Outer Worlds 2

[txa1265]

The game isn't getting review bombed
View attachment 2573655
View attachment 2573656

Just to note - there are no user reviews because the game has been out literally 20 minutes as I type this.

As the words below the image you posted say "Please spend some time playing the game. Come back to review it starting at 12:00pm PST on Oct 30, 2025"

Anyone playing the game before 1PM EST today literally spent $100 to do so.

 

[maflynn]

Just to note - there are no user reviews because the game has been out literally 20 minutes as I type this.

You were the one mentioning review bombing, no one else had, and you were critical of people who bough the game, left a negative review, and then got a refund. Is that the natural order of things? If I bought a product, found it lacking, I'd get a refund, and also where applicable, leave a negative review, stating why it was lacking. That's helping people who may not want to waste their time and money on something.

 

[maflynn]

I'm debating over how many reviews I want to watch (or read) as I don't want too much of the story leaked or any spoilers revealed.

I subscribe to Matty,he's a big time Bethesda fan, but he seems to offer good balanced feedback, reviews and observations.

His thoughts are this: Is OU2 as good as Fallout NV, the answer is no. Did he really enjoy the game, yes. How did it measure up to the original? It met and exceeded the original. The first 1/2 of the game seem to be a fully open/explorable and exceeding Outer Worlds, but the second half seemed less open more scripted.

He stated that he has completed the game with 50 hours of game play. That sounds like good news, the original game was about 20 hours of game play without the DLCs and now this is 45-50? I'll be happy with that.

 

[Non-Euclidean]

I doubt FNV will ever be bested by another Obsidian product.

I wonder if it would have been as highly regarded if it had come out before F3, instead of after it. Every few years I reinstall and fire up F3 to play the Alaska content. FNV has never been uninstalled and I have explored a ton of the mods and adventure packs.

As per spoilers, I'll let myself get a bit spoiled, since I will be waiting for the GoG release. That happened with BG3, where I spent a ton of times over in their games forum, reading the BG3 thread. I'll probably do the same once the TOW2 thread gets going.

The thing that really got me on BG3 was watching some of the build + gear videos given the interesting gear set synergies available (ice/radiant/lightning/etc) to make some really interesting builds. Then wanting to try them but not having acquired the gear in the first section, oops, start over. I actually never finished BG3, I was in BG upper level, but didn't get to the content against that Devil or the Dragon. That was the second run I got as far as BG.

Then in TOW, I started checking out videos on best sniper guns, etc. to find out what I needed to get from where.

 

[maflynn]

I doubt FNV will ever be bested by another Obsidian product.

Agreed and in many respects, its an unfair comparison simply because many of the creative people who were part of the Fallout NV team have moved on.

Every few years I reinstall and fire up F3 to play the Alaska content.

I've been tempted to play it lately, the rumors about its re-release and remastering have held me back. I have done the Alaska content that was enjoyable

 

[Non-Euclidean]

Agreed and in many respects, its an unfair comparison simply because many of the creative people who were part of the Fallout NV team have moved on.


I've been tempted to play it lately, the rumors about its re-release and remastering have held me back. I have done the Alaska content that was enjoyable

Is that F3 on the F4 engine?

I remember installing a mod for FNV on F4 for the early area of the FNV, like around the NCR outpost on the hill with all the radscorpions nearby and the dry lakebed with the ants, etc.

I see how it would be an improvement, but when I think of my F3/FNV gameplay experience, I didn't feel it was particularly lacking or limited by the game engine.

 

[maflynn]

Here's the current metacritic ratings including user reviews.

User reviews are much harsher then the critics, perusing the reviews, people are unimpressed with the companions, and the writing seems to be something that is being called out

Steam tells another store where its very positive.

Obsidian has released a patch to address some of the bugs, though I've not head of too many issues with game stability or bugs

 

[diamond.g]

The companions were bullet sponges in the first game, dunno why folks think the second one would be any better...

 

[Non-Euclidean]

The companions were bullet sponges in the first game, dunno why folks think the second one would be any better...

I disagree. Obsidian put a lot of effort into creating different ways to play the game. The perks had entire trees for Leader type builds where if you didn't have to be the killing machine you could spend perks on bonuses for your companions. They could handle the heavy lifting while you specialized in other play aspects. I tried it for a while, but my heart wasn't in it/not my preferred play style.

There were plenty of youtube videos on how to build your character/play the game. God knows I watched enough based on where weapons/armor/rare items were. I collected all the good rifles.

 

[maflynn]

The companions were bullet sponges in the first game, dunno why folks think the second one would be any better...

The one thing I hated about companions in the first one was by default they would charge at the enemies, I tend to be a stealthy player, so they always ruined that. I basically changed their settings/behavior so that they never participated in the fire fights. Largely a solo player.

Since I've done the companion quests, any subsequent play throughs have been companion-less. I much prefer just doing my own thing without dealing with them.

I disagree. Obsidian put a lot of effort into creating different ways to play the game.

I was (am) largely unimpressed with the companions with the first game. Ellie seemed to be the best of the lot.

One question I have for OU2, is how much of the 40+ hours of game play is companion quests and how much of it is the main story?

 

[Non-Euclidean]

The one thing I hated about companions in the first one was by default they would charge at the enemies, I tend to be a stealthy player, so they always ruined that. I basically changed their settings/behavior so that they never participated in the fire fights. Largely a solo player.

Since I've done the companion quests, any subsequent play throughs have been companion-less. I much prefer just doing my own thing without dealing with them.


I was (am) largely unimpressed with the companions with the first game. Ellie seemed to be the best of the lot.

One question I have for OU2, is how much of the 40+ hours of game play is companion quests and how much of it is the main story?

By and large I agree with you. I think the companions were good for:
1) Bullet sponging.
2) Pack Mule (earlier parts of game).
3) Occasional humorous comment.

I also did all the companion quests, but yeah, I don't think anyone ran with me by endgame or the DLCs.

 

[Non-Euclidean]

Review here https://www.ign.com/articles/the-outer-worlds-2-review

"65 hour completist playthrough."

"With a story that’s more grounded and interesting, significantly more competent combat, and an irresistible RPG grind"

"For the first half of the story, you’ll instead prioritize a humdrum revenge quest I cared about so little that I actually forgot it was even the first act’s main focus by the time I reached credits. In fairness, they do use this early time to introduce you to the principle movers and shakers in Arcadia while you seek vengeance, which sets it up for a much stronger second act, but for the first 20 or so hours felt like the main story was quite slow and unengaging. It does rally if you can hang in there for a bit, but I wish it was more consistent throughout."

Apparently much more limiting with skill points:

"With only two skill points earned per level to spend across 12 skills that make you good at everything from Leadership to Lockpicking, you’ve got some serious decisions to make about what you want to excel in"

 

[txa1265]

Finally got started with Outer Worlds 2 yesterday, and have ~5 hours in including a restart after prologue to redo my starting skills. (and based on that I stand even more strongly by my thoughts around what is/isn't possible to do within the review window while claiming to fully experience each aspect).

I've been clear I really enjoyed the first game, and also of the opinion that people saying they played it in 20 hours missed the vast majority of the experience. Basically it was a 20-hour FPS with skill trees, or a 60 hour deep RPG with great characters and nuanced writing. Just like someone who played all of Baldur's Gate 2 in 30 hours, sure it is POSSIBLE, but I play RPGs to take in the breath of the experience ... and Obsidian games (unlike Bethesda) are about savoring the nuanced writing.

As expected looking at Metacritic you have the right wing trolls out and about as expected, but as noted Steam and general reviews show the game off as the excellent experience it is.

There is some revisionist history adulation around New Vegas that forgets the 'glorified expansion', 'bug ridden mess' and other critiques that were widespread when it was released. It reviewed similar to Outer Worlds 2, and so far I think that is fair.

I am assuming it will take me ~80 hours to play through the game - because I tend to be a completionist who actually explores, reads dialogue and so on. I say that because I had a similar experience with Avowed.

 

[Non-Euclidean]

Huh. No redos mid game.

Edit: See post below for more info.

 

[txa1265]

Huh. No redos mid game.

Not sure where you pulled that from, but it isn't totally true. You get to play the entire prologue - with opportunities to test a wide variety of effects of backgrounds, traits and skills ... and then you 100% DO GET TO RESPEC.

So you DO get to make choices that will provide you an INFORMED choice around re-spec'ing your character. So ANYONE saying 'no respec' is a liar. But unlike the first game, you only get the one reset option ... WHICH IS PRETTY MUCH EXACTLY WHAT YOU GET IN THE BELOVED NEW VEGAS!

 

[Non-Euclidean]

One related choice cuts through the entire experience, the flag-bearing resolution to underscore this mindset. That is this: The Outer Worlds 2 has no character respec option, meaning the only way to reset your character experience is to start the whole game over. Choices you make in the character growth process across thirty levels are final, and therefore often agonizing. I know this won't be to everybody's taste, but I love it and I love the director's explanation for why even more.


"You'll see games where they allow infinite respec, and at that point I'm not really role-playing a character, because I'm jumping between -- well my guy is a really great assassin that snipes from long range, and then oh, y'know, now I'm going to be a speech person, then respec again," he told me back in June. The implication is clear: this is a game that wants you to make choices, and in truest role-playing tradition the consequences for those choices aren't always going to be immediately clear.

This goes for narrative stuff, of course, but it also sticks just as hard in gameplay. If you have a mental blocker around the idea of missing out on stuff and want the most perfect, pristine playthrough at all costs, this game probably isn't for you. The very nature of this system and the number of skill points available across a play through means you are going to constantly encounter speech checks you can't pass, terminals you can't hack, locks you can't pick, and puzzles you can't solve. There is power in this, however: it engenders a role-playing experience where you need to plan ahead and make your peace with that planned path. It also allows strange twists on your original thinking to suddenly establish themselves, most often through a perk system just as expansive as in this game's predecessor.

The Outer Worlds 2 review - a strong sequel with a canny sense of when to iterate and when to reinvent

The Outer Worlds 2 remains fluffy gaming comfort food for better and worse, but it is better than its predecessor in almost every way.

www.eurogamer.net

Yeah, one after the intro. But no infinite respec.

I think that is great, you can play the intro with whatever styles you want, until you are happy and then go at it, somewhat informed of the value of your choices.

 

[Non-Euclidean]

Not sure where you pulled that from, but it isn't totally true. You get to play the entire prologue - with opportunities to test a wide variety of effects of backgrounds, traits and skills ... and then you 100% DO GET TO RESPEC.

So you DO get to make choices that will provide you an INFORMED choice around re-spec'ing your character. So ANYONE saying 'no respec' is a liar. But unlike the first game, you only get the one reset option ... WHICH IS PRETTY MUCH EXACTLY WHAT YOU GET IN THE BELOVED NEW VEGAS!

I guess I had forgotten that. Was there a popup to change things when left Good Springs? I remember the character selection in that doctors house, but not the respec.

 

[Huntn]

What are the story/character connections between I and II if any?

 

[Non-Euclidean]

What are the story/character connections between I and II if any?

None from what I have read. Some occasional eater eggs or references. TOW2 takes place in an entirely different sector and you are a member of Earth Security.