this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2023
354 points (93.6% liked)

Games

16785 readers
820 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zoboomafoo@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The difference is that the actual stated end goal of the game is to go NG+.Not defeat Aldiun, not battle for New Vegas.

So to use your words, it's not "Game A plus feature B", it's just feature B,

NG+ as a concept stresses immersion, and making it the point of the game shattered it completely. I like the idea or giving an in-game explanation, and the story they used could have worked, but it needed to be a side quest

[–] abraxas@sh.itjust.works -1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

The difference is that the actual stated end goal of the game is to go NG+.

I mean, it's "Discover the secrets of the artifacts". The main plot is never the goal of a Bethesda game.

and making it the point of the game shattered it completely.

Since when? You can say you don't like it, but it certainly technically worked.

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Not a great sign if your advice for the game is to not play the main game, tho, no?

The main line of fallout or skyrim or oblivion may get sidetracked, but its still a huge goal thats genuinely fun and satisfying to complete.

[–] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 0 points 11 months ago

That's not really what I'm saying, though. Bethesda's signature is always that their faction quests are deeper and cooler than their main quests. You're allowed not to like that, but it's definitely how Bethesda works.

The main line of fallout or skyrim or oblivion may get sidetracked, but its still a huge goal thats genuinely fun and satisfying to complete.

I agree, as I felt Starfield was satisfying to complete. It's just not the point. They call them Sandbox RPGs for a reason. For Skyrim, I would take the Companions, Thieves Guild, Dark Brotherhood, Winterhold, etc over the main plot every day. For Fallout 4, it was different because the main plot turns into "pick a faction to wipe out the Institute (unless you pick the Institute)". Yeah, NV is similar with that. It got a lot of flak for that, but I thought it worked. Fallout 3, though... "I wanna make clean water". It's fun, but not why F3 is a masterpiece.

[–] Zoboomafoo@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

You can say you don't like it, but it certainly technically worked.

Don't hide behind objectivity when discussing art, it's all subjective all the time, and even statements that declare something is are subjective. The immersion is shattered because that is my experience with it for the reasons I already stated.

I don't need to add an 'in my opinion' because it never will be anything but my opinion

[–] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Unfortunately, you're not the only person I'm discussing Starfield with here, and most are trying to tell me that Starfield is objectively bad. I am not "hiding behind" objectivity, I'm arguing that Starfield isn't "objectively bad".

[–] Zoboomafoo@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Much like literally, objectively is often used for emphasis, and I hate it, those words shouldn't be used that way

[–] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 0 points 11 months ago

I think people here are actually trying to make objective statements about the quality of the game (that is, lack thereof). Though they aren't really quantifying good reasons to support that high bar.