Starfield - "space epic" from Bethesda Game Studios

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Based Todd does it again!

Can't wait for the references to FTL's SunDog: Frozen Legacy.

 

[tentanz]

Skyrim: Occasional dragon fights, guards question the existence of dragons, sometimes you see Alduin necromatize a dragon. In the end, you mash attack with three friends you meet exactly one time. Afterwards, the world is physically unchanged.

Oblivion: By midgame, the wilderness is taken over by Oblivion gates, the sky is always red, and you can't go anywhere without getting attacked by a daedra. In the end, you hold off Mehrunes Dagon in single combat, which you are literally incapable of winning, until Martin Septim transforms into the avatar of an Aedra to do Kaiju battle. Afterwards, the Oblivion gates remain visible as ruins, the kaiju are forever preserved in stone, and a statue dedicated to your heroism is erected (based upon the armor you wore).

Both main quests are kind of bad, but I know which one was executed better in terms of reminding you the main quest is affecting the world.

Skyrim has two main quests.

 

[Robotigan]

The player is even provided with a document detailing Dagoth Ur's long-term plans and explaining how the Sixth House has gradually expanded over decades:

This is one of the most blatant lore dumps I've ever seen.

 

[Utgard-Loki]

it's a "lore dump" only for retards that didn't pay attention playing the game. besides akulakhan you find out about every single one of these points just reading mainquest dialogue and reading books you find in the mainquest recommended by npcs.

 

[Hace El Oso]

it's a "lore dump" only for retards that didn't pay attention playing the game. besides akulakhan you find out about every single one of these points just reading mainquest dialogue and reading books you find in the mainquest recommended by npcs.

Interesting, the illiterate dumbasses who refuse to read and are outraged when people around them expect otherwise are just transposing their everyday behavior into the games.

 

[jackofshadows]

Imagine reading in games.

 

[NecroLord]

Imagine reading in games.

Planescape Torment.

 

[Caim]

Imagine reading in games.

Planescape Torment.

You're not only reading in that one but your character is making more for you to read by updating his journal.

 

[The_Mask]

Now I wanna replay Planescape: Torment.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Now I wanna replay Planescape: Torment.

They made a sequel, you should check it out.

 

[The_Mask]

Pass.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Pass.

yeah it's on gamepass

 

[Stavrophore]

Should every AAA RPG that have the budget for it, be made in first or third person? Technicalities and finances aside, what are the advantages of isometric/top down view vs first/third person? I really can't find any good arguments vs the immersion that first person brings, especially when you can see your body[skyrim can do that with a mod].

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Should every AAA RPG that have the budget for it, be made in first or third person? Technicalities and finances aside, what are the advantages of isometric/top down view vs first/third person? I really can't find any good arguments vs the immersion that first person brings, especially when you can see your body[skyrim can do that with a mod].

I hate first person perspective in games because it does a horrible job at representing human vision. Close up third person, as strange as it sounds, does a significantly better job of representing our vision.

First person is decent for horror games I suppose.

 

[thesecret1]

Should every AAA RPG that have the budget for it, be made in first or third person? Technicalities and finances aside, what are the advantages of isometric/top down view vs first/third person? I really can't find any good arguments vs the immersion that first person brings, especially when you can see your body[skyrim can do that with a mod].

Depends on how you want your combat to work. Third person can beat first person when you want the player to have higher combat awareness, ie. in group fights, third person provides a lot more information than first person – countering a person attacking you from the back is practically impossible in first person, for example, while being bread and butter of third person. Isometric is great at managing multiple characters (something that's borderline impossible in first person), while first person excels in 1v1 duels (ie. taking into account attack directions and so on).

Basically: Do you have more than one character you should order around? Isometric/top down. Is the game geared towards having you fight large enemy groups where you're expected to riposte and shit like that? Third person. Is the game geared towards more complicated combat, where attack directions, timing, and various combos matter, and where you will usually be against a single opponent, or a small group at most? First person.

In a game like Skyrim, it doesn't really matter whether you go for first or third person, as it's not playing to strengths of either (combat is always just retarded button mashing, who cares what perpective you do it in?) but games like, for example, KC:D make full use of the perspective given to them.

 

[perfectslumbers]

Should every AAA RPG that have the budget for it, be made in first or third person? Technicalities and finances aside, what are the advantages of isometric/top down view vs first/third person? I really can't find any good arguments vs the immersion that first person brings, especially when you can see your body[skyrim can do that with a mod].

I find combat generally much more fun in isometric party rpgs than any first or third person rpg, but if it's a single character then third or first person is more enjoyable.

 

[Stavrophore]

for example, while being bread and butter of third person. Isometric is great at managing multiple characters (something that's borderline impossible in first person), while first person excels in 1v1 duels (ie. taking into account attack directions and so on).

This is a problem with elaborate magic system i agree. You would need to allow player to set extensive ruleset for magic usage by companion to not pause/move camera and constantly make player feel like OOBE, which is out of scope for mainstream games and would need a rudimentary algorithm/coding skill demand from the user. So devs usually make the ability pool for companions much shallower and automated, which takes agency from player[not good!]. For Starfield this won't be a problem since there's no elaborate magic system, and i guess neither will be for abilities. Something along ME2 will be most likely utilized.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Should every AAA RPG that have the budget for it, be made in first or third person? Technicalities and finances aside, what are the advantages of isometric/top down view vs first/third person? I really can't find any good arguments vs the immersion that first person brings, especially when you can see your body[skyrim can do that with a mod].

I hate first person perspective in games because it does a horrible job at representing human vision. Close up third person, as strange as it sounds, does a significantly better job of representing our vision.

First person games feel like you're playing a manlet tbh, although I guess that's due to the limitations of the typical PC screen (whether monitor or TV) being too wide to properly account for a normal line of sight.

 

[Stavrophore]

Should every AAA RPG that have the budget for it, be made in first or third person? Technicalities and finances aside, what are the advantages of isometric/top down view vs first/third person? I really can't find any good arguments vs the immersion that first person brings, especially when you can see your body[skyrim can do that with a mod].

I hate first person perspective in games because it does a horrible job at representing human vision. Close up third person, as strange as it sounds, does a significantly better job of representing our vision.

First person games feel like you're playing a manlet tbh, although I guess that's due to the limitations of the typical PC screen (whether monitor or TV) being too wide to properly account for a normal line of sight.

I don't have such display, but i wonder how 32:9 curved monitor feel, i think that kind of displays can fix the problem of fov with right curvature, display size and distance from monitor.

 

[Lt. Michael Byrd]

Hope its least has third person mode.

 

[Vic]

 

[Heroic Liberator]

 

[ropetight]

Should every AAA RPG that have the budget for it, be made in first or third person? Technicalities and finances aside, what are the advantages of isometric/top down view vs first/third person? I really can't find any good arguments vs the immersion that first person brings, especially when you can see your body[skyrim can do that with a mod].

I hate first person perspective in games because it does a horrible job at representing human vision. Close up third person, as strange as it sounds, does a significantly better job of representing our vision.

First person is decent for horror games I suppose.

Because looking over our own ass is the way we see the world.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Should every AAA RPG that have the budget for it, be made in first or third person? Technicalities and finances aside, what are the advantages of isometric/top down view vs first/third person? I really can't find any good arguments vs the immersion that first person brings, especially when you can see your body[skyrim can do that with a mod].

The issue of perspective cannot be disconnected from other game mechanics; generally, the subgenre in which an RPG falls will determine its proper perspective. Action RPGs such as Demon's/Dark Souls or Dragon's Dogma, for example, require a second-person-from-behind perspective, for the player to be fully aware of the spatial location of the character versus enemies, since proprioception is lacking. Party-based dungeon-crawlers, whether in real-time (Dungeon Master-likes) or turn-based (Wizardry-likes), need a first-person perspective for immersive dungeon exploration, though single-character 3D dungeon crawlers (Underworld-likes) or Open World games (Morrowind-likes) can use either first-person or second-person-from-behind perspectives (the latter was not technologically possible for Underworld-likes still relying heavily on sprites). Tactical RPGs, which are focused on turn-based combat, require a third-person bird's-eye or isometric perspective, so that the player can understand the relative location of both PCs and enemies and plan accordingly.

 

[soulburner]

I agree about the perspective being integral to the gameplay. I'm generally a fan of first person perspective and I like Bethesda games for giving a choice. There are many third person games I cannot play because I feel disconnected from the player character. I couldn't feel the horror of Dead Space, for example, because a dude covered half my screen and I didn't care if he dies or not. First person gives me this feeling of actually being in the world, looking at items and shit and caring about "my" survival. Interestingly, I do not have this kind of immersion breakage when playing tactical isometric-like games.

Games like The Elden Ring might not work in first person, so I play them as intended by developers, but there are titles which do not have this kind of perspective + gameplay connection and I am having less fun with them. If Cyberpunk 2077 or Dying Light 2 kept their combat models but were third person games, I wouldn't be interested.