Click bait or not Bethesda gave them a free copy to review. It's their own fault for giving it to, as you put it 'some Indian dude who's intentions are only to get that sweet click bait moolah'.
Fallout 4's first review
- Thread starter Kilus
- Start date
Click bait or not Bethesda gave them a free copy to review. It's their own fault for giving it to, as you put it 'some Indian dude who's intentions are only to get that sweet click bait moolah'.
D Borous
It Wandered In From the Wastes
I ain't sayin' nothin' more about this one. There'll be plenty to discuss later, when the full reviews are released.
thenightgaunt
First time out of the vault
I really liked this review.
I don't think it was tame as much as it is a difficult series and genre to review. Reviewers (self included when I was doing it) generally go to an extreme of love it but admit the flaws, or hate it and begrudgingly acknowledge what it does right. Because, no, you don't want to offend the fanbase, but also because your own biases influence your review before you even pick up the game.
No, I like the review because it touched on an issue that I expected and have seen in every damn game like Fallout 3-4, Skyrim and Oblivion and all the other good open world games.
To quote the reviewer:
"When is something interesting supposed to happen?"
Skyrim was a fun game, but after the intro it became just you wandering the game world, exploring and meeting NPCs you'll never interact with after finishing their quests. In Skyrim, the only NPCs I ever really formed a connection with were primary companions or quest givers. Ayla, Lydia, Ulrick, Elisif, and so on. F:New Vegas at least had a captivating plot, but it was one that lost steam fast. You're following Benny to New Vegas, but so many damned side quests force you off the path for no reason. I mean yes you want to find out from Manny Vargas where Benny went after hitting Novac, but you already know. He went to Vegas. He's going to Vegas. The point of the game is to get to Vegas. So why spend an hour or so dealing with the damned ghouls? From a storytelling POV I mean. Wouldn't it make more sense if there was a closed door of some sort that involved Benny? Maybe he screwed over the ghouls on his way through and you can't get through Novac without resolving that quest. Some reason for me to keep hating the Bastard other than the slow boil of revenge.
It's an issue I have with the whole damned "open world" genre. Oblivion did an Ok job of it because those random oblivion gates got really annoying after a while, and Fallout 3 kept reminding you that you were looking for your dad, but Skyrim just threw dragons at you. Dragons loaded with magic souls and awesome resources. I never really got the urge to end that quest because other than Helgan, the dragons weren't really screwing up my world. I couldn't run or hide from them and they scaled in difficultly to me. So really they were just random minibosses of awesomeness.
Now I'm going to play the hell out of Fallout because I love the setting and when I love a setting, I don't get bored with these problems. I've put 400+ hours into Skyrim and 400+ into Fallout: NV. But the reviewer is right. It does hurt new players. I've tried to get gamer-family members into Fallout:NV with no success. My brother and I are avid Fallout fans, but my sister and dad are more generalist gamers. They love FPS' like Call of Duty or Resistance, and story driven games like Until Dawn . Very linear but very story driven games. So when I tried to get my dad into Fallout:NV, he gave it a shot and after a few hours quit and said he just couldn't get into it for the reasons I mentioned above. Now there are no one size fits all games that appeal to EVERYONE and there really shouldn't be. But at the same time that is a flaw of the genre (not just whatever new game comes out in it). But I don't think it's a flaw we can get rid of without destroying part of what draws fans to the genre.
I don't think it was tame as much as it is a difficult series and genre to review. Reviewers (self included when I was doing it) generally go to an extreme of love it but admit the flaws, or hate it and begrudgingly acknowledge what it does right. Because, no, you don't want to offend the fanbase, but also because your own biases influence your review before you even pick up the game.
No, I like the review because it touched on an issue that I expected and have seen in every damn game like Fallout 3-4, Skyrim and Oblivion and all the other good open world games.
To quote the reviewer:
"When is something interesting supposed to happen?"
Skyrim was a fun game, but after the intro it became just you wandering the game world, exploring and meeting NPCs you'll never interact with after finishing their quests. In Skyrim, the only NPCs I ever really formed a connection with were primary companions or quest givers. Ayla, Lydia, Ulrick, Elisif, and so on. F:New Vegas at least had a captivating plot, but it was one that lost steam fast. You're following Benny to New Vegas, but so many damned side quests force you off the path for no reason. I mean yes you want to find out from Manny Vargas where Benny went after hitting Novac, but you already know. He went to Vegas. He's going to Vegas. The point of the game is to get to Vegas. So why spend an hour or so dealing with the damned ghouls? From a storytelling POV I mean. Wouldn't it make more sense if there was a closed door of some sort that involved Benny? Maybe he screwed over the ghouls on his way through and you can't get through Novac without resolving that quest. Some reason for me to keep hating the Bastard other than the slow boil of revenge.
It's an issue I have with the whole damned "open world" genre. Oblivion did an Ok job of it because those random oblivion gates got really annoying after a while, and Fallout 3 kept reminding you that you were looking for your dad, but Skyrim just threw dragons at you. Dragons loaded with magic souls and awesome resources. I never really got the urge to end that quest because other than Helgan, the dragons weren't really screwing up my world. I couldn't run or hide from them and they scaled in difficultly to me. So really they were just random minibosses of awesomeness.
Now I'm going to play the hell out of Fallout because I love the setting and when I love a setting, I don't get bored with these problems. I've put 400+ hours into Skyrim and 400+ into Fallout: NV. But the reviewer is right. It does hurt new players. I've tried to get gamer-family members into Fallout:NV with no success. My brother and I are avid Fallout fans, but my sister and dad are more generalist gamers. They love FPS' like Call of Duty or Resistance, and story driven games like Until Dawn . Very linear but very story driven games. So when I tried to get my dad into Fallout:NV, he gave it a shot and after a few hours quit and said he just couldn't get into it for the reasons I mentioned above. Now there are no one size fits all games that appeal to EVERYONE and there really shouldn't be. But at the same time that is a flaw of the genre (not just whatever new game comes out in it). But I don't think it's a flaw we can get rid of without destroying part of what draws fans to the genre.
Last edited:
Well, somebody isn't going to receive review copies from Bethsoft anymore.
Your points are valid, but when you actually read how bad the review is, then you'll know where I come from. I read the review, the guy seems like he has never played ANY fallout game. He makes criticisms without using examples of what is wrong with the game. He never spends time talking about anything different from previous iterations, nor does he even mention any of the improvements in the series. It seems like propagandist click bait. Honestly, from his review, its likely that hrs never played it, never got a review copy. Man, it's called international business times, it's just a fancy name for an Indian click bait site. There's tonnes of them with equally shitty and self important titles. I put no stick in a review that doesn't actually talk about the game that they are ALLEGEDLY reviewing. But, hey, take someone who presented ZERO facts as gospel if you wish. I learnt ZERO about fallout 4 from this click-bait review.
PossibleCabbage
Vault 22 Survivor
Usually publishers will accept "oops, we goofed and got the embargo date wrong, sorry, we'll take it down" as an excuse.
CRBASF23
First time out of the vault
5545Trey
Underground Deviant
Good to know that internet hostility is still alive and well in 2015.
Jedasd
It Wandered In From the Wastes
Also they released the article at the correct time according to first date Bethesda has given, probably "missed" the announcement about the extended date.
If this is true and if there isnt any level scaling, doesnt this limits the game a lot? Especially the "freedom" part of a Bethesda game where you can go anywhere you want as soon as you you step out of the tutorial or beginning location?
Last edited:
Shardik
Still Mildly Glowing
Let's accept your premise that this reviewer has never played a Fallout game in his life (which IMO is a faulty one - he does after all say that current fans of Fallout 3 will love it, so he may have some sort of experience with that game to use as a reference). Don't you think there might be a problem if a newbie to the Fallout franchise has trouble getting into the game? If this game's going to be the biggest thing EVAH and shatter all sales records, don't you think it better be able to rope a bunch of new players into the franchise? Especially when you consider that from all appearances so far, Bethesda is pretty much telling a significant chunk of their existing customer base, the fans of the originals and New Vegas, to just piss off?
By the way, if you had bothered to look at that link provided earlier, you'd learn that IBT was founded by an American and a Frenchman and its headquarters is in Manhattan. Vincent Balistriere (the review author's name) sounds more Italian than anything else. So where are you getting the idea that it's some kind of "Indian click bait site"?
Last edited:
Oblivion is the only Bethesda game that was really like that. In the other games you can wander off and get killed if you don't know what you are doing.
5545Trey
Underground Deviant
Sir, you forgot to include Skyrim and Fallout 3 into that category.
Jedasd
It Wandered In From the Wastes
Yeah, they aren't like Oblivion. Think about the giants in Skyrim, for example.
However, the minimum levels are relatively low, so that map is probably wrong, or you level up really fast, or level 40 monsters aren't actually that tough.
Shardik
Still Mildly Glowing
Based on the streams I've looked at, the leveling up really fast part is true, at least in the early game. I haven't seen enough mid to late game stuff to determine how much it slows down as you gain levels.
I didn't bother to look, because anytime I search games, ibt is usually one of the click bait sites that regurgitate the same bullshit from other sites and talks about games without giving any meaningful details. Lol to consider international business times as legit, says more about those who consider it legit. Its a publication that cannot be taken seriously, at all. But if you want to take such pathetic nonsense as gospel, that's down to you. Just don't get butthurt when people call bullshit on such bullshit "reviews"
For you to actually to consider this as a "review", says it all. Also, I can't help that you're butthurt that it's not more like NV, I preferred Fo3 more anyway, so kudos to Bethesda to keeping true to their own franchise and not buckling to the demands of jilted fanboys. After all they paid for the rights of the franchise, they didn't pay to play lip service to fanboys.
I couldn't care how the game sells, as I'm not some pathetic cod fangirl whereby I'd use sales to justify how I spend my own cash ( couldn't care less if it sells more than "evah", what a dumb, butthurt, bitchy and whiny fangirl statement to make). I already bought my copy, so I don't give a shit about anything except my own experience. Although I'll call bullshit on bullshit. If I don't like the game, I won't be afraid to say, it's my right as a consumer. Go figure.
If you're not happy with what Bethesda has done to the game don't buy it or play it, it's as simple as as that.
Did you actually consider this as a legitimate review? I'd be intrigued to know why you'd consider this as a review and not a pile of click bait bullshit.
Yeah, they have a different opinion to what I want them to have so they are clickbait and haven't played the game and something about Indians.
5545Trey
Underground Deviant
They all have level-scaling, are built on the same engine (you could argue that the Creation Engine is not an updated Gamebyro Engine, but honestly, I doubt anyone could name at least 5 differences between the two), and all three of these games have the same design philosophies. So basically, yes they are.
Giants are not a good example, as there are simple methods to killing them while playing as a low level character (Watch this for an example).
Walpknut
This ghoul has seen it all
"Fans" of a game that hasn't even come out registering to insult some random review while telling others they are butthurt. Man, are this the first drops of the Bethdrone storm we are going to get next week?
What they don't accept is reviews of "AAA" titles that are actually critical. Well, of course they can't prevent it but I highly doubt that anyone who calls the dialogue "bland and boring" in a review will be getting free review copies in the future. (Now if Gamergate would've actually been about that, I'd've joined)