Joshua Sawyer's lack of involvement really hurt the game (he did some balancing according to his Tumblr, that's it). He's a gun nut, which also explains why the weapons are so mediocre compared to what NV had. It's a good game, but it's not New Vegas. It doesn't even have throwable grenades!
Pendant Blade that’s not exactly true. Josh’s own twitter says:”almost everything i know about firearms was information i learned during the development of fallout: new vegas. i did not grow up around guns & had no training prior to deciding to research them. an incredible amount of information is available even if you're not in the US.” I don’t know where you got your info from, but he probably became a gun but after development on New Vegas. It’s something anyone of them at Obsidian could’ve learned about. And New Vegas itself has way too many weapons that most became too useless.
@@breakingpoint252 Yes, this does not disprove that he wasn't a gun nut. He knew his weapons because of his research and implemented it well. I disgaree there are guns that become useless later on. Perks like Grunt makes early game guns like the service rifle and 9mm handguns viable. A souped varmint rifle can last you till midgame. The only guns I think become obsolete are the .22 pistol and SMG. OW has only three ammo types and by the end of Edgewater, you have literally thousands of ammo. There is no ammo variation, because the guns are the variation making them far less flexible. Yes the shooting is improved over all, but the depth in firearms disminished.
Pendant Blade true but he still had to learn first before he worked on the weapons and even then it’s not like he was the only one who had to study weapons. Some weapons are ofc usable but there are a few that just seem pointless with the amount of automatic rifles and pistols and SMGs and shotguns it’s like why do you need more than one type of shotgun when you have the riot shotgun or even the lever action That’s understandable but you have to keep in mind that this is a low budget game so they can’t add too many different weapons, and there’s not much wrong with that ammo design because heavy, light, and energy all serve their own purposes to their weapons. I wouldn’t say depth is diminished. The science weapons and special weapons offer a lot of variety in how you can approach situations
@@breakingpoint252 Fair. There's different rifles because they serve different roles. It's also a maintenance issue. Revolvers go from .357 to .44 to. .45-70. Each type of ammo is more powerful and rare. Whether its viable to carry a hunting revolver is dependent if you're wealthy enough to not only afford ammo but also maintenance. Some players gamble w/ high LUK and have lots of money, some don't. Some are veterans who can get a powerful .44 early on, some are newbie sticking to 9mm to the end of the game. Apply this to all weapon types and it works. The problem with OW is its waaaay too easy. Even on supernova, it' easy enough to amass ammo and upgrades. Buying better gear is replaced by throwing money at a weapon until it gets better. It may work in a game like RE4 but it doesn't in OW. Perks in OW are also equally shallow, with most being + upgrades. In NV, you can literally specialise by being a cowboy which encourages a playstyle. Overall, I don't think OW is a bad game, but it plays far too safely.
NV only had better weapons if you care about aesthetics more than how the gunplay feels. NV was severely held back by Gamebryo. NV, 3, and 4 just do not have good feeling combat and the game basically relied on VATS. Comparatively the time dilation in the Outer Worlds feels mostly optional.
I played a more diplomatic playthrough the first time. The second time I murdered everyone on sight, and I was as hostile/disagreeable as I could be. I got the good ending both times.
Yeah, this whole video was just a comparison video. Not as big as odyssey and fallout 4. Marvel movie video game. Fallout in space. He needs to focus on the game. The lack of good characterization, the lack of perks and differentiation within the actual choices you make with little to no impact. The lack of world building and unique moments in the game. Nothing in this game did anything uniquely good. Just a decent rpg after a long history of not great rpgs in the last 4 years.
Yet they exploited the shit out of the Fallout comparisons in marketing. You can't have it both ways. And ANY of the Fallouts shit on the Outer Worlds, even Fallout 4.
@@mwjgcreeves4984 I can’t be convinced this game stands up to fallout 4, I liked it but the lack of cool stuff to find or stuff to build is quite apparent when compared to fallout.
I struggle with this game. I enjoy the writing and most of the characters presented. I enjoy the bleak corporatist atmosphere delivered. But the RPG elements underscoring the narrative and environments are so laughably mediocre that it makes me second guess how much I actually like this game. Skill point lvling system, interesting concept but nearly none of the point thresholds feel meaningful in any way, detracting from my attachment to how I want to build my character. Perks, lots of em but they are all just boring, tired flat percentage/numerical increases to stats. Fun. Weapon variety is pitiful, gun and armor customization is pitiful. That being said, I had a good time with this game. Will I do another playthrough? No. This game is missing some je ne sais quoi, it feels like a title that was capitalizing on a void in the market in the most non-committal way.
After playing underrail i cant bring myself to playing games like outerworlds, where combat is so flat, shallow and perks are just numerical values that doesnt actually change anything. It honestly feels like the perks are what the skills should have done, they simply increase damage, so why are the skills there at all? They only increase in effectiveness every 25th level so its essentially just another perk point.
It's funny u bring up underrail. I just added that to my wishlist before cuz it looks so similar to fallout. Can't wait to play it later when I can buy it
I feel like this is a really fair critical video, it’s shallow, it ends abruptly, has cut content or things that should’ve been more fleshed out, but it’s just so filled with love with great characters and humour with a fun world to explore
The story in this game is an utter sellout and I have no idea how people can praise it. The joke of the bumbling and useless mega corporation that the writers try to beat you over the head with for the entire 20-hour duration of the game wears out its welcome well before even the mid section of the first planet. It's even becomes tiring to read the various terminals after awhile because of how this dead horse gets beaten. In reality, corporations with such power over an entire solar system would have an insane amount of resources to divert to learning how to manipulate the human populace, and they would not be bumbling, but insidiously cunning in their means, covertly controlling all public institutions, mass media, and even directing the ultimate path of human language towards their own advancement.
The people that praise it are also the same people that hate everything Bethesda does (regardless of it its justified such as Fallout 76, or if its not even done by Bethesda such as ESO) and join the bandwagon. So many touted The Outer Worlds as "A sci-fi fallout and the Bethesda Fallout killer", which 76 kind of already did (at least until the next main line game comes and people fanboy that too). I think overhype and comparisons to Fallout are why it feels so off and mediocre. It copies certain aspects, some better some not as well, but doesn't innovate or take chances.
I've definitely found this game shallow in the rpg elements and it's similarity to fallout hurts it more than helps and the combat is totally bare bones , but overall am enjoying it. EDIT: 2 weeks after writing this I returned it because the game is mediocre garbage
@@TheSpectralForce yeah I don't really know what keeps me coming back honestly. I really thought this game would be more immersive but I guess I'm OK with fallout with not terrible writing
@@castrochris94 Same here! I think it's the characters and the writing that keep pulling me back. Every last NPC I encountered was interesting and charming. Even the ones who are supposed to be douchebags (_wink_)
@@FirstLast-qm4ye I think it could be considered a nice foundation for eventual development. At least I hope so - the blueprints for something really great is there, and considering TOW has been kinda successful, I expect they get the chance to develop things more later. As is, it is a good game. Sequels could potentially be great.
Your being quite dis-honest when you say Fallout New Vegas was built in 18 months and Outer Worlds in 3 years. The 18 months Fallout NV had started with a completed (albeit incredibly flawed) engine, with most of the systems being holdovers from Fallout 3. The 3 years for the Outer Worlds was built in Unreal, but all the systems had to be developed from the ground up. Outer Worlds was a new IP with a new world and new concepts to be ironed out, New Vegas had a lot of its ideas taken from Interplay's cancelled Fallout 3 in a existing established world. Not saying your wrong about the length, but I am saying that neither of those numbers really mean anything on their own as context makes it clear they are not comparing the same thing.
@@wyrdplae8586 Its very common knowledge that New Vegas reuses Fallout 3's engine and assets and that the Outer World's had to be built from the world building stages (by the very nature of it being a new IP) undermines him comparing the development time number he used to him his point it, I do conced it could be Hanlon's Razor, but doubt he didn't know NV reused assets or Outer World was a new IP.
@Dark Legionnaire What????? It's ok to dislike the game or any game but how is the game you see before you a Mass effect clone that sounds very ridiculous. Just by watching the current video and a video of Mass effect you can see they are two very distinct games the only similarity is that they are in space.A more apt comparison would probably be it being A "Fallout Rip-off" or even a "Borderlands Rip-off" but for "Mass Effect Rip-off" I'm just confused dude what are you even talking about. Also by "Bethesda helping them the whole time" do you mean the game is only good because the engine because as far as I know besides allowing it and providing the engine and a speedy deadline they weren't really that involved,but maybe I'm wrong?
@Dark Legionnaire Stolen assets don't make it a clone and many RPGs have the same companion control commands. My point was more that the gameplay ends up being more like a bad version of borderlands with a kind of looter shooter vibe then Mass effect. Don't get me wrong though I am no obsidian fanboy I have my own criticisms of the game I feel like a lot of it was rushed. Their is little depth except for every npc standard line "Can you do me a favor".The faction system is fairly meaningless and it is easy to get everyone to like you,the game has a super short runtime even after every quest,The combat and looting gets repetitive and annoying quickly due to a lack of loot variety except food holy Fuck their is so much meaningless food,and the story is a fairly linear one.The game still has its positives with pretty good character writing and a fairly decently built up world,it feels like this is gonna be one of those games where it is simply building up for a sequel,though.So I'm not giving it a "Bethesda-level pass" Pass I just didn't think the criticisms giving before were all that clear or really even true,I still have my own issues with the game and probably won't go back to play it again.Also yes I have Played Wasteland 2(Did you know they are currently making Wasteland 3 I'm p hyped for that!!). It is a really good game and I love it. I have also played Planescape:Torment,Baldur's Gate 1 and 2,The original two Fallouts,and,Mass Effect 1-Andromeda,Dragon Age:Origins (Didn't really like Inquisition), and Vampire the Masquerade,but I don't see what me playing Wasteland 2 has to do with anything I'm sorry. If you want to send me underrail go ahead it sounds like a good game and that is very kind of you but I get the vibe you are only saying that because you are thinking of me as new too the genre witch I am not. I just kind of think the clone accusation isn't a very good criticism. Like you could consider Terraria a clone of Minecraft because I'm both games you are granted immense freedom to build and craft in a randomly generated world. That doesn't make either a bad game. The sci-fi theme of Mass Effect isn't even that similar either.In Mass Effect it is drawing a lot more from Star Trek and with Outer World's it seems to be inspired by pulp fiction serials and Firefly.So yes they are both sci-fi games where you fly around on a ship but that is a very generic concept and besides that they are pretty different,story-wise and gameplay-wise.I say it is more of a Fallout clone because the plot is basically Fallout 1's again where you have to find the Macguffin to save your fellow Vault Dwell....... Oh sorry I mean The Hope's inhabitants and for the gameplay it goes from the open world stylings of Fallout 3-76 to a much more poorly done Borderlands. Those are more reasons for comparison to those games but your comparison to Mass Effect just felt shallow to me.And last but not least if we are recommending games here try out Disco Elysium I think that is probably the best rpg of that decade not Outer World's like you are assuming I am. I'd give OW a 5.5/10 and Disco Elysium a 9.9/10.It is a great game that really sucks you in to the story and makes you think deep about things. That has little to do with anything but it's just such a good game that more people need to play.
@Dark Legionnaire Also why you Soo angry lol I just wanted clarification I don't like the game much either I just didn't understand what you were going on about. Notice how I commented to only you and no one else who expresses dislike to the the game.I'm not just some fanboy getting ANGRRRRRY over any criticism I just don't see the basis of yours.
I like the game but it feels like it's missing something compared to fallout 1 and new vegas, some of that magic is missing, the world and characters are simply not very interesting at least for me.
My issue with the game is that the opening act on the first planet is by far the best part of the game. The game allowed me to "play the long game". I got to screw over the rebel faction to complete my objective, then I got to go into the rebel camp and convince their leader to take over the town (because she would've been far better at it, even without her knowledge of how to fertilize crops), and then convinced the main guy to step down as if he loved the company so much, he should see that the best people be put in charge of protecting it and its bottom line. The game was never as good as those moments again. Every quest I did afterwards didn't feel so rewarding. Every quest afterwards didn't seem to offer me as many interesting alternatives. They were all "straight forward" and the best I could do was just hack my way around an obstacle, unlock a door around an obstacle, or talk my way around an obstacle. Which... to be honest... is nice... but sort of dull when it doesn't do anything except let you progress. Likewise, I liked that the game would let me betray the guy who woke me up... but then it starts the massive list of contrivances to keep me from actually doing it. "Oh, you know where he is? Fill out this form. Then, it goes up the ladder of bureaucracy to the next step". Oh, I can turn him in to the official at the embassy, he has the authority! But, his stamper is missing. I have to get it back. So, I buy it back, he stamps the form, then tells me to move along to the next planet so that I can have an official official look at it and decide what to do about it. So, I get annoyed and go to the guy's hide-out for the first time in forever... and he has locked himself behind doors I cannot access at all, so I can't even shoot him in the face. This, inevitably tells me that he's been listening to me the entire time and just faking that the transmitter is broken. At which point... I'm just bored with the game. I was so bored with the game, in fact, that I killed an entire town of people on Monarch for no reason other than the game let me. I didn't save it, but I did put the game down. The problem with the game is that there's just... not much here. The perks are fairly "lack luster". The only ones I cared about were the carry weight ones. The gunplay is fairly bland (aside from the early game where I had to use cover because the starting weapons and armor are garbage and you don't have enough money to upgrade them to God-Tier) and I stand out in the open and just plink everyone with a shotgun until they die with way too many medical inhaler things to back me up. Likewise, so many quests have a distinct lack of "resolution". You do what meager thing they want you to do, nothing really comes of it, and you just get XP and get paid. Likewise, the companions don't really talk all that much except the first two you get, and nobody really offers anything of interest except the first one. Overall, the game is just... shallow? I don't know. It's hard to put into words. It feels like there's not much content. It feels like what I can do is rather dull. It feels like my skills don't really matter all that much except to gatekeep me from specific dialogue options. It feels like the game loses direction and coherency after the first planet. I feel like I'm "wandering aimlessly" too much. I also don't feel a rush of excitement when I level up either. For a while, I was holding onto three separate level ups just because I didn't need any skills at the time and didn't have any idea what two perks I wanted. I eventually used them when I ran into an NPC that required I have a specific number in a specific stat in order to use a specific dialogue option. Even the act of obtaining loot was rendered meaningless to me as I've got about 3,000 shotgun rounds at any given moment and 6,000 energy rounds at any given moment. I have so many "mods" for my weapons and armor that I'll never use, 'cause all I had to do was pick some good equipment and then just dump money into it to make it amazing without mods. It's not even like the game feels "too easy". I mean, I enjoyed Fallout New Vegas despite how utterly easy it was to break the hell out of that game and become overpowered by Level 8 (able to easily murder Death Claws and Cazadores, even on Survival Difficulty). It's just that this game feels like there's not much here. It feels like everything I try to engage in just sort of "peters out" with no real resolution of any kind, or even a conclusion. Just a cursory, "okay, we're done here" and the game never speaks of it again. To which I just think, "Oh, um... Okay... I guess I gotta go find something new to do now?" It certainly doesn't help that there are so many buildings you can't even enter in the game. So many doors that can't be opened. Or, if you do open them, the interiors are boring with next to no Lore on the area. Early in the game, there's a geothermal plant you go to, it's got a bunch of robots running amuck. The most lore you get out of it? "Corporate gave us these new robots, told us not to muck about with them, and then they killed everyone". Do you ever find a reason for it? I didn't. My best guess was the robots were defective or Corporate wanted the colony destroyed for some reason. The game is filled with stuff like that. Just... Lore that serves no purpose, doesn't flesh out anything, and goes nowhere. Much of it is even completely devoid of personality. For example, in New Vegas, I remember the Vault where they had to elect people to die every year, so it got super political. I remember the two major players in that. Not their names, but who they were as people. The lady who had her husband murdered and she plotted murders to get elected, then changed the computer system so nobody could ever have a political stranglehold again. Then, the other guy who wanted to hold onto his power and plotted to overthrow the whole Vault by controlling the water and power. I remember them both. Even their voices. But, in the Outer Worlds? I pick up audio logs and have no idea who these people are, nor do I care. They have no personality and are interchangeable with everyone else. I don't know. The game is good for about 10 hours, and drastically declines after that.
I really didn't see much difference between Adelaide running Edgewater and running the Botanical Labs when she either ousts out the pro-corporate folks in one and refuses them entry in another. As for the robots in the Vale, the terminals indicate it was about Spacer's Choice wanting to make a tiny profit by intentionally killing people (it's heavily inferred from the insurance policy they suddenly took out on that facility and what's mentioned about the robot attacks being due to how their new equipment was hardwired to do so).
There are a few different ways you can find an explanation for the geothermal plant. Spacer’s Choice installed hostility mods and set the automechanicals loose to cash in on the insurance. I found this out from a hacked terminal, but Sophia Akande of the board will also tell you as much as well if you start her questline in a certain way. If you aren’t finding much specific lore, you aren’t digging hard enough. Just about every single zone had a specific reason that it was the way it was. Most of the criticisms i’ve heard of this game are from people who just didn’t do everything or find everything, which i think is brilliant. If you want answers, you have to dig for them. Not everything is spoonfed to you, and if your character isn’t the sort of person who would be focused on finding all of this out, you never will. Just like how Chris here never realized that you can put Adelaide in control of edgewater.
So, I played the game on hard, and the beginning was brutal. I was immediately impressed by the difficulty and the smart enemy ai. I was rationing ammo, going stealthy, rushing to cover, trying to fighre out ways to draw the enemy to where I was or running if they came to somewhere I couldn't fight. After a few quests I had all ammo I could want. Soon I didn't need those tactics anymore. A little before level 15 I saw my last overleveled enemy. Soon enough, I was a little overleved for everything, just by doing sidequests throughly. And by that point, I was death incarnate.
It is not as immersive as 3 or new Vegas due to how shallow many systems feel and how uninteresting the story is. The writing is good but the only reason to progress the story is to unlock the other planets. The story is not at all compelling and you care about none of the characters to a point where everyone I talked to says they immediately tried to turn that crazy scientist in. I have completed this game twice with both endings and I couldn't tell you what happened in the story if you put a gun to my head. It's a good game but only great in the sense that a starving man would say something from McDonald's dollar menu was great because we are just desperate for this type of game that any halfway decent offering seems amazing. People are waaaaay over hyping this game
I agree that in terms of aesthetically and in design, Fallout 3 is a lot more immersive, but I disagree as a whole comparison. Fallout 3s progression system while being the same as New Vegas completely lacks in both quality and quantity regarding perks. The map while being 'big', has a lack of interesting areas and loot;"unique" weapons. You get stuck with the same weapons for most of the game (if not all). The writing is sub-par, and always lacks in how many dialogue options you have; seemingly missing out on what you actually want to say. Fallout 3 is held up by the interesting kill cams, targeting system, looting system, and the world it is set in. The locations and random event/cinematic occurrences keep the game somewhat refreshing, but on a whole the game lacks. The Outer Worlds on the other hand seemingly fixes a lot of these issues, and despite not being an amazingly big game, its quality outshines the lack of quantity it has (still has a good amount of content). As for F:NV vs TOW... I agree it has a lot left to desire in comparison to that game. As for the story... If you actually read through everything (assuming you didn't by that comment), you would have a good grasp on what is happening. If you actually go back and play Fallout 3 after playing TOW, you wouldn't be making that comment (I don't think at least).
"3 or New Vegas"... Hmm I know many people find the wasteland in fallout3 very cool to roam around in (me too) and think its good worldbuilding but when it comes to story and writing, it's still better than 3. Not as cool as New Vegas sadly tho because as he said in the video, they have played it too safe and went for a streamlined approach.
@elijah mikle It's not solely on writers. Sure if the writers make shitty one dimensional characters then it's on them. But I like the characters in the Outer Worlds. If you don't for reasons of X,Y and Z I'm pretty sure that's on you.
I don't think your dev time comparison is fair. 18 months for NV, 3 years for this. NV was made by modifying and adding to FO3, this was built from scratch in UE4. Also, NV was famously a bug-riddled mess and you say this game is fairly polished. Polish takes time.
I mean, I'm not saying three years is a long time to make a game of this quality. I just don't think people need to make apologies for it not being as good as NV.
Polish? Game runs like ass for many people. GTX 1070, i7-6700HQ, and 16 gigs of DDR4 and the game has trouble staying at 60 in indoor areas and can't pass 40 in outdoor areas in LOW settings. I'd rather deal with New Vegas bugs than crap optimization like this.
Yeah it's funny how people will say the game Is buggy they should've polished it more....but when it's polished they say it's shallow. You damn imbeciles don't understand what's going on when you make a game with a double a budget. The reviews speak for themselves....which btw I predicted it would be getting 9s and some 8.5s and Goty Contender months in advance
@@carcosian there's always something to criticize with these drones. Outer worlds was being shitted on by alot of people before it's release. These frauds are no where to be found after the reviews came out. I bet alot are on this channel trying to bring down a double a game...
It was really shitty that increasing the difficulty basically only added 30 minutes to the time it takes you to become overpowered and steamroll everything.
Exactly. Even in harder difficulties you can one shot almost anything with any weapon and there's no challenge to anything else.
3 ปีที่แล้ว
@@stubbyflex1275 What? You can't one shot pretty much anyone with any weapon. When I played through the game on normal the weapons still felt underpowered. I had current level weapons and tried various ones, including the uniques and it always felt like an airsoft gun since the enemies are bullet sponges.
Given Obsidian's financial and commercial history, I think their actions in marketing the game and in constructing it more as a "vignette" than their usual deep-dives like KOTOR 2, New Vegas, Alpha Protocol, Tyranny, etc make tons of sense. I think they realize this is a game that - if they blow their load on a deep game that is critically-warm but commercially rather flat (see: almost all of their fucking games) - they'll be back at kickstarter trying to tread water again and they don't want to do that. They know this is the first time back to the "mainstream" gaming market in quite some time - having operated in a niche market for years - and they want to bust out all the stops and really hustle to make this game successful not just for themselves as a company but to show Microsoft that they can be more than just double-A darlings, the company that gets to work on other company's spin-offs and sequels rather than their own material (New Vegas and The Sith Lords). This is Obsidian - for better or worse - putting their Littlefinger scheme in play after years of just trying to stay solvent and comfortable. This is them trying to make a power-play and not just carve out a new spot on the top shelf for themselves, but push motherfuckers off if they feel they must. It's a shame Avellone and Obsidian had a falling out, because while Avellone seems to be doing even BETTER for himself since getting the boot I think Obsidian could really use his talent going forward. I think The Outer Worlds will be a commercial success, which hopefully is just enough cushion to let them work on the deeper projects for which they're known - I think they might've raised expectations too high, what folks should understand going into this is that you're getting a good game out of your money, but you're also putting a down-payment on even better games in the future. That's what this seems like to me. A vertical slice of what Obsidian is capable of in order to prove themselves to those unfamiliar and to wet the appetites of those they've been gone from for a while.
Yeah, the game feels like they're testing the waters with this new IP. They probably felt like sinking too many resources on an untested IP would be too risky. Resources that, when they started making the game 3 years ago they didn't have. Now that they're part of Microsoft, they have basically infinite resources, so... (in fact, that was one of the things Feargus Urquhart mentioned when he announced the deal) Let's just hope Microsoft doesn't screw this up.
Fallout 1 was a game that despite considerable constraints did something innovative and exciting. Under your defined terms outer worlds is nothing like fallout 1
...? He listed quite a bit of reasons as to why it's similar. Your statement is basically like saying, "You can't compare a lion and a tiger because they're different creatures and live in different parts of the world" lmao what.
@@cgijokerman5787 you are right. outer worlds adopts the limitations of a game from 1997 to "play it safe." I was being facetious to use a word like "nothing" in such a context. What I should have said was "the exciting innovations featured in 1997's fallout 1 are present in outer worlds but no longer are these features exciting or innovative."
@@dwbryant13 Now that, that is accurate. Except the companions though, I feel like they were better done than in F1, but even then, not nearly as well written or even just... Like why does every companion follow you? At least in Vegas, if you had too much bad karma, you couldn't recruit good karma characters, it made sense, why would a goody two shoes wanna travel with someone who sides with the bad guys?! In OW there isn't any of that
Yup! Fallout 1 was actually new, proactive and interesting. While Outer worlds is boring and inoffensive to the highest degree, with no originality whatsoever.
The difference in Fallout 1, 2 and New Vegas and outer worlds is that interplay made Fallout 1 and 2 they went bankrupt after that obsidian was made and obsidian made New Vegas very small company and it takes time to grow a company outside of New Vegas I have never heard of obsidian back then and now they got acquisitioned by Microsoft they got a lot more people and capital play with
Just finished it and I must agree, I was really hyped for it, but it just let me feel disappointed. Great characters and dialogue, ok story, ok combat, bad enemy, weapons and gears variety, perks that barely make any differences, choices that are pretty shallow with no nuanced options like a Witcher game, for example, and a really short undeveloped story that took me only 26h with almost all sidequests completed. I really expected better from the guys that made Fallout New Vegas (one of my favorite games of all time)
Yeah, the only characters I care about are the crew. And even then most of that care goes towards Parvati. Something about the game felt weird to me. I couldn't connect with the story and found myself zoning out so much during dialogue moments that I basically didn't know what I was doing anything for half the time.
@@frenzy2061 It was disappointing that the only remotely attractive female is a lesbian and therefore I could not romance her (as a dude), in other words my sexuality was not represented. How whimsical
@@mrbouncelol I didn't mind that there wasn't any romance. Not every game needs to appeal to people's sexuality you know. The game had it's flaws but in don't think this is one of them...
Not really, I wanted to get it for quite some time now and it's still pretty high on my wishlist. I want to play it just for the art style and writing, even if it is somewhat average in all other aspects.
@@connorambrosino1741 I think movies are the most expendable media ever. They are made in thousands and at best only a couple of hundred are even remembered.
Panda Ryuu I think it's a fun game. Not perfect. Not ground breaking. But fun and serviceable. The game really should have sold for $30 or $40 however. I got it on game pass so no biggy to me. But I think calling this game bad at a $30 price point would just insane. As a $60 title, it's mediocre. Though in my eyes, this game is a gem. It has me putting in hours like I used to in my child hood
3:50-4:00. YES. I played so much more of this game percentage wise, because the content was good. I didn't get tired from having to curate my play-through. I like Ubisoft games like Far Cry and Assassin's Creed well enough, but there is always that point about seven hours in where I look at the map, sigh, and have to figure out how much of the I'm going to bother with. Not the case in Outer Worlds.
one thing i really dislike about the outer worlds is how every location has the same generic bandit type enemies, or atleast the vast majority. I don't think it would be asking too much for each major location to have its own kind of enemies to deal with given they're from different fucking planets. if this game wants to ride new vegas's coat tails constantly then it should of looked back on how many unique raider type enemies there were.
Was it only a "food shortage"? I thought it was the fact that the food itself wasn't nutritious (meaning you could eat tons and still die of starvation)?
Yup, hence why it doesn’t make sense why Byzantium would still be doing it’s thing. It doesn’t matter how much they eat or how much food they have access to, they’re still going to die. It’s why the situation was so dire
Having thoroughly played Fallout 1 & 2, New Vegas, Knights of the Old Republic 2, and even Neverwinter Nights 2... this game is just extremely okay. It's missing too much polish, it lacks a gripping narrative, it has an uninspiring world design, its characters are boring and uninteresting - not to mention useless, FPS gameplay is bland, and its RPG and level up mechanics are mediocre. The Outer Worlds is really, extremely okay. For my first run I'm playing on hardest difficulty and going on 65 hours... I feel like there's only 1/4 left of the game. However, in all brutal honesty, I really don't want to play it anymore. I just want to get it over with and be done already. The only part of me that continues playing is the desire to get more than my $60 worth. I'm just so bored with this game but I will still concede it's not a bad game; it's a ridiculously okay game. Shallow, as this video pointed out, is the perfect way to describe The Outer Worlds.
@@ReTr093 Because I kept hoping it would get better but I just got sadder and sadder playing this game. I totally forgot this game ever existed. That's how boring it was. And then there are people desperately defending this game with everything they've got and I'm happy again because I realize I'm not as sad as they are.
@Adam how was it journalism? The person was just annoyed that you can't play in third person despite every indication from character customization to cosmetic equipment that it would most likely exist. I'm in the same boat loathing first person and making a compromise to give the game a fair shake. I've a similar gripe that despite having a barber in the game you can't change your hair or beard in universe.
Having game audio instead of cheesy looping background music underneath your commentary makes this video at least 200 % more enjoyable for me. Thank you so. MUCH.
Also the fact that Fallout 1 actually had some unique and inventive aspects to it, whereas Outer Worlds shamelessly rips off of every dystopian game from the last 20 years.
I agree with your statement about Outer Worlds quality, but it is worth mentioning that NV had prebuilt assists and systems and OW had to do all that and have higher standards. NV had to assemble, OW had to build
but on the other hand, creating assets and designing and making games, in general, is a lot easier now in modern game engines compared to how it was in the late 2000's and especially in Bethesda's garbage gamebryo engine. Also, even if some of the assets were there for them to use, they obviously had to create a huge amount of original work for Fallout New Vegas too. Anybody who has actually played both games, would agree I think.
@@NatrajChaturvedi I wouldn't say that making games on a modern engine is easier. Modern PCs and Consoles are much more capable and so the games nowadays are expected to look much better than the games 5 or 10 years ago and to meet those expectations developers have to create much more assets and the assets themselves are much more complex. That's why we don't see many AAA games move forward in game design, because visuals take most of the time and budget, and the bar for them keeps getting higher and higher with each game (on top hiring an actor for voice and/or mocap for every character) Not to mention the visual design standards are higher and creating a brand new IP like Outer Worlds takes a lot more work even before you get to the building the game itself, you gotta remember that hell of a lot of work goes into concept art and writing the world before the work on the in-game stuff actually starts. While with New Vegas you already have a pre-build world, you already have certain limits and directions to work with. When it comes to assets, it's not only models that they could use from Fallout 3, it's also AI, UI, gameplay systems and a bunch of other stuff that requires a lot of work to build but we, players, take for granted. And you have to remember that it's ALWAYS easier to work with something already made. It's always easier to change and add than to build something new from scratch. That's why so many companies stick to franchises. Not only it's less risky, but it's also easier to make something new and better by building on what you already have. Also, New Vegas was from many developers of original Fallout games. So even if they had to adapt to the new Bethesda Fallout style, they still had a lot of knowledge on how such game should be done.
@@MrFr2eman look above for my answer. Edit: Btw I was saying a similar thing to what your saying, that they had to infact do a lot of original work for New Vegas. People who say "development for New Vegas must have been easy because Bethesda gave them ready-made assets and a game engine" are being foolish. Even things like UI elements had to be tweaked or created fresh for New Vegas. Then there's the entirely new map they had to create, tons of new weapons, armors, constumes, characters, factions (faction system) so yea I never said Fallout New Vegas was easy to make!! As for weather game development is easier now or was back then, just compare the size of the indie market now and back in 2008. You know what has been one of the factors that has this explosion in the indie space and allowed so many independent game developers to create games? its better and easier tools and more powerful hardware that is much cheaper than it used to be. Still this really is a subjective thing considering neither of us is in "AAA" game development (I am assuming you are not. If you are then I will take your opinion as objective fact) and there's no point arguing it.
They justified the relatively shot play time by saying you will want to play through multiple time but the reality is you won't. You're choices rarely matter in this mostly just effecting the ending narration. Yes some characters will change or be replaced but rarely with any consequence to a point where I at one point actively pissed off a companion doing the opposite of what they said and always being as rude as possible and they still stick with you often times acting as if a conversation where I called them asshole never happened. It makes everything Oz like with it appearing real on the surface but with just a little digging being revealed as extremely shallow
I remember hearing so many people saying good things about this game, from internet muckrakers, to endless Reddit posts. I then tried it, and was relatively... underwhelmed with it. The guns felt too similar, the weapon mods were boring, the status ailments barely did anything, the morality was obvious, character building was uninspiring, and free form exploration was relatively pointless since seemingly every single location was tied to a quest. I could write an entire paragraph or two on just how disappointing the arsenal was. If you ask me, it’s no big mystery that the main reason for TOW’s success was it’s timing.
Yeah, I was thinking about how The Emerald Vale and Monarch were waaay too similar to each other, which isn't helped by the fact that the asset reuse is far worse in this game than it is in Fallout and everything and everyone look the same. Considering that the world is fairly static, I just got bored after a while and involuntarily autopiloted my way through Monarch. Which is bad coming from me cause I adore space sci-fi and I don't think we get nearly enough adventure games with this kind of setting. So, it saddens me that this game wasn't all I wanted to be. Personally, I thought this game could have been a lot more compelling if it went even further with the critique of capitalism. IT already comments on the corporate culture of pursuing short-term gain to the detriment of all, but I thought it could have gone much deeper into changing markets and blindness when it comes to supply and demand due to class divide. Like you said, the rich need the lower class, but I thought the game could have gone into the rich not being able to understand what the lower class want and/or trying to influence it by limiting the market. It's a way they could have introduced complex themes and really gone in on the social commentary, but it just doesn't reach those heights. That's one thing I was confused about,too. Everyone in the system seems to work for a corporation sans the Groundbreaker, so what is the market that these companies are trying to appeal to? Who are the common, unconnected people that the marketing and corporate ads are supposed to influence? Presumably it would be the only free people in Halcyon, the Groundbreaker, but everyone on the Groundbreaker acts like the Board only tolerates their presence and only keeps them around because it's more profitable to trade through them. Edgewater is even an example of a corporate town that limits the food supply to only the products of the company that owns the town. So, if companies restrict the workers to the products they produce, has the corporation become some cyclic machine where the workers have to put the money they earn back into the company by buying the products they produce? If so, why all the marketing? It seems completely unnecessary. You'd think it would be Earth, but Earth has supposedly abandoned Halcyon for 3 years before the game starts and most of what the companies produce is food which probably wouldn't survive the 10 year trip home. I mean, maybe I'm overthinking it, but to my understanding, in order for capitalism to exist there has to be a market to appeal to in the first place, and it just doesn't seem to exist in this game. As a result, it feels like we're ultimately fighting for nothing as most of the people under the corporate banner seem content with their lives outside of the troubles you solve for them and the only people outside the corporate banner are dissenters who want to survive or topple the system but have no ultimate long term goal. In New Vegas, you could thoroughly think out which faction would most benefit the future of the Mojave through the quests, dialogue, and strong writing behind everything going on. You could actually think through how to solve the problem the region was going through and your character was a direct influence. Here, you can make ripples that will eventually lead to larger changes in the future, which I like, but the long term goal of your quest is ultimately to wake up some frozen people who will solve all the important problems for you. It's not nearly as compelling and it feels like Obsidian weren't on their A-Game or creating an entirely new IP instead of a sequel or spinoff was beyond them for some reason. I don't know. Still, I had fun, and I'm hoping for some DLC that will improve the game and allow us to visit some of the gated locations and meet some of the companies we weren't able to meet in the main game. Hopefully with some better stories and setpieces to switch things up.
You make some interesting points and I've wondered about some of the same things. The corporations have enough money to colonize planets and send people to live on them. But I'm not sure who they're selling their products to besides the people in the colonies. I'm still early in the game though so I haven't seen that much.
"in order for capitalism to exist there has to be a market to appeal to in the first place, and it just doesn't seem to exist in this game." That's exactly why it doesn't work in the first place. It seems more like a bunch of government-owned brands you're forced to consume with no real options, something that would happen in gulag-land. Calling the game's corps "corps" instead of what it functionally is within the game, a governing body that owns factories, is curious.
I thought monarch being similar to edgewater was the point: essentially it takes the first scenario of the game and flips it on its head so that the corporation looks like the good guys and the hippies are the bad guys instead of the reverse in edgewater.
I appreciate you giving this game a more critical look. It's great, but lacking in many ways as well. Seems like the community is more focused on saying how great it is but not so much on where devs can improve on for the next game. There's a lot of potential, but fans need to be critical too.
A lot of people, including reviewers, used TOW as a way of sticking it to Bethesda, instead of judging the game solely on its own merits. They had made up their mind about TOW the day it was announced (that it was better then ANY Bethesda Fallout game). I remember a similar, but not quite as bad, hype around Greedfall ("look, we don't need Bioware anymore!"). It's all politics.
Luobo Mu Exactly this, and I feel like they only discuss the things it has that Fallout doesn’t instead of vice versa. This game it really lacking in the gameplay department, and I found the story bland enough to where I never beat it. Fallout 4 isn’t great overall, and it’s a subpar at best RPG, but I still find everything else in that game far more interesting than anything in TOW
@@luobomu9747 to be fair, i still think the OW is superior to fallout 4 and 76. But it still lacks in depth to truly be a "fallout killer" if people TRULY want to stick it to bugthesda, they can't make an ok game like TOW, they need another masterpiece like fallout 2 or NV.
@@lobstertown1826 Idk, fallout 4s gameplay loop bores me a lot more than TOWs, at least it's story is somewhat consistent and has some skill checks. But then again there is also the fact that I despise settlement building, so that might make people like F4 more if you like that stuff. For me, at least mechanically it's a better RPG and combat is about on the same level as F4. Plus it's story makes more sense at least. But that's me. Still, TOW needs to improve in its sequel, majorly if it wants to see the same success and become a true franchise. It needs to be like fallout 2 or wasteland 3. Taking what was wrong with the last installment and making it substantially better.
conversely the hardcore mode is a bit too difficult because in combat you are a bit too weak and having companions dying permanently is too unfair then. I have finished FNV's HC mode many many times and that is much better balanced I will say.
I honestly thought hard was decent difficulty enough, it's only later does it become easy when you upgrade stuff. Only issue I had was the final mission everything took a stark jump in difficulty damage/health wise. And things that had been giving me little trouble where far harder then before, I think that level in particular needs to better balancing.
The first hours I had a lot of fun with it, but soon I would grown to find the game boring and I couldn't play more than an hour without getting bored. I had to force myself to play it, so I sold it.
FYI: Some logs on monarch mention that it is NOT a straight up food shortage but a shortage of specific nutrients that don’t develop in Halcyon. That makes the entire lifetime employment program more plausible and also explains why the board didn’t want to thaw the hope inhabitants. It feels like it was shoehorned in at a late stage, because the spoken dialog never mentions that, but they thought about that still.
Would also explain why using corpses for the plants would keep them going longer. My biggest issue is they get stellar freighters from earth just mass ship food
Yeah, you're right. I just kind of thought of it as a food shortage in my head and it found its way into the script like that. I'm not sure that it changes the logic behind the LEP though, does it? I mean, whether it's a food shortage or shortage of good food, we're still talking about a lack of the basic needs of human beings.
@@ChrisDavis_Games Well at least the "official" version of the LEP, the bit about cycling through inhabitants is consistent then, right? Just like leaving the hope inhabitants frozen, because having them available as work force could perhaps change a food shortage, but not a nutrient shortage, which would only exacerbate with more people. That is my understanding. How you reconcile the actual LEP, that stuff with the robots that murder and process you is another matter. I guess you could say that humans are a good nutrient storage. Well.
@@goreobsessed2308 They GOT mass shipments from Earth until about 3 years ago, hence why a fundamental problem only became a crisis recently. None of the food they find in the colony is edible to humans, so they have to either import it or grow Earth crops on non-native soil. Even the pigs they mass farm were developed on Earth, not Halcyon. The crisis of the Board was one of alarming incompetence rather than outright maliciousness with very few exceptions, such as the Chairman.
31:25 , for me I pulled the power to Edgewater. Then convinced Adelaide I was on her side, THEN went back to Reed and told him to beat it and he sucked. He left, Adelaide moved back in and Edgewater is now run by her with the plague cure being supplied by the graveyard. I think that’s the “best” ending for there
@@Spirit47373 I've talked with Lily Anderson, and whilst I don't know how long the video is (she won't say, prolly don't know herself) she has said that Joe is working on said video.
Lol, realizing that I finished this game with 34 hours and never used companion abilities, shot weakpoints (other than head) and never used proper damage types on specific enemies and STILL found the game to be incredibly easy on hard.
A shame you don't get more views, your videos are always a great surprise when they come out! Cool coincidence i was playing the game just when your video came out too!
This is one of the best critiques of the game I've seen. A lot of ro for improvement. Now that they have a baseline I can't wait to see where they go from here
honestly the whole "you can kill anyone in the game" stuff is such a dumb compliment. it never really effects your story and mostly just shows how bland plot is. nothing in this game matters, its such a lifeless world and you never feel like there are any consequences for anything.
Correction to a point you made: the secondary driver wasn't really a shortage of food. It was that the human body wasnt getting enough nutrients in the long run to maintain itself. This distinction is important.
They comment on marauder gear, but make no mention if you walk around town in your spacepants. I know this because I went around town in my spacepants talking to people.
I was in a masochistic supernova lone wolf playthrough, and clicked "ok" to take parvati with me when the dude asks you to. Since the rooms in the ship arent open (you dont have power) you *cant dismiss her* or do anything to get rid of her so I whacker her to death since I need my goddamn loner buffs. Luckily companions die permanently so I could go on my merry way with my buffs intact
The Board did try the mutation route, but apparently the scientists were given so little resources that they ended up experimenting on themselves to make any sort of progress. I mean, couldn't Akande afford to smuggle them a few cystipigs as test subjects ? It took Phineas 35 years, but he managed !
I completely disagree. This game was everything I had hoped it would be and more. The combat is satisfying, the writing is fantastic, and the characters are interesting. They nailed the aesthetic and the humor perfectly. It kept me engaged the entire way though my first playthrough with my ranged build, and now I'm already pumped to head into my second run with a melee build. I really really enjoyed the length of the game, I'm a little tired of massive open world titles that take 100 hours to complete. My first run was somewhere around 35-40 hours and I liked that. Also, all the little choices that you have to make throughout the game really contribute to the replay-ability of the game as a whole. Not only are you given the freedom to make morally grey choices as you see fit, but they actually have a significant impact on the world around you. The dialogue is excellent, I never got bored of chatting with NPC's and always exhausted every available line of dialogue before moving on with the story. You also have to give credit to Obsidian for creating a game that launched as a practically bug-free experience. All of that in combination with the fact that Obsidian created this game on a very small budget, what they managed to make with the recources they had is nothing short of art in my opinion. This game managed to fill every void Bethesda has left in the Fallout experience for me. The dialogue, the freedom of choice, the writing, the narrative, the world building all just felt so right to me. Of course you can't please everyone, but based on the critical acclaim and overwhelmingly positive player feedback, I'm happy that Obsidian is finally getting the credit they deserve beyond FNV and KOTOR2(even if that game is still criminally under-rated). Also, Take Two has come out and said that TOW sales figures have been extremely impressive. That news along with Microsoft purchasing Obsidian as part of their campaign to create new exclusive IP's to attract customers to their new gen consoles, looks like The Outer Worlds could become a franchise competing for the same market Fallout used to occupy.
Agreed. The combat could be little bit better but I find it passable. And I love all the little effects TDD can do when shooting an enemy. But the planets and characters were great. And I really loved all the little details the game had. Especially compared to what Bethesda has done to Fallout this does help me fill the void that gave.
The dialogue choices were great, everything else ehhhh... you really thought the combat was satisfying? You must not play many shooters then. And sure, props to Obsidian for making this game in a budget and it will be cool to see what they can do with a real AAA budget but if you evaluate the game for what it is it's kinda lackluster in a lot of areas. You can like it (perhaps because there haa not been a similar game in some time) but that's the truth.
8:14 There absolutely IS such a thing as objective criticism of art and, in the context of video games, much of this criticism tends to be aimed at mechanical flaws (eg. engine limitations, bugs, poorly developed animations/hitboxes, etc.) We can criticise a game such as Fallout 76 for it's seemingly countless amount of bugs, choppy animations and poor performance on most PC hardware (and consoles for that matter), all of which would be considered objective criticism given that it does not fall under any personal preference. Instead, these things occur regardless of how we feel about them. Aspects of a video game, such as artistic direction, aesthetics, character design and music, would fall under a subjective measure, or, how we feel about said aspects.
The Lifetime Employment Program video was one of my favorite parts of the game. It's how I think, no not think, it shows perfectly how execs (gaming and otherwise) feel about their employees/consumers (the citizens of Halcyon being both).
@@1997lordofdoom At the risk of sounding foolish, what does based mean to you? Because to me he was "based" in London. Is there another definition I'm unaware of?
There is no reason for Phineas to believe the colonists on the Hope are any smarter than the colonists who came out on the Groundbreaker. It is 100% wishful thinking. When you choose your character at the start, you see the type if people on the Hope (you were one of them), and they are very mundane. I help Welles on every playthrough, because he is with the most humane groups. But in reality, he should be working with Adelaide in Edgewater and Eva Chartrand on Byzantium. They are both working on ways of feeding the colony in the long term. (Since Reed Tobson has said out loud that the colony is about to be shut down, helping him in the first moral quandary is utterly pointless - giving the power to Tobson just prolongs the misery. Adelaide may need her arm twisting about taking on more people though! She is one old lady - shouldn't be a problem). The Board need pushing aside, and the scientists and farmers should take over! The Board is indifferent to the lives of the colonists, so they have not been thinking about how to solve things in the long term.
I started playing and stopped for the night when I came back from work the day after I just ... Forgot about it and played something else, this game is so weird.
I literally have to force myself to play the game because it’s so boring. I just want to finish it so I can post a long, nasty review of it on GOG lol. I have never written a game review in my life, and I just feel impelled to complain because it’s so dull and uninspired
The first few hours are the only part of the game I genuinely adored. My opinion of it then plummeted faster and faster to the point that I'd say I hate it now for how much potential was wasted.
You shouldn't sell yourself short by comparison to other YT'ers man. This video is really good. Your insight is almost clinical without losing any of your personal view point. Its great. I get matthewmatosis vibes, and I mean that with the highest of respect for you both!
Today is June 25th 2020, which happens to be the very day Mr House is born, according to FO:NV lore. A little nugget of information from a game released ten years ago. I doubt anyone remembered anything about TOW ten days after playing it.
@@tslomka6272 Fallout 1 is shallow in the sense that it hints at a lot more than is actually there. Like, the Boneyard is supposed to be just miles and miles of twisted metal structures, where survivors fear to tread out of superstitious awe at the horrific loss of life. But there's actually just a few locations you can visit. And Necropolis is a ghoul city, where the still rational ghouls live and take care of their feral brethren. But you can only interact with the city by stealing their water chip, fixing their well, and talking to the leader. You don't get to explicitly see their society outside of those snippets. It's fine, the game is still really good, especially considering the limitations that Interplay was operating under.
Fallout 1 was actually inventive, interesting and provocative when it came out. Whereas Outer Worlds shamelessly rips off of every dystopian game from the last 20 years.
@@FB792 Outer Worlds just goes to show how Obsidian has become a shadow of their former selves. But at least they gave us Fallout New Vegas, so that’s a plus.
Good enough in terms of characters, writing and worldbuilding I agree but too streamlined and dumbed down in a lot of game design departments for my taste.
No shit Captain obvious but for a double a game the combat is superb......Better than Skyrim or Witcher and Witcher has no replayability. I'd rather play New Vegas Masterpiece. Also take it from me the individual who predicted this would be a goty Contender....Outer worlds 2 will be far superior. It's a SOLID DOUBLE A GAME. If you're comparing it to triple a games that are real good you are lost.
Chris, there's a middle path for the Edgewater Quest, just like on Monarch, and also feels like "true" ending, again like Monarch. Probably something to look into, but I'm enjoying the video otherwise so far!
@@anonysalt Reed leaves (and dies) and the Lady takes over but all her people come aswell and Edgewater thrives ( that's what my end card told me) that I'm cool with over killing one group over the other completely.
Reed's supporters also leave and die. I did get the same ending. There's no middle path, it's A or B. Unless you kill everyone, that'd be the most equal outcome.
I wish when designing rpgs they would plan it around being able to complete without an objective marker, and give the player the option to turn it off.
Jordan Jack Not as easy as you think. Game desing is incredibly hard and you'd be surprised at the amount of people who cant complete test even with a quest marker. It's important to be able to guide your players through your levels. So so so many players fall through the cracks and miss important quest dialogues, items and more during the testing faze of a game. These failures largely shape the direction in which the game is designed. And it's not like the players are dumb. It's just that sometimes people are bound to miss things. I'm certain we've all had that moment when we had to look up something about a game on TH-cam, and the thing we couldn't get right or find was obscenely obvious or simple and then we feel dumb afterwards.
"I generally hate hallucination stuff in games because it's not clear what is supposed to be real and what's hallucination." ...i'm sorry, is the reality of what hallucinations are by definition inconvenient for you? XD (I generally love hallucination stuff in games, because those scenes are usually the only ones who actually use the possibilities of virtual worlds of the medium to their full potential, or even pushing the boundaries a bit. I've got some designs on paper for games which are basically a single uninterrupted hallucination scene, and they would be awesome.)
Same, the pitifully small number of games that actually bother to do this at-all/well is a perpetual disappointment. Like, The Evil Within has some cool scene transitions (2 has a few more again), The e3 trailer for Ghostwire had some fun similar stuff that I almost fully expect won't actualised be in the final product (see Control). As for actual 'hallucinatings' I can't even remember any rn, Holine Miami, Driver San Fran? Christ my brains have seen better days...
Well, put it this way, I don't mind hallucinations in say a horror game, but I don't like them in games that are otherwise supposed to be "grounded" or "realistic" (and yes, I know that sounds a bit silly in the context of these games). Like in Fallout 4 with that weird Children of the ATOM quest. If you're going to say that sort of stuff exists in the world, it should be a big deal, not just a throwaway side quest.
@@ChrisDavis_Games "Like in Fallout 4 with that weird Children of the ATOM quest." ok, point partially taken, BUT... if i'm not mistaken, the problem with that quest was that, since the hallucination correctly guided you to the right spot, it implied that it, in fact, *was not a hallucination* , and that's what the issue is. on the other hand, my go-to hallucination scenes (which i think of when i hear mentions like this) are the Far Cry 3 ones, which are, in my opinion, done extremely well all-around, and don't create these kinds of plot/lore holes.
I think it's possible to give Adelaide control of Edgewater if you send power to it and then convince the mayor to leave I assume then she would have actually helped everyone
SPOILERS BELOW Having Adelaide control Edgewater in the Phineas ending has her grow a garden there, but she kicks out all of Tobson's loyalists. Could be considered the better ending but it does mean the town loses more people overall.
Oh I didn't really get that from her personality seems it kinda seems like them punishing you for something you had no information on like how it goes in Fallout 1
@@Lunartic_ She hates Reed but Reed leave and probably dies I think she even has a line about how she doesn't blame the people but the system that makes people act the way they do
New Vegas and The Witcher have, in a way, ruined these kinds of RPGs with their scope. I felt a little disappointed that I didn't get NV again, but at the same time, I can see the love put into the game. I'm also happy to support Obsidian and I want to see them excel - and, ultimately spite Bethesda for bankrupting them. Good game, and I'm looking forward to their next big project.
So...i have to wait for The Outer Worlds 2... being more like THE KING... Fallout 2. This looks more like Borderlands than Fallout. Back to modding part 2.
I'd be happy with it at least being like FO4, eh story but at least immersive world. In this bright and shiny world full of boring enemies I did not feel.. Well anything. And even Borderlands 2 made me cry, it's not that hard to get an emotional response from me lol
I purposely put off buying this game until some form of proper modding support exists. There's enough I've yet to explore in other games that the Outer Worlds seemed... meh despite the hype
Pretty good review and there's a fair few criticisms you make to the game's mechanics and gameplay that I quite agree with, but I have to take umbrage to your suggestion early on that this game is anything like a "Marvel movie". Whilst I think I catch your drift regarding what you mean here, I have to vehemently disagree in both the means I believe you intended it as, and what is implicitly stated in the comparison. Firstly, there's the assumption that this game either treats its themes as decor or doesn't say much beyond what is said in the first section of the game. I disagree strongly with this, I don't believe the game's entire world can merely be construed as a series of satirical jabs at a late-capitalist system and think there are more interesting and nuanced depictions of alternative views and positions therein, be it in the role of a smaller independent and autonomous company in the Groundbreaker, a pro-union capitalist system as presented by MSI and so on, that offset or add a wider variety of stances to a more directly opposing "insurgent" or "revolutionary" movement and so on. More importantly, though, is that the game's discourse does progressively veer to a different and more interesting direction as it approaches the matter of starvation, portraying in the act not merely a physical starvation but an ideological one too. Graham, much as he's portrayed in something of a wolf in sheep's clothing in the game, does have a rather interesting and correct idea inasmuch as the setting's true tragedy lies in the ideological stagnation that this society has fallen into as generations of workers have been hammered into their "role" within an overly bureaucratized, industrialized world. It's a Weberesque nightmare that much rather recalls Terry Gilliam's Brazil, or a slow despairing grind to a societal halt reminiscent of Alfonso Cuarón's Children of Men, where in these too it's the act of invention or spiritual, ideological fertility that can interrupt society's gradual, decadent death-march and so on; it's a scenario where "the hope" in the setting is literally represented by scientists, artists, engineers, "great minds" because these act as the carriers of progress and ideas and so on - the Hope is essentially a similar metaphor to what the state of pregnancy in Children of Men is, and it's also why the Board, or the system they've built, would keep such an entity or concept in stasis. Much of what Slavoj Zizek says about Children of Men in his own video about the film is applicable to this game too. In these ways there's much more at play in this game to so flippantly say it's just "a Marvel movie". Secondly there's the implicit statements made about the game in the comparison, which are that much in the way many Marvel and "cinematic universe" films feel, this is somehow another in a line of sausage-factory products made for quick consumption and little else. I honestly am not seeing many other games quite like this one being done today or with this sort of frequency, and certainly less which take the time Obsidian does at creating pretty lively, detailed and distinct worlds populated with characters who each has their own voice, their own ideolect and beliefs, who sound like a unique part of their environment and so on. The "Marvel" comparison in this regard might be much better suited for the endless franchises the likes of a Call of Duty, or the very rigidly by-the-formula open worlds of Ubisoft games and whatnot. The Outer Worlds may seem familiar relative to other RPGs out there like Mass Effect or Fallout or even The Witcher in some regards, but it still has a very unique feel, character and vibrance to it that distinguishes it as its own thing. Again I suspect this isn't the meaning you intended when making this comparison but with Marvel being often synonymous to this approach of moviemaking and brand exploitation, I do think this comparison is pretty undeserved. But, already I think it isn't doing it justice with its intended meaning either. Also I do think Felix is more interesting than you make him out to be. Whilst his companion quest is indeed pretty basic and not all that surprising, it's a part of what seems like one of the most complete and transformative character arcs amidst your companions whereby you temper his initial revolutionary idealism into a vision that is ultimately more well-rounded and not merely the reflection of some romantic notion of adventure fed to him by the serials he consumes. He starts off a bit like the Philip J. Fry of the team, a bit comically incompetent and naive and a fish out of water, but develops into someone who feels a lot more assertive about his beliefs and what it takes to stay true to them. I do agree with you that Vicar Max's quest ends on a pretty poor note though, despite him being an altogether quite likable and interesting character - it really is the only moment in the game where the writing absolutely fell flat for me, giving way to a lot of earnestly-spoken platitudes and so on.
I agree. I think he's portraying things as being far more simple than they really are. He seems to have a "capitalism bad" mindset and assumed that was what the game was critiquing, in reality Adelaide can be called out as incredibly selfish early on, because you can tell her that her plan will kill people from the town, she won't care, she's not nearly as compassionate or nice as she first seems and you don't have to get to the ending credits to see this. Also Graham didn't lead the attack the pirates did. He left the door open for them to get in because they told him they would only kill the Board members, but instead they slaughtered everyone. When you confront him you'll tell him he's only desperately trying to atone cause he feels guilty and screams at you that of course he fucking is, he didn't want all those people to die. The game paints up the board as this big bad evil but most of the people going against it are idealists with hands stained in the blood of the innocent cause that's what happens to radical idealists. Also Felix was great, I definitely agree out of all the companions he had the most personal growth besides Father Max, and his time with you left him a genuinely better person who could still have high ambitions and genuinely want better for people but he's become more experienced and a little less niave.
@@nickelakon5369 Adelaide isn't a villain, though, and her anger over her son is pretty understandable. Despite how some folks seem to assume that Edgewater is indisputably the best option (even to the point of romanticizing Reed, who makes it clear that he didn't think Adelaide's son was worth saving if you speak with him after finding out what happened to Adelaide's son and before choosing between Edgewater and the Botanical Labs), I also don't think she's villainous for thinking that people who are loyal to the Board would be a problem in the kind of society she's trying to make where even Parvati thinks that being treated like a piece of property by the corporation is acceptable (as you hear when she explains how her mother had to give her up because she literally belonged to Spacer's Choice).
@@maximo_lopez did I say she was a villian? Tell me where I said she was, because I don't think I did. Adelaide is something far different from a villian or a hero, she's human. I called her selfish because she is, because she's willing to let a town full of people die out of revenge for her son, of course though, she has no interest in viewing the blood as on her hands and accepting responibilty. And while I don't agree with kissing up to the board I still see Reed as the better person of the two (despite giving the town to Adelaide during my playthroughs). Reed is kind of an idiot, he's an absolute tool but Reed still ultimately wants what's better for Edgewater, Adelaide wants what's best for herself. You also have to remember, Reed didn't just deny Adelaide's son medicine, he gave it to someone else who would be just as dead as Adelaide's son if they hadn't gotten it.
@@maximo_lopez i put her in charge purely for practical reasons, she can stop people from being sick and I don't see using corpses as fertilizer as a problem, especially since they have a raider problem. Adelaide is the best choice for the town for that reason, even though Adelaide is the only person who is noted as being left out of town by Reed and Adelaide kicks a bunch of people out, not only potentially killing them but potentially adding to the Raiders' numbers.
@@nickelakon5369 You clearly frame Adelaide as a villain even in your response to me, though. You also seem to think that Adelaide's actions are entirely motivated by revenge, which doesn't seem to be the case given everything she's doing, something that even Parvati comments on despite her opposition to Adelaide using corpses to grow food so that people can eat. Feeding the hungry and giving shelter to people who can't live in Edgewater. And the apologism for Reed pretty much handwaves all the people who are dead because of him, including Adelaide's son, who he shows no remorse about and is dismissive about his death if you bring it up to him. You seem to be forgetting how dismissive Reed was about his death.
47:09 that's... That's literally what they're doing. There's a whole quest about it. It's called the last chimerist. Also there's a third ending for Edgewater where Adelaide controls Edgewater
Didn't like how the perks felt empty and completely number based, the characters were alright didnt like how there wasnt anything to other than finish the story and no gameplay options after
My biggest problem with the game is that nothing felt fleshed out. They also gave you too many skill points, which made you too OP in too many skills. I never felt like I was making hard decisions about my build.
ty I thought I was crazy when I couldn't get into it. I love fallout 3 and New Vegas, Skyrim, my favorite game is Kotor. So this was supposed to be amazing but it just felt... bland? The characters and writing was amazing but the rest was so lacking and outdated it took me out of the atmosphere and seeing nothing but praise from others made me feel like I was missing something.
Tbh I found myself allying with the corporations more often than not. I didn't see them as evil, just incompetent with a problem way above their paygrade. I think it's implyed in the game that the reason the corporations are so greedy is because they have to import so much food from other worlds across the Galaxy.
Wasteland 2 does a really interesting thing with its companions because you play as pretty much everyone. You create 4 rangers instead of 1, and you can get 3 extra companions. The only difference between those companions and the crew you create is that your crew is permant and you will fully customize their stats, while companions will have their "special" points pre allocated and some skills already leveled when you find them. Otherwise, everyone does combat and talks during conversation. This means you only need one guy with each skill, ie you don't need two hackers, two lockpickers or two guys with diplomatic speech skills. Everyone needs to be specialized so you can have an effective party, but you can still do a lot of stuff because you have many members that do different things. This is great for role playing. You will remember who is your medic, who is your sniper, who does the talking. You might create someone who has intimidate speech skill, and also has brute force skills to break doors or locks, and who's also a brawler, and you'll play with that. Or you might make someone else a secondary healer in your party, and you'll add that to however you're roleplaying that character. It also lets you experience being a brawler and a sniper and an assalt rifle guy, all without making a new character.
Thank you for this, I felt the same way about the game. It's incredibly shallow and I found myself bored of it after the 10 hour mark. I hope you will play Disco Elysium, the best RPG of this year.
The whole game felt like a prologue. I watched the ending credits thinking 'why aren't I playing this? Why isn't this the game? ' . Bro this game had so little content
my favourite point you made was that for subsequent games each colony from the setting could be like the vaults from fallout. Each having their own twist or secret while all sharing the same foundations
@@ryanvandoren1519 I thought "going back to their roots" meant going back to their... well, roots. As in their early stuff. Obsidian's early stuff were turn-based games in the vein of the so-called "isometric" RPGs, and a lot of their key personnel came from Black Isle Studios, who made a lot of those "isometric" RPGs.
I think the word you say at the beginning of the video, "refreshing", is perfectly fitting. Not at all the deepest 1st person RPG, but beautiful to watch, serviceable in all its systems, easy going and with all the needed amount of personality and fun things to do and to explore. It doesn't drag beyond the depth it has under the hood, so it never becomes boring. And, for once, just once, no bugs. At least as far as I could see, having bought it some months after it was released, and at a completely appropriate price. Thanks for your videos!
![The Outer Worlds in Close Critique [Spoilers]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TpxidRlZyXc/mqdefault.jpg)
Joshua Sawyer's lack of involvement really hurt the game (he did some balancing according to his Tumblr, that's it). He's a gun nut, which also explains why the weapons are so mediocre compared to what NV had. It's a good game, but it's not New Vegas.
It doesn't even have throwable grenades!
Pendant Blade that’s not exactly true. Josh’s own twitter says:”almost everything i know about firearms was information i learned during the development of fallout: new vegas. i did not grow up around guns & had no training prior to deciding to research them. an incredible amount of information is available even if you're not in the US.”
I don’t know where you got your info from, but he probably became a gun but after development on New Vegas. It’s something anyone of them at Obsidian could’ve learned about. And New Vegas itself has way too many weapons that most became too useless.
@@breakingpoint252 Yes, this does not disprove that he wasn't a gun nut. He knew his weapons because of his research and implemented it well.
I disgaree there are guns that become useless later on. Perks like Grunt makes early game guns like the service rifle and 9mm handguns viable. A souped varmint rifle can last you till midgame. The only guns I think become obsolete are the .22 pistol and SMG.
OW has only three ammo types and by the end of Edgewater, you have literally thousands of ammo. There is no ammo variation, because the guns are the variation making them far less flexible.
Yes the shooting is improved over all, but the depth in firearms disminished.
Pendant Blade true but he still had to learn first before he worked on the weapons and even then it’s not like he was the only one who had to study weapons.
Some weapons are ofc usable but there are a few that just seem pointless with the amount of automatic rifles and pistols and SMGs and shotguns it’s like why do you need more than one type of shotgun when you have the riot shotgun or even the lever action
That’s understandable but you have to keep in mind that this is a low budget game so they can’t add too many different weapons, and there’s not much wrong with that ammo design because heavy, light, and energy all serve their own purposes to their weapons. I wouldn’t say depth is diminished. The science weapons and special weapons offer a lot of variety in how you can approach situations
@@breakingpoint252 Fair.
There's different rifles because they serve different roles. It's also a maintenance issue. Revolvers go from .357 to .44 to. .45-70. Each type of ammo is more powerful and rare. Whether its viable to carry a hunting revolver is dependent if you're wealthy enough to not only afford ammo but also maintenance. Some players gamble w/ high LUK and have lots of money, some don't. Some are veterans who can get a powerful .44 early on, some are newbie sticking to 9mm to the end of the game. Apply this to all weapon types and it works.
The problem with OW is its waaaay too easy. Even on supernova, it' easy enough to amass ammo and upgrades. Buying better gear is replaced by throwing money at a weapon until it gets better. It may work in a game like RE4 but it doesn't in OW.
Perks in OW are also equally shallow, with most being + upgrades. In NV, you can literally specialise by being a cowboy which encourages a playstyle.
Overall, I don't think OW is a bad game, but it plays far too safely.
NV only had better weapons if you care about aesthetics more than how the gunplay feels. NV was severely held back by Gamebryo.
NV, 3, and 4 just do not have good feeling combat and the game basically relied on VATS. Comparatively the time dilation in the Outer Worlds feels mostly optional.
I played a more diplomatic playthrough the first time. The second time I murdered everyone on sight, and I was as hostile/disagreeable as I could be. I got the good ending both times.
Should have played as a idiot then
+
@Dark Legionnaire with the same ending mission in the same location.
I was very underwhelmed by this game.
ONSIDIAN SEY THE STANDARD THAT HIGH ALL BY THEMSELVES
ITS NOT THE FANS FAULT THEY COULDNT LIVE UP TO BETHESDAS LOW STANDARDS
Bit smug, but I hope you have recovered.
"We don't need other people's games to be bad for our game to be good." - Tim Willits, id Software
Yeah, this whole video was just a comparison video. Not as big as odyssey and fallout 4. Marvel movie video game. Fallout in space. He needs to focus on the game. The lack of good characterization, the lack of perks and differentiation within the actual choices you make with little to no impact. The lack of world building and unique moments in the game. Nothing in this game did anything uniquely good. Just a decent rpg after a long history of not great rpgs in the last 4 years.
@@HeroFall The video is an hour and a half long, I'd recommend watching more than five minutes of it.
Yet they exploited the shit out of the Fallout comparisons in marketing. You can't have it both ways. And ANY of the Fallouts shit on the Outer Worlds, even Fallout 4.
@@mwjgcreeves4984 Pointedly wrong
@@mwjgcreeves4984 I can’t be convinced this game stands up to fallout 4, I liked it but the lack of cool stuff to find or stuff to build is quite apparent when compared to fallout.
I struggle with this game. I enjoy the writing and most of the characters presented. I enjoy the bleak corporatist atmosphere delivered. But the RPG elements underscoring the narrative and environments are so laughably mediocre that it makes me second guess how much I actually like this game. Skill point lvling system, interesting concept but nearly none of the point thresholds feel meaningful in any way, detracting from my attachment to how I want to build my character. Perks, lots of em but they are all just boring, tired flat percentage/numerical increases to stats. Fun. Weapon variety is pitiful, gun and armor customization is pitiful. That being said, I had a good time with this game. Will I do another playthrough? No. This game is missing some je ne sais quoi, it feels like a title that was capitalizing on a void in the market in the most non-committal way.
After playing underrail i cant bring myself to playing games like outerworlds, where combat is so flat, shallow and perks are just numerical values that doesnt actually change anything. It honestly feels like the perks are what the skills should have done, they simply increase damage, so why are the skills there at all? They only increase in effectiveness every 25th level so its essentially just another perk point.
Sums up my experience with the game. Uninstalled after ive beaten it once, aint looking back.
Just needs some modding tlc
It's funny u bring up underrail. I just added that to my wishlist before cuz it looks so similar to fallout. Can't wait to play it later when I can buy it
@Brendan Schaub Look everyone, this guy reads books! Wowzers that's such an accomplishment mate. Good work being able to read you schmuck.
I feel like this is a really fair critical video, it’s shallow, it ends abruptly, has cut content or things that should’ve been more fleshed out, but it’s just so filled with love with great characters and humour with a fun world to explore
@Dark Legionnaire Wow, that's a bit aggressive. Lmao
@Dark Legionnaire Holy shit, dude.
@Dark Legionnaire Boi who hurt you
Tell me how you really feel though
This game was garbage.
The story in this game is an utter sellout and I have no idea how people can praise it. The joke of the bumbling and useless mega corporation that the writers try to beat you over the head with for the entire 20-hour duration of the game wears out its welcome well before even the mid section of the first planet. It's even becomes tiring to read the various terminals after awhile because of how this dead horse gets beaten.
In reality, corporations with such power over an entire solar system would have an insane amount of resources to divert to learning how to manipulate the human populace, and they would not be bumbling, but insidiously cunning in their means, covertly controlling all public institutions, mass media, and even directing the ultimate path of human language towards their own advancement.
The people that praise it are also the same people that hate everything Bethesda does (regardless of it its justified such as Fallout 76, or if its not even done by Bethesda such as ESO) and join the bandwagon.
So many touted The Outer Worlds as "A sci-fi fallout and the Bethesda Fallout killer", which 76 kind of already did (at least until the next main line game comes and people fanboy that too).
I think overhype and comparisons to Fallout are why it feels so off and mediocre. It copies certain aspects, some better some not as well, but doesn't innovate or take chances.
My life is a low-intelligence run 😂
I've definitely found this game shallow in the rpg elements and it's similarity to fallout hurts it more than helps and the combat is totally bare bones , but overall am enjoying it. EDIT: 2 weeks after writing this I returned it because the game is mediocre garbage
Yeah, it's strange how much OW fans acknowledge how middle of the road the game is (objectively), yet still enjoy it so much.
@@TheSpectralForce yeah I don't really know what keeps me coming back honestly. I really thought this game would be more immersive but I guess I'm OK with fallout with not terrible writing
@@castrochris94 Same here! I think it's the characters and the writing that keep pulling me back. Every last NPC I encountered was interesting and charming. Even the ones who are supposed to be douchebags (_wink_)
@TheSpectralForce IMHO Outer Worlds is a well polished mediocre RPG elevated by a lack of competition.
@@FirstLast-qm4ye I think it could be considered a nice foundation for eventual development. At least I hope so - the blueprints for something really great is there, and considering TOW has been kinda successful, I expect they get the chance to develop things more later. As is, it is a good game. Sequels could potentially be great.
Your being quite dis-honest when you say Fallout New Vegas was built in 18 months and Outer Worlds in 3 years.
The 18 months Fallout NV had started with a completed (albeit incredibly flawed) engine, with most of the systems being holdovers from Fallout 3.
The 3 years for the Outer Worlds was built in Unreal, but all the systems had to be developed from the ground up.
Outer Worlds was a new IP with a new world and new concepts to be ironed out, New Vegas had a lot of its ideas taken from Interplay's cancelled Fallout 3 in a existing established world.
Not saying your wrong about the length, but I am saying that neither of those numbers really mean anything on their own as context makes it clear they are not comparing the same thing.
Yes. Also Fallout NV - literally unplayable upon release because of numerous bugs
@@wyrdplae8586 Its very common knowledge that New Vegas reuses Fallout 3's engine and assets and that the Outer World's had to be built from the world building stages (by the very nature of it being a new IP) undermines him comparing the development time number he used to him his point it, I do conced it could be Hanlon's Razor, but doubt he didn't know NV reused assets or Outer World was a new IP.
@Dark Legionnaire What????? It's ok to dislike the game or any game but how is the game you see before you a Mass effect clone that sounds very ridiculous. Just by watching the current video and a video of Mass effect you can see they are two very distinct games the only similarity is that they are in space.A more apt comparison would probably be it being A "Fallout Rip-off" or even a "Borderlands Rip-off" but for "Mass Effect Rip-off" I'm just confused dude what are you even talking about. Also by "Bethesda helping them the whole time" do you mean the game is only good because the engine because as far as I know besides allowing it and providing the engine and a speedy deadline they weren't really that involved,but maybe I'm wrong?
@Dark Legionnaire Stolen assets don't make it a clone and many RPGs have the same companion control commands. My point was more that the gameplay ends up being more like a bad version of borderlands with a kind of looter shooter vibe then Mass effect. Don't get me wrong though I am no obsidian fanboy I have my own criticisms of the game I feel like a lot of it was rushed. Their is little depth except for every npc standard line "Can you do me a favor".The faction system is fairly meaningless and it is easy to get everyone to like you,the game has a super short runtime even after every quest,The combat and looting gets repetitive and annoying quickly due to a lack of loot variety except food holy Fuck their is so much meaningless food,and the story is a fairly linear one.The game still has its positives with pretty good character writing and a fairly decently built up world,it feels like this is gonna be one of those games where it is simply building up for a sequel,though.So I'm not giving it a "Bethesda-level pass" Pass I just didn't think the criticisms giving before were all that clear or really even true,I still have my own issues with the game and probably won't go back to play it again.Also yes I have Played Wasteland 2(Did you know they are currently making Wasteland 3 I'm p hyped for that!!). It is a really good game and I love it. I have also played Planescape:Torment,Baldur's Gate 1 and 2,The original two Fallouts,and,Mass Effect 1-Andromeda,Dragon Age:Origins (Didn't really like Inquisition), and Vampire the Masquerade,but I don't see what me playing Wasteland 2 has to do with anything I'm sorry. If you want to send me underrail go ahead it sounds like a good game and that is very kind of you but I get the vibe you are only saying that because you are thinking of me as new too the genre witch I am not. I just kind of think the clone accusation isn't a very good criticism. Like you could consider Terraria a clone of Minecraft because I'm both games you are granted immense freedom to build and craft in a randomly generated world. That doesn't make either a bad game. The sci-fi theme of Mass Effect isn't even that similar either.In Mass Effect it is drawing a lot more from Star Trek and with Outer World's it seems to be inspired by pulp fiction serials and Firefly.So yes they are both sci-fi games where you fly around on a ship but that is a very generic concept and besides that they are pretty different,story-wise and gameplay-wise.I say it is more of a Fallout clone because the plot is basically Fallout 1's again where you have to find the Macguffin to save your fellow Vault Dwell....... Oh sorry I mean The Hope's inhabitants and for the gameplay it goes from the open world stylings of Fallout 3-76 to a much more poorly done Borderlands. Those are more reasons for comparison to those games but your comparison to Mass Effect just felt shallow to me.And last but not least if we are recommending games here try out Disco Elysium I think that is probably the best rpg of that decade not Outer World's like you are assuming I am. I'd give OW a 5.5/10 and Disco Elysium a 9.9/10.It is a great game that really sucks you in to the story and makes you think deep about things. That has little to do with anything but it's just such a good game that more people need to play.
@Dark Legionnaire Also why you Soo angry lol I just wanted clarification I don't like the game much either I just didn't understand what you were going on about. Notice how I commented to only you and no one else who expresses dislike to the the game.I'm not just some fanboy getting ANGRRRRRY over any criticism I just don't see the basis of yours.
I like the game but it feels like it's missing something compared to fallout 1 and new vegas, some of that magic is missing, the world and characters are simply not very interesting at least for me.
My issue with the game is that the opening act on the first planet is by far the best part of the game. The game allowed me to "play the long game". I got to screw over the rebel faction to complete my objective, then I got to go into the rebel camp and convince their leader to take over the town (because she would've been far better at it, even without her knowledge of how to fertilize crops), and then convinced the main guy to step down as if he loved the company so much, he should see that the best people be put in charge of protecting it and its bottom line.
The game was never as good as those moments again. Every quest I did afterwards didn't feel so rewarding. Every quest afterwards didn't seem to offer me as many interesting alternatives. They were all "straight forward" and the best I could do was just hack my way around an obstacle, unlock a door around an obstacle, or talk my way around an obstacle. Which... to be honest... is nice... but sort of dull when it doesn't do anything except let you progress.
Likewise, I liked that the game would let me betray the guy who woke me up... but then it starts the massive list of contrivances to keep me from actually doing it. "Oh, you know where he is? Fill out this form. Then, it goes up the ladder of bureaucracy to the next step". Oh, I can turn him in to the official at the embassy, he has the authority! But, his stamper is missing. I have to get it back. So, I buy it back, he stamps the form, then tells me to move along to the next planet so that I can have an official official look at it and decide what to do about it. So, I get annoyed and go to the guy's hide-out for the first time in forever... and he has locked himself behind doors I cannot access at all, so I can't even shoot him in the face. This, inevitably tells me that he's been listening to me the entire time and just faking that the transmitter is broken.
At which point... I'm just bored with the game.
I was so bored with the game, in fact, that I killed an entire town of people on Monarch for no reason other than the game let me. I didn't save it, but I did put the game down.
The problem with the game is that there's just... not much here.
The perks are fairly "lack luster". The only ones I cared about were the carry weight ones. The gunplay is fairly bland (aside from the early game where I had to use cover because the starting weapons and armor are garbage and you don't have enough money to upgrade them to God-Tier) and I stand out in the open and just plink everyone with a shotgun until they die with way too many medical inhaler things to back me up. Likewise, so many quests have a distinct lack of "resolution". You do what meager thing they want you to do, nothing really comes of it, and you just get XP and get paid. Likewise, the companions don't really talk all that much except the first two you get, and nobody really offers anything of interest except the first one.
Overall, the game is just... shallow? I don't know. It's hard to put into words. It feels like there's not much content. It feels like what I can do is rather dull. It feels like my skills don't really matter all that much except to gatekeep me from specific dialogue options. It feels like the game loses direction and coherency after the first planet. I feel like I'm "wandering aimlessly" too much. I also don't feel a rush of excitement when I level up either. For a while, I was holding onto three separate level ups just because I didn't need any skills at the time and didn't have any idea what two perks I wanted. I eventually used them when I ran into an NPC that required I have a specific number in a specific stat in order to use a specific dialogue option. Even the act of obtaining loot was rendered meaningless to me as I've got about 3,000 shotgun rounds at any given moment and 6,000 energy rounds at any given moment. I have so many "mods" for my weapons and armor that I'll never use, 'cause all I had to do was pick some good equipment and then just dump money into it to make it amazing without mods.
It's not even like the game feels "too easy". I mean, I enjoyed Fallout New Vegas despite how utterly easy it was to break the hell out of that game and become overpowered by Level 8 (able to easily murder Death Claws and Cazadores, even on Survival Difficulty). It's just that this game feels like there's not much here. It feels like everything I try to engage in just sort of "peters out" with no real resolution of any kind, or even a conclusion. Just a cursory, "okay, we're done here" and the game never speaks of it again. To which I just think, "Oh, um... Okay... I guess I gotta go find something new to do now?"
It certainly doesn't help that there are so many buildings you can't even enter in the game. So many doors that can't be opened. Or, if you do open them, the interiors are boring with next to no Lore on the area. Early in the game, there's a geothermal plant you go to, it's got a bunch of robots running amuck. The most lore you get out of it? "Corporate gave us these new robots, told us not to muck about with them, and then they killed everyone". Do you ever find a reason for it? I didn't. My best guess was the robots were defective or Corporate wanted the colony destroyed for some reason. The game is filled with stuff like that. Just... Lore that serves no purpose, doesn't flesh out anything, and goes nowhere. Much of it is even completely devoid of personality.
For example, in New Vegas, I remember the Vault where they had to elect people to die every year, so it got super political. I remember the two major players in that. Not their names, but who they were as people. The lady who had her husband murdered and she plotted murders to get elected, then changed the computer system so nobody could ever have a political stranglehold again. Then, the other guy who wanted to hold onto his power and plotted to overthrow the whole Vault by controlling the water and power. I remember them both. Even their voices. But, in the Outer Worlds? I pick up audio logs and have no idea who these people are, nor do I care. They have no personality and are interchangeable with everyone else.
I don't know. The game is good for about 10 hours, and drastically declines after that.
I really didn't see much difference between Adelaide running Edgewater and running the Botanical Labs when she either ousts out the pro-corporate folks in one and refuses them entry in another.
As for the robots in the Vale, the terminals indicate it was about Spacer's Choice wanting to make a tiny profit by intentionally killing people (it's heavily inferred from the insurance policy they suddenly took out on that facility and what's mentioned about the robot attacks being due to how their new equipment was hardwired to do so).
How long did it take you to type this
@@elijah4621 About 10 minutes or so. Formatting on TH-cam is abysmal, so things always look bigger than they actually are.
@@XxTaiMTxX lmao
There are a few different ways you can find an explanation for the geothermal plant. Spacer’s Choice installed hostility mods and set the automechanicals loose to cash in on the insurance. I found this out from a hacked terminal, but Sophia Akande of the board will also tell you as much as well if you start her questline in a certain way. If you aren’t finding much specific lore, you aren’t digging hard enough. Just about every single zone had a specific reason that it was the way it was. Most of the criticisms i’ve heard of this game are from people who just didn’t do everything or find everything, which i think is brilliant. If you want answers, you have to dig for them. Not everything is spoonfed to you, and if your character isn’t the sort of person who would be focused on finding all of this out, you never will. Just like how Chris here never realized that you can put Adelaide in control of edgewater.
So, I played the game on hard, and the beginning was brutal. I was immediately impressed by the difficulty and the smart enemy ai. I was rationing ammo, going stealthy, rushing to cover, trying to fighre out ways to draw the enemy to where I was or running if they came to somewhere I couldn't fight.
After a few quests I had all ammo I could want. Soon I didn't need those tactics anymore. A little before level 15 I saw my last overleveled enemy. Soon enough, I was a little overleved for everything, just by doing sidequests throughly. And by that point, I was death incarnate.
That's how every rpg has worked since the dawn of time. Once you hit the bend, nothing can stop you.
It is not as immersive as 3 or new Vegas due to how shallow many systems feel and how uninteresting the story is. The writing is good but the only reason to progress the story is to unlock the other planets. The story is not at all compelling and you care about none of the characters to a point where everyone I talked to says they immediately tried to turn that crazy scientist in. I have completed this game twice with both endings and I couldn't tell you what happened in the story if you put a gun to my head. It's a good game but only great in the sense that a starving man would say something from McDonald's dollar menu was great because we are just desperate for this type of game that any halfway decent offering seems amazing. People are waaaaay over hyping this game
I mean, that's on you if you didn't care about characters. Because I did care about most characters I met especially the ones on Monarch
I agree that in terms of aesthetically and in design, Fallout 3 is a lot more immersive, but I disagree as a whole comparison. Fallout 3s progression system while being the same as New Vegas completely lacks in both quality and quantity regarding perks. The map while being 'big', has a lack of interesting areas and loot;"unique" weapons. You get stuck with the same weapons for most of the game (if not all). The writing is sub-par, and always lacks in how many dialogue options you have; seemingly missing out on what you actually want to say. Fallout 3 is held up by the interesting kill cams, targeting system, looting system, and the world it is set in. The locations and random event/cinematic occurrences keep the game somewhat refreshing, but on a whole the game lacks.
The Outer Worlds on the other hand seemingly fixes a lot of these issues, and despite not being an amazingly big game, its quality outshines the lack of quantity it has (still has a good amount of content). As for F:NV vs TOW... I agree it has a lot left to desire in comparison to that game.
As for the story... If you actually read through everything (assuming you didn't by that comment), you would have a good grasp on what is happening.
If you actually go back and play Fallout 3 after playing TOW, you wouldn't be making that comment (I don't think at least).
"3 or New Vegas"... Hmm I know many people find the wasteland in fallout3 very cool to roam around in (me too) and think its good worldbuilding but when it comes to story and writing, it's still better than 3. Not as cool as New Vegas sadly tho because as he said in the video, they have played it too safe and went for a streamlined approach.
You finished it twice and couldn't tell what happened in the story, haha come on.
@elijah mikle It's not solely on writers. Sure if the writers make shitty one dimensional characters then it's on them. But I like the characters in the Outer Worlds. If you don't for reasons of X,Y and Z I'm pretty sure that's on you.
I don't think your dev time comparison is fair. 18 months for NV, 3 years for this. NV was made by modifying and adding to FO3, this was built from scratch in UE4. Also, NV was famously a bug-riddled mess and you say this game is fairly polished. Polish takes time.
I mean, I'm not saying three years is a long time to make a game of this quality. I just don't think people need to make apologies for it not being as good as NV.
Polish? Game runs like ass for many people. GTX 1070, i7-6700HQ, and 16 gigs of DDR4 and the game has trouble staying at 60 in indoor areas and can't pass 40 in outdoor areas in LOW settings.
I'd rather deal with New Vegas bugs than crap optimization like this.
Yeah it's funny how people will say the game Is buggy they should've polished it more....but when it's polished they say it's shallow. You damn imbeciles don't understand what's going on when you make a game with a double a budget.
The reviews speak for themselves....which btw I predicted it would be getting 9s and some 8.5s and Goty Contender months in advance
@@lupefiasco653 So...A game can't be good and polished? Only one or the other?
@@carcosian there's always something to criticize with these drones. Outer worlds was being shitted on by alot of people before it's release.
These frauds are no where to be found after the reviews came out.
I bet alot are on this channel trying to bring down a double a game...
It was really shitty that increasing the difficulty basically only added 30 minutes to the time it takes you to become overpowered and steamroll everything.
Exactly. Even in harder difficulties you can one shot almost anything with any weapon and there's no challenge to anything else.
@@stubbyflex1275 What? You can't one shot pretty much anyone with any weapon.
When I played through the game on normal the weapons still felt underpowered. I had current level weapons and tried various ones, including the uniques and it always felt like an airsoft gun since the enemies are bullet sponges.
They ask 60$ for this game, of course it deserves to be critisized as any game.
Free on xbox live pass, but OK.
@@neilwilson5785 Xbox one and live pass are not free, but OK.
@@criticalcoffee
less then 20 dollars, but OK
@@eliran9231 For both? Yeah, nah, but OK.
This should not have been $60.
It doesn't feel like a triple A game
To be fair, at least obsidian finally got the required time to finish their game for once.
Given Obsidian's financial and commercial history, I think their actions in marketing the game and in constructing it more as a "vignette" than their usual deep-dives like KOTOR 2, New Vegas, Alpha Protocol, Tyranny, etc make tons of sense.
I think they realize this is a game that - if they blow their load on a deep game that is critically-warm but commercially rather flat (see: almost all of their fucking games) - they'll be back at kickstarter trying to tread water again and they don't want to do that. They know this is the first time back to the "mainstream" gaming market in quite some time - having operated in a niche market for years - and they want to bust out all the stops and really hustle to make this game successful not just for themselves as a company but to show Microsoft that they can be more than just double-A darlings, the company that gets to work on other company's spin-offs and sequels rather than their own material (New Vegas and The Sith Lords).
This is Obsidian - for better or worse - putting their Littlefinger scheme in play after years of just trying to stay solvent and comfortable. This is them trying to make a power-play and not just carve out a new spot on the top shelf for themselves, but push motherfuckers off if they feel they must. It's a shame Avellone and Obsidian had a falling out, because while Avellone seems to be doing even BETTER for himself since getting the boot I think Obsidian could really use his talent going forward. I think The Outer Worlds will be a commercial success, which hopefully is just enough cushion to let them work on the deeper projects for which they're known - I think they might've raised expectations too high, what folks should understand going into this is that you're getting a good game out of your money, but you're also putting a down-payment on even better games in the future. That's what this seems like to me. A vertical slice of what Obsidian is capable of in order to prove themselves to those unfamiliar and to wet the appetites of those they've been gone from for a while.
Vignette is a pretty good description.
Yeah, the game feels like they're testing the waters with this new IP.
They probably felt like sinking too many resources on an untested IP would be too risky. Resources that, when they started making the game 3 years ago they didn't have.
Now that they're part of Microsoft, they have basically infinite resources, so...
(in fact, that was one of the things Feargus Urquhart mentioned when he announced the deal)
Let's just hope Microsoft doesn't screw this up.
Fuzzy Dunlop
Are you seriously calling Alpha Protocol a "deep-dive"?
-_-
A vignette they slap a £60 price tag on.
Don’t apologize for them.
Fallout 1 was a game that despite considerable constraints did something innovative and exciting. Under your defined terms outer worlds is nothing like fallout 1
...? He listed quite a bit of reasons as to why it's similar. Your statement is basically like saying, "You can't compare a lion and a tiger because they're different creatures and live in different parts of the world" lmao what.
@@cgijokerman5787 you are right. outer worlds adopts the limitations of a game from 1997 to "play it safe." I was being facetious to use a word like "nothing" in such a context. What I should have said was "the exciting innovations featured in 1997's fallout 1 are present in outer worlds but no longer are these features exciting or innovative."
@@dwbryant13 Now that, that is accurate. Except the companions though, I feel like they were better done than in F1, but even then, not nearly as well written or even just... Like why does every companion follow you? At least in Vegas, if you had too much bad karma, you couldn't recruit good karma characters, it made sense, why would a goody two shoes wanna travel with someone who sides with the bad guys?! In OW there isn't any of that
Yup! Fallout 1 was actually new, proactive and interesting. While Outer worlds is boring and inoffensive to the highest degree, with no originality whatsoever.
The difference in Fallout 1, 2 and New Vegas and outer worlds is that interplay made Fallout 1 and 2 they went bankrupt
after that obsidian was made and obsidian made New Vegas very small company and it takes time to grow a company outside of New Vegas I have never heard of obsidian back then
and now they got acquisitioned by Microsoft they got a lot more people and capital play with
Just finished it and I must agree, I was really hyped for it, but it just let me feel disappointed. Great characters and dialogue, ok story, ok combat, bad enemy, weapons and gears variety, perks that barely make any differences, choices that are pretty shallow with no nuanced options like a Witcher game, for example, and a really short undeveloped story that took me only 26h with almost all sidequests completed.
I really expected better from the guys that made Fallout New Vegas (one of my favorite games of all time)
Well, they made Dungeon Siege 3. A game that basically killed the franchise.
The writing lags behind Fallout 1 for me. Besides, after Disco Elysium it just felt extremely trite.
iam i the only one that doesnt find world interesting and characters are good but nothing special
sillylittlesheep Jax yea the world is kind of shallow too there is not much to do in it and it’s not too interesting most of it is really flat
Yeah, the only characters I care about are the crew. And even then most of that care goes towards Parvati. Something about the game felt weird to me. I couldn't connect with the story and found myself zoning out so much during dialogue moments that I basically didn't know what I was doing anything for half the time.
Corporations bad, very creative plot
@@frenzy2061 It was disappointing that the only remotely attractive female is a lesbian and therefore I could not romance her (as a dude), in other words my sexuality was not represented. How whimsical
@@mrbouncelol I didn't mind that there wasn't any romance. Not every game needs to appeal to people's sexuality you know. The game had it's flaws but in don't think this is one of them...
This game has already been forgotten
Not really, I wanted to get it for quite some time now and it's still pretty high on my wishlist. I want to play it just for the art style and writing, even if it is somewhat average in all other aspects.
Yeah but that's not really saying anything. Most games have been forgotten. Video games are probably the most expendable media ever.
@@connorambrosino1741 I think movies are the most expendable media ever. They are made in thousands and at best only a couple of hundred are even remembered.
@@giorgialadashvili4771 I think they forgot Netflix still rents out physical media lol.
Why do you think that is?
Bro your comments at 8:40 about your own critique cracked me up
Keep up the good work! You’ll be the next Joseph Anderson in no time!
The whole game feels six years out of date.
If anything you are being generous by saying only "six"...
Yall high af
@@intuitivedruid5732 It's not a good game.
It's not 'out of date', it's just mediocre,
Panda Ryuu I think it's a fun game. Not perfect. Not ground breaking. But fun and serviceable. The game really should have sold for $30 or $40 however. I got it on game pass so no biggy to me. But I think calling this game bad at a $30 price point would just insane.
As a $60 title, it's mediocre. Though in my eyes, this game is a gem. It has me putting in hours like I used to in my child hood
3:50-4:00. YES. I played so much more of this game percentage wise, because the content was good. I didn't get tired from having to curate my play-through. I like Ubisoft games like Far Cry and Assassin's Creed well enough, but there is always that point about seven hours in where I look at the map, sigh, and have to figure out how much of the I'm going to bother with. Not the case in Outer Worlds.
one thing i really dislike about the outer worlds is how every location has the same generic bandit type enemies, or atleast the vast majority. I don't think it would be asking too much for each major location to have its own kind of enemies to deal with given they're from different fucking planets. if this game wants to ride new vegas's coat tails constantly then it should of looked back on how many unique raider type enemies there were.
Was it only a "food shortage"? I thought it was the fact that the food itself wasn't nutritious (meaning you could eat tons and still die of starvation)?
DreamingFlurry Yea, nutritional shortage, but the term is close enough
Yeah, that's more accurate.
Yup, hence why it doesn’t make sense why Byzantium would still be doing it’s thing. It doesn’t matter how much they eat or how much food they have access to, they’re still going to die. It’s why the situation was so dire
Having thoroughly played Fallout 1 & 2, New Vegas, Knights of the Old Republic 2, and even Neverwinter Nights 2... this game is just extremely okay. It's missing too much polish, it lacks a gripping narrative, it has an uninspiring world design, its characters are boring and uninteresting - not to mention useless, FPS gameplay is bland, and its RPG and level up mechanics are mediocre. The Outer Worlds is really, extremely okay.
For my first run I'm playing on hardest difficulty and going on 65 hours... I feel like there's only 1/4 left of the game. However, in all brutal honesty, I really don't want to play it anymore. I just want to get it over with and be done already. The only part of me that continues playing is the desire to get more than my $60 worth. I'm just so bored with this game but I will still concede it's not a bad game; it's a ridiculously okay game.
Shallow, as this video pointed out, is the perfect way to describe The Outer Worlds.
You are too clever for me. Go to NASA and invent a space ship. Maybe not an 'Unreliable' one.
Not sure it makes sense comparing it to the best Fallout game.
How on Earth did you play this game for 65 hours? I would have died from boredom a long time ago.
@@ReTr093 Because I kept hoping it would get better but I just got sadder and sadder playing this game. I totally forgot this game ever existed. That's how boring it was.
And then there are people desperately defending this game with everything they've got and I'm happy again because I realize I'm not as sad as they are.
It was boring. That was my issue, oh and no third person after I spent an hour making my character.
The lack of third person bugged me to. What's the point of having armor customization and a custom character if you never see them?
Adam how was that journalism? The dude just stated his opinion and criticism on, get this, *a video critiquing the game*
@Adam how was it journalism? The person was just annoyed that you can't play in third person despite every indication from character customization to cosmetic equipment that it would most likely exist. I'm in the same boat loathing first person and making a compromise to give the game a fair shake. I've a similar gripe that despite having a barber in the game you can't change your hair or beard in universe.
@@danielyoung6778 Why would you want to trim your beard? You can't see yourself.
Having game audio instead of cheesy looping background music underneath your commentary makes this video at least 200 % more enjoyable for me. Thank you so. MUCH.
this does not have a feel like fallout 1. Fallout 1 has lot's of choices to pick, this one has 1 straight line for everything.
Also the fact that Fallout 1 actually had some unique and inventive aspects to it, whereas Outer Worlds shamelessly rips off of every dystopian game from the last 20 years.
I agree with your statement about Outer Worlds quality, but it is worth mentioning that NV had prebuilt assists and systems and OW had to do all that and have higher standards. NV had to assemble, OW had to build
TOW not OW. OW is overwatch
but on the other hand, creating assets and designing and making games, in general, is a lot easier now in modern game engines compared to how it was in the late 2000's and especially in Bethesda's garbage gamebryo engine. Also, even if some of the assets were there for them to use, they obviously had to create a huge amount of original work for Fallout New Vegas too. Anybody who has actually played both games, would agree I think.
@@NatrajChaturvedi I wouldn't say that making games on a modern engine is easier. Modern PCs and Consoles are much more capable and so the games nowadays are expected to look much better than the games 5 or 10 years ago and to meet those expectations developers have to create much more assets and the assets themselves are much more complex. That's why we don't see many AAA games move forward in game design, because visuals take most of the time and budget, and the bar for them keeps getting higher and higher with each game (on top hiring an actor for voice and/or mocap for every character) Not to mention the visual design standards are higher and creating a brand new IP like Outer Worlds takes a lot more work even before you get to the building the game itself, you gotta remember that hell of a lot of work goes into concept art and writing the world before the work on the in-game stuff actually starts.
While with New Vegas you already have a pre-build world, you already have certain limits and directions to work with. When it comes to assets, it's not only models that they could use from Fallout 3, it's also AI, UI, gameplay systems and a bunch of other stuff that requires a lot of work to build but we, players, take for granted.
And you have to remember that it's ALWAYS easier to work with something already made. It's always easier to change and add than to build something new from scratch. That's why so many companies stick to franchises. Not only it's less risky, but it's also easier to make something new and better by building on what you already have.
Also, New Vegas was from many developers of original Fallout games. So even if they had to adapt to the new Bethesda Fallout style, they still had a lot of knowledge on how such game should be done.
@elijah mikle people are free to tell themselves whatever they want cuz its a free world... mostly
@@MrFr2eman look above for my answer. Edit: Btw I was saying a similar thing to what your saying, that they had to infact do a lot of original work for New Vegas. People who say "development for New Vegas must have been easy because Bethesda gave them ready-made assets and a game engine" are being foolish. Even things like UI elements had to be tweaked or created fresh for New Vegas. Then there's the entirely new map they had to create, tons of new weapons, armors, constumes, characters, factions (faction system) so yea I never said Fallout New Vegas was easy to make!!
As for weather game development is easier now or was back then, just compare the size of the indie market now and back in 2008. You know what has been one of the factors that has this explosion in the indie space and allowed so many independent game developers to create games? its better and easier tools and more powerful hardware that is much cheaper than it used to be. Still this really is a subjective thing considering neither of us is in "AAA" game development (I am assuming you are not. If you are then I will take your opinion as objective fact) and there's no point arguing it.
Outer Worlds was like Fallout 1? Not even remotely lmao, Outer Worlds' Quests were way, way too linear.
Bro you got that anime girl Deus Vult icon hahahah did anybody ask you?
@@BLIGHTROT666 deadass berserk fan saying this shit
It’s almost 2 hours of video, you can’t just go lmao and say nothing to support your opinion, makes you look like a bad person.
Fallout 1 had pretty linear quests as well. I recently played it and it's not as open as I remembered it to be. Plus it actually is similar to OW
They justified the relatively shot play time by saying you will want to play through multiple time but the reality is you won't. You're choices rarely matter in this mostly just effecting the ending narration. Yes some characters will change or be replaced but rarely with any consequence to a point where I at one point actively pissed off a companion doing the opposite of what they said and always being as rude as possible and they still stick with you often times acting as if a conversation where I called them asshole never happened. It makes everything Oz like with it appearing real on the surface but with just a little digging being revealed as extremely shallow
I remember hearing so many people saying good things about this game, from internet muckrakers, to endless Reddit posts. I then tried it, and was relatively... underwhelmed with it. The guns felt too similar, the weapon mods were boring, the status ailments barely did anything, the morality was obvious, character building was uninspiring, and free form exploration was relatively pointless since seemingly every single location was tied to a quest. I could write an entire paragraph or two on just how disappointing the arsenal was.
If you ask me, it’s no big mystery that the main reason for TOW’s success was it’s timing.
Yeah, I was thinking about how The Emerald Vale and Monarch were waaay too similar to each other, which isn't helped by the fact that the asset reuse is far worse in this game than it is in Fallout and everything and everyone look the same. Considering that the world is fairly static, I just got bored after a while and involuntarily autopiloted my way through Monarch. Which is bad coming from me cause I adore space sci-fi and I don't think we get nearly enough adventure games with this kind of setting. So, it saddens me that this game wasn't all I wanted to be.
Personally, I thought this game could have been a lot more compelling if it went even further with the critique of capitalism. IT already comments on the corporate culture of pursuing short-term gain to the detriment of all, but I thought it could have gone much deeper into changing markets and blindness when it comes to supply and demand due to class divide. Like you said, the rich need the lower class, but I thought the game could have gone into the rich not being able to understand what the lower class want and/or trying to influence it by limiting the market. It's a way they could have introduced complex themes and really gone in on the social commentary, but it just doesn't reach those heights.
That's one thing I was confused about,too. Everyone in the system seems to work for a corporation sans the Groundbreaker, so what is the market that these companies are trying to appeal to? Who are the common, unconnected people that the marketing and corporate ads are supposed to influence? Presumably it would be the only free people in Halcyon, the Groundbreaker, but everyone on the Groundbreaker acts like the Board only tolerates their presence and only keeps them around because it's more profitable to trade through them. Edgewater is even an example of a corporate town that limits the food supply to only the products of the company that owns the town. So, if companies restrict the workers to the products they produce, has the corporation become some cyclic machine where the workers have to put the money they earn back into the company by buying the products they produce? If so, why all the marketing? It seems completely unnecessary. You'd think it would be Earth, but Earth has supposedly abandoned Halcyon for 3 years before the game starts and most of what the companies produce is food which probably wouldn't survive the 10 year trip home.
I mean, maybe I'm overthinking it, but to my understanding, in order for capitalism to exist there has to be a market to appeal to in the first place, and it just doesn't seem to exist in this game. As a result, it feels like we're ultimately fighting for nothing as most of the people under the corporate banner seem content with their lives outside of the troubles you solve for them and the only people outside the corporate banner are dissenters who want to survive or topple the system but have no ultimate long term goal. In New Vegas, you could thoroughly think out which faction would most benefit the future of the Mojave through the quests, dialogue, and strong writing behind everything going on. You could actually think through how to solve the problem the region was going through and your character was a direct influence. Here, you can make ripples that will eventually lead to larger changes in the future, which I like, but the long term goal of your quest is ultimately to wake up some frozen people who will solve all the important problems for you. It's not nearly as compelling and it feels like Obsidian weren't on their A-Game or creating an entirely new IP instead of a sequel or spinoff was beyond them for some reason. I don't know.
Still, I had fun, and I'm hoping for some DLC that will improve the game and allow us to visit some of the gated locations and meet some of the companies we weren't able to meet in the main game. Hopefully with some better stories and setpieces to switch things up.
That's a lot of typing
@@foxysobek8109 I've had a lot of thoughts about the game since finishing it.
You make some interesting points and I've wondered about some of the same things. The corporations have enough money to colonize planets and send people to live on them. But I'm not sure who they're selling their products to besides the people in the colonies. I'm still early in the game though so I haven't seen that much.
"in order for capitalism to exist there has to be a market to appeal to in the first place, and it just doesn't seem to exist in this game."
That's exactly why it doesn't work in the first place. It seems more like a bunch of government-owned brands you're forced to consume with no real options, something that would happen in gulag-land. Calling the game's corps "corps" instead of what it functionally is within the game, a governing body that owns factories, is curious.
I thought monarch being similar to edgewater was the point: essentially it takes the first scenario of the game and flips it on its head so that the corporation looks like the good guys and the hippies are the bad guys instead of the reverse in edgewater.
I appreciate you giving this game a more critical look. It's great, but lacking in many ways as well. Seems like the community is more focused on saying how great it is but not so much on where devs can improve on for the next game. There's a lot of potential, but fans need to be critical too.
A lot of people, including reviewers, used TOW as a way of sticking it to Bethesda, instead of judging the game solely on its own merits. They had made up their mind about TOW the day it was announced (that it was better then ANY Bethesda Fallout game). I remember a similar, but not quite as bad, hype around Greedfall ("look, we don't need Bioware anymore!"). It's all politics.
Kind of reminds me of Xenoblade that way.
Luobo Mu Exactly this, and I feel like they only discuss the things it has that Fallout doesn’t instead of vice versa. This game it really lacking in the gameplay department, and I found the story bland enough to where I never beat it. Fallout 4 isn’t great overall, and it’s a subpar at best RPG, but I still find everything else in that game far more interesting than anything in TOW
@@luobomu9747 to be fair, i still think the OW is superior to fallout 4 and 76. But it still lacks in depth to truly be a "fallout killer" if people TRULY want to stick it to bugthesda, they can't make an ok game like TOW, they need another masterpiece like fallout 2 or NV.
@@lobstertown1826 Idk, fallout 4s gameplay loop bores me a lot more than TOWs, at least it's story is somewhat consistent and has some skill checks. But then again there is also the fact that I despise settlement building, so that might make people like F4 more if you like that stuff. For me, at least mechanically it's a better RPG and combat is about on the same level as F4. Plus it's story makes more sense at least. But that's me. Still, TOW needs to improve in its sequel, majorly if it wants to see the same success and become a true franchise. It needs to be like fallout 2 or wasteland 3. Taking what was wrong with the last installment and making it substantially better.
Never did finish it, the cakewalk difficulty made it so boring..
I assume you tried upping the difficulty I found hard mode pretty perfect (but that's only as a casual fps fan.)
@@dylanbaker9016 i did the 2nd highest difficulty cuz i really dislike survival things like having to eat and drink
@@magnusberge that was my reasoning to.
conversely the hardcore mode is a bit too difficult because in combat you are a bit too weak and having companions dying permanently is too unfair then. I have finished FNV's HC mode many many times and that is much better balanced I will say.
I honestly thought hard was decent difficulty enough, it's only later does it become easy when you upgrade stuff. Only issue I had was the final mission everything took a stark jump in difficulty damage/health wise. And things that had been giving me little trouble where far harder then before, I think that level in particular needs to better balancing.
The first hours I had a lot of fun with it, but soon I would grown to find the game boring and I couldn't play more than an hour without getting bored.
I had to force myself to play it, so I sold it.
FYI: Some logs on monarch mention that it is NOT a straight up food shortage but a shortage of specific nutrients that don’t develop in Halcyon.
That makes the entire lifetime employment program more plausible and also explains why the board didn’t want to thaw the hope inhabitants.
It feels like it was shoehorned in at a late stage, because the spoken dialog never mentions that, but they thought about that still.
Would also explain why using corpses for the plants would keep them going longer. My biggest issue is they get stellar freighters from earth just mass ship food
Yeah, you're right. I just kind of thought of it as a food shortage in my head and it found its way into the script like that. I'm not sure that it changes the logic behind the LEP though, does it? I mean, whether it's a food shortage or shortage of good food, we're still talking about a lack of the basic needs of human beings.
@@ChrisDavis_Games Well at least the "official" version of the LEP, the bit about cycling through inhabitants is consistent then, right? Just like leaving the hope inhabitants frozen, because having them available as work force could perhaps change a food shortage, but not a nutrient shortage, which would only exacerbate with more people. That is my understanding.
How you reconcile the actual LEP, that stuff with the robots that murder and process you is another matter. I guess you could say that humans are a good nutrient storage. Well.
@@goreobsessed2308 They GOT mass shipments from Earth until about 3 years ago, hence why a fundamental problem only became a crisis recently.
None of the food they find in the colony is edible to humans, so they have to either import it or grow Earth crops on non-native soil. Even the pigs they mass farm were developed on Earth, not Halcyon.
The crisis of the Board was one of alarming incompetence rather than outright maliciousness with very few exceptions, such as the Chairman.
31:25 , for me I pulled the power to Edgewater. Then convinced Adelaide I was on her side, THEN went back to Reed and told him to beat it and he sucked. He left, Adelaide moved back in and Edgewater is now run by her with the plague cure being supplied by the graveyard. I think that’s the “best” ending for there
I literally never used the slow time feature outside of the tutorial
Your and Anderson's videos are both awesome) your nod to his videos warms my heart
Be cool if he mad a critique of outer worlds
@@Spirit47373 apparently he's making a NINE HOUR video on the witcher series
@@Morden97 oh man that sounds nuts. Where did you hear that?
He is. He mentions it on his Twitch streams quite a lot.
@@Spirit47373 I've talked with Lily Anderson, and whilst I don't know how long the video is (she won't say, prolly don't know herself) she has said that Joe is working on said video.
I couldn't even bring myself to beat the game. Its super dull, the combat is lackluster, the story is ass. Overall very meh
Lol, realizing that I finished this game with 34 hours and never used companion abilities, shot weakpoints (other than head) and never used proper damage types on specific enemies and STILL found the game to be incredibly easy on hard.
A shame you don't get more views, your videos are always a great surprise when they come out! Cool coincidence i was playing the game just when your video came out too!
Thanks!
This is one of the best critiques of the game I've seen. A lot of ro for improvement. Now that they have a baseline I can't wait to see where they go from here
That Navkey was actually in a safe to the left when you walk into Gladys' room. FYI
honestly the whole "you can kill anyone in the game" stuff is such a dumb compliment. it never really effects your story and mostly just shows how bland plot is. nothing in this game matters, its such a lifeless world and you never feel like there are any consequences for anything.
I just started killing everyone in town because of how bored i was, just to see what would happen. No surprise, nothing happens. It’s just dull.
Agree, unless the game hard locks you from continuing and breaks your save file, what's the point? (srs)
It really depends on implementation if you ask me
Correction to a point you made: the secondary driver wasn't really a shortage of food. It was that the human body wasnt getting enough nutrients in the long run to maintain itself. This distinction is important.
They comment on marauder gear, but make no mention if you walk around town in your spacepants. I know this because I went around town in my spacepants talking to people.
I was in a masochistic supernova lone wolf playthrough, and clicked "ok" to take parvati with me when the dude asks you to. Since the rooms in the ship arent open (you dont have power) you *cant dismiss her* or do anything to get rid of her so I whacker her to death since I need my goddamn loner buffs. Luckily companions die permanently so I could go on my merry way with my buffs intact
Wait a little while and you will get that option.
Ya monster
The Board did try the mutation route, but apparently the scientists were given so little resources that they ended up experimenting on themselves to make any sort of progress. I mean, couldn't Akande afford to smuggle them a few cystipigs as test subjects ? It took Phineas 35 years, but he managed !
I completely disagree. This game was everything I had hoped it would be and more. The combat is satisfying, the writing is fantastic, and the characters are interesting. They nailed the aesthetic and the humor perfectly. It kept me engaged the entire way though my first playthrough with my ranged build, and now I'm already pumped to head into my second run with a melee build. I really really enjoyed the length of the game, I'm a little tired of massive open world titles that take 100 hours to complete. My first run was somewhere around 35-40 hours and I liked that. Also, all the little choices that you have to make throughout the game really contribute to the replay-ability of the game as a whole. Not only are you given the freedom to make morally grey choices as you see fit, but they actually have a significant impact on the world around you. The dialogue is excellent, I never got bored of chatting with NPC's and always exhausted every available line of dialogue before moving on with the story. You also have to give credit to Obsidian for creating a game that launched as a practically bug-free experience. All of that in combination with the fact that Obsidian created this game on a very small budget, what they managed to make with the recources they had is nothing short of art in my opinion. This game managed to fill every void Bethesda has left in the Fallout experience for me. The dialogue, the freedom of choice, the writing, the narrative, the world building all just felt so right to me. Of course you can't please everyone, but based on the critical acclaim and overwhelmingly positive player feedback, I'm happy that Obsidian is finally getting the credit they deserve beyond FNV and KOTOR2(even if that game is still criminally under-rated).
Also, Take Two has come out and said that TOW sales figures have been extremely impressive. That news along with Microsoft purchasing Obsidian as part of their campaign to create new exclusive IP's to attract customers to their new gen consoles, looks like The Outer Worlds could become a franchise competing for the same market Fallout used to occupy.
Agreed. The combat could be little bit better but I find it passable. And I love all the little effects TDD can do when shooting an enemy.
But the planets and characters were great. And I really loved all the little details the game had. Especially compared to what Bethesda has done to Fallout this does help me fill the void that gave.
The dialogue choices were great, everything else ehhhh... you really thought the combat was satisfying? You must not play many shooters then. And sure, props to Obsidian for making this game in a budget and it will be cool to see what they can do with a real AAA budget but if you evaluate the game for what it is it's kinda lackluster in a lot of areas. You can like it (perhaps because there haa not been a similar game in some time) but that's the truth.
8:14 There absolutely IS such a thing as objective criticism of art and, in the context of video games, much of this criticism tends to be aimed at mechanical flaws (eg. engine limitations, bugs, poorly developed animations/hitboxes, etc.) We can criticise a game such as Fallout 76 for it's seemingly countless amount of bugs, choppy animations and poor performance on most PC hardware (and consoles for that matter), all of which would be considered objective criticism given that it does not fall under any personal preference. Instead, these things occur regardless of how we feel about them. Aspects of a video game, such as artistic direction, aesthetics, character design and music, would fall under a subjective measure, or, how we feel about said aspects.
The Lifetime Employment Program video was one of my favorite parts of the game. It's how I think, no not think, it shows perfectly how execs (gaming and otherwise) feel about their employees/consumers (the citizens of Halcyon being both).
Have you heard about the Bullshit Jobs theory? You might really enjoy David Graeber's talks.
@@aaronwebb1548 Did not expect to find people talking about David Graeber here, he was so based.
@@1997lordofdoom At the risk of sounding foolish, what does based mean to you?
Because to me he was "based" in London. Is there another definition I'm unaware of?
There is no reason for Phineas to believe the colonists on the Hope are any smarter than the colonists who came out on the Groundbreaker. It is 100% wishful thinking. When you choose your character at the start, you see the type if people on the Hope (you were one of them), and they are very mundane.
I help Welles on every playthrough, because he is with the most humane groups. But in reality, he should be working with Adelaide in Edgewater and Eva Chartrand on Byzantium. They are both working on ways of feeding the colony in the long term. (Since Reed Tobson has said out loud that the colony is about to be shut down, helping him in the first moral quandary is utterly pointless - giving the power to Tobson just prolongs the misery. Adelaide may need her arm twisting about taking on more people though! She is one old lady - shouldn't be a problem).
The Board need pushing aside, and the scientists and farmers should take over! The Board is indifferent to the lives of the colonists, so they have not been thinking about how to solve things in the long term.
I started playing and stopped for the night when I came back from work the day after I just ... Forgot about it and played something else, this game is so weird.
its legit a trash game i tried to force myself to play it but couldnt it jus really shit and uninspired
I literally have to force myself to play the game because it’s so boring. I just want to finish it so I can post a long, nasty review of it on GOG lol. I have never written a game review in my life, and I just feel impelled to complain because it’s so dull and uninspired
@@SpotCam found a call of duty drone
The first few hours are the only part of the game I genuinely adored.
My opinion of it then plummeted faster and faster to the point that I'd say I hate it now for how much potential was wasted.
Yeah I agree. The atmosphere was great then it started feeling very generic and dull.
Got to the 3rd planet and stopped playing, felt like I'd seen everything I needed to see.
Holy crap! An Outer Worlds video that doesn't use Ellie doing the finger guns as the thumbnail! You get kudos for that on its own.
One of my favorite games this year. So glad you made a critique on it Chris.
I'm glad someone could enjoy it. I wasted my money on this trash lol
@@barrybender3377 xbox game pass?
@@lilyounggamer naw i got an epic games account specifically to play this game :(
@LeadFaun i know aha, been trying too
Same. Great game. One of the best this year. So funny all these people spend their free time bitching about it 😂😂
I love how $60 is such a significant price point. Here in Canada it's closer to $100.
What are wages like there? The conversion rate is about 30%, so it makes some (on the surface) sense.
@@Artersa I cant speak for everyone but I know my wages are pretty low
Well technically it's $1
You shouldn't sell yourself short by comparison to other YT'ers man. This video is really good. Your insight is almost clinical without losing any of your personal view point. Its great. I get matthewmatosis vibes, and I mean that with the highest of respect for you both!
Today is June 25th 2020, which happens to be the very day Mr House is born, according to FO:NV lore. A little nugget of information from a game released ten years ago. I doubt anyone remembered anything about TOW ten days after playing it.
Game broke during Parvati’s “romance” the Don’t bite the sun quest line kept auto failing on me every time I tried to acquire it.
Have you ever played fallout 1. “Fallout 1 in space” this is not
Fallout 1 is hardly shallow. Fallout 4 on the other hand...
I've played Fallout 1 and 2 before i played OW and I agree, it reminds me more of 1 than it does of 2 or NV.
@@tslomka6272 Fallout 1 is shallow in the sense that it hints at a lot more than is actually there. Like, the Boneyard is supposed to be just miles and miles of twisted metal structures, where survivors fear to tread out of superstitious awe at the horrific loss of life. But there's actually just a few locations you can visit. And Necropolis is a ghoul city, where the still rational ghouls live and take care of their feral brethren. But you can only interact with the city by stealing their water chip, fixing their well, and talking to the leader. You don't get to explicitly see their society outside of those snippets.
It's fine, the game is still really good, especially considering the limitations that Interplay was operating under.
Fallout 1 was actually inventive, interesting and provocative when it came out. Whereas Outer Worlds shamelessly rips off of every dystopian game from the last 20 years.
@@FB792 Outer Worlds just goes to show how Obsidian has become a shadow of their former selves. But at least they gave us Fallout New Vegas, so that’s a plus.
Its no divinity or witcher 3, but its a fun rpg with a lot of love put into it, absolutely worth it imo
Good enough in terms of characters, writing and worldbuilding I agree but too streamlined and dumbed down in a lot of game design departments for my taste.
No shit Captain obvious but for a double a game the combat is superb......Better than Skyrim or Witcher and Witcher has no replayability.
I'd rather play New Vegas Masterpiece.
Also take it from me the individual who predicted this would be a goty Contender....Outer worlds 2 will be far superior.
It's a SOLID DOUBLE A GAME. If you're comparing it to triple a games that are real good you are lost.
Let's not compare table top RPGs to outer worlds either....that's asinine.
Chris, there's a middle path for the Edgewater Quest, just like on Monarch, and also feels like "true" ending, again like Monarch. Probably something to look into, but I'm enjoying the video otherwise so far!
I was going to mention this aswell, since it's what I got on the first play through after some extra effort.
The "middle" path where the Reed leaves Edgewater and still dies?
@@anonysalt Reed leaves (and dies) and the Lady takes over but all her people come aswell and Edgewater thrives ( that's what my end card told me) that I'm cool with over killing one group over the other completely.
Reed's supporters also leave and die. I did get the same ending. There's no middle path, it's A or B. Unless you kill everyone, that'd be the most equal outcome.
I did the whole helping Adelaide get back and making Reed leave. Is that the one you mean?
I wish when designing rpgs they would plan it around being able to complete without an objective marker, and give the player the option to turn it off.
True
Jordan Jack Not as easy as you think. Game desing is incredibly hard and you'd be surprised at the amount of people who cant complete test even with a quest marker. It's important to be able to guide your players through your levels. So so so many players fall through the cracks and miss important quest dialogues, items and more during the testing faze of a game. These failures largely shape the direction in which the game is designed. And it's not like the players are dumb. It's just that sometimes people are bound to miss things. I'm certain we've all had that moment when we had to look up something about a game on TH-cam, and the thing we couldn't get right or find was obscenely obvious or simple and then we feel dumb afterwards.
@@EggEnjoyer well, as you noted right in your comment, we can always look it up in the TH-cam in case we get hopelessly lost.
Witcher did it
@@UnicornStorm they didn't. They just replaced quest markers with witcher sense that's just as much in your face and as mandatory.
"I generally hate hallucination stuff in games because it's not clear what is supposed to be real and what's hallucination."
...i'm sorry, is the reality of what hallucinations are by definition inconvenient for you? XD
(I generally love hallucination stuff in games, because those scenes are usually the only ones who actually use the possibilities of virtual worlds of the medium to their full potential, or even pushing the boundaries a bit. I've got some designs on paper for games which are basically a single uninterrupted hallucination scene, and they would be awesome.)
MidnightSt yea weird complaint lol
Same, the pitifully small number of games that actually bother to do this at-all/well is a perpetual disappointment.
Like, The Evil Within has some cool scene transitions (2 has a few more again), The e3 trailer for Ghostwire had some fun similar stuff that I almost fully expect won't actualised be in the final product (see Control). As for actual 'hallucinatings' I can't even remember any rn, Holine Miami, Driver San Fran?
Christ my brains have seen better days...
Well, put it this way, I don't mind hallucinations in say a horror game, but I don't like them in games that are otherwise supposed to be "grounded" or "realistic" (and yes, I know that sounds a bit silly in the context of these games). Like in Fallout 4 with that weird Children of the ATOM quest. If you're going to say that sort of stuff exists in the world, it should be a big deal, not just a throwaway side quest.
@@ChrisDavis_Games "Like in Fallout 4 with that weird Children of the ATOM quest."
ok, point partially taken, BUT... if i'm not mistaken, the problem with that quest was that, since the hallucination correctly guided you to the right spot, it implied that it, in fact, *was not a hallucination* , and that's what the issue is.
on the other hand, my go-to hallucination scenes (which i think of when i hear mentions like this) are the Far Cry 3 ones, which are, in my opinion, done extremely well all-around, and don't create these kinds of plot/lore holes.
"I hate hallucinations because it complicates my main hobby of writing wikis instead of actually playing games."
I think it's possible to give Adelaide control of Edgewater if you send power to it and then convince the mayor to leave I assume then she would have actually helped everyone
SPOILERS BELOW
Having Adelaide control Edgewater in the Phineas ending has her grow a garden there, but she kicks out all of Tobson's loyalists. Could be considered the better ending but it does mean the town loses more people overall.
Oh I didn't really get that from her personality seems it kinda seems like them punishing you for something you had no information on like how it goes in Fallout 1
@@romulusnuma116 Wasn't it obvious she would do that? She hates Reed more than anyone.
@@Lunartic_ She hates Reed but Reed leave and probably dies I think she even has a line about how she doesn't blame the people but the system that makes people act the way they do
@@romulusnuma116 She would hate his loyalist the same way she hates Reed.
The most important thing about the outer worlds is that it did well and we should get an Outer Worlds 2
Yup forsure. Glad it got great scores and 99% of people like it. Can't wait for dlc or a sequel. Maybe an earth prequel to show what happened before
@Albert Twangle your a letdown to your ugly mother
@@thedonofthsht76-58 and your acting like a jack ass
New Vegas and The Witcher have, in a way, ruined these kinds of RPGs with their scope. I felt a little disappointed that I didn't get NV again, but at the same time, I can see the love put into the game. I'm also happy to support Obsidian and I want to see them excel - and, ultimately spite Bethesda for bankrupting them. Good game, and I'm looking forward to their next big project.
bethesda did not bankrupt them, stop spreading blatant, outright lie.
@@valdimardotof930 let them be man, new vegas fans couldn't hear a single good thing about bethesda before they put a neck on a noose
So...i have to wait for The Outer Worlds 2... being more like THE KING... Fallout 2.
This looks more like Borderlands than Fallout. Back to modding part 2.
You nailed it. This feels more like Borderlands than Fallout
I'd be happy with it at least being like FO4, eh story but at least immersive world. In this bright and shiny world full of boring enemies I did not feel.. Well anything. And even Borderlands 2 made me cry, it's not that hard to get an emotional response from me lol
I purposely put off buying this game until some form of proper modding support exists. There's enough I've yet to explore in other games that the Outer Worlds seemed... meh despite the hype
an arcanum reference. I'd die happy if that game was remade.
Pretty good review and there's a fair few criticisms you make to the game's mechanics and gameplay that I quite agree with, but I have to take umbrage to your suggestion early on that this game is anything like a "Marvel movie". Whilst I think I catch your drift regarding what you mean here, I have to vehemently disagree in both the means I believe you intended it as, and what is implicitly stated in the comparison.
Firstly, there's the assumption that this game either treats its themes as decor or doesn't say much beyond what is said in the first section of the game. I disagree strongly with this, I don't believe the game's entire world can merely be construed as a series of satirical jabs at a late-capitalist system and think there are more interesting and nuanced depictions of alternative views and positions therein, be it in the role of a smaller independent and autonomous company in the Groundbreaker, a pro-union capitalist system as presented by MSI and so on, that offset or add a wider variety of stances to a more directly opposing "insurgent" or "revolutionary" movement and so on. More importantly, though, is that the game's discourse does progressively veer to a different and more interesting direction as it approaches the matter of starvation, portraying in the act not merely a physical starvation but an ideological one too. Graham, much as he's portrayed in something of a wolf in sheep's clothing in the game, does have a rather interesting and correct idea inasmuch as the setting's true tragedy lies in the ideological stagnation that this society has fallen into as generations of workers have been hammered into their "role" within an overly bureaucratized, industrialized world. It's a Weberesque nightmare that much rather recalls Terry Gilliam's Brazil, or a slow despairing grind to a societal halt reminiscent of Alfonso Cuarón's Children of Men, where in these too it's the act of invention or spiritual, ideological fertility that can interrupt society's gradual, decadent death-march and so on; it's a scenario where "the hope" in the setting is literally represented by scientists, artists, engineers, "great minds" because these act as the carriers of progress and ideas and so on - the Hope is essentially a similar metaphor to what the state of pregnancy in Children of Men is, and it's also why the Board, or the system they've built, would keep such an entity or concept in stasis. Much of what Slavoj Zizek says about Children of Men in his own video about the film is applicable to this game too. In these ways there's much more at play in this game to so flippantly say it's just "a Marvel movie".
Secondly there's the implicit statements made about the game in the comparison, which are that much in the way many Marvel and "cinematic universe" films feel, this is somehow another in a line of sausage-factory products made for quick consumption and little else. I honestly am not seeing many other games quite like this one being done today or with this sort of frequency, and certainly less which take the time Obsidian does at creating pretty lively, detailed and distinct worlds populated with characters who each has their own voice, their own ideolect and beliefs, who sound like a unique part of their environment and so on. The "Marvel" comparison in this regard might be much better suited for the endless franchises the likes of a Call of Duty, or the very rigidly by-the-formula open worlds of Ubisoft games and whatnot. The Outer Worlds may seem familiar relative to other RPGs out there like Mass Effect or Fallout or even The Witcher in some regards, but it still has a very unique feel, character and vibrance to it that distinguishes it as its own thing. Again I suspect this isn't the meaning you intended when making this comparison but with Marvel being often synonymous to this approach of moviemaking and brand exploitation, I do think this comparison is pretty undeserved. But, already I think it isn't doing it justice with its intended meaning either.
Also I do think Felix is more interesting than you make him out to be. Whilst his companion quest is indeed pretty basic and not all that surprising, it's a part of what seems like one of the most complete and transformative character arcs amidst your companions whereby you temper his initial revolutionary idealism into a vision that is ultimately more well-rounded and not merely the reflection of some romantic notion of adventure fed to him by the serials he consumes. He starts off a bit like the Philip J. Fry of the team, a bit comically incompetent and naive and a fish out of water, but develops into someone who feels a lot more assertive about his beliefs and what it takes to stay true to them. I do agree with you that Vicar Max's quest ends on a pretty poor note though, despite him being an altogether quite likable and interesting character - it really is the only moment in the game where the writing absolutely fell flat for me, giving way to a lot of earnestly-spoken platitudes and so on.
I agree. I think he's portraying things as being far more simple than they really are. He seems to have a "capitalism bad" mindset and assumed that was what the game was critiquing, in reality Adelaide can be called out as incredibly selfish early on, because you can tell her that her plan will kill people from the town, she won't care, she's not nearly as compassionate or nice as she first seems and you don't have to get to the ending credits to see this.
Also Graham didn't lead the attack the pirates did. He left the door open for them to get in because they told him they would only kill the Board members, but instead they slaughtered everyone. When you confront him you'll tell him he's only desperately trying to atone cause he feels guilty and screams at you that of course he fucking is, he didn't want all those people to die. The game paints up the board as this big bad evil but most of the people going against it are idealists with hands stained in the blood of the innocent cause that's what happens to radical idealists.
Also Felix was great, I definitely agree out of all the companions he had the most personal growth besides Father Max, and his time with you left him a genuinely better person who could still have high ambitions and genuinely want better for people but he's become more experienced and a little less niave.
@@nickelakon5369 Adelaide isn't a villain, though, and her anger over her son is pretty understandable. Despite how some folks seem to assume that Edgewater is indisputably the best option (even to the point of romanticizing Reed, who makes it clear that he didn't think Adelaide's son was worth saving if you speak with him after finding out what happened to Adelaide's son and before choosing between Edgewater and the Botanical Labs), I also don't think she's villainous for thinking that people who are loyal to the Board would be a problem in the kind of society she's trying to make where even Parvati thinks that being treated like a piece of property by the corporation is acceptable (as you hear when she explains how her mother had to give her up because she literally belonged to Spacer's Choice).
@@maximo_lopez did I say she was a villian? Tell me where I said she was, because I don't think I did.
Adelaide is something far different from a villian or a hero, she's human. I called her selfish because she is, because she's willing to let a town full of people die out of revenge for her son, of course though, she has no interest in viewing the blood as on her hands and accepting responibilty. And while I don't agree with kissing up to the board I still see Reed as the better person of the two (despite giving the town to Adelaide during my playthroughs). Reed is kind of an idiot, he's an absolute tool but Reed still ultimately wants what's better for Edgewater, Adelaide wants what's best for herself. You also have to remember, Reed didn't just deny Adelaide's son medicine, he gave it to someone else who would be just as dead as Adelaide's son if they hadn't gotten it.
@@maximo_lopez i put her in charge purely for practical reasons, she can stop people from being sick and I don't see using corpses as fertilizer as a problem, especially since they have a raider problem. Adelaide is the best choice for the town for that reason, even though Adelaide is the only person who is noted as being left out of town by Reed and Adelaide kicks a bunch of people out, not only potentially killing them but potentially adding to the Raiders' numbers.
@@nickelakon5369 You clearly frame Adelaide as a villain even in your response to me, though. You also seem to think that Adelaide's actions are entirely motivated by revenge, which doesn't seem to be the case given everything she's doing, something that even Parvati comments on despite her opposition to Adelaide using corpses to grow food so that people can eat. Feeding the hungry and giving shelter to people who can't live in Edgewater. And the apologism for Reed pretty much handwaves all the people who are dead because of him, including Adelaide's son, who he shows no remorse about and is dismissive about his death if you bring it up to him. You seem to be forgetting how dismissive Reed was about his death.
"First Person RPG roots?"
Wut?
Good video, man :)
Yeah that was a strange thing to say
My bad, I always think of KOTOR2 as a game they as under Black Isle Studios but they formed Obsidian shortly before.
47:09 that's... That's literally what they're doing. There's a whole quest about it. It's called the last chimerist. Also there's a third ending for Edgewater where Adelaide controls Edgewater
This game ticks so many boxes of what I want in a RPG. But I just couldn't build myself to care about any of the characters or the story.
Didn't like how the perks felt empty and completely number based, the characters were alright didnt like how there wasnt anything to other than finish the story and no gameplay options after
My biggest problem with the game is that nothing felt fleshed out.
They also gave you too many skill points, which made you too OP in too many skills. I never felt like I was making hard decisions about my build.
"They had to huddle around that computer for warmth" xD
Oh wow, imagine the games they will make when not sharing one hot computer between 5 people!!!!
Hmmm. It's not Fallout, the game is to linear/on rails. I heard that it's very Fallout'esk, but not from the time I spent with it.
ty I thought I was crazy when I couldn't get into it. I love fallout 3 and New Vegas, Skyrim, my favorite game is Kotor. So this was supposed to be amazing but it just felt... bland? The characters and writing was amazing but the rest was so lacking and outdated it took me out of the atmosphere and seeing nothing but praise from others made me feel like I was missing something.
This game was too easy I just felt too powerful too many ways to get things done ridiculous amount of ways to get things done
I'm really excited for Avowed and Outer worlds 2.
Tbh I found myself allying with the corporations more often than not.
I didn't see them as evil, just incompetent with a problem way above their paygrade.
I think it's implyed in the game that the reason the corporations are so greedy is because they have to import so much food from other worlds across the Galaxy.
I found the corporations fundamentally flawed and idiotic. I haven’t seen one thing done properly by them in my play through
Everyone is incompetent except you in this game lol
Wasteland 2 does a really interesting thing with its companions because you play as pretty much everyone. You create 4 rangers instead of 1, and you can get 3 extra companions. The only difference between those companions and the crew you create is that your crew is permant and you will fully customize their stats, while companions will have their "special" points pre allocated and some skills already leveled when you find them.
Otherwise, everyone does combat and talks during conversation. This means you only need one guy with each skill, ie you don't need two hackers, two lockpickers or two guys with diplomatic speech skills. Everyone needs to be specialized so you can have an effective party, but you can still do a lot of stuff because you have many members that do different things.
This is great for role playing. You will remember who is your medic, who is your sniper, who does the talking. You might create someone who has intimidate speech skill, and also has brute force skills to break doors or locks, and who's also a brawler, and you'll play with that. Or you might make someone else a secondary healer in your party, and you'll add that to however you're roleplaying that character.
It also lets you experience being a brawler and a sniper and an assalt rifle guy, all without making a new character.
Thank you for this, I felt the same way about the game. It's incredibly shallow and I found myself bored of it after the 10 hour mark. I hope you will play Disco Elysium, the best RPG of this year.
Lol I hadn't left the tarting area till 12 hours in did you explore any
@@goreobsessed2308 I completed the whole game in like 22 hours, how did you not get bored after hour 4 on the first planet
The whole game felt like a prologue. I watched the ending credits thinking 'why aren't I playing this? Why isn't this the game? ' . Bro this game had so little content
It was fun to start, but the whole "corporations are evil and stupid hahaha" got old fast. They didn't really have any further ideas for story.
Search "Bullshit Jobs" and check out just how much like Halcyon the Earth is. And has been for decades.
Or don't, but it could be fun!
My problem isn’t the length, it’s the lack of a conclusion.
It's as if Bethesda Game Studios' Fallout and Borderlands made a baby... And it lacked the good qualities from both.
my favourite point you made was that for subsequent games each colony from the setting could be like the vaults from fallout. Each having their own twist or secret while all sharing the same foundations
"Going back to their first person RPG roots"?
Yes, new Vegas was Obsidions first ever "first person RPG." So this game is going back to that.
@@ryanvandoren1519 I thought "going back to their roots" meant going back to their... well, roots. As in their early stuff. Obsidian's early stuff were turn-based games in the vein of the so-called "isometric" RPGs, and a lot of their key personnel came from Black Isle Studios, who made a lot of those "isometric" RPGs.
@@darthsuitcase6166 you are 100% correct, but in the context he used, new Vegas is their "roots" when it comes to first person.
I finally found the answer to why I find it hard to return to the game after putting it down mid-playthrough for a week. Thanks for the vid.
I also lost interest in the game before finishing it. It gets old very quickly.
I was left very disappointed by the outer worlds. i agree that the game is quality in many aspects but it just didnt grab me i guess. dont know why
I think the word you say at the beginning of the video, "refreshing", is perfectly fitting.
Not at all the deepest 1st person RPG, but beautiful to watch, serviceable in all its systems, easy going and with all the needed amount of personality and fun things to do and to explore. It doesn't drag beyond the depth it has under the hood, so it never becomes boring.
And, for once, just once, no bugs. At least as far as I could see, having bought it some months after it was released, and at a completely appropriate price.
Thanks for your videos!