First round of Fallout 4 Reviews

[generalissimofurioso]

A game where you can die is now hardcore?

Wow.

Does this have more to do with Bethesda cutting down on level scaling or more the fact that people don't seem to grasp how open-world RPG's operate through beef gates?

 

[phipboy]

Interesting http://www.polygon.com/2015/11/9/9695634/fallout-4-bethesda-hardcore-death

Yeah, you know, just like how GTA5 was a big deal when it came out. Except this dude is so deep in his own made up world where he thinks Fallout 4 is more popular than GTA5 was at the time, I guess?

I've never heard someone refer videogames to pop songs on the radio like that. Not even GTA5. Fucking stupid.

E: The hype around Fallout 4 will die in a few weeks. Mark my words.

 

[ExplodesLikeABloodSausage]

There will be bugs, no doubt about it. Those will get fixed, as they always are in time. Reviews should concentrate on gameplay/story/design etc. No such thing as a bug-free release anymore. Those days are long gone (if they ever existed)

 

[Shardik]

A French gaming site called GameKult which has a reputation of being "tough but fair" and is the bane of many fanboys gave Fallout 4 a 6/10 stating while it is fun it is basically Skyrim with guns and has awful writing and poor quest design. God Bless the French. http://www.gamekult.com/jeux/test-fallout-4-SU3050477633t.html#ps4

Oh my, looks like another site gets to join IBT as an "Indian trash site whoring for that sweet, sweet clickbait moolah". Maybe I'll start a list of these sites later, when I can post on something other than my phone.

 

[Battlecross]

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.

40 hours if you rush it, sure.

 

[Jabberwok]

"Without spoiling anything further, the main narrative is generally weaker than most of the side storylines, which isn't anything particularly new with Fallout."

Hmm, I think he meant to say Bethesda there instead of Fallout, since this is exactly what everyone says about ES games.

 

[Walpknut]

Most quests are generic kill quests so you really are not missing much if you don't do those.

 

[Battlecross]

Most quests are generic kill quests so you really are not missing much if you don't do those.

"Most"? And if you explore much at all it will last significantly longer.

 

[Hassknecht]

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.

40 hours if you rush it, sure.

I'd be surprised that the main quest will take more than 20 hours to finish.

 

[Battlecross]

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.

40 hours if you rush it, sure.

I'd be surprised that the main quest will take more than 20 hours to finish.

Which is to be expected, the entire experience if you play like I do will likely take 60-100 hours as I explore and do side quests far more than the main one.

 

[PossibleCabbage]

A game where you can die is now hardcore?

Wow.

Does this have more to do with Bethesda cutting down on level scaling or more the fact that people don't seem to grasp how open-world RPG's operate through beef gates?

Wasn't "If you don't pay attention to what you're doing, you're going to die early on a lot" one of the primary complaints leveled by the Bethdrones against New Vegas? And likewise that one of the saving graces of Fallout 3 was that you can just wander off in whatever direction and you'll be fine.

 

[Szilard]

The ArsTechnica review is the best I've seen so far.

Can't post a link?

Anyway: miserable pacing, boring NPCs, redundant, crafting/settlement stuff tedious & unrewarding, But some major story & atmosphere payoffs amongst all the glitchy stodge.

 

[kostjamoscow]

Most quests are generic kill quests so you really are not missing much if you don't do those.

Uhm.. no

 

[kostjamoscow]

The ArsTechnica review is the best I've seen so far.

Can't post a link?

Anyway: miserable pacing, boring NPCs, redundant, crafting/settlement stuff tedious & unrewarding, But some major story & atmosphere payoffs amongst all the glitchy stodge.

It's the best because it resembles your opinion..wow

 

[Hassknecht]

The ArsTechnica review is the best I've seen so far.

Can't post a link?

Anyway: miserable pacing, boring NPCs, redundant, crafting/settlement stuff tedious & unrewarding, But some major story & atmosphere payoffs amongst all the glitchy stodge.

Here it is.

 

[Szilard]

It's the best because it resembles your opinion..wow

No, because it was well-written and seemed thoughtful.

I don;t have a personal opinion about this game, not having played it yet.

 

[sampson70]

Another "fair" review http://mashable.com/2015/11/09/fallout-4-review/#rZpgWYLSXSqx

 

[Gaddes]

Sure it is Ben lol.

 

[FearMonkey]

IGN, as part of spamming hundreds of articles about Fallout, posted this little gem of a video.



Get Power Armor within 5 minutes of leaving the Vault.

Good on ya, IGN.

 

[phipboy]

The ArsTechnica review is the best I've seen so far.

Can't post a link?

Anyway: miserable pacing, boring NPCs, redundant, crafting/settlement stuff tedious & unrewarding, But some major story & atmosphere payoffs amongst all the glitchy stodge.

It's the best because it resembles your opinion..wow

How many times have we seen you say that? Yeah no shit he thinks it's the best if it resembles his opinion (because we tend to be right in the end). And you think it's the worst because it doesn't resemble your opinion, right? Not because it's well-written (or badly written) or anything. Nope.