Fallout 76 Really Sucks. People Act Shocked.

They Live is a kickass movie.

 

If video games are not art, how come gamers get so mad over what are essentially toys and aren't art? If it is not meant to be art why should developers put a shred of effort into the product if no one will take it seriously?

 

If video games can't ever be art or more than a product for mass consumption why should developers make effort for good games?

 

It's a combination of compulsive consumerism and impatient morons. People don't have to go to their local game store in fear of being criticized/shamed for buying Fallout '76, no they can hide in the comfort of their living rooms as the game is being downloaded onto their hard drives. As long as people have money to throw away, games like '76 will continue to be made and make money. So don't blame Bethesda, blame the idiots who fill their coffers.

 

Because people are more inclined to purchase things that are good. Same reason that tech companies put effort into their products. So that they have a higher-quality product than their competitors.

 

The opinion on the actual material it comes from might be mixed here (it comes form Terry Goodkind's "Faith of the Fallen") but there's a quote exchange I like:
"Would you try to forge steel while its cold?"
"No, of course not. It has to be white hot"
"So must men."

Keep that anger. Infuse others with it. Keeping people angry enough to be aware that things are going to be taking a dive soon is the only way it might be avoided - keep the needle hot to lance a boil. The problem with that is of course people like Jason here (I still haven't finished this. I can only watch it and bits and pieces without yelling arguments at the monitor and problem is more than Jason, plenty of rage dies quickly for people):


There's an argument for calm and acceptance of the 'not that bad'. I almost even get it. I hate rapid change, I hate the belief that the clock's so broken it can't be fixed and is only right twice a day, and only then until the hands fall off. That something built might require being torn down or that people might lose jobs, or that devs are going to suffer from fair complaint. But those are the breaks. Nothing gets improved with some suffering, and I think devs and studios, and us - when we miss what might seem like a good game, a pretty light suffering really - are all going to be having a bit.

Hopefully all that makes sense and I didn't come across as a nutcase encouraging burning down Gamestops or something.

EDIT: I sound like some dumbass wannabe "revolutionary" on reread. I think there's an element of sound advice to it to stay motivated but really? I'm preaching to an informed and intelligent choir here. I'll leave it up since I never delete a post because of a bad reread, even one that makes me sound a bit reactionary and redundant.

 

>the reviews for the game are slowly going up

This time its not even the big outlets- Forbes, Guardian Newspaper, Eurogamer, large sites like that are slamming the game... but small outlets are for some reason giving the game 76s, 80s, etc.

Its weird to watch the larger reviewers refuse to endorse the game, and smaller reviewers, who'd you expect to have more integrity, go up to bat for them.

 

Yeah. Even IGN only gave F76 a 75 on the PC metacritic. That's basically a subzero score coming from them. Meanwhile, the 2 other positive reviews are from comparatively small reviewers. 'S weird. Perhaps they're trying to get on Bethesda's good side, maybe get an invitation to a resort when Fallout 5 comes out?

 

I mean Bethesda sent Yong Yea the collectors PA helmet and such after his negative reviews. I wonder if the smaller ones got equally "personal" gifts.

 

I posted this on a different Fallout 76 topic around here. But it fits quite well in this thread:

Most of the reviews I have seen seem to rate the game around 2.5 out of 5, 5(0) out of 10(0). A little bit more or a little bit less.

These are the reviews I found:

• Metacritic PC version (other version don't have enough critics reviews yet): 56 out of 100
• Gadgets 360: 5 out of 10
• Attack of the Fanboy: 2.5 out of 5
• Noob Feed: 55 out of 100
• The Sixth Axis: 3 out of 10
• Gamespot: 4.1 out of 10
• Fortress of Solitude: 55 out of 100
• XBox Tavern: 5.6 out of 10
• Softpedia: 3 out of 5
• Xbox Achievements: 65 out of 100

It seems like it is considered a not very good game. In the age of games that get 75 out of 100 being considered bad or weak...

 

I sympathize with the reaction and the frustration but you all know that this is futile. Millions of people don't mind paying for shitty games each day and publishers naturally look for ways to exploit them even more. They're like sheep or cattle or whatever.

Oh, by the way, like the other old guys who gave you Fallout, Fallout 2 and FNV, I'm an old guy and I like Burger King. You blame the old guys while I blame the Millenials for this shit show, as they are the ones who make these games nowadays, and they are also the ones who buy them.

I also would like to mention that games CAN be art, like a well written book or a well made movie. Except, you can't really half-ass art. You have to use everything you have in your disposal to make art and never reveal it until you're satisfied with it. That's the reason why most books, movies or video games are NOT art. They are commercial products for mass consumption.

 

Something I have found on YouTube:

No one has to believe me I am not naming names or anything but I recently had a off the record chat with an employee at obsidian at a concert literally last week. It seems that the development of New Vegas was seen as a challenge and many people on the development team took it as a friendly and personal challenge to make a good game, better even than Fallout 3. After all if they could follow up a critically acclaimed game successfully the game world would be their oyster. After the success Bethesda took it as a burn and had an attitude of how dare you make a better selling and better made game than us. You brought up the bonuses based on Metacritic scores that was supposed to be based on sales figures and when New Vegas outsold Fall out 3 Bethesda flipped. They promised that bonus not thinking it would sell better and when it did they claimed it only sold well because the hype was still there for Fallout 3 and came up with some random legal jargon to deny the bonuses. After some heated talks Obsidian left with being told that they will never work on a Bethesda game again and New Vegas will never be ported or remade. So much for a New Vegas remaster folks

 

Todd Howard is 47 years old, so not a millennial. And he is the director and executive producer of the games. He decides how the games are made and what goes in them.
Ashley Cheng has been the production director of Bethesda Game Studios since 1998, so he must be over 40 years old.

I don't know how old Emil is, but he was already employed by Looking Glass Studios, Inc. in 1998. So 20 years ago, he was probably on his 20's then, assuming he finished University. So he is around 40 years old, also not a millennial. And he writes the main stories and many quests for the games.

Pete Hines is the vice president of Bethesda Softworks, which publishes the games and has to give his OK for that to happen, is 48 years old. Vlatko Andonov has been Bethesda Softworks president since 1995 (23 years) since I doubt he became President before he was at least 20, he is over 40 years old too (he looks like he might be closer to 50-60), not a millennial.

The ones programming the games might be young, but they do not decide what the game will contain, look, the important writing, story, how it plays, what changes to make from the previous games, etc. All of those are decided by people over 40 years old .

Also the millennials seem to not enjoying this new Fallout, because they seem to be buying way less than they did Fallout 4.

And the average gamer age is still around 35 - 40. So not that young.

 

don't know ..... it's natural that the "sequel" of a hit game will sell even more. Was not Bethesda expecting it?

But yeah, clearly the success of NV left the guys angry. how can a game made in a hurry have been better than the great project in which they worked for 4 years?

and it's kind cute how they wanted to imitate NV with the multiple factions in Fallout 4, but failed miserably

 

I think the discussion about video games as art is a tricky one. The modern state of affairs and how business as usual has moved the world, coupled with the fact that people now are struggling more than, say, 20 years ago, makes games seem like they should absolutely be concerned with money first and foremost. But games as money making machines, if you think about it, is actually a contradiction where epistemology is concerned. I suspect that is why people have become tired with the model.

I DO enjoy complex and varied mechanics in the games I play. I enjoy them even more if it's coupled with a fresh story, and presented with interesting individuals. Even more if the environments are innovative and go for a new take on things.

Fallout 76's formula has worn soles on it's shoes and a drape jacket to show off. Whether or not I want it to fail is irrelevant. It will never succeed the same way if it were a GOOD game at launch.

 

None of those people have actually worked on Fallout 76. People say that Howard wasn't even there most of the time. I doubt 76 was his idea either.

You are missing the point, it's the Millenials and younger generations who shape today's gaming industry, games are made by them and more importantly FOR them. They have no issues paying for shit games, be it a mobile game or a console game. Yes, console games, the beginning of the disease called consolitis, it was all because of the Millenials. Not to mention they are the ones who praise FO3 and 4 and keep shitting on the original games, which wasn't made by the Millenials.

Who do you think buys all those shitty mobile games today, not to mention spend money on shitty microtransactions? I'm 48 and I've never even wanted a smartphone, let alone paying to play games on it.

I highly doubt that people of that age group or older would be interested in playing an online game with a 12 year old though. In other words, I doubt FO76 was made for them. And I bet they are the ones who complain the most about 76.