Interesting read. I really wish someone picked up Totalbiscuit's Port Report video format and make more videos about this technical stuff. RIP TB.
As a general rule for myself I must own a physical version on console for RPGs, but I also buy the PC version if it's as flexible as Fallout and The Elder Scrolls.
Aside from the technical stuff mentioned in this report I hear a lot of good things about the game so i'm very interested in it. However, nobody (that i'm aware of) has mentioned anything about official mod support, in game console command, etc. I'm starting to worry that this game is more a feature-locked spiritual successor to Mass Effect than it is a spiritual successor to Fallout.
And honestly, the game itself is brilliant. I’m loving it. It feels so wonderful to play a proper RPG again from the people who have pioneered the genre. I’m just disappointed with the state of the PC version and wanted to share my findings with folks to help them understand what they’d be getting with the PC version. Hope it was helpful.
Thanks for the technical aspects of making the game more playable. I would think that most of the people on this forum don't have half the system you do. I had a wide monitor and did not like it, I have a 32" Samsung now and find myself playing mostly at 1080p as the difference in playing at 4k is minor in most games and the performance hit is significant.
I have it (for the PC of course since I'm not a filthy barbarian savage) and am enjoying it. I am disappointed though. I was expecting more from Cain. The rpg system is the weakest of any Cain game. I really dislike the itemization. They went too console and skimped on the rpg. I was expecting more Bloodlines in space, knowing Leonard was the bigger influence, but Bloodlines had the rpg stuff I expected.
My big gripes are the (in my opinion) horrible itemization and consoley-ness (which means easy combat, no thinking gameplay, and quests designed for retarded children to have no problem completing). My lesser gripe is the lack of richness and meat in barebones chargen and dev of the rpg system.
Is it a good game? Yes. Is it a good rpg? Decent, and I like it more than most console rpgs like Witchers, the new Fallouts, Elder Scrolls, etc. I was expecting more from Tim though.
Hopefully him and Leonard's next game will be more rpg and less console and have a bigger Tim stamp on it. Or if they start work on Outer Worlds 2 now that they have the main shit down they can beef up the weaknesses, inject more rpg systems, revamp the chargen and chardev, and completely redo the itemization.
The setting is good, the theme is good, the C&C is good, the characters are good (I really like Pavarati or whatever her name is), the story is good, etc.
Honestly, if you loved the series Firefly, you will love this. They basically made a Firefly RPG.
All they need now would be a Serenity mod and a few more adult jokes.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
I am surprised people are "loving" this game. Then again, the bar for "great games" has been lowered to the point where mediocre games end up being "master pieces" just due to sheer lack of quality games floating around today.
Thankfully, I only paid $1 to rent this game via Microsoft's xbox pass for PC, and did not suffer a loss that would have come with a full priced purchase.
After a lengthy playthrough, I am simply not impressed with the design choices, the characters, the mechanics, the art assets. It comes across as trying to be a form of sad mimicry of what made Fallout and Bioshock work so well. The technical execution falls incredibly short, like a novice trying to match up with a grand master. A sort of a sad attempt at copying the kind of success of other titles, where you want to give them kudos for their effort but not the piss poor result.
...and that is where we are now. Kudos for the effort I suppose. There is potential to polish the IP into a good franchise, to make it more unique alongside the bioshock and fallout styled worlds. I simply do not think Obsidian has the ability to do so however, as they are generally a B studio, rather than a AAA one.
While I do agree with most things you said I don't think being a B studio is a bad thing nor I agree that a B studio couldn't pull off a game like this, but better.
My issues are that most of Obisidian staples are here for the worse. They keep thinking making you visit small map zones for some fetch quests is fun - while I kept asking myself why wouldnt they let me do "whatever". I wish all those maps and zones were just an open map which I could explore, felt like a wasted potential. Also "you'll go somewhere else now, make sure to fill all the check marks before proceeding" warnings felt kinda sour in my mouth on this particular style of game.
Those first person RPGs (or even CRPGs) are great in immersion and freedom, so I really dislike when companies treat them as a "game" and use all these clichê gaming conventions on their mechanics and storytelling - even worse when those conventions are dated.
So it got me: New Vegas is as good as it is because Bethesda balanced Obisidian and Obisidian kept Bethesda in check. When they are apart they focus on the worse side of themselves for some reason. But together... oh, my.
A minor issue I had was level design, terrain to be more specific. Felt like placed/sculpted without thinking about it as a part of the gameplay experience to a point I always felt terrain was getting in my way instead of being part of the game to be played with.
Being a "B studio" is certainly not a bad thing on its own. What it comes down to is scope of project and the amount of talent they can hire. B studios doing projects with a much larger scope is often beyond their ability assuming they wish to match up with the AAA studios. B studios can excel with smaller scope projects or niche genres.
In this case they perhaps should have approached The Outer Worlds as an isometric fallout styled RPG first in order to flesh out the world building and franchise (same way Fallout did). They already have experience with Unity and a system build around isometric RPGs due to their previous projects. What they are not known for however is FPS styled games, as such they are not playing to their strengths.
The design of the outer worlds is most definitely cookie cutter, the level design as you noticed, did not seem thought out. I usually chock this off due to having lower talent or skilled designers, which would not be surprising since from what I recall, many of Obsidian's older devs have left the studio.
The previous developers when mixed with Bethesda's engine and toolset resulted in New Vegas being a much smaller project than it looks. The environment was minimal from an asset point of view and most of the work was done by Bethesda on the engine/toolset. New Vegas was closer to being a overhaul mod, and that worked well for a studio of their size.
Anyways, when enough time has passed and with old developers leaving, new younger ones coming in, the nature of the studio starts to change...and I think we can see that reflected in Outer Worlds.
I have w question for you - what % of playerbase would prefer a deep RPG experience vs a more rpg-lite more casual game?
When games are made for mass sales - deep gameplay systems will get sacrificed
I realize some gave this a "wtf" but it's a valid question.
At one time, another player on this forum recommended Drakensang. "Deep role playing game!"
Well, I'll admit it's "deep" but at the same time I just don't know if I can get through it. It feels like the worst tedium. It's like when I played Dungeons and Dragons and had to snip out all the stuff that felt like it was a slog so that the adventure and story stuff could come first.
So yeah, maybe a good many people do want a lighter version of a role playing game (depending on what that is.)
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I have w question for you - what % of playerbase would prefer a deep RPG experience vs a more rpg-lite more casual game?
When games are made for mass sales - deep gameplay systems will get sacrificed
What percentage of Tim Cain game fans prefer a deep rpg experience vs more rpg-lite more casual game? 100% of them. That is exactly why we are Tim Cain game fans. And exactly why we prefer deep rpgs versus console tripe for nincompoops with rpg-lite filler and systems.
Why would Tim make a game for mass sales versus keeping to his 100% streak of making deep rpgs until now?
What game fits the least in the following? Fallout 1, Fallout 2, Arcanum, ToEE, Bloodlines, The Outer Worlds.
People on this site seem to be very disingenuous when reading statements, and do their best to twist them into what they want their narrative to be versus what was specifically stated (RE: read the replies to what I stated about Disco Elysium). I'm not saying this is what you are doing. I'm just stating this so my specific and exact point won't be twisted or misrepresented.
My specific and exact point - this is a good game and a good console "rpg," but as specifically a huge Tim Cain fan, I am disappointed in this as a game and an rpg, as it is hands down his worst game and most rpg-lite and most console game. It did not give me what I want and have come to expect from Tim.
In order to console my fragile mind I have no choice but to blame Leonard, so I will consider this a good game for Leonard that Tim helped out on and not an actual Tim game. Or maybe Jason Anderson is a necessary part of the group to make a true Tim Cain game. And true Tim Cain games are always deep and great rpgs first, last and always.
I have w question for you - what % of playerbase would prefer a deep RPG experience vs a more rpg-lite more casual game?
When games are made for mass sales - deep gameplay systems will get sacrificed
I realize some gave this a "wtf" but it's a valid question.
At one time, another player on this forum recommended Drakensang. "Deep role playing game!"
Well, I'll admit it's "deep" but at the same time I just don't know if I can get through it. It feels like the worst tedium. It's like when I played Dungeons and Dragons and had to snip out all the stuff that felt like it was a slog so that the adventure and story stuff could come first.
So yeah, maybe a good many people do want a lighter version of a role playing game (depending on what that is.)
I miss the whole spend 1 hours making a char because you was reading what each skill do and what class do, today i'm savy enough to pull half things right without reading, if is a system I never had dealty before, but even so I like to read and these drags are common on the start of the game for the first time, with tend to leviate after you learn the basic from playing the game,
what I saw on this game now is, system is dirty simple, they wanted to steal a lot from fallout but couldn't, combat skills are not really required, better raise diplomacy science and stealth till 50 then diverge from that, limiting my skills point to 10 each lvl also don't help much, stats almost don't influence the game, buffs tend to stay not enough, the lack of weapon are also getting on my nerve, after some time it leviate but I still find there as not a nice weapon to use.
the flaw system is kinda interesting but I think we had to ahve a list and if we didn't take that flaw we can get it later, or having a chance for said flaw to show up again, but then getting a permanent debuff for just a extra perk point kinda make it pointless
possible they could evolve from that on a system lvl, but that will depend a lot, devs nowadays will choose waht gave then the less work possible, so chances are they will simplify this system even more, with will make us miss the old games even more
I have w question for you - what % of playerbase would prefer a deep RPG experience vs a more rpg-lite more casual game?
When games are made for mass sales - deep gameplay systems will get sacrificed
I realize some gave this a "wtf" but it's a valid question.
At one time, another player on this forum recommended Drakensang. "Deep role playing game!"
Well, I'll admit it's "deep" but at the same time I just don't know if I can get through it. It feels like the worst tedium. It's like when I played Dungeons and Dragons and had to snip out all the stuff that felt like it was a slog so that the adventure and story stuff could come first.
So yeah, maybe a good many people do want a lighter version of a role playing game (depending on what that is.)
I miss the whole spend 1 hours making a char because you was reading what each skill do and what class do, today i'm savy enough to pull half things right without reading, if is a system I never had dealty before, but even so I like to read and these drags are common on the start of the game for the first time, with tend to leviate after you learn the basic from playing the game,
what I saw on this game now is, system is dirty simple, they wanted to steal a lot from fallout but couldn't, combat skills are not really required, better raise diplomacy science and stealth till 50 then diverge from that, limiting my skills point to 10 each lvl also don't help much, stats almost don't influence the game, buffs tend to stay not enough, the lack of weapon are also getting on my nerve, after some time it leviate but I still find there as not a nice weapon to use.
the flaw system is kinda interesting but I think we had to ahve a list and if we didn't take that flaw we can get it later, or having a chance for said flaw to show up again, but then getting a permanent debuff for just a extra perk point kinda make it pointless
possible they could evolve from that on a system lvl, but that will depend a lot, devs nowadays will choose waht gave then the less work possible, so chances are they will simplify this system even more, with will make us miss the old games even more
I agree for the most part. They could have tied skill points per level to one of the mental stats. Had backgrounds that actually do something. Have traits that increase perk points, etc.
The itemization is just a crazy call. its pure console jrpg type fluff nonsense. I hate scaling and I hate weapons with levels. Its just filler nonsense.
The amount of loot is ridiculous too, which is just exacerbated by the lack of quality on loot. I just don't understand - all the core systems scream, "this is not a Tim Cain game."
It has some neat ideas, but the neat ideas aren't very fleshed out and are just too simple or unimportant. The healing item slots are pretty neat, but I use it mainly to pass dialogue checks. After going from Disco Elysium to this, I am really burnt out on saving-reloading and changing outfits to pass dialogue checks.
But, as a huge knock to our argument - when a game for our type of people is made, it gets shit on and not supported. Wasteland 2 gets trashed so they make Wasteland 3 more consoley and less rpg. BT4 gets trashed, Torment gets trashed, PoE2 is less successful than 1 but put a huge effort into improving the flaws of the rpg systems and making them better, deeper, and more complex. The Realms of Arkania remakes get trashed, most people never even heard of underrail but love kid's tripe like undertale.
We just belong to a shitty community that neither supports nor appreciates the games that are made for us. I can't fault a developer for making retarded console games for savage barbarians who like simple shit for nincompoops. Why work hard to get shit on when you can just throw money at graphics and controller UIs and get universal love?
I have w question for you - what % of playerbase would prefer a deep RPG experience vs a more rpg-lite more casual game?
When games are made for mass sales - deep gameplay systems will get sacrificed
I realize some gave this a "wtf" but it's a valid question.
At one time, another player on this forum recommended Drakensang. "Deep role playing game!"
Well, I'll admit it's "deep" but at the same time I just don't know if I can get through it. It feels like the worst tedium. It's like when I played Dungeons and Dragons and had to snip out all the stuff that felt like it was a slog so that the adventure and story stuff could come first.
So yeah, maybe a good many people do want a lighter version of a role playing game (depending on what that is.)
I miss the whole spend 1 hours making a char because you was reading what each skill do and what class do, today i'm savy enough to pull half things right without reading, if is a system I never had dealty before, but even so I like to read and these drags are common on the start of the game for the first time, with tend to leviate after you learn the basic from playing the game,
what I saw on this game now is, system is dirty simple, they wanted to steal a lot from fallout but couldn't, combat skills are not really required, better raise diplomacy science and stealth till 50 then diverge from that, limiting my skills point to 10 each lvl also don't help much, stats almost don't influence the game, buffs tend to stay not enough, the lack of weapon are also getting on my nerve, after some time it leviate but I still find there as not a nice weapon to use.
the flaw system is kinda interesting but I think we had to ahve a list and if we didn't take that flaw we can get it later, or having a chance for said flaw to show up again, but then getting a permanent debuff for just a extra perk point kinda make it pointless
possible they could evolve from that on a system lvl, but that will depend a lot, devs nowadays will choose waht gave then the less work possible, so chances are they will simplify this system even more, with will make us miss the old games even more
I agree for the most part. They could have tied skill points per level to one of the mental stats. Had backgrounds that actually do something. Have traits that increase perk points, etc.
The itemization is just a crazy call. its pure console jrpg type fluff nonsense. I hate scaling and I hate weapons with levels. Its just filler nonsense.
The amount of loot is ridiculous too, which is just exacerbated by the lack of quality on loot. I just don't understand - all the core systems scream, "this is not a Tim Cain game."
It has some neat ideas, but the neat ideas aren't very fleshed out and are just too simple or unimportant. The healing item slots are pretty neat, but I use it mainly to pass dialogue checks. After going from Disco Elysium to this, I am really burnt out on saving-reloading and changing outfits to pass dialogue checks.
But, as a huge knock to our argument - when a game for our type of people is made, it gets shit on and not supported. Wasteland 2 gets trashed so they make Wasteland 3 more consoley and less rpg. BT4 gets trashed, Torment gets trashed, PoE2 is less successful than 1 but put a huge effort into improving the flaws of the rpg systems and making them better, deeper, and more complex. The Realms of Arkania remakes get trashed, most people never even heard of underrail but love kid's tripe like undertale.
We just belong to a shitty community that neither supports nor appreciates the games that are made for us. I can't fault a developer for making retarded console games for savage barbarians who like simple shit for nincompoops. Why work hard to get shit on when you can just throw money at graphics and controller UIs and get universal love?
Talk shit about undertale. Why?
maybe because its diferent, and some neats idea, but its not really that much
on Poe2 they made some fixes but also craped some, plus the whole I can keep farming the ships for money is meh a lot, plus lack of gear is even more bigger on poe2, one thing you can figure on obsidian nowadays is they can't make gear.
torments and disco elysium are more visual novels, but tides of numeraria at least had some combat, and disco elysium ended like its the first part of something big who would happen
but yes another thing who kinda piss me off is the fact I can only wear 4 weapons, its very console game, and I can't even use punchs
Comments
My big gripes are the (in my opinion) horrible itemization and consoley-ness (which means easy combat, no thinking gameplay, and quests designed for retarded children to have no problem completing). My lesser gripe is the lack of richness and meat in barebones chargen and dev of the rpg system.
Is it a good game? Yes. Is it a good rpg? Decent, and I like it more than most console rpgs like Witchers, the new Fallouts, Elder Scrolls, etc. I was expecting more from Tim though.
Hopefully him and Leonard's next game will be more rpg and less console and have a bigger Tim stamp on it. Or if they start work on Outer Worlds 2 now that they have the main shit down they can beef up the weaknesses, inject more rpg systems, revamp the chargen and chardev, and completely redo the itemization.
The setting is good, the theme is good, the C&C is good, the characters are good (I really like Pavarati or whatever her name is), the story is good, etc.
|The problem with the youth of today is that one is no longer part of it. -Salvador Dali|
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Thankfully, I only paid $1 to rent this game via Microsoft's xbox pass for PC, and did not suffer a loss that would have come with a full priced purchase.
After a lengthy playthrough, I am simply not impressed with the design choices, the characters, the mechanics, the art assets. It comes across as trying to be a form of sad mimicry of what made Fallout and Bioshock work so well. The technical execution falls incredibly short, like a novice trying to match up with a grand master. A sort of a sad attempt at copying the kind of success of other titles, where you want to give them kudos for their effort but not the piss poor result.
...and that is where we are now. Kudos for the effort I suppose. There is potential to polish the IP into a good franchise, to make it more unique alongside the bioshock and fallout styled worlds. I simply do not think Obsidian has the ability to do so however, as they are generally a B studio, rather than a AAA one.
www.90and9.net
www.prophecymma.com
In this case they perhaps should have approached The Outer Worlds as an isometric fallout styled RPG first in order to flesh out the world building and franchise (same way Fallout did). They already have experience with Unity and a system build around isometric RPGs due to their previous projects. What they are not known for however is FPS styled games, as such they are not playing to their strengths.
The design of the outer worlds is most definitely cookie cutter, the level design as you noticed, did not seem thought out. I usually chock this off due to having lower talent or skilled designers, which would not be surprising since from what I recall, many of Obsidian's older devs have left the studio.
The previous developers when mixed with Bethesda's engine and toolset resulted in New Vegas being a much smaller project than it looks. The environment was minimal from an asset point of view and most of the work was done by Bethesda on the engine/toolset. New Vegas was closer to being a overhaul mod, and that worked well for a studio of their size.
Anyways, when enough time has passed and with old developers leaving, new younger ones coming in, the nature of the studio starts to change...and I think we can see that reflected in Outer Worlds.
At one time, another player on this forum recommended Drakensang. "Deep role playing game!"
Well, I'll admit it's "deep" but at the same time I just don't know if I can get through it. It feels like the worst tedium. It's like when I played Dungeons and Dragons and had to snip out all the stuff that felt like it was a slog so that the adventure and story stuff could come first.
So yeah, maybe a good many people do want a lighter version of a role playing game (depending on what that is.)
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Why would Tim make a game for mass sales versus keeping to his 100% streak of making deep rpgs until now?
What game fits the least in the following? Fallout 1, Fallout 2, Arcanum, ToEE, Bloodlines, The Outer Worlds.
People on this site seem to be very disingenuous when reading statements, and do their best to twist them into what they want their narrative to be versus what was specifically stated (RE: read the replies to what I stated about Disco Elysium). I'm not saying this is what you are doing. I'm just stating this so my specific and exact point won't be twisted or misrepresented.
My specific and exact point - this is a good game and a good console "rpg," but as specifically a huge Tim Cain fan, I am disappointed in this as a game and an rpg, as it is hands down his worst game and most rpg-lite and most console game. It did not give me what I want and have come to expect from Tim.
In order to console my fragile mind I have no choice but to blame Leonard, so I will consider this a good game for Leonard that Tim helped out on and not an actual Tim game. Or maybe Jason Anderson is a necessary part of the group to make a true Tim Cain game. And true Tim Cain games are always deep and great rpgs first, last and always.
The itemization is just a crazy call. its pure console jrpg type fluff nonsense. I hate scaling and I hate weapons with levels. Its just filler nonsense.
The amount of loot is ridiculous too, which is just exacerbated by the lack of quality on loot. I just don't understand - all the core systems scream, "this is not a Tim Cain game."
It has some neat ideas, but the neat ideas aren't very fleshed out and are just too simple or unimportant. The healing item slots are pretty neat, but I use it mainly to pass dialogue checks. After going from Disco Elysium to this, I am really burnt out on saving-reloading and changing outfits to pass dialogue checks.
But, as a huge knock to our argument - when a game for our type of people is made, it gets shit on and not supported. Wasteland 2 gets trashed so they make Wasteland 3 more consoley and less rpg. BT4 gets trashed, Torment gets trashed, PoE2 is less successful than 1 but put a huge effort into improving the flaws of the rpg systems and making them better, deeper, and more complex. The Realms of Arkania remakes get trashed, most people never even heard of underrail but love kid's tripe like undertale.
We just belong to a shitty community that neither supports nor appreciates the games that are made for us. I can't fault a developer for making retarded console games for savage barbarians who like simple shit for nincompoops. Why work hard to get shit on when you can just throw money at graphics and controller UIs and get universal love?
All you have to do is make a game that.....
"just works"......TODD!