Fallout 4 goes Skyrim with infinite re-releases

[Zentropy]

I've never played Fallout 4 or even seen a video of it. How did it make a "massive leap forward in terms of combat"? I genuinely know nothing of the game, but am curious.

So firstly you have to totally seperate Fallout 1 & 2, as they are CRPGS.

Morrowind had three directional melee combat, weak archery, weak stealth elements, and a developed support magic system with a basic magical combat system

Oblivion evolved the combat by adding Havok to their physics engine, making environments and objects totally interactive, adding ragdoll physics, retrievable arrows, explosions, and realistic stealth mechanics but broke enemy level scaling

Fallout 3 added improved Havok Physics and stealth, and improved enemy scaling/difficulty

Skyrim increased enemy AI intelligence, stealth mechanics, Havok physics, and melee combat. The combat in Skyrim was a watershed moment for Bethesda, as for the first time, it was passable as an action game, not just acceptable "for an RPG"

Fallout 4 further improved physics, Havok physics, stealth mechanics, had a huge boost to AI intelligence, and the gunplay in Fallout 4 is actually passable as a first person shooter, which is much harder to pull off than action melee/archery combat. The gun animations, recoil, weapon feedback, the thud of bullets hitting, the explosions, and the ability of enemies to take cover and flank were all vastly improved.

This evolution will continue in Starfield, then Elder Scrolls 6, and by the time we get Fallout 5 in 2028/2029, it will be a fucking masterpiece lol. I imagine it looking like Doom Eternal... but that's probably a bit of a reach x)

As a huge fan of Fallout 1 and Morrowind, I highly recommend trying Fallout 4. Just keep an open mind, don't even think of it in relation to the old Fallout games, and get past the dialogue trees not existing, and you'll find it's the best combat experience Bethesda has ever created.

 

[Gizmojunk]

As a huge fan of Fallout 1 and Morrowind, I highly recommend trying Fallout 4. Just keep an open mind, don't even think of it in relation to the old Fallout games

But it is; they are a defacement of the series. They are the official number three and four titles—and they are not RPGs, nor reasonably related to the series proper. This makes them a deliberate and intentional insult for sake of a bait & switch cash grab. Approaching it with an open mind to appreciate its own special merit (whatever that is)...is like asking certain people to do the same with the piss christ.

 

[Zentropy]

But it is; they are a defacement of the series. They are the official number three and four titles—and they are not RPGs, nor reasonably related to the series proper. This makes them a deliberate and intentional insult for sake of a bait & switch cash grab. Approaching it with an open mind to appreciate its own special merit (whatever that is)...is like asking certain people to do the same with the piss christ.

Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel was the defacement of the series, as was Black Isle's other poor financial decisions that made them literally SELL Fallout to Bethesda! Like god damn at least the series was sold so more games can be made, and thank god it was to Bethesda so we can at least get some quality, stylistically different games as a consolation.

 

[Gizmojunk]

Like god damn at least the series was sold so more games can be made, and thank god it was to Bethesda so we can at least get some quality, stylistically different games as a consolation.

This was not for the best; this is Highlander 3 level crap. Yes I had high hopes for Bethesda's treatment of the series when I first found out about it. I had never heard of their studio before then, so I bought Oblivion to see what they were capable of doing. I was impressed with the engine; I could see how it could be applied to the Fallout series. It never once occurred to me that they would merely clone TES and re-skin it from the Fallout IP. I didn't know professionals were that low, and could be so limited. Bethesda turned out to be a one trick pony; a plumber that fixes carpentry with a pipe-wrench—cause that's what they know how to use.

Later, after exiting the Oblivion tutorial, I then saw how bad of an RPG that it was. But Oblivion was a different kind of game, its own kind, and that was fine. However I started to suspect a problem when Bethesda was taken by surprise that UK players commonly played in third person (as I did).

Bethesda had the best blueprint possible for a Fallout game, and they discarded it in favor of a post apocalyptic retro themepark. They wanted a digital Delos style Fallout-World rather than make a proper Fallout sequel, for the proper Fallout fanbase—which they cared nothing about. Several devs working on FO3 had never played the earlier games, while others had never heard of it. So they knew next to nothing about it.

Bethesda exploited the IP for its setting alone. This is the equivalent of some studio making an RTS of Elder Scrolls—as the official series' next TES sequel. Imagine if Skyrim had played like Halo Wars, or Warcraft 3... approach it with an open mind on its own merits?

 

[Norzan]

Morrowind and Oblivion are nothing alike.

Yeah, you are correct that they are nothing alike because Oblivion is a worse Morrowind. Somehow worse combat (multiple weapon types removed and others merged into types that makes no sense together like Axes being blunt weapons), much worse magic (all the cool spells were removed), incredibly bad faction system where there's no interaction between factions (there are no opposing factions that cause one to hate you if you join their rival), the writing is much worse (and it's not like Morrowind's is all that great), far worse art direction and an incrediby generic setting that is trying way too hard to be like Lord of the Rings where Morrowind looked like incredibly distinct with its alien flora and fauna.

The development of Oblivion added so much to Bethesda's engine, and while I understand that you don't appreciate this, it should be acknowledged.

It can be acknowledged, it led to nothing of value regardless. The mere fact that NPC schedules have been toned down heavily is just proof that Bethesda also thinks they were a bad idea and they were.

The issue I have with standard cut scenes isn't the the exposition, but rather the fact that they take away control from the player.

And the plenty of times in Bethesda games where control is taken away from the player. A lot of their intros take away control from the player. The Esbern exposition dump in Skyrim at that dragon mural is a case of the player having the control taken away from them. The only thing you can do is press the next dialogue option.

and thank god it was to Bethesda so we can at least get some quality, stylistically different games as a consolation.

The problem is the exact opposite, Bethesda has been making the same game since 2002 but with a different coat of paint and more shallow. There are all just iterations of each other where each game just simplifies both series more and more. Skills get removed, stats get removed, weapons get removed, RPG elements get removed.

And i don't know why you are going on about Bethesda making apparently good games but agree that Fallout 76 is bad and this was the last game they made. Why can anyone be excited for any future game when they thought Fallout 76 was something that should be released?

 

[NotZak]

I've never played Fallout 4 or even seen a video of it. How did it make a "massive leap forward in terms of combat"? I genuinely know nothing of the game, but am curious.

They hired a bunch of people from Bungie to work on the combat

 

[NotZak]

Bethesda is the only developer making immersive sims at the moment, and if you guys have never gotten into those types of games, I highly recommend it.

Did you forget that Arkane studios, OtherSide entertainment, Ghost Story Games and the entire Indie scene exist?

 

[Zentropy]

So the Fallout setting stopped being sacred as soon as Brotherhood of Steel was made. Even the biggest Bethesda hater knows they're doing much better than that crap heap. Anyways. Fallout 3 is more like Star Wars: The Force Awakens than Highlander 3.

And Bethesda's shtick is using the same engine across all of their games and evolving it from title to title; it's just their thing. Every game they have made in the last 20+ years aside from Fallout 76 has been critically acclaimed and has sold WELL.

Even OBSIDIAN made a Fallout game in BETHESDA'S engine, and lots of fans think it's the best in the series.

 

[Zentropy]

And Norzan, you're reaching by saying that exposition dumps in 1st person while the player has full control "takes away control from the player" and you know it :p

C'mon, how many hours have you played Skyrim?

 

[Zentropy]

Did you forget that Arkane studios, OtherSide entertainment, Ghost Story Games and the entire Indie scene exist?

You're right I forget about the ladder two, but Bethesda does publish Arkane Studios, which I think is even fuirther proof of a connection.

 

[Zentropy]

And finally I'm not gonna' sit here and try to defend the objective merits of games that have 90%+ on Metacritic (Oblivion has a 94%, Fallout 3 91%). It's totally fine to not enjoy Bethesda games, it's valid to say you don't like them because of A, B, and C, but metacritic was created to objectively portray the quality of entertainment products and Bethesda's metacritic scores speak for themselves.

Fallout 3 and 4 are terrible Fallout games... but they're good games.
I understand you guys miss the old CRPG Fallout games, but it isn't Bethesda's fault they aren't made anymore. It's Black Isle/Interplay/Obsidian's fault. If Bethesda tried to make a CRPG Fallout game it would be freaking garbage, they don't know how to do it.

Just play the games and be objective about it, rather than constantly comparing them to Fallout 1 & 2, they're totally different genres and are incomparable in every category aside from writing and world building.

 

[Gizmojunk]

Every game they have made in the last 20+ years aside from Fallout 76 has been critically acclaimed and has sold WELL.

So has food at McDonald's, that's not indication of quality; it's indication of low consumer standards.

Just play the games and be objective about it, rather than constantly comparing them to Fallout 1 & 2

They are numbered sequels, they invite comparison; they lose hands down.

Fallout 3 and 4 are terrible Fallout games... but they're good games.

This is true, but not appropriately good games.

I understand you guys miss the old CRPG Fallout games, but it isn't Bethesda's fault they aren't made anymore. It's Black Isle/Interplay/Obsidian's fault. If Bethesda tried to make a CRPG Fallout game it would be freaking garbage, they don't know how to do it.

It's not Black Isle/Interplay/Obsidian's fault, it's devolved consumer tastes, and sensible hesitancy to risk a lot of money; also it's a bit of a lost art. But this is also good reason not to try making them if inept or incapable... it's far worse to try if you've no understanding of the task, because damage gets done...and they did damage it; comparable to the example below.

 

[Verevoof]

So firstly you have to totally seperate Fallout 1 & 2, as they are CRPGS.

Morrowind had three directional melee combat, weak archery, weak stealth elements, and a developed support magic system with a basic magical combat system

Oblivion evolved the combat by adding Havok to their physics engine, making environments and objects totally interactive, adding ragdoll physics, retrievable arrows, explosions, and realistic stealth mechanics but broke enemy level scaling

Fallout 3 added improved Havok Physics and stealth, and improved enemy scaling/difficulty

Skyrim increased enemy AI intelligence, stealth mechanics, Havok physics, and melee combat. The combat in Skyrim was a watershed moment for Bethesda, as for the first time, it was passable as an action game, not just acceptable "for an RPG"

Fallout 4 further improved physics, Havok physics, stealth mechanics, had a huge boost to AI intelligence, and the gunplay in Fallout 4 is actually passable as a first person shooter, which is much harder to pull off than action melee/archery combat. The gun animations, recoil, weapon feedback, the thud of bullets hitting, the explosions, and the ability of enemies to take cover and flank were all vastly improved.

This evolution will continue in Starfield, then Elder Scrolls 6, and by the time we get Fallout 5 in 2028/2029, it will be a fucking masterpiece lol. I imagine it looking like Doom Eternal... but that's probably a bit of a reach x)

As a huge fan of Fallout 1 and Morrowind, I highly recommend trying Fallout 4. Just keep an open mind, don't even think of it in relation to the old Fallout games, and get past the dialogue trees not existing, and you'll find it's the best combat experience Bethesda has ever created.

This does not sound like a “massive leap forward.” You admitted that the combat is “passable.” If your combat is first person shooter combat, “passable” is not a “massive leap forward.” That’s pretty bad, given the other games out there in the industry and all this massively successful studio can manage is a grade of C.

If your “massive leap forward” is in reference to only Bethesda games, well, that’s one hell of grading scale.

 

[NotZak]

You're right I forget about the ladder two, but Bethesda does publish Arkane Studios, which I think is even fuirther proof of a connection.

They still don't develop the games though and I'm pretty sure it would be Zenimax doing most of the publishing and not Bethesda

 

[Norzan]

Even OBSIDIAN made a Fallout game in BETHESDA'S engine, and lots of fans think it's the best in the series.

New Vegas would have been a much better game if it wasn't made in Bethesda's terrible version of Gamebryo.

And Norzan, you're reaching by saying that exposition dumps in 1st person while the player has full control "takes away control from the player" and you know it :p

When the only thing you can do is a press button to continue the exposition dump, that's taking control away from the player. That's no different than having to press A to continue the dialogue in many games.

Doesn't change the fact that i have to listen to an huge exposition dump instead of being able to make dialogue choices that greatly reduce it in order to get a move on. You know the intro to Old World Blues? You can cut that so much from that exposition dump by making the correct dialogue choices, that's actual control that the player has.

And finally I'm not gonna' sit here and try to defend the objective merits of games that have 90%+ on Metacritic (Oblivion has a 94%, Fallout 3 91%). It's totally fine to not enjoy Bethesda games, it's valid to say you don't like them because of A, B, and C, but metacritic was created to objectively portray the quality of entertainment products and Bethesda's metacritic scores speak for themselves.

Metacritic is just as subjective as every other site, there's nothing objective about it. If you go to sites like Steam and GoG you see that the Bethesda Fallouts are some of the lowest ranked in the series, below Fallout 1, 2 and New Vegas, but that doesn't make them objective.

Just play the games and be objective about it, rather than constantly comparing them to Fallout 1 & 2, they're totally different genres and are incomparable in every category aside from writing and world building.

No. Our experiences from the past is what gives our current perspectives, so it's completely valid to compare what is released today with past releases. Specially when they are part of the same series. If Bethesda made their own post-apocalyptic IP, i wouldn't be comparing to Fallout.

 

[NotZak]

And finally I'm not gonna' sit here and try to defend the objective merits of games that have 90%+ on Metacritic (Oblivion has a 94%, Fallout 3 91%). It's totally fine to not enjoy Bethesda games, it's valid to say you don't like them because of A, B, and C, but metacritic was created to objectively portray the quality of entertainment products and Bethesda's metacritic scores speak for themselves.

Fallout 3 and 4 are terrible Fallout games... but they're good games.
I understand you guys miss the old CRPG Fallout games, but it isn't Bethesda's fault they aren't made anymore. It's Black Isle/Interplay/Obsidian's fault. If Bethesda tried to make a CRPG Fallout game it would be freaking garbage, they don't know how to do it.

Just play the games and be objective about it, rather than constantly comparing them to Fallout 1 & 2, they're totally different genres and are incomparable in every category aside from writing and world building.

I will stop criticizing them as role playing games when Bethesda stops calling them role playing games

 

[Zentropy]

So Gizmo/Norz, you guys mentioned that Bethesda games are comparable to McDonalds, and that on GoG/Steam, their games have low scores.

So McDonalds isn't critically acclaimed, it's just popular. And Steam/GoG aren't based on objective critical opinion, and a lot of the rating are review bomb from people who just make accounts to review bomb the games. This is why Metacritic is necessary,

If you really want to get consumer sentiment you could go on the Xbox dashboard and look up game reviews, as the games on thieir platform can only be reviewed by accounts that have purchased the games, 1 purchase= 1 review. Bethesda games are much higher rated in that environment because people can't review bomb the titles, and reviews are much higher on Metacritic because the reviews are written by professionals at the time the game was released.

 

[Zentropy]

I will stop criticizing them as role playing games when Bethesda stops calling them role playing games

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure Bethesda doesn't even refer to their games as RPGs. If you could find a moder instance where I'm wrong, I'll concede the point to you.

 

[Zentropy]

This does not sound like a “massive leap forward.” You admitted that the combat is “passable.” If your combat is first person shooter combat, “passable” is not a “massive leap forward.” That’s pretty bad, given the other games out there in the industry and all this massively successful studio can manage is a grade of C.

If your “massive leap forward” is in reference to only Bethesda games, well, that’s one hell of grading scale.

I mean passable as a Triple A first person shooter, that's a really high bar that no game with a progression system has never pulled off as far as I know; for example, I would not call Borderlands combat "passable". "Passable" FPS combat is like Halo Reach (worst in the series imo), Call of Duty WW2, etc.

Having "passable" action/FPS combat in a Bethesda IP is an AMAZING achievement.

 

[Zentropy]

Finally Norzan, by your definition, no game can have any dialogue of length without "taking control away from the player"... that's prety silly.

And as I said, when I, and many other people talk aboit "taking control away" we mean physically taking away control of the player character, as I said before. This is why being objective in these matters is important. As you have said yourself, a large segment of people enjoy the fact that we maintain control of they player character during Bethesda games. You don't enjoy this. But rather than accepting that it is a positive to other people, you try to argue why it isn't a valid opinion.

Niche opinions, like my opinion that Bethesda games are more akin to Immersive Sims, can be argued this way, but meta opinions, like "Skyrim is good" or the fact that people enjoy not having their control taken away, can't just be dismissed.