The Outer Worlds: Spacer's Choice Edition - Obsidian's first-person sci-fi RPG set in a corporate space colony

[Grunker]

Roguey, let's take that concrete example that Grunker offered.

Might and Magic 7 allows character promotion to explicitly Evil classes: Liches, Black Knights, even a class called Villain. Clearly, if any adventurers would murder innocents, it would be these guys, yet non-encounter NPCs remain unkillable. Would you say that this is because the developers were simply "lazy"? Was this behavior out of scope for the kind of game they wanted to have? Or was there another reason?

I don't know but I have zero interest in playing M&M 7 on account of its ugly 3D graphics and awkward realtime/turnbased combat.

I do recall being able to murder townspeople to my heart's content during the few minutes I played M&M VI so it sounds like a downgrade to me.

You can in MM7 as well. But just like MM6 you can't murder shopkeepers and quest givers since they are not implemented as actual NPCs - they are 2D images in building screens.

 

[Grunker]

Also, you're missing out. WoX is probably the best MM by objective standards, but 7 is my personal favourite. It has the best systems and the most polish. I'm surprised that you're a graphics whore though.

 

[Cael]

I wonder how much howls of outrage someone would get if he were to create a game where you play a classic hero of the heart-of-gold type.

 

[Jedi Master Radek]

Running around murdering civilians is fun in 2-3 first games you play that has this feature. After that you have experienced everything it has to offer.

 

[Yosharian]

Come on guys, this thread is supposed to be about The Outer Worlds



On second thoughts, carry on

 

[Nano]

Sometimes I like booting up GTA and murdering everything in sight for a few minutes. Great stress relief.

 

[Cadmus]

Guys is this shit? I'm looking for a game to play so maybe DOS2 or this?

 

[Ash]

I played this game. Once I turned it off after completion I had an epiphany and discovered I was gay and created a twitter account for making socio-political statements, and further still, realized I had terrible taste in games prior and meaningful games like TOW is the way forward.

Spoiler

In all seriousness the game isn't completely terrible but I STRONGLY recommend skipping over it. It's just not very good in every aspect of design. There's so many better games you could be playing.

 

[mediocrepoet]

Guys is this shit? I'm looking for a game to play so maybe DOS2 or this?

I picked this and the expansions up on a deep sale. It's not completely terrible, but it's not great. It's nice to look at and has some interesting ideas. Some parts are funny and others are try hard, but the biggest issue with it is that it's completely boringly easy. It's like the entire game was based around games journalist difficulty at the highest level and then scaled down from there. It'd be better if I was 5 and playing my first RPG, but now this is awful. I think that's the main thing it'd take to save it though is a difficulty pass.

Note that I'm playing a speech/thief/tech guy with minimal combat skills and I still find the combat ridiculously easy.

So if you want something that's somewhat interesting storywise but not at all challenging gameplaywise, then sure. If not, I'd probably skip it and hope they actually do a difficulty pass for the sequel.

 

[Yosharian]

Guys is this shit? I'm looking for a game to play so maybe DOS2 or this?

I picked this and the expansions up on a deep sale. It's not completely terrible, but it's not great. It's nice to look at and has some interesting ideas. Some parts are funny and others are try hard, but the biggest issue with it is that it's completely boringly easy. It's like the entire game was based around games journalist difficulty at the highest level and then scaled down from there. It'd be better if I was 5 and playing my first RPG, but now this is awful. I think that's the main thing it'd take to save it though is a difficulty pass.

Note that I'm playing a speech/thief/tech guy with minimal combat skills and I still find the combat ridiculously easy.

So if you want something that's somewhat interesting storywise but not at all challenging gameplaywise, then sure. If not, I'd probably skip it and hope they actually do a difficulty pass for the sequel.

Yup, there is zero challenge in the game and it's a huge problem

 

[Wesp5]

Yup, there is zero challenge in the game and it's a huge problem

Exactly. And this is not only a problem from the gameplay side of things, also for world building. The setup is already quite weak to begin with and then you have all these hacking and lockpicking devices lying around all over the place? That's just ridiculous...

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

Yup, there is zero challenge in the game and it's a huge problem

Yeah they made the same mistake with Deadfire but at least Deadfire eventually fixed it with patches.

 

[Major_Blackhart]

With regards to all this killing whomever, I have two answers of games that did it:

1. Arcanum
2. Underrail (Six and Tanner are insanely tough but doable with some builds).

Aside from that, what I've heard about TOW is that it has no challenge, and that was the earliest complaint I recall hearing of. That's honestly the worst part about any particular game, especially a FPS styled one, that you can have. Deus Ex had INSANE challenge early on, until you got badass enough that you could breeze thru shit. But even then, if you wanted, you could create a broken character. And then, realistic difficulty added another flavor to it of near instant death in some cases. Then there's GMDX, which makes a guy want to go back and replay again.

That game was a gem as well due to unintentional ways of doing things which the devs didn't foresee but were possible due to the engine mechanics. Now, it was a railroaded story, but the insane level of replayability had to do with a certain level of interactivity and mild reactivity PLUS new ways to fight enemies, etc. thanks to the awesome options given by way of augmentations and skills.

 

[Blaine]

I'm not sure if "(almost) too strong to kill" entirely qualifies, especially since both Six and Tanner are supranormal individuals by nature. I don't necessarily think that the protagonist must be capable of becoming the martially strongest individual in the entire game world in order to achieve peak freedom.

This is especially true in certain settings—Lovecraftian ones, for example... though I admit that's a somewhat self-defeating example, given that Tchort is clearly Lovecraftian. It gets my point across, though.

By the same token, "Can't kill it because you can't even 'find' it" (God, for example) probably doesn't qualify.

What really qualify are relatively normal characters who get up again after playing dead, or characters wearing an invisible damage-nullifying body sock.

 

[Inconceivable]

I played The Outer Worlds recently, and while it is a good game, I couldn't help being disappointed because everyone was comparing it favorably to Bethesda's Fallout, which raised a lot of false expectations. The Outer Worlds isn't an RPG at all. More like a cross between a looter-shooter and Bioshock. It's a FPS first and foremost, consisting of long and sometimes too drawn out shooting sections, with some interesting conversation sections in between. And that is pretty much it.

Many like to rip on Bethesda, but the reality is that people love their games because they are so complex, which makes the games very immersive. NPC's are unique and have daily schedules, going about their lives. There's interesting item mechanics, and several crafting mechanics, like alchemy, enchantments, smithing. You can buy houses and decorate them to a certain degree. There is a huge variety of weapons, spells and enemies to fight. Tons of locations to explore with hidden treasures of which most are accessible from the beginning of the game. Crime and punishment mechanics and guilds, unique quests that yield unique rewards... Beth games are vastly more complex than your average game.

The Outer Worlds has almost nothing of that. NPC's stand on the same spot 24/7, items are limited to armor, weapons and boosters. There's only 5 or 6 types of enemies to fight. It's a much, much simpler type of game. Comparing it favorably to Fallout is grossly misleading.
It's a good game for what it is, but given the choice, I would prefer replaying Fallout 3, NV, 4, or any recent Elder Scrolls game any time.
One good example that highlights The Outer Worlds' lack of mechanics is that in some sections of the game, it taunts you with an important item, letting you know that it is located in a certain container. But it's actually impossible to steal it from that container without being detected, because it's in full line of sight of a plot-relevant NPC plus guards. And while you can sneak and steal in the game, there is absolutely no game mechanic to distract people or get them to move away, and since they stand on the same spot forever, the only way to get to the chest is to kill them. That is just lame.
I know the developers decided to make every NPC killable and then added in lots and lots of different conversations to still make the plot work. I don't think this design choice was worth it. I'd rather they put in some essential NPC's and instead had focused more on fleshing out game mechanics.

Any way... once you get to terms that the game is just a shooter with conversations, it is enjoyable. Murder on Eridanos is definitively the highlight of the game, since it de-emphasizes combat a bit and puts the focus more on conversations and investigation.

 

[Yosharian]

I played The Outer Worlds recently, and while it is a good game

 

[jackofshadows]

TemplarGR come, say hello to your new fellow here

 

[Ibn Sina]

Outerworlds is shit. You did not need to write this entire diatribe to say it is shit. It is a shit game made by shit has-been developers who cannot make a good game even if their lives depended on it.

 

[Inconceivable]

Outerworlds is shit. You did not need to write this entire diatribe to say it is shit. It is a shit game made by shit has-been developers who cannot make a good game even if their lives depended on it.

I think what makes a good game or not, largely depends on expectations. Expectations were inflated, due to the many favorable comparisons to Fallout, made by clueless reviewers and game journalists. (Edit: And wishful thinking)

The Outer Worlds is a decent game for trodding along alien landscapes, blasting all life from the map, while getting some slight, intellectual tingles from dystopian NPC conversations along the way. A bit cliché at times, but I found it interesting enough.
And Murder on Eridanos is quite a bit better than the base game.
If your expectations are something along the lines of New Vegas, the game sucks ass, for sure.

Also. "Diatribe!" I learned a new word today. Thanks, random Internet person!

 

[Major_Blackhart]

Inconceivable Word of warning. Even our NPCs are not real NPCs when it comes to RPGs. If you're of a different opinion, be ready.

So I'm gonna fire the first shot. Hopefully it won't devolve into me threatening to rape you or something.

You can say The Outer World (TOW) is a decent enough game as a shooter (NO YOU CAN'T!!!!), but that was NEVER how it was marketed as. It was marketed from the start as a game coming from celebrated RPG Creators Tim Cain and Leon Boyarsky. You don't get much more RPG Street Cred than that.

Everybody knew it was gonna be first person. BUT what everyone was hoping for, based on the company, the leads, and yes, interviews and reviews and journo trash, was at least a Deus Ex (DX1) experience, or better yet a FONV / Bloodlines mesh.

What people got instead was a watered down FPS. That's NOT what Obshitian advertised. That's NOT what everyone was led to believe. And on top of it, it's generic shooter and no difficulty.

That's why there's such pushback against this game, and that's why it's such shit in the 'Dex. TOW was advertised as sirloin. Instead, they pinched a loaf on the plate and said bon appetite. And as a result, it's shit.

Edit: Corrected Yosharian

 

[Yosharian]

I think what makes a good game or not, largely depends on expectations. Expectations were inflated, due to the many favorable comparisons to Fallout, made by clueless reviewers and game journalists. (Edit: And wishful thinking)

The Outer Worlds is a decent game for trodding along alien landscapes, blasting all life from the map, while getting some slight, intellectual tingles from dystopian NPC conversations along the way. A bit cliché at times, but I found it interesting enough.
And Murder on Eridanos is quite a bit better than the base game.
If your expectations are something along the lines of New Vegas, the game sucks ass, for sure.

Also. "Diatribe!" I learned a new word today. Thanks, random Internet person!

Yeah my expectations were for it to not be shit, it was shit

 

[Yosharian]

You can say The Outer World (TOW) is a decent enough game as a shooter

But it isn't though. It's a shit shooter.

 

[jackofshadows]

I think what makes a good game or not, largely depends on expectations. Expectations were inflated, due to the many favorable comparisons to Fallout, made by clueless reviewers and game journalists. (Edit: And wishful thinking)

Speaking of first impressions - sure. I was gravely dissapointed, too. But now, after the dust settled it doesn't take much to soberly look at the subj and conclude that it's mediocre at best on its own, whatever expectations or marketing words aside. And I agree with you, even Beshesda's abominations of games like F4 or Skyrim are better. Because TOW has no redeeming qualities, none.

The shooter aspect is shit. Stealth? Shit. The world-building is just as crazy. The dialogues while sterile and well-edited doesn't make much sense most of the times thanks to worldbuilding. Not to mention the honk-honk stuff even. The role-play system is shallow as fuck. The loot is insanely overboard like there's no tomorrow. The game-world itself is cramped unlike in Beth games. Overall difficulty is laughable. Bottomline - it's a mass-appeal game which has absolutely nothing to offer to passionate gamers and lose on a Beth field because of scope, budget and whatever other reasons.

 

[KVVRR]

Outerworlds is shit. You did not need to write this entire diatribe to say it is shit. It is a shit game made by shit has-been developers who cannot make a good game even if their lives depended on it.

I think what makes a good game or not, largely depends on expectations. Expectations were inflated, due to the many favorable comparisons to Fallout, made by clueless reviewers and game journalists. (Edit: And wishful thinking)

The Outer Worlds is a decent game for trodding along alien landscapes, blasting all life from the map, while getting some slight, intellectual tingles from dystopian NPC conversations along the way. A bit cliché at times, but I found it interesting enough.
And Murder on Eridanos is quite a bit better than the base game.
If your expectations are something along the lines of New Vegas, the game sucks ass, for sure.

Also. "Diatribe!" I learned a new word today. Thanks, random Internet person!

Why do you think Murder on Eridanos is better than the base game? It's more or less the same imo, just with an even stupider villain.

 

[Inconceivable]

Outerworlds is shit. You did not need to write this entire diatribe to say it is shit. It is a shit game made by shit has-been developers who cannot make a good game even if their lives depended on it.

I think what makes a good game or not, largely depends on expectations. Expectations were inflated, due to the many favorable comparisons to Fallout, made by clueless reviewers and game journalists. (Edit: And wishful thinking)

The Outer Worlds is a decent game for trodding along alien landscapes, blasting all life from the map, while getting some slight, intellectual tingles from dystopian NPC conversations along the way. A bit cliché at times, but I found it interesting enough.
And Murder on Eridanos is quite a bit better than the base game.
If your expectations are something along the lines of New Vegas, the game sucks ass, for sure.

Also. "Diatribe!" I learned a new word today. Thanks, random Internet person!

Why do you think Murder on Eridanos is better than the base game? It's more or less the same imo, just with an even stupider villain.

I thought the plot was smarter, less cliché and more fun (more in the spirit of Fallout, actually). I liked the new mechanic of searching for clues, and there is much more emphasis on conversations. You can fuck up the ending in several ways if you accuse the wrong person and don't make the right conclusions. The setting was also fun and refreshing, as were some of the new "Science Weapons". Overall, it's less depressing and more fun than the base game, even though the general theme is still that of evil corporations doing unimaginable things, there is a much higher LOL factor to what is going on.