top 20 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 15 points 8 months ago (3 children)

🥱

Holy fuck, release something new you clowns.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    I’d much rather play Fallout: Seattle, or Fallout: Minneapolis, or Fallout: Beijing (or Moscow or Lagos or Paris or Paris, Texas, or…) than a prettier rendition of 3 or New Vegas.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    One the one hand F:NV is a broken mess that could seriously use a once-over... but one the other I shudder at the thought of all the mods this might break.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    ... presumably it would 'break' basically all of them, given that this is a remaster, aka, a different game, the same way that the GTA Definitive editions are remasters of the original games.

    The Creation Engine is now ... what, 15 years older?

    And if they do what they did with the Oblivion remaster, it'll be a frankenstein of UE5 and the Creation Engine.

    So yeah, you'd have to make all the mods all over again, perhaps with a few very rare exceptions...

    But it wouldn't break the original FONV.

    ... Unless they just decide to do that also, like they did with FO4.


    ... Also FONV works fine now, modders have fixed and expanded it greatly.

    https://vivanewvegas.moddinglinked.com/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago*

    I find this 15 minutes after the article has been updated saying "lol jk they're not actually making a NV remaster." 😮‍💨

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 8 months ago (9 children)

    Oblivion was alright, but I remember seeing most players topped out at like 5 hours played.

    It was fun to see it all again, but the novelty wore off quick...

    This tho, I could see sinking 10s likely 100s if hours into.

    4 years newer doesn't sound like much these days, but 2002 to 2006 was a huge jump. NV has a much better starting point for an update, and could feel like a truly modern game that pulls people in without having to drastically change the experience.

    Plus the desert setting makes it easy to hide graphical shortcomings. So even after cranking the resolution up, it's not gonna take a lot more resources, there's plenty of room to improve other stuff too.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    yeah, as someone who just played through New Vegas again due to S2 of the show, it would have to be some serious quality of life changes to make me shell out for it again.

    I have never played FO3 though and im putting my hope capital into willing that into existence

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Just play a Tale of Two Wastelands

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago

    it would have to be some serious quality of life changes to make me shell out for it again.

    Eh, I first bought it 20 years ago, and have bought it a couple times since on different platforms.

    If it's $30 bucks I'm buying it regardless. Maybe not right at first, but eventually I will.

    That's also why I don't think any game shouldnt be able to run "maxxed out" on release. A great game people are still gonna want to run it a decade later. It doesn't hurt anyone if the dial turns to 11 if 10 is the same setting it's always been.

    So make games that in a decade still look decent on settings no one could enable all at once on release. It doesn't change the quality on release, just gives it legs to look good longer.

  • source
  • parent
  • 4 comments in c/fnv@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 12 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    I'd love it - but I dont wan't this weird non-mod supporting one that they had with oblivion.

    Just do pretty much the same but with more explicit mod support, like put NVSE in there natively.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 8 points 8 months ago

    Yeah, I was really disappointed in the oblivion "remaster" since I could have gotten a similar experience with enough mods, the exact same game but a new coat of paint. And FNV needs more than that, there are so many empty locations that need something in them, but I don't think that's what we'll get. I will be excited that FNV will be back in the spotlight and more people will experience it, but I have a bittersweet taste in my mouth

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago

    I have precisely zero positive expectations due to the amount of belly flops Zenimax, Microslop, and Bethesda have been having lately.

    That being said if this actually ends up a good remaster I'll be pleasantly surprised, but I won't hold my breath or buy before complete reviews hit.

  • source
  • I might play the Fallout 3 remaster because I could never be bothered to play the original, but if there are no mods then I'm not interested in a New Vegas remaster. I don't care that much about a game looking like shit compared to all the gameplay tweaks and full expansions people have released over the years.

  • source