Fallout 4 - A Final Goodbye

[joxer]

Well for me it's the re-spawning enemies, loot, and radiant missions and shallow NPC interactions. If that had been cut out / deepened, I would have been a lot happier. Having 4 factions to play with is great though.

That's exactly why I could never put it at #1 spot in this year.
Sure, I applied norespawn mod after a while, but before I did it, the almost instantenious respawn rate of mobs and radiant junk almost irritated me to the point of uninstalling the game without finishing it at all.

Said somewhere and am saying it again. MMOs do it as so called "endgame content". Bethesda did make MMO so how couldn't they learn it from there? I'm not sure why they didn't put respawn-o-rama activated only after a player finishes normal quests and clears sideareas.

 

[Thrasher]

I may need to do that. Once I do a few radiants for the other factions. But remember, Skyrim had radiant quests too, way before ESO.... :/

 

[Hadoken13]

I like Fallout 4 but I wish there were stat, level, or skill caps. The fact you can simply make an Uber Character with little planning towards a particular character build kinda kills the game for me. I enjoy it but no real reason to play more than once when you can make a super character that is both a jack of all trades and a master of all.. There are some different story branches but it is the change in play styles with different character builds (forced by stat, skill, or level caps) that makes me wish to play a game again.

 

[Grifman]

Maybe because I am not a native English speaker… what I wanted to say is that you cannot call someone a Bethesda hater for saying bad stuff about bethesda games because they are just another crap in the sea of crappy games and we talk same bad about all that crap.

Ok, that makes sense now, but once again, your argument can be turned against you as follows:

You cannot call someone a Bethesda fanboy for defending Fallout 4 because it is a good game and we talk the same about all good games.

See, if your own argument can be reversed and turned against, it's not a good logical argument

 

[Archangel]

Well I don't consider myself a Bethesda hater because of reasons given but I cannot stop other people calling me that.

 

[Grifman]

Well I don't consider myself a Bethesda hater because of reasons given but I cannot stop other people calling me that.

I don't have a problem with people not liking Fallout 4, if they don't they don't. What I don't like is calling the those who enjoy and praise the game, "Bethesda fanboys".

I really don't care who the developer of a game is - the proof is in the game, not the developer. Yes, I trust certain developer more than I trust others, but I'm not going to call a bad game good, just because of the developer. Why would I do that? Saying someone liking or defending a game a "fanboy" is just so that you can just discount what they say without having to defend your opinion. It's a cheap and lazy debating tactic.

 

[luj1]

Ok, that makes sense now, but once again, your argument can be turned against you as follows:

You cannot call someone a Bethesda fanboy for defending Fallout 4 because it is a good game and we talk the same about all good games.

See, if your own argument can be reversed and turned against, it's not a good logical argument

You could say that if FO4 was actually a good game, and not a 1inch deep ocean. FO4 can be considered good in that its a fairly enjoyable repetitive hack&slash game. Ofcourse, that is not nearly enough for a multi-million corporation and a cult IP. But anyone can keep calling a half-done copy-pasted wasteland a good game if that is your standard , obviously. We can wait 2-3 years for fans to fix the game (like Todd Halfward intended from the start) and then call it fairly solid . Cause in this sorry state its pretty shitty

 

[CelticFrost]

I can imagine the disappointment of a young person who can decide to give a try to FO1 instead of getting right into FO4. .

I can't imagine a young person spending any more that 10 hours playing any game. Less if it wasn't total voice, less again if half of it wasn't cut scenes and not all a lot if you had to think and solve something like a puzzle.

 

[Stingray]

I don't have a problem with people not liking Fallout 4, if they don't they don't. What I don't like is calling the those who enjoy and praise the game, "Bethesda fanboys".

IMO, "Bethesda fanboys" aren't people who like the game. They're the people who insist on always attacking the people that don't like the game. As far as I know you aren't one, but there's several around here, and they tend to wreck legit discussion just as much as the "haters" do.

 

[luj1]

I really don't care who the developer of a game is…

alright, lets say you never played any of their games …

- the proof is in the game, not the developer.

Very true. So lets see

Skyrim 2011 - badly codded in ancient , slow code, outdated textures, sloppy meshes, broken dynamic lightning, unresponsive UI, countless glitches usual with Bethesda, unplayable at launch.



BUT burned millions in marketing and PR coz that's what brings $$$ and GOTY


Skyrim 2015 - finished by fans, obviously worth playing in this state, like any Bethesda game after modding, expanded gameplay, expanded functionality way beyond the original framework, the masses praise Bethesda and jump on Todd Halfward's dick and promise to buy everything with their logo on it


It will be the same with FO4. IF we get a good Creation Kit, which I have no reason to doubt. As it stands now, same raiders are everywhere , you get bombed by radiant garbage, same bland wasteland everywhere, boring quests, kill everything, same items in each container type, no difference whether you have 1 intelligence because you can still hack computers and get most dialogue options, most of what you say you get the same result, and so on. But in a couple of years it will be a different (much better) game, maybe even an actual RPG



So yeah… If they cared about consumers, they wouldn't handle things this way… but anyone is free to ride there penis if it makes you happy… You must understand the typical Zenimax business model. Which is good toolset + bad port. They operate by parasiting off in three directions. Off cult IPs , because that's how they gain attention and access to a wider consumer base. Off ignorant masses of casuals, which is why trash gets passed as 100/100. And off talented modders , which is how they get undeserved credit to further fuel their capitalist rampage

Yes, I trust certain developer more than I trust others, but I'm not going to call a bad game good, just because of the developer.

No not *strictly* based on the developer. We can tell this game is shit without looking at who's the developer. And this particular developer does it all the time. So there's the connection

 

[rune_74]

IMO, "Bethesda fanboys" aren't people who like the game. They're the people who insist on always attacking the people that don't like the game. As far as I know you aren't one, but there's several around here, and they tend to wreck legit discussion just as much as the "haters" do.

Ahh you mean me I take it....Sorry, I don't feel bad about calling out the crap that has come to the forums.

 

[Grifman]

Well I don't consider myself a Bethesda hater because of reasons given but I cannot stop other people calling me that.

You could say that if FO4 was actually a good game, and not a 1inch deep ocean. FO4 can be considered good in that its a fairly enjoyable repetitive hack&slash game. [

See, that's your opinion, which you state as if it is some universally accepted fact, and you provide no evidence for your assertion. Why should I listen to you if you can't even support your position with evidence?

Ofcourse, that is not nearly enough for a multi-million corporation and a cult IP. But anyone can keep calling a half-done copy-pasted wasteland a good game if that is your standard , obviously.

Again, more opinion, no supporting argument. Why should anyone believe what you say if can't bother to provide any evidence?

 

[Grifman]

IMO, "Bethesda fanboys" aren't people who like the game. They're the people who insist on always attacking the people that don't like the game. As far as I know you aren't one, but there's several around here, and they tend to wreck legit discussion just as much as the "haters" do.

Sure, then call those people out. But too many say that anyone that likes, praises or defends Fallout is a Bethesda fanboy. Defend the game, you're a "fanboy", and they never deal with your arguments. I've seen it too many times here and elsewhere. It's a cheap and lazy debate tactic.

 

[luj1]

… same raiders are everywhere , constantly bombed by radiant garbage, the same wasteland everywhere, boring quests=kill everything, same items in each container type, no difference whether you have 1 intelligence because you can still hack computers and get most dialogue options, dialogue choices get the same result, and so on…

See, that's your opinion, which you state as if it is some universally accepted fact, and you provide no evidence for your assertion. Why should I listen to you if you can't even support your position with evidence?

rofl what "evidence" and other BS you are talking about? … those aren't opinions, those are facts… facts from observation …. if you played the game, you'll know what im talking about….Don't play dumb… Read my post again, its EXACTLY how I said it…. anyone can easily check

and PS …. You stop having opinions when you realize truth is your master…. I have no choice but to go with the truth, and the truth is FO4 is traditionally a weak product from Bethesda that gets approved only by uninformed people, because of low consumer standard and hipsterism

 

[GabrielMP_19]

I do think that people often mix up the game quality with nostalgia.
Pretty much every old classic game is unplayable by today's standards.
No matter how good the game was in the year 1995, it looks like a total crap in year 2016. Interface, visuals, plot, quests, everything is mediocre at best, except for nostalgia - your memory about your excitement that you first saw that game in year 1995.

I can imagine the disappointment of a young person who can decide to give a try to FO1 instead of getting right into FO4. I would not recommend to anyone any of those old classic games no matter how great my excitement was when I first saw such classics as Wizardry 7 or Worlds of Xeen or Dark Queen of Krynn.

This is absolute crap. Despite the clunky UI, the first two Fallouts are absolutely playable today, considering you have one or two hours to learn how to play them. And their freedom and ambientation are unmatched by most of these new so called RPGs. I'm currently playing for the first Fallout 3 and, while it's not really as bad as I heard, it's pretty disappointing in terms of options of gameplay and freedom, even though you can walk around in the wasteland all you want.

PS: Haven't played Fallout 4 yet, just joined the discussion to defend the old games.

 

[MigRib]

rofl what "evidence" and other BS you are talking about? … those aren't opinions, those are facts… facts from observation …. if you played the game, you'll know what im talking about….Don't play dumb… Read my post again, its EXACTLY how I said it…. anyone can easily check

and PS …. You stop having opinions when you realize truth is your master…. I have no choice but to go with the truth, and the truth is FO4 is traditionally a weak product from Bethesda that gets approved only by uninformed people, because of low consumer standard and hipsterism

Fact: Fallout 4 is a game
Fact 2: Fallout 4 has bugs
Opinion: Fallout 4 is a a 1inch deep ocean

There's not any forum rethoric mastery that can change the meaning of words. Words have a meaning. Use them properly.

 

[MigRib]

This is absolute crap. Despite the clunky UI, the first two Fallouts are absolutely playable today, considering you have one or two hours to learn how to play them. And their freedom and ambientation are unmatched by most of these new so called RPGs. I'm currently playing for the first Fallout 3 and, while it's not really as bad as I heard, it's pretty disappointing in terms of options of gameplay and freedom, even though you can walk around in the wasteland all you want.

PS: Haven't played Fallout 4 yet, just joined the discussion to defend the old games.

If the game runs in modern computers it's absolutely playable. The question remains: who would like to play it? Member of the Watch? Sure. Gamers in general? I really don't think so.

 

[MigRib]

You stop having opinions when you realize truth is your master

Are you the Messiah?

 

[MigRib]

Sure, then call those people out. But too many say that anyone that likes, praises or defends Fallout is a Bethesda fanboy. Defend the game, you're a "fanboy", and they never deal with your arguments. I've seen it too many times here and elsewhere. It's a cheap and lazy debate tactic.

This is really getting pretty boring. I would like to avoid discussing with people who use those dirty tactics, but every time I come to the Watch to check the news I seen that another Fallout 4 thread has new posts and I end up feeding the trolls. Soon I'll have to spend another 3 or 4 months checking the news someplace else.

 

[Archangel]

If the game runs in modern computers it's absolutely playable. The question remains: who would like to play it? Member of the Watch? Sure. Gamers in general? I really don't think so.

Steamspy stats:
Fallout 1:
Owners: 755,971 ± 18,714
Players in the last 2 weeks: 13,415 ± 2,496 (1.77%)
Fallout 2:
Owners: 774,752 ± 18,945
Players in the last 2 weeks: 10,488 ± 2,207 (1.35%)

Now these are facts. So shut up with bullshit already.
(I don't think RPGWatch + RPGCodex have enough people to alone own and play these games so much)