Fallout 4: Exploring Far Harbor

Read the big endings from the leak a few days ago. It sounds pretty tame. And pretty similar to 4's "nuke ___ or save ____" ending.

Jeez, is that really all they can come up with?
 
comscar said:
Read the big endings from the leak a few days ago. It sounds pretty tame. And pretty similar to 4's "nuke ___ or save ____" ending.

Jeez, is that really all they can come up with?
Click to expand...
Better then anything else they've done. Apart from Morrowind.
 
I am a little disappointed. From what I hear the DLC is just pretty mediocre and nothing really offensive. I was hoping for something that would be all out stupid. Oh well, maybe we will get that with the Nuka World dlc.
 
It turns out Far harbor has a story section that is literally minecraft with blocks in a digital world, where you build in settlement mode.
 
Phil Nelson said:
Everyone has a sympathetic side new legendary weapon, and a side that’s not-so-sympathetic pipe gun, and you have to decide where you’re going to land which you're going to loot. We wanted to include a ton of different options backpedal and ripoff as much of New Vegas as is possible. Is it possible to go through with no one dying? Yes actually it is, all the named characters are essential. Can you just decide to destroy everyone? Yes, you can nuke the island for no explicit reason. Can you bring certain people to justice put all the raiders to death and drag out certain truths poorly written dialogue? Is it worth exposing this person killing this raider if it means all these other people are going to be hurt you'll get is another legendary weapon? We give you a lot of tools legendary weapons and information (HATE NEWSPAPERS) that affects all groups New Settlements that need your help!, and then you have the ability to decide what you’re going to do with it can do what the map marker tells you to do.
Click to expand...
Fixed.
 
comscar said:
Read the big endings from the leak a few days ago. It sounds pretty tame. And pretty similar to 4's "nuke ___ or save ____" ending.

Jeez, is that really all they can come up with?
Click to expand...

Alright, I'm going to give you a challenge. Come up with endings for Fallout 4 that was better than the actual ones. It has to meet the requirements of:
  • Must not offend anyone. At all. Ever. No matter what. Just in case, that means no themes explored that could possibly leave any player unsatisfied.
  • Must immediately result in some form of instant gratification, because game endings need to be a reward when the whole game was about a journey.
  • Must not have lasting consequences, as that would complicate post-ending gameplay, and designing the DLC that takes place afterwards.
  • Must not cost the player anything in-game, as that would complicate post-ending gameplay, and an inconvenience could be mistaken for a bug.
I say that for those requirements, whichever writer had to salvage Emil's concepts did a pretty fantastic job, like salvaging a whole train car from a devastating trainwreck. See if you can come up with a better one that meets all of those requirements. Don't bring up the "but that's not what a Fallout game should be" argument, there's already a thread for that, take it there.
 
ZigzagPX4 said:
Alright, I'm going to give you a challenge. Come up with endings for Fallout 4 that was better than the actual ones. It has to meet the requirements of:
  • Must not offend anyone. At all. Ever. No matter what. Just in case, that means no themes explored that could possibly leave any player unsatisfied.
  • Must immediately result in some form of instant gratification, because game endings need to be a reward when the whole game was about a journey.
  • Must not have lasting consequences, as that would complicate post-ending gameplay, and designing the DLC that takes place afterwards.
  • Must not cost the player anything in-game, as that would complicate post-ending gameplay, and an inconvenience could be mistaken for a bug.
I say that for those requirements, whichever writer had to salvage Emil's concepts did a pretty fantastic job, like salvaging a whole train car from a devastating trainwreck. See if you can come up with a better one that meets all of those requirements. Don't bring up the "but that's not what a Fallout game should be" argument, there's already a thread for that, take it there.
Click to expand...


Uh, who you chose to win the Commonwealth ties back into Far Harbor.
 
NotAcasul said:
Uh, who you chose to win the Commonwealth ties back into Far Harbor.
Click to expand...

I was talking to the people who thought Fallout 4's ending was absolute crap. I thought it was well-salvaged even if poorly written, and I haven't played Far Harbor yet, but the fact that who you chose ties into Far Harbor proves my point, so thanks for proving my point.

But fine. Let me redefine the requirements.
  • Must not offend anyone. At all. Ever. No matter what. Just in case, that means no themes explored that could possibly leave any player unsatisfied.
  • Must immediately result in some form of instant gratification, because game endings need to be a reward when the whole game was about a journey.
  • Must not have lasting consequences, as that would complicate post-ending gameplay, and designing the DLC that takes place afterwards.
  • Must not cost the player anything in-game, as that would complicate post-ending gameplay, and an inconvenience could be mistaken for a bug.
 
ZigzagPX4 said:
Alright, I'm going to give you a challenge. Come up with endings for Fallout 4 that was better than the actual ones. It has to meet the requirements of:
  • Must not offend anyone. At all. Ever. No matter what. Just in case, that means no themes explored that could possibly leave any player unsatisfied.
  • Must immediately result in some form of instant gratification, because game endings need to be a reward when the whole game was about a journey.
  • Must not have lasting consequences, as that would complicate post-ending gameplay, and designing the DLC that takes place afterwards.
  • Must not cost the player anything in-game, as that would complicate post-ending gameplay, and an inconvenience could be mistaken for a bug.
I say that for those requirements, whichever writer had to salvage Emil's concepts did a pretty fantastic job, like salvaging a whole train car from a devastating trainwreck. See if you can come up with a better one that meets all of those requirements. Don't bring up the "but that's not what a Fallout game should be" argument, there's already a thread for that, take it there.
Click to expand...

I'm just gonna give my 2 cents on the BoS ending.

The BoS decided to blow up the Institute. The end. Kill me now pls.
 
ZigzagPX4 said:
  • Must not have lasting consequences, as that would complicate post-ending gameplay, and designing the DLC that takes place afterwards.
  • Must not cost the player anything in-game, as that would complicate post-ending gameplay, and an inconvenience could be mistaken for a bug.
Click to expand...
So basically, what you're suggesting, is they come up for an ending that has no consequences, in a Fallout game?, A game that, in it's original form, pretty much ever Dev ever said that an important part was "Actions having consequences"
 
JO'Geran said:
So basically, what you're suggesting, is they come up for an ending that has no consequences, in a Fallout game?, A game that, in it's original form, pretty much ever Dev ever said that an important part was "Actions having consequences"
Click to expand...

There comes the "that's not what Fallout should be" argument. Don't get me wrong - I do agree with that argument - but I'm trying to ask you, under requirements like those ones, could you come up with a better ending for Fallout 4?

For something so thoroughly stomped by publishers forcing the game not to offend or inconvenience anyone, it was shit that smelled less badly than I could have. For that, I applaud whoever managed to salvage the wreck, though I can guess it wasn't Emil.
 
Eh, I guess what Zigzag means is that the guys at Bethesda are just trying to make endings more in line with their overall design philosophy (which, at this point, basically fulfilled all of the requirements above). Having gained THAT much of audience, if they suddenly put some stuff that challenged their fans' worldview and thought-provocation that some people who 'just want to have fun' gets uncomfortable..... eh, I'm not sure what to imagine if that is to happen.
 
New Vegas did it. They sold more copies than FO3. Even Mass Effect had better endings. Are you in apologist mode again Zigzag?
 
When I predicted major framedrops just like in PL, no one here believed. Now redditors indicates on major fps drops on PC and consoles.
No such problems in Beta version though.
 
My point is that Fallout 4 was probably the best ending that a numbered Fallout probably could've got, because honestly, Bethesda isn't going to allow anything more risky or deep than what we got. It was more of a lamentation for how restrictive modern games are with their writing, and for a game burdened with the "never-offend-or-annoy-anyone" requirements, Fallout 4 ended up relatively well. Like I said, even if it's shit, it's shit that smells less shit than all the other, and that's still a plus.

Hopefully the good parts of Bethesda's development team just quits and joins some other developer where they're actually able to make something with quality, and aren't beholden to publisher sales requirements.


Walpknut said:
New Vegas did it. They sold more copies than FO3.
Click to expand...

New Vegas endings were full of complex themes, didn't allow for post-ending gameplay, and there was no well-defined "good ending" that could give overall satisfaction, just a grim and realistic vision of consequences. Good, but Bethesda isn't going to allow things like that to possibly turn off some of their sales in numbered games like Fallout 4.

Walpknut said:
Even Mass Effect had better endings.
Click to expand...

Mass Effect endings all resulted in possible loss of teammates and affected certain parts of their sequels. Bethesda wouldn't dare allow such a inconvenience to appear in Fallout. There were probably a lot of casual gamers who were turned off Mass Effect because of that, and that could affect sales.

Walpknut said:
Are you in apologist mode again Zigzag?
Click to expand...

No, I'm not. Don't use "apologist" for anything outside of politics, there is already a post that did that and it was stupid there too. Your stand against apologism, hypocrisy and pretentiousness that shows up in every of your posts is pointless and annoying. For future reference, I don't take sides. Allegiances are dumb. I defend whatever I think makes the most sense at the time. If you don't agree, then... don't agree.
 
ZigzagPX4 said:
New Vegas endings were full of complex themes, didn't allow for post-ending gameplay, and there was no well-defined "good ending" that could give overall satisfaction, just a grim and realistic vision of consequences. Good, but Bethesda isn't going to allow things like that to possibly turn off some of their sales in numbered games like Fallout 4.
Click to expand...
Pure speculation I think.
I mean what you're saying is, that Bethesda fans are to dumb to get it and to lazy, so they have to be spoon feeded the content, like the narrative to them. Pretty offensive when you think about it - not saying that this is your intention, I get what you're trying to say.
It just seems to me, that Beth has pushed themself in this corner. They have dumbed down their games for more than a decade now. No surprise that their fans are not used with anything else but tropes, and simplified plots and action oriented storylines. Even the ones that seem to be deep, still follow the same Bethesdian design of solve-it-this-way or the highway. Like with the Brotherhood quests, that everyone seems to love so much ... I get it, I get it, you assasinate everyone, yaaay! But it's still playing heavily on rails, with no choices. And the characters are a bit more nuanced, but not really by that much. So, Todd, Emil and Pete might be under the impression, that the only way to sell even MORE copies, they have to simplify everything even MORE. Because, CoD sold 30 milion units. And, mine craft is also very popular. And Borderlands was awesome super popular! So, their new game, of course needs all that they have. I think, they let trends guide them to much - if that is the case. You can fall in a trap with it. Todd said in some interview, that each new game for them, is treated like a completely new and white canvas. Nothing that was before it matters. That can have advantages, but it also comes with huge disadvantages.

I think, with all the time they spend on marketing, they could sell very complex plots to the gamers. Mass Effect, even with its flaws, has shown that it is possible. Same with Obsidian and Fallout NV.
 
Crni Vuk said:
Pure speculation I think.
Click to expand...

I don't really think so. All those things matter when it comes to sales. Fallout 5 is not going to allow complex themes for fear of offending gamers. It's not going to allow inconvenience for fear of turning gamers off. The only time Betheda Softworks would ever allow inclusion of these things is when other popular AAA games are doing in, and it's working. New Vegas was fairly low-profile when compared to the kind of profit Bethesda aims for.

Crni Vuk said:
I mean what you're saying is, that Bethesda fans are to dumb to get it and to lazy, so they have to be spoon feeded the content, like the narrative to them. Pretty offensive when you think about it - not saying that this is your intention, I get what you're trying to say.
Click to expand...

That's actually what everyone defending classic Fallouts on this site look like they're saying. I apparently dare to say they maybe - just maybe - might not all be dumb, and several (not you) RPG fans here run out to immediately shoot me down because I dared to look like I could possibly be defending Bethesda. That's just not giving people a chance.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not criticising NMA for existing, or for complaining about Fallout. I have no reason to take potshots at a group that appreciates art and bothers no one but each other. But don't be surprised when people do.

Crni Vuk said:
It just seems to me, that Beth has pushed themself in this corner. They have dumbed down their games for more than a decade now. No surprise that their fans are not used with anything else but tropes, and simplified plots and action oriented storylines. Even the ones that seem to be deep, still follow the same Bethesdian design of solve-it-this-way or the highway. Like with the Brotherhood quests, that everyone seems to love so much ... I get it, I get it, you assasinate everyone, yaaay! But it's still playing heavily on rails, with no choices. And the characters are a bit more nuanced, but not really by that much. So, Todd, Emil and Pete might be under the impression, that the only way to sell even MORE copies, they have to simplify everything even MORE. Because, CoD sold 30 milion units. And, mine craft is also very popular. And Borderlands was awesome super popular! So, their new game, of course needs all that they have. I think, they let trends guide them to much - if that is the case. You can fall in a trap with it. Todd said in some interview, that each new game for them, is treated like a completely new and white canvas. Nothing that was before it matters. That can have advantages, but it also comes with huge disadvantages.

I think, with all the time they spend on marketing, they could sell very complex plots to the gamers. Mass Effect, even with its flaws, has shown that it is possible. Same with Obsidian and Fallout NV.
Click to expand...

@Crni Vuk, I know you have this idea that Obsidian, or maybe at the very least Bethesda, can manage to please both the general public who want Fallout 4 styled gameplay and the original fans who wants a half-decent RPG that doesn't take a dump on the lore. I'm just going to say that it's a very ambitious dream you have there. Since pleasing the general public is more profitable than pleasing you joyful bunch, Fallout 4 is not going to be leaning on the faithful sequel side of things.

It's never going to happen, in my opinion. Bethesda lead developers like Todd has a vision for a perfect game, and it is not the Fallout game you want. And I don't believe Obsidian will ever get a good chance of making another Fallout game, at least not with arbitrary requirements to make them seem incompetent, like that Metacritic score incident. Fallout is not my number one game so while I might be a bit disappointed with that, I'm fine with the other games I have.

So no, I don't think we're getting a good Fallout from Bethesda, or a Fallout from Obsidian at all. The Fallout 2 spiritual successor will exist one day, I just hope that the New Vegas successor does too. I feel like it's going to get ignored for it being part of Bethesda's legacy, but I want something like New Vegas more than something like Fallout 2. Maybe that makes me a bad Fallout fan, but I honestly don't care.
 
ZigzagPX4 said:
I don't really think so. All those things matter when it comes to sales. Fallout 5 is not going to allow complex themes for fear of offending gamers. It's not going to allow inconvenience for fear of turning gamers off. The only time Betheda Softworks would ever allow inclusion of these things is when other popular AAA games are doing in, and it's working. New Vegas was fairly low-profile when compared to the kind of profit Bethesda aims for.
Click to expand...

A number of AAA games have done it, and it worked. Recent examples? Witcher 3 around 10 million in sales, The Last of Us 8 million sales on only 2 platforms (ps3, ps4) as of August 2014.

I don't think Bethesda would lose any customers by delving deeper into complex themes, or even if they did lose a portion (which I doubt), they would probably more than make up for it by attracting gamers who were looking for a game with a more "mature" or call it what you will attitude.

They have one of the largest fanbases in the gaming industry, people would probably buy Fallout 5/TES6 even if it was just a CD Case with a steaming turd inside. They can pretty much do whatever they want, and they know it. That's why they're getting lazier and lazier with each release. At least that is how I see it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top