Zor2k13 Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 New star wars is crap might as well be another spaceballs movie if it had mel brooks in there it might not be so bad:-( When I originally played oblivion I was hooked on the power play and the little details too but once I got into porn mods for oblivion I completely lost that enjoyment of the game. The same thing happened to me with skyrim and porn mods lol. I don't think beth knows what they want to do with this series they just want money and don't care how they get it. Maybe this is more of a sign of the times and many people working there getting older for example gas powered games and chris taylor ruined supreme commander series with sc2. All they had to do was fix the bugs in scfa but nope they had to make a console game and it flopped then the company went bust.
Ernest Lemmingway Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 To the OP. Bethesda has never really gotten Fallout. FO3 was forgettable in the extreme while at least Obsidian tried with NV, considering the engine was a piece of shit even before they got the license. BGS insists on setting the game in cities with strong ties to American history even though such places have nothing to do with the original setting of California and the Mojave Desert, much less the Master, the Enclave, or the FEV. And as is horribly obvious in FO4, they don't even try to get the feel of a post-nuclear wasteland; take TES template, fill with modern gear and super mutants, and BOOM! Instant Fallout game to them. As well as far too many sheeple who've never played the first two titles from Black Isle or understand what the world would really be like after the Big One. Food, even if it's irradiated, everywhere? Easily found firearms, even that pipe crap? After two centuries most people wouldn't even have the knowledge, much less the equipment, to create or repair firearms. Those that did would be kings while everyone else was reduced to javelins, spears, and crude bludgeons. I won't even start on their utter failure to include corny pop culture references to geek culture as Easter eggs. Or their inability to understand the importance of faction rep, Karma, reputation titles, or other little things that truly made Fallout unique. The world looks good this time around, but it feels empty. Soulless. Bethesda didn't lose track. They were never on it to begin with.
Tj412 Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 3, NV and 4 (Which I'll collectively refer to as Bethouts) all lack atmosphere. 4 is the worst offender, NV a close second. 3 is the closest Bethesda got and probably will get to replicating what F1 especially felt like, but it's still a far cry. One of the reasons is the population density in the game world. Fallout 1 & 2 didn't have this problem because each "cell" was self-contained, with a larger, "non-playable" map connecting them all and standalone "random" cells for anything that takes place between destinations, not something you can easily get away with in an open-world first-person game. When you travelled anywhere you had the impression that you were in a truly remote location, the ass-end of nowhere, with only you and your equipment to rely on. In the Bethouts on the other hand, no matter where you go you're never more than 5 minutes away from friendly or at least neutral territory. New Vegas is by far the worst for this. There's simply not enough wilderness between the settlements which should be seen as oases in a desert of hostility. This is further exacerbated by fast travel. Its implementation in Bethouts has been probably the worst I've witnessed. When you fast travel, you teleport and the time of day changes. You're in the Glowing Sea with a single fusion core left and no ammo? Just hit tab, click on the map and you're back to safety, no harm done. As soon as you do so, there's 0 chance of being stopped on the way to your destination, unlike in F1&2 where you witnessed your journey across the map and any manner of encounter could be triggered along the way. It also gives you a greater sense of the passage of time which is further emphasised by the first half of the main quest's time limit. New Survival in F4 goes too far the other way, without game mechanics to back it up. Sure there's a greater emphasis on management of supplies, but when these supplies are so ridiculously abundant, and the distances it's possible to travel in a given direction before reaching your destinations so short, it becomes inconsequential. However, the distances you must travel are often long enough, or journeys between destinations repeated enough to become incredibly tedious. Fast Travel is a must, casual gamers notwithstanding, but this isn't how it should be implemented. I haven't even touched on the lore, writing, humor, visual aesthetics or the gameplay its self. Those are other rants for other times.
reeeeeeee123 Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 no its not a fallout game that's why it's called fallout 4 what kind of question is this
Shininku Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 TL;DR: Is the only thing Fallout means is: "post apocalyptic setting"; then yes, Fallout 4 is a Fallout game. If, however, Fallout means: a deep RPG with various speech checks, meaningful perks and skills, interesting towns, everyone own to screw you over to continue surviving, and those possible psychos with the big sturdy armor that wasn't easier to aquire then getting pregnant in a park; then no Fallout 4 is not a Fallout game. Now for the Long and maybe read part... No seriously, it's really long, I even edited in a spoiler tag because of how long it is. I'll try to condense this as much as possible, because sometimes I get ranty and just keep going, even to I don't give a flying pig about Fallout 4's story, something I don't believe I've said about a "RPG" in a VERY long time, that WASN'T just an action game. I don't like children, especially babies, once they get 5-6 and can take orders and have discipline, it's a different story. Hell I might have cared more if Shaun was older, at least then I'd have felt he was actually deserving of damn near my every dialogue option being "SHAUN!". Hell the damned bastard doesn't even give a slave collar about you, why should you care about him? But maybe it's because I'm not a parent. I cared way more about getting revenge for my spouse then I did about Shaun. Clearly the developers disagree because I don't think your spouse is even brought up in the dialogue outside of talking to Codsworth the first time. And the big twist was, at least for me, 100% expected. I had a slimmer of a doubt when I saw Tony the Tiger with the child, but after I got to the Institute I was just like I KNEW IT. Screw those moments I doubted, I KNEW IT. But moving on, Shaun literally let you out, more or less, as an experiment; and tries to claim that killing Corn Flakes was revenge for him too. I don't like any of the factions. Institute would be more interesting if I wasn't a puppet, Railroad doesn't give a fake leg about the Commonwealth, the Minutemen are just boring as paint. (Hey that settlement though). And the Brotherhood WHERE'S MY RENEGADE OPTION? Where's my Dark side nuke them all option? Where's any sort of depth behind my character besides "MY BABY!! MY BABEH!!" There is none. Just like leveling up. Just like the points, it doesn't matter. Where's my option to force Cait to do even more drugs? Where's my option to tell Piper to be even more blatant in her newspaper? Where's my option to completely forget the other companions, because I don't even remember their backstories. That's the nutshell of Fallout 4 for me. There's no substance. As a Roleplaying game, it's failed me entirely, because I don't care about the role I'm playing. Unlike being Revan or Exile, being Warden or Hawke, or even being Shephard; I don't give a dead Shaun about the Lone Survivor. At least for Mass Effect, though I feel the endings were disappointing because I feel like they didn't justify any choices at all in the trilogy but at least I can say I really enjoyed the journey. But FO4, both the ending and the journey are underwhelming. Moreover, if you want to make a story about saving someone, then you should at least have some degree of attachment to that character instead of literally three minutes. Why is Walking Dead so painful, because I grew attached to Lee and Clementine and I actually cried at the end. I can't think of a single other video game at the moment, that's actually made me cry. Shaun is FAR from being someone I actually care about. And when the entire narrative is built around that, it is, as I've said before, a complete failure for me. I played it on PS4 to play pure vanilla at first, then immediately regretted my purchase. Then I bought it on sale for my pc where's it's barely gotten any playtime as I wait for something to make it not boring. You know who would like Fallout 4? My mom; who doesn't play anything but point and click find the item game. But even that may not be true because she hasn't actually tried FO4 yet (though she did really enjoy FO3). But at the same, because she's had two boys, maybe the story actually means something to her, where it didn't to me. The saddest part for me honestly, is thinking what mods could really come out that would make me interested in Fallout 4? Because of where we are, I have to say SexTec? obviously, because I'm thinking of what I could potentially turn these boring, irritating little, whiny settlers into. Bring back Paradise Halls or Reno. I'm not even into BDSM and slavery for sexlab and all that stuff, but I greatly welcome it to Fallout 4 just to add what should have been there in a Fallout game, what used to be there even. But the closest to that is do you care about man-made Synths and their plight? Sure they don't have bombs on their necks, but with a tiny phrase they cease to exist. Sorry, I just don't feel the gravitas. I need to see the collar, show me the agony, then I'll care more about your robotic plight. But I suppose that's the best they can do more due to how being politically correct is Even those mods though, aren't quite enough to fully have me enjoy Fallout 4. Because honestly, at this point, I doubt anyone's going to do a massive overhaul and make Fallout 4 actually have the depth the series used to have, I'm not even sure if it's even possible. So to that extent, where does that leave me? If there's do depth, and I've already paid for it, I'll have to find some kind of dumb overhaul that completely destroys Fallout 4. Like the Starship Troopers overhaul for FO3, because at least that doesn't have depth, I just need to fight giant bugs and have dumb jokes. Maybe a Star Wars Overhaul, surprisingly for the Clone Wars over GCW; just because the vertibirds are perfect for LAAT gunships and Synths to battledroids. But honestly, it's sad when I think that removing the Fallout from Fallout 4 is the only way I can really think to make it more enjoyable at this point. I mean Fallout 4 is this relatively bright and happy world. Someone touched on it in an earlier post, everyone's just practically radiating happiness. Everywhere is awesome. It's not a gritty, screw you, world as it used to be. It's now a world where all you need is Charisma to pass the handful of speech checks; a world where not having a perk only means you can't build that one thing in that settlement; a world where having max Intelligence doesn't mean a damn thing. It's a world where the only way you can even be the bad guy, is by joining a plan to kill all humans and repopulate the world with Synths. As I've said before, it's a roleplaying game where I don't give a nuked megaton about the role I'm playing. And to me, that is the markings of a failed RPG. There's not even a real point to leveling, "customizing" your levels is a joke. It's not a bad game, it has good things. It's just a bad RPG. If you want to shoot stuff and build settlements, then it's your cup of tea. If your idea of a good story is chasing after the waft of a newborn, not giving a flipped lighter about your murdered spouse, and then choosing who nukes who then it's your game. That said however, shooting stuff and building settlements is not what Fallout was originally about. Hell, you could play through most of the first games without fighting. So to OP, in my opinion, they are intentionally losing track. The first games aren't what's "in"; hell I've talked to several people who were playing some games and claimed they that "there were too many options". Like what? How are there ever too many options in a video game? But then if you cut it, they want to cry that it's super linear. Then, I was at a Gamestop one time and someone returned GTAV because it was too open and they didn't know what to do. Yes, I'm dead fucking serious. In the end though, I'm just a niche gamer, who mostly plays turn based games and JRPGs which many would also are complete trash, so what do I know. Hell, I'll even admit some of them are complete trash, but at least they do what I do like, right; and don't try to fuck me to sleep with empty words and broken promises. But hell, even those are going to change once this new politically co But even aside from that, the depth of the story is removed (for me). There's practically no point to customizing your levelups. You can't even really enjoy sidequests without hearing about JASON. And the depth is replaced instead with crafting and settlement building. I don't like crafting. Never have. I've actually quit MMOs because the only way to get the best gear is to make it or buy it for ludicrous prices, that's the kind of person I am. The first game I really got into crafting for was... Skyrim. That's right. 20 years of gaming, and Skyrim's the first game I really got into crafting for. There was a certain degree of joy of building my own armor, something I feel slightly increased joy for in FO4, because I can rename them. But not if it comes at the apparent cost that Fallout 4 paid. Lastly, I don't care about building. When I was little, I played with legos and built some cool stuff. Hell, I even drew back then, and continue to do so, but I don't care about building. Especially not when I building things for uppity little settlers who cry and complain non-stop and never having anything good to say to the person who saved their goddamn miserable little existences. Hell, there's even a few who THREATEN you. Did the same person who wrote Delphine and the Blades write the settlers? Hey, I know you're the Dragonborn, and without you, I'm literally trash and can't kill a dragon, but go into the enemy's headquarters, you know, the Thalmor, whom I believe are the one's raising the dragons and just look around. Nah, nah, don't worry, you look like trash but if you put on this dumb party outfit, they'll never suspect you. Oh and don't question how I got the horn of Jurgen, how I knew where it was, how I knew they'd send you to get it, or how I got it to get it. Oh and don't question that if I'm really as "well-informed" as I claim, I should know that you already killed at minimum one dragon and thus this Kynesgrove quest is completely pointless, or the complete irritation that we have to go back to Riverwood just so that I can tell you to go to Solitude. Oh and also, don't forget, I ask you to kill one of the most unique characters in the game, the fucking wise old dragon who betrayed his own kind and put his life on the line to teach us shouts to stop Alduin in the first place. Me and this senile old man are totally more important than that wise dragon who isn't totally the only dragon you can just chat up whenever you want. Sorry... I went on a rant, can you tell I don't like the Blades in Skyrim. That's my thoughts. My unnecessarily long thoughts. Including the off-topic ones. But I write what I'm thinking, even so it's bound to be... weird.
TheCaptn Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 Is FO4 a Fallout game? Maybe for the people who started the series with Bethesda's FO3. I'm not one of them. To me, Fallout 1 & 2 is what the series all about in terms of game play and atmosphere and I don't consider FNV as a successful attempt in recapturing that either. FNV is more like a Fallout total conversion mod made for FO3. Bethesda's Fallouts are very different games in many ways. I consider Fallout 2 as the best Fallout BTW, minus the wacky stuff. I'm pretty much on the exact opposite side to you, and I'm also an 'old school' player. In fact I'm old enough to have played Wasteland on the Commodore 64... I think Fallout 4 is arguably the most "Fallout" game so far, in the way that it brings two decades worth of atmosphere, lore, art design, narrative history, influences and humor into what is in my opinion the most cohesive Fallout world we've seen up to this point... But then worldbuilding is something Bethesda really do excel at. What Fallout 4 is not is a particularly good roleplaying game, or a very compelling story (It's no Mass Effect). But this fact is actually pretty well hidden if you 'roleplay' the typical Hero archetype, which I mostly do, so it took me a while to understand the complaints being levelled against the game on this basis. It's all true though, and you just need to step across to the anti-hero path to realise there actually isn't one. Despite that it's still my favourite of the franchise. Fallouts 1 and 2 are games I install and 'play through' every couple of years, but then then they're gone again... In contrast, despite their flaws the Bethesda contributions don't get uninstalled until they have a sequel, and even then there might be a year or more of overlap. And it's not just modding that keeps them alive. I really just enjoy being immersed in their worlds, even if I've already explored every nook and cranny (which hasn't actually happened yet. I still occasionally find places in New Vegas that I haven't seen before and which turn out to be vanilla).
Ernest Lemmingway Posted June 4, 2016 Posted June 4, 2016 And what is wrong with the wacky stuff from Black Isle's Fallout titles? That's called "comedy relief." It's actually a cornerstone of the series. There is just so much wrong with what Bethesda did to this game, going back to ideas introduced in FO3. Plus none of Bethesda's versions has ever evoked that feeling of being a true post-apocalyptic world. They're too politically correct to really go into the ugly realities of survival in a lawless world (sexuality, racial prejudice and tribalism, the uglier truths of slavery). The proliferation of food and fluids is completely unbelievable for two centuries after the fact. And then Synths? Why did Howard feel the need to add them when they don't fit in and feel as artificial dramatically as they are biologically? Like I said before, Bethesda just doesn't get the franchise and likely never will. Fallout used to be unique and dared to be different. Now it's a homogenized and pasteurized mess designed to appeal to the masses rather than a dedicated group of fans. Other games did the same thing. A few might still be kicking around but most flopped and were abandoned.
DigitalP Posted June 4, 2016 Posted June 4, 2016 I'm just going to leave this here and say. Fallout 4 is close to my perfect style of game.
TheObsidianRelic Posted June 5, 2016 Posted June 5, 2016 Played FO4 for a week and stopped for 2 months before finally coming back and beating it with the Institute ending, which seemed like the only one that made remote sense. Idk, entire game seemed like a flop from day one, coming from New Vegas. Sure FO1 and 2 were the best, but New Vegas is a better comparison. Obsidian only had 10 months to make NV and it is spectacular. Sure it's a bit buggy, but it was layered, thick in RPG elements, and was pretty much a "true" FO3, and they only had 10 months. On the other hand, FO4 is said to had begun serious development in 2011 or 2012 and the game is dumbed down and boring. The hardest thing in the game is managing carry weight, lol. Probably won't play FO4 again until someone makes a Requiem-style mod for it. This. All of what this person said. They took everything i loved in a fallout game and basically just left it out of Fallout 4. After beating the game once i was like.. that's it? I attempted to replay it but got instantly bored that i had to start everything over again.. Now in fallout 3 and Fallout New vegas i beat and beat and beat and beat till i really did EVERYTHING and I wasn't bored starting over again. Im replaying fallout 4 now that all the downloadable content is out and I'm finding it EXTREMELY hard to continue. So yea in my opinion, Fallout 4 is not a Fallout game. It's just a piece of garbage with great graphics.
bjornk Posted June 5, 2016 Posted June 5, 2016 And what is wrong with the wacky stuff from Black Isle's Fallout titles? That's called "comedy relief." It's actually a cornerstone of the series. How is a crashed Federation shuttle from Star Trek, King Arthur's knights and the bridge guard from Monty Python and so on "a cornerstone of the series"? Don't be ridiculous. Those are simply bullshit, they aren't even funny. They are NOT Easter eggs either as they are very much part of the game as "random encounters" and some of them even give you armor, weapons, stimpaks, skill boosts etc. which you can take advantage of in the game. This isn't Angry Birds, Fallout is a role-playing game and immersion is important, the setting as well as the story needs to be believable, adding these sort of things is counterproductive in terms of creating immersion. I'm okay with pop culture references as long as they are subtle, such as the Scientology (=Hubology) stuff. PS. There's only one Fallout game made by Black Isle, which is Fallout 2.
Outlast1 Posted June 5, 2016 Author Posted June 5, 2016 Now understand I only brought this topic up to release steam of frustrations I had. I felt the atmosphere was lacking the main thing is being that everyone is too happy. I mean really? Raiders trying to kill you or eat you which ever comes first. Super mutants that want to eat you, And oh every living creature wants to eat you and use your bones for a tooth pick. Take for instance the death claw, first fight I got into with it I was like oh shit!!! but after that I felt like I was shooting blind puppies with serious motor control problems and bad hygiene. They were not as intimidating. In terms of settlement building its ok but I built some stuff and even a few bases and then forgot about their existence. I dont know how many times I shot my own settler in front of the my wall for just threatening me. But again its not the worst game I just feel out of place in this game. Make no mistake I am not hating it just feeling like its not my genre of game any more. I loved fallout 3 and played hundreds of times even last night. play FNV regularly, and still love oblivion and Skyrim which all of these stated by many other people as terrible games, But they sung to me and I like them now was skyrims story any good in my opinion....no not really I preferred just wandering aroundi doing all the weird side quests or tracking and killing every thalmor I could cause I always play as a wood elf and made myself believe they destroyed my homeland. I just want everyone on here to understand wether you like, love, loathe, despise the game it really does not matter cause at the end of the day we either are gonna play it or forget it. The only reason this post started up was because I wanted to understand all sides of this case from those who loved the game to those who hated it and why. The main question of is fallout 4 a fallout game or not was poised to be dumb question just as a thought starter with the intent of hearing an opinion. I guess I have no life as I have read everyones posts on here and noted that everything said wrong with the game is either exactly the same or very similar, and all the good pro's were identical which shows to me that many are divided about the game. Sadly I am no longer the raider chick I always play as in fallout, but the dragon born with serious family issues, and a bad case of poor social skills lol.
Ernest Lemmingway Posted June 5, 2016 Posted June 5, 2016 And what is wrong with the wacky stuff from Black Isle's Fallout titles? That's called "comedy relief." It's actually a cornerstone of the series. How is a crashed Federation shuttle from Star Trek, King Arthur's knights and the bridge guard from Monty Python and so on "a cornerstone of the series"? Don't be ridiculous. Those are simply bullshit, they aren't even funny. They are NOT Easter eggs either as they are very much part of the game as "random encounters" and some of them even give you armor, weapons, stimpaks, skill boosts etc. which you can take advantage of in the game. This isn't Angry Birds, Fallout is a role-playing game and immersion is important, the setting as well as the story needs to be believable, adding these sort of things is counterproductive in terms of creating immersion. I'm okay with pop culture references as long as they are subtle, such as the Scientology (=Hubology) stuff. PS. There's only one Fallout game made by Black Isle, which is Fallout 2. Funny random encounters were a part of the series since the first game and acted as a way of breaking tension. Because Fallout has its origins among tabletop RPGs, such comic breaks are often necessary when the mood is in danger of becoming stale. As someone who plays tabletop I can understand why the original developers would include such. It's also an excellent reminder to people who take it too seriously: it's only a game. If some people find that "immersion" breaking, that's their opinion.
~~MetaNaito~~ Posted June 5, 2016 Posted June 5, 2016 Really fun game when you add survival to it. Absolutely love it. My only problem with fallout 4 is settlements were a waste of dev resources and everything and their dog (quite literally) is out to kill you. Why? Nah, that's too complicated. Bethesda needs a team of like 10 writers for their next game because the lore and story is so lackluster.
sinkitsune Posted June 5, 2016 Posted June 5, 2016 From a friend who WORKED on Fallout 1 and Fallout 2. "Fallout 4 is great. If Bethesda didn't pick it up with 3 we would have NEVER gotten another Fallout game." "The Poor Saps that want Obsidian to make Fallout games would be sorely disappointed in what would have came out like a FPS" OH and just a FYI. Obsidian barely had to do anything when they already had all the resources from Bethesda. So think on that when you say Bethesda ruined Fallout. So thank Bethesda for NV being "So much better than FO3/4" as some people would say.
Guest endgameaddiction Posted June 5, 2016 Posted June 5, 2016 And the person who said that FNV was made in 10 months. They are obviously forgetting that they used every single resource from Fallout 3 except voice actors and story writing and probably some other small stuff.
ragindude Posted June 7, 2016 Posted June 7, 2016 "OH and just a FYI. Obsidian barely had to do anything when they already had all the resources from Bethesda. So think on that when you say Bethesda ruined Fallout. So thank Bethesda for NV being "So much better than FO3/4" as some people would say. Yeah, did they really have a choice there? I'm sure as hell they didn't get the biggest portion of the budget to make it in the first place. And yet it left a better impression than Fallout 4.
Frel Posted June 7, 2016 Posted June 7, 2016 From a friend who WORKED on Fallout 1 and Fallout 2. "Fallout 4 is great. If Bethesda didn't pick it up with 3 we would have NEVER gotten another Fallout game." "The Poor Saps that want Obsidian to make Fallout games would be sorely disappointed in what would have came out like a FPS" OH and just a FYI. Obsidian barely had to do anything when they already had all the resources from Bethesda. So think on that when you say Bethesda ruined Fallout. So thank Bethesda for NV being "So much better than FO3/4" as some people would say. Can we stop with the war of Obsidian vs Beth please ? yes Bethesda did a lot of work on modernizing a game that otherwise would have died out with its studio. yes Obsidian reused assets and the engine that were developed by Bethesda and yes Obsidian worked a lot on making a story and extend mechanics that feels by many old fan of the series as more a continuation of what was done in Fallout 1 and 2. And yes fallout NV was a buggy mess at launch (even if I prefer FNV to F3 can admit that) Some people prefer the take from Bethesda others prefer Obsidian's one. Both are great studio that made excellent games (TES and Fallout 3 are very impressive but so are Fallout NV, southpark or pillars of eternity). As for Fallout 4 well it is clearly a change of direction whether you look at Fallout serie (including FNV) or even previous Bethesda games (including TES). To me at least this is the first BGS game that do not really feel like I can be anybody and the first Fallout where I do not really expect anything more than having to shoot people. Edit: also while people are bickering about they forget that BGS (Todd in fact) said that they were open to do a repeat on the Obsidian thing. And so did one of the lead writers at Obsidian (http://www.techtimes.com/articles/127234/20160124/obsidian-lead-writer-ups-hype-new-fallout-game-vegas-2.htm) so settle down everybody there's no war happening here except between fans and it start to be ridiculous tbh
peculiaris Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 From someone who played every fallout game the past six months I can say: Fallout 1 and 2 are fun, challenging and both have a great story. Fallout tactics I really didn't like. Fallout 3 looks great and has a great story, Fallout New Vegas is a brown mess of a game but has a story that is almost as great as fallout 2. Fallout 4 is a great continuation for fallout 3, it has great visuals and a good story. For me fallout 1, 2 and New Vegas are the more dark and impactful stories of the wastelands. Fallout 3 and 4 are more the "Good guy does good things" Stories where Bethesda is so good at. And tactics is just to different and my gamer head doesn't understand it.
Halstrom Posted June 11, 2016 Posted June 11, 2016 Are there already numerous "Whine about FO4" threads or did we lose track.................
maybenexttime Posted June 11, 2016 Posted June 11, 2016 Fallout 3 was the first Fallout game I played a bit back (around 2010). It was fun, had an interesting story. Once I was done I never touched it again until 2015 from TTW. I played NV for the first time around 2012. Despite it hosting a much smaller worldspace (and a pretty empty one), I had a hard time leaving it. The RPG elements of the game kept me going for a good 4 years. There was so much freedom to the game and honestly... I was pretty unfamiliar with that sort of freedom in a game. I lost countless hours playing as different types of the Courier. To me, those RPG elements are one the reasons that made NV so great despite all of its flaws. Obviously, I pre ordered FO4 and Season Pass. I played FO4 for a month and couldn't go back (until the DLCs were released). The game felt so lifeless. I felt it since day one but I prayed inside the game would get more interesting/intense as I progressed the story. I guess this is the first time I understood why a lot of Fallout fans hated Bethesda's iteration of Fallout. I suppose if Bethesda continues to work on DLCs for Fallout, it could be a solid game due to sheer amount of content and mod support. But I can't but help feel that Fallout 4 left me unsatisfied.
Ernest Lemmingway Posted June 11, 2016 Posted June 11, 2016 this: I fully agree with this video's narrator. FO4 was a decent first-person shooter, but some of us were expecting an RPG. That means a fully fleshed out story, interesting characters, and a hell of a lot more flavor than what we got. It also lacks so many of the things that made Fallout interesting (Karma, faction rep, moral ambiguity, a choice of whether to be good or evil) that it's not even a true Fallout game to me. This game is bad even for Bethesda! Especially for Bethesda, given their track record for fully-realized open worlds. If anyone tries to argue that this is a true RPG, I'll hunt you down and bite your toes off with my sharp little teeth! *chomp, chomp, chomp*
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.