Fuck It! (Fallout 4 review, rant, plead...)

I'm glad this post exists because I mostly feel the same as OP.
I play FO4 when I'm in the mood for an open-world shooter game because that is all it is (I don't bother with settlements at all cause it bores me).

I was hoping FO4 would be another first-person(third person optional perspective) action role-playing game like FO3 and FNV and was very disappointed upon playing it to find out that even with Charisma 10 you'd never be able to talk enemies into a non-violent resolution.
Other things like the broken Animal Friend perk (after being "tamed" animals turn hostile again after a while) underscored my disappointment.
Now I refuse to buy any Bethesda game until it passes the "GOTY edition test" which means that it's been out long enough for modders to fix the shortcomings of Bethesda's game.
Bethesda now just caters to the lowest common denominator (console gamers/fps game fans) so I decline to give them any more of my $$ until their "product" is on sale for 75% off.

But that's just the opinion of someone who really likes post-apocalyptic, first-person perspective role-playing games.
 
Protip: Elitism is bad. People who like different games or platforms are not inferior to you.
Protip: Everyone has different opinions.

Some people would argue that consoles are an obsolete platform, and therefore think its justified to show elitism over console players.
 
I think the easiest way to judge a game's 'goodness' is its mechanics.

You can have a shitty story, and little characters, but if the game actually plays well, and ticks all the boxes needed for good gameplay, it's a good game, simple as that.

Doom 1, for example, has a laughable character, and basically no story other than "Demons come, fuck shit up, now you need to kill demons, good luck".

New Vegas, for all its clunkiness, was still a good game, despite not ticking all the 'gameplay' boxes. The story, characters, and design made up for these shortcomings.

Fallout 1-2 had excellent gameplay, but had its issues like most things, but this was also made up for the story and characters.

3 and 4 are the games where they neither have the story, characters, or gameplay, they're just shitty games.

NV improved on 3 in many ways, only for 4 to not only dumb down NV, but become DUMBER THAN THREE.

You need to have a whole new level of low inteligence to do something like that.
 
You need to have a whole new level of low inteligence to do something like that.
No, the intelligence is fine, it's because the company doesn't take it's audience seriously. And the lack of standards and quality control in gaming industry in general adds to it. Fallout 4 wouldn't be that dumb and poorly done if Bethesda actually cared for their players and appreciated time they're spending in their hiking simulators. But no, gamer's free time is considered a waste that must be spent somehow, doesn't matter how. Because of that here's you long hikes, repeatable quests and other cheap trick inflating the playing time.
 
No, the intelligence is fine, it's because the company doesn't take it's audience seriously. And the lack of standards and quality control in gaming industry in general adds to it. Fallout 4 wouldn't be that dumb and poorly done if Bethesda actually cared for their players and appreciated time they're spending in their hiking simulators.

Well...The Audience has an average inteligence SPECIAL of 1-3...That doesn't help.

No amount of mentats can save Todd and stuff though.

*Tell me lies intensifies*
 
Well, treat human like animal and he'll be the one for you.

Fucking straight right.

It's amazing how...Brainwashed I can see people.

I hear people happily say "Man, I can't wait for Call of Duty 14, supermodern futureblackops", while purchasing Call of Duty 13 Warcrimesuper edition.
 
I hear people happily say "Man, I can't wait for Call of Duty 14, supermodern futureblackops", while purchasing Call of Duty 13 Warcrimesuper edition.
Well, at least MP is decent enough arcade fun, and it's not like CoD creators betrayed it's core principles, unlike Bethesda.
 
Well, at least MP is decent enough arcade fun, and it's not like CoD creators betrayed it's core principles, unlike Bethesda.

Its moreso that people are so ingrained into buying whatever is 'new', regardless of what it is.

As far as I am concerned, World At War is still the best Call of Duty game there is, its just that new ones are shiner graphics and wankier guns.
 
Because of that here's you long hikes, repeatable quests and other cheap trick inflating the playing time.

Fallout 4 in a nutshell:

93101280.jpg



Its moreso that people are so ingrained into buying whatever is 'new', regardless of what it is.

As far as I am concerned, World At War is still the best Call of Duty game there is, its just that new ones are shiner graphics and wankier guns.

It's probably the darkest of the Call of Duty games. I enjoyed it a lot because of that, but Finest Hour is still my favourite.
 
I was actually thinking of trying this game a while ago, but then i tried New Vegas and 4 does everything i love about New Vegas really poorly.

Then again, New Vegas also made 3 much worse, to the point i consider it a really crappy game.
 
Fallout 4 succeded in one thing. It managed to combine all the gimmicks that appeared in the games that were successfull when they were making their own. Then, they managed to advertize those gimmicks in a way to cash in from the playerbase of all those games, who bought their product at a big price on day one. They were successfull as product seller. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about their skills at making games. But, at the end of the day, it doesn't matter, as money keep flowing. The team can pay their rents and the admin board can add a new pool in their fourth mansion.
 
Back
Top