Mass Effect: Legendary Edition
Been playing the remastered Mass Effect trilogy lately – the Legendary Edition – and it’s been a lot of fun. I’ve played the trilogy once before, but that was ages ago, and I didn’t have any of the DLCs (all included in the LE).
I’m not that far into the game, just picked up Liara and that was the second mission I did after leaving the Citadel, so there is a long journey ahead. Very cool.
I was planning on playing on insanity, but since I know I will do more playthroughs, I figured I might as well save that for later, so I went with veteran instead, one level above normal.
Also made a last-minute change about class – I guess premeditating didn’t go too well this time – and decided to go with adept. Was infiltrator last time, and thought I might try sentinel this time, but something about adept captured my imagination.
One thing that’s enhancing my enjoyment this time around is that I’m listening to the official Mass Effect books in parallel to playing. Learning more about Anderson and Saren, or even just seeing the Citadel through the eyes of Anderson, and so on, is so much fun and makes the whole experience richer and more meaningful. And knowing in more detail what a bastard Saren is will make it all the more satisfying ending his miserable life later on.
Cyberpunk 2077
And so was the very anticipated Cyberpunk 2077 released, after years of waiting. The reception probably wasn’t what CDPR had hoped for. And the game, of course, wasn’t what people had hoped for, either.
As for me? I… rather enjoyed the game actually, despite even running it on a last gen console, though I played most of it after the first few hotfixes.
Was it buggy? It was. My play through was 50+ hours, and during that time I had about ten or so crashes, and tons of little glitches. But nothing game-breaking, no serious quest bug or anything.
Is it a good game? I think so, really good even. I liked the story and the characters, the world, the character progression system, some memorable scenes and interesting ideas, among other things. But I also felt it was too short, and kind of shallow at times, like something was lacking. They introduce you to so many things which you then naturally want to explore further, which you then often can’t. For example, Voodoo Boys seemed like an interesting gang, but my involvement was (involuntarily) over before it even got started, it seemed. Among other shortcomings. Still, let’s have a sense of proportion here, there certainly are worse games in this particular regard, including Outer Worlds (which I also enjoyed, but…).
Also keep in mind I wasn’t doing a particularly deep run (though certainly more than just the main story, completed the Rudy quest line among many other things), so this is not my final take. In addition, the game will start expanding once they have it in working order. CDPR will start adding more material to the game, both smaller free DLCs, and bigger ones for purchase, so we could be looking at a different game later on.
But it will take a while before the next run, probably until after having played through the upcoming Mass Effect trilogy remaster, which is coming in May and will likely take a long time to finish. Might be looking at an autumn run. Perhaps I’ll even have a current gen console by then.
Currently playing Baldur’s Gate EE, good times.
Character Creation Fail in The Outer Worlds
Started playing The Outer Worlds (by Obsidian) recently, and I like it, though not as much as I had hoped. This post, though, is about a relatively minor design problem I uncovered, regarding the character creation process. Might be relevant for some other games as well.
Right at the beginning you’re asked to make permanent decisions about your character, and mostly there’s no problem, but in regard to one thing in particular they leave out vital information that one requires to make an informed decision. Specifically, certain attributes have an impact on both combat and dialog (passing speech checks), but the dialog part is left out of the description completely. They don’t just leave out details (which would be fine), but omit the mention the link entirely. This is further obscured by the fact that there are options in the skills section that clearly are made for improving the character’s dialog ability.
I want my character to be good at passing speech checks, and not knowing the info outlined above, I created a character that was regularly locked out of interesting-looking dialog options. Found a station on the ship that allows for respecifying the character stats, but it only applies to skills and perks, not attributes. Attributes are forever, apparently.
Didn’t take long to realize that this state of affairs would continuously annoy me and impede my enjoyment of the game, so I figured it would be worth restarting the whole damn thing, despite losing hours of progress.
(Yes, consumables can temporarily raise attributes, but that’s not a good solution. It’s a real hassle as it will require you to either save and reload the game regularly, or to always keep at hand and eat consumables before every conversation just in case, because some speech checks won’t appear a second time. No thanks.)
In conclusion, I’m perfectly fine with having to make permanent character decisions early on, and fine with not knowing the all implications and the full impact of each decision (that’s part of the fun, making decisions with incomplete information), but I think it’s untenable to completely neglect to mention that a certain choice will impact dialog options. Unless they’re rare and insignificant, I suppose, but that didn’t seem to be the case here.
Mass Effect: Andromeda, the build
Damn. I was supposed to write this post a long time ago, while still remembering the details. Now it’s all a bit hazy. But I remember some of it, and back then I made some notes and a rough draft, so I’ll create a post out of those. It’ll be less comprehensive than I had intended, but no one will care because no one plays this game anymore.
I’m talking about Mass Effect: Andromeda, and the build I used to play through the game on insanity (the highest difficulty) without much trouble and without having to play like an action hero (which I neither enjoy nor master). It allows for a relatively relaxed and chilled playing style despite the recurring chaos on the battlefield, letting the team (squad + constructs) do much of the heavy lifting. I don’t even engage in active use of combos, though my team made them happen with increasing frequency as they get more upgrades.
The short version is this: it’s a tech-based build using as active powers the two tech constructs (the turret and the remnant) and the cloak, with the engineer profile. For weapon, a sniper rifle with unlimited ammo, which goes well with being relatively stationary and far away from the epicenter of the action.
Initially and for a good long while I concentrate on developing the tech section, but eventually one runs out of useful tech skills/upgrades to develop, at which point I start investing elsewhere, into improving sniping and other passive non-tech skills. All of those skill points go into the combat section actually, but I would definitely get Barrier from the biotics section if it was available without any previous points into that section (might actually be worth it anyway — there are some wiggle room in this build, some things are set in stone and others are not, and you have to use your own judgement to decide which is which).
Skill upgrades and division of labor
As for skill upgrades, whenever there’s a mutually exclusive choice, I (nearly?) always prioritize improving the team over improving myself, and when I do improve myself I prioritize defense and survival over offense. (That’s not to say that I always pick improving the team first if there’s a non-mutually exclusive choice — that would depend on the current needs, as based on experience from the field. E.g. maybe I really need a better cloak right now, and then that would come first).
With good reason — there is a synergy going on between the these particular skills, skill upgrades, the playing style, and choice of squad members.
All the team do is directly attacking, but I have a couple of additional responsibilities.
There’s the attacking of course, using the sniper rifle, but there’s also the constantly managing and coordinating the others, assessing the situation on the battlefield and making decisions about where they should go and who to attack. That often means having them attack the same target (often the weakest), but not always.
They’re allowed to die or get destroyed; I’m not, so I also need to prioritize survival for myself. In part, I do that through the playing style, hanging around in the background and on the edges of the battle, but also through upgrading my defense and ability to survive. That’s not just improving armor, but also things like making the cloak last longer, and being able to recharge the shield while being cloaked. That’s way more important than, say, getting an upgrade to do more melee damage while cloaked, which would be nearly useless.
Lastly, it’s my job to revive fallen comrades and re-employing destroyed constructs. This happens pretty regularly early on, but less so as the team gets better. In doing so, the cloak is very useful, esp since I often prefer squad members that go into close contact with the enemy, such as the Krogan and Cora, which means that when they die, they end up right in the middle of the action — good luck reviving them on insanity without having a cloak. But in addition the cloak is useful for getting into good vantage points, and escaping if the enemy gets too close. Can’t overestimate how useful and necessary the cloak is for this build and this playing style.
A few additional notes about skills
The three active powers are all so good and essential to this build that I never use anything else, so all other skill points go into getting and upgrading passive powers. I don’t think it’s that hard to determine which of those powers to get (in time I think you get pretty much all passive powers, upgraded all the way, in the tech section.). In some cases it might be somewhat tricky deciding what specific upgrades to get when you have to choose among the mutually exclusive ones. Just use your judgement to the best of your ability and upgrade in accordance with the guidelines I’ve given above. Some choices are obvious, but some are not, in which case it might not even matter that much which way you go. Remember that it’s always possible to regret your decision and redistribute all skill points.
Here’s an additional example of synergy, from memory: there is an upgrade where one can make the assault turret slowly repair itself if it’s in proximity to me. That’s a superb one, esp since I’m relatively immobile during combat anyway. But as mentioned, I am usually far away from the action, so the turret needs to be as well. That in turn means that as it’s time to decide whether to equip it with ice or fire, it needs to be ice, since that’s a long distance weapon, and fire (a flame thrower really) is not.
There are synergies like that all over the place, both obvious and less obvious ones, including finding a nice balance between having the team priming and detonating combos. Having them all do one and not the other would obviously be suboptimal, as far as combos go (which is just one consideration — it’s like a puzzle where you want all pieces to fit). Done right, combos will in time go off regularly without you lifting a finger. I don’t do combos myself, but it’s great having a team that does.
Obviously the Team Support skill has many good upgrades, but you can find team-related upgrades scattered across the other skills and upgrades as well.
You don’t need to be too dogmatic about the details. Maybe I wasn’t, I don’t remember, could very well be that I put a few points i to e.g. sniping before getting a certain team-related upgrade. But in general, team comes first, and then defense/survival over offense for myself, then the rest. That applies not only to skills, but also to armor, which to pick and what bonuses to add, and maybe in other areas as well, I don’t remember all the systems.
A different beginning
Please note that none of those three active powers are available at the start. For the cloak and turret, you first you need to add nine points into the tech section. That means levelling up a few times. Don’t worry, that happens early, but if you run into the wrong enemies before that point, it could actually get really difficult. If so, maybe go elsewhere to get those points, and come back later. I have no advice on what initial interim powers to choose.
The remnant will take a tad bit longer to get, as it requires you to find PeeBee and finish one of her early quests, but do prioritize that though, at least after having the other two powers. Shouldn’t take too long or be too hard.
When you do get the specified powers, don’t forget to respec the build (done in the medical bay) so that no skill points are wasted.
Final thoughts
I’ve heard of people getting stuck on insanity level, overwhelmed by enemies. It doesn’t have to be that way. I’ve also seen it claimed that actively using combos is necessary at this difficulty. Not true. With the right skills and right playing style it is pretty smooth sailing. I’m sure there are many viable builds (even for insanity), especially for action heroes who don’t mind intense and explosive action, but I’ve found a convenient and fun build that suits me perfectly. This is the ”let someone else do the hard work” build. I’m sure it’s boring to some people, but I for one prefer it this way. Among other things, it makes it more of an RPG experience where you rely a little more on making thoughtful decisions and a little less on being good at fast-paced combat.
But anyway, that’s that.
Mass Effect: Andromeda on insanity
Decided to return to Andromeda for a second run, but this time on the hardest difficulty, insanity.
Perhaps the simplest thing in the world for some people, but I’m not an action hero, so I wasn’t sure how it would go.
On my last run (on normal), after starting out trying various things, I eventually converged on using cloak and the two tech constructs as my three active powers, plus sniping as my main weapon. That makes for a playing style that suits me fine. Figured I might use the same setup this time, but I wasn’t sure — that setup doesn’t allow for taking advantage of power combos, and many say they’re indispensable on insanity. And maybe I would want to play around with other powers anyway, for fun? In any case, cloak and tech constructs aren’t available at the start, so I could at least play around with power combos for a while.
And so I did. At first it went well; noticeably harder than last time, but not to the point of hitting a wall. Then I came up against some remnants guarding a monolith, and I hit that wall. I tried again and again, using different tactics and vantage points etc, but I just couldn’t win. My squad mates died, and it was difficult to revive them without dying myself, and it seemed like an endless stream of remnants coming at us (1). Eventually, it felt like a complete exercise in futility.
I’m sure part of this was just me playing badly, since the first run on normal (and without combos) didn’t provide much training, but I felt defeated enough that I didn’t want to have to seriously practice to demolish this obstacle.
A real low point, I wasn’t sure I was going to be able to finish the game at all. But I had one last card up my sleeve: using my old build, even though I mostly would have to forfeit using power combos. I was still a low level character at this point, but I had enough skill points to be allowed to use cloak and turret, and unlike most of my last run I knew it was possible to respec my character.
And so I did, and it also became a more focused build too, since I before that had wasted a few points trying different powers.
Lo and behold, after a few tries I made it work. Phew. I was elated; the game was on.
And I kept going, clearing Eos, establishing a base and returning to the Nexus. That’s where I was at when I wrote the first draft. Then I forgot about the draft and kept playing. Now I’m nearly done with the game. After I got on track with the build, the game just became easier and easier with each new character level. Soon enough, it was easier even than my previous run on normal.
So it’s not only perfectly possible to finish the game on insanity without using combos (2); it’s also easy (3). Perhaps this build is actually the easiest way, especially for someone who doesn’t have the chops to whirl around like a ninja on steroids. I mostly just hang around in the background overlooking the battle, making certain decisions and some half-hearted sniping. In these games, action RPGs, I often look for the most relaxed playing style, but without ”cheating” like e.g. playing on easy. I want a real problem to solve, but I want the solution itself to make it relaxed, so to speak. And this is indeed pretty relaxed since my squad and my constructs do most of the heavy lifting. In any game of this kind, if there’s a choice between making myself stronger or my squad/companion/constructs etc, I always prioritize them.
Even though I use the same active powers and the same type of main weapon as last time, the build is different in other ways, and clearly better. Partly because it is a lot more focused (like I said, didn’t then know until near the end, long after the main quest was done, that I could respec, so I ended up with a lot of wasted skill points), but there are other improvements as well.
So the build has cloak, tech constructs and sniping, but there is also a matter of having the right combination of optional traits (important), and to some extent the right armor, and even the right sniping rifle and augs. But I don’t obsess over optimization; I’m happy to neglect details. So I may delay researching the next level equipment or making immediate use of a good aug I just found or whatever. I make sure to get the important things right, and then do the rest as I feel like. I never use consumables.
I’ll return to delineate the important elements of the build, as well as a post on tactics to use while engaging in a battle using this build.
1. Not an unjustified feeling, as I didn’t know at this point that Assemblers create new remnants, and so I didn’t target the Assemblers first.
2. Yes, the squad and the tech constructs do use combos, and in fact I build them to maximize that. But I don’t use combos myself.
3. I did run into one (optional) battle that initially was hard (apparently infamously hard, even on normal), but even that one became easy with the right tactic. I’m talking about the end battle in the vault on H-047C.
The story of the release of Fallout 76
That went well.
I didn’t get the game, not even with the generous discount offered like ten minutes after the game had been released. I expected the game to be vastly inferior to earlier titles, but even long before the release I gradually lost even the little excitement I initially might have had. Especially since I’m able to listen to the stellar soundtrack directly on my music service anyway. Might still get the game in the future, but quite possibly I won’t.
I did however, despite my disinterest in playing the game myself, follow the unfolding release story with great interest, starting way back with the teaser. And it was quite a ride, much drama as Bethesda had their reputation obliterated step by step. Probably more interesting than the stories within the game itself, and more tragic.
What had me most worried about the game right from the E3 show was the lack of human NPCs. Such a gap would of course mean a downgrade of NPC interaction in general, in favor of multiplayer, which seemed like a terrible decision for this series, and for my personal taste.
In the days following the E3 announcement I was trying to get this point across in various forums, but it fell on deaf ears. One guy even refused to believe me — “do you really think Bethesda would…” — and I had to point him to several sources where Todd made it clear that they indeed intended to.
Instead the main worry was the risk of griefing. I had some concern about that too, but Bethesda did say it was possible to play solo and that there would be anti-griefing measures in place, making it possible to play basically as a single-player game except for the occasional run-in with another player. Especially with relatively few players on each map.
But that wouldn’t cure the problem of having downgraded NPC interaction.
And it’s the kind of shared world that is bound to ruin the solo-player experience in certain other ways as well, including by not allowing any one person to have any lasting impact on the world that way you routinely have in single player games. When the state of the world changes, it’s for the most part just temporary, then it resets. That diminishes the sense of progression. Your character progresses, but not the world. Heck, even the impact of a nuke is reset after a few hours, I hear. Imagine how cheapening and ridiculous it would have been if Megaton and its residents would reset a few hours after nuking it. Nukes should be serious business, especially in a game like Fallout — war never changes — but Fallout 76 turns them into a joke. Watch the intro video to the first Fallout game to know what I mean by serious.
The game is more like an amusement park with a bunch of fun stuff to do with your buddies, where most things are of little consequence. Even the parts that are serious, the tragic and poignant stories you get to hear while listening to the holotapes, are kind of ruined if you go multiplayer, because most people just don’t want to spend five minutes listening to a tape while your friend is waiting. It’s like reading a book and socializing at the same time, it doesn’t mix well.
But anyway, then the beta arrived and all hell broke loose. What had been a speculative breeze of worry turned into a full blown storm of hate, as the emerging self-organized consensus was that this game just plain sucks. Turns out that a lot of players do agree that a Fallout game devoid of NPCs is indeed without a heart and soul, only they had to experience it first hand to realize it. But not only that, even the multiplayer was not what people had hoped for (though griefing specifically wasn’t a problem), and the game had an impressive amount of bugs, and so on.
A few brave souls remained hopeful that Bethesda would get their act together and patch the bugs before the release, and maybe even address some of the other concerns, but I think most understood that that wasn’t going to happen. Indeed, it didn’t. The game tanked among players and reviewers alike.
And then the disaster train just kept going, both in terms of the game itself, and the site (leaking information about certain customers), and products related to the game, such as the bag and the Nuka rum. It was a spectacular parade of fail, their first in many years (or ever?) [1].
On the positive side, with Fallout 76 as a yardstick and a point of reference, it shouldn’t be too hard to do better next time, right? Unless it’s a symptom of something seriously broken over at Bethesda HQ, but let’s not make too much out of this. Once isn’t a pattern, might be an exception and an honest mistake.
I would really like to have and have had an insider’s view of all of this, to hear what has been said at Bethesda HQ. Did they suspect ahead of time that the game was going to fail? Was the game, minus the bugs, as they had intended it, or did something go terribly wrong during development? What was the reaction to the, mildly put, negative reception? Have they learned anything, and what are their plans for the future?
I’ve been a big fan of the series from the very start, and I especially love New Vegas. I really enjoyed even Fallout 4 and I’ve defended it on occasion (old post available here, though that’s more of a criticism than a defense), so the whole Fallout 76 thing was a big disappointment. Maybe we can put it in the same category as the BoS console game and Tactics; it’s there but it didn’t really happen.
But it’s not like I don’t have enough games on my hands anyway, and maybe it’ll even be an object lesson of sorts for the gaming industry. Heck, maybe it’ll even be a lesson for players, those who have kept asking for a multiplayer Fallout for a long time (and no, even co-op is a bad idea). But I doubt it.
All in all I think my pre-beta post on the game holds up pretty well.
The easiest and safest way for Bethesda to redeem themselves is to remaster Fallout 3 and New Vegas. They did a good job with Skyrim (thanks), now do it with those two. Heck, why not go all in and remaster Fallout 1 and 2 while you’re at it. That might please even the Fallout purists, well some of them, if you do a good job.
1. Yes yes, Fallout 4 had a lot of detractors, but overall the game was still a smashing success and a pretty damn good game, despite the dialog system among other shortcomings. Angry Joe made long and detailed reviews of both Fallout 4 and Fallout 76, and the former got 8/10 and the latter 3/10. Fair assessments.
Witcher 3, the ending
Finished the game a while ago, the main story and plenty of side quests (including all monster contracts.) I have yet to play the expansions, but I hear are pretty massive.
Spoilers will follow, for the ending no less.
In terms of Ciri, I got the witcher ending — Ciri becoming a witcher — which was pretty neat. Would she had been happy as an empress? Possibly, but that’s less certain. Would the land benefit from her leadership? Probably, but tough luck.
One of three endings for Ciri is getting her killed (or at least lost — probably killed). That’s a mighty dark ending. Interestingly enough, it’s relatively subtle decisions that get you there, a lot of people unknowingly get that ending despite wanting and trying their best for her. For example, if you don’t agree to ransack the elf’s room up (long story), that counts against you, and if you’re a borderline case at that point, that decision alone can be the difference between her dying or not dying.
Luckily, I let her have at it. The only apparently bad decision I made was facing the lodge together with her (take notice, if you have yet to face this decision.)
That’s a whole post — or ten — in itself, the way decisions and consequences are linked and implemented in these games.
As for rulership, I got the Nilfgaardian ending. It’s not great, he’s a bit of a tyrant (and worse in the books, I hear), but it might still be the best. Better than Radovid for sure, but maybe northern rule by Dijkstra is worth consideration.
And then there’s romance. Apparently Yen vs Triss is a big topic in the community. I romanced both. Works out well, until it doesn’t. Had a hunch it might not end well, but it seemed like a good idea at the time. Not only does it ruin your chances with either, but it also has a deep and somewhat poignant impact on your life ever after — leadning not to a bad life exactly, just a typical witcher life, and just not what you’d get with Yen or Triss — if the ending slide is to be trusted. Which makes sense, clearly those are rare opportunities, and once gone lost forever.
Well, that’s it. I’m currently taking a break from the game, but I’ll be back at least for the expansions. Right now, I’m midway through Metal Gear Solid 5.
Witcher 3
If there’s anything you learn from the video game community, it’s that Witcher 3 is a perennial fan favorite RPG, along with the series in general. Pretty much everyone loves it.
Well, I’ve finally got around to give it a shot, and I suppose it’s time for me to join the club.
Been wanting to do this for a long time, and I’ve had the game (and DLCs) in my library waiting patiently.
It’s not actually the first time I play the series though, a long time ago I took Witcher 2 for a very short spin. Wasn’t in the mood, didn’t get into it, and never got around to give it a second chance. I meant to, especially since I know I’m slow to get into these kind of games, but it didn’t happen.
At some point I figured I might as well jump to Witcher 3 directly, and learn about the Witcher world, including the stories and events of the first two games, from documents and videos.
A tough decision, as I remain convinced that Witcher 2 is a really good game, but time is finite and my backlog isn’t. It seems like most think Witcher 3 is (somewhat) better anyway.
Now I’m 50+ hours into the game. That’s many hours, but I feel like I’ve barely scratched the surface. That includes a lot of side quests though, and a fair amount of Gwent. The remaining quest list is long and growing ever longer, and I’m having a blast, and I hear some people put an ungodly amount of hours into this game even in a single playthrough — so I don’t need to rely on conjecture to conclude that I will keep going for a good long while.
Indeed, I do enjoy the experience a lot, there’s much to love in this game. More posts to come.
(Incidentally, this hypes me even more for Cyberpunk 2077, although I’ve been hyped ever since the announcement and that first teaser, years ago.)
Fallout 76
Several weeks ago Bethesda started running a livestream teasing an upcoming Fallout related reveal. Much speculation ensued. I was myself expecting a remaster or two, something I’ve wanted for a long time.
Turns out they got a brand new Fallout game, for which we got a teaser trailer a day or so later. Fallout 76. Not many saw that coming, especially not before the livestream.
A brand new game, but other than that the trailer didn’t reveal much, we would have to wait for E3. So more speculation ensued, and there were also some (supposed) leaks and rumors going around, including that of Fallout 76 being a multiplayer game, which was also subtly hinted at by the trailer itself.
Then E3 arrived, and we learned that the game is in late stage development and that it’s indeed a multiplayer game of sorts, though not an mmorpg, and not a typical multiplayer shooter. They say it’s its own kind of multiplayer.
You can play solo if you want [1], but the experience may not be what you expect from a Fallout game, since it is built around multiplayer. They’ve removed and downgraded some traditional Fallout single player elements, most noticeably removed the human NPCs. All humans in the game are now real people. Previous games in the series all have plenty of human NPCs to interact with [2], indeed one might argue that that’s a core part of the series and a core driver of the storytelling. There will be some non-human NPCs (eg robots), but all in all NPC interaction will likely not feature as prominently this time around. In an interview Todd Howard has stated flat out that there will be no NPCs in the game (points for not trying to mislead us or conceal this gap), which strictly speaking is false (those robots) but still telling.
Filling this gap is the aforementioned multiplayer; you get to interact with other players instead of NPCs. If you go solo you’ll have to live with the gap and enjoy whatever else the game will offer.
It’s uncharted territory for a Fallout game, quite a change actually. Permissible experiment or a train wreck in the making? We’ll see, but from the looks of it, it’s hard not to conclude that it’s a significant step back for those looking for a single player experience, even though some of classic elements are there, such as quests, character development and exploration, and the Fallout world itself with its history and lore and everything.
But it might be a fun game in its own right, especially if played as intended, providing some new engaging experiences that the old Fallout games cannot. If you’re into that sort of thing. The setting does look compelling and beautiful — and the territory is apparently four times the size of Fallout 4 — and I do like base building (except… this time the settlements might be a bit desolate? In Fallout 4 they had people living in them.) Despite everything I just can’t help getting at least a little bit excited about getting to be in the Fallout universe again, with everything that (still) entails. Hopefully they have a surprise or two in store for us as well. And hopefully Inon Zur will return to create another awesome soundtrack — that alone would be something to look forward to. But conversely, if they don’t go with Inon Zur (or Mark Morgan, for that matter), and if they screw up the soundtrack somehow, that would be a huge blow to the game, as far as I’m concerned. A stellar soundtrack has been integral to Fallout since day one, and it’s a big deal.
In conclusion, I say this: I would much rather have a more traditional Fallout game, a single player game with lots of NPCs and so on, but I’ll likely give Fallout 76 a chance at some point, for old times’ sake if nothing else. Not sure really what to expect.
It will be released November 14.
—
1. Todd Howard’s term. It doesn’t mean playing on a map without other players — they will always be there — but apparently there will be substantial anti-griefing measures available for those who want to go about it alone.
2. No I’ve never heard of Tactics or the console BoS game, go away.
Skyrim #6, Quest Soup
Another post that’s nominally about Skyrim, but actually about a broader topic related to game design, using Skyrim as an example and as a springboard. Here we go.
So there you are in Skyrim, going about your business, stealing, killing, saving the world. Maybe on a mission, maybe just wandering about. Maybe new in town, talking to people trying to get a sense of the place, excited by the prospect of making some profit, ehhh I mean helping the poor.
You’re an offbeat outlander wearing a ghastly mask and a blood soaked armor, but they deem you worthy all the same, their very own watershed moment, and they tell it all within seconds. About family feuds and curses, about private messages to be delivered, some by word and some by the sword, about stolen heirlooms and dark secrets of sadness and cruelty; they tell it all, because they need your help, urgently. You are the perfect stranger, a strand of silver hanging through the sky.
So now you get another quest. They stack up, time passes, attention goes elsewhere many times over. Naturally the details start to blur or get lost entirely in the fog of fading memories, especially since many of the quests aren’t that interesting or relevant to begin with, and since it might have been tens of hours since you got some of them.
As the quest list grows longer, a curious phenomenon emerges: you start to accidentally make progress on, even completing, quests.
You talk to some random guy, and suddenly you’re unexpectedly informed that you’ve taken the next step in a quest you’ve long forgotten. Turns out some women gave you a quest 27 hours ago to inform her brother about some herbs or something, and now you’re unknowingly talking to that brother for some other unrelated reason, maybe trying to get a sense of a new town, and in the course of the conversation delivered the message and made that old forgotten quest progress.
Well, that was easy, but, needless to say, advancing a quest in this manner doesn’t feel very meaningful. Completion still gets you the in-game reward, and to the person you’re helping you may very well be a savior, but you clearly aren’t immersed in the quest narrative.
Heck, even deliberately trying to get engaged in these (to you) small and sometimes rather pointless quests is often a challenge, and you run the risk of completing them by simply going through the motions following the quest arrow, rather than actually caring.
And this, all of it and more, is quest soup, bon appétit. A chaotic unwieldy mess of many forgettable and forgotten quests that are being stacked up in a ten mile long list and completed without immersion, by accident or otherwise. (Which is not to say that Skyrim doesn’t also have some quests that are more interesting and more inherently immersive, but they’re not central enough to the experince as a whole to dissolve the soup.)
I’d like to think quest soup isn’t inevitible in a game like this (Mass Effect compares favorably, for one thing), neither in terms of game design or playing style, but that’s a topic for another day.
Meanwhile, ponder the fact that I’ve said quest more than one hundred times in this short post. I just don’t feel “mission”. And “investigation”? Are you kidding me, what is this, a detective game?
End captain’s log.