But he's right, FNV was a great game despite it's base, not because of it. If you think otherwise then why don't you lay out what FO3 contributed to NV's quality?
The only thing that I can think of is that using recycled assets let them spend their budget on more important things, but that doesn't really mean much.
Gamebryo looks pretty bad on a technical level (it's failings especially noticeable in that first screenshot) but Fo3 and NV both manage to come through from time to time with strong art direction. The New Vegas Strip, despite being about 4 buildings with loading doors in between, does look quite impressive when you first arrive, especially if you arrive at night when its all lit up. I always liked the forest road leading up to Jacobstown too.
And of course there's the thousands of bugs inevitable with any Gamebryo game.
I've never understood people complaining about combat in gamebryo Fallout, because I had fun with it. Much more so in FNV.
You've got two RPGs that get on the top 10 of all time list that have been done in gamebryo, Morrowind and FNV. I'm tired of people trashing the engine that powered these two great games, despite its flaws.
Which side is the good side?Those moments where the art direction and the good side of gamebryo click are the moments that make you forget how shit the overall game is.
I've never understood people complaining about combat in gamebryo Fallout, because I had fun with it. Much more so in FNV.
You've got two RPGs that get on the top 10 of all time list that have been done in gamebryo, Morrowind and FNV. I'm tired of people trashing the engine that powered these two great games, despite its flaws.
I've never understood people complaining about combat in gamebryo Fallout, because I had fun with it. Much more so in FNV.
The combat suffered from a case of "shoot people in the face twice at point blank range with a shotgun and only do 1 bar of HP damage" stuff, but it was serviceable most of the time. Project Nevada definitely did a lot to help NV's combat.
I've never understood people complaining about combat in gamebryo Fallout, because I had fun with it. Much more so in FNV.
The combat suffered from a case of "shoot people in the face twice at point blank range with a shotgun and only do 1 bar of HP damage" stuff, but it was serviceable most of the time. Project Nevada definitely did a lot to help NV's combat.
I never understood this complaint. On vanilla I put the game on Very Hard, the HP bloat didn't matter because enemies would still die easily. I didn't even have an efficient build or anything. The combat was that it felt "floaty" and the AI is retarded ("aaaaaah, please spare me!"...*turns around*..."die already, you fucker!").
Fallout3 is shit. There is nothing extenuating about it.
Fallout3 apologetics leads to Fallout 4 being even more stinky turd, 'cause Todd would interpret it as a proof that even codexers like his shit.
Fallout3 is shit. There is nothing extenuating about it.
Fallout3 apologetics leads to Fallout 4 being even more stinky turd, 'cause Todd would interpret it as a proof that even codexers like his shit.
Someone here posted that Bethesda has an arts department that's full of talented and well paid professionals. On the other hand, they really cheap out when it comes to hiring level designers and don't seem to have any full time writers at all (this might have changed since Skyrim though).
The disparity of investment really shows, but if you isolate the parts of Fallout that have had significant investment, I think they've done a good job in those areas.