And that was great, but it's understandable that not every studio will be interested in doing something like that. They went with a much more open, less linear, less setpiece-driven narrative to make it work with the kill-anyone allowance players had. New Vegas had the right approach, imo, but to be fair it came with concessions in terms of what they could do with the main story. Skyrim giving you a big bounty was the furthest they took it in these modern games, which ended up just highlighting how laughable it all was - murder a small army's worth of guardsmen for no reason, sit a week in jail, everything's fine forever. They'll fight back, then very soon afterward act like none of it ever happened. I was rewatching ManyATrueNerd's kill everything run of Fallout 3 the other week and was reminded of how completely the story breaks down if you attack the Brotherhood. In none of these games has there ever been believable consequences for going on violent killing sprees. I don't really remember how Fallout 4 fares but I'd guess it's not great either. Fallout 3 was all over the place regarding which characters it would let you kill or not.
Skyrim had the infamous Stormcloak/Imperial army commanders that were bizarrely immortal even after the civil war was over. Bethesda have always had a weird, haphazard approach to immortal NPCs.
0 kommentar(er)
