What are you playing?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-04-2016, 10:07 AM
RE: What are you playing?
Been playing Dead Space 1 lately. I finally get that damn thing back to where it belongs and then get trapped in an airlock only to watch that one bitch steal it again. I have been trying to see how it ends. Hopefully I will get through it today.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2016, 12:21 PM
RE: What are you playing?
(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  
(23-04-2016 03:49 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Negotiate? Siding with Caesar has you killing NCR soldiers. Siding with NCR has you killing the Legion. Siding with House or yourself has you attacking everyone. There isn't a confrontation free ending to New Vegas.
Attacking? I can go about as I please in New Vegas. I can sneak past everyone in the Hoover Dam battle and not touch a single legionnaire. Infact, aside from Nelson, I don't think the game forces you to kill legionnaires at all. I didn't say that I wanted a "confrontation free" alternative to the "Killing the other faction" plotlines. I wanted a "confrontation" which leads to a more peaceful alternative than a straight up series of executions. (BTW, I never play as the Legion. They're all pretty much unspeakable assholes)

Okay, so you wanted peace. Peace wasn't an option. You don't always get to set the terms or the rules of engagement. Sometimes those things are out of your control, no matter how hard you might try.

There is no peaceful coexistence with the Harbinger in Mass Effect 2, and having a peaceful coexistence option at the end of Mass Effect 3 caused a lot of backlash too.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  
(23-04-2016 03:49 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Plus, you don't have to pick a side if you just never finish the main quest. There is no time limit like in FO1, where you will get a 'game over' if you take too long playing around. Once you realize that you're upon the point of no return, you can just stop, and all of the factions stop with you. It's not like if you wait too long, the Prydwen carpet bombs the Institute on their own.
Yeah, that's called ignoring the the story. Pretending there isn't a story doesn't change the fact that there is a story; and that it has problems.

All stories have problems.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  
(23-04-2016 03:49 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Yeah, the Brotherhood are zealots, they do nasty shit in the belief that their ends always justify their means. Every Brotherhood knight would put a bullet into the head of Hancock, Valentine, or Curie without batting an eye. Their ideology justifies their actions, by positing everything against the backdrop of human extinction; it's very easy to justify genocide in the face of extinction.
I know that, but the Brotherhood of Steel chapter in the Mojave Desert under the command of Elder Mcnamara and the people who stayed behind with Elder Lyons, are living proof that the Brotherhood isn't black and white. I will agree that it takes extraordinary circumstances to change the Brotherhood's mind. I, the player however, has always been able to be that extraordinary circumstance. You can't in Fallout 4, and in comparison to the series as a whole, that's just alien.

Elder Lyons was an outlier, effectively exiled because of his views. The chapter in the Mohave was under powered and toothless, hiding in a hole and licking their wounds after getting their asses kicked; they were not operating from a position of power. When they had the power, they operated liked the owned the place and weren't answerable to anyone but themselves, just like the assholes in the Prydwen or back in the original FO1 bunker. You didn't fundamentally change the Brotherhood in FO1, they were a means to an end. They were once again almost nonexistent and powerless in FO2; and once again, the Lyon's chapter in FO3 was an outlier that Maxson is quite clearly being contrasted against.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  
(23-04-2016 03:49 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  The problem isn't the outcome, it's the execution. Even a short quest detour where an attempt at diplomacy was tried and shot down would at least give better justification. But the idea that the Brotherhood are militaristic zealots that only trust their own judgement and always do things their own way? I get it. They're basically the wasteland's Al Quedia; using force and terror to advance their ideology at any costs, because they know they are right.
Tried and shot down? What about the matter of Danse and Maxson? I convinced Maxson to stay his hand, and me refusing to execute him. I then get promoted to Paladin. Say hypothetically I planted a bomb inside the Prydwen as the Railroad or Minutemen, and then confronted Maxson. I could tell Maxson he and his brothers and sisters were well and truly fucked, and unless he retreats from the Commonwealth, his ship will detonate and his whole chapter most likely goes to hell. After a sucsessful speech check, Maxson complies, but swears he will return one day in the future. Same with the Railroad. You could confront them and say it the obvious; leave the Commonwealth or be mauled by a superior force that shows no mercy. The Railroad complies, but swears they will return in greater numbers. This is exactly the same comprimises that were possible in the other games, namely New Vegas.

New Vegas was a dick measuring contest over a fucking damn, a chunk of pre-war infrastructure; either side having it or denying it to the other isn't seen as an apocalyptic catastrophe. The Institute and the Brotherhood, both aware of the possibility that Synths represent, are fighting for fundamentally much higher stakes. Retreat is not an option that either side is willing to entertain, and I get why.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  Unlike a FEV induced Super Mutant or an AI(not Eden), The Brotherhood, Railroad, Minutemen; they're human. And you can reason with humans, believe it or not. If I want to, I can be Commonwealth's answer to Jean-Luc Picard; 10 in Charisma, and ALWAYS willing to TRY diplomacy before genocide, unlike FO4 which gives you no choice. And that is the key; to choose.

Must I remind you that even Picard broke the prime directive, and not always for the best or well thought out reasons? Weren't there times when his hand was forced?


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  
(23-04-2016 03:49 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  You could kill children in the first two games, and in some instances, they could kill you too. Seriously, one of those kids in Klamath has a grenade in his inventory, and he will use it if needed (or if the AI bugs out).
And? I can kill children with Killable Children in FO3 and NV and Stranger Danger in Skyrim. Do I do it? No, I don't like killing children. Are you forgetting something here?

https://youtu.be/i5QzComfZU4?t=6m18s

And

https://youtu.be/8yn0PXkaIsM?t=29m46s

Uh, you're not the fucking Avatar in Fallout? What am I supposed to say? Shit sucks in the wasteland, kids can die. Does that make you uncomfortable? Knowing on that kids died when the Prydwen crashed in a ball of fire?

GOOD! You're supposed to feel dirty, it was dirty business! If you weren't at least a little disturbed, that might be cause for concern. Guess what? Destroying the Institute also kills the children there too! War never changes, and war fucking sucks. Now, was it worth it? Maybe, maybe not. That's not a question I can answer for you. Everyone will have to come to terms with their own actions when they attempt to balance their ledgers at the end of the day.

Was the security and safety of the Commonwealth (or indeed, the world) worth the lives of those children? In the grad scheme of things, what are a few more bodies on the pyre in a world already so burnt? How many more would have died if you hadn't stopped the Brotherhood or Institute? It's a sick calculus the game forces on you, and being able to dodge that bullet misses the point.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  
(23-04-2016 03:49 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  But on the other hand, that is the nature of the wasteland. There are no heroes, nobody is in the right, everyone has good reasons to do what they do. That places all of them on a collision course with yourself as the catalyst that tips the balance of power one way or another. You're placed in the untenable position of making a choice between a selection of bad options, and having to live with the consequences as forces beyond your control take effect and play out. 'Unintended consequences' is the modus operandi of the end game.

Also, the child soldiers help reinforce that terrorism parallel I pointed out earlier, doesn't it?
Oh sure, but unlike the White Phosphorus scene in Spec Ops: The Line, where the story is "set" and there isn't anything you can do about it, you CAN in Bethesda's games.

But not this time. Therein lies the point. I didn't enjoy my time with Spec Ops: The Line, the entire experience made me very uncomfortable; and it was fucking amazing.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  That's the whole point; you can do whatever you want in them and still make a story out of it. You have always been put in bad situations in any Bethesda game. This is just the first time you've been given a severe lack of options to solve the situation, where here you can only choose to go along with it or turn the game off in dissapointment.

Except the factions have never been both so integral, and antagonistic. Sure, you can be the head of the Dark Brotherhood in Skyrim, but that has zero affect on the main story; because those factions exist within their own bubbles and have little to no connection with one another. FO4 doesn't have that luxury, the very nature of the three major factions means that they cannot help but be at each other's throats. Remember, you could practically skip the central civil war in Skyrim in advancement of the main quest.

In Oblivion, no matter what, you defeat Mehrunes Dagon. In Skyrim, no matter what, you defeat Alduin the World Eater. In Fallout 3, no matter what, you defeat the Enclave. You might have had a few different ways of bringing down the big-bads, but defeat them you did. You couldn't side with Mehrunes Dagon, Alduin, or the Enclave. In Fallout 4, you can.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  Remember the nuclear missile launch in Longsome Road? I can choose an insane genocide against NCR or Legion citizens, but you can also allow ED-I to sacrifice itself for the good of many. That was hard choice I had to take due to 'Unintended consequences'. Same with FO3's ending where you don't have to send yourself into the radiation death machine and just make Fawkes do it.

It can also be argued that allowing ED-I to take the fall is an 'easy out', the game pulls it's punch and doesn't force you to make a terrible decision. Would that white phosphorus scene from Spec Ops carry the same weight if you had the option to sacrifice one of your team instead?


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  Also, the stuff you're saying about the "nature of the wasteland" is just wrong. Just because it's a norm, doesn't make it right.

So you have to deal with the wasteland as it is, not as how you'd like it to be; and you don't like that. I get it, I disagree, but I get it. That's not something I can fix, and if it was Bethesda's intent to make it such, more power to them.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  Again, I should be able to prevent genocide and the death of children. But I can't. And I also happen to be a person who kills Deathclaws by punching them and maintaining a romantic relationship with five people at the same time. I am a demigod who should be able to defy expectations at any time. Mind you, I would have found it a problem if the idea was reversed aswell; that the Railroad or Brotherhood couldn't be savagely exterminated and only convinced to leave.

In other words, as my cousin said, who really made me think of this, the fact that you can't select a peaceful route to deal with the factions you really don't have a quarrel with, severly deminishes the replayability factor.
Regardless of how many times to start a new save, you're still gonna be a butcher who didn't try negotiations.

And every time you start a new game of Skyrim, you have to deafest Alduin the World Eater; there is no option to negotiate with him or join his side.

How much did that bother you then?


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  
(23-04-2016 03:49 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Even if you sided with yourself at the end of New Vegas, how many people had you already killed by the end? How much less of a 'genocidal manic' was your character?
Actually quite a bit. I have done a clean paragon run of NV. I drove off the Power Gangers in self-defense, but never attacked the Prison Complex. I convinced the Great Khans to cast off the Ceasar's Legion intiation, and leave the Moajve. I convinced the Brotherhood chapter to make peace with the NCR, and I didn't kill any Super Mutants since I snuck by them, convicing Tabiha to leave. The Boomers got what they wanted, and made peace with the Kings and NCR Squatters. I never massarced Cottonwood Cove or The Fort, and the battle of Nelson is optional, although you can justify the battle as a liberation. I snuck by the final battle, confronted Legate Lanius, and convinced him to abandon his campaign, for now. And with the NCR in control, I have given Nevada the best shot at democracy they can get. It can be done, and I'm sure I could do something similar in FO3. It hurts me that I can't make a similar set of choices near the endgame in FO4.

And yet, Bethesda isn't Obsidian. Or Black Isles. I'm not sure if judging the game's ability to facilitate a pacifist run is the best metric out there. Of which, for the record, is only possible in New Vegas; and even then only if you side with Yes Man or NCR. All of the other options and games will require you to kill an intelligent creature to advance through to completion of the main story.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  
(23-04-2016 03:49 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  You'll never be able to please everyone, the forces involved are too unyielding to make that possible. Ultimately, all three major players cannot fundamentally peacefully coexist. The Brotherhood cannot suffer the existence of a technological rival with the potential (nay, near certainty) of ending mankind by making them effectively obsolete. The Institute cannot just ignore the Brotherhood on their doorstep, or the Railroad hiding in the shadows. The Railroad cannot abide either the enslavement or genocide of the synths, making them opposed to both the Institute and Brotherhood. Of those three factions, the Railroad is the only one that could conceivably peacefully coexist with the Minutemen given both groups ideologies and goals; with the both the Institutes' and Brotherhoods' casual disregard for the well being of the common people being deal breakers.
Coexistance and unyielding positions? Again, I could tell Legate Lanius, a bloodthirsty brainwashed madman to evacuate his forces. I could tell General Lee Oliver, a man hell bent on taking New Vegas for a decade, to fuck off from Nevada.

Once again, dick-measuring over a piece of pre-war infrastructure; not a fight over the most advanced technology the world has ever seen that holds the potential to end humanity for good.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  I could convince Ulysses that mankind isn't lost and have him fight by my side.

An individual, lacking the inertia of an entire organization.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  I could convince an AI like Eden that the Enclave is immoral and must dissappear.

And you're still left having to deal with the Enclave. Turning him doesn't ally you with the Enclave, all you do is remove it's figurehead; the real power is still Autumn, and he's still alive and cannot be negotiated with. Turning Eden has zero real impact on the game itself, you get the same outcome even if you don't turn him; Raven Rock gets dealt with either way, you escape and the mission is complete.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  Or what about the BoS in the West? What about making peace with the NCR, their bitter enemy in the Mojave who killed dozens of them.

They were in a position of weakness, against an enemy that doesn't represent apocalyptic destruction. Before they had their teeth kicked in, they'd never have considered it. This is decidedly different than the position Maxson finds himself in the Commonwealth.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  The Kings and the NCR Squatters.

Not primary factions, only tangentially related to the main story.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  Even with The Great Khans I could make peace.

Side faction, not at all involved with the end game. Like the Minutemen, except even less relevant to the outcome.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  And lastly, The Master from FO1, who wanted to assmililate the whole planet, but agrees to terminate himself when presented with evidence of his failed plan. I'd say these factions and induviduals are quite unyielding. And yet, you can change it.

It's a speech check to defeat the end boss instead of shooting him in the face, either way he is defeated. You don't have the option to side with the Master, become his General, and get hours upon hours of game play carrying out his orders and cleansing the survivors in California. It's relatively easy to both program and implement such an option. That is a far cry from the three way power struggle seen in the Commonwealth.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  A lot of these situations are temporary soulutions, but still solutions to the problem of coexistance. And who knows, maybe I'll sit down with a cup of tea, discussing peace with the Brotherhood and the Railroad in the future. You never know.

And maybe as the head of the Institute, you'll free the Synths and stop production of new ones, averting the almost certain obsolescence and subsequent extinction of humanity. In which case, you side with the Institute and use that reasoning and the promise of the future to justify your actions in the present.

But the existence of the Synths themselves is, in and of itself, a deal breaker. The Brotherhood at Maxson's command, if they were to turn away from their plan, would be akin to welcoming Armageddon again. It's an unstoppable force hitting an unmovable object.

You cannot side with Mehrunes Dagon, Alduin, or the Enclave. But you can side with the Brotherhood or the Institute.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  I actually agree with both Railroad, Brotherhood and the Minutemen that the Institute must be removed in some form. I don't agree with the Brotherhood mercilessly executing the greatest scientists in the world while they're crying for mercy, instead of capturing and interrogating them like smart people would do. And of course I do not agree with Maxson idioticly ordering the whole Institute to be blown up instead of securing and containing the facility, which is the the Brotherhood's whole goddamn purpose in the first place.

They're zealots, and zealots don't always operate on logic.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  I actually don't know what the Railroad and Minutemen do when they attack the Institute, but I don't think I'm gonna find out since they demand me to shoot down a fully manned airship.

Once the balance of power is tipped, both sides have to go. If the Institute survives, they can focus their resources on eliminating the Railroad, and subverting the safety of the Commonwealth for their own gains. If the Brotherhood survives, they hunt down the Railroad and all other Synths and sympathizers, and also target the ghoul populations under the protection of the Minutemen. Either faction, if left to their own devices, will be at odds with both the Railroad and the Minutemen.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  
(23-04-2016 03:49 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  There is no happy ending in Fallout 4, and I'm okay with that.
Happy ending? I'm afraid that happy ending thing kinda took the train to nowherewille with the gigantic nuclear cataclysm, the execution of your spouse, that your supposed son has grown up to be an emotionless dick, nevermind the fact that the "ending" doesn't even address the actions the Lone Survivor did (that the game continues after the main quest is over is no excuse). But I'm still allowed to be a nice guy in a shit world, doing the best I can if I want to.

And the best you can do this time is make a tough choice from a selection of bad options, which is still more options than Bethesda (not Obsidian, not Black Isle) has ever given you before. I preferred this to the 4 buttons at the end of Deus Ex: Human Revolution or the '3 cupcakes' at the end of Mass Effect 3.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  All in all, Fallout 4 gives you less control over the actions of your own character; a lack of personality. If Bethesda thinks that they can only create a suspenseful ending to their game through forced violent confrontations, then I may no longer be their target audience.

I don't know, play Bioware games only? Hopefully the next Deus Ex and Dishonored games will retain their pacifist options.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2016, 03:05 PM
RE: What are you playing?
(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Okay, so you wanted peace. Peace wasn't an option. You don't always get to set the terms or the rules of engagement. Sometimes those things are out of your control, no matter how hard you might try.

Well, aside from the fact that they don't allow you to try.

(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  There is no peaceful coexistence with the Harbinger in Mass Effect 2, and having a peaceful coexistence option at the end of Mass Effect 3 caused a lot of backlash too.

The Reapers are machines following simple orders; to avoid war between synthetic and organic life by any means necessary. They cannot be reasoned with. Regardless, Shepard could try to reason with them, and fail miserably, but atleast he had the option.


(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  All stories have problems.






(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Elder Lyons was an outlier, effectively exiled because of his views. The chapter in the Mohave was under powered and toothless, hiding in a hole and licking their wounds after getting their asses kicked; they were not operating from a position of power. When they had the power, they operated liked the owned the place and weren't answerable to anyone but themselves, just like the assholes in the Prydwen or back in the original FO1 bunker. You didn't fundamentally change the Brotherhood in FO1, they were a means to an end. They were once again almost nonexistent and powerless in FO2; and once again, the Lyon's chapter in FO3 was an outlier that Maxson is quite clearly being contrasted against.


Again, extraordinary circumstances. I'd say me as a Charsima level 10 character could be Fallout 4's extraordinary circumstance (nevermind the fact I'm taken in as a random guy on the street).

(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  New Vegas was a dick measuring contest over a fucking damn, a chunk of pre-war infrastructure; either side having it or denying it to the other isn't seen as an apocalyptic catastrophe. The Institute and the Brotherhood, both aware of the possibility that Synths represent, are fighting for fundamentally much higher stakes. Retreat is not an option that either side is willing to entertain, and I get why.

Well, aside from the fact that the dick measuring contest in question determines the fate of thousands; if the Legion continues their savage but effective conquest, or if the NCR expands the power of their so called "republic". The stakes are quite high. Now if compares to the Institute's Dr. Evil plan of taking over the world however, is a different story.

(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Must I remind you that even Picard broke the prime directive, and not always for the best or well thought out reasons? Weren't there times when his hand was forced?

Unless you're talking about a screenwriting trainwreck like Star Trek Insurrection, Picard ended up breaking the Prime Directive after diplomacy failed, and mostly when the crew of the Enterprise was in danger. This also happens to be nr 1 reason anyone breaks the Prime Directive.



(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Uh, you're not the fucking Avatar in Fallout? What am I supposed to say? Shit sucks in the wasteland, kids can die. Does that make you uncomfortable? Knowing on that kids died when the Prydwen crashed in a ball of fire?

GOOD! You're supposed to feel dirty, it was dirty business! If you weren't at least a little disturbed, that might be cause for concern. Guess what? Destroying the Institute also kills the children there too! War never changes, and war fucking sucks. Now, was it worth it? Maybe, maybe not. That's not a question I can answer for you. Everyone will have to come to terms with their own actions when they attempt to balance their ledgers at the end of the day.

Was the security and safety of the Commonwealth (or indeed, the world) worth the lives of those children? In the grad scheme of things, what are a few more bodies on the pyre in a world already so burnt? How many more would have died if you hadn't stopped the Brotherhood or Institute? It's a sick calculus the game forces on you, and being able to dodge that bullet misses the point.

Oh but here's the thing, I'm not in a split second "push the fat man in front of the train to save the railworkers" situation. I just explained to you possible scenarios to not destroy the railroad or down the airship. I wish there was such a possbility. Too bad there isn't. Therefore my brain says "I don't even bother, doesn't resonate with my current playthrough".


(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  But not this time. Therein lies the point.

Which I'm afraid is a silly point if you want to play the good guy. It is possible that I wanna play as a character who doesn't feel that genocide justifies saving my son.

(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Except the factions have never been both so integral, and antagonistic. Sure, you can be the head of the Dark Brotherhood in Skyrim, but that has zero affect on the main story; because those factions exist within their own bubbles and have little to no connection with one another. FO4 doesn't have that luxury, the very nature of the three major factions means that they cannot help but be at each other's throats. Remember, you could practically skip the central civil war in Skyrim in advancement of the main quest.

In Oblivion, no matter what, you defeat Mehrunes Dagon. In Skyrim, no matter what, you defeat Alduin the World Eater. In Fallout 3, no matter what, you defeat the Enclave. You might have had a few different ways of bringing down the big-bads, but defeat them you did. You couldn't side with Mehrunes Dagon, Alduin, or the Enclave. In Fallout 4, you can.

Cool. Atleast for the people who like to play the bad guy and enjoyed being crazy person working for the Legion.

I hardly ever get this feeling, sadly.

(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  It can also be argued that allowing ED-I to take the fall is an 'easy out', the game pulls it's punch and doesn't force you to make a terrible decision. Would that white phosphorus scene from Spec Ops carry the same weight if you had the option to sacrifice one of your team instead?

Depends if you cared about your teammates or not. I cared about ED-I. To each their own.


(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  So you have to deal with the wasteland as it is, not as how you'd like it to be; and you don't like that. I get it, I disagree, but I get it. That's not something I can fix, and if it was Bethesda's intent to make it such, more power to them.

While I feel that they should have given me more power to make the already shitty wasteland better, aside from the terrible settlement building that is...





(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  And every time you start a new game of Skyrim, you have to deafest Alduin the World Eater; there is no option to negotiate with him or join his side.

How much did that bother you then?

Frankly it didn't. Alduin wants to devour the world and end all time as Tamriel knows it. As far as I know, I never compared any events from Elder Scrolls to Fallout 4 here. Elder Scrolls and Fallout are very much seperate worlds to me.


(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  And yet, Bethesda isn't Obsidian. Or Black Isles. I'm not sure if judging the game's ability to facilitate a pacifist run is the best metric out there. Of which, for the record, is only possible in New Vegas; and even then only if you side with Yes Man or NCR. All of the other options and games will require you to kill an intelligent creature to advance through to completion of the main story.

What, are you implying that Bethesda is incapable writing some dialouge and add some animations of an airship flying away or the Railroad packing up? This has got to do with what Bethesda either had in mind with the game or what they didn't bother adding. Either way sadly doesn't suit me.




(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  I could convince Ulysses that mankind isn't lost and have him fight by my side.

An individual, lacking the inertia of an entire organization.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  I could convince an AI like Eden that the Enclave is immoral and must dissappear.

And you're still left having to deal with the Enclave. Turning him doesn't ally you with the Enclave, all you do is remove it's figurehead; the real power is still Autumn, and he's still alive and cannot be negotiated with. Turning Eden has zero real impact on the game itself, you get the same outcome even if you don't turn him; Raven Rock gets dealt with either way, you escape and the mission is complete.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  Or what about the BoS in the West? What about making peace with the NCR, their bitter enemy in the Mojave who killed dozens of them.

They were in a position of weakness, against an enemy that doesn't represent apocalyptic destruction. Before they had their teeth kicked in, they'd never have considered it. This is decidedly different than the position Maxson finds himself in the Commonwealth.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  The Kings and the NCR Squatters.

Not primary factions, only tangentially related to the main story.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  Even with The Great Khans I could make peace.

Side faction, not at all involved with the end game. Like the Minutemen, except even less relevant to the outcome.


(23-04-2016 09:05 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  And lastly, The Master from FO1, who wanted to assmililate the whole planet, but agrees to terminate himself when presented with evidence of his failed plan. I'd say these factions and induviduals are quite unyielding. And yet, you can change it.

It's a speech check to defeat the end boss instead of shooting him in the face, either way he is defeated. You don't have the option to side with the Master, become his General, and get hours upon hours of game play carrying out his orders and cleansing the survivors in California. It's relatively easy to both program and implement such an option. That is a far cry from the three way power struggle seen in the Commonwealth.

Irrevelevant if they belong to the main stories or not. These examples display factions hell bent on an objective, and that you can change all of their minds. Nothing more.


(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  And maybe as the head of the Institute, you'll free the Synths and stop production of new ones, averting the almost certain obsolescence and subsequent extinction of humanity. In which case, you side with the Institute and use that reasoning and the promise of the future to justify your actions in the present.

But the existence of the Synths themselves is, in and of itself, a deal breaker. The Brotherhood at Maxson's command, if they were to turn away from their plan, would be akin to welcoming Armageddon again. It's an unstoppable force hitting an unmovable object.

You cannot side with Mehrunes Dagon, Alduin, or the Enclave. But you can side with the Brotherhood or the Institute.

And that's a good thing. I already told you I see the need to combat the Institute. Mind you, I have never joined the Institute, Legion or Eden's FEV plan. I'm not a huge fan of being the bad guy in some of the games I have the choice to.

(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  They're zealots, and zealots don't always operate on logic.

What does that even mean? Everyone is talking on the airship that Maxson is a return to formula. And then he destroys the greatest haul the Brotherhood has ever sized. Maxson behaves like an idiot, more than an idiot than Lyons was; the man Maxson calls an actual idiot. It's like if the Brotherhood Outcasts blew up the Operation Anchorage bunker, and they're quite good at being zealots as far as I am aware.

(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Once the balance of power is tipped, both sides have to go. If the Institute survives, they can focus their resources on eliminating the Railroad, and subverting the safety of the Commonwealth for their own gains. If the Brotherhood survives, they hunt down the Railroad and all other Synths and sympathizers, and also target the ghoul populations under the protection of the Minutemen. Either faction, if left to their own devices, will be at odds with both the Railroad and the Minutemen.

Thx

(23-04-2016 12:21 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  I don't know, play Bioware games only? Hopefully the next Deus Ex and Dishonored games will retain their pacifist options.

Ech. The options I was given wasn't what I expected from a game series that loves to give you options. This isn't restricted to one game made by Bethesda; I also resent Bioshock Infinite for similar reasons around options, but that's another story.

So lets recap here.

You agree with the options Bethesda provided in their game, for any moral playstyle. I don't, considering this "second" playthrough went against my original plans. I thought you could save "Shaun" without the interference of the four factions, like Bethesda actually said. I couldn't. This leaves me the option to murder people I really don't have a problem with, people who aren't drugged up on chems and try to beat my head in with a stick for no reason than for the lolz and my money. I don't want to work for the Railroad or Minutemen since I don't want to down the airship, and I don't want to murder Maxson who I met as a kiddo in FO3; I like the guy. There is no peaceful solution, so pretty much my only choice is to work for the Brotherhood. Unfortunately, I already did that. I have already played as a super pro-Brotherhood guy who looks down on the peasants of ignorance (that includes the Railroad, I gunned them down mercilessly); that was my first playthrough, and I rather liked it. I was roleplaying. Now when the time comes for me to play a more normal person with high CHR, I'm met with this wall. It basically forces me to redo the whole Brotherhood thing. It made me unhappy to say the least. I won't side with the Institute, since they're a bunch of dicks, and if I'm gonna be dick it's gotta be one walking in Power Armor.

So you see, my big problem was that my grand plan for replayablility was flushed down the crapper. It's not that I treat every single game I play with this strict moral code I can't break. In the Total War games, I'm worse than Vlad the Impaler ever could be. But in Fallout 4, the only kind of person I can play as is the Brotherhood fanboy, and I'm not in the mood for playing that again right away.

In short, I have a problem with not being able to be the ultimate babyface Hulk Hogan running wild and saving all the Hulkamaniacs (paragon) if I wanted to in FO4, and you don't.

I believe the problem is solved.




[Image: 20cad83ad8d757191e2878b0f4bf05a9.png]
"Don't answer that. A rhetorical question."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2016, 05:10 PM
RE: What are you playing?
Dark Souls 3 now works for me... mostly... with help i managed to defeat the Curse-Rotted Greatwood. But I have no idea when to go here there. Every way I found ultimately leads back to there...

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2016, 07:26 PM
RE: What are you playing?
(23-04-2016 05:10 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  Dark Souls 3 now works for me... mostly... with help i managed to defeat the Curse-Rotted Greatwood. But I have no idea when to go here there. Every way I found ultimately leads back to there...


This is the way to go:

Go to the tower with the giant shooting arrows where you meet Siegward. Take the lift down. Careful of the tough dude but the sword he drops is pretty fucking sweet.

To get to the tower you need to cross the small bridge and go past the three dudes with clay pots and big saws. Which is along the road leading up to the large stairs before the Rotten and the opposite way to the entrance to the sewers with the big rat.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2016, 07:44 PM
RE: What are you playing?
(23-04-2016 07:26 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(23-04-2016 05:10 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  Dark Souls 3 now works for me... mostly... with help i managed to defeat the Curse-Rotted Greatwood. But I have no idea when to go here there. Every way I found ultimately leads back to there...


This is the way to go:

Go to the tower with the giant shooting arrows where you meet Siegward. Take the lift down. Careful of the tough dude but the sword he drops is pretty fucking sweet.

To get to the tower you need to cross the small bridge and go past the three dudes with clay pots and big saws. Which is along the road leading up to the large stairs before the Rotten and the opposite way to the entrance to the sewers with the big rat.

... I completely forgot that way existed... Thanks, Muffs. Away I go

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2016, 08:03 AM
RE: What are you playing?
I'm trying to play Mirror's Edge Catalyst beta, but that POS overheats my Radeon R9 380 in 10 minutes (to 85°C!) and I'm afraid to give it another go in case it would kill the GPU outright.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2016, 08:25 AM
RE: What are you playing?
(24-04-2016 08:03 AM)Naridar Wrote:  I'm trying to play Mirror's Edge Catalyst beta, but that POS overheats my Radeon R9 380 in 10 minutes (to 85°C!) and I'm afraid to give it another go in case it would kill the GPU outright.


85°C is overheating? My GTX 970 doesn't start to throttle performance until it hits 87°C, and it never hits that because it's a Maxwell chip in a EVGA card with their custom heat-sink placed inside an Air 540 dual chamber case.


I mean, I've heard that AMD's run hot and loud. When was the last time you cleaned out your case? Might be time to get a can of compressed air and dust off all of your fans.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2016, 08:37 AM
RE: What are you playing?
I'm playing Dark Souls. I've been playing this game for like a year and I have like 250 hours on it. I'm doing a blind run of the game, so I've spent a ton of time just messing around, level grinding, getting lost. I'm finally on Lord Gwyn though and he's incredible difficult. I need like, stronger weapons to defeat him. I'm going to try to level up my magic and get the great magic sword spell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2016, 11:34 AM
RE: What are you playing?
(24-04-2016 08:25 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(24-04-2016 08:03 AM)Naridar Wrote:  I'm trying to play Mirror's Edge Catalyst beta, but that POS overheats my Radeon R9 380 in 10 minutes (to 85°C!) and I'm afraid to give it another go in case it would kill the GPU outright.


85°C is overheating? My GTX 970 doesn't start to throttle performance until it hits 87°C, and it never hits that because it's a Maxwell chip in a EVGA card with their custom heat-sink placed inside an Air 540 dual chamber case.


I mean, I've heard that AMD's run hot and loud. When was the last time you cleaned out your case? Might be time to get a can of compressed air and dust off all of your fans.

Kind of an outdated question (since you're running an SLI to my knowledge), but the 970 memory problem at its launch; seen any problems related to it?

[Image: 20cad83ad8d757191e2878b0f4bf05a9.png]
"Don't answer that. A rhetorical question."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: