recent: tears of the kingdom, or as i like to call it botw 1.2, its the same thing all over again just with one or two added gimicks, the open world is dead, npcs are boring and nintendo just got away with it like that

not so recent: i cant stand persona 5, joker and his entourage are annoying teenagers, the time management is a horrible gameplay addition and the artstyle is just a visual overstimulation

with that being said,~~ plz dont kill me~~

  • IncrediblyIncredible@beehaw.org
    6·
    2 years ago

    I finished Fallout New Vegas but never really enjoyed my time with it. Was a boring open world with emotionless NPCs and a forgettable storyline. Tried Fallout 76 recently and it was still the same type of thing. I played the hell out of Skyrim though and loved it the whole time. Maybe I just don’t like an apocalyptic open world? People always seem to love Fallout but it’s just not for me.

    • Gilsman@beehaw.org
      2·
      2 years ago

      Same everyone raves about new vegas but I enjoyed my time with fallout 3 much more (I don’t even want to talk about the number of hours I have on Skyrim…)

      • setsneedtofeed@beehaw.org
        1·
        2 years ago

        They have very different approaches to designing worlds. Fallout 3 and 4 have much more tangential and almost self contained wackiness going on that can be tonally all over the place, and FNV tends to be built all in support of a single tone and while it has wacky elements a bit more grounded.

        Different approaches. What this means for me is that while I find the Fallout 4 main quest incredibly poorly written, I can largely ignore it because there are so many unrelated tangent stories that I do like a lot, and locations to explore in a kind of themepark of a game world. Whereas FNV doesn’t quite have that themepark level of variety as it is building a world that’s trying to be immersive in support of the main story.