It's a fun game.

>>743248437
Mostly because it was almost impossible to make, if you watch any behind the scenes on this game it was an utter mess that still didn't completely come together at the end. Then some of the controls, hacking, overall rpg elements kind of drag the game down. The telltale like choice system and the writing are top notch fun but the game parts in between needed way more time they didn't have.
Overall I still enjoyed it a lot because it's one of the only games where "choices matter" not in a specific dramatic moments way but that even small choices change certain outcomes. There really is nothing else like it.

>>743250158
Yeah but why has nobody tried to make something similar so far?

>>743250813
Publishers only greenlight things with "scale" because the shareholders believe bigger is better. This leads to exactly two types of projects being greenlit:
>open world surrogate job checklist simulators with infinite "content"
>hollywood cinematic movie slop with photorealistic talking heads discussing gender and race issues
None of the purse string holders want to greenlight a mid-length game with variety of outcome because content the player doesn't see is content that's not earning them money.

>>743250813
>Yeah but why has nobody tried to make something similar so far?
Tracking all those little choices and making them matter costs money because you're basically pre-determining how much content you need to make which means your budget can keep ballooning as you write yourself into needing more consequences for all the choices. Even with good planning (and the behind the scenes show they did have a method for planning everything out) it still costs too much money.

>>743251113
It's also because that content is invisible to players.
Technically, open world sloppathons have "more" content, but because players can see it, it means that it's marketable.

Think back to Detroit: Niggers Aren't Human and those SNOY horror walking sims. They got away with it by having a map of story branches. That's more or less what it would take, but Obsidian were never in a position to pitch something like that/don't have dirt on an any executives to leverage to be allowed to make what they want.

>>743248437
It was too based. You know what I'm talking about

>>743251623
No, I don't know. What are you talking about?

>>743248437
Because the game sucked and flopped because it was a bad game?

Tough world if you like shit games.

>>743248437
Owlcat Games is literally making an Expanse RPG with Mass Effect-style dialogue system.

>>743248437
Games that depict female on male rape?

>>743252224
What's it like, having such subhumanly shit taste?