First round of Fallout 4 Reviews

It's the PC one I realized that is 89, currently. After a week, I think the score across all platforms will settle to low 90s, which is expected. Metacritic or press reviews aren't to be highly trusted, of course.
 
RangerBoo said:
Well they didn't want New Vegas to compete with Skyrim. The last thing they wanted was for Obsidian to steal their thunder and have New Vegas out sell Skyrim. Damn shame as New Vegas blows Skyrim out of the water with its RPG mechanics and story.
Click to expand...

It is interesting noticing how different the campaign for New Vegas and Skyrim were. I can't even remember New Vegas's trailer, but everyone has seen, and remembers, Skyrim's trailer. Maybe there was a hint of deliberate sabotage on Bethesda's part there, but I dunno. It's a motive, but is there proof? That motive can be countered with, "wouldn't Bethesda want every game it publishes to do well, at least financially?"
 
Surprising it has better scores on Console even tho it's been confirmed it suffers from a lot of performance issues on Consoles.....
 
kostjamoscow said:
Marionettetc said:
Fallout 4 is a bowl of steamy diarrhea that's only meant to be enjoyed by those of very low intelligence, and teenagers who hunger for the nostalgia of the previous game, that of one from their childhood.
Click to expand...

Haha. You haven't even played it hater.
Click to expand...

Just because I expect a lot of people to say this kind of thing i.e. we can't judge the game before we play / buy it - that's patently not true. We make our judgement whether a game seems good or not as part of our decision whether to buy it, which is based on reviews, trailers, streams, lets plays etc. Its perfectly valid to have an opinion without playing the game
 
Framerate drops on consoles have been confirmed to even reach the single digits sometimes and Loading times are as long as 30 seconds even into already loaded areas...
 
Earth said:
RangerBoo said:
Well they didn't want New Vegas to compete with Skyrim. The last thing they wanted was for Obsidian to steal their thunder and have New Vegas out sell Skyrim. Damn shame as New Vegas blows Skyrim out of the water with its RPG mechanics and story.
Click to expand...

It is interesting noticing how different the campaign for New Vegas and Skyrim were. I can't even remember New Vegas's trailer, but everyone has seen, and remembers, Skyrim's trailer. Maybe there was a hint of deliberate sabotage on Bethesda's part there, but I dunno. It's a motive, but is there proof? That motive can be countered with, "wouldn't Bethesda want every game it publishes to do well, at least financially?"
Click to expand...

True but they own the Fallout IP now. They probably didn't want Obsidian to have credit or out due them in terms of quality with the Fallout IP. "How dare Obsidian make a better and more memorable Fallout game. This is our series now! Nobody out does us!." It kinda reminds me of a teenager who is a member of a football team but is jealous of another player who is better then them and is the star and during the big championship game when every player is needed they go and break the other player legs just to smite them and steal their glory. That is how Beth comes across in terms with Obsidian and New Vegas.
 
kostjamoscow said:
Realistic because you agree with him more?
Click to expand...

After perusing the article I would say objective.

Mike Suskie says:

In fact, this familiarity is a bit problematic since it makes Fallout 4 the safest, least surprising Bethesda game in ages. The comfort-food factor would be more than good enough if they'd finally gotten their technical act together, but as usual, Fallout 4 is overrun with bugs ranging from the hilarious to some which were damn near game-breaking.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I've come to expect from a company attempting to maximize short-term profits in the safest, most marketable fashion possible.
 
Marionettetc said:
http://www.gamecritics.com/mike-suskie/fallout-4-review

Much more realistic review. Guy gives it a 70 and states it took 40 hours to finish the game.
Click to expand...
A mostly fair review. The most telling bit is at the end, in the parental advisory bit: "For those unfamiliar with the Fallout games, the combat involves watching thousands of enemies get their heads and limbs blown off in slow motion." Bethesda's game design in a nutshell.
 
GlowHound said:
Just look at the developers list on either Fallout wiki. Bethesda had more testers and the Director of QA.
Click to expand...

Can the QA issue be directly linked to Bethesda though? The three QA testers for New Vegas are all people who worked for Obsidian. None of them have a history with Bethesda, at least, from what I can tell from the wiki. So was it that Bethesda didn't give them enough funding? I'm not well-educated on what Bethesda's role in QA should be so I'm unsure of how much of the blame they should get for this. Should they have lent them members from their team?
 
Oh, I have that guy on ignore like all the other Fallout 3 funbois.

Here's a little background info for "kostjamoscow" :He's a 21 year old Russian hipster who thinks that his evaluation of Fallout 3 when he was 15 was nuanced enough to continue to support that shitty game's next release.Thanks for proving my point, and you're still ignored.
 
Marionettetc said:
Oh, I have that guy on ignore like all the other Fallout 3 funbois.

Here's a little background info for "kostjamoscow" :He's a 21 year old Russian hipster who thinks that his evaluation of Fallout 3 when he was 15 was nuanced enough to continue to support that shitty game's next release.Thanks for proving my point, and you're still ignored.
Click to expand...

You must be a fun fella to be around.
 
Earth said:
GlowHound said:
Just look at the developers list on either Fallout wiki. Bethesda had more testers and the Director of QA.
Click to expand...

Can the QA issue be directly linked to Bethesda though? The three QA testers for New Vegas are all people who worked for Obsidian. None of them have a history with Bethesda, at least, from what I can tell from the wiki. So was it that Bethesda didn't give them enough funding? I'm not well-educated on what Bethesda's role in QA should be so I'm unsure of how much of the blame they should get for this. Should they have lent them members from their team?
Click to expand...

Read a bit farther down. There are separate sections for both companies who worked on it.
 
the most active people here are the same the biggest critics of the game

dont you feel that you are wasting your time reading every day another ton of new posts, answering on half of them saying "this is bad" but each time in other form, almost sleeping here and only refreshing the site with half closed eyes to look if there is something new wich i can hate (yes, because activity of some users really looks like that)?

i can't imagine myself spending so many free time on things that i do not like and which i know they never be good again...
 
GlowHound said:
Read a bit farther down. There are separate sections for both companies who worked on it.
Click to expand...

Ah, found them. Wow, that's a lot of testers...

...Did none of them notice the people sitting in front of, rather than on their chairs?
 
Well you are here posting about how you think all activity here is "just hate" so you are apparently doing the exact same.

Earth said:
GlowHound said:
Read a bit farther down. There are separate sections for both companies who worked on it.
Click to expand...

Ah, found them. Wow, that's a lot of testers...

...Did none of them notice the people sitting in front of, rather than on their chairs?
Click to expand...



They probably did, but it's on the Publisher to act on fixing those issues they found. And like we have seen with other games they usually hear but don't bother until the consumers complain about the released game having bugs.
 
banned85 said:
the most active people here are the same the biggest critics of the game

dont you feel that you are wasting your time reading every day another ton of new posts, answering on half of them saying "this is bad" but each time in other form, almost sleeping here and only refreshing the site with half closed eyes to look if there is something new wich i can hate (yes, because activity of some users really looks like that)?

i can't imagine myself spending so many free time on things that i do not like and which i know they never be good again...
Click to expand...

Says the guy taking his free time just to post on a forum to tell them he doesn't like them
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top