense this old factory exploration is in my head even in the absence of any real gameplay ambiance, just because the environment is so perfect.Hmm, a compelling point.
But I will point out there's a difference between "deeply flawed" and "shitty", the former allows for some good points while the latter is pretty much entirely negative. So if someone thinks that Fallout is flawed but there are no alternatives (which would be a fair position) then purchasing and criticizing Fallout is fine, but if they think it's shitty and purchase it anyway then TBH I'm just not going to view their complaints with much if any sympathy.
It's like willfully sticking your hand in a bear trap and then complaining when you're mangled.
I actually wrote the important notes out by handThe Game needs a card sorter and either a record of various results or some other tool to help keep track of what you've tried and what the results were.
I actually wrote the important notes out by hand
Of course, the most important/difficult to remember detail is the Lore Subversion Cycle; most of the rest is just... You learn it by muddling through, and then it's something you just remember, like riding a bike.
That said, there really does need to be a better system for cards, because as it is junk cards just drop all over the place and wreck fucking everything lol.
*coughs*EXALTED*coughs*EVERYVERSIONOFD&DBEFORE5E*coughs*Hot Take: Something can be deeply, deeply flawed in a lot of ways and still be fucking amazing. Sure, an Obsidian game can be buggy, but for me that doesn't mean anything to the things that are actually cool about it. If the game rocks, that's it, I don't need to check it's teeth like its a horse.
Now if it actually fucks up the thing it has actually going for it that's another story.
Frankly if someone willingly purchases a game they view as shitty then they lose any ground to stand on when complaining about its flaws, because by doing that they are voting with their wallets and rewarding the game company for doing something they view as wrong.
Of course it doesn't, my position is purely about buying a game that one views as shitty.Also it doesn't take into account the situations where the game becomes shitty after updates.
Unless the game is KOTOR II, which is a special case, I am against first runs of games being modded. When I played FO3 & NV and Skyrim, everyone told me to mod them. I couldnt but that isnt the point. If a game cant stand on its own, it is a bad game and not worth playing in the first place.
I would have been fine having the Walled City as something of a bogeyman which you barely touch until the end, but the payoff isn't there for that implementation. I honestly kind of want the game to be structured less around 'noobs forced into running while solving the Mystery of Raymond' and more frontloaded general running shenanigans until act 2 when you are stuck in KWC, and then you have to use the cash, favors, info and connections you gathered to try and escape. Act 3 can then have the Prosperty Tower run and the return to the city to solve or exploit the problem.Shadowrun Hong Kong utterly fucks over its premise of having the Walled City as its big attraction only to go there only twice in the entire game, near the beginning and near the end.
Thanks, game. I'll be sure to give a crap about the Walled City despite only staying at the nice seedy town on the outskirts on my big ass boat and having jack all cash to buy any upgrades for my team and myself.
Also, we went over this. You'll have enough cash to go around if you don't play a mage or a summoning shaman
It is if you're trying to upgrade your spells on the regular since the highest end spells are ¥2000-2500 a pop , but if you can get by with lower ranking versions and using a shaman dip to camp out on dragon lines for the boost, the money situation is considerably more tolerable.I avoided a lot of combat situations and my mage was a certified wrecker of shit by the end, so it really wasn't that much of a problem.