The Outer Worlds - Combat Gameplay Video

I'm not thrilled by the setting. Corporations run a newly colonized world, meh, kinda boring. Also not into the political aspect of the "evils of capitalism". I disliked the colorful palette of the game from the start, and, I agree with Darth Tagnan's comment earlier, that the more I hear, the less I'm interested.

Okay, who detonated the negatron bomb?

This looks like a mashup of several games with FO3 gameplay. I will wait for the reviews but finding myself bored watching the gameplay videos is not a good sign.

I must admit that after watching the Rage 2 trailer that The Outer Worlds AI seems quite simple in comparison. However the game is not primarily a shooter so I don't expect the world of that particular aspect. Still too soon to say I think.

The problem with making shooter based games is that people will immediately compare them to games that specialize in it. Mass Effect and Alpha Protocol had the same problem. Fallout 3, NV and 4 were also criticized for it, but it was somewhat mitigated by VATS.

It's a bit unfair on those games, just like it would be unfair to compare Skyrim to God of War or Dark Souls. However, "fantasy based action games" are nowhere near as established as shooters, which makes a direct comparison less likely.

When making an RPG with the style of a shooter, I feel they should make the gameplay a bit more distinct, using skills, talents, abilities and so on and so forth. Reduce the shooting aspect in favor of more traditional RPG aspects to shift the focus away from the gameplay of a shooter, to avoid being compared to all the shooters people have played over the years.

As it is, it just looks flat.

I'm certainly not about to write it off entirely. I love me some sci-fi RPG, especially as it's not the most common genre - and I find it helps tremendously to keep your expectations lower rather than higher.

As for the reasons behind the game not being what I would have hoped for, those are utterly irrelevant to me.

Same goes for whether or not it's the largest game they've made in terms of "world-building" if it means less than 40 hours. I mean, that wouldn't even make sense to me.

Either it's what one wants or it's not. Who cares about the whys and hows?

Originally Posted by Darth Tagnan
Watched the first two minutes and my impressions were 100% confirmed. It's not an open world type of game - and it's not going to be about exploring space and so forth.

True, and that's a shame. But it actually was already a safe bet after the first trailer.

Originally Posted by Cacheperl
True, and that's a shame. But it actually was already a safe bet after the first trailer.

Honestly, I tend to not watch a lot of videos or pay much attention to trailers, because that's how I maximize my enjoyment of games. I prefer to know as little as possible about them.

Of course, there are exceptions - but they tend to be for games that I really get excited about - and where I can't quite stay away.

The closer they get to release - and the more they're hyped up, the harder it gets to stay away from news, but I do try.

But, something like this would be a perfect "sleeper" hit for me, personally - if I can manage my expectations. So, it's sort of a trick

That said, I did unfortunately manage to catch a few minutes of the initial reveal - where it was clear that the writing is definitely NOT my cup of tea.

Then again, that only put my expectations even lower - so it might end up helping me

I guess I've gotten a little weird with my hobby here - since I tend to play a lot of tricks to avoid disappointment and optimise enjoyment.

For instance, I've been in a "Star Citizen" blackout for a few months now. I don't intend to follow development anymore - at least not for a long time. I was already way too knowledgable about it - and I really don't want to be sick of the game before it's even launched.

Same goes for Cyberpunk 2077 - which has the potential to be an absolutely amazing game. But, I know from experience that games are never quite as good as you think they are when you reach a certain stage of hype. So, I'd rather not know anything else about it - and I'd rather manage expectations about it. Especially because I was equally hyped for Witcher 3 - and they manage to fuck that up royally in several ways - at least for me.

Anyway - about Outer Worlds - I'm going to do my best to ignore it, and then I'll probably pick it up around release and see for myself. But I know enough already not to expect anything fancy.

Originally Posted by Maylander
The problem with making shooter based games is that people will immediately compare them to games that specialize in it. Mass Effect and Alpha Protocol had the same problem. Fallout 3, NV and 4 were also criticized for it, but it was somewhat mitigated by VATS.

It's a bit unfair on those games, just like it would be unfair to compare Skyrim to God of War or Dark Souls. However, "fantasy based action games" are nowhere near as established as shooters, which makes a direct comparison less likely.

When making an RPG with the style of a shooter, I feel they should make the gameplay a bit more distinct, using skills, talents, abilities and so on and so forth. Reduce the shooting aspect in favor of more traditional RPG aspects to shift the focus away from the gameplay of a shooter, to avoid being compared to all the shooters people have played over the years.

As it is, it just looks flat.

My dream game is a D&D like game but from 1st person perspective.
And it will have the whole range of options a real D&D game should have. And it will be real time with ability to either pause so you can issue orders or slow down like Outer Worlds while you issue orders and cast spells.

Originally Posted by Maylander
The problem with making shooter based games is that people will immediately compare them to games that specialize in it. Mass Effect and Alpha Protocol had the same problem. Fallout 3, NV and 4 were also criticized for it, but it was somewhat mitigated by VATS.

It's a bit unfair on those games, just like it would be unfair to compare Skyrim to God of War or Dark Souls. However, "fantasy based action games" are nowhere near as established as shooters, which makes a direct comparison less likely.

When making an RPG with the style of a shooter, I feel they should make the gameplay a bit more distinct, using skills, talents, abilities and so on and so forth. Reduce the shooting aspect in favor of more traditional RPG aspects to shift the focus away from the gameplay of a shooter, to avoid being compared to all the shooters people have played over the years.

As it is, it just looks flat.

Well, I'm not sure it's as big a problem as one would think - considering the success of games like Fallout 4 and Mass Effect (not Andromeda).

Some people have unreasonable demands because they don't understand the genre they're talking about. The same kan be said for, say, Division - which is "bullet spongey" - but that's on purpose and by design.

Still, it did pretty well - so I don't think it's a big problem that we have a segment of the audience who don't know what the hell they're talking about.

Of course, when it comes to Obsidian - they have a particularly poor track record when it comes to moment-to-moment gameplay and fancy engine stuff.

It's with that in mind that I'm probably more lenient than I would be.

That said, there were a few cases in Alpha Protocol where it went too far in the opposite direction. The infamous drug dealer who could take several magazines straight to the head just put me off in a big way.

Originally Posted by Archangel
My dream game is a D&D like game but from 1st person perspective.
And it will have the whole range of options a real D&D game should have. And it will be real time with ability to either pause so you can issue orders or slow down like Outer Worlds while you issue orders and cast spells.

So if you accept 3rd person instead of 1st person that would be KotoR 1+2.

Originally Posted by Morrandir
So if you accept 3rd person instead of 1st person that would be KotoR 1+2.

Kotor 1+2 are not even close. They are more like 3rd person Neverwinter Knights games.

What I want is more like a Skyrim experience (or Elex) but with proper range of options D&D offers instead of those they implemented into those games.
Make the world smaller as a result but let us do more in it.

I understand most points brought up, and I agree with a few of them. Though I can estimate/guess this game will probably sell a few million more copies then PoE 1&2.

Originally Posted by Archangel
Kotor 1+2 are not even close. They are more like 3rd person Neverwinter Knights games.

Well, I just noticed that these games have the features you mentions (except from 1st person).

Originally Posted by Morrandir
Well, I just noticed that these games have the features you mentions (except from 1st person).

They only have some and only in a very basic way. Also they are very small and confined to small hubs.

Here is the YouTube version of the interview.

The next video interview from yesterday.

Obsidian Isn't Happy With Fans Bashing Bethesda - GameInformer

Urquhart says he's surprised that some people assume the team at Obsidian would know back in 2015 when they started working on The Outer Worlds that the game's announcement would line up with a negative reaction toward Bethesda's Fallout 76 at the end of 2018. "People even said things about our trailer: 'Oh man, just slamming it home to Bethesda!' because we said the original creators of Fallout and makers of Fallout: New Vegas. We have storyboards from July that said that," he says. "I have no ill will for Bethesda, I love playing Fallout games… We’re not fighting for the same dollars."

"This isn’t meant to be negative – it can probably be taken as negative. We really enjoyed making Fallout: New Vegas and people really enjoy Fallout: New Vegas," Urquhart says. "Bethesda is looking to take the Fallout brand in a different direction. There's nothing right or wrong about that. That’s their choice. They own it, they get to do what they want with it. But in our mind, there are people that enjoy where Fallout was. That is what we wanted to do with The Outer Worlds, to give people that. And you know what? Maybe that’s a bad decision from the standpoint of the number of people that will buy it. I don’t know… People seem to really enjoy what Fallout: New Vegas was, so let's give them an experience that's as similar as we can to that."

Originally Posted by Drithius
I'm expecting a blend of Kotor and Jade Empire with a Borderlands aesthetic. It's hard to hope for more given Obsidian's lack of technical experience in creating entirely new 3D worlds.

That wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. I'd be fine with something a little more focused yet still having meaningful player choice. As for the AI, most likely they're still refining it. I wouldn't put much stock in this early view.

Can't wait, should be a very good RPG with Tim and Leonard at the helm. Another day one purchase for me.

Yesterday's Outer Worlds article about Science Weapons - Game Informer

The Outer Worlds isn’t exactly a serious or believable game, but it generally adheres to its own internal logic. Except when it comes to science weapons. These unique items are difficult to find, but thorough explorers who amass a collection of them are treated to a variety of outlandish and entertaining effects. During our time at Obsidian Entertainment, we talked to the team in detail about one of these weapons – the shrink ray – and about how the science weapons in general are implemented in The Outer Worlds.