The Outer Worlds (Obsidian's new RPG) [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

The_Jackal

2018-12-07, 02:11 PM

Obsidian was cool and good. Sadly they died (on the same day as Stan Lee too). I don't care what anyone anywhere says, any smaller studio bought out by a big corp is dead and gone. So RIP. Don't care what they're doing anymore cos it's now a zombie shambling on with only the name of a thing I used to know attached to it.

The sale only just closed, which means that this title was developed without influence from Mister Softee. My guess is that they piled all their dough into Outer Worlds, then showed it off to Microsoft to get an infusion of cash with which to market the game.

For my part, I'll be judging the game on its merits, rather than assuming that just because someone with money bought the thing it's going to be bad. Big, small, rich, poor, good games are where you find them, and bad games are the norm, not the exception.

OutOfThyme

2018-12-07, 06:34 PM

The_Jackal

2018-12-07, 07:33 PM

I'll be keeping an eye on this. Unlike BioWare and Bethesda, Obsidian still has some degree of goodwill left with me. I know they were recently bought by a larger publisher/studio (not super familiar here, so bear with me), but this was clearly in the works before that.

I hope that the game is as polished as this is on release - assuming that Obsidian doesn't have the same kind of corporate pressure that forced them to crank out KOTOR 2 and New Vegas on limited timeframes. But, since Obsidian games being bug-ridden messes is kind of a long-standing joke, I'll probably wait for a bit once this comes out.

Businesses are bought and sold all the time. That's how the owners of businesses get paid. Most game studios don't make the listing requirements to go public, so they have little choice but to sell themselves to a publisher. Are most publishers bad and exploitative? Kinda, in the same way that most movie studios are, but you wouldn't stop watching Martin Scorsese movies just because he worked with the same production company as Uwe Boll, right?

Narkis

2018-12-07, 07:55 PM

Businesses are bought and sold all the time. That's how the owners of businesses get paid. Most game studios don't make the listing requirements to go public, so they have little choice but to sell themselves to a publisher. Are most publishers bad and exploitative? Kinda, in the same way that most movie studios are, but you wouldn't stop watching Martin Scorsese movies just because he worked with the same production company as Uwe Boll, right?

That's not true at all. I mean, yeah, businesses do change hands often, but owners don't wait to sell off to get paid. That's what profits are for. And a business being sold is not a good sign for its past profitability and general health.

And to go back to the topic at hand, I believe that Obsidian is living on borrowed time until they get completely assimilated into Microsoft's culture and then devoured. But even if every game studio bought by a major publisher was eventually destroyed, they more often than not still had a couple good games in them. I hope that's the case here as well, especially since it's apparently almost complete, giving Microsoft very little time to interfere.

The_Jackal

2018-12-07, 08:38 PM

That's not true at all. I mean, yeah, businesses do change hands often, but owners don't wait to sell off to get paid. That's what profits are for. And a business being sold is not a good sign for its past profitability and general health.

Most do exactly that: They collect most of their profit when they sell the business, either by going public or by selling to a private buyer, like another business or a private equity firm, and healthy businesses are bought and sold all the time. Blizzard Entertainment was sold to Vivendi Universal when it had Warcraft II and Diablo launched to huge success, and just launched Starcraft to rave reviews only 3 months prior.

Generally, you want to sell things when their perceived value is high, not when it's low. Sure distressed sales happen in business all the time, but that doesn't mean that every purchase is a sign of impending doom.

And to go back to the topic at hand, I believe that Obsidian is living on borrowed time until they get completely assimilated into Microsoft's culture and then devoured. But even if every game studio bought by a major publisher was eventually destroyed, they more often than not still had a couple good games in them. I hope that's the case here as well, especially since it's apparently almost complete, giving Microsoft very little time to interfere.

Well, Microsoft has published a lot of good games. Are they the best publisher ever? No, but they're far from the worst. I would recommend a more dispassionate attitude towards publishers and distributors, if you want to play triple-A games. They're a necessary evil.

Aotrs Commander

2018-12-07, 09:45 PM

Wait, MS bought Obsidian?

Dammit.

Guess we're unlikely to see a Pillars 3, then; could be seeing the back end of the isometirc RPG again already.

(I mean, MS are not remotely the worst or have even being doing a whole lot of asshattery recently, at least not enough to compete with all the other muppets... But weren't they supposed to be doing Age of Empires 4 or something? We had one pointless teaser trailer and then, as far as I'm away, nothing...)

I'm not much of an open-world fan (Witcher 3 was the only one that ever held my interest enough to finish, and Morrowind only held it for a while because it the my first one and had the novelty value), but this looks okay... Maybe something to look at down the line (way down the line).

Wait? It this even for PC? If not, then it's completely irrelvent to me, since I don't have any consoles. (As I am guessing it isn't going to run on a PS2, Gamecube or GBA/DS/3DS...)

The_Jackal

2018-12-07, 10:39 PM

Wait? It this even for PC? If not, then it's completely irrelvent to me, since I don't have any consoles. (As I am guessing it isn't going to run on a PS2, Gamecube or GBA/DS/3DS...)

I really hope so, but I kind of doubt it's not. After all, the acquisition was only last month, they had to be doing development on this project for at least 2 years.

factotum

2018-12-08, 12:37 AM

And they're not going to throw away 2 years of (presumably) PC development to re-factor the game for XBox at this stage, I would say.

houlio

2018-12-08, 01:17 AM

And they're not going to throw away 2 years of (presumably) PC development to re-factor the game for XBox at this stage, I would say.

Didn’t this kind of thing happen with Dragon Age 1 when Bioware was gobbled up by EA? I remember that game getting retooled from a PC-Exclusive at the time to get a a console version.

Granted, I have much more faith in Obsidian to stick to their guns in this case. Pillars was basically what kept them going as a studio, so I doubt we’ll see their new brand of isometric rpgs melt away. I’m more concerned with the fact that a new Alpha Protocol will probably never come around now than Obsidian dropping it’s bread and butter rpg releases.

Cespenar

2018-12-08, 02:58 AM

The feeling I got from Obsidian is that if they ever would get to a point where they have to churn out brainless game after brainless game under Microsoft, they would probably just quit after a while, bring together as many members as they could, and reconstitute under a different name, say, I dunno, Volcanic Entertainment or something. :smalltongue:

GloatingSwine

2018-12-08, 03:10 AM

Wait, MS bought Obsidian?

And inXile. (and Ninja Theory)

However, that does mean they'll have a budget behind them and won't have to rely on crowdfunding, which is not as good for developers as was initially thought (Although it produces money up front it means most people who are going to buy the game already have it and don't get a sales splash), and as a platform holder Microsoft are probably the best you could have hoped for because they won't have the incentive to turn everything into a loot box cash cow.

Plus it means their future games will all still be on PC as well because Microsoft cross platform all their first party stuff now (and cross purchase if you buy digital versions, so if you have a PC and XBox you can play all the firstparty stuff on whichever platform you happen to be sitting at).

Narkis

2018-12-08, 04:08 AM

Wait? It this even for PC? If not, then it's completely irrelvent to me, since I don't have any consoles. (As I am guessing it isn't going to run on a PS2, Gamecube or GBA/DS/3DS...)

I just found out it even has a Steam page already: https://store.steampowered.com/app/578650/The_Outer_Worlds/

Aotrs Commander

2018-12-08, 06:24 AM

And inXile. (and Ninja Theory)

However, that does mean they'll have a budget behind them and won't have to rely on crowdfunding, which is not as good for developers as was initially thought (Although it produces money up front it means most people who are going to buy the game already have it and don't get a sales splash), and as a platform holder Microsoft are probably the best you could have hoped for because they won't have the incentive to turn everything into a loot box cash cow.

Plus it means their future games will all still be on PC as well because Microsoft cross platform all their first party stuff now (and cross purchase if you buy digital versions, so if you have a PC and XBox you can play all the firstparty stuff on whichever platform you happen to be sitting at).

Hrrrm. Still a little dubious, though, as I say, it's at least MS and not say Unicronic Arts... Actually, if being bought was a danger, ye gods let it be almost anyone but Unicronic Arts; these days, I'd sooner see the company go bust entirely than go to them to be destroyed anyway when they force whatever it was into their mad cash-grab-above-all formula regardless of suitability and it not work.

And MS HAVE been better behaved of late (it's been quite a while since Jim Sterling had to have a go at them).

But I mean, I have never though much of MS at the best of times, really.

And if crowd-funding wasn't enough to support the sort of mid-tier games I want to play (e.g. Pillars, Torment), then I'm not hugely convinced that MS will be willing to do it, either. (Not to mention you're back on that dangerous bandwagon of being forced to rush it out before it's ready if the owning company decides to press things.).

This is at best neutral news.

(I'd rather have seen them all go to Paradox if they had to go to anyone, which is mostly well-behaved and manages a better job of "games-as-service" (sic) than the "triple AAAAAAAAAAA" companies because it does support games for years, even if you don't get the expansions and I personally am quite happy to pay for expansions for their games, because at least for their grand strats, you are getting hundreds of hours of playtime compared to a more "normal" game. But I know people are also put off by the amount of expansions. But again, I liken it to wargames - the grand strats are a hobby in and of themselves within the gaming hobby; I only play about four different wargames, period (and only two with any regularity), not dozens of different ones.)

I just found out it even has a Steam page already: https://store.steampowered.com/app/578650/The_Outer_Worlds/

Actually checking on OBS' forums, where there is actual information, this is going to be for PC, X-Box and Playstation.

GloatingSwine

2018-12-08, 06:52 AM

And if crowd-funding wasn't enough to support the sort of mid-tier games I want to play (e.g. Pillars, Torment), then I'm not hugely convinced that MS will be willing to do it, either. (Not to mention you're back on that dangerous bandwagon of being forced to rush it out before it's ready if the owning company decides to press things.).

The problem with crowd funding is that under the traditional publishing model you get money to make the game from the publisher, and then some more money when people buy it.

With a crowdfunded game, most of the people who would have bought it will have backed it, so you only get the money for the production costs and a lot less money in profit when it comes out.

Crowdfunding can get the games made, but it's not really enough to support the whole studio.

Aotrs Commander

2018-12-08, 07:12 AM

The problem with crowd funding is that under the traditional publishing model you get money to make the game from the publisher, and then some more money when people buy it.

With a crowdfunded game, most of the people who would have bought it will have backed it, so you only get the money for the production costs and a lot less money in profit when it comes out.

Crowdfunding can get the games made, but it's not really enough to support the whole studio.

Which suggests that games which are currently being crowd-funded to get made won't make enough money that MS will be really interested in making them (because making "some money" or "enough money" isn't good enough anymore for the vast majority of companies) - and as they are now the owners, OBS may not get to chose what they want to make anymore. It suggest that it they are simply not feasible to make for anyone in today's economic climate and we may never get them again. So, given the appalling state of the games industry at the moment, you'll have to forgive my cynicsm that for the sort of games I like, these acquisitions are good news. (I mean, it well might be for Obsidian the company and for people for whom this game is th sort of thing they love, just not for the stuff I prefer. It's just... disheartening.)

I might be wrong. I will be pleasantly surprised if I am, but really, we're at the point it's nearly too much to even hope for at the minute.

Cespenar

2018-12-08, 12:26 PM

factotum

2018-12-08, 03:55 PM

I think the major problem with crowdfunded games is that most of the hype happens at the point of the crowdfunding drive. Two years later, when the thing actually comes out, it's fallen off everybody's radar and thus maybe doesn't sell as well as a game that was being newly released at that time would.

Inarius

2018-12-08, 04:22 PM

Wait, MS bought Obsidian?

Dammit.

Guess we're unlikely to see a Pillars 3, then; could be seeing the back end of the isometirc RPG again already.

Interestingly enough Obsidian doesn't own the Pillars IP so whether we see another Pillars game or not doesn't solely rest on Microsofts wishes. Basically the owners setup a holding company for the IP to be able to retain it in case Obsidian went bankrupt and had to sell of its assets. So ultimately they can license out the IP to whoever they want at this point even to themselves if they all get canned from Microsoft.

The_Jackal

2018-12-08, 04:46 PM

The problem with crowd funding is that under the traditional publishing model you get money to make the game from the publisher, and then some more money when people buy it.

With a crowdfunded game, most of the people who would have bought it will have backed it, so you only get the money for the production costs and a lot less money in profit when it comes out.

Crowdfunding can get the games made, but it's not really enough to support the whole studio.

Ultimately, there's just not enough people willing to support via crowd funding, and it certainly won't ever invade the console market. So, crowd funded games are low-production quality indie-games, which then limits their mass market appeal, and thus won't make as much money once the original crowd-funders have been given their product.

If, by some miracle, you could get every person who bought a copy of, say, RDR2, to pony up $10.00 to a game studio, that would pay all the people who actually make the game far more than what they'd make through a regular studio system. RDR2 earned 17 million copies in 2 weeks. 170 million dollars will pay for a lot of game designers, developers, and 3d artists.

JadedDM

2018-12-08, 06:11 PM

This game looks like Fallout meets Firefly. That works for me. If I can't have another Fallout Vegas, I suppose this is the next best thing.

Also, I looked it up, and it's going to be released on PC, Xbox One and PS4.

Keltest

2018-12-08, 10:13 PM

Tentatively, im excited. This looks like it's going to scratch an itch I haven't had scratched since Borderlands, and Obsidian has been good to me far more often than not.

The Glyphstone

2018-12-08, 11:07 PM

I'm intrigued. It's definitely got a Borderlands-like spice to it, though it lacks the casual insanity of Pandora that gives BL its charm.

Rynjin

2018-12-08, 11:47 PM

I'm intrigued. It's definitely got a Borderlands-like spice to it, though it lacks the casual insanity of Pandora that gives BL its charm.

Lacking that "casual insanity" will also mean it's likely to lack the poorly-aging meme comedy the series became known for as well.

Triaxx

2018-12-09, 08:57 AM

I thought that Obsidian was the Publisher, and the other company... private Division was the dev?

GloatingSwine

2018-12-09, 09:51 AM

I thought that Obsidian was the Publisher, and the other company... private Division was the dev?

Other way around.

Private Division are part of Take Two.

Narkis

2018-12-09, 09:53 AM

I thought that Obsidian was the Publisher, and the other company... private Division was the dev?

The other way around. Private Division is a small publisher.

Triaxx

2018-12-09, 11:55 AM

Ah, I mis-read it then.

Cikomyr

2018-12-09, 12:11 PM

I was happy to see people who have worked on Fallout games doing something different. While I like the Fallout games, they are increasingly becoming a lot of the same kinds of things over and over with very little new to them imo. I'm happy to see the talent behind them put into another IP.

Thats because none of the people working on what passes off as Fallout games nowaday actually worked on a Fallout game while asking themselves what is the real soul of a fallout game.

Fallout 3 was the closest thing they got to a genuine Fallout game, and its not like they nailed the story or setting in any way beside superifical cutesy spectacle. And that was the best between FO 3, FO4 and FO76

Compare to New Vegas, that really got it.

GloatingSwine

2018-12-09, 12:39 PM

More specifically, the original Fallout crew that are working on this one are Tim Cain and Leonard Boyarsky.

Since Tim Cain worked at Carbine, I think we can safely say that this is him getting to continue Wildstar under a new name.

Cikomyr

2018-12-09, 03:17 PM

Triaxx

2018-12-09, 05:24 PM

Wasn't that the MMO that got closed down when the publisher went out of business?

EeksGames

2018-12-09, 05:30 PM

Wow. It really blows my mind where graphics are today. Sadly, releases like these are going to be useless to me for a few years. I operate on $600 laptops mostly. Retro games are the rage right now. I would definitely try this title though, looks amazing.

Erloas

2018-12-09, 07:40 PM

I'd like to believe that all of those crowdfunding projects incorporate at least a modest profit into their main goal sum. It'd make no sense from a business standpoint if they don't.
They can't, it is pretty much impossible. The way crowdfunding works now you've essentially got to have a decent amount of prototyping and style assets done so you've got enough to show off what you're making and that you've got the credentials to make it. I think the estimate is something like 20% of the budget pretty much has to be brought into the project before you can get to a kickstarter that people will really look at. They try to get enough money to finish the game and keep everyone feed until the game launches and they can make some actual money.

I'm not surprised they sold, development costs are simply too high for a small or medium sized business to manage. It takes an amazing financial department to keep a business going when most of their sales come in 2-3 year chunks but expenses are continuous. Then take into account that almost everyone at these companies are artists and coders and not accountants and you can see where the weak link is.

I'm going to look at the game for what it is though, not who publishes it. The trailer looks good, and I was a big fan of Borderlands and the original Fallouts, so I'll keep an eye on it.

Winthur

2018-12-09, 09:11 PM

After seeing every single "oldschool developer" screw up this year in some way, I'm cautious, especially in light of all the tea on Feargus Urquhart from Chris Avellone. If Cain and Boyarsky pull a Fargo or bring us another Underworld Ascendant, it's gonna be sad.

The_Jackal

2018-12-09, 10:16 PM

WildStar... The Space.Cowboy cartoon?

Wasn't that the MMO that got closed down when the publisher went out of business?

Yes and yes. Yeah, I see a lot of flavor informed by Wildstar and Borderlands, plus I get a whiff of Bioshock Infinite with the art nouveau style of the posters and advertisements. And, of course, I feel all of these are somewhat influenced by Joss Whedon's Firefly series from 2002, which in turn is influenced by the legendary Cowboy Bebop. All good things.

They can't, it is pretty much impossible. The way crowdfunding works now you've essentially got to have a decent amount of prototyping and style assets done so you've got enough to show off what you're making and that you've got the credentials to make it. I think the estimate is something like 20% of the budget pretty much has to be brought into the project before you can get to a kickstarter that people will really look at. They try to get enough money to finish the game and keep everyone feed until the game launches and they can make some actual money.

I'm not surprised they sold, development costs are simply too high for a small or medium sized business to manage. It takes an amazing financial department to keep a business going when most of their sales come in 2-3 year chunks but expenses are continuous. Then take into account that almost everyone at these companies are artists and coders and not accountants and you can see where the weak link is.

I'm going to look at the game for what it is though, not who publishes it. The trailer looks good, and I was a big fan of Borderlands and the original Fallouts, so I'll keep an eye on it.

There's something else to why Kickstarter doesn't work for game development: Accounting and benefits laws. In brief, there are regulatory reasons why companies are structured the way they do, and compensate their employees in the manner they do, and that framework isn't really conducive to Kickstarter. Simply put, funds raised on Kickstarter aren't debt, they're income. So, if you make a kickstarter for a project that's going to be in development for five years, you can't amortize the money you've collected over the first year over the full project timeline, you can only deduct the expenses from that year, which means you'll wind up paying a much bigger marginal rate on the money you collect, and you won't get any tax money back for the next four years when you have negative income.

Triaxx

2018-12-09, 11:36 PM

It appears to be some form of English. Did anyone understand that?

ShneekeyTheLost

2018-12-10, 01:09 AM

It appears to be some form of English. Did anyone understand that?tl;dr version: taxes suck.

Slightly more complicated, but still ELI5 version:

When you borrow money from investors, it is a debt to them that must be repaid, typically with interest. Similar in concept to going to the bank for a loan. As such, the net income on that borrowing of money is technically negative, because you have to pay it all back and then some. Now, say you promise to pay it back over the next five years. So you have a fiduciary obligation to pay that money back to the guys you borrowed it from. So, when your company does their taxes, they get to write off that loan payment as a business expense, and thus pay fewer taxes.

Kickstarter, however, is just 'I am throwing my money at you, with no expectation of having it paid back'. As a result, you don't have that loan you can write off each year, which means the whole amount is pure profit. Which means you have to pay taxes on the full amount on that year, but you don't have that loan you can write off as a business expense on following years, meaning you end up 'making' more money, even though you didn't make a dime, because you didn't lose money paying that debt back.

Zombimode

2018-12-10, 05:55 AM

Well, the Kickstarter thing seem to have worked out for Harebrained Schemes. So maybe there are ways to circumvent the Problems using Kickstarter?

houlio

2018-12-10, 07:40 AM

Well, the Kickstarter thing seem to have worked out for Harebrained Schemes. So maybe there are ways to circumvent the Problems using Kickstarter?

While their games were successful, they were also bought by Paradox shortly after the release of Battletech. So, I'm not sure the example works out exactly. AFAIK, Obsidian's kickstarter games were also all successful, but I don't think that would overall guarantee their longevity.

Cikomyr

2018-12-10, 08:27 AM

tl;dr version: taxes suck.

Slightly more complicated, but still ELI5 version:

When you borrow money from investors, it is a debt to them that must be repaid, typically with interest. Similar in concept to going to the bank for a loan. As such, the net income on that borrowing of money is technically negative, because you have to pay it all back and then some. Now, say you promise to pay it back over the next five years. So you have a fiduciary obligation to pay that money back to the guys you borrowed it from. So, when your company does their taxes, they get to write off that loan payment as a business expense, and thus pay fewer taxes.

Kickstarter, however, is just 'I am throwing my money at you, with no expectation of having it paid back'. As a result, you don't have that loan you can write off each year, which means the whole amount is pure profit. Which means you have to pay taxes on the full amount on that year, but you don't have that loan you can write off as a business expense on following years, meaning you end up 'making' more money, even though you didn't make a dime, because you didn't lose money paying that debt back.

There is always the possibility of funding with capital investment. The money appears in your balance sheet as ownership equity, and thus that owner is entitled to a part of the corporation's profits over time. Maybe if you made the Kickstarter a separate entity from the corporation and treated it as a limited partner?

Cikomyr

2018-12-10, 09:36 AM

Rodin

2018-12-10, 11:42 AM

Oooohhhhh.. i just saw the Gamespot video on the game. Something really excited me.

Apparently, some character development will hapoen based on your experience. Example give: if you have been set on fire 5 times in the past hour, the game may offer you the flaw "fear of fire", which gives a debuff near fire, but then you may get an additional perk slot?

This is something I've wanted in a game for, well, forever. It's the big feature that I wish Darkest Dungeon had - that the negatives and positives would all be reflected by that character's personal experiences.

I would love to see this, especially if it happens organically (i.e. it's offered immediately rather than at level-up, or even forced upon you).

ShneekeyTheLost

2018-12-10, 01:28 PM

There is always the possibility of funding with capital investment. The money appears in your balance sheet as ownership equity, and thus that owner is entitled to a part of the corporation's profits over time. Maybe if you made the Kickstarter a separate entity from the corporation and treated it as a limited partner?

No, because then you aren't funding the project, you are simply giving money to the separate entity, with no initial connection to the project. So trying to market it as a kickstarter for the project would be a bait and switch false advertisement, and due to how the SEC works, potentially also investor fraud. The IRS would also be keenly interested in the project, as you've just described a common money laundering tactic.

Erloas

2018-12-10, 01:51 PM

Even if you did that, the holding company would have to pay taxes on all of their income and they wouldn't have any expenses to write off.

There are a lot of games that use "achievements" to give bonuses to characters, that would be an achievement penalty but essentially the same thing. It isn't a bad thing for non-standard character advancement but they tend to be almost a given at some point. As such, I could see unlocking them as you go, but only being able to pick a certain number of them at a given time. Not that you couldn't just have all of them active all the time but it starts to just become background bonuses that aren't noticed soon after.

Completely unrelated, but just started watching another video on the game and it starts with a "distorted and noisy" video feed from some other person. The noise and distortion were unquestionably the result of an analog signal being interfered with, a digital signal would not distort like that. Given how advanced and digital everything else is that doesn't make any sense. Of course that is 100% the kind of thing that would only be noticeable if you know much about electrical signals and noise. But it also belies the age of the developers, you're probably already to the point where a good portion of the population wouldn't recognize that as poor signal because the only place you see that now is being simulated in games and movies because we've entirely moved away from analog displays and video signals in most of the world.
I'm not entirely sure why that jumped out at me watching the video, but it did.

edit: after having finished watching the video
To me it seems more like a cross between Borderlands and Mass Effect. It might have to do with the fact that I've played both of those a lot more than the Fallout games, but that is a stronger comparison to me. The visual design is a lot more interesting than anything I've seen from Fallout 3+. (Not counting 1&2 simply because the technology difference in game design is almost not directly comparable)

OutOfThyme

2018-12-10, 03:35 PM

To me it seems more like a cross between Borderlands and Mass Effect. It might have to do with the fact that I've played both of those a lot more than the Fallout games, but that is a stronger comparison to me. The visual design is a lot more interesting than anything I've seen from Fallout 3+. (Not counting 1&2 simply because the technology difference in game design is almost not directly comparable)Definitely. It's like an intersection between Borderlands (corporate dystopia), Mass Effect (Space exploration in the distant future vibe) and Firefly (jk space is really just the Wild West Pt. 2) in all the right ways. The promo video set precisely the sort of tone that would get me interested.

One thing I'm really happy for looking at GameSpot's First Look is clean interiors.

Clean interiors, people. I'm so happy we have clean interiors.

Cikomyr

2018-12-10, 03:45 PM

Definitely. It's like an intersection between Borderlands (corporate dystopia), Mass Effect (Space exploration in the distant future vibe) and Firefly (jk space is really just the Wild West Pt. 2) in all the right ways. The promo video set precisely the sort of tone that would get me interested.

One thing I'm really happy for looking at GameSpot's First Look is clean interiors.

Clean interiors, people. I'm so happy we have clean interiors.

I so much hated Fallout 3 for insisting the Apocalypse happened 200 years ago, while everything looked liked it happened 2 years ago

Triaxx

2018-12-10, 05:56 PM

I'm guessing that it was there, and jumped out at you, means it will be important.

The_Jackal

2018-12-10, 09:36 PM

tl;dr version: taxes suck.

Slightly more complicated, but still ELI5 version:

When you borrow money from investors, it is a debt to them that must be repaid, typically with interest. Similar in concept to going to the bank for a loan. As such, the net income on that borrowing of money is technically negative, because you have to pay it all back and then some. Now, say you promise to pay it back over the next five years. So you have a fiduciary obligation to pay that money back to the guys you borrowed it from. So, when your company does their taxes, they get to write off that loan payment as a business expense, and thus pay fewer taxes.

Kickstarter, however, is just 'I am throwing my money at you, with no expectation of having it paid back'. As a result, you don't have that loan you can write off each year, which means the whole amount is pure profit. Which means you have to pay taxes on the full amount on that year, but you don't have that loan you can write off as a business expense on following years, meaning you end up 'making' more money, even though you didn't make a dime, because you didn't lose money paying that debt back.

While your longer summary is quite on point, I would like to add some nuance to the TLDR of 'Taxes sucks'. I am not of the opinion that taxes suck, rather that the way the American tax system skews the way businesses operate, and stacks the economic deck in favor of finance is both unjust and inefficient. At risk of getting political, if I were in charge of American tax law, I would shift the burden of taxes to three categories: Waste, Property, and Rents (in the economic sense).

ShneekeyTheLost

2018-12-10, 10:35 PM

While your longer summary is quite on point, I would like to add some nuance to the TLDR of 'Taxes sucks'. I am not of the opinion that taxes suck, rather that the way the American tax system skews the way businesses operate, and stacks the economic deck in favor of finance is both unjust and inefficient. At risk of getting political, if I were in charge of American tax law, I would shift the burden of taxes to three categories: Waste, Property, and Rents (in the economic sense).

Well, yea. Unfortunately, nuance gets left behind in a tl;dr, which was what I was poking fun at.

We could discuss the various merits and overly abundant flaws of the taxation system we currently have in America, but that would be mostly off-topic and probably start wandering into politics at some point.

The larger issue being, of course, that a significant percentage would have just read the tl;dr... and stopped there. And not cared about going any further. It is that shortsightedness, that lack of desire to understand why things are happening, that is a core problem that will... probably do very bad things in the probably not too distant future.

The_Jackal

2018-12-11, 05:40 PM

Well, yea. Unfortunately, nuance gets left behind in a tl;dr, which was what I was poking fun at.

We could discuss the various merits and overly abundant flaws of the taxation system we currently have in America, but that would be mostly off-topic and probably start wandering into politics at some point.

The larger issue being, of course, that a significant percentage would have just read the tl;dr... and stopped there. And not cared about going any further. It is that shortsightedness, that lack of desire to understand why things are happening, that is a core problem that will... probably do very bad things in the probably not too distant future.

Sure. Regardless, the upshot is that I don't think Kickstarter is a good fit for a project as ambitious and time-consuming as a triple-A video game. More to the point, whatever Platonic ideals we may have about how game development should work, it is how it is.

Game Informer has a gameplay trailer, it's not much, but it looks promising to me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3cRpYGVPsU

Things I like the look of: Aiming down sights. This is a big must-have for me in a FPS game, this is an aesthetic component that I feel is mandatory. They've got a slow-time mechanic, which is, I feel, a preferable compromise from the VATS implementation from Fallout 4, where you had slow time, but using it converted your combat results from physics engine to hash table lookup, which I find galling. Some of the combat animations feel a bit inorganic, but it's obviously an early build, so it's possible that will get some love before launch. Even if they don't, nothing I see is a deal-breaker.

Which brings me to wonder: How much open-world/sandbox philosophy does one think might feature in the game? These are elements I enjoy, so I'd be sorry to lose them entirely, though a less perfunctory story would certainly not be unwelcome. Also, I wonder if they'll be as inviting to modders as Bethesda. In any case, it looks like it will be a long year, waiting for RDR2 for PC, and this.

ShneekeyTheLost

2018-12-11, 07:43 PM

Which brings me to wonder: How much open-world/sandbox philosophy does one think might feature in the game? These are elements I enjoy, so I'd be sorry to lose them entirely, though a less perfunctory story would certainly not be unwelcome. Also, I wonder if they'll be as inviting to modders as Bethesda. In any case, it looks like it will be a long year, waiting for RDR2 for PC, and this.

While Bethesda may have been friendly to modders in the past, they seem to be progressing to a less modder-friendly role.

The Content Club, for example, is basically paid mods. I know, it's not precisely paid mods, because Bethesda is putting their stamp on it and so it has a semi-official status above and beyond a 'mod', but let's face it... it's paid mods. Now, I don't strictly object to paying the developers of mods for their work, but I do object to Bethesda getting between the modders and the consumers of mods to mandate it and get a piece of the action. Add to the fact that they've been pushing it, hard, for FO4 and Skyrim, the two titles which make the most sense for the platform, and I become... concerned.

Of course, F76's very nature doesn't lend itself to modding. Now that we're dealing with a multiplayer scenario, game balance is actually a thing to be concerned about. Besides, you'd have to mod the server, in addition to individual clients. It would be like how Minecraft does multiplayer modded, where the mod list between server and clients have to match up. So without a separate launcher or modpacks (which have a somewhat spotty past in the Minecraft community), that's gonna be difficult to do. Did they do it this way on purpose to try to move away from mods? Dunno. Never ascribe to malice that which may be adequately explained by ignorance. Most likely, they weren't thinking about mods when they put it together, which tells you something about their likely stance concerning mods going forward.

In any case, I'm hoping The Outer Worlds is at least as open to modding as most devs lately have been. If not actively helping, then at least not actively resisting it.

The_Jackal

2018-12-11, 10:50 PM

While Bethesda may have been friendly to modders in the past, they seem to be progressing to a less modder-friendly role.

The Content Club, for example, is basically paid mods. I know, it's not precisely paid mods, because Bethesda is putting their stamp on it and so it has a semi-official status above and beyond a 'mod', but let's face it... it's paid mods. Now, I don't strictly object to paying the developers of mods for their work, but I do object to Bethesda getting between the modders and the consumers of mods to mandate it and get a piece of the action. Add to the fact that they've been pushing it, hard, for FO4 and Skyrim, the two titles which make the most sense for the platform, and I become... concerned.

Yeah, totally, because the Zenimax guys look over at Riot Games and Epic rolling in micro-trasaction bucks, and they lose their minds, in spite of the fact that Fallout 4 has made billions. I too don't have problems with developers making money, I approve of it, but the value premise of these products is incredibly, terribly poor. They're selling us potato chips one at a time, instead of just selling the bag, for the sole reason that they think they'll make more money. Well, they might, but they won't get any of it from me.

Of course, F76's very nature doesn't lend itself to modding. Now that we're dealing with a multiplayer scenario, game balance is actually a thing to be concerned about. Besides, you'd have to mod the server, in addition to individual clients. It would be like how Minecraft does multiplayer modded, where the mod list between server and clients have to match up. So without a separate launcher or modpacks (which have a somewhat spotty past in the Minecraft community), that's gonna be difficult to do. Did they do it this way on purpose to try to move away from mods? Dunno. Never ascribe to malice that which may be adequately explained by ignorance. Most likely, they weren't thinking about mods when they put it together, which tells you something about their likely stance concerning mods going forward.

In any case, I'm hoping The Outer Worlds is at least as open to modding as most devs lately have been. If not actively helping, then at least not actively resisting it.

My take on 76 is that there was a bunch of work in the can on coop/multiplayer for Fallout 4, and rather than just spike the project, and write down the loss, they decided to cobble it into a game, and try to flog it on the public, and it has backfired horribly on them. Nothing is more important to a brand than perception of value (not quality, value. You can get away with making bad products if they're cheap enough.) and Fallout 76 has severely hurt that perception.

OutOfThyme

2018-12-12, 09:59 AM

Yeah, totally, because the Zenimax guys look over at Riot Games and Epic rolling in micro-trasaction bucks, and they lose their minds, in spite of the fact that Fallout 4 has made billions. I too don't have problems with developers making money, I approve of it, but the value premise of these products is incredibly, terribly poor. They're selling us potato chips one at a time, instead of just selling the bag, for the sole reason that they think they'll make more money. Well, they might, but they won't get any of it from me.It's worse than that, because they've already sold us the party-size bag of chips, and they're now selling us individual chips.