Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

The Outer Worlds: Spacer's Choice Edition - Obsidian's first-person sci-fi RPG set in a corporate space colony

Infinitron

I post news
Patron
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
99,690
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
Basically every "real RPG" they'ye made since Fallout: New Vegas, which set the standard.
 

Grunker

RPG Codex Ghost
Patron
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
27,765
Location
Copenhagen
Uh, okay.

You can defend basically anything Obsidian has made from some honest perspective. KotOR 2 is one of the best stories told in the Star Wars universe. Neverwinter Nights 2 was the most expansive implementation of 3.5 before Kingmaker. Alpha Protocol had incredible C&C. New Vegas is a masterpiece. Dungeon Siege III was a competent aRPG. Pillars is obviously controversial, but plenty of people who are clearly not Obsidian shills like it. Tyranny, much like Alpha Protocol, had plenty of ambition and unearthed new design space.

Now I don't personally like NWN2, Dungeon Siege III or Tyranny that much, and I think Alpha Protocol is more interesting in theory that it is actually playing it. But I don't necessarily think you have to be an Obsidian shill to defend the merits that those games do have.

But Outer Worlds? What does Outer Worlds have that is worth defending? Even if I was an SJW, I would be aggravated by the game's intensely lame, vapid and first-semester-just-read-my-first-summary-of-a-Gramsci-article "satire," since it completely fails at any substantive criticism of modern culture or capitalism. There's simply nothing worth defending in Outer Worlds, and so I am immediately suspicious about why anyone would do that.
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
36,759
Uh, okay. Btw it is an Obsidian design tenet that predates Boyarsky joining the company.
Hmmm like which games? Killing people in PoE would break your progress from what i remember.
Lady Webb is the only person you "can't" kill because doing so gives you a non-standard game over.

Basically every "real RPG" they'ye made since Fallout: New Vegas, which set the standard.

You can't kill everyone in Dungeon Siege III or South Park. It's something decided on a project-by-project basis since there's no one super-director who would care to enforce it.
 

Grunker

RPG Codex Ghost
Patron
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
27,765
Location
Copenhagen
Basically every "real RPG" they'ye made since Fallout: New Vegas, which set the standard.

Every real rpg since NV = Pillars and Outer Worlds. One of which has unkillable NPCs galore (which is fine by me, I never understood the whole debacle about "NPCs must be killable", but your statement is odd).
 

Blaine

Cis-Het Oppressor
Patron
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
1,874,787
Location
Roanoke, VA
Grab the Codex by the pussy
Uh, okay. Btw it is an Obsidian design tenet that long predates Boyarsky joining the company.

Forgive me for failing to keep a rigorous mental dossier of each studio's current design doctrine.

"Everyone can be killed" is a well established tenet of inclined RPGs, and in general I'd take it as a given for any studio that develops incline, but tenets of incline are an endangered species and Obsidian has abandoned quite a few of them.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Patron
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
99,690
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
But Outer Worlds? What does Outer Worlds have that is worth defending? Even if I was an SJW, I would be aggravated by the games intensely lame, vapid and first-semester-just-read-my-first-summary-of-a-Gramsci-article "satire." There's simply nothing worth defending in Outer Worlds, and so I am immediately suspicious about why anyone would do that.

I don't particularly want to defend it. I just rated rusty_shackleford's post fake news and he felt that he had to reply to that, so I got drawn in. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

Grunker

RPG Codex Ghost
Patron
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
27,765
Location
Copenhagen
I dunno man, this is the second time we have an altercation about what I percieve to be apologism about Outer Worlds :M
 
Last edited:

Blaine

Cis-Het Oppressor
Patron
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
1,874,787
Location
Roanoke, VA
Grab the Codex by the pussy
There's simply nothing worth defending in Outer Worlds, and so I am immediately suspicious about why anyone would do that.

Infinitron has a clear track record of defending certain developers to the absolute bitter end. He will become exasperated when this is pointed out, so he is clearly aware of what he's doing, but he sticks to his guns and will never explicitly admit to it.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Patron
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
99,690
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
I dunno man, this is the second time we have an altercation about what I percieve to be apologism about Outer Worlds :M

It's a mediocre, basically juvenile game that I think gets criticized for the wrong reasons instead of the right ones. I've talked before about some of the things I think it did right ("loredumps" for example, which were considered the Worst Thing In The World About Nu-Obsidian not long ago) and about what I think the game's real themes are (in short, not really about "anti-capitalism" at all but a story about incompetent and stagnant government in general) but I really don't have much more to say about it.
 

Grunker

RPG Codex Ghost
Patron
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
27,765
Location
Copenhagen
at least we agree about the overall rating of the game I guess, but both of those posts are fairly apologetic to my mind, the last one spectacularly so. In the actual core meaning of apologism; to defend something with virtues that the something does not possess. There's nothing to indicate anything but the fairly obvious reading about corporate criticsm, and plenty, PLENTY of brainless, simple-minded dialogue that supports that it should actually be read fairly literally.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
50,754
Codex Year of the Donut
inf*nitron will call the writers liars rather than accept that the writers were telling the truth about their own product they made
 

fantadomat

Arcane
Edgy Vatnik Wumao
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
37,558
Location
Bulgaria
But Outer Worlds? What does Outer Worlds have that is worth defending? Even if I was an SJW, I would be aggravated by the games intensely lame, vapid and first-semester-just-read-my-first-summary-of-a-Gramsci-article "satire." There's simply nothing worth defending in Outer Worlds, and so I am immediately suspicious about why anyone would do that.

I don't particularly want to defend it. I just rated rusty_shackleford's post fake news and he felt that he had to reply to that, so I got drawn in. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Takes a dumb kwan to draw in a jew.
:updatedmytxt:
 

Infinitron

I post news
Patron
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
99,690
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
at least we agree about the overall rating of the game I guess, but both of those posts are fairly apologetic to my mind, the last one spectacularly so. In the actual core meaning of apologism; to defend something with virtues that the something does not possess. There's nothing to indicate anything but the fairly obvious reading about corporate criticsm, and plenty, PLENTY of brainless, simple-minded dialogue that supports that it should actually be read fairly literally.

I think the game's treatment of its themes is shallow, but if you followed its development, Boyarsky and Cain dropped some hints about what they were doing. I think the game's real theme was expressed by one of its taglines: "In the corporate equation for the colony, you are the unplanned variable." The moral of the story is that a planned society will stagnate, fall apart and literally starve to death. Organic growth must be introduced to the system. They told the game's writers to watch the movie Brazil, a satirical take on 1984 which is about a quasi-communist regime. That adds credence to my belief that the pseudo-early 20th century robber baron "critique of capitalism" stuff was for them mostly just a cool visual skin.

Again, if all of this sounds trite and juvenile, that's because it is. But here's Boyarsky shortly after release appearing to reveal that he did give some thought to the game's in-world ideologies: https://blog.playstation.com/archiv...-its-new-sci-fi-rpg-the-outer-worlds-to-life/

How did you flesh out the religions of Scientism and Philosophism? Were there real world inspirations?

Leonard Boyarsky: Scientism started with its name, yet another Simpsons’ reference (their official name, ‘The Order of Scientific Inquiry,’ came later). After settling on that, I began exploring what type of religion could be worthy of that name, and what type of purely materialistic religion the corporations might espouse as a way to remove everything spiritual from their workers’ lives.

I’ve always been fascinated by Laplace’s demon, the idea that somehow the entirety of the universe could be divined if only we had enough information, so I worked that in as well in the guise of their ‘Universal Equation,’ their version of their ‘divine right’ to rule.

The name Philosophism came from Theosophy, a turn of the century mystical philosophy/religion, which, except for their shared belief in a personal experience of God, is about where the similarities end. It was designed as a specific answer to Scientism’s ordered, deterministic ideology.

We took aspects of various eastern religions and mashed them together to come up with something that was vague enough to be misinterpreted by many people in the colony and was also easy for the Board to turn into something to scare their workers with. It was also designed in such a way that there’d be an interesting gap between it and Scientism that could be filled in by Vicar Max’s spiritual quest.
 
Last edited:

Grunker

RPG Codex Ghost
Patron
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
27,765
Location
Copenhagen
It doesn't really matter what their ambitions were, what matters is what they made. And what they made is chuck full of references to corporate structure specifically as well as PLENTY of superficial, on-the-nose criticism of corporate culture, folly and greed.
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
36,759
I never understood the whole debacle about "NPCs must be killable"

It provides greater role playing freedom and is a flex on game developers, forcing them to change their stories so that they can accommodate our playstyles.

https://screenrant.com/fallout-new-vegas-outer-worlds-kill-everyone-anyone/

Cain stated that during playtests of the game their producer, Eric DeMilt, would simply shoot everyone he came across no matter what, causing them to re-evaluate the way they were gatekeeping certain puzzles. "Not only was he missing out on all the dialog," Cain said, "he made it challenging for us to figure out how to advance story lines... he didn't talk to anyone the whole game... If he saw someone, he shot them."

Boyarsky then reminded his co-worker that this was not new behavior. "You make that sound like it's a new thing," he said. "Eric was working with us at Interplay and he went - he played Fallout by punching everybody. And found a bug that way!" Seeing one of their team members completely ignore all of the hard work put in to the game's dialog was clearly slightly irritating for some of the creators, but it helped them to realize how accessible they needed to make their game's structure to accommodate different kind of gameplay styles. "So, even from way back then we've known, if you've decided you want to be able to kill everybody in the game, you need alternate ways of getting this [plot] information."
 

Grunker

RPG Codex Ghost
Patron
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
27,765
Location
Copenhagen
It provides greater role playing freedom

This can be said for a million things that aren't in RPGs. The question is why is it more important than something else than provides greater role playing freedom for the same amount of development cost. I personally never gave a shit whether all npcs were killable or not
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
36,759
This can be said for a million things that aren't in RPGs. The question is why is it more important than something else than provides greater role playing freedom for the same amount of development cost. I personally never gave a shit whether all npcs were killable or not

If a character annoys me, I should be able to express my frustration with them by ending their virtual life. I don't play RPGs to feel powerless.
 

Grunker

RPG Codex Ghost
Patron
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
27,765
Location
Copenhagen
You could as easily argue that you should be able to jump, or to smash a computer that doesn't work

EDIT: Also come to think of it a lot of the very best RPGs make you feel powerless in many situations - whether through great C&C or gameplay difficulty
 
Last edited:

purupuru

Learned
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
415
Characters should be killable. But one shouldn't design the game's plot and questlines around it. If you break the quest you break the quest, murdering a friendly folk should bear its dire consequences.
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
36,759
Wow. Just wow.

If you the range of expressions is limited to "hero to anti-hero" then sure, it wouldn't make sense for your character to kill just anybody. But if the range includes outright evil, then it's dubious to put limits on whom you can kill for no reason other than a lazy designer didn't feel like supporting it.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
50,754
Codex Year of the Donut
Being able to kill every NPC is a good idea because not everyone has the same morality. For example, if I am roleplaying a lawful good paladin I will seek out and cleanse evil wherever I find it. Not being able to kill an evil NPC -- or even worse, being forced to work with an evil NPC -- would be antithetical to my character's nature.

Being capable of doing something doesn't mean you must or even that you want to do something. Choosing not to do something is as equally as important as choosing to do it, but when there is no choice it is no longer an aspect of your character but something forced upon you by the developers.
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
36,759
Here we go again. I'm mad at every RPG that doesn't add a dentistry minigame just because the designers were too "lazy" to support it.
As BLOBERT so eloquently put it back in 2011

A BRO SHGOULD BE ABLE TO KILL OR TALK TO ANY MOTHERFUCKER

THE WORLD SHOULD SEEM LIKE A REAL WORLD BROS THEY COULD DOP THIS SHIT IN THE 80S

Combat is one of the actions allowed in most RPGs. There are some RPGs that decide "Yeah you can fight those who are hostile to you, but you can't initiate hostilities against these select characters for reasons." Sometimes the reasons are completely justifiable, sometimes they're incredibly flimsy.
 

Justicar

Dead game
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Apr 15, 2020
Messages
4,620
Location
Afghanistan
Being able to kill every NPC is a good idea because not everyone has the same morality. For example, if I am roleplaying a lawful good paladin I will seek out and cleanse evil wherever I find it. Not being able to kill an evil NPC -- or even worse, being forced to work with an evil NPC -- would be antithetical to my character's nature.
Fuck off with your retarted dnd alignment bullshit nigger. Real life doesen't work like this Hurr durrr Im good so I will kill everyone evil hurrrr durrrr go try that in north korea and see what happens niggeroid.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom