why didnt they make skyrim more like fallout nv? : V - Skyrim

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 11:16 pm

Fallout: New Vegas was developed by Obsidian who like to focus on a linear story but Bethesda have their own way to do things.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 11:24 pm

The plot with multiple choices?
The mostly grey factions?
The writing that actually didn't svck?
The interesting characters?
The actually usable and also interesting companions with their quests?
Improved gameplay mechanics?

Honestly, if you think Fallout is only about Wasteland tourism, I suggest you to look at the genre again. It's called RPG, which NV delivers.

But not only we are just derailing this thread, the main point of OP is bringing all the good stuff into TES. You really wouldn't like a smart mouthed optional companion ala Rose of Sharon Cassidy that would interact with you throughout the entire questline? Or your choices actually having a larger impact on the gameworld interaction?

Sadly, this will sooner of later turn into a "NV svcks because of bugs", with all the positive points of the game completely swept under the carpet. That's how it works here. :tongue:

Elder scrolls isn't just about rpg, it's at least 50% open world adventure and action, that's why so many people hated vegas, for it's linearity in an open world, for it's insistence on being an open and close book instead of a game, because many Bethesda fans are open world/sandbox fans first and foremost BEFORE being rpg fans.

I'd be very happy if beth sold fallout, i only liked 3 because it was made to Bethesda's philosophy of gaming.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 8:33 pm

Fallout: New Vegas was developed by Obsidian who like to focus on a linear story but Bethesda have their own way to do things.

yeah youre absoultly right, i mean...you had 4 different main/end factions to side with and 4 endings while in skyrim you have 1 ending and 2 main factions so yes clearly fnv is much more linear.... :banghead:

besides, i still absolutely cant see your point that having more factions to join, potentially mutually exclusive factions, would limit your freedom in any way...sorry but that argument is simply not valid at all

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 10:32 pm

Elder scrolls isn't just about rpg, it's at least 50% open world adventure and action, that's why so many people hated vegas, for it's linearity in an open world, for it's insistence on being an open and close book instead of a game, because many Bethesda fans are open world/sandbox fans first and foremost BEFORE being rpg fans.

I'd be very happy if beth sold fallout, i only liked 3 because it was made to Bethesda's philosophy of gaming.

And that's why people like me actually propose a joint effort. Why not have the best of both worlds? I agree that exploration isn't Obsidian's strong suit (just like Bethesda and their writing department), but I can also see their positivie points. With both studios. :thumbsup:

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 6:50 pm

Because basic politics and a couple numbers apparently overwhelm and perplex the majority of the market.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:45 am

And that's why people like me actually propose a joint effort. Why not have the best of both worlds? I agree that exploration isn't Obsidian's strong suit (just like Bethesda and their writing department), but I can also see their positivie points. With both studios. :thumbsup:

Well of course that point i can understand, but for me as i don't appreciate a single thing Obsidian have done, any joint effort would be a loss.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 5:37 am

Skyrim is non-linear compared to NV? How so? From what I can tell, you still have to proceed through each quest-line in its set order. The ability to choose when to do which side-quest is nothing new; in fact almost any RPG lets you do that. Skyrim has a nicer open world, though. Still, I don't like how with each incarnation of TES we get fewer and less complex factions. In fact, I would barely call them factions, since all they do is offer a single short quest-chain and have no impact on the game-world aside from that.

Bethesda should take some inspiration from Obsidian, and also from Mount and Blade.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 9:46 am

what i dont understand with a lot of people on such boards is sometimes they are simply being so black and white all the time, its always either 100% good or total crapp, they never differentiate or look at it from different angles but honestly

nothing is really all bad or all good
everything can be improved
you can find good aspects in overall bad games
just because you are criticising something doesnt mean you dont like it, it means you see more potential to it

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:17 pm

Well of course that point i can understand, but for me as i don't appreciate a single thing Obsidian have done, any joint effort would be a loss.

Fair enough.

Also, are we really arguing the same thing in two different topics? :tongue:

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:55 am

Fallout: New Vegas was developed by Obsidian who like to focus on a linear story

:confused: There's some confusion to be found in that sentence.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 4:19 am

Fair enough.

Also, are we really arguing the same thing in two different topics? :tongue:

Yeah i think so :laugh:

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 9:16 am

yeah youre absoultly right, i mean...you had 4 different main/end factions to side with and 4 endings while in skyrim you have 1 ending and 2 main factions so yes clearly fnv is much more linear.... :banghead:

besides, i still absolutely cant see your point that having more factions to join, potentially mutually exclusive factions, would limit your freedom in any way...sorry but that argument is simply not valid at all

You do have multiple endings because the game is focused more on the story and less on the exploration. The game, on the whole, still feels far more linear than anything Bethesda has made to this day. This isn't necessarily a bad thing but it's simply a different style. Bioware and Obsidian are two of my favourite developers but Bethesda have their own unique way to do things and I don't understand why all games should be exactly the same.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 10:51 pm

i can actually live without meaningful decisions you have to make, but WHY didnt they copy the best part of fallout new vegas - LOTs of factions which you could actually join / do quests for? you should always be able to join different factions which are mutually exclusive to other factions...these should give you unique rewards which would also be mutually exclusive - this would increase replayability MASSIVELY without adding a lot of work....for example, why is it not possible to join the silver hand VS werewolfes, why not join Vampires or Vampire Huners, why not join foresworn or some foresworn hunting/hating nords, merchants guild or thieves guild, dark brotherhood or guards/police, aldmeri dominion or ??, bandits or guards, dragon hunters or dragon priests, also even "mini factions" such as the quest with the redguard women...etc. etc....

i mean its all there, why didnt they expand it, make it more meaningful, include more VS factions...this would increase replay value that much and incrase the role playing experience a lot...it was pretty much THE best part about fallout nv

ps: a lot of factions here are made up due to lore so they dont really exist in the game

its a good idea but skyrim is already so packed with content that i layed asided my plans for a second character... after 150+ hrs

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:48 am

I would love this, I would rather there be consquences to my actions when I roleplay, however now in the same play though I can join all the factions when infact most are at oposit ends of the spectrum and should bar me from entry if I'm a member of their enemy.

I would like to have each have a quest line that leads in so that I learn about the faction and how it would fit with my current toon before I have to 'choose' a faction and eliminate the rest.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:42 am

You do have multiple endings because the game is focused more on the story and less on the exploration. The game, on the whole, still feels far more linear than anything Bethesda has made to this day. This isn't necessarily a bad thing but it's simply a different style. Bioware and Obsidian are two of my favourite developers but Bethesda have their own unique way to do things and I don't understand why all games should be exactly the same.

I would argue that Obsidian model in NV gives the best of both, you are free to explore but the story is paced in such way that you are carried along with it and it never feels like a chore. The story in Skyrim does feel a bit like a chore at times.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 11:11 pm

:confused: There's some confusion to be found in that sentence.

This doesn't apply to Fallout: New Vegas where the story is told in a non linear fashion, I'll give you that, but this is what Obsidian generally do (e.g. KotOR 2, NWN2, etc.) and as I said in another post this isn't necessarily a bad thing.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 8:35 am

I'd love it. There seems to be very little dramatic choice right now, the only real one I can think of is joining the storm cloaks or legion locking you out of the opposite.

I rushed Oblivion to get to the end because I found it got very boring, knew I wouldn't play the main story again.
Did the same with Fallout 3.

New Vegas Iv'e played through quite a few times just to try out all the different ways I can take the story, not to mention even the DLCs have multiple ways you can go with it and potential to role play. I also found the characters to be much, much better in New Vegas, Old World Blues probably has some of my favourite video game characters right now, personality wise.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:30 pm

New Vegas Iv'e played through quite a few times just to try out all the different ways I can take the story, not to mention even the DLCs have multiple ways you can go with it and potential to role play. I also found the characters to be much, much better in New Vegas, Old World Blues probably has some of my favourite video game characters right now, personality wise.

thats exactly my take on it, characters are also true - without spoiling anything there are some really (potentially) nice characters in skyrim (babette for example or how she is called), but bethesda simply never really uses that potential...

lol i know you cant have everything but

the realism from mount & blade
the difficutly and fight-feeling from dark souls
the factions and choices/consequences from new vegas
the character development and freedom from skyrim
and the character depth from dragon age would make for a pretty aweseom experience...

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 9:18 am

The plot with multiple choices?
The mostly grey factions?
The writing that actually didn't svck?
The interesting characters?
The actually usable and also interesting companions with their quests?
Improved gameplay mechanics?

Honestly, if you think Fallout is only about Wasteland tourism, I suggest you to look at the genre again. It's called RPG, which NV delivers.

Man, you're answering to someone who says NV writing is horrible and its character bland, and praise those of Skyrim... Don't you think it's just feeding the troll ?

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:12 am

Since when did New Vegas have a lot of factions?

NCR, Legion... uh... NC... No wait, I said that... Yeah. House? Yes Man?

Unless you're counting the reputation you can earn from each town as a faction, New Vegas didn't have a whole lot of factions to join.

You can't join the Followers of the Apocalypse (which is kinda irksome). You can't join the Enclave, because they were pretty much gone at that point. I suppose you could count The Kings; you CAN join them if you take it as your favor but it doesn't make a bit of difference, since you've already completed all The King's quests by then. You can't join any of the Families in New Vegas itself.

So what then are people considering factions in New Vegas that puts it as having more than Skyrim's 7?

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 8:09 pm

i am not saying that, what im saying is, why didnt they include parts of other games which really worked well for these games, would also work really well for skyrim, would add a lot of value without a lot of work...

shouldnt that be how the whole "evolutionary process" works? take over all the good things that work in your games and get ridd of the stuff that doesnt?

Thats not evolutionary, that'll be just a copy and paste job.

If skyrim were to copy everything from Fallout NV, we'll have people complaining about why Skyrim is just a copy and paste job from Fallout NV, lack of innovation.

What is evolutionary, is the current levelling system in Skyrim, which although not perfect, changes the game for the better IMO.

I suppose, we'll see the implementations done in skyrim carry over to fallout 4 which will also carry forward to fallout 4 pseudo sequel and of course move on to TES6.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 7:09 am

Regarding Skyrim, my thought was to keep track of the groups that I joined, do relevant side quests, and "perhaps" play again with another character. This 2nd character would choose the groups / quests and routes that the first character did not.

Is this possible? I only have about 20 hours in. I like to do the main quest slowly, but I *do* get through it. I am not a wanderer - I just like to enjoy the game so I do side quests that make sense to me.

R
(this post is in response to the OP's concern about being able to do all quests without choosing factions)

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:32 pm

Man, you're answering to someone who says NV writing is horrible and its character bland, and praise those of Skyrim... Don't you think it's just feeding the troll ?

If you disagree with me that's fine, but calling someone a troll simply for having a different opinion is trollish behaviour in itself.

I stand by my opinion that new vegas was dreary, horribly linear, destroyed replayability by having a forced ending, that the character stories were tedious and boring, and that the world was truly uninspired compared to fallout 3 that even had a giant boat that people lived in, the only thing i remember from vegas was a plastic dinosaur, all the other buildings were instantly forgettable.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:57 am

Holy [censored] [censored]! Why do people keep saying that Skyrim should be more like this or this?

Because Bethesda have created a number of similar games which have features that would benefit Skyrim. I'm surprised you couldn't figure that out for yourself.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:58 am

Because Bethesda have created a number of similar games which have features that would benefit Skyrim. I'm surprised you couldn't figure that out for yourself.

But Bethesda didn't make New Vegas; they merely licensed the IP to Obsidian Entertainment. On top of that, Obsidian has (or had) many of the original people who designed, wrote and programmed the original 2 Fallout games.

Mostly what I see in a lot of these "Skyrim lacks " posts/threads is people who want Morrowind with modern graphics.