Fallout 4 - Bethesda: Launch was successful

[zahratustra]

The Bethesda 9/10 + 10/10 fanbois have very likely at least bought the game and are basing their score on the game. It's a related score. It may be overrated or whatever but at least they are actually voting on the game and not on something unrelated that Bethesda did or did not do in the past, the present or even the future.

And here we disagree. IMO Beth's fanboys aren't voting on the game but on the company that produced it. Their 10/10 scores are just as unreliable as 0/10 scores of the haters.

 

[BoboTheMighty]

No, I did not really forget that. As I pointed out, the people with the 0/10 political votes are those who cast their votes unrelated to the game. The vast majority of them has neither bought the game nor are they basing their score on the actual game. They just vote 0/10 because they hate Bethesda's guts for some reason unrelated to FO4.

The Bethesda 9/10 + 10/10 fanbois have very likely at least bought the game and are basing their score on the game. It's a related score. It may be overrated or whatever but at least they are actually voting on the game and not on something unrelated that Bethesda did or did not do in the past, the present or even the future.

You are assuming a lot there Moriendor…It could be equally said that "fanboys" will also have much more positively oriented mindset even before playing the game…it's hard to believe many people would buy the game just so they would have even more arguments for hating Bethesda.
So in the base that DID buy the game, it's fair to assume that majority are initially positively oriented toward Bethesda.
"Fanboyism" definitely plays a factor in score for All games…recently Witcher has provoked silly amount of hatred from good number of Dark Souls/Skyrim fans, but it did not have a huge impact on the rating.
In this case, I think pro scores will drop slightly around 8-8.5 ( if only to 84, so Feargus could have a laugh ), and with user rising to 6.5-7 when people calm down.
Overall, 7-7.5 game, which is my impression of the game.
And of course I'm the only one here, being perfectly objective about it.

 

[Archangel]

I'm around 25 hours in now, and I'm still enjoying it a lot. It's a really good game if you enjoy the setting.

If you're looking for deep dialogue or lots of C&C, go play something like Age of Decadence. That's not what this game is about. Considering Bethesda's games have never been strong in those aspects, it makes me wonder why people would bitch about them not being strong in FO4.

I'm pretty sure that a large percentage of the negative comments from people that A.) still haven't actually played the game even though they claim to have - or B.) old-school fans that are still pissed off that Fallout is no longer isometric or turn-based.

Unfortunately I am about 8 hours in and nothing of note happened after that PA vs Deathclaw fight. Now I just run around, find some random items (nothing exciting), kill some raiders and animals. If this was Fallout 2 I would have cleared two towns by now and talked to many interesting NPCs and had cool battles.

What Fallout 4 does good is how collecting all the crap is then turned into upgrades for your weapon and armor. This feature of useless crap being everywhere was super irritating to me in Fo3 and FNV, I am glad it was improved.

The rest? Slow and boring game. I even turned down difficulty because shooting enemy into head 5 times before they die? No, sorry that kills my immersion.
As a FPS the game is so far behind cool games like Far Cry or Crysis it is not even comparable.

 

[lackblogger]

If this was Fallout 2 I would have cleared two towns by now and talked to many interesting NPCs and had cool battles.

This has always been my problem with these limitless games. In a normal cRPG my hour is normally spent talking to NPCs, getting involved in the plot, going out and killing a few monsters in interesting battles using a plethora of newly found/learned attack items and varying tactics, getting excited about a decent loot drop, going back to a merchant, fiddling with inventory and being motivated to push forward to experience lots of newness in plot, environments, tools, tactics and NPCs. The whole hour will require my mind to be fully occupied by a whole host of varied continuous thoughts about what just happened, what I can do to improve my state and what's going to happen.

It might, on paper, seem like the sandboxy games offer something similar, but whenever I play them this never seems to be the case. The loot is mostly uninteresting, the environments take hours upon hours to change, the NPCs never seem varied, the battle tactics are always just shoot things in the head with little variety and wielding a twelve bore instead of a pistol just doesn't fill me with the same joy has replacing a regular sword with a sword +1 plus fire damage. Upgrading a helmet to another helmet with slightly better stats just doesn't feel the same as replacing a normal helmet with a Crown of Thorns with unusual bonuses. My brain just has nothing to think about beyond reacting to jump-scare bad-guy drops while turning myself around in an impossible maze.

But when I empathise with someone who likes repetitive drudgery and doesn't get bored by this sort of thing, then it all makes sense. It's just a wonderful alternative world for people to escape into… for as long as possible, like walking into the holodeck. And I don't think comparisons can be made between such divergent game styles, comparisons can only really be made from a like-to-like perspective. So since I never play games like this then I can't comment on the true nature of it's quality, but I can reiterate that there's no point whatsoever comparing F4 (or any game like it) to any isometric cRPG, and doing so would be the most futile thing possible. As I said, give these kind of games their own category for heaven's sake.

 

[TomRon]

This thread was an interesting read. A lot of interesting views and opinions, and most of them put forth in an adult manner (Bobo, Moriendor, Pibbur, Zahratustra and Forgottenlor). The other two who participated in the debate? Not so much. Throwing insults at each other and calling each other fanboys or Trolls instead of actually debating the game is still kind of a fun read, but nothing that will stay with me (kind of like the writing in a Beth game?).

Myself I haven't bought Fallout 4 yet, but I'm pretty sure I will. FO3 was a HUGE letdown for me, but mostly because it was nothing like 1 and 2. New Vegas was much better, not only because of the superior writing but mostly because my expectations were different. As they are with FO4, and I'm pretty sure I'll put a shitload of hours into it just like it's predecessors.

Today, I'm not really sure why so many people are angry at Bethesda. When FO3 came out, I cried (maybe not literally but pretty close) because out of all the games I loved in my teenage years NONE were left standing. Today, we have Kickstarter. And this last year I've played WL2, Divinty:OS, PoE and loads of others bringing back genres I had thought were lost. So TODAY when Bethesda releases yet another Sandboxy buggy immersive poorly written but with great exploring title? Hell yeah, bring it on, it's been a while since I got bored in Skyrim. And hopefully Obsidian can make a spin off.

 

[TomRon]

Oh, and Lackblogger, your inputs into the debate are really good too. Let's just call them Beth-likes? And I agree, it's futile to compare so different game experiences. The only meaningful comparison would be fun factor. And that is a little bit subjective isn't it?

 

[rune_74]

This has always been my problem with these limitless games. In a normal cRPG my hour is normally spent talking to NPCs, getting involved in the plot, going out and killing a few monsters in interesting battles using a plethora of newly found/learned attack items and varying tactics, getting excited about a decent loot drop, going back to a merchant, fiddling with inventory and being motivated to push forward to experience lots of newness in plot, environments, tools, tactics and NPCs. The whole hour will require my mind to be fully occupied by a whole host of varied continuous thoughts about what just happened, what I can do to improve my state and what's going to happen.

It might, on paper, seem like the sandboxy games offer something similar, but whenever I play them this never seems to be the case. The loot is mostly uninteresting, the environments take hours upon hours to change, the NPCs never seem varied, the battle tactics are always just shoot things in the head with little variety and wielding a twelve bore instead of a pistol just doesn't fill me with the same joy has replacing a regular sword with a sword +1 plus fire damage. Upgrading a helmet to another helmet with slightly better stats just doesn't feel the same as replacing a normal helmet with a Crown of Thorns with unusual bonuses. My brain just has nothing to think about beyond reacting to jump-scare bad-guy drops while turning myself around in an impossible maze.

But when I empathise with someone who likes repetitive drudgery and doesn't get bored by this sort of thing, then it all makes sense. It's just a wonderful alternative world for people to escape into… for as long as possible, like walking into the holodeck. And I don't think comparisons can be made between such divergent game styles, comparisons can only really be made from a like-to-like perspective. So since I never play games like this then I can't comment on the true nature of it's quality, but I can reiterate that there's no point whatsoever comparing F4 (or any game like it) to any isometric cRPG, and doing so would be the most futile thing possible. As I said, give these kind of games their own category for heaven's sake.

I don't agree with all you wrote, but I do agree that it isn't as structured as story driven games, it allows you to wander more. However, there are some great mini story areas throughout fallout 4 if you go to marked areas there have been some interesting areas. That's not to say that there are not filler areas, but this is one area I think they actually improved with 4. I have found some nice challenge out there, you could beat the game if you really wanted in a short time, but you would Missout on some very interesting story lines.

I had one simple encounter that resulted in me finding a recording of a scientist discussing using radiation on dead people....in this house was a glowing one locked a room....note, this is just a minor interesting lore item(I really simplified this encounter down before you jump on this) and this is not even marked on the map, I wandered on to this....also, I followed an emergency beacon to a lore event....lots of things happen like this that draw me away from the main quest and into some interesting things. This is by no means even close to all I have encountered.

Someone asked how this controls better? It is the controls for aiming...I was playing new Vegas before this came out....literally the week before and the controls for aiming just feel better. As well, looting is actually better the way they handle it hear with the square listing what is in a container. Lock picking/hacking is the same.

Base building is neat, haven't done much with it or seen if it matters long term, seems like a feature that will be fleshed out in expansions or future games, definitely welcome. Weaponcrafting/armor is just awesome plain and simple.

The perk select system actually works, and I was worried about this.....the way they laid it out and the graphics they used felt fallout. It stops you from getting powerful to quick, a least I feel that way so far.

It feels like a fresher more enjoyable fallout new Vegas. To me that is great, to others it depends on what you want. I've played all the fallouts and enjoyed each for what they bring.

 

[Terry]

Hey, thanks Rune for the controls info, were you playing on a PC in both cases?
Interested in F4 just need to clear some of my huge back log of other games up before I head back in to the waste land.

 

[rune_74]

Hey, thanks Rune for the controls info, were you playing on a PC in both cases?
Interested in F4 just need to clear some of my huge back log of other games up before I head back in to the waste land.

Yes, mouse and keyboard...I did change the sensitivity of the controls...and did what this guy said.

http://files.shanelenzen.com/fix-fallout-4.html

 

[JDR13]

And here we disagree. IMO Beth's fanboys aren't voting on the game but on the company that produced it. Their 10/10 scores is just as unreliable as 0/10 scores of the haters.

I can't agree with that at all. I think a 10/10 score is a lot more believable than a 0/10, especially for a game by Bethesda who have a pretty decent history of making games.

While I've never personally rated anything 10/10 in my entire life, and I certainly wouldn't rate FO4 that high, I can at least understand some people believing it could be that high.

The 0/10 scores on the other hand are pure troll bullshit.

 

[Arkadia7]

Interesting to read the comments. I have not played the game, and am not interested in playing it. Everything I have read about it has turned me off, both before the game launched when it listed the "features" and after, and things I have seen, such as the interface. To me, the interface looks like absolute trash. Ugly, unreadable, unusable and stupidly designed. And I mean everything about it, like that nauseating shade of green, which you will be staring at the whole game. It's one of the worst interfaces I have seen in years.

Other huge turn offs -- the combat system where you can target body parts. How friggin' annoying. I hate how time slows to a crawl, disrupting the flow of the game. I also hate the slow motion gore shots. That would get super annoying to me after a while. The setting of post-apocalyptic Boston is another turn off. How utterly boring. I even hate how they put a dog in as a companion, and how much effort they obviously put into that stupid dog. LOL. Yep, this game is not for me. Basically, if I want to play a first person shooter, I will play one designed like that from the ground up, not this mish mash.

 

[CelticFrost]

We, the company I work for just had a huge one day sale. Was it successful, I thought it was would another company that does something similar to us think the same I don't know.

If Bethesda thinks it was a success than it was no matter what anyone else thinks.

 

[JDR13]

Interesting to read the comments. I have not played the game, and am not interested in playing it. Everything I have read about it has turned me off, both before the game launched when it listed the "features" and after, and things I have seen, such as the interface. To me, the interface looks like absolute trash. Ugly, unreadable, unusable and stupidly designed. And I mean everything about it, like that nauseating shade of green, which you will be staring at the whole game. It's one of the worst interfaces I have seen in years.

Other huge turn offs -- the combat system where you can target body parts. How friggin' annoying. I hate how time slows to a crawl, disrupting the flow of the game. I also hate the slow motion gore shots. That would get super annoying to me after a while. The setting of post-apocalyptic Boston is another turn off. How utterly boring. I even hate how they put a dog in as a companion, and how much effort they obviously put into that stupid dog. LOL. Yep, this game is not for me. Basically, if I want to play a first person shooter, I will play one designed like that from the ground up, not this mish mash.

Do you realize that nearly everything you listed is optional? You can change the color of the UI if you don't like the green. You don't have to use the slow-mo feature at all. You don't have to target body parts (although I don't understand why anyone would list that as a negative). You don't have to take the dog as a companion or anyone else for that matter.

The only thing that isn't optional is the setting. That said, I'm finding The Commonwealth to be just as fun to explore as the Capital Wasteland was in FO3.

 

[BoboTheMighty]

Eh, is JDR pissed off? Surely, the end of times is upon us.
Glad to see you Arkadia on our team. These pesky Bethesda fanboys need to learn their place.

 

[Stingray]

Err.. by definition it's trolling.

No, it's not. Not at all.

"One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument."

It is entirely possible to post useful alternative opinions without trolling. All it takes is a modicum of thought.

While the definition you posted (lifted from the first result on urbandictionary, it seems) isn't too far off the mark, you seem to have missed the main point of what makes someone a "troll" and it's the "deliberately provocative" part. People sharing on-topic opinions on a forum dedicated to what they're discussing are not trolls, and frankly, it's dickish on your part to call them such.

If you want a more precise definition of trolls rather than one from some random guy on urbandictionary, check out the first paragraph on the Wikipedia page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

PS: thanks rune_74 for that link, game feels a hell of a lot better with it.

 

[JDR13]

Eh, is JDR pissed off? Surely, the end of times is upon us.
Glad to see you Arkadia on our team. These pesky Bethesda fanboys need to learn their place.

I can't tell if you're joking or not. I'm just pointing some things out to people who haven't played the game yet.

 

[Arkadia7]

Do you realize that nearly everything you listed is optional? You can change the color of the UI if you don't like the green. You don't have to use the slow-mo feature at all. You don't have to target body parts (although I don't understand why anyone would list that as a negative). You don't have to take the dog as a companion or anyone else for that matter.

The only thing that isn't optional is the setting. That said, I'm finding The Commonwealth to be just as fun to explore as the Capital Wasteland was in FO3.

It's just not my type of game. I would never pay for this game, and am truly not interested. And I have too many other good games to play first anyway. I went on a buying binge earlier this year after I bought a new high end laptop, and have only gotten through a few of the titles so far. Nice try though.

 

[JDR13]

It's just not my type of game. I would never pay for this game, and am truly not interested. And I have too many other good games to play first anyway. I went on a buying binge earlier this year after I bought a new high end laptop, and have only gotten through a few of the titles so far. Nice try though.

Fair enough. That's really all you needed to say.

I definitely understand the time issue. I'm lucky enough to have this month almost entirely to myself, but I'll have very little time for gaming starting next month, and my backlog is gonna go untouched for quite some time.

 

[crpgnut]

ESO has nothing to do with the single player dev teams, they built a studio just to make that game and it use the Hero Engine anyway.

As someone who works for a huge corporation, this just isn't the way it works. If one piece of your corporate pie makes you barf, you can end up losing your whole meal, not just dessert

 

[BoboTheMighty]

I can't tell if you're joking or not. I'm just pointing some things out to people who haven't played the game yet.

Sorry, kidding. Eh, where is D'artagnan? Seems to have dropped off from the face of the earth.