Can we honestly say Fallout 4 is better than Fallout 3?

AlphaPromethean said:
I suppose it comes down to this: If you asked me which one I'd rather replay right now, I'd choose Fallout 4. So that one's better I guess.
Click to expand...
... Except that on any given day, I'd [typically] rather play DOOM than PS:Torment, but DOOM is not better than PS:Torment.

** I cannot honestly comment on FO4 yet, as I have never played it; but I wanted to ask, does it have a Borderlands vibe to it?
 
I wouldn't even be posting here if Fallout 4 matched Fallout 3. It is a complete departure from Fallout 3. There's not even the illusion of dialogue choices in fallout 4.

So yea Fallout 4 is worse than 3. I would have preferred they remaster Fallout 3 than do what they did with 4.

Bethesda didn't just screw up Fallout based on Fallout 1 and 2 and New Vegas, they screwed their own version of fallout up. Fallout 4 was not made for fans of ANY previous fallout game in my opinion.
 
Crni Vuk said:
Fair enough, but you could have goten those also without the name of Fallout bolted on it. To be fair, most of what you described could have been achieved by any random-post-apocalytic RPG set in the US. Or even some random landscape that just looks like it, for that matter.
In other words, those have never been the core design principles behind Fallout as a game. But you already said, that is what was important for you, personaly. So I give you that. But I am just saying, when you're looking at developer quotes and interviews - of which we have some on NMA I think - it was not just about that. And I would argue that this tone, as you say, isn't even what seperated Fallout 1 from other games.
Click to expand...

That feeling is by a country mile not the most important aspect of Fallout's tone/atmosphere, but it's simply a part of it for me.
 
Gizmojunk said:
... Except that on any given day, I'd [typically] rather play DOOM than PS:Torment, but DOOM is not better than PS:Torment.

** I cannot honestly comment on FO4 yet, as I have never played it; but I wanted to ask, does it have a Borderlands vibe to it?
Click to expand...
They tried to give it a Borderlands vibe, and did to a point, but in the end they just half-assed it like they did everything else in Fallout 4. That's the entirety of the game, in a nutshell. They grabbed ideas from Borderlands, Minecraft, Sims, anything else that they thought was "cool" and what "gamers really want", put just enough effort into them to get them barely working, then just threw it all together without any thought given to how well these "cool" ideas would actually interact with each other in a single game in a franchise with a distinct theme and solidly established lore, and tried to stitch it all together with an even lamer than Fallout 3 story line that once again has you running around trying to find a lost family member.

And that's why we have the "Fallout experience" today being nothing more than building stupid contraptions you can use to throw brahmin at Preston Garvey, so you can upload a 30-second clip to YouTube. Or squeeing to all your friends about how a robot NPC in the game will say your character's name, if you name him "Fuckface". Or "roleplaying" as a garbage collector in between accepting Radiant Kill-Loot-Return "quests".

And if you thought the NPCs in FO3 were bad, you ain't seen nothing yet. At least some of the FO3 ones were memorable, even if annoying. The ones in FO4 are just bland and boring with almost no personality at all. I've run into maybe one or two of them that pique my interest even a little; the rest of them may as well be stationary dummies that hand out quests when you push a button.

As far as which game is better, at least I was able to finish Fallout 3's main quest and the DLC story quests. I can't even finish Fallout 4's, haven't bought any of the DLC, and probably never will. The one thing I do know is that I won't be buying any more Bethesda games.
 
You mean they most likely took everything as inspiration the marketing gurus in their development team told them to take a look at. Minecraft sold so-and-so many units! AND it appeals to children! Borderlands has sold so-and-so many units, and it appeals to teenagers! We have also to hit the mass effect demographic! They hate reading! But they love dialog wheels! And voiced protagonists!

Fallout 4 is, I would say, a meticulously crafted product, with the intention to attract as many gamers as possible. Where as Fallout 1, at least how it was conceptualised, was always meant to be a niche experience.

Gizmojunk said:
I would argue that it is also the turn based combat mechanics; and that it is IMPOSSIBLE to create anything but a Fallout spin-off without it.

I liked FO3's atmosphere and environs [a lot!]... so long as there were none of their NPCs around to ruin it.
Click to expand...
Yes, but we are the purists, my dear Gizmo.
What is sad, is that some ... confuse this with the nerdyness of complaining about wrong placed bolts on the T-51b Powerarmor ... I mean that is a pretty big sin as well! Don't get me wrong.
 
Last edited:
Crni Vuk said:
You mean they most likely took everything as inspiration the marketing gurus in their development team told them to take a look at. Minecraft sold so-and-so many units! AND it appeals to children! Borderlands has sold so-and-so many units, and it appeals to teenagers! We have also to hit the mass effect demographic! They hate reading! But they love dialog wheels! And voiced protagonists!

Fallout 4 is, I would say, a meticulously crafted product, with the intention to attaract as many gamers as possible. Where as Fallout 1, at least how it was conceptualised, was always meant to be a niche experience.
Click to expand...

Fallout 4 is a perfect example of what happens when you take game development away from actual developers and give it to the marketing department.
 
I don't know. I tried playing Fallout 3. It's bad. Asking me whether Fallout 3 or 4 were worse is kindof like asking me which Hellraiser direct-to-VHS sequel was the worst.
 
As per the topic, 3 showed some attempt to make a game with Fallout-like elements in it, granted it mostly failed at that. At least, 3 had some nice music and there was a post-apocalyptic feel to their plains (that falls apart once the NPCs show up). 3's arguably best feature was as a quick and extremely brief introduction to the rest of the Fallout series since it was tangentially separate from the developed setting of 1 and 2 granted New Vegas did this a lot better by actually having actual links to the original setting.

4 was a Borderlands game with token RPG elements that bog down id's shooting mechanics and had a token attempt at a settlement and crafting mechanic. So, no; Fallout 3 is better than 4 but that's not saying much.
 
olestra said:
I don't know. I tried playing Fallout 3. It's bad. Asking me whether Fallout 3 or 4 were worse is kindof like asking me which Hellraiser direct-to-VHS sequel was the worst.
Click to expand...
Have you played Fallout?
*Obviously not directly related to a FO3/FO4 comparison, but for myself and many others, "better" means "closer to the ideal"; and so in that respect FO3 wins by default [for me] because terrible as it is... it's closer to the ideal. (With New Vegas closer still, and Fallout 2 closer than New Vegas.)
 
Last edited:
From watching a couple rant videos, I can say no.

The people who made the videos can share their stories on FO3, but have a hard time telling tales from FO4.
 
fo4 has three things going for it over fallout 3. Gunplay. And it didn't ruin Harold for no reason. And it has better companions (Although fawkes > strong).
 
Slayerite said:
Yes. Fallout 4 is better than Fallout 3.
Click to expand...
Why? [specifics please]

This would go a lot towards understanding your perspective of it, and what you appreciate in FO4 that is not present (or well implemented) in FO3.

*Many here hold the same opinion of FO3 (likely for similar/ albeit reversed) reasoning, when unfavorably compared to Fallout 1&2. [FO3 is missing plenty!]
 
Do you really want to open that can of worms Giz? The guy is probably just an alt of someone, or here to troll people. Which I think he even admited at some point.
 
Crni Vuk said:
Do you really want to open that can of worms Giz? The guy is probably just an alt of someone, or here to troll people. Which I think he even admited at some point.
Click to expand...
There was this kid in grade-school that I saw on the bus years after, and spoke to him for a minute... I had mentioned having just seen a movie, and when asked 'how was it?', I said that it wasn't as good as the book.

[Movies usually aren't], but he could not fathom this. He blustered out, "How!?"; "movies have Action and Sound! Books are paper, and they just sit there!". It was inconceivable to him that a book could be enjoyed, much less thought superior to a film. There are people that simply cannot enjoy a game like Fallout, and there are people that will only eat fast-food ~because of the familiar taste. I've met people proud of never eating "anything green" [vegetables].

How can one explain [convince] someone that a book like Shogun, or ''The Worm Ouroboros" is better [by far] than "Transformers II" ~to someone that cannot imagine the experience of a great novel ~because they are not comfortable with the medium. This is the only plausible [non-malicious] reason (to my mind) for liking FO4 over ~even FO3; not to mention Fallout itself. Like books to that guy from grade-school, Fallout does not even try to offer what Slayerite seems to want and appreciate; where FO4 does... just as Michael Bay films probably do for him as well; as opposed to 'the Golem', Nosferatu, Metropolis, and Citizen Kane.
 
Fallout 3 had decent atmosphere and the music went well if the themes of the game. Songs like " way back home "fit into fallout 3's theme of mourning over what the world once was, and "let's go sunning" resonates with "50s" era of optimism, and ignorant bliss.
Fallout 4's soundtrack mostly consists of bad "bomb" pun songs,and songs that have absolutely no meaning at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top