Dust to Dust
Over 10 years ago, CCP released an EVE-based FPS called Dust 514. An exclusive to the PS3, I was nevertheless intrigued enough to download and play it. The results were… less than ideal. The bones of something were there, but between the decision to be PS3-exclusive and the rather insane competitive environment in which it was released, it had no chance to breathe. Dust 514 was shut down in 2016.
Cue my surprise in 2023 to then receive this email:
I guess technically it should not have been a surprise that the ghost of FPS past has returned. It was not even a year after Dust 514’s original 2013 release that it was potentially getting “rebooted” on PC. Then again, CCP says a lot of things, and its only nine years later that they appear to be on the verge of delivering them. Maybe.
Let me just say, from my perspective, it’s actually a great time to be releasing a FPS. Back in 2013, the competition was at the top of its game: PlanetSide 2, Battlefield 3 & 4, Warframe, Call of Duty: something or other, Borderlands 2, Far Cry 3, Titanfall, and more. A decade later and… I dunno. PlanetSide 2 is still around, but it’s not the same. Battlefield 2042 is a flop and Battlefield V wasn’t good either. Call of Duty still sells millions of copies, but there’s controversy. Look, there are tons of arena-based shooters and Fortnite and whatever, but what I’m saying is that now is probably the best time to try to penetrate the market with something new.
So, CCP, I have subscribed to your newsletter. Just, please don’t immediately slam your dick in a car door agai…
Goddammit, CCP! I mean, OK, maybe that makes sense for early access. Then you pivot, right? Right?
With the model Vanguard is proposing, simply using EVE Online’s existing subscription for access frees up the dev team to focus less on monetization and more on creating the most compelling game possible. […] EVE Online’s creative director Bergur “CCP Burger” Finnbogason called it a “relief” when the team realized the monetization model could be baked into EVE Online’s existing subscription.
While the initial monetization is coming from EVE Online Omega subs, that’s not going to be the end goal for Vanguard. Of course, there will need to be more monetization on top of the sub to keep the development afloat long-term. […]
MMORPG.com
What the literal shit. What the actual fuck. A subscription-based FPS?
I mean, congratulations, I think that might be a first. There are battlepasses galore in this space, but I don’t think anyone had the chutzpah to outright charge $19.99/month to play their FPS. If this was any other company, I would think it silly to assume this monetization strategy would persist outside of Early Access. Leveraging your existing customer base to playtest your new title is Marketing 101.
But this idea is stupid enough that I think CCP will go for it. In which case, I would ask: what was the fucking point? The goal is either to make the EVE tent bigger or extract more dollars from your existing playbase. This accomplishes neither! Maybe there is an angle where you lure the Alpha (F2P) portion of players to pony up money for the real subscription, but that seems really weak.
For now, this is all just prognostication. Maybe upon release, CCP will do the sensible thing and either sell a box or go F2P again with an optional Omega subscription granting battlepass-level benefits. In which case, I will try out Vanguard like I did Dust 514 before it. God knows I’m starving for a more modernized PlanetSide 2 or Battlefield analog that doesn’t suck.
But I’m certainly not going to be subscribing to one.
P.S. NoizyGamer has a good write-up from the EVE side of things.
Mainlining: Wartales
My enthusiasm for gaming has been wanning for the past month or so. Cyberpunk’s expansion has been fantastic, but even at its height, I “only” played for about two hours at a time, maximum. For some reason, I would complete a mission, sit there for a second, and then turn it off and go watch Hearthstone clips on Youtube and/or scroll vids. Nothing was really grabbing me, you feel?
Then I downloaded Wartales off of Game Pass and… goddamn. Four hours a night has never evaporated so fast.
Wartales is medieval, low-fantasy mercenary RPG in the same vein as Battle Brothers. You control a small squad of mercs and endeavor to complete jobs to earn money to feed, pay, and outfit your crew. Combat is turn-based, but everything else takes place in real-time, with merchant caravans, bandits, and packs of hostile wildlife roaming the overland map (or hiding in the woods). A stamina meter acts as a clock to your escapades – requiring your team to camp and eat – but there is no other world-ending deadline like in Battle Brothers. As long as you can keep up with your food and salary, you can take as long as you want to do anything.
I started to type up explanations of the game’s various features, but let me just hit the highlights:
- Granular difficulty – You can toggle the combat and “upkeep” difficulties independently. Additionally, you choose between Free-Roam (scaling enemies) or Region-Locked. The latter mode allows you to over-level an area if you’re having trouble, and makes more sense overall (no max-level peasants afoot).
- Multiple Progression Systems – Gain Knowledge Points to unlock craftable items, learn recipes, gain permanent camp upgrades, and complete repeatable Path “achievements” to unlock more stuff.
- Optimization Galore – Choose talent specializations based on “class,” equip Legendary/unique items with powerful abilities, apply 1-2 of dozens of weapon enhancements, build your perfect merc band.
- Armored HP – Armor gives you an extra HP bar. Simple, grokkable, and you can cheese it in a few ways.
- Play As Bandits – Ambush Merchant caravans and loot all their wares. Run from the fuzz. Or play everything straight… only stealing items otherwise locked behind special currency.
Downsides? There are quite a few:
- Death Spirals – Characters get wounds when reduced to 50% HP, and require expensive medicine to cure. Armor damage also needs purchasable items to repair. Early game is rough going.
- Noob Traps Galore – Choices are everywhere, but some of them are objectively bad (or bugged!). Descriptions alone can be misleading, and there’s no good Wiki info.
- Alpha Strike Focus – inevitable with turn-based combat, but the game seems (im)balanced around killing everyone within 1-2 rounds (if not the first few character turns).
- SAVED GAME BUG – Unpatched as of this post, there’s a bug that can remove a full day’s progress.
The last item in particular is unfortunate, and happened to me. Basically, you save the game as normal, everything seems fine, but next time you open the game it’s like whatever saves you made the previous day do not exist. There is an apparent workaround of making a copy of your saved game folder, but I haven’t confirmed whether it makes a difference (bug hasn’t struck again).
Looking at my /played number though… 60+ hours. Wow. Does this mean Wartales is better than any of the other games that deserved to be playing? No. But it is the game I apparently needed right now.
Past is Prologue
Starfield has been a wild success. Like, objectively: it was the best-selling game in September and has since become the 7th best-selling game for the year. And those stats are based on actual sale figures, unmuddied by Xbox Game Pass numbers. Which is astounding to think about.
[Fake Edit] A success… except in the Game of the Year department. Yikes. It’s at least nominated for Best RPG, along with (checks notes) Lies of P? No more sunlight between RPG-elements and RPG anymore, I guess. Doesn’t matter though, Baldur’s Gate 3 is going to continue drinking that milkshake.
Starfield having so many procedurally-generated planets though, is still a mistake. And its a mistake that Mass Effect: Andromeda took on the chin for all of gamedom a decade ago.
Remember Andromeda? The eagerly-anticipated BioWare follow-up to their cultural phenomenon trilogy? It ended up being a commercial flop, best remembered for terrible facial animations and effectively killing the golden goose. What happened? Procedurally-generated planets. Andromeda didn’t have them, but the (multiple) directors wanted them so badly that they wasted months and years fruitlessly chasing them until there was basically just 18 months left to pump out a game.
You can read the Jason Schreier retrospective (from 2017) for the rest of the story. And in total fairness, the majority of the production issues stemmed from EA forcing BioWare to use the Frostbite engine to create their game. But it is a fact that they spent a lot of time chasing the exploration “dream.”
Another of Lehiany’s ideas was that there should be hundreds of explorable planets. BioWare would use algorithms to procedurally generate each world in the game, allowing for near-infinite possibilities, No Man’s Sky style. (No Man’s Sky had not yet been announced—BioWare came up with this concept separately.)
[…] It was an ambitious idea that excited many people on the Mass Effect: Andromeda team. “The concept sounds awesome,” said a person who worked on the game. “No Man’s Sky with BioWare graphics and story, that sounds amazing.”
That’s how it begins. Granted, we wouldn’t see how No Man’s Sky shook out gameplay wise until 2016.
The irony though, is that BioWare started to see it themselves:
The Mass Effect: Andromeda team was also having trouble executing the ideas they’d found so exciting just a year ago. Combat was shaping up nicely, as were the prototypes BioWare had developed for the Nomad ground vehicle, which already felt way better to drive than Mass Effect 1’s crusty old Mako. But spaceflight and procedurally generated planets were causing some problems. “They were creating planets and they were able to drive around it, and the mechanics of it were there,” said a person who worked on the game. “I think what they were struggling with was that it was never fun. They were never able to do it in a way that’s compelling, where like, ‘OK, now imagine doing this a hundred more times or a thousand more times.’”
And there it is: “it was never fun.” It never is.
I have logged 137 hours in No Man’s Sky, so perhaps it is unfair of me to suggest procedural exploration is never fun. But I would argue that the compelling bits of games like NMS are not the exploration elements – it’s stuff like resource-gathering. Or in games like Starbound, it’s finding a good skybox for your base. No one is walking around these planets wondering what’s over the next hill in the same way one does in Skyrim or Fallout. We know what’s over there: nothing. Or rather, one of six Points of Interest seeded by an algorithm to always be within 2km walking distance of where you land.
Exploring a procedurally generated world is like reading a novel authored by ChatGPT. Yeah, there are words on a page in the correct order, but what’s the point?
Getting back to Starfield though, the arc of its design followed almost the reverse of Andromeda. In this sprawling interview with Bruce Nesmith (lead designer of Skyrim and Bethesda veteran), he talked about how the original scope was limited to the Settled Systems. But then Todd Howard basically pulled “100 star systems” out of thin air and they went with it. And I get it. If you are already committed to using procedural generation on 12 star systems, what’s another 88? A clear waste of time, obviously.
And that’s not just an idle thought. According to this article, as of the end of October, just over 3% of Xbox players have the “Boots on the Ground” achievement that you receive for landing on 100 planets. Just thinking about how many loading screens that would take exhausts me. Undoubtedly, that percentage will creep up over time, but at some point you have to ask yourself what’s the cost. Near-zero if you already have the procedural generation engine tuned, of course. But taking that design path itself excludes things like environmental storytelling and a richer, more tailored gaming experience.
Perhaps the biggest casualty is one more felt than seen: ludonarrative. I talked about this before with Starfield, but one of the main premises of the game is exploring the great unknown. Except everything is already known. To my knowledge, there is not a single planet on any system which doesn’t have Abandoned Mines or some other randomly-placed human settlement somewhere on it. So what are we “exploring” exactly? And why would anyone describe this game as “NASApunk” when it is populated with millions of pirates literally everywhere? Of course, pirates are there so you don’t get too bored exploring the boring the planets, which are only boring because they exist.
Like I said at the top, Starfield has been wildly successful in spite of its procedural nonsense. But I do sincerely hope that, at some point, these AAA studios known for storytelling and/or exploration stop trying to make procedural generation work and just stay in their goddamn lane. Who out here is going “I really liked Baldur’s Gate 3, so I hope Larian’s next game is a roguelike card-battler”? Whatever, I guess Todd Howard gets a pass to make his “dream game” after 25 years. But as we sleepwalk into the AI era, I think it behooves these designers to focus on the things that they are supposedly better at (for now).
We learn from our mistakes eventually, right? Right?
Epic Whims
Epic is in court again, this time facing off with Google. And during the testimony, it was admitted that the Epic Game Store is still not profitable. Not sure of the current figures, but they had lost $330 million back in 2021. That is not always a bad thing for tech companies, who typically operate under a “if you build it, they will come” fantasy funded entirely by rich gamblers who hope to get cheap shares of the next Facebook. Still, even Epic thought their storefront would be profitable by 2023.
Interestingly though, Epic is not being funded by venture capitalists per se. They are being funded by their ridiculous, beyond-all-comprehension wildly successful Fortnite money:
When Fortnite launched in 2017, Epic was a 500-person company—known primarily for producing the Gears of War franchise and creating the industry-leading game development software, Unreal Engine. It was booking about $100 million per year in revenue. A year later, Epic made a staggering $5.6 billion in revenue. Ninety-seven percent of it was from Fortnite.
[…] According to Forbes estimates, the Cary, North Carolina-brd developer posted revenues of more than $6 billion in 2022, with the vast majority still coming from Fortnite.
Forbes (paywall)
I knew Fortnite was successful, but part of me still imagined that the Unreal engine was most of what sustained the company. That does not appear to be the case.
My question is: how long can this go on? I mean, on the one hand the Fortnite money machine is still printing. And, hey, Uber has been around for 9 years and only became profitable a few months ago. But we’ve also seen Epic lay off 16% of their staff this year and divest themselves of Bandcamp and other properties. Clearly, sustainability is a concern.
With that backdrop in mind, will they continue dropping free games every Thursday through 2024?
Beyond the freebies, this is relevant to my interests because of all the (timed) exclusives too. Dead Island 2 is still not available on Steam, and likely won’t be until next April. While the Epic Games Store has improved over the years – they have had wishlists and shopping carts for at least two whole years now! – exclusivity equals higher prices for longer. Who knew? Some of that is changing a little, as it seems Fanatical and Humble are selling an EGS key for Dead Island 2, but that’s just 1 of 2 listed key sellers to the dozens of Steam alternatives.
Not that I’m hurting for games, of course. But I do want to play Dead Island 2.
Cyberpunk Appreciation
Absence (and a shit-load of updates) really have made me fonder of Cyberpunk 2077.
My second attempt at the game started from remembering how fun the movement was – specifically, being able to just push aside NPCs while running. It seems like such a tiny little detail in the scheme of things, but not only is it an insanely good quality-of-life measure whose lack immediately gets felt in other games, pushing NPCs around also makes them more real. It is the difference between walking through tall grass in a game and seeing the blades bend, rather than a 2D texture awkwardly rotate.
Coming from Starfield, the dialog and general interaction is also miles beyond. I’m not going to say Cyberpunk has ruined other RPGs for me, but even the other best examples in Baldur’s Gate 3 and the Mass Effect series seem… almost immobile in comparison. To say nothing about the stiff talking heads of Starfield and other Bethesda games. Come 2024, if your RPG doesn’t have Idris Elba casually stepping over a chair for no reason while relaying quest details, what the fuck are you even doing?
I also appreciate the ability to exit conversations by just walking away. I occasionally employ that IRL.
So, yeah, overall I am having a blast. We’ll have to see if I maintain the momentum to reach the endgame, as currently I am just doing all the new expansion stuff. The whole Johnny angle never really appealed to me and I burned myself out doing side-quests as a result. Will history repeat itself? Does it even matter if it does? Stay tuned.
Night (City) and Day
Sometimes it ends up being the little things.
I was playing Starfield last week and wanted to rest in my bed (10% XP boost) before exiting my ship. Except one of my companions was standing inside the cockpit hatch. I literally couldn’t move past them. It wasn’t quite as bad as this, but it was close. “Why can’t I just sort of shove past them like in Cyberpunk 2077? That always felt satisfying.”
About an hour later, I was patching Cyberpunk and bought the Phantom Liberty DLC.
Granted, I was always planning to go back to Cyberpunk eventually, especially after the Skill revamp in 2.0. But let me tell you: being able to walk through a crowd of NPCs and not constantly be collisioned is exactly as satisfying as I remembered. And also reading random notes left on tables. And being able to have ammo. And having interesting dialog, set pieces, weapons, item modifiers, plot. You know, the “little things.”
I’ll probably be back to Starfield eventually. Bethesda also says Starfield will be supported for “years to come.” Cool. So… I guess I’ll see you in a few years then. Meanwhile, there are better games to play.
Incentivizing Morality
In the comments of my last post, Kring had this to say:
In an RPG I don’t think there should be a game mechanic rewarding “the correct way” to play it. The question isn’t why aren’t we all murder-hoboing through a game where you can be everything. The question is, if you can be anything, why would you choose to be a murder-hobo?
In the vast majority of games, “the good path” is incentivized by default. This usually manifests in terms of a game’s ending, which sees the hero and his/her scrappy teammates surviving and defeating the antagonist when enough altruistic flags are raised. Conversely, being selfish and/or evil typically results in a bad ending where the hero possibly dies, or becomes just as corrupt as the original antagonist, and most of the party members have abandoned you (or been killed). It’s almost a tautology that way – the good path is good, the bad path is bad.
Game designers usually layer on addition incentives for moral play though. The classical trope is when the hero saves the poor village and then refuses to accept the reward… only to be given a greater reward later (or sometimes immediately). I have often imagined a hypothetical game in which the good path is not only unrewarding, but actively punished. How betrayed do you think players would feel if doing good deeds resulted in the bad guy winning and all your efforts come to naught? It would probably be as unsatisfying in such a game as it is IRL.
Incentives are powerful things that guide player behavior. And sometimes these incentives can go awry.
Bioshock is an example of almost archetypal game morality. As you progress through the game, you are given the choice of rescuing Little Sisters or harvesting them to consume their power. While that may seem like an active tradeoff, the reality is that you end up getting goodies after rescuing three Little Sisters, putting you about on par with where you would have been had you harvested them. By the end of the game, the difference in total power (ADAM resource) is literally about 8%. Meanwhile, if you harvest even one (or 2?) Little Sister, you are locked into the bad ending.
An example of contrary incentives comes from Deus Ex: Human Revolution. In this one, you are given the freedom of choosing several different ways to overcome challenges. For example, you can run in guns blazing, sneak through ventilation shafts, and/or hack computers. The problem is the “and/or.” When you perform a non-lethal takedown, for example, you get some XP. You also get XP for straight-up killing enemies. But what if you kill someone you already rendered unconscious with a non-lethal takedown? Believe it or not, extra XP. Even worse, the hacking minigame allows you to earn XP and resources whereas acquiring the password to unlock the device gives nothing. The end result is that the player is incentivized to knock out enemies, then kill them, search everywhere for loot but ignore passwords/keys so you can hack things instead, and otherwise be the most schizophrenic spy ever.
Does DE:HR force you to play that way? Not directly. Indeed, it has a Pacifist achievement as a reward for sticking just to non-lethal takedowns. But forgoing the extra XP means you have less gameplay options for infiltrating enemy bases for a longer amount of time, which can result in you pigeonholing yourself into a less fun experience. How else could you discover the joy that is throwing vending machines around with your bare augmented hands without having a few spare upgrades?
Speaking of less fun experiences, consider Dishonored. This is another freeform stealth game where you are given special powers and let loose to accomplish your objective as you choose. However, if you so happen to choose lethal takedowns too many times, the environment becomes infested with more hostile vermin and you end up with the bad ending. I don’t necessarily have an issue with the enforced morality system, but limiting oneself to non-lethal takedowns means the majority of weapons (and some abilities) in the game are straight-up useless. This leads you to tackle missions in the exact same way every time, with no hope of getting any more interesting abilities, tools, or even situations.
I bring all this up to answer Kring’s original question: why choose to be the murder hobo in Starfield? Because that’s what the game designers incentivized, unintentionally or not. Bethesda crafted a gameplay loop that:
- Makes stealth functionally impossible
- Makes non-lethal attacks functionally impossible
- Radically inflates the cost of ammo
- Severely limits inventory space
- Gates basic character functions behind the leveling system
- Has Persuasion system ran by hidden dice rolls
- Feature no lasting consequences of note
Does this mean you have to steal neutral NPCs’ spaceships right from under them and pawn it lightyears away? Or pickpocket every named NPC you encounter? No, you don’t. Indeed, some people would suggest that playing that way is “optimizing the fun out of the game.”
But here’s the thing: you will end up feeling punished for most of the game, because of the designer-based incentives not aligning with your playstyle. In every combat encounter – which will be the primary source of all credits and XP in the game regardless of how you play1 – you will be acutely aware of how little ammo you have left, switching to guns that you don’t like and also take longer to kill enemies with, being stuck with smaller spaceships that perform worse in the frequent space battles, and don’t offer quality of life features you will enjoy having. Sinking points into the Persuasion system will make those infrequent opportunities more successful, but those very same points mean you have less combat or economic bonuses which, again, will leave you miserable in the rest of the game.
Can you play any way you want in Starfield in spite of that? Sure. Well… not as a pacifist. Or someone who sneaks past enemies. Or talks their way out of every combat encounter. But yes, you can avoid being a total murder hobo. You can also turn down the graphical settings to their lowest level and change the resolution to 800×600 to roleplay someone with vision problems. Totally possible.
My point is that gameplay incentives matter. Game designers don’t need to create strict moral imperatives – in fact, I would prefer they didn’t considering how Dishonored felt to play – but they should take care to avoid unnecessary friction. Imagine if Deus Ex: Human Revolution did not award extra XP for killing unconscious NPCs, and using found passwords automatically gave you all the bonus XP/resources that the hacking game offers. Would the game get worse or more prescriptive? No! If anything, it expands the roleplaying opportunities because you are no longer fighting the dissonance the system inadvertently (or sloppily) creates.
In Starfield’s case, I’m a murder hobo because the game doesn’t feel good to play any other way. But at the root of that feeling, there lies a stupidly simple solution:
- Let players craft ammo.
That’s it. Problem solved – I’d hang up my bloody hobo hat tomorrow.
Right now the outpost system is a completely pointless, tacked-on feature. If you could craft your own ammo though, suddenly everyone wants a good outpost setup, which means players are flying around and exploring planets to find these resources. Once players have secured a source of ammo, credits become less critical. This removes the incentives for looting every single gun from every single dead pirate, which means less time spent fighting the awful inventory and UI. With that, being a murder hobo is more of a lifestyle choice rather than a dissonance you have to constantly struggle against.
That’s a lot of words to essentially land on leveraging the Invisible Hand to guide player behavior. And I know that there will be those that argue that incentives are irrelevant or unnecessary, because players always have the choice to play a certain way even if it is “suboptimal.” But I would say to you: why play that game? Unless you are specifically a masochist, there are much better games to roleplay as the good guys in than Starfield. You can do it, and there are good guy choices to make, but even Bethesda’s other games are infinitely better. And that’s sad. Let’s hope that they (or mods, as always) turn it around.
- I have read some blogs that suggest you can utilize the outpost system to essentially farm resources, turn them into goods to vendor, which nets both credits and crafting XP. So, yeah, technically you don’t have to rely on combat encounters for credits. However, you can’t progress through the story this way, and I’m not sure that using outposts in this fashion is all that functionally different from simply stealing everything. ↩︎
Murder Hobo
In Starfield, I roleplay exclusively as a murder hobo. Oddly enough, Wikipedia has an entry on that:
murderhobo (plural murderhobos or murderhoboes)
- (roleplaying games, derogatory or humorous) A character who wanders the gameworld, unattached to any community, indiscriminately killing and looting.
I was reflecting on this the other day. I found myself on a planet and inexplicably, irrationally, exploring. Everything is procedurally generated, there is zero environmental storytelling, and the payout for fully scanning a planet is not even remotely worth your time. But… I do it occasionally. So there I was, walking towards a Point of Interest, and then a ship landed nearby. These are technically a random encounter, but the ships often leave the area stupidly quickly, making you wonder why Bethesda bothered programming them in.
So, I zip over there fast as I can, expecting some pirate action. Instead, they were neutral NPCs. I talk to them, they say they are low on supplies, and ask for some water. I give it to them. Then I check out their ship. Lockpick my way past the hatch, empty their cargo hold of cash and valuables, and then… look at the captain chair. Then I sit in the captain chair and blast off into space. A few menu screens later, I land the ship in New Atlantis, register it, sell it, and then fast travel back to the planet I was exploring originally.
In the abstract, I think this sequence was literally the most psychopathic thing I have ever done in a (non-Rimworld) videogame. This small group of people landed on an uncharted planet, desperate for supplies. A random passerby graciously gave them water. Then, moments later, they had to watch as their only means of survival is stolen out from under them. They are literally stranded on a desolate planet with no breathable atmosphere, no shelter, no hope.
Also, no consequences.
Now, obviously that is the problem here. I do not usually murder hobo my way through Baldur’s Gate 3, or Cyberpunk 2077, or Mass Effect, or really most other games. I was thinking about that though: why don’t I? What is enough of a consequence to augment my behavior? Some kind of automatic karma penalty like in Fallout? That often led to some arguably more murder hobo-ish behavior insofar that stealing from “bad guy” was apparently worse than just killing him and taking the now-ownerless items. Companion dissatisfaction? That can certainly be annoying, especially when you want to be a bit more “Renegade” in your dialog choices. Often though, this can be gamed by simply selecting different companions, doing what you wanted to do, and then swapping them back in once you’re done.
Honestly, I think it comes down to the possibility of accountability. I do not know every permutation to your choices in Baldur’s Gate 3, but I have read enough posts and interviews to know that characters you interact with in Act 1 may or may not show up in Act 2 and Act 3 based on your actions. That leads one to a different posture when it comes to negotiations; the more people survive, the more possible quest givers exist for the late-game. This requires a certain level of detail though, which is not always possible in a more sandbox-lite environment.
One method I would like to see though, is almost a metagame appeal to empathy. Every named NPC in Starfield carries 800-1200 credits, which is kind of a lot for how easy it is to pickpocket them. If you lose the roll, you get caught, and have to Quick Load your way out of consequence. But if you succeed… nothing happens other than credits in your pocket. What if NPCs had dialog lamenting their loss of credits? About how they won’t be able to make rent payments? What if they asked other NPCs (or even you) for help looking for a lost Credstick or whatever? What if that group of now-stranded civilians put out a mayday asking for rescue? Or really just a personal appeal to return their ship?
Sometimes being a murder hobo is its own reward, but often I think it is just a natural consequence of game incentives/lack of disincentives combined with a failure of immersion. If NPCs don’t matter, it doesn’t matter what happens to them. You can make them matter using elaborate penalty systems or story hooks, or make them matter by making them “real” enough to care about.
Or maybe this is all just me, and I have a bit of the Dark Urge IRL.
In An Age 
Fallout TV
Dec 4
Posted by Azuriel
A new teaser trailer was released for the upcoming Amazon-funded Fallout TV show, and it looks… good? Possibly amazing?
Show is starting April 14th, 2024.
To be fair, I have watched pretty much zero TV adaptions. Not Halo, not Wheel of Time, not The Last of Us, not Twisted Metal (?!). I guess I did watch two seasons of The Witcher and thought it was pretty good. Yeah, yeah, and I guess Game of Thrones.
Anyway, what I like about the Fallout trailer is that it hits on the irreverence of the game. Cool scene of the Brotherhood of Steel flying away in vertibirds… and it ends with the goofy bobbly head of a Power Armor suit. You’re left wondering if the armor is supposed to be impressive or obviously impractical or what. (Answer: Yes) Then you got some shots of the ultra-violence, some comedic timing, older music playing over nuclear explosions. That’s Fallout.
Can’t wait.
Posted in Commentary
2 Comments
Tags: Adaption, Fallout, Fallout TV, Trailer