Fallout 4 Reviews

  • Thread starter Thread starter TorontoReign
  • Start date Start date
Monco said:
Dastra said:
I found this review... the game is pretty much an FO 3 with better graphics.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...m/fallout-4-review-dangers-hype-video-2174132
Click to expand...

Seems like a decent review from what I've seen of the game, if most of the review of this game are similar to this one there might yet be hope, but of course I wouldn't be surprised if the game got near perfect scores and unanimous praise from the mainstream press.

"It's not that the game doesn't give you things to do -- it gives you far more than anybody could reasonably expect -- it's that it doesn't really supply a consistent set of reasons to want to do those things." Pretty much hits the nail on the head
Click to expand...

exactly how fallout 3 feels. it's really fun, and then it's not, because there's no point.
 
XOA937b.gif


Perfect.
 
kostjamoscow said:
Doctor 0 said:
Pondwitch said:
Reminder that Fallout 3 has a metascore 10 points higher than New Vegas.

This game is hyped as shit, there's no way it won't have at least a 90 metacritic score.
Click to expand...

I'm going with this. Fallout dies with a thunderous applause.
Click to expand...

In your twisted mind it does.
Click to expand...

Speaking of twisted minds,
[spoiler contains an enemy-type seen in the stream]
how do you defend pre-war android frontline soldiers with deathlaserfaces (and boob-plates) built by RobCo added to the lore?
 
They are cool, man! Cool! Who cares about lore, verisimilitude, or rules? We want cool androids with boobs and lasers!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
To Bethesda Fanboy the idea of Defending Bethesda is ridiculous, anyone who does is in the wrong and a heretic.
 
That's funny and I can admit I'm one of these bones plowing people aside and let's be honest here: The only two games the can compete are witcher and metal gear. And this is coming from a die hard Star Wars fan.

Battlefront is too shallow a game. Just like most other first person shooters. Actually quite a bit less seein as how there is no single player compain in the conventional sense.

This is incredibly dumb.


Athough I'll be getting my vader ps4 and playing BF, not a penny will I ever spend on DLC...

Ended post like a true back peddling boner: right on.
 
I think labeling a large portion of a genre as "shallow" is close-minded, especially when there many styles and formulas to it.
 
5545Trey said:
I think labeling a large portion of a genre as "shallow" is close-minded, especially when there many styles and formulas to it.
Click to expand...
Yep, as a fan of FPS's, it's sad to see so much watered down drivel, but at the same time there's so many wonderfully crafted, beautiful FPS's, the Metro series comes to mind, to name one.
 
Quake 1 and 3, Unreal Tournament 1999, Halo: CE (OG Xbox; PC port is laggy and inconsistent as all hell), Perfect Dark, and Counter-Strike are all also great examples.
 
WarAlwaysChanges said:
That's funny and I can admit I'm one of these bones plowing people aside and let's be honest here: The only two games the can compete are witcher and metal gear. And this is coming from a die hard Star Wars fan.

Battlefront is too shallow a game. Just like most other first person shooters. Actually quite a bit less seein as how there is no single player compain in the conventional sense.

This is incredibly dumb.


Athough I'll be getting my vader ps4 and playing BF, not a penny will I ever spend on DLC...

Ended post like a true back peddling boner: right on.
Click to expand...

A chance against Witcher 3? No chance.
 
I'll be happy if witcher wins because it deserves it. It was a very fun game and I did literally everything you could in it. Although the story left something to be desired my problem is the lack of interaction with the environment. Every book shelf looks the same, so many rooms you can't explore, so many people in the world you cannot interact with. It's just a different beast. Like when people compare skyrim to inquisition. So hard to compare.

Witchers combat has a huge one up on any Bethesda game. So fun, quick, and fluid.

Years before I found fallout I LOVED MGS. The story is the best part of that series obviously Yet again I feel a lack of interaction with my environment.
 
WarAlwaysChanges said:
I'll be happy if witcher wins because it deserves it. It was a very fun game and I did literally everything you could in it. Although the story left something to be desired my problem is the lack of interaction with the environment. Every book shelf looks the same, so many rooms you can't explore, so many people in the world you cannot interact with. It's just a different beast. Like when people compare skyrim to inquisition. So hard to compare.

Witchers combat has a huge one up on any Bethesda game. So fun, quick, and fluid.

Years before I found fallout I LOVED MGS. The story is the best part of that series obviously Yet again I feel a lack of interaction with my environment.
Click to expand...

I loved Witcher 3, great writing. Better then anything Bethesda made. And I find interaction boring if it's not worth it. I do not want a loot simulater, but a fun and well written experience that Witcher provides.
 
Seems the scores are around the 90% range mostly from the reviews coming in.

Destructoid gave it a 7,5... ouch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top