Fallout 4 is not "Skyrim with guns."

[khain]

Come to think of it, every single Fallout 4 cue was taken from multiplayer games. The massive focus in crafting, looting, and repetitive quest grinding. Loose plot with inconsistencies that needs to be filled in by fans. Highly hyped with an influential PR office. Aims for big crowds. Theme park feel. The only thing it lacks is the actual multiplayer. Maybe they should just make a Fallout MMO and get it out of the system - it's like they're itching to make one.

I think it's pretty clear that's where they're headed, especially after Elder Scrolls Online.

I know it wasn't an overwhelming success, but I don't think that will stop them to try and apply the same 'evolution' path to the Fallout series.

So, yeah, I'm pretty sure that by 2020 we'll have 'Fallout Online: Wasteland Unlimited'.

 

[farchettiensis]

I didn't and don't mind the faults of Skyrim. It was a beautiful, massive world, and was somewhat plausible, in its own logic. The factions are fun (Cicero from Assassin's guild was awesome) and enjoyable to play, though admittedly they could be made more verisimilar and logic. That is the thing: you don't mind the slips, if the whole is alright. Skyrim had a couple of most beautiful scenarios in the video game history, as far as I know, and it was amazing to play through them. There was plenty of lore to it, though not without inconsistencies, and it felt that way, as you played it. Plus, the background plot involving the Civil War was very appealing, and even had some depth to it, even though the way it played through was rather linear. I felt that the actions and the different quests should have a more interesting interplay, but I felt that, individually, they delivered. And that was enough.

Fallout 4? It had none of that. It's uninteresting to play through, a generic shooter and just so dumb and flat. I honestly think it is the biggest disappointment I ever had and will have with a game. Comparing this piece of garbage with Skyrim is a sacrilege and a patent inability to relate elementary facts.

 

[Irwin John Finster]

I think both FO3 and FO4 are tremendous games when viewed on their own concepts

I agreed with this sentiment until about the 60 hour mark of Fallout 4. I just can't reconcile the dialogue wheel/system in Fallout 4. If any other game had this kind of wonky dialogue and grindfest nature I would not even have bought it.

 

[MercenarySnake]

I think both FO3 and FO4 are tremendous games when viewed on their own concepts

I agreed with this sentiment until about the 60 hour mark of Fallout 4. I just can't reconcile the dialogue wheel/system in Fallout 4. If any other game had this kind of wonky dialogue and grindfest nature I would not even have bought it.

How many hours have you put into the game? I was going to play Fallout 4 today after updating all my mods but the end result was playing Fallout 2 and entering the NCR to help the Rangers with the slavers instead.
How do you get the incentive to play even a little bit? I see some people talking about hitting over the 200 hour mark and I'm like, I can't even get the incentive to get past the 76 hour mark to wrap up the main story.

 

[Gizmojunk]

I think both FO3 and FO4 are tremendous games when viewed on their own concepts

I agreed with this sentiment until about the 60 hour mark of Fallout 4. I just can't reconcile the dialogue wheel/system in Fallout 4. If any other game had this kind of wonky dialogue and grindfest nature I would not even have bought it.

I don't even consider dialog as part of the game mechanics... I think the Disciples and King's Bounty are great games ~as well, but their dialog is not very impressive; while Chess and Go have no dialog at all, yet are simply superb. I spoke of judging them on their own merits [strengths] rather than the dev's posturing of them. Judging it as an RPG (or as a Fallout game) it is like judging a claw hammer to be a poor excuse for a pipe wrench; yet the claw hammer has merits of its own.

 

[Irwin John Finster]

I think both FO3 and FO4 are tremendous games when viewed on their own concepts

I agreed with this sentiment until about the 60 hour mark of Fallout 4. I just can't reconcile the dialogue wheel/system in Fallout 4. If any other game had this kind of wonky dialogue and grindfest nature I would not even have bought it.

I don't even consider dialog as part of the game mechanics... I think the Disciples and King's Bounty are great games ~as well, but their dialog is not very impressive; while Chess and Go have no dialog at all, yet are simply superb. I spoke of judging them on their own merits [strengths] rather than the dev's posturing of them. Judging it as an RPG (or as a Fallout game) it is like judging a claw hammer to be a poor excuse for a pipe wrench; yet the claw hammer has merits of its own.

Unfortunately, when I go to every website reviewing or selling Fallout 4, it is under the RPG category. Bethesda is pushing this as an RPG, so as an RPG it's a total failure. So even though you might not think it's an RPG, they are marketing it as one and doing so is only going to lower expectations for future RPGs.

Even as a game on it's own, Call of Duty is better as a shooter, and all other current games have 100000 times less loading screens and janky animations and glitches. These issues were forgiven in previous Bethesda games because the writing and RPG side of the game was not a mess, or at the very least it allowed for some immersion and suspension of disbelief. When you can't be immersed in a game world anymore all you notice is these things and that is exactly what happened when they completely gutted dialogue and RPG elements for the same of some kind of linear action game with bugs as a "feature."

If I were to judge Fallout 4 as it's own game, I'd still say it was mediocre at best. The last thing anyone expected from a game titled "Fallout" that was in an RPG category when they bought it would be a linear action shooter with a dialogue wheel that might as well be written in another language given how little it tells you about your actual dialogue choice.

 

[MercenarySnake]

Speaking of loading screens, the way they allow you to rotate and view the models on the loading screens it's as if they knew their loading screens would be long so they put those in there.
Judging Fallout 4 by its own standards sounds like you would have to lower standards to view it like that. It's fine if others like it but as a good game period? It's bad and boring.

 

[Dr Fallout]

Speaking of loading screens, the way they allow you to rotate and view the models on the loading screens it's as if they knew their loading screens would be long so they put those in there.
Judging Fallout 4 by its own standards sounds like you would have to lower standards to view it like that. It's fine if others like it but as a good game period? It's bad and boring.

Agreed. They're from Skyrim obviously.

 

[Ilosar]

I think both FO3 and FO4 are tremendous games when viewed on their own concepts

I agreed with this sentiment until about the 60 hour mark of Fallout 4. I just can't reconcile the dialogue wheel/system in Fallout 4. If any other game had this kind of wonky dialogue and grindfest nature I would not even have bought it.

I don't even consider dialog as part of the game mechanics... I think the Disciples and King's Bounty are great games ~as well, but their dialog is not very impressive; while Chess and Go have no dialog at all, yet are simply superb. I spoke of judging them on their own merits [strengths] rather than the dev's posturing of them. Judging it as an RPG (or as a Fallout game) it is like judging a claw hammer to be a poor excuse for a pipe wrench; yet the claw hammer has merits of its own.

I'm not sure in what genre Fallout 4 is tremendous.

As an RPG, well we know how it goes. As an FPS it is nothing spectacular, some of the guns are fun and PA feels good but it's nothing that hasn't been done better by other games. As an exploration game, it's good as per usual Bethesda fare, but still suffers a bit in comparison to recent, quality open world games. As a survival game it's a joke because it is way too easy and you never need to eat or drink. As a settlement management game it falls way behind even indie titles like Banished, to say nothing of the Cities XL of this world. It suppose it is a champion in its own ''collect tin cans to make stuff'' category but that's rather narrow.

Fallout 4 has merit. I'm 80 hours in total and I have enjoyed playing the game, not going to pretend otherwise. But it really doesn't excel. It is a fun game, but not much else.

 

[Dr Fallout]

Ehh I can argue about fun, but that's subjective to the player.

 

[Crni Vuk]

What you guys describe sounds a lot like Fast food

 

[Dr Fallout]

What you guys describe sounds a lot like Fast food

It is fast food... it's fast gaming.

 

[MercenarySnake]

What you guys describe sounds a lot like Fast food

It is fast food gaming.

Fixed that for ya.

 

[Dr Fallout]

What you guys describe sounds a lot like Fast food

It is fast food gaming.

Fixed that for ya.

Pretty much sadly.

 

[Titan357]

I didnt really comprehend how absolutely dated Fallout 4 looks until I launched The Withcher 3 and tooled around, it speaks volumes about Fallout 4 and TW3 when Gwent is more interesting, fun and engaging than the majority of fallout 4. At that point I stopped since I wanted to play Metal Gear Solid 5 TPP and just restart TW3 at a later point.

MGS5 is worlds ahead of Fallout 4, the AI is better, it looks better, runs better, sounds better and plays better. MGS5 is touted as "action, adventure and stealth" and its more of a RPG than Fallout 4 in some ways. Do you want to just kill everyone, sneak in and kill no one or something in between. You can interact with the world in a meaningful way and the world interacts/reacts with you. Looking at MGS5 and TW3 Bethesda really should feel ashamed of the product they realsed, sadly its viewed as a major success and I doubt that they spent very much time on the game at all, as Fallout NV had 18 months of dev time and is far better in most ways.

 

[MercenarySnake]

Metal Gear Solid V looks WAY better than Fallout 4 at max settings...and runs WAY better too...

 

[Dr Fallout]

Metal Gear Solid V looks WAY better than Fallout 4 at max settings...and runs WAY better too...

Witcher 3 is the same. Looks better and runs better.

 

[MercenarySnake]

Metal Gear Solid V looks WAY better than Fallout 4 at max settings...and runs WAY better too...

Witcher 3 is the same. Looks better and runs better.

The screenshots I've seen of The Witcher 3 look gorgeous.

 

[Dr Fallout]

Metal Gear Solid V looks WAY better than Fallout 4 at max settings...and runs WAY better too...

Witcher 3 is the same. Looks better and runs better.

The screenshots I've seen of The Witcher 3 look gorgeous.

I've played it. It's beautiful.

 

[Irwin John Finster]

Metal Gear Solid V looks WAY better than Fallout 4 at max settings...and runs WAY better too...

Witcher 3 is the same. Looks better and runs better.

The screenshots I've seen of The Witcher 3 look gorgeous.

It is and it manages to use every last % of my graphics card.

I tried it in SLI and it still uses almost all of both cards in some instances.

So it's an amazing looking game that will melt your GPU if not careful with the settings - particularly Hairworks.