Atomic Postman
Vault Archives Overseer
At least the last guy like that focused on criticizing NV instead of bothering to try and steelman Fallout 4 lmfao
Fallout 76: General thread
- Thread starter Heisenberg
- Start date
-
- Tags
- fallout 76
At least the last guy like that focused on criticizing NV instead of bothering to try and steelman Fallout 4 lmfao
Heisenberg
Chemistry Teacher
So in other words, you are a regular on an online forum because it's an echo chamber for your own opinions on a video game? And I'm the bad guy for coming to this place, admittedly not a comfort zone for people who hold similar opinions to I, and making a thread based around something which was well-explained and documented, only for you to make a condescending post in a couple of short sentences, not even an attempt at properly addressing the original post? Just "bethesda bad"?
And I don't even care about you being condescending in your post. It's nature of the Internet. If you consider that the most toxic thing, you clearly haven't been around.
We were talking about factions, but since you prompted the discussion, let me explain.
Fallout 4 has an open-ended ending where you can continue to play to see the aftermath of your decisions yourself. You don't need ending slides to tell you what happened. You can visit CIT yourself to see what it looks like after it exploded. You can visit Synth Shaun yourself if you saved him and speak to him. New Vegas and 3 were different in this aspect. 3 was clearly written to be narratively a finality for the Lone Wanderer. New Vegas had it's post-game ending cut due to time constraints. They had a lot of content that they couldn't realize within the time they had to create it, so they made the slides instead. It was intended to give some closure on the narrative that replaced the post-game ending, not be a staple of the franchise itself.
Let's agree to disagree. From the very start, the Institute is hinted at. BoS introduce themselves very early on in a manner characteristically suitable for them to do so, and the Railroad are hidden in the shadows up until the player chooses to unravel them. All of them are introduced in well-thought out, unique and distinct ways. Institute is entangled with the player's life, BoS shows up to gather intel (much like they've been doing in every FO game) and Railroad can be avoided entirely up until you get tasked to decode the courser chip, which bearing in mind, you can do in a whole matter of different ways. You can ask them politely, sneak in and do it for yourself, kill them all. You have a few options of doing this.
Meanwhile, FNV introduces the Legion in such a way that can be completely avoidable if you skip Nipton and cut straight to The Strip. This isn't bad by any means. The BoS can be avoided in FO4 too, but at least the BoS declare their existence to the player when they fully arrive in the Commonwealth via the Prydwen as soon as the player exits Fort Hagen. The Legion on the other hand is executed poorly. The player can have no idea of them up until the legion courier gives the player the Mark of Caesar, and if you went straight to the Lucky 38, House gives the player the introduction to the Legion, which sucks.
NCR are also boring and the first time you meet them, they're struggling to take down 5 bandits in the Vikki and Vance casino that have taken over Primm. It's embarrassing for them, being such a military strength that has control of Hoover Dam, which is what the whole game centers around.
The only "good" faction introduction in New Vegas is House.
Fallout 4 has a reputation system, but it's integrated within it's story quests. For instance, if you kill Father, you are barred from doing every Institute quest since you are expelled from their HQ, and they will shoot you on sight.
Brotherhood and Railroad also have a similar function. In fact the Minutemen is the only faction which doesn't, which makes sense considering they're A: The player's faction and B: A small militia that is unorganized and united only by the fact they hate raiders.
You're also failing to mention that every faction leader bar Preston can be killed straight off the bat in Fallout 4.
One of my favorite playstyles is the "Fistful of Dollars" playstyle. The one where the player betrays all the factions from beneath their feet and sides with 1 faction, either themselves or another of their choice.
I was able to do this in Fallout 4 very well, especially with the Institute ending.
I was able to do this in New Vegas to varying degrees of success. Often times it's hard to play both sides against each other, since as you said, the cut-off point is rather early. You have to play quests in a specific order and constantly look to the wiki for points of no return. It's fatiguing.
This is not what a roleplaying game should be. I should be able to play both factions up until the very end. The only faction I am able to do that with in New Vegas is NCR and House/Independent, which is astounding, considering the game is influenced thematically by spaghetti westerns which have this as a core trope.
You're joking. Are we playing the same game? There's the Atom Cats, the Children of Atom, the Cabots.
Wrong. I'm actually of the mind that they SHOULDN'T have included iron sights. I would have much preferred a DOOM-like combat system, where the guns don't need an annoying piece of metal covering 1/3rd of the screen at any given time.
The point I was trying to make was that Bethesda took what players liked from New Vegas and applied it to Fallout 4. They had Id Software working for them at the time, who made DOOM. If they wanted to keep the traditional zoom in from Fallout 3, they could have done so. DOOM didn't have iron sights and Id was literally called in by BGS to help them with the combat. They made the conscious decision to add iron sights in.
Iron sights aren't a key feature of any First Person Shooter game, kiddo. FPS games haven't had iron sights for longer than they have. It's a modern FPS thing that changed this with Call of Duty and other modern military shooters like Medal of Honor, of which New Vegas hopped on the train of doing FIRST.
Speech is contained within Charisma now, which eliminates the Speech 100 Charisma 1 character builds seen in New Vegas.
Skills have been integrated into Perks. This simplifies and enhances the experience for some players. Even if it is a controversial decision, you can see their mentality.
Traits were superfluous in many regards. You don't need them to roleplay a specific character since skills and perks contribute to that anyway. They brought these back with mutations in Fallout 76.
Fallout 4 does feature a blank slate protagonist for the most part if you disregard the voice. While Nate and Nora had occupations pre-war their occupations are so open-ended you can justify any character with them. And even if we take a step back and analyze this in comparison to New Vegas, New Vegas still isn't much better in this regard. You have to be a Courier from Mojave Express, you have to have walked the Divide, you have to have been weak enough to get captured by Benny and shot in the head and you have to be courageous enough to hunt him down through thick and thin. What about my nerdy weakling character who doesn't want revenge? What about my strong tough guy character who would shrug off bullets like they're raindrops?
The argument I was making was many people disagree with you. Every point you've made so far is that Wastelanders writing is as bad as Fallout 4's. You've never explained why and you've parroted this belief as though it's concrete and solid fact. I'm merely reminding you that people disagree with your opinion, MANY people. Your opinion is not objectively correct, it's not a solid truth. It's just an opinion. Saying this in response to how I've examined the ways 76 does it right is a non-point. You've not elaborated on it.
Well, here's a point. Fallout: New Vegas is literally Borderlands. I don't believe this, but I'm proving to you that anyone can make a point. Does it make it true? Not at all. You haven't explained this, so I won't explain my statement. Fair?
You talked about worldbuilding, I was explaining to you why worldbuilding, the way factions are framed and the environments they are put into have to be different in a multiplayer game. It's not my fault you can't keep up.
Not an appeal to authority, it's an argument in favor of having fun regardless of whether or not you have to abide by some strict set of rules written by someone who doesn't even control the IP anymore decades ago.
I'm a Fallout fan who doesn't care about some "Fallout Bible" written by a proclaimed sexual harasser decades ago. I care about having fun in a video game. Fallout is NOT a state of mind. It's a video game. Bethesda want to appeal to people like me, people with jobs and lives outside of a video game forum. If I want NCR Veteran Ranger Armor or the Brotherhood of Steel in my video game, that's a perfectly reasonable demand. They would be insane to think that a small note in that guy's "Bible" overwrites my claim.
Check my point above. I don't give a shit about your "lore" if it gets in the way of me having fun. I only care about the lore if it's intriguing to the world and it's a fun little tid bit on travels. Not when it completely gets in the way of me wanting something to be in a game I purchased.
Oh really. That's why many vocal members of this forum proclaimed New Vegas to be "more Fallout 3" when it was released, right?
My point was not that NMA doesn't like Fallout 1 or 2. My point was that every Fallout game NMA has had any sort of influence on has disgraced and killed the franchise before Bethesda brought it back from the dead.
Nitpicky and cherrypicky, right? Much like what you do with Fallout 3 and Fallout 4. But whatever. I was trying to make the point that you cherrypicking certain quests to fit your narrative is disingenuous, but yet you have proven my point by calling me disingenuous for parodying said point. I applaud you.
Wrong. You can avoid these quests. They are completely skippable. You can also sneak in the former and it's actually encouraged and the quest stages change if you so desire to do this.
Plus, it's not so different from the "Kill Mr. House" quest in New Vegas. Is it? I don't remember being able to speak him down. Even if you turn off his control he miraculously dies either way.
The Kings are intended to be a pivotal faction in the NCR questline. You get sent to make peace with them in Freeside. It makes sense for the Kings to be much more elaborated, since they are center stage and the first faction one meets once they walk into Freeside.
The Atom Cats on the other hand are isolated within their own hideout. The player is not forced to visit them or even to acknowledge them. Despite this they still have characters, dialogue and even their own paint job for Power Armor. Name 1 Kings NPC apart from The King and Pacer.
Also what is this about depth anyway? The Atom Cats and the Kings are about as deep as each other. Both of them are Elvis/greaser impersonators which a similar number of characters. The only difference is that the Kings were center stage in Freeside and the Atom Cats weren't.
Can you not read between the lines? Institute wants to create a slave class of synths to rebuild the wasteland back to it's former glory. That's literally their motto: "Mankind Redefined". The fact that many players even debate which faction is preferable even today over New Vegas where it's pretty common knowledge that the Legion are evil slavers and the NCR are bureaucrats with a dark side, but mostly the good guys.
The Minutemen are intended to be a player faction so I can see I have infected you with my somehow "disingenuous" talking points. Yes Man was about as boring as two rocks put together but he's from New Vegas so I guess you seemingly glossed over that.
I was giving an explanation or a theory. There's many different theories to this quest.
But here's the thing, just because one quest is an oddity doesn't mean the entire game is badly written (even though I agree with you in some aspects of how the game should be criticized).
What you're failing to realize is that New Vegas had poorly written side quests too. You're telling me that I can't kill Joe Cobb and finish Gun Town Ghost Fight without talking to Ringo first? It makes no sense.
You're telling me that Ghouls managed to fly to the moon and back to Novac to help them out? How did they even land back there with the approximate co-ordinates? Didn't they leave their technician guy?
Fallout 4 isn't some shakespearean masterpiece. But neither is New Vegas. I'm merely making the point that if you're calling Fallout 4 a bad game for minor lore inconsistencies you have to keep in mind the absolutely batshit insane inanities that infested Fallout 2 and New Vegas.
Wrong, wrong and wrong. We're off to a great start.
I have only ever mentioned corporate authority when in reference to how Bethesda act to appease their own playerbase. After all they are a company and have to appease their consumer after all. This does not equal a decline in "quality", but a minor sacrifice that gets retconned immediately to provide players who want x thing with x thing regardless of what Chris "give me kickstarter money" Avellone wrote in his heyday.
Commercial success is an inevitable point. More people play Fallout 4 than New Vegas. This doesn't mean New Vegas is bad, mind you. It just means that more people would prefer to play Fallout 4. I doubt people would buy a more expensive game just to hate it while playing it when they could just buy New Vegas. This means that many players, even if they consider Fallout 4 a better roleplaying game, consider it a better overall game. And that's discounting the people who don't even have good enough hardware to play Fallout 4.
How do you speak to your mother with that mouth?
You don't have to. Stop posting any time.Yeah I'm writing more words on arguing with a troll right now than on my on my uni assignment
I don't need to elaborate. A forum is for sharing ideas, not defending them while scared and defenceless. I will hold my opinion Fallout 3 is the best Fallout game regardless of what you basement dwellers say on here.
Oh and also, calling someone a troll because you disagree with them is "disingenuous". Not only might you want to look that word up in a dictionary, but also learn how to spell it.
Norzan
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Cookie cutter, complete parodies of actual factions can never be as developed as the Legion. There is an actual reason for what they do unlike most factions in the Bethesda Fallouts, which just do random bullshit. The mere fact that your character asks Shaun what the Institute does and Shaun's reply is to say you wouldn't understand is just the prime example of how shallow Bethesda's factions have become.
I also bet you're one of those that looks at the Legion through today's morals. No shit they would be evil in the current social climate, they would be no better than terrorists. But the entire point of the Legion is to look at them through the perspective of the Fallout world and what they can bring to it. And, an hint, Fallout's world and our world aren't exactly the same.
It doesn't matter if it doesn't happen to you, it happens to others. The entire point of the Aton store is to lock all the cool looking shit behind a paywall and leave what you can get on your own look terrible. It's on purpose.
And what about the fact they sell actual items that affect gameplay after saying they wouldn't do that? How naive are you?
They do need to eat and drink because the ghouls in the Necropolis will die of thirst if you take their water chip. They die of actual dehydration. A ghoul in New Vegas survived by eating cockroaches and condensation from pipes because he said he would have died otherwise.
Stay classy. If you expect any sympathy after this in this forum, you got another thing coming.
Welp, another of these Bethesda fanboys that come here to tells us we just hate Bethesda and workship the first two games, and the other usual variation of the same nonsense. Nothing to see here, folks, moving on.
I will add this. Bethesda didn't bring back Fallout from the dead, they basically fucking stole it from another company that most likely would have done much better games with it.
Last edited:
Heisenberg
Chemistry Teacher
Right. Saving the world from angry easily controlled and manipulated robots that pass for human in every context they have been placed in, that can easily malfunction at a moment's notice and kill everyone in the vicinity, and when gathered in large groups, can completely overpower humanity, is "random bullshit".
Well tell us what, genius. When Stephen Fucking Hawking, one of the greatest scientists of the generation and to many "the smartest man in the world" says that Artificial Intelligence can mean the end of humanity as we know it, was he just speaking "random bullshit"?Because the premise of the BoS hinges on his point.
And I also love how you compare this to Legion as if there's any comparison. Oh well, I guess saving humanity from destructive evil robots is a lesser, more random task than enslaving all of mankind to put some totalitarian bald narcissist as the leader of the empire of the wasteland!
Can you imagine anyone supporting the Legion? Your sisters, your mother, all being used for one purpose. To breed with other men. Why? To give Caesar soldiers so he can continue to do this to other people.
Ah, I guess they have a reason why they're doing this though!
What? I can't look at them through today's perspective? It's fucking 2281, 260 years from now and I can't look at it through today's perspective? Okay lol.
It doesn't help that there's a more progressive, albeit corrupt alternative, the NCR. Which is literally plastered all over the promotional material. Past civilizations and societies never had this alternative. Fallout does.
And I know that the Fallout world and the real world aren't the same, but they're both on planet Earth and they both are aimed at contemporary audiences. They're not aimed for some distant civilization to judge, they're not aimed at some past civilization 200 years ago. They're aimed at normal people who share my modern day first world perspective.
They don't "lock all the cool looking shit behind a paywall, what are you even talking about? Do you have the slightest inkling of what I meant by that?
There's absolutely nothing I give a shit about it in the atom store. I've heard others say the same thing.
And honestly, I don't agree with the whole basis of it either. I made the OP to comment on how the actual content of the game is. Not what is included with it. I can agree that Fallout 1st and all that stuff is shit, but what can you do? Every company does it nowadays.
But yeah, one thing I don't disagree with you on is the Atom Store. All I said was that it had nothing that interested me. To be perfectly honest despite microtransactions being a shady and shitty business practice I've seen far worse microtransaction implementation in countless other games. So yeah it's bad, but better than 99% of other stuff out there.
Like I said. There's many explanations and theories out there, but read my above points I made to that other guy. New Vegas had similarly annoying and bizarre quests too. A minor lore break is nothing in comparison to the bizarre inane shit in Fallout 2 or New Vegas.
C'mon man. I love Troika Games like VTMB and Planescape Torment but be fucking real for once. They went bankrupt. Fallout would once again be orphaned and that would have allowed Bethesda another chance to grab it. Only difference here is that Fallout 3 would release in 2011 or something and New Vegas would likely not even exist. Would you really want to live in that universe?
T
TorontoReign
Guest
Some fag comes in here defending Fallout 76 because it can try to do some RPG stuff because he is either 12 or a moron and he acts like this place is irrational. This should be fun.
Jogre
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Fuck it, I know I said I wasn't going to engage, but one thing that pisses me off more than anything is badly written discussions of AI being passed off as a work of genius, because the person talking about it has never heard even the most basic discussions of AI before and thinks Fallout 4 is genius for having handled it.
Do you know how many stories there are about "What if robots, then do rights?, What if robots dangerous"?, Like it is basically a cliche at this point.
"Steven Hawking said how Artificial Intelligence was a threat to humanity!", So? That doesn't mean literally every single story written about AI is therefore good.
Do you think this counts as Hard Science Fiction? Why not, it takes place in space, and space exists therefore this is a great piece of Hard Science Fiction.
Isaac Newton said space exists. Are you disagreeing with Isaac Newton. by saying this image is not good science fiction? Do you not see how by adknowledging that space exists this is the single most well-written and grounded in reality science fiction ever written.
(I know nothing about physics so I can't actually make a clever reference here)
Fun fact: AI is a REALLY COMMON SCIENCE FICTION TROPE. Like it's been used in thousands of franchises over the years. Just because Steven Hawkings wrote some stuff about AI being a threat, doesn't mean that literally every single story about AI being a threat is therefore super deep and engaging. I can't believe I'm even having to type this out because the idea that "Stories containing AI aren't always interesting explorations of the concept of AI" is such a basic statement, that it's ridiculous I even need to argue it.
Fallout 4's plot is "What if act like human, talk like human, is human in every way, BUT THEY ROBOT, WHAT IF THE ROBOT THREAT? ARE ROBOT PEOPLE?"
Do you know how many times that exact plot has been done before? That's literally the plot of Rossum's Universal Robots, the stage play that literally coined the term robots. The exact same story that Fallout 4 has, has been told since the 1920s and Fallout 4 added no unique plot elements or ideas that aren't found in literally every other telling of this exact same story. "Fallout 4 is so deep because it asks whether the artificially created humans are actually humans and poses them as a threat to humanity". Like, there is nothing original or well-thought out about it. Like literally, there are so many pieces of media with that exact point, that Fallout 4 adds literally nothing original to this already oversaturated genre.
Here's a question for you: if art is to be of any value whatsoever, shouldn't it be constantly self-critical and seeking improvement or new interpretations of what came before? Isn't the whole point of art to share unique interpretations of events.
Well I'm going to make a bold statement here: There is literally nothing original, or any unique interpretation on how Fallout 4 handles Synths. None. Literally the entire plot could have been plagirised from another work on AI and nobody would notice the difference because it's such a generic cookie-cutter AI plot, so fundementally unoriginal, that were it not set in the Fallout Universe, it would be literally indistinguishable from the thousands of identical stories with the exact same premise and execution.
When neither the premise or execution is original, no new original ideas are introduced, and it is not at all critical or provides any unique interpretation of the source material at all, what's the point in it even existing as a unique story. It contributes literally nothing to the artistic world because it does not have a single shred of originality.
Now just to rub in the point as hard as I possibly can: This is a line from the Medical Computer in the San Fransisco Bunker in Fallout 2, arguably the single most minor character in the entire game:
"The suicide rate among true artificial intelligence machines was extremely high. When given full sensory capability the machines became depressed over their inability to go out into the world and experience it. When deprived of full sensory input the machines began to develop severe mental disorders similar to those among humans who are forced to endure sensory deprivation. The few machines that survived these difficulties became incredibly bored and began to create situations in the outside world for their amusement. It is theorized by some that this was the cause of the war that nearly destroyed mankind."
This probably isn't original, in fact given that I've already mentioned how oversaturated AI related stories are, I would not be surprised if it wasn't. However let's do a basic source of comparison
The Entire main plot to Fallout 4: "Synths are basically like humans, they act and talk like them and in day to day life are basically indistinguishable. Some people argue they have rights, some don't: It's never really explained beyond vague generalities why anyone actually believes their stance on AI. Given certain capacities they have that humans don't, some people argue they're a threat to humans."
A single line in Fallout 2: "When true AI with consciousness realises the limits of not being able to interact with the world in the same way a human could, due to lacking the same evolved sensory input humans have, it's a mind like ours that exists without the same capabilities we've developed, and this inherently drives it mad, realising how fundementally limited it is compared to it's creators. Many AI don't see a point in living like this."
Maybe if Fallout 4's plot was the first plot ever like it I wouldn't judge it so harshly. But it's such a generic cookie cutter approach to AI that it actually pisses me off. When you have media that writes things that are supposed to be interesting and thought provoking questions, but does so in a way that makes it as uninteresting as possible, that's honestly a cardinal sin.
Fallout 2 has a far more engaging and philosophically interesting discussion of AI, IN A SINGLE LINE OF DIALOGUE, then Fallout 4, a game that's supposed to be about AI, and that really says something IMO.
Do you know how many stories there are about "What if robots, then do rights?, What if robots dangerous"?, Like it is basically a cliche at this point.
"Steven Hawking said how Artificial Intelligence was a threat to humanity!", So? That doesn't mean literally every single story written about AI is therefore good.
Do you think this counts as Hard Science Fiction? Why not, it takes place in space, and space exists therefore this is a great piece of Hard Science Fiction.
Isaac Newton said space exists. Are you disagreeing with Isaac Newton. by saying this image is not good science fiction? Do you not see how by adknowledging that space exists this is the single most well-written and grounded in reality science fiction ever written.
(I know nothing about physics so I can't actually make a clever reference here)
Fun fact: AI is a REALLY COMMON SCIENCE FICTION TROPE. Like it's been used in thousands of franchises over the years. Just because Steven Hawkings wrote some stuff about AI being a threat, doesn't mean that literally every single story about AI being a threat is therefore super deep and engaging. I can't believe I'm even having to type this out because the idea that "Stories containing AI aren't always interesting explorations of the concept of AI" is such a basic statement, that it's ridiculous I even need to argue it.
Fallout 4's plot is "What if act like human, talk like human, is human in every way, BUT THEY ROBOT, WHAT IF THE ROBOT THREAT? ARE ROBOT PEOPLE?"
Do you know how many times that exact plot has been done before? That's literally the plot of Rossum's Universal Robots, the stage play that literally coined the term robots. The exact same story that Fallout 4 has, has been told since the 1920s and Fallout 4 added no unique plot elements or ideas that aren't found in literally every other telling of this exact same story. "Fallout 4 is so deep because it asks whether the artificially created humans are actually humans and poses them as a threat to humanity". Like, there is nothing original or well-thought out about it. Like literally, there are so many pieces of media with that exact point, that Fallout 4 adds literally nothing original to this already oversaturated genre.
Here's a question for you: if art is to be of any value whatsoever, shouldn't it be constantly self-critical and seeking improvement or new interpretations of what came before? Isn't the whole point of art to share unique interpretations of events.
Well I'm going to make a bold statement here: There is literally nothing original, or any unique interpretation on how Fallout 4 handles Synths. None. Literally the entire plot could have been plagirised from another work on AI and nobody would notice the difference because it's such a generic cookie-cutter AI plot, so fundementally unoriginal, that were it not set in the Fallout Universe, it would be literally indistinguishable from the thousands of identical stories with the exact same premise and execution.
When neither the premise or execution is original, no new original ideas are introduced, and it is not at all critical or provides any unique interpretation of the source material at all, what's the point in it even existing as a unique story. It contributes literally nothing to the artistic world because it does not have a single shred of originality.
Now just to rub in the point as hard as I possibly can: This is a line from the Medical Computer in the San Fransisco Bunker in Fallout 2, arguably the single most minor character in the entire game:
"The suicide rate among true artificial intelligence machines was extremely high. When given full sensory capability the machines became depressed over their inability to go out into the world and experience it. When deprived of full sensory input the machines began to develop severe mental disorders similar to those among humans who are forced to endure sensory deprivation. The few machines that survived these difficulties became incredibly bored and began to create situations in the outside world for their amusement. It is theorized by some that this was the cause of the war that nearly destroyed mankind."
This probably isn't original, in fact given that I've already mentioned how oversaturated AI related stories are, I would not be surprised if it wasn't. However let's do a basic source of comparison
The Entire main plot to Fallout 4: "Synths are basically like humans, they act and talk like them and in day to day life are basically indistinguishable. Some people argue they have rights, some don't: It's never really explained beyond vague generalities why anyone actually believes their stance on AI. Given certain capacities they have that humans don't, some people argue they're a threat to humans."
A single line in Fallout 2: "When true AI with consciousness realises the limits of not being able to interact with the world in the same way a human could, due to lacking the same evolved sensory input humans have, it's a mind like ours that exists without the same capabilities we've developed, and this inherently drives it mad, realising how fundementally limited it is compared to it's creators. Many AI don't see a point in living like this."
Maybe if Fallout 4's plot was the first plot ever like it I wouldn't judge it so harshly. But it's such a generic cookie cutter approach to AI that it actually pisses me off. When you have media that writes things that are supposed to be interesting and thought provoking questions, but does so in a way that makes it as uninteresting as possible, that's honestly a cardinal sin.
Fallout 2 has a far more engaging and philosophically interesting discussion of AI, IN A SINGLE LINE OF DIALOGUE, then Fallout 4, a game that's supposed to be about AI, and that really says something IMO.
Atomic Postman
Vault Archives Overseer
Fuck it, I know I said I wasn't going to engage, but one thing that pisses me off more than anything is badly written discussions of AI being passed off as a work of genius, because the person talking about it has never heard even the most basic discussions of AI before and thinks Fallout 4 is genius for having handled it.
Do you know how many stories there are about "What if robots, then do rights?, What if robots dangerous"?, Like it is basically a cliche at this point.
"Steven Hawking said how Artificial Intelligence was a threat to humanity!", So? That doesn't mean literally every single story written about AI is therefore good.
Do you think this counts as Hard Science Fiction? Why not, it takes place in space, and space exists therefore this is a great piece of Hard Science Fiction.
Isaac Newton said space exists. Are you disagreeing with Isaac Newton. by saying this image is not good science fiction? Do you not see how by adknowledging that space exists this is the single most well-written and grounded in reality science fiction ever written.
(I know nothing about physics so I can't actually make a clever reference here)
Fun fact: AI is a REALLY COMMON SCIENCE FICTION TROPE. Like it's been used in thousands of franchises over the years. Just because Steven Hawkings wrote some stuff about AI being a threat, doesn't mean that literally every single story about AI being a threat is therefore super deep and engaging. I can't believe I'm even having to type this out because the idea that "Stories containing AI aren't always interesting explorations of the concept of AI" is such a basic statement, that it's ridiculous I even need to argue it.
Fallout 4's plot is "What if act like human, talk like human, is human in every way, BUT THEY ROBOT, WHAT IF THE ROBOT THREAT? ARE ROBOT PEOPLE?"
Do you know how many times that exact plot has been done before? That's literally the plot of Rossum's Universal Robots, the stage play that literally coined the term robots. The exact same story that Fallout 4 has, has been told since the 1920s and Fallout 4 added no unique plot elements or ideas that aren't found in literally every other telling of this exact same story. "Fallout 4 is so deep because it asks whether the artificially created humans are actually humans and poses them as a threat to humanity". Like, there is nothing original or well-thought out about it. Like literally, there are so many pieces of media with that exact point, that Fallout 4 adds literally nothing original to this already oversaturated genre.
Here's a question for you: if art is to be of any value whatsoever, shouldn't it be constantly self-critical and seeking improvement or new interpretations of what came before? Isn't the whole point of art to share unique interpretations of events.
Well I'm going to make a bold statement here: There is literally nothing original, or any unique interpretation on how Fallout 4 handles Synths. None. Literally the entire plot could have been plagirised from another work on AI and nobody would notice the difference because it's such a generic cookie-cutter AI plot, so fundementally unoriginal, that were it not set in the Fallout Universe, it would be literally indistinguishable from the thousands of identical stories with the exact same premise and execution.
When neither the premise or execution is original, no new original ideas are introduced, and it is not at all critical or provides any unique interpretation of the source material at all, what's the point in it even existing as a unique story. It contributes literally nothing to the artistic world because it does not have a single shred of originality.
Now just to rub in the point as hard as I possibly can: This is a line from the Medical Computer in the San Fransisco Bunker in Fallout 2, arguably the single most minor character in the entire game:
"The suicide rate among true artificial intelligence machines was extremely high. When given full sensory capability the machines became depressed over their inability to go out into the world and experience it. When deprived of full sensory input the machines began to develop severe mental disorders similar to those among humans who are forced to endure sensory deprivation. The few machines that survived these difficulties became incredibly bored and began to create situations in the outside world for their amusement. It is theorized by some that this was the cause of the war that nearly destroyed mankind."
This probably isn't original, in fact given that I've already mentioned how oversaturated AI related stories are, I would not be surprised if it wasn't. However let's do a basic source of comparison
The Entire main plot to Fallout 4: "Synths are basically like humans, they act and talk like them and in day to day life are basically indistinguishable. Some people argue they have rights, some don't: It's never really explained beyond vague generalities why anyone actually believes their stance on AI. Given certain capacities they have that humans don't, some people argue they're a threat to humans."
A single line in Fallout 2: "When true AI with consciousness realises the limits of not being able to interact with the world in the same way a human could, due to lacking the same evolved sensory input humans have, it's a mind like ours that exists without the same capabilities we've developed, and this inherently drives it mad, realising how fundementally limited it is compared to it's creators. Many AI don't see a point in living like this."
Maybe if Fallout 4's plot was the first plot ever like it I wouldn't judge it so harshly. But it's such a generic cookie cutter approach to AI that it actually pisses me off. When you have media that writes things that are supposed to be interesting and thought provoking questions, but does so in a way that makes it as uninteresting as possible, that's honestly a cardinal sin.
Fallout 2 has a far more engaging and philosophically interesting discussion of AI, IN A SINGLE LINE OF DIALOGUE, then Fallout 4, a game that's supposed to be about AI, and that really says something IMO.
Work on your damn paper. That was the decision I made.
T
TorontoReign
Guest
A return to form would be Fallout 1 anyway.
Atomic Postman
Vault Archives Overseer
I still think with the crpg revival in the past decade, commissioning a low-budget isometric spin-off would have been easy money and good will, but I'm no industry corpo
T
TorontoReign
Guest
They tried that with W2.
Atomic Postman
Vault Archives Overseer
Yeah but Fallout IP
T
TorontoReign
Guest
Fallout IP is overrated.
Iprovidelittlepianos
Vault Senior Citizen
Saying Roshambo influenced Fallout: Tactics is like saying MLK influenced the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing.
Although perhaps that analogy is in poor taste...
caplanchy
First time out of the vault
Lets not forget the name of our genre of game. Computer Role Playing Game. No one in their right mind would side with the Legion. But the character you play as does not need to be in the right mind. Fallout 4 is a fun game, it's the first Fallout game I played, but it is not built for roleplaying. Your very specific backstory follows you everywhere first of all. Your previous occupation is already defined as veteran soldier, so obviously this man will have a sense of camaraderie, probably an aversion to the anarchy of the wasteland and to evil in general.. This is also expressed in the dialogue, which is hardly ever neutral to his backstory, like when you say to the Brotherhood of Steel you have prior military experience.
Can we agree that there are different kinds of fun? Fallout 4 arguably had the best action and general exploring in my opinion (can't comment on 76, haven't played it), but in terms of roleplaying and the story, New Vegas pulls it off far better. They are both fun in different ways, though Fallout really should focus on the latter types of fun than the former.
My point is that Fallout 4 has shitty boring factions that only lend to the removal of the RP in the RPG.
The aftermath of your decisions is that next to nothing really changes. I wouldn't really call that an actual ending.
I don't get what is bad about this. This makes perfect sense as something that would happen.
Aaaand I'm not gonna read the rest of these arguments around here. New user joins to express contrarian opinions. It's been a day and he's made 27 posts already (some massive ones too). Nothing of value here, again. Move along people.
Last edited:
Heisenberg
Chemistry Teacher
Wow... little bit bigoted don't you think? To use such language? What a troll!
Nice ad-hominem attack too. How's the swelling around your anus lookin'?
Nah. You purposely waited for me to get some sleep so you could get your 5 seconds of glory. I'm here to shut you down again.
Did I say it was, genius? Go back to the original point I was refuting. Nice fucking strawman.
THIS is the point I was refuting dumbass. I wasn't saying Bethesda factions are the most fantastically written factions out there. I was saying that their motivations are a bit more than "random bullshit", don't you think?
At this point, I'm actually thinking you're deliberately going around in circles and moving the goalposts.
Yes. So is Blade Runner's plot. Do you like the movie Blade Runner? It's been done dozens of times before. If you are you're a hypocrite. It's poorly written trash.
Jesus fucking Christ even Cyberpunk treads the same steps. Are you gonna criticize that too?
Do you see the flaw with this argument?
....eeeek. Blade Runner didn't either. Checkmate. Are you gonna badmouth that too?
And I don't think retellings of stories are bad by inherent nature. One can argue Fallout 1 is a retelling of numerous other post-apocalyptic pieces of fiction out there, such as Mad Max. Does that make it bad too?
And Fallout 4 still manages to do this. Never before has this story been told in a unique environment like the Boston Wasteland. Every other time it's been in a dystopian tech-noir or cyberpunk city. There's some other examples but for the most part that's what most people think of.
Fallout 4 on the other hand manages to be unique in how it tackles it. This is not a co-ordinated state with institutions of law. It's a wasteland with no government and no legislation. That makes it unique. Never before has this issue been tackled by another Fallout game.
Yeah, whatever. Read my above points. You literally have no grounds to criticize Fallout 4 when Fallout 1 and 2 do the same thing with many other pieces of media.
I never said that. I said that NMA influenced those shitty games and reaped the consequences of it. His existence is proof of that. They wouldn't have even acknowledged or knew about him otherwise.
Fallout 4 factions are about as boring as Fallout New Vegas factions. Your brain has just been frazzled by ZoomTube and the likes.
- Massive crater in the middle of CIT (if Institute is destroyed)
- Massive Prydwen wreckage in the middle of Boston Airport (if BoS is destroyed)
- Synth Shaun exists and has tons of dialogue and a unique weapon (if he is saved)
- Your characters gets some nice end-game goodies (paint jobs, uniques, armors, weapons, etc)
Can we also just take a step back and realize that next to nothing changes outside of a few slides and lines of dialogue in New Vegas's ending? In all truth, the DLC is the post-game for Fallout 4. This has been deemed canon by the timeline. In New Vegas the story just ends. No post-game, nothing.
We were talking about how badly the New Vegas factions are introduced, not if it's a possibility or not. Re-read, same goes for the above user whatever his or it's name is.
"contrarian opinions"
Oh well. I guess that's why more people play Fallout 4 and 76 than New Vegas currently.
caplanchy
First time out of the vault
You are well aware it's contrarian opinion around here, but that's got nothing to do with unnecessary hate. There is obviously a difference between the games history, that much is undeniable. This is an old forum, where they have sections here for pen and paper role playing, and has been around before Fallout 3 as much as I know. It's clear this forum is about Fallout, but geared towards the classic games, New Vegas, somewhat Tactics. And of course, if you are interested in the newer games, there are other forums out there that have a demographic who enjoy those. Pick your platforms instead of picking fights. Unless you want to admit that's what you came here to do, because you know well enough that discussing newer games around here is fruitless. Is it wrong to prefer the older games?
Last edited:
CerberusGate
I should save my game in a whole new slot
Well said. I'd say you'll do well here (then again I'm not an old member compared to others here so who am I to judge).
I suspect it came here to pick fights like most trolls that this forum gets. It even follows the standard MO of the typical troll, starts with a post to praise the recent Bethesda Fallouts, responds aggresively to critical posts and replies, devolves into flinging insults and purposefully says contrarian points to try and trigger people. They eventually get bored and leave/get banned for continued trolling.
Heisenberg
Chemistry Teacher
Nice job calling for isolationism. A forum is a platform for discussion. If there is nothing to discuss, the forum ceases to exist. It's only a matter of time before this happens to NMA. The fact that I was the most recently joined member for an entire day proves this. Nobody wants to come here.
I've came here to talk Fallout, seeing as it's a Fallout forum, regardless of whether or not it's tailored for specific games. If this forum wishes to survive, it needs to get with the times and stop harassing the majority of people who actually like the newer games.
Without RPGcodex members and you making YouTube videos, your platform is dead. Poof. It ceases to exist.
No. It's wrong to endlessly piss on the countless other people with differing opinions to yours, even begging them for an explanation and being deliberately condescending on a forum to them, and then getting mad when they *shock* do not want to entertain your childish bullshit. That's what wrong. But keep moving the goalposts.
I made a perfectly succinct and well-written post about how Fallout 76 is, looking at things optimistically, a misunderstood step in the right direction, a litmus test for what Bethesda should or should not pursue in the next Fallout game.
I was met with "bethesda bad" and just staggeringly false and objectively wrong comments.
Now I don't care. It's what I was expecting anyway. But you've got half the story and you're white knighting for other users who deep down, you truly know are in the wrong. It won't get you any cookie point being moderator's pet you know.
So what you're saying is:
1. Make a post praising a game they like
2. Get shit on and condescendingly pissed on by other users
3. Respond in a similar fashion paralleling the tone of the other users
4. Devolves into a flame war
5. Gets banned for "contrarianism"
And that's a troll to you? Someone who defends their POV and reacts in a similar way to other users. If so, mods are either too delusional to see or too scared of banning their own regulars for continued shitposting.
caplanchy
First time out of the vault
May this thread rest in peace
CerberusGate
I should save my game in a whole new slot
So two wrongs make a right? Is that what you're saying? Try that argument in real life and see if it holds up in court (Spoiler alert: It doesn't but points for actually trying).
How hilarious. You're not even trying to argue for your preferred game at this point, you're only pissing off people on purpose with silly one-liners and troll arguments fitting of a Youtube comment section. Run-in-the-mill trolling at its most basic.
Or that the standard troll is so unoriginal that they do the same thing over and over again. Go check out Someguy37, Greed (Someguy's alt btw) or some other troll posts in The Vats for examples. You're nothing special at all.
