People understandably love to hate Oblivion and Fallout 3, but I feel the side quest writing had heart, like groups of devs got to go wild within their own little dungeons. Their exploitable mechanics were kinda endearing.
…And I didn’t get that from Starfield? I really tried to overlook the nostalgia factor, but all the writing felt… corporate. Gameplay, animation, Bethesda jank without any of the fun. I abandoned it early and tried to see what I was missing on YouTube, but still don’t “get” what people see in that game.
If you want a big walking sandbox in that vein, I feel like No Man’s Sky would scratch the itch far better, no?
Meanwhile, BG3 and KC2 completely floored me. So did Cyberpunk 2077, though I only experienced it patched up and modded. Heck, even ME Andromeda felt more compelling to me.
Oblivion is my favorite Elder Scrolls. I actually played it again recently and thought it held up pretty well. I’m a sucker for wandering lush bucolic landscapes though.
I got Cyberpunk in December and KCD2 in February. At this point I’m convinced I’ve spoiled the entire RPG genre for myself for the next decade. I can’t imagine playing 2 great games back to back like that again.
Could somebody please explain fo me how either of these two aggressively cliche and generic games are in any way “ambitious, weird, and unexpected”?
“Aggressively cliché” huh?
So… Where are all the realistic medieval sandbox RPGs? You know, of the kind set in an actual historical period?
Or… Or… How often has capturing the freedom and complexity of D&D in a videogame been attempted so accurately?
For something to even approach becoming a cliché there’d have to be a lot of that particular something done in exactly that particular way. So please do give a nice long list of games exactly like Kingdom Come Deliverence and Baldur’s Gate 3, because clearly everyone must’ve missed them.
The article totally misses the big intervening step between Skyrim/old Bioware and the failure of Starfield/Dragon Age: CDProjectRED.
While those studios largely just made “more of the same”, CDPR made Witcher 3 and then Cyberpunk 2077. Both games are way better narrative experiences and pushed RPG forward. Starfield looks very dated in comparison to both, and Dragon Age failed to capture to magic. Baldur’s Gate 3 and Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 are successes because they also bring strong narratives and emotional connections to the stories.
Starfield would have been huge if it had been released soon after Skyrim. But now it just looks old fashioned, and I think the “wide as an ocean, as deep as a puddle” analogy is good for Starfield. Meanwhile Witcher 3 - which is 10 years old! - has quests and storylines with choices and emotional impact. BG3 and KC:D2 are heirs to Witcher 3.
People like to write off CP2077, which is such a shame.
…And maybe this makes me a black sheep, but I bounced off Witcher 2/3? I dunno, I just didn’t like the combat and lore, and ended up watching some of the interesting quests on YouTube.
I wish there were more new sci-fi RPGs of that quality.
I do hear CP2077 is good now and I keep meaning to play it.
TBH I’ll probably end up enjoying Starfield once I get around to trying it as well.
I’ve heard people take that approach with Starfield and still be very disappointed. If it’s space you want and are ok with creating your own story, Elite Dangerous is getting a pretty big revival
Its mostly just that I want a Morrowind/Oblivion/Skyrim with a sci-fi setting. A solid story, lots of side-quests, and a dynamic world that reacts to the player. I’d probably enjoy a modern metropolitan criminal setting as well for an RPG like GTA’s settings but Elder-Scrolls/3D-Fallout gameplay but you never see that at all.
Space is cool though.
I don’t believe you. That game exists, it’s called Starfield, and it failed specifically because of its sci-fi setting and for no other reason.
fucking lol.
- terrible game design
- zero game direction
- nonsensical script
- not even 2 dimensional characters
- incredibly unlikeable companions
- bad dialog
- fallout 4 style fake choices and railroading, only one way to complete most quests,
- open world" that requires fast travel, completely undercutting exploration
- immersion breaking loading screens for literally everything, even following cutscenes which aren’t used for bg loading for some reason
- spaceship fantasy that barely makes use of the spaceship, it’s just a toy you can decorate but can’t properly pilot, space combat is horrendously bad even though other games nailed it in the fucking 90s
- planet exploration fantasy that breaks planets into tiny chunks even though no man’s sky existed for years
- open world fantasy where discovery is undercut by the fact that the same assets are reused over and over. like not even texture and models randomized to have some variation, but entire buildings copied including the placement of objects inside.
- classic Bethesda style afraid to lock the player out of anything approach that means you have no choices to make, just get through everything in the order you like … be a cop and a thief and a merchant and a cultist and a garbage man why not
- vast space fantasy with a gazillion planets yet you are the center of everything
- scifi universe that doesn’t have means of long distance communication for some reason, needing you to go back and forth between planets just to relay messages
i can go on but got bored.
the fact that you claim that the only problem starfield had was it’s scifi setting when massively successful scifi games like cyberpunk, deus ex, half life, nier, mass effect etc exist just proves you know nothing about video games.
and more specifically your seem to have no idea what people want from rpgs if you even consider starfield to be one worth mentioning, let alone an exemplary one.
I concur; we need more of this new breed of aggressively strange RPG’s, like earthbound/mother, planescape:torment, and morrowind.
None of what you listed is “new”. Also, Morrowind wasn’t actually “strange” in the slightest. Plenty of fantasy RPGs had elements of sci-fi and weird bug shit (see: Wizardry and even Might and Magic) and the “you can screw up the main quest” was similarly common at the time. Planescape I’ll give you.
Which is also true here. BG3 is not “strange”, It is literally the third Baldurs Gate game and continues most of the same themes and concepts. Yeah, it is a whole lot more gay but even that is not out of the ordinary for CRPGs at this point and had been pushed by companies like Larian, Obsidian, and Owlcat. Hell, the Mass Effects and Dragon Ages deserve a LOT of props for how horny and gay they were and normalizing the idea of picking the right dialogue options for a sexy card cutscene (also see CD Projekt Red).
And KCD2 is one of the most bog standard power fantasy games out there.
Like most articles of this variety, this is just a fancy way of saying “people should make good games”
Yeah, it is a whole lot more gay but even that is not out of the ordinary for CRPGs at this point and had been pushed by companies like Larian, Obsidian, and Owlcat. Hell, the Mass Effects and Dragon Ages deserve a LOT of props for how horny and gay they were and normalizing the idea of picking the right dialogue options for a sexy card cutscene (also see CD Projekt Red).
Haven’t played BG3 yet, but I’m interested to read this because I’ve noticed a lot of discussion seems to be about romancing characters, and I don’t remember that being a prominent feature in the first two. That said, I was a kid, so maybe that just went over my head at the time. Or is that something that Larian brought in from their other games?
