Fallout 4 announced with official trailer

[TorontoReign]

I have heard about how unfunny ctrl+alt+del was... and I now I can see for myself.

Eh. Hit or miss usually. I'm told you are a terribly unfunny person.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I have heard about how unfunny ctrl+alt+del was... and I now I can see for myself.

Eh. Hit or miss usually. I'm told you are a terribly unfunny person.

I'm not familiar with the comic series, but I thought that was hilarious. I have family in Bawstun, and I immediately thought of something like that comic when it was confirmed that FO4 will take place there.

 

[WastedWastelander]

Welcome to NMA, home of the ancient Fallout lovers and who, rightfully so, think Fallout New Vegas is a better game than Fallout 3.

 

[WastedWastelander]

Holy Christ. I joined this forum after seeing the trailer today so that I could share my excitement with the rest of the Fallout Community, relive some great memories from Fallout 3 and New Vegas, and look forward to the release of Fallout 4. Instead what I get, right off the bat, is a TON of negativity. "OMG *THIS OBJECT/SCENE/CHARACTER/SOUND/ENVIRONMENT/SHADING/WHATEVER* ISN'T EXACTLY HOW I IMAGINED IT! THE GAME IS RUINED!" Or something like that. People are crying about everything from the shade and brightness of the environment, textures of the dog, state of infrastructure for settlements, the voiced main character, and the fact that Bethesda is the creator of this game.
WTF? Fallout 3 and New Vegas had green and yellow tints to their environment, respectively, which was cool initially, but wore off and got annoying very quickly, so I like the natural lighting and color of the game, it improves the overall look.
Sure, the textures on the dog are not stellar, but look at what we are dealing with: a MASSIVE open world, more immersive and dynamic than any Fallout game before it, so certain sacrifices had to be made to ensure good performance. Choosing between perfect textures, and a game that runs well, I'll pick the performance.
I forget who it was, but somebody was complaining about the settlements not looking advanced enough, it's the first trailer and offers only a few glances at the settlements, calm your tits. I love the salvaged look, especially when there is a surplus of unused materials EVERYWHERE. Survival logic says, "Use what's available before wasting time and energy building it from scratch."
The voiced main character...in my opinion one of the BEST aspects of the trailer. Some people feel it limits dialogue? How exactly? I don't see it limiting anything. The lack of a voiced character in the previous Fallout games was a limitation, sorry but one way dialogue is boring as hell.
Finally, many people are disappointed that Bethesda has made Fallout 4, claiming that Fallout: New Vegas was a breath of fresh air and better than that Fallout 3 was bland and boring. I have to disagree. While NV did bring in some great new features, namely ADS, a massive array of mutated wildlife, weapons and armor, and most of all weapon modding (though it wasn't as great as it could have been), the story and characters left a LOT to be desired. Fallout 3 had a great story and characters, a better environment, and actually let you continue playing the game after the main story ended. Also, Fallout 3 runs FAR better than NV ever has, for my anyways.

All in all, it's a reveal trailer, and it only gives us bits and pieces. Calm down, have some optimism, and get excited that we have a NEXT GEN FALLOUT GAME!

I'm one on the side of cautious optimism. I like a fair bit of what I'm seeing, there are some things I don't. One of the things I don't like is the dog's textures. I love that there's at least the chance at having another dog, and one that's not an Australian Cattle Dog. I still want it to not be so jarring in looking strange. This is not an unreasonable thing to want. If it comes to it, a better looking dog mod will be one of the first things I look for. If I'm forced to look for such a mod, it would be due to a failing in the game. Them's the breaks.

Secondly, I absolutely loathe the idea of a voiced protagonist. That will not add any sort of immersion for me, and again, one of the first mods I would look for is one silencing the voice. This is because I put my own voices to the characters that I play in my head as I play. Voicing the player character is hugely limiting in the sorts of responses that you can possibly have simply due to the need to have a voice actor record all the lines for it. I don't want that. What I want, are responses that are more than one or two sentences long. The most immersive moment I've ever had in any Fallout game was in Fallout 2, speaking to Renesco, a man with very little patience. I was given paragraph after paragraph of inane chatter to annoy him with. Dialogue that was the first to ever make me actually laugh at something a game had written. That is the sort of thing I want back. That is something that is nearly impossible with having a voiced player character due to the limited time a VA has, even in house. Time could be better spent elsewhere, thus the player is given less options in the end.


In the end, I will most likely buy, play, and enjoy myself with this new title. I am willing to forgive a lot when it comes to my own leisure time and enjoyment. I've not become so jaded as to not be able to do so. On the other hand, some people, especially many of those here, have. And for good reason. The flaws in all the games are readily apparent to anyone who is willing to see them. The irritation some feel comes from a place of love, deep, deep down. And disappointment at squandered potential. Not to mention that looking at everything with a critical eye, especially something one paid for, is something I would consider to be a useful skill. It's what keeps a certain level of quality there to begin with, instead of just shoveled out rehashes with the intent of exploiting those who are interested.

Yeah, I would hate a voiced protagonist aswell...

 

[TyloniusFunk]

I remain cautiously optimistic, but lets face it, Fallout peaked 1999. Let's all move on to something better.

 

[Alleged Girl #9]

Rumor it takes place 10 years after FO3, no gender select for main game

That better be bullshit.

 

[WorstUsernameEver]

I'm sure that a random Reddit rumor that mostly copied stuff from the Kotaku leaks and added some stuff like a spin-off developed by the Naughty Bear developers is credible, guys.

 

[ChildServices]

Rumor it takes place 10 years after FO3, no gender select for main game

That better be bullshit.

There's absolutely no fucking way it isn't bullshit. Bethesda blows ass but almost every single RPG they've made has had full character customisation, in the very least aesthetically.

 

[Alleged Girl #9]

Rumor it takes place 10 years after FO3, no gender select for main game

That better be bullshit.

There's absolutely no fucking way it isn't bullshit. Bethesda blows ass but almost every single RPG they've made has had full character customisation, in the very least aesthetically.

Stranger things have happened.

 

[Eternal]

I don't believe it personally, but if the main character is fully or even mostly voice acted then it would make SOME sense financially. The 10 years after FO3 seems like a super easy bet to make, anyone can see that coming.

It's all rumors though.

 

[mdf_365]

I don't believe it personally, but if the main character is fully or even mostly voice acted then it would make SOME sense financially. The 10 years after FO3 seems like a super easy bet to make, anyone can see that coming.

It's all rumors though.

I dunno, which is cheaper: having writers and developers create lush options or having a single storyline that is VO? my guess is Main character VO is the savings, so unfortunately, could be a thing.

Also, 10 years seems like a really long time spread in game between FO3 & FO4 but it doesn't really matter much I suppose, depending on what elements carry over.

 

[TorontoReign]

I don't believe it personally, but if the main character is fully or even mostly voice acted then it would make SOME sense financially. The 10 years after FO3 seems like a super easy bet to make, anyone can see that coming.

It's all rumors though.

Also, 10 years seems like a really long time spread in game between FO3 & FO4 but it doesn't really matter much I suppose, depending on what elements carry over.

Not a long time at all really.

 

[Alleged Girl #9]

I don't believe it personally, but if the main character is fully or even mostly voice acted then it would make SOME sense financially. The 10 years after FO3 seems like a super easy bet to make, anyone can see that coming.

It's all rumors though.

Also, 10 years seems like a really long time spread in game between FO3 & FO4 but it doesn't really matter much I suppose, depending on what elements carry over.

Not a long time at all really.

Not relativistically anyway. There was a much greater time gap between Fallout 2 and Fallout 3.

 

[Lexx]

Just remember how voiced NPCs have affected dialogue writing. Now mash in voiced player characters and Bethesda quality writing will be as stupid as never before.

PS: I don't believe the player character will be voiced. It's just not what Bethesda does. They would need to create "third person dialogue" cutscenes for it to make sense and remember how their dialogue interface always looks like (inclusive NPC animations while talking). I find it very hard to imagine Bethesda going down that road.

Pretty sure Fallout 4 dialogue will pretty much look like this:

 

[Akratus]

Holy Christ. I joined this forum after seeing the trailer today so that I could share my excitement with the rest of the Fallout Community, relive some great memories from Fallout 3 and New Vegas, and look forward to the release of Fallout 4. Instead what I get, right off the bat, is a TON of negativity. "OMG *THIS OBJECT/SCENE/CHARACTER/SOUND/ENVIRONMENT/SHADING/WHATEVER* ISN'T EXACTLY HOW I IMAGINED IT! THE GAME IS RUINED!" Or something like that. People are crying about everything from the shade and brightness of the environment, textures of the dog, state of infrastructure for settlements, the voiced main character, and the fact that Bethesda is the creator of this game.
WTF? Fallout 3 and New Vegas had green and yellow tints to their environment, respectively, which was cool initially, but wore off and got annoying very quickly, so I like the natural lighting and color of the game, it improves the overall look.
Sure, the textures on the dog are not stellar, but look at what we are dealing with: a MASSIVE open world, more immersive and dynamic than any Fallout game before it, so certain sacrifices had to be made to ensure good performance. Choosing between perfect textures, and a game that runs well, I'll pick the performance.
I forget who it was, but somebody was complaining about the settlements not looking advanced enough, it's the first trailer and offers only a few glances at the settlements, calm your tits. I love the salvaged look, especially when there is a surplus of unused materials EVERYWHERE. Survival logic says, "Use what's available before wasting time and energy building it from scratch."
The voiced main character...in my opinion one of the BEST aspects of the trailer. Some people feel it limits dialogue? How exactly? I don't see it limiting anything. The lack of a voiced character in the previous Fallout games was a limitation, sorry but one way dialogue is boring as hell.
Finally, many people are disappointed that Bethesda has made Fallout 4, claiming that Fallout: New Vegas was a breath of fresh air and better than that Fallout 3 was bland and boring. I have to disagree. While NV did bring in some great new features, namely ADS, a massive array of mutated wildlife, weapons and armor, and most of all weapon modding (though it wasn't as great as it could have been), the story and characters left a LOT to be desired. Fallout 3 had a great story and characters, a better environment, and actually let you continue playing the game after the main story ended. Also, Fallout 3 runs FAR better than NV ever has, for my anyways.

All in all, it's a reveal trailer, and it only gives us bits and pieces. Calm down, have some optimism, and get excited that we have a NEXT GEN FALLOUT GAME!

Fresh . . fish

Fresh fish

Fresh fish!

FRESH FISH

FRESH FISH!

 

[calajira]

To be honest, it looks way better than Fallout 3. F4 might still be a disgrace to the name, but at least we seem to get ACTUAL settlements, like someone tried to think about how this world could work and survive. Don't get me wrong, it will still be the same ol' Howard's-tested-n-proven-awesome-immershun-shtick, but compared to F3 I might actually have some fun with this. Best case it's a fun postapocalyptic dungeon-crawler that is not the creative trainwreck the previous installment by Bethesda was.

And there is always hope that they are already in talks with Obsidian to continue the west coast franchise.

 

[Yellow]

liking the OG jumpsuit

 

[mef]

why should my radiation immune ghoul, super mutant and robot buddies have to move five feet and hit a button?

ROBOTS ARE NOT IMMUNE TO RADIATION
sorry, but I hear this argument everywhere and it pisses me off

Okay, I had to sleep it off. I watched the trailer again for the 9999th time and I'm somehow excited. It took my seven years, but I don't care anymore if it's just like the classics or more Mass Effect style with voiced protagonist, dialogue wheel and shooter sequences. It would be great to have another F1, yes, but now I just want a good game with good writing and atmosphere and with no stupid f3-style shit. And I know that Bethesda is capable of it. The question is, are they willing to.
Probably not and the game will be shit. But we'll see.

And I hope we get another Obsidian's Fallout in the next three years. But this time give them more than 13 months.

I recommend you to replay F1 and F2 with all the nostalgia aside. You will notice how the classics are cartoony and juvenile sometimes and how they lack logic in many ways. And most of you seem to forget it.

I can't believe I actually wrote this.

btw. those guys in 1:44 are most likely super mutants, I messed with it in photoshop and they're green

 

[fred2]

Sounds like Bethesda's MO alright. They basically set up their own timeline but added no logic to how long between the nukes and "present day." Looks like little to no NEW tech, barely any true rebuilding (still using scavenged supplies instead of finally creating some semblance of an infrastructure) and probably very little in the way of world logic to coexist with game design logic (I can believe small amount of farming to supply a large town... not a 6ft by 6ft garden and 1 brahmin for the size of Megaton. You can't say "we didn't show it because it's boring/unimportant" when you make a completely open near seamless world.

I am also happy that Beth used the west coast to set the plot for its new installments, allowing for games (like FO:NV) back on the east coast. But I disagree that they botched up the logic in your examples.

You see "barely any true rebuilding" because its convenient, the static universe is a common plot device. This is why we see very little actual technological and social changes in the fallout universe, because overall its about us exploring various issue in a specific and unique setting not how make a realistic sim of how environment react to radiation overtime

As for farming land (size of settlements etc usual criticism), you are right but you need to understand engine limitation (i.e. its a continues fairly small world) you can't jump from city to city (like in FO1\2) and need to squeeze a ton of settlements, landmarks, unique terrain features and some desolation emptiness in between over the span of few hills... trying to fit it all, make it interesting and accessible for movement is huge task, so unless you can do better you have to attempt to suspens disbelief or avoid openworld games..

Just a reminder. America is only 240 years old next year. It's been 210 years since America was nuked by the setting of FO5. You can already visit parts of chernobyl directly affected by the disaster without protection other than a geiger counter to stay away from hotspots. You can live in many places in and around Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

I agree to an extent, the work is set on the west coast, and I am open to a more varied landscape (based on the trailer they seem to deliver some of that) However, keep in mind that if you stray to much from the formula you will loose what makes FO unique.. So again its not about realism but a balancing act.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

Holy Christ. I joined this forum after seeing the trailer today so that I could share my excitement with the rest of the Fallout Community, relive some great memories from Fallout 3 and New Vegas, and look forward to the release of Fallout 4. Instead what I get, right off the bat, is a TON of negativity. "OMG *THIS OBJECT/SCENE/CHARACTER/SOUND/ENVIRONMENT/SHADING/WHATEVER* ISN'T EXACTLY HOW I IMAGINED IT! THE GAME IS RUINED!" Or something like that. People are crying about everything from the shade and brightness of the environment, textures of the dog, state of infrastructure for settlements, the voiced main character, and the fact that Bethesda is the creator of this game.
WTF? Fallout 3 and New Vegas had green and yellow tints to their environment, respectively, which was cool initially, but wore off and got annoying very quickly, so I like the natural lighting and color of the game, it improves the overall look.
Sure, the textures on the dog are not stellar, but look at what we are dealing with: a MASSIVE open world, more immersive and dynamic than any Fallout game before it, so certain sacrifices had to be made to ensure good performance. Choosing between perfect textures, and a game that runs well, I'll pick the performance.
I forget who it was, but somebody was complaining about the settlements not looking advanced enough, it's the first trailer and offers only a few glances at the settlements, calm your tits. I love the salvaged look, especially when there is a surplus of unused materials EVERYWHERE. Survival logic says, "Use what's available before wasting time and energy building it from scratch."
The voiced main character...in my opinion one of the BEST aspects of the trailer. Some people feel it limits dialogue? How exactly? I don't see it limiting anything. The lack of a voiced character in the previous Fallout games was a limitation, sorry but one way dialogue is boring as hell.
Finally, many people are disappointed that Bethesda has made Fallout 4, claiming that Fallout: New Vegas was a breath of fresh air and better than that Fallout 3 was bland and boring. I have to disagree. While NV did bring in some great new features, namely ADS, a massive array of mutated wildlife, weapons and armor, and most of all weapon modding (though it wasn't as great as it could have been), the story and characters left a LOT to be desired. Fallout 3 had a great story and characters, a better environment, and actually let you continue playing the game after the main story ended. Also, Fallout 3 runs FAR better than NV ever has, for my anyways.

All in all, it's a reveal trailer, and it only gives us bits and pieces. Calm down, have some optimism, and get excited that we have a NEXT GEN FALLOUT GAME!

'Nuff said.


Also, I remember the excitement about FO3. We all know how that went alright.

I remain cautiously optimistic, but lets face it, Fallout peaked 1999. Let's all move on to something better.

Fair enough - we have awesome stuff like Divinity OS, PoE, a new expansion for Shadowrun coming up etc. etc. But not really anything in the same veign as FO that scratched that kind of itch (sadly, Wasteland 2 didn't do it for me).