One DLC in...how are YOU enjoying Fallout 4 thus far?

prinyo · April 5, 2016

FO4 has a lot of interesting companions and some interesting side characters

Like ... who? o_0

My biggest problem with this game is that it is full with brainless idiots (NPCs) and treats you (the actual player) like a brainless idiot.

Let's face it - FO4 is optimized for a brainless shooter play-through. All you need to do is kill anything that moves without even thinking (compare the NPC's you are not "supposed" to kill in FO3 and FO4).

If you are not supposed to kill some NPC - no worries, they are essential and will still survive so after your mindless shooting spree is over you need to talk to the dude/dudette that is still alive after you've "killed" them several times.

Oh, but talking... that requires thinking.... and I just want to shoot, shoot, shoot, kill, kill, kill...

No worries - whenever there is a dialog simply press "arrow down" and it will be over soon. Or if you want to look more intellectual - first press "arrow up" and then "arrow down". This way the NPC will first compliment you how clever you are before complimenting you on how strong and capable you are and send you to shoot and kill some more. So now, feeling like an actual ancient god you can continue to shoot, shoot, shoot and kill, kill, kill.

Basically the main purpose of the dialog is to boost the player's ego between the shootings.

The way this game misuses the gratification gaming principles is quite bad. No other game has told me so many times how clever and strong I am. And the overlay where the vault-boy winks at you and then his head explodes into a fountain of caps ..... what is this.. Farmville? Even social-spam games like Dragons World don't go that far...

My biggest problem with the dialog system is that it is hard-coded to work for a mindless playthrough - press down to agree to whatever you need to kill next, press up to feel clever about it, press left to add some self-serving superiority attitude.

I do appreciate all the points people make in defense of FO4. I also do appreciate the fact that it needs some time to grow on you. I think I started to appreciate it more after about 40 hours of play. (Against 10 minutes in Skyrim and 30 minutes in FO3 for example)

Regardless of all logical arguments you can present - the fact is FO4 has no "soul".

Sometimes you hear (in real life) a piece of music that sounds quite right, has all harmonic and rhythmic components correctly working together, but it doesn't touch you, doesn't feel connected to you. Bethesda did their best to ensure that the FO4 world is disconnected from the player and un-RPG-able regardless if they did a lot of things right/well. The voiced player character is a small but a strong destructive element. Still, fixable via a mod. But the most serious problem is the dull, emotionally flat world full with brainless idiots and unlikable NPCs that will not accept any attempt to role-play.

But I have to go now, I used to have an arrow in the knee like you, but now I have dirt under my fingernails(!) and another settlement full with my nameless brainless zombie-like slaves needs my help. It's not that they can die... they are just drama queens. But I enjoy constantly re-confirming my Godly Awesomeness by showing them and myself how pathetic their eternal life would be without my Godly Clever and Powerful Protection.

P.S. The game is full with missed opportunities to be something else than a mindless shooter. For example Senior Scribe Neriah who is "researching the effects of radiation on wasteland creatures, such as ghouls, super mutants, mole rats and so on". And I was like: "Cool, finally something interesting! What do you want me to do?" And she sends me to kill some more rats... *facepalm* I actually rage-closed the game at that point.

Bloodfang · April 5, 2016

Weird, I do remember characters in New Vegas, even DLCs I played only once. Yet I remember their names and stories.

Can't say the same for characters in FO4. The stories overall are quite not engaging unlike New Vegas or even Fallout 3, Fallout 4 may have more "side-quests" but they aren't really unique quests, they are mostly misc take this item/kill that and then come back quest with no real story/reason behind except just do it for XP.

Main quest is cool, until you get to the Institute it feels like Beth dropped the ball for some reason.

Firstly, Fallout 4's stories (especially the MQ) is definably better than Fallout 3's story, and New Vegas's cliche main story. (New Vegas shines the most in it's smaller stories and DLCs. The MQ in New Vegas is just one big boring cliche).

Secondly, different characters has different effects on each player. I remember specific characters from FO3, FO4, and New Vegas myself. FO4 having the most with New Vegas trailing by a few numbers. Though, this is mostly because FO4 has a lot of interesting companions and some interesting side characters while New Vegas only has some interesting companions and a bit more interesting side characters. Though, this is mostly because I dislike some characters in New Vegas due to their personality is based on an event in their lifetime which is a cliche that makes no sense. (Boone is a great example of such character).

Thirdly, the Institute part is suppose to be the "ball drop" part of the MQ. If you're playing the game like an old Bethesda fan, there is definably a huge build-up to the Institute as you're doing many side and faction quests which may or may not mention them and goes about them. Then, when you finally do get to that point of the MQ, the ball is dropped and it suppose to be so. As from then onward, the MQ revolves around on what YOU DO personally. There's no linear path to follow. The ball has been dropped and it is now up to you to roll it in any direction as you please. It's surprisingly good, which is saying something since Bethesda hadn't done a really good MQ since Morrowind. (I wouldn't say this is better than Morrowind's but up there).

Lastly, I want to say this. There's a difference between Side Quests and Misc Quests. There's also a difference between Side Quests and Radiant Quests. (The Radiant ones, for the most part, are the extra never-ending quests for each faction). The Misc quests being mostly just fetching stuff and killing stuff. The Side quests though... There's a lot of them. Some of them are for the Railroad, Brotherhood, and Institute while others can be found all thru-out the game on ye' own dealing. (Cool thing to note: Bethesda even manage to entwine some side quests into faction quests. If you're an enemy of a faction, doing a specific side quest will be very different from if you're allied with the faction, which is a nice touch. Plus it even changes how the quest plays out a bit; and some side quests already change enough depending on if you start them from the beginning or go straight to a specific point in it).

Though, some side quests are still linear but they're still really good. Trevor's quest is really fun to do. The Silver Shroud is also amazingly fun. However, those quests are linear unlike ones like the Covenant quest. But yes, they're a lot of nice side quests. More than Fallout 3. It's just, a lot of them are a bit more hidden than Fallout 3's. Usually, Fallout 3 just had one interesting side quest per minor town with Megaton and Rivet City having a few more extra side quests to do, which made them easier to find since those side quests are pointed toward by the guards or are flat-out happening when you go into the town... While a lot of Fallout 4's quests requires you to actually do something to provoke them to start or require you to actually explore towns or specific areas, talking to the right people.

I think you misunderstood what I meant or more precisely I didn't explained myself well

Dropped the ball as in "bad writting"/something missing. One of very first thing that bugged me is how inconsistant the dialogue is.

When you arrive you can interrogate Father (remember Virgil asked you to find his serum) after that you're supposed to visit the Institute and the FEV-lab which is proof of where the kidnapped people went, and what became of them. Not even ONCE in the whole game you can confront Father or any Institute scientist in the Bio-department about that. It's like the whole thing never happenned. Same with Virgil post-end with the Institute. Same with the questions : What about University Point ? Why let Super-Mutants loose on the Commonwealth? why make gen-3, for science? because they were curious for knowing how far they could go ? There are so many plotholes or things that trully make no sense I don't even bother to count after a while.

At least in New Vegas, even if it is cliché for you, at least they gave us the reasons. Why each character was like that or did this. Even Caesar gives you his reasons (and the Legion content got cut/was unfinished btw). The writting is just so much better.

I remember when seeing stuff, reading terminals in previous Fallout games, how you were able to use this info you gathered to confront people. In Fallout 4, it's just not there anymore. It's not about following a linear path, that's not what Fallout games are known for, it's about having more options and possibilities.

It's just that once you get to the Institute, the quality of the story/writting/dialogue just decrease by quite a lot. The endings being the worst, just check the forums. ^^

Also, the problem with the side-quests : like 80% of them are all tied to factions. Meaning, if you want to play the game's content you have to stop supporting factions until specific quests, and it's quite fast to get ennemy with a faction. Not everyone was aware of missing out of the Ballistic Weave of the Railroad for example. It should be independant from the factions, things like Cabot House. We don't get many of these, just a few here and there.

Also you said : "If you're an enemy of a faction, doing a specific side quest will be very different from if you're allied with the faction, which is a nice touch".

There are no similar side-quests between factions, they are actually different (event if it follows the kill this/get that). The only ones similar afaik are the last missions when you get to destroy opposing factions, especially when destroying the Institute. They basically replaced the NPCs, copy/pasta the ending slideshow. Done. Couldn't be more lazy than that.

And by the way, I liked Boone a lot, he doesn't open up to you. You get to know him, ASK him many questions about him.

You simply can't build that kind of virtual relationship with a companion in FO4, you just get your scripted dialogue once you get enough affinity.

Get a least 2 dialogue responses... And that's it. Back to the generic lines. I was quite dissapointed with the companions overall in Fallout 4. Most of them don't even have a proper personnal quest. Piper's being the most lame companion quest, while being (imo) the best VA in the game along with the female PC.

*DocClox* · April 6, 2016

Firstly, Fallout 4's stories (especially the MQ) is definably better than Fallout 3's story, and New Vegas's cliche main story. (New Vegas shines the most in it's smaller stories and DLCs. The MQ in New Vegas is just one big boring cliche).

"Definably better?" I'm guessing that's a non-standard definition.

Look: I'm not a fan of NV's writing particularly, but at least I knew what Caesar wanted. None of this "the institute are such cold, clinical, bastards that they will shoot a mother and abduct a baby because rather than just takng samples from the entire vault because they can (Boo-hah-hah-hah-hah) and then the go all goo-goo-eyed at the baby and rather than sticking it in a food processor and refrigerating the DNA sludge, they adopt the adorable, little rugrat and educate him as one of their own. Because that's what cold, clinical, bastards do. Apparently."

Or there's "Father is getting old and so despite being a complete psychopath he starts wondering if his mummy loved him. So he has her thawed out from the Vault and engineers a meeting between her and the baddest bad-ass killer he knows, because he's not sure if a cybernetically augmented assassin can beat a pre-war lady lawyer in a fair fight involving only guns, knives, synths and turrets, and he really want to find out. But that's OK because he's secretly hoping that she'll win, blow the assassin's brains out, use the implant in the assassin's hippocampus to reveal the institute's best kept secret (I mean who wouldn't think of that?), and then interview a man Father has ordered killed so she can find out how to hack into the relay. At which point Father will take a chance on Mummy not killing him out of hand before he can explain that he's her little lost babby despite being in his sixties or so. Because estrogen, apparently. This is all so he can groom her to to take over his post as leader of the most hardline rationalist faction in the commonwealth, because that's how hardline rationalists behave - like the Joker on crystal meth."

I have problems with the NV plot, not least of which is that I don't believe anyone could comprehensively turn a bunch of tribals from Grampy Bone and Sulik into "Ring-a-ding-ding baby" and "Ave Caesar" in the time available. But lordy, lordy, lordy, at least everyone had comprehensible aims and objectives. You could explain what they wanted without a page and a half of exceptions and special pleading and bizarre hypothetical frameworks under which apparently nonsensical actions appear to make a degree of sense.

I think if F4 is "definably better", then I probably need to see the definition you're using.

Jusey1 · April 7, 2016

When you arrive you can interrogate Father (remember Virgil asked you to find his serum) after that you're supposed to visit the Institute and the FEV-lab which is proof of where the kidnapped people went, and what became of them. Not even ONCE in the whole game you can confront Father or any Institute scientist in the Bio-department about that. It's like the whole thing never happenned. Same with Virgil post-end with the Institute. Same with the questions : What about University Point ? Why let Super-Mutants loose on the Commonwealth? why make gen-3, for science? because they were curious for knowing how far they could go ? There are so many plotholes or things that trully make no sense I don't even bother to count after a while.

The dialogue system in general isn't that good, and I hated that you cannot interrogate Father... However, the questions about the Institute in general? That's... Hard. That's is a HUGE hole to jump into and try to argue about. Hell, it can even be argued that Father has been lying to you the whole entire time for all we know, because of contradicting a lot of different evidence in-game is. So the Institute in general can take a lot to debate about, and a lot of in-game research to really have some proper arguments and discussions about them.

So, I rather not touch the Institute stuff due to how vastly mysterious and unknown they are proposed as toward the player. So, I wouldn't say that these are flat-out plotholes... Just that, we don't know enough of what is going on to really have a proper estimate of whether or not these are literally plotholes.

Eth4rlad · April 7, 2016

It's not plotholes.....just unexplained holes in the plot.

How convenient.

greenquesadilla · April 8, 2016

I'll say the same that I said about the base game.

I'm glad I didn't pay for it.

megnamon · April 8, 2016

Only two things I hate most about FO4, its optimization and melee combat. Goddamnit, I just want to play melee oriented but then the melee gameplay just " wat ? " hurrrghhhhhh

TheTraveler · April 8, 2016

If I recall, you could target specific body parts in melee combat with the previous games, correct?

*DocClox* · April 8, 2016

If I recall, you could target specific body parts in melee combat with the previous games, correct?

Not in F3 or NV. I think you could in 1 and 2 - I have this memory of a newly emerged Vault Dweller trying to chop the heads off rats. It's been a while though.

Jusey1 · April 9, 2016

Only two things I hate most about FO4, its optimization and melee combat. Goddamnit, I just want to play melee oriented but then the melee gameplay just " wat ? " hurrrghhhhhh

Melee is OP and dangerously fun, with the right set-up that is.

TheTraveler · April 9, 2016

If I recall, you could target specific body parts in melee combat with the previous games, correct?

Not in F3 or NV. I think you could in 1 and 2 - I have this memory of a newly emerged Vault Dweller trying to chop the heads off rats. It's been a while though.

I remembered it from 1 and 2. Wasn't sure about 3 and NV as I never played a melee character. Seems odd that you wouldn't want to try and smassh an enemies skull or arms instead of their chest.

*DocClox* · April 9, 2016

If I recall, you could target specific body parts in melee combat with the previous games, correct?

Not in F3 or NV. I think you could in 1 and 2 - I have this memory of a newly emerged Vault Dweller trying to chop the heads off rats. It's been a while though.

I remembered it from 1 and 2. Wasn't sure about 3 and NV as I never played a melee character. Seems odd that you wouldn't want to try and smassh an enemies skull or arms instead of their chest.

I spent quite a lot of time running around with the stealth suit and shock sword from Operation Anchorage. If you engage VATS with a melee weapon, the target's whole body lights up as a single hit location.

But yeah, it does seem like an odd design decision.

Miin · April 9, 2016

Still waiting on F4 GECK to come out so we can fix all the little things to make the game playable.

Like ohh I dont know: rebindable keys (the big elephant in the room, really bethseda what were you thinking?).

And dont even get me started on shadows.....

Ernest Lemmingway · April 10, 2016

Still waiting on F4 GECK to come out so we can fix all the little things to make the game playable.

Like ohh I dont know: rebindable keys (the big elephant in the room, really bethseda what were you thinking?).

The game is a port from console to PC. Everything about the game appeals to console gamer sensibilities. That's the market Bethesda is going for now. So of course they wouldn't bother fixing issues that computer games would have a problem with.

Miin · April 11, 2016

Yes but they actually made the game itself on PC though....

Ernest Lemmingway · April 11, 2016

Yes but they actually made the game itself on PC though....

They make all video games on PCs. Even when they make video games for PCs they don't always bother to consider that we have different priorities from console gamers. Even those of us who play on both approach have developed certain expectations from each. This is one of the better and more balanced debates of PC vs. console and sums things up rather well.

*Monsto Brukes* · April 14, 2016

unless they update their engine up to 2016 standards, gamebryo barely holds together and duct tapes are ripping. Just use that money , hire more engine programmers and do it.

They need to buy/license another engine. This was kinda dated when skyrim came out but now it's just poor.

Jusey1 · April 14, 2016

There is nothing wrong with Bethesda's engine. They constantly update the engine for each game. The engine they used for Fallout 4 is probably a lot different than the one they used for Skyrim due to these updates... Especially A LOT DIFFERENT from Morrowind's engine. And Bethesda will not be using another engine any time soon cause that'll cost a lot more time and money than just updating their own. Plus, not many engines can truly handle the stuff that Bethesda does in their games.

Snazzishoez · April 14, 2016

So far so good. Has there been an actual release date for Far Harbor?

prinyo · April 14, 2016

I need to say .. after all the bitching and complaining... the other day I found myself staring at a "first aid" box on the wall at a local supermarket in RL. I realized I'm standing there looking at the box contemplating if I should check what's inside and "loot" it. I think the daydream ended when I decided to check it after all but there was no "E" key to open it.

And then I also realized that for the past one and a half years visiting this shop I have never noticed the box even exists. So.. yeah...

April 15, 2016

I posted this in the game engine thread

http://www.loverslab.com/topic/60477-i-realized-the-other-day-the-game-is-fun-even-tho-the-engine-really-sucks-ass/

So I mostly say same things from that post in that thread

But because Fallout 4 was made in 64bit and not 32bit (pretty sure this is why)...but Fallout 4 is so much more stable and way better performance than I got in Skyrim. In Skyrim, it would stutter a lot as it loaded in new areas/assets even on a 100% vanilla game. Modded Skyrim always performed way worse as well, especially with ENB attached. However, even my pretty heavily modded Fallout 4 with an intensive ENB performs WAY better than Skyrim did with mods+ENB and Fallout 4 doesn't even have stability mods out. Even using an ENB in Fallout 4, I still get great FPS, no stutters or anything. And even with explosions and some bigger battles (compared to Skyrim), I still don't get stutters or much frame drops either. I can spawn in 30 enemies in Skyrim, and performance drops so much (even on a 100% vanilla game). I do the same in Fallout 4, even as explosions and gun fire and everything is going off...and performance is still really great, and that is even with mods still left on.

I still kinda like Skyrim more as a game, but I'm enjoying the stability and lack of stutters as it loads things in WAY more in Fallout 4. Bethesda really made huge improvements in the engine they use in that regard.

Wired · April 15, 2016

I still kinda like Skyrim more as a game, but I'm enjoying the stability and lack of stutters as it loads things in WAY more in Fallout 4. Bethesda really made huge improvements in the engine they use in that regard.

They simply follow the fasion and in their case 64-bit is kinda saved them. A bit. LOD system is kinda stuck in the 00s though.

April 15, 2016

I still kinda like Skyrim more as a game, but I'm enjoying the stability and lack of stutters as it loads things in WAY more in Fallout 4. Bethesda really made huge improvements in the engine they use in that regard.

They simply follow the fasion and in their case 64-bit is kinda saved them. A bit. LOD system is kinda stuck in the 00s though.

Yeah, LOD is meh. Its a little harder to tell without mods, but like the brighter glowing red rocket station mod...you have to be close to actually see the changes the mod made to it. Without texture mods, LOD is actually better...but you are right, it still isn't that great.

prinyo · April 15, 2016

I'm just gonna leave this here

13 Shocking Facts about Fallout 4 That Will Forever Change the Way You Think about RPGs

Wired · April 15, 2016

Good writing but still biased. It criticises Bethesda for overusing their formulas like dealing with companions more rather than result of it which is a complete wrong. Is Fallout 4 not a good game? Yes. Is it tedious sometimes? Absolutely. Is this a massive disaster like Deus Ex: Invisible War survived only because of hype? Hell no.

Sign In

One DLC in...how are YOU enjoying Fallout 4 thus far?

Recommended Posts

Guest Vendayn

Guest Vendayn

Archived

Recently Browsing 0 members