Doesn't that make the game more fun? Or does that not follow your Bethesda-hate bias? It boggles my mind that the same people that complain about not having consequences in the new Fallout games are also the same people that like having straight checks to percentage checks. How can anybody prefer brick walls to percentage checks? This leads me to believe that many on this forum just have an unhealthy obsession with Fallout: New Vegas, rather than actually being a fan of classic game design. If it DID succeed, I felt fucking awesome for it, because I took the risk and it paid off. I loved in Fallout 3 how you could chance something anyway, despite it being a 25% chance to succeed. Where's the fun in that? Where's the risk? This is boring, and just leads to me taking no chances in dialogue when playing the game. "Nope, you can't even try to get away with saying this unless you have 60 Speech, and then you automatically succeed." This is a good system, and New Vegas threw it out the window in favor for just brick walls in your face. There was a percentage chance to succeed, like D&D-type games. Yet, that's how skills worked in the old games. I saw a discussion over Fallout 3's percentage chance in speech checks, and they were hating all over it. Specifically, Walpknut, but he's not the only one. However, some of the people on this forum have an unhealthy obsession with it, and that's where all of their opinions of what Fallout "should be" are coming from. It's my favorite of the games I have finished, and I find myself coming back to it frequently.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |