Can you really call yourself a Fallout fan if you love Fallout 4, honestly?

Honestly... Yeah.

I enjoy Fallout 4 a bit more than I did 5 years back (I'm a bit embarrassed at how much time and effort I spent on hating on it tbh, it's just a game at the end of the day).

If someone likes 4, that doesn't stop them from being any less of a fan than someone who dislikes it.

Does someone who likes Amazing Spider-man 2 make them any less of a Spider-man fan? No. It just means they like a shitty movie.

I'm not gonna take that away from anyone, it's not my place
 
HarkonFourth said:
The game changes so much it's practically unrecognizable as Fallout. The gameplay is dumbed down to practically being a Call of Duty shooter, the lore is pretty much completely raped and killed and replaced with, whatever it is Bethesda thinks they are making (The Institute is the stupidest thing ever), and there is absolutely zero roleplaying. None what so ever. Who's idea was it to give the character a voice? And the stupid references to contemporary culture that they just throw in because, I dunno, laughs I guess. Yeah, the nuking the fridge was hilarious in 2008. Actually, no it never was.

Whatever. Fallout 4 isn't Fallout. Therefore, you aren't truly a Fallout fan if you love this game, as far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...

I like it. i wouldn't say i love it though.

The gameplay loop is fun. building your character to be certain things can work itself out and is pretty rewarding as you progress. it may boil down to "point and shoot" even if your not really invested in the new perk system which i felt added more a specific class of character you want to play as. Sniper for example. it's definitely more streamlined however compared to other previous fallout games new vegas especially or 3 even with how selecting perks and updating skills work in those games. there was a lot more planning in those games. Like if you wanted to get into a safe/terminal at a certain level for whatever reason then you needed to be smart in how you invested in your skillpoints on each level-up before you reached that location with the safe/terminal especially since it divides your attention away from other potential sources of investment like guns which increase accuracy and increase damage output. i feel the new system sees the bigger picture more then the old system does hence why it's more streamlined character class building.

the problem with the institute for me is that they hold very little purpose outside of being the generic bad guy of the commonwealth is cool you can join them, but outside of that they represent a very serious threat, and their abductions are meaningless why do they need to abduct people to make synths? Couldn't they just make the synths instead of modeling them after a pre-existing human? It all seems rather pointless to the grand scheme of things. But i will say this the institute i feel does have some purpose such as wanting to rule from the shadows rather directly over the commonwealth unlike the brotherhood of steel which is more rule on the ground and direct military control.

Nothing wrong with giving the character a voice lots of RPGs do this Mass Effect did it. though i have some issue with how some lines are written in that game more so then in fallout 4. Fallout 4 i feel at least tries to not come across as just being an edgy 14 year old like certain dialogue in mass effect 2 or 3 comes across for me. but i feel this is a limiting factor with voiced protagonists as they can't voice too many lines as there is more then one choice. this is why they cap it to 4 dialogue options for fallout 4 or two default options for mass effect not counting the paragon/renegade status options that unlock based on if your a renegade or paragon or whatever or the investigate options to find out more information.

i actually didn't have a problem with the ghoul in the fridge quest. while yes it was disrespectful to the lore saying ghouls can survive without food or water discarding the whole necropolis thing. at least it does one thing right and that's a small little quest that introduces a ghoul child something which hasn't really been seen before in a fallout game.
 
Shitty dialogue wheel aside I don't see what's so hateful about Fallout 4 from a gameplay point of view. No for me what makes it so hateful is the Flanderization that began in Fallout 2, it's the theme over realism that made me HATE Dead Money's contrivances, that made me take all the fucking gold out of the Vault to spite Chris Avellone, the man I hate more for destroying Fallout more than Emil ever could.

Look, everything everyone hates about Fallout is something that was baked into it or at least Fallout 2. I hate Fallout 3 (unmodded) and beyond for the same reason I LOATHE every last one of the Mad Max Sequels; I hate any story that puts themes or artistic license above absolute organic worldbuilding. Fallout 1 to me, is not a B movie pulp send-up, it only LOOKS like one, there's something much smarter, with a lot more heart in under it in there, which if you look at the FEV files, it's no radiation gives powers it's genetic engineering is the new nuke setting update. Later sequel retcon the setting back to full retard, INCLUDING New Vegas with Camp Searchlight. There should be NO FERAL GHOULS in 3 4 or NV by time and attrition.

Fallout 4 is an abomination, not of gameplay per se, but of gameplay in era. It's only an abomination in that you're unfrozen 200 years later and not 20 or 50 or maybe even 100, assuming Boston got nuked and hit with bioweapons that caused ghoul-like effects. You play Frost, which is set in 2082 and is JUST the core gameplay plus constant radiation on the surface, and the game makes PERFECT sense as a looter shooter.

No, Fallout 4 is an abomination of storytelling. It tells us that without our fancy machines, humans are lazy and will live in trash and filth and senseless violence for eight generations and do nothing but sit on our thumbs and SHIT on them like ice cream machines on sugar cones. And we all know that's some serious bullshit. Boston by all logic should have been the rebuilt and intact gem of the east coast by the end of the 21st century, the whole fucking city should look like the Institute between the prime trading position, all the robots left around, the COMPLETELY intact infrastructure, all the unbelievable power armor lying around.

Fallout 4 is an abomination because there isn't ONE TRUTHFUL THING in its vaunted environmental storytelling. People who like Fallout 4 like GAMES. They don't give a damn about STORIES, not about COHERENT WORLDBUILDING, but to be fair that went out the window with Avellone's wretched Fallout Bible. Fallout jumped the shark with 2, it was its greatest moment, but it was also when the series was fatally flawed. Fallout should never EVER have gone wacky. Corpos and Corpo writers can't handle wacky, they think it means they don't need to take things seriously.
 
Fallout 4 is ok if you want a game with an infinite loop of looting and shooting for it's own sake with very little in the way of questing or writing g. But that ain't for me and it isn't what I play RPGs for either, specially Fallout. 76 is just that with even less pretension of having a plot of any kind. Is sad but unless Microsoft decides they want to print money with a New Vegas 2, Fallout is just dead as an RPG franchise, it is now just another loot shooter mill.
 


The base building mechanic was fun honestly. I had such a cool Sanctuary built up.
 
Last edited:
It is perfectly possible for the same person to love chess, tennis, soccer and free fighting. Or apples and oranges.
So while the two things have nothing in common, it remains possible to love both. (not that you have to)
 
Yes, if I can love the great story of New Vegas then I can love Fallout 4's gameplay. If you think you can only enjoy one or another then you're a fool.
 
I don't enjoy MMOs or Looter mills so I can also dislike the gameplay of a game whose entire loop is that. It's just that Fallout wasn't that until Bethesda decided to turn it into that with 4, even FO3 wasn't built on top of that gameplay loop. Expecting people who weren't used to that gameplay from a series to enjoy it just because it has the name it's pretty foolish, same way some of the old school fans just don't enjoy the clunky FPS gameplay of FO3 and NV. If Fallout 5 is suddenly something like Last of Us or Dad of War you will probably also lose a bunch of the player base that liked the Loot shooter mill.
 
I understand where you're coming from, I think the settlement system was a huge mistake but you can argue that all looter shooters are similar to this in a sense. I thought you were one of those people who hate Fallout3/4 because it isn't Fallout1/2
 
I don't like Fallout 4 (Hate is too strong a word) because I find it completely boring in every aspect, from the just terrible writing to the repetitive gameplay loop. I kid you not the last time I played Fallout 4 I literally fell asleep in the middle of combat because I was that bored. Any time I tried playing it after beating it once I mostly tried mods and tried to get over the tedium of the gameplay loop by cheating with console commands to see if maybe that let me enjoy it more by focusing on the mods, but just everything about the game made me feel bored, even the visual presentation of the world is clunkier than even New Vegas which (while being my favorite Fallout) is basically a frankenstein puppet show, and Bethesda managed to make their production values even poorer somehow.
 
Everything being a bullet sponge in Fallout 4 makes whatever improvement to gameplay from the previous two games absolutely worthless because shooting at an enemy with a billion health points isn't fun in the slightest.
 
They actually removed features from the gunplay in New Vegas like Ammo types, and Melee and Unarmed are just straight up worse on every account, no special moves, no special perks, no variety, all the weapons in that category having limited modying capabilities, the awful design of the weapons on top of that (Why is the Power fist a bunch of scrap with a plate?).
 
Last edited:
I only remember having bullet sponge issue when I was sub level 30. After that it's not hard to down deathclaws and mirelurk queens with modded weapons in a few seconds. It goes from one extreme to the next and I felt like I had to either ignore the weapon mods, or cap myself at a certain level regarding mods applied. Not sure why anti materiel rifle wasn't included. Maybe a dlc had it? Then again the fully modded hunting rifle is just .50cal sniper with a muzzle break. I'd rather it be it's own thing though.

I'd say it's a 7/10

I've actually put a decent amount of time into it and the first playthrough and only one I beat it on was actually fun overall. Shitty in a lot of ways, but it was decent enough. Not nearly as good as NV even with much worse gameplay.
 
Walpknut said:
They actually removed features from the gunplay in New Vegas like Ammo types, and Melee and Unarmed are just straight up worse on every account, no special moves, no special perks, no variety, all the weapons in that category having limited modying capabilities, the awful design of the weapons on top of that (Why is the Power fist a bunch of scrap with a plate?).
Click to expand...
As someone who only does Melee/Unarmed I feel heard. Bethesda Fallout's unarmed is just awful. They had no excuse after New Vegas, they could have even just ported the weapons to Fallout 4 and called it a day. There's only two viable unarmed weapons in the game. Why?
 
Walpknut said:
They actually removed features from the gunplay in New Vegas like Ammo types, and Melee and Unarmed are just straight up worse on every account, no special moves, no special perks, no variety, all the weapons in that category having limited modying capabilities, the awful design of the weapons on top of that (Why is the Power fist a bunch of scrap with a plate?).
Click to expand...

i believe they didn't add ammo types because for one armor piercing rounds wouldn't fit well with damage resistance system they use rather then damage threshold. Since Damage resistance is supposed to represent the bullet hitting the "Weak points" of the armor rather then the armor itself. aside from power armor which now is bulkier and heavier and more durable in a lot of ways compared to fallout 3 in fallout 4. though i believe different ammo types overall still have different effects on armor/unarmored targets i could be wrong of course but i think there was a difference between my .308 sniper and .50 cal sniper in one of my playthroughs besides just using the different ammo types to avoid relying too much on one weapon and the damage output.

i built a combination character that used a revolutionary sword in close quarters and a laser musket for mid/long range that joined the minutemen and it was pretty fun though it definitely wasn't like using special moves or special perks in new vegas so they definitely watered it down a lot in comparison.
 
The main problem with 4 is that the base building took so much center stage it actively hindered every other aspect of the series, even things that were staples of it and as basic to the very genre that is baffling, like Settlements, questing and NPCs. Bethesda isn't the best when it comes to writing NPCs (There is a mod for Skyrim literally called Interesting NPCs to put things in perspective) but even Skyrim's NPCs felt less like robotic quest dispensers than in 4, where they even start just randomly saying vague things and it starts a quest to kill some rando critter on the other side of the map. Also the "Legendary" system is just terrible talk about making the concept of Unique special bosses and weapons into the complete opposite just for the sake of the endless loot mill gameplay loop.
I would even be ok with a Fallout game that dispenses with the open world altogether and works with a system of hubs like the Trails series, the open world has started to become something that makes games worse, not better.
 
Millim said:
Honestly... Yeah.

I enjoy Fallout 4 a bit more than I did 5 years back (I'm a bit embarrassed at how much time and effort I spent on hating on it tbh, it's just a game at the end of the day).

If someone likes 4, that doesn't stop them from being any less of a fan than someone who dislikes it.

Does someone who likes Amazing Spider-man 2 make them any less of a Spider-man fan? No. It just means they like a shitty movie.

I'm not gonna take that away from anyone, it's not my place
Click to expand...
Yeah, you've had a lot of takes like this and I kinda agree with them to a limited extent.

I know it's a cliche to say this, but to a certain extent this forum is an echochamber. Echochambers can be productive, as this forum is, as it gives a chance to formulate more substantial points by working with people who's ideas you're willing to take in to account (Which I feel NMA does to a large extent), but in this case it also does create an atmosphere where overly-negative takes aren't really challenged.

And so it's easy to see a game that, a lot of people find fun, and they're free to do so, as being worthless to everyone and the assumption that there's a contradiction between being thoughtful and liking the game, which there isn't since different people like different things in games. The personal experience you get out of a game is inherently going to be that, personal.

But also, I don't feel you should feel embaressed for "hating" on the game as much as you did. We're all fans of a series for it's unique qualities, and articulating why we feel a certain entry isn't an accurate reflection on that, at least for me, does provide a certain benefit, as it allows you to reach a greater appreciation of what you do like, realise what does and doesn't work in regards to game design and worldbuilding, ect.
 
Jogre said:
Yeah, you've had a lot of takes like this and I kinda agree with them to a limited extent.

I know it's a cliche to say this, but to a certain extent this forum is an echochamber. Echochambers can be productive, as this forum is, as it gives a chance to formulate more substantial points by working with people who's ideas you're willing to take in to account (Which I feel NMA does to a large extent), but in this case it also does create an atmosphere where overly-negative takes aren't really challenged.

And so it's easy to see a game that, a lot of people find fun, and they're free to do so, as being worthless to everyone and the assumption that there's a contradiction between being thoughtful and liking the game, which there isn't since different people like different things in games. The personal experience you get out of a game is inherently going to be that, personal.

But also, I don't feel you should feel embaressed for "hating" on the game as much as you did. We're all fans of a series for it's unique qualities, and articulating why we feel a certain entry isn't an accurate reflection on that, at least for me, does provide a certain benefit, as it allows you to reach a greater appreciation of what you do like, realise what does and doesn't work in regards to game design and worldbuilding, ect.
Click to expand...

It's not so much I felt embarrassed about hating it, it's just how much time and energy I put into hating it. It really didn't need me posting essays upon essays to it. And I've seen how hating on one thing for too long is unhealthy, just look at the fan reaction to star wars. Instead of just saying they are bad movies and here's the reason why, were at a point where folks are willing to defend the Prequels like they were always these much loved movies. The reality is, there's a rather rose tinted way of viewing older media, especially if it's done by different creators.
I don't think Bethesda are the big creatively bankrupt company that People think they are, I think outside of writing, their games range from having ideas that don't pan out well but at least have it a try to actually having some good and decent ideas.
I also think with age, I just look at things differently.

But yeah, the forum can be a bit of an echochamber sometimes. It's not always a bad thing, you can learn a lot that way, but it can go too far at times.
I think healthy critisms are a good thing, but they have a limit. Dedicating years worth of it to a game really isn't healthy.
 
KingArthur said:
@R.Graves Like it or not, Fallout 4 is objectively good for mindless fun. It’s like Skyrim; you don’t play F4 for a thought provoking plot, or genius writing. You play it for the mindless grind and for SHAUUUUN
Click to expand...

I always shoot him
then follow up with some additional shots, to make sure he's really, really dead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top