How did a video game with complete shit gameplay end up becoming so highly regarded among the gaming communities?
Is gameplay not the most important aspect of a video game?
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
How did a video game with complete shit gameplay end up becoming so highly regarded among the gaming communities?
Apparently not.
Making dialogue choices is a form of gameplay dumbass
NV is only liked by people who don't like video games. They like stories and pseudo-intellectualism and trannies and shit like that. No one actually plays NV. They just run the program and do things for a bit and then jerk off about how "intelligent" a gamer they are.
>NV is only liked by people who don't like video games.
This
Considering you can do this with Bomberman, I don't believe it's a valid argument.
good morning sirs
You’re mentally retarted please check in to the nearest mental health facility
the gameplay is moderately better than its immediate predecessor and the story/writing is WAY better so it got a bit of a boost there. Also quality combat/direct gameplay is moderately less important for RPGs to be considered "good."
OP is confusing gunplay with gameplay.
This. It's an RPG first and a shooter, second. Unlike Bethesda Fallouts.
>It's an RPG first and a shooter
There has to be something more to it. The choices and effect you had on the game just had more weight to it than any other rpg i've ever played.
>The choices and effect you had on the game just had more weight to it than any other rpg i've ever played.
The faction system had more depth than most RPGs, especially with respect to the Legion-NCR conflict. By the time you've reached Vegas, you've probably either helped the NCR out everywhere or allied with the Legion.
>The choices and effect you had on the game just had more weight to it than any other rpg i've ever played.
That's just not true. Almost no decision the player makes has any significant impact on anything in NV. You make lots of decisions which should matter, e.g. deciding who becomes sheriff of Primm, where does the power go from the power station, etc., etc. and they tell you that matters but then there's no actual noticeable changes to the world from any of this shit. And, as is so often noted, when you finish the main quest of Fallout 4 the game keeps going and whichever faction has won as a significantly increased presence in the game while the others are either diminished or gone completely. When you finish the main quest of NV the credits roll and the game is over. There is no weight to almost all decisions the player makes in NV and claims to the contrarian are complete horseshit.
That is the distinction between a bad RPG maker like Obsidian and a good RPG making like Bethesda. Obsidians just tells and never shows. Bethesda shows more than it tells and then idiots just make up decisions have no impact in Bethesda's games. Even just simple things that result from decisions the player makes in Bethesda's Fallout games like people you screw over coming after you for revenge or a relative of someone who died running into the player and asking if they've seen them already put Bethesda leaps and bounds ahead of Transidion.
do you actually belive this, pajeet?
Believe? I fricking KNOW it because I've actually played the games. Name one fricking decision apart from the final decisions of the main quest that has ANY fricking impact on the game beyond Mr. New Vegas on the radio saying a different line.
>You make lots of decisions which should matter, e.g. deciding who becomes sheriff of Primm, where does the power go from the power station, etc., etc. and they tell you that matters but then there's no actual noticeable changes to the world from any of this shit
You're not wrong, it could have been a lot more reactive, yet no developer wants to do something even close to what NV did
interactive fully open world, lack of almoust any railroading and faction system
In other games you only decide how you go, but in new vegas you also have alot of choice in "Where" and "When"
For someone who claims to not like this game you sure spend an awful amount of time never shutting the frick up about it.
Do any of you guys ever get tired of having the same arguments over and over with people who are likely either arguing in bad faith to begin with or so vitriolic and set on their position that they'll never concede any point to you regardless of what you say?
No because it is 6 million times better then any normalgay npc gathering zone with one sided excessive troony jannys & bots steering the convo or astroturfing whatever current thing zog shat out
think you got enough buzzwords in there
Seethe more moron you got the answer to your question
This.
You'll get a a brain tumor and suffer, fricktard.
WRPGs aren't supposed to have good gameplay. The exception are japanese WRPGs like Fromsoft's games because they don't understand how WRPGs are made.
Alchestbreach
fnv is a cakewalk
because trannies are a vocal minority.
It's probably fun. Is that hard to believe?
It’s the incredibly memorable atmosphere, unique story, and normie hype from Fallout 3 bringing it into the mainstream. The opening intro of New Vegas is iconic and instantly hooks you. The world is weird, interesting and full of nuance to dive into just like the originals but in a modern, accessible format. It took off as a result.
I'm gonna do it bros. I'm gonna make a companion mod that isn't pro-Wild Card.
Ok anon, tell us then which game in your opinion should be more appreciated since you have a better taste