That makes no sense. Those original FOs have led to how many games in the series?
FO is not forgotten despite being a niche game. And, that despite the fact, it wasn't even a huge seller when originally released.
'Forgotten'. Come on, man.
FO was and is one of the most impactful crpgs ever.
The original thread here was talking about superficial games. And yes no one remembers the og fallouts. If anything these super niche games that take pride in the nicheness are superficial.
I'm not sure you're using the word superficial correctly.
Plenty of people remember Fallout, moreover, a lot of the people who make RPGs today consider Fallout to be a touchstone of the genre
Originally Posted by N7Greenfire
If you talk with average rpg gamer 99% won't know anything about the og fallouts.
I wouldent call rpg's niche they are probably the biggest genre second to shooters. They've been pretty mainstream since mass effect if not before.
Mass Effect made a hell of a bigger impact than the wicher 1 for example.
Mass Effect is what I would consider 'fairly recently'. I think the Bioware renaissance is where it started; nerd subculture has become culture over the past 20 years.
I have no idea what the "average rpg gamer" is, but based on a number of people on the internet who talk fondly of playing Fallout, Fallout is a big game for Gen X, that generation is also where being a gamer started to turn the corner from being niche. The Timothy Cain started a Youtube channel a few weeks ago and it has 36k subscribers right now. Todd Howard must have been a fan if he wanted to shell out for the property. I can throw out more nonsense metrics to go by, the point being that the original games are part of the dialogue. Some people consider the sandbox of Fallout and older rpgs to be the most important aspect of the genre, and lament it's absence from modern design.
I'm not sure you're using the word superficial correctly.
Plenty of people remember Fallout, moreover, a lot of the people who make RPGs today consider Fallout to be a touchstone of the genre
Originally Posted by N7Greenfire
If you talk with average rpg gamer 99% won't know anything about the og fallouts.
I wouldent call rpg's niche they are probably the biggest genre second to shooters. They've been pretty mainstream since mass effect if not before.
Mass Effect made a hell of a bigger impact than the wicher 1 for example.
Mass Effect is what I would consider 'fairly recently'. I think the Bioware renaissance is where it started; nerd subculture has become culture over the past 20 years.
I have no idea what the "average rpg gamer" is, but based on a number of people on the internet who talk fondly of playing Fallout, Fallout is a big game for Gen X, that generation is also where being a gamer started to turn the corner from being niche. The Timothy Cain started a Youtube channel a few weeks ago and it has 36k subscribers right now. Todd Howard must have been a fan if he wanted to shell out for the property. I can throw out more nonsense metrics to go by, the point being that the original games are part of the dialogue. Some people consider the sandbox of Fallout and older rpgs to be the most important aspect of the genre, and lament it's absence from modern design.
Mass Effect was 15 years ago. Not recent by any means
Originally Posted by Volourn
Why are you lying? Nobody? Clearly, I do. As do many other. Bethesda certainly did to my chagrin. Obsidian did.
As do all the developers out there who try their best to model their games after them.
FO is one of the most impactful and most remembered CRPGs ever. The game is LEGENDARY.
Absolutely no doubt about it.
It called figurative language. The original Fallout games have little to no modern day impact. The current gen of devs grew up on Drsgon Age Origin's not fallout people who played the og fallout games are coasting into retirement now.
It's a just a guess but I'm guessing that in the next 5 or so some dev is going say "we're not trying to be BG3, we're aiming to be the next BG2"
That would be the best news I could possibly get from the gaming world.
And what game would you like it to be? Another game on Infinity Engine? A carbon copy of PoE, but set on FR?
As for the topic on hand, I don't think BG3 will kill rpg as we know it, but it will try to set up a new standard im *some* areas. I believe problem lies not with the game itself, though, but how we set up our expectations after playing BG3. I experienced this issue not so long ago after finishing Red Dead Redemption 2. Rockstar set a bar so high with this game, I just couldn't help to compare any other open world with it. And even if I played many wonderful games, all of them paled in comparison with RDR2, effectively diminishing my gaming experience. That ended, when I stopped comparing other games to RDR2, and accepted the fact, that what Rockstar did, won't be seen until...they release their jest game. Suddenly, I miraculously started to enjoy other open worlds for all they had to offer, focusing on what they did great, instead of whining that Rockstar done this or that better.
Speak of the Devil...Timothy Cain released this video today, wherein he talks about how despite having only 1/10th the sales of another of his games, The Outer Worlds, Fallout remains the project he is most know for, and which continues to be a part of the 'zeitgeist'. He actually used that word, I wonder if he's lurking here . I can't help but post it here.
If you really want to talk about 'forgotten' games, then Arcanum is that game, it also might be his best. The Outer Worlds might soon be too, who knows. I don't really see the influence of those games on the industry.
Speak of the Devil...Timothy Cain released this video today, wherein he talks about how despite having only 1/10th the sales of another of his games, The Outer Worlds, Fallout remains the project he is most know for, and which continues to be a part of the 'zeitgeist'. He actually used that word, I wonder if he's lurking here . I can't help but post it here.
If you really want to talk about 'forgotten' games, then Arcanum is that game, it also might be his best. The Outer Worlds might soon be too, who knows. I don't really see the influence of those games on the industry.
Most people don't know any game devs at all, even gamers. Miyazaki is probably the most well known if you dont include Toddy.
So you get into a bit of self selection where the only people likely contacting him are Fallout superfans. Also all of his projects since wildstar are delibratly cashing in on crpg nostalgia so again slef selection.
I don't think he's talking about himself directly...the video is about how people judge a game to be 'good'. If you watch the video he talks about seeing Fallout as part of the discourse; video reviews, forum discussions, and what I'm assuming is 'let's play' audiences. But you're right about the average gamer not knowing about game devs, though I would say that is less true now than it was when Fallout came out.
Speak of the Devil...Timothy Cain released this video today, wherein he talks about how despite having only 1/10th the sales of another of his games, The Outer Worlds, Fallout remains the project he is most know for, and which continues to be a part of the 'zeitgeist'. He actually used that word, I wonder if he's lurking here . I can't help but post it here.
If you really want to talk about 'forgotten' games, then Arcanum is that game, it also might be his best. The Outer Worlds might soon be too, who knows. I don't really see the influence of those games on the industry.
Yup, as I've argued, popularity does NOT equal quality. Some popular games may very well also be quality games, but there is no linear relationship between the two. And in my view, the more popular a thing, the more likely that thing is to be a shallow/unsophisticated thing because that's what it takes to get something to be super-popular these days. Hence with all things entertainment, I tend to not care for the things that are very popular, for example popular movies and TV shows.
And so I will always push for and support those game developers who are willing to make games for the small niche audiences with only limited sales potential, and not only make games that are expected to sell many millions.
Speak of the Devil...Timothy Cain released this video today, wherein he talks about how despite having only 1/10th the sales of another of his games, The Outer Worlds, Fallout remains the project he is most know for, and which continues to be a part of the 'zeitgeist'. He actually used that word, I wonder if he's lurking here . I can't help but post it here.
If you really want to talk about 'forgotten' games, then Arcanum is that game, it also might be his best. The Outer Worlds might soon be too, who knows. I don't really see the influence of those games on the industry.
Yup, as I've argued, popularity does NOT equal quality. Some popular games may very well also be quality games, but there is no linear relationship between the two. And in my view, the more popular a thing, the more likely that thing is to be a shallow/unsophisticated thing because that's what it takes to get something to be super-popular these days. Hence with all things entertainment, I tend to not care for the things that are very popular, for example popular movies and TV shows.
And so I will always push for and support those game developers who are willing to make games for the small niche audiences with only limited sales potential, and not only make games that are expected to sell many millions.
I have to say, Fallout 2 had some absolutely crazy levels of reactivity here and there. Just look up "Golden Globes" on a Fallout wiki. Granted, it is unusual even by Fallout standards. It has the hallmarks of one or two people sitting down on extra time and designing an interaction just for the sake of the art. And the end result is that a type of character played by more or less no one because the requirements were to specific had a few extra lines in encounters while walking the town.
The takeaway from this is that no, BG3's reactivity, if it turns out to be as impressive as anticipated, is not a revolution. It's not something that hasn't been done before, except in scope. It is something game studios should've aspired to in the last 25 years, knew how to do, and did not. So really, they do not have a reason to complain.
Most likely, BG 3 will become the new standard of games. Good example. A lot of big companies are afraid and that's good, because they have forgotten how to make games. I really hope that Lorian will continue to please us with good games and will not turn into a dragon who thinks only about profit.
And now, just to ballance things out ... a sceptical prognosis:
Baldur's Gate III. will come out and it will be awesome ... Big studios will not give a shit and will keep releasing things, just as they allways did ... And people will buy those things, just as they allways did ...
So nothing really change. Only from time to time, someone on some long forgotten forum, in a decade or two ... will mention that once uppon a time, it was possible to make things differently.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
And now, just to ballance things out ... a sceptical prognosis:
Baldur's Gate III. will come out and it will be awesome ... Big studios will not give a shit and will keep releasing things, just as they allways did ... And people will buy those things, just as they allways did ...
So nothing really change. Only from time to time, someone on some long forgotten forum, in a decade or two ... will mention that once uppon a time, it was possible to make things differently.
I kinda think it will actually make things worse. Companies like EA, they have Bioware, but they don't understand Bioware's product or the demographic. The EAs of the world don't understand Larian and they don't understand Baldurs Gate, nor the hardcore rpg genre, in general. They're going to look at BG3 and the money it will make, and the order will pass down from corporate execs on high that they must have their own Baldur's Gate. But they will have completely wrong takeaways about what made BG3 successful. They will dictate that their games will have devil-men, or incredible amounts of gore, or bestiality, perceiving these as being essential to the BG3 magic recipe. In the end, a whole slew of shoddy rpg knock-offs will roll out. They will fail. Then the big corporates will try to buy Larian or anyone else who has made an rpg with isometric view in the last decade. If Sven sells out, it will mean yet more decades without a good rpg.
I think that may well happen, but I'll reserve my judgment on the EA era of Bioware when Dreadwolf comes out, my expectations are low, especially after the leaked gameplay footage came out, but I'd like to believe that the corporate overlords were chastised by Inquisition's reception and whatever happened to Anthem.
I think BG3 is going to be a wild success, having something for every quarter of RPG-dom, and coming out in a relatively sparse era of RPG creation.
Im a bit lost in this modern "who owns who" ... Especialy lately, since it sometimes feels like it changes faster, than their owners changes underwear. :-/
But ... EA and Disney belong together, or they are just working together from time to time?
Since, my hopes for Disney are officialy gone, since they refused KotOR remaster with official reasoning "it wasnt action enough". -_- And if EA belong under same umbrella, i can aswell just strike out Dreadwolf and return to 1000th replay of all 3 Dragon Age games that are just perfect for me ... Origin, Awakening, and Witch Hunt. :P
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
Im a bit lost in this modern "who owns who" ... Especialy lately, since it sometimes feels like it changes faster, than their owners changes underwear. :-/
But ... EA and Disney belong together, or they are just working together from time to time?
Since, my hopes for Disney are officialy gone, since they refused KotOR remaster with official reasoning "it wasnt action enough". -_- And if EA belong under same umbrella, i can aswell just strike out Dreadwolf and return to 1000th replay of all 3 Dragon Age games that are just perfect for me ... Origin, Awakening, and Witch Hunt. :P
Disney makes arrangements with developers through contracts. They do not own any of the big gaming publishers or any major developers IIRC. They currently have deals with Square Enix, Electronic Arts, and Ubisoft.
Remember the human (This is a forum for a video game):
but I'd like to believe that the corporate overlords were chastised by Inquisition's reception and whatever happened to Anthem.
It seems to be that EA is less to do with the demise of BioWare than many might think. Truth is, they were always a bit of a mess and never had their shit together. When all of the people in change left, nobody was around to keep things moving, even in the haphazard way they used to run.
Ea is bio. There's no getting around that. And, bio was not a mess until the owners left. You ate talking about a company who once told a publisher to get bent, took their game, went to a different publisher, and the old publisher could do nothing but whine, trash talk, and make up lies they couldn't back up before all but folding.
The demise was slow but ea has turned bio into a soulless part of ea with little connection to old bio.
.
