Why play a story based rpg, If all you want is more stuff to colect. and more levels to gain, in a completely random ( which it never will be given finite locations and stuff to collect, creatures to kill ) generated manner.

Oblivion yes you can play on after the main quest having done so many times, and you can do almost everything without even touching the MQ. But after a bit it gets hollow, go to cave use the same techniques to clear cave repeat. collect armour see its one you already have repeat. Buy house fill house with junk repeat. Talk to the whole town find nothing new repeat.
After a few hundred hours wnen you have explored everything, and you are left with no story hooks just leveling all your skills to 100. You are not playing an rpg just a number game with pretty pictures with at best a throw out comment such as "hail saviour of our nation" from npc's you saved ( even though their township is wrecked, they go about doing nothing ).

So just stretch yourself start fresh and try something different, not just getting to the top and admiring how tough your character is with all the goodies he has.

This.

In general, games that just keep on going, even though you've "ended" the game, have long been the exception that proves the rule - not vice versa. In my mind, "Role-playing Game" has a lot more to do with what you actually in the game itself, than whether or not you can finish the Main Quest and then proceed to play on (which I usually find feels tacked-on when it's present and presents all sort of plot-holes - like how no one usually seems to notice that you've just saved the entire universe from the brink of destruction and all that...)

Lol...my point is that in your post you imply that the person you quoted (Leydenne) said that games not ending is wrong, and she didn't say that at all...she just said that most RPGs end, which is true. I think a lot of people that have mostly played Bethesda RPGs and not many others assume that RPGs should not have definitive endings, but Bethesda's RPGs are in the minority in that regard. I've played more RPGs than I can count, and almost all of them have had a definitive ending.

Besides, I spelled out pretty clearly what my point was: there's nothing wrong with choosing to handle the ending either way as long as it's done well. I personally don't care either way. I usually get bored exploring and doing the (IMO tedious) "collect all of this or that" quests after the main quest ends and either play a different game or start a new character anyway.


I don't think a single person in this thread has said that. You're arguing with the wind.


Many would agree, and many would disagree. I disagree.

To be honest, this is why a computer version is better. You could download mods and that add more quests or weapons. With the GECK, there's almost no limits to what you can make provided you have the patience.

If only I hadn't wasted ￡1500 on junk...

Not every game needs to do it. Sometimes it just doesn't fit with what they're trying to do and makes the ending less meaningful. As long as the ending is satisfying it's all good. Start a new game and try new things.

what do you mean when you say "it never will be given finitie locations, stuff to collect, and creatures to kill?"

There could be reasons in some situations that it shouldn't be done or the developers might choose not to do it, though. I mean, do you think they're doing it just to make you sad? You can't say there's no reason because you aren't developing the game.

In my heart I would love to be able to play after the main quest, however, my mind is telling me that it would be twice as epic just to end the game at the end. It'd leave me with a better impression of the game some time after I have completed it, still, it would be nice if they gave you the option to do either one.

X amount of locations , Y amount of junk, Z amount of creatures. A fixed amount ( untill expansions or mods ) leaving you with a strong chance to repeat combinations all the time. Depending on how familiar with the system and areas and rules you are, it will be very easy to rig any random event in your favour to give you exactly what you want.
Hence not truly random. even though real random patterns will have reocurances.

In any game with generators they have limited options, and patterns are easy to spot because of small groupings of random occurances within their systems.

Take a loot generator, it is basicly leveled to the player, and what type of npc you have killed. so you kill enough oblivion bandits lets say, the chances of finding a deadric hammer, elven curiass, glass greaves, and a mithrel helmet on more than one are highly likely. And magic items being of a common list will reacur frequently. Hence not random just the same endlessly repeated.

Yes Bethesda is publishing it people , something very different . I rather have a good ending that a lackless one with Fallout 3 . I want the Carrier ( whatever the PC is in NV is called ) to drift into the sunset and not be seen. Broken steel just made me bored and kinda least favorite of the DLC's .

Are you suggesting that you would like to see random locations so no fixed map or just random quests? I personally like the map being fixed and all the locations in the game will always be there and in the same places.

No sorry I was saying I would like no random quests in a game like FO NV, As they defeat the purpose of a story based rpg. The only reason to include them is to continue after the MQ.
which in itself ruins the story element of an rpg imo.

And was pointing out that random placements of quests and items is not a thing I would want to play for. as they are pointless candy compared with a story of substance.

And that they can never be truely random.

What's it called when someone joins, starts a thread about a something to get everyone riled up, then mysteriously leaves and does not write again?

True but if you could continue after the main quest you wouldn't need random quests per se because you could do the rest of the fixed quests in the game that you didn't get to or want to do before the main quest.

I believe that is referred to as a "Cleveland Steamer."

True but Mcclaud brought up the issue of random quests, and I just wanted to explain why they would not fit in FO NV.

But I don't want to see a cotinuation after the MQ as I pointed out in an earlier post with going past the MQ in a game like FO you end up just repeating the same thing. And sometimes tying up a loss side quest.
Nothing changes, it is the same game as you started except you have more toys to play with. If you could see your after effects first hand and the npc's would act differently that would be fine. But since it is not the only reason to continue playing is for people to tick of tasks on their to do lists.

I wish I didn't google that...

Personally, I think Oblivion's a terrible example, because almost nothing changes "after the end". Yeah, you can keep wandering around and doing stuff.... but all that's changed is that the NPCs hail you as a hero. A couple new lines of meaningless dialogue.

Ooh, aah?



In Fallout 3, the vast majority of the "post-ending" changes are months and years off. And everything that *does* have an immediate change? Can have that change before the end as well.

You train and arm Big Town to defend themselves..... look, they're armed and patrolling. You use diplomacy to get Roy Phillips' people into Tenpenny? The results of that shows up pretty quick too. You don't need The End in order to see the effects of your actions there.

Any of the major things, though? Really shouldn't be visible to you right away. Like it'll be years until anything happens if you help Harold "grow". And the water purifier *really* shouldn't purify the entire river and bay instantly. Even the spread of the anti-FEV virus if you spiked the water shouldn't have a big reaction quickly.


So the whole "I want to keep playing so I can see all the things mentioned in the closing slideshow" thing is silly. The *real* changes won't be visible. And anything that will, could be done before the end. (That, or the Ending has some catastrophic and sudden event, like the explosion of Megaton. Which really wouldn't be much of interact with..)



Nearly every RPG *ends*. And people have happily stopped right before those endings to wander around and do sidequests for decades. It's not a hardship, it's not a loss of the mythical "immersion", it's not a bug or a problem or a failure.

[quote name='Kiralyn2000' date='24 June 2010 - 05:52 PM' timestamp='1277427150' post='16085628']
Personally, I think Oblivion's a terrible example, because almost nothing changes "after the end". Yeah, you can keep wandering around and doing stuff.... but all that's changed is that the NPCs hail you as a hero. A couple new lines of meaningless dialogue.
:sadvaultboy:

whats this idea that you need to see "changes" who cares, i just want to play the game, i didn't play oblivion just so i could see some change later on. i wanted to keep playing cause it was fun. i don't play fallout 3 so i can see some ending slideshow, thats you're hangup not mine. by the way oblivion is one of the all time top 10 xbox 360 games along with fallout 3. it was a great game. just like fallout 3 was and is. neither of those games had official endings, not even fallout 3 with broken steel. other bethesda rpg also didn't have endings. a lot of game companies still haven't caught with with bethesda popular style of game making, so in the future we're prob gonna see more and more sandbox style openened rpg's.
:celebration:

[quote name='westoftherockies' date='24 June 2010 - 08:15 PM' timestamp='1277428512' post='16085692']
[quote name='Kiralyn2000' date='24 June 2010 - 05:52 PM' timestamp='1277427150' post='16085628']
Personally, I think Oblivion's a terrible example, because almost nothing changes "after the end". Yeah, you can keep wandering around and doing stuff.... but all that's changed is that the NPCs hail you as a hero. A couple new lines of meaningless dialogue.
:sadvaultboy:

whats this idea that you need to see "changes" who cares, i just want to play the game, i didn't play oblivion just so i could see some change later on. i wanted to keep playing cause it was fun. i don't play fallout 3 so i can see some ending slideshow, thats you're hangup not mine. by the way oblivion is one of the all time top 10 xbox 360 games along with fallout 3. it was a great game. just like fallout 3 was and is. neither of those games had official endings, not even fallout 3 with broken steel. other bethesda rpg also didn't have endings. a lot of game companies still haven't caught with with bethesda populay style of game making, so in the future we're prob gonna see more and more sandbox style openened rpg's.
:celebration:
[/quote]

Nicely said. I'm not sure what these changes are that people want to see that keep being referenced I just want to keep playin like you said.

Oh and not only is oblivion one of the top 10 ps3/360 games it is the best next gen game period.

Isn't that what people keep saying in these "why can't we keep playing" threads? That they want to see the how the world has changed?


At least, that's what they say every time one of us says "well, just reload a save from before the Final Mission? and go exploring".

/shrug

It's not just as fun to finish exploring before taking the last step of the main quest...or to make a new character?


Again, who are you arguing with? Who's hangup?


That's an opinion. :shrug: Just cuz OXM says it's so doesn't mean everyone agrees.


Nah...open-world games have been around since the '70s, and Bethesda has been doing them since the '90s. Still, though, many, many companies make RPGs that are different styles. Not every game has to be exactly like Oblivion and Fallout 3 to be good. There are other ways of doing things that are just as valid.


What's a next-gen game? Don't you mean "last-gen?"


Yeah, I'm pretty sure most people in this thread don't actually want to have a discussion about this...rather they'd prefer to repeat their stance over and over whilst ignoring everyone else's posts.

Yep, very true.
Its another one of those lets repeat it several thousand times, untill it becomes a fact. with no discussion to back their ideas topics.
So do I think New Vegas could be defined as an RPG, yes completely so.

Actually there are often many quests one can still complete after "the end" in oblivion. And new weapons to get, new spells to try, a statue is built for you, people recognize you as the hero you get some new cool armor. There are many NPC's you may not have met and it's quite nice wandering around exploring without all the deadra popping up out of the gates any longer. Um, and the gates are gone.

But of course an RPG is not required to not have an ending and most do in fact have endings. But there are some folks that love it when they don't regardless of how someone else feels about it. I lean that way. I tend to get into the role I am playing and often just want to continue my characters story long after the game has ended. Heck, I didn't even go to the Shivering Isles until after I finished the main quest.

I'm not sure anyone is being quite fair to anyone in this thread. Folks beating up folks for wanting the game to end and others beating up folks because they don't want it to. Everyone has a jolly good right to their own preferences without fear of being berated for it. I mean really!

Bottom line however is that this game will have an ending and this time those who like their games to have a definite ending get it their way. I'm a bit disappointed but maybe next time it will be my turn to get a "neverending story". In the meantime, I will be playing this game, ending or not. And I'm betting it will have an awesome end to it.

If you never deliver the amulet you don't have to worry about the oblivion gates ever opening up. Actually you can deliver the amulet as long as you don't close the gate at kvatch no worries about further gates.