RangerBoo
Resident Schizo Poster
Fallout 76 is so bad on a legendary level that the Internet Historian made a video about it. 
Last edited:
I have zero respect for Bethesda now
- Thread starter G-Hombre
- Start date
Wow, I missed some acts of this shitshow. Glorious.
Atomic_Spawned
Radiation-soaked, needs a towel.
So, I agree that Fallout 76 is a massively low point, but I have hope for the future. The release was just a beta, but everyone can play, and they seemed to keep messing up in critical areas. However, I think they can get their act together. Some of the new 76 content at the very least sounds exciting. And who can knock their cover of 'Take Me Home, Country Roads'?
Bethesda always sounds exciting. Thing is, it rarely ends up to be that.
Joking aside, 76 was a massive fuck up even on a technical scale. Game needs to be fixed, then rebalanced, then new content can come out. Is the game even stable now? Legitimate question. I haven't really kept up with it so they might have finally had the thing be playable but I also heard people still get into the dev room. Seems like a lost cause to invest their money into really.
Atomic_Spawned
Radiation-soaked, needs a towel.
Squadcar said:
Yeah, I never said it didn't. I was just saying it looked neat. I believe they do have some catch-up to do, they definitely performed poorly, I merely think that it's salvageable, or at the very least, they can redeem themselves.
Norzan
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
They can't and they won't. They fucked up too much with this game to be salvageable in any capacity. Then again, they have been fucking up royally since Fallout 3, not surprised 76 turned out the way it is.
Atomic_Spawned
Radiation-soaked, needs a towel.
@Norzan So, do you just hate all the Bethesda games? I think they can fix the PVP, revamp some of their other systems, like player vending, and definitely stabilize it. It has great potential, they just shouldn't have rushed it out the door.
Norzan
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Oh boy, we have another one of these. Nah, i just hate bad games.
Here's the thing: hardly anyone is playing this game. The population is extremely low after all the controversies and the fuck ups from Bethesda. They gain very little in trying to improve this game.
I mean, the game sold so poorly that the shops start to attach it as a freebie for new controllers. That's a major sign of failure.
Here's the thing: hardly anyone is playing this game. The population is extremely low after all the controversies and the fuck ups from Bethesda. They gain very little in trying to improve this game.
I mean, the game sold so poorly that the shops start to attach it as a freebie for new controllers. That's a major sign of failure.
Atomic_Spawned
Radiation-soaked, needs a towel.
Is it? It's not a sign of failure, necessarily. Often times, if the people (Like yourself) who dislike something because it doesn't fit their rigid standards say something is bad, it steers those who would listen away from the material. I'm not saying it's a good game... yet. It can be, but they need to start really focusing on it.
Norzan
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Having standards of quality is now "rigid". Sorry if i want good games, and not disasters like Fallout 76. You are basically telling me to lower my standards and i ain't doing that. You can like the Bethesda Fallouts all you want, but don't you dare say my standards are "rigid". I don't think you are gonna make friends here by telling people their standards are rigid or that the purpose of the forum is to complain at Bethesda.
And yes, it is a failure. Game sells extremely poorly, gets lambasted by critics and players, and it has a low population of players. They can try to salvage the game all they want, the mark the game has made on the fanbase has been imprinted forerver. This game's reputation is forever stained.
Atomic_Spawned
Radiation-soaked, needs a towel.
So, I don't think you should drop your standards, and I definitely didn't say the purpose of this forum was to complain at Bethesda. My question was whether or not the purpose was to complain. It wasn't a statement, but rather an inquiry. I get that critics hated it, sure. It had its faults, and in no short supply. My original point (which I realize got lost in the heat of argument) wasn't that it's a good game. It was that it can be improved. I'm not saying a standard of quality is bad, but if you walk into every game with your palm outstretched and walk away with less than you wanted, of course you're going to be disappointed.
On the subjects of critics hating it, I raise this point. Take, for example, the original Predator. This movie is undeniably huge, yet it received a 45 on Metacritic. It's a matter of perspective. If you hate the game, I get it. But don't tell people they're wrong because you don't like it.
On the subjects of critics hating it, I raise this point. Take, for example, the original Predator. This movie is undeniably huge, yet it received a 45 on Metacritic. It's a matter of perspective. If you hate the game, I get it. But don't tell people they're wrong because you don't like it.
Norzan
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
No, in this case they are wrong. Fallout 76 is objectively bad from every design standpoint and there's no argument to counter that.
I'll say this: liking something does not make that thing good. There are people that like The Room, Superman 64, Sonic 06 and the other objectively bad things. And people are free to like things. But when criticism of something is being argued, not everything is subjective. Design philosophies exist and there are design choices that just work better than others. This is a fact. When one thing does what the other is trying to do but better, then it's an objective fact that it's better.
People need to start to realize that everything is not subjective. Feelings are subjective, arguments with logic are not subjective. The sooner we realize this, the sooner we can have a baseline.
I'll say this: liking something does not make that thing good. There are people that like The Room, Superman 64, Sonic 06 and the other objectively bad things. And people are free to like things. But when criticism of something is being argued, not everything is subjective. Design philosophies exist and there are design choices that just work better than others. This is a fact. When one thing does what the other is trying to do but better, then it's an objective fact that it's better.
People need to start to realize that everything is not subjective. Feelings are subjective, arguments with logic are not subjective. The sooner we realize this, the sooner we can have a baseline.
Atomic_Spawned
Radiation-soaked, needs a towel.
There is no logic to saying it's objectively bad from every standpoint though. If it were objectively bad, everybody would agree that it's bad. There are things that can't be objective, like art. Modern art is a heap of things, and to one person, it's thought-provoking and beautiful. Another person may see a poorly executed idea. It's in the eye of the beholder [Though not Xanthar]. Don't forget, video games are pieces of art. Fallout 76 had good ideas. I like the concept of the PVP system, it just needs tweaking. I enjoyed the map size, it just needs to be patched. And I offer a counter to one of your previous points: Hating something doesn't make it bad.
Norzan
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
No, art can be objectively bad as well.
A person got paid to do this and ruined the restoration. This is objectively bad. You know what would happen if everything was truly "subjective"? Nothing would improve. Devs would do whatever they want and use terrible design choices for their game but you couldn't criticize them, because everything is "subjective".
Without objectivity, things don't improve. We don't have a baseline on how things are supposed to be designed and they could be improved further. If we justify terrible design choices with "subjective", then these choices will never go away.
If you can't understand that, that's your problem. But 76, and 3 and 4 for that matter, are truly bad games. You can like these all you want, but don't try to claim they are good without any solid reasoning besides "the story was beautifully told in Fallout 3" (which by the way, was a plot hole ridden mess filled with one dimensional characters, and your character is an errand boy with no agency), then you can't argue that the game is good.
This "everything is subjective" nonsense needs to die, or games don't get better.
A person got paid to do this and ruined the restoration. This is objectively bad. You know what would happen if everything was truly "subjective"? Nothing would improve. Devs would do whatever they want and use terrible design choices for their game but you couldn't criticize them, because everything is "subjective".
Without objectivity, things don't improve. We don't have a baseline on how things are supposed to be designed and they could be improved further. If we justify terrible design choices with "subjective", then these choices will never go away.
If you can't understand that, that's your problem. But 76, and 3 and 4 for that matter, are truly bad games. You can like these all you want, but don't try to claim they are good without any solid reasoning besides "the story was beautifully told in Fallout 3" (which by the way, was a plot hole ridden mess filled with one dimensional characters, and your character is an errand boy with no agency), then you can't argue that the game is good.
This "everything is subjective" nonsense needs to die, or games don't get better.
Big No
Watch as I open and close this door
I'll have you know that I've nearly 100% Sonic 06 and it's objectively a good challenge.
Norzan
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Game is still objectively bad.I'll have you know that I've nearly 100% Sonic 06 and it's objectively a good challenge.
Atomic_Spawned
Radiation-soaked, needs a towel.
Well, there's your problem! Sure, the man was paid to restore the painting, but he did bad because he didn't restore it. Those are the apples. With a video game, do you want them to just keep restoring it? No. It would get boring. Those are the oranges. You can't compare the two. And It's not that I think we shouldn't criticize the games. I've thrown out my qualms about the series, but you seem to be looking over them every time I say that it was good. I didn't like all of it, but I liked a lot of it.
One of the main reasons I liked it so much was because of the open-endedness of it. In Fallout and Fallout 2, there wasn't a sense of freedom and maneuverability like in 3 or 4. It was more streamlined, restricted. to be able to actually feel immersed in the game was what really did it for me. It's not like I hate the older ones. I just like Fallout 3 and 4 as well. Here's something for you to chew on: Objectively, Interplay's graphics were bad. Fallout 1 and 2, while having nice mechanics and cool elements, not to mention a dynamite set of stories between them, was disgusting in terms of visual design. Even for the time, the character models and animation were abominable.
One of the main reasons I liked it so much was because of the open-endedness of it. In Fallout and Fallout 2, there wasn't a sense of freedom and maneuverability like in 3 or 4. It was more streamlined, restricted. to be able to actually feel immersed in the game was what really did it for me. It's not like I hate the older ones. I just like Fallout 3 and 4 as well. Here's something for you to chew on: Objectively, Interplay's graphics were bad. Fallout 1 and 2, while having nice mechanics and cool elements, not to mention a dynamite set of stories between them, was disgusting in terms of visual design. Even for the time, the character models and animation were abominable.
Gizmojunk
Antediluvian as Feck
Yes, I'd say so. They are not going to get a return on their development and hosting costs, and they have heinously marred their professional reputation in the aftermath.
I have never seen this outside of the theoretical. Most people with a poor opinion of Bethesda's treatment of the Fallout IP —in the series context, have an understanding of why certain aspects are terribly wrong/ insulting/ detrimental/ and disrespectful of it, and those who question them typically don't have a clue about the issues, and simply spill on them their own discontent, at the person disliking something they themselves either enjoy or see promise in. They apparently take personal offense at this; albeit some on an unconscious level.
And for those who have only experienced the recent [3&4] games, it's kind of like a kid asking a mechanic, "Why do you assume that sugar is bad [for a car]? Sugar tastes great and makes everything run better—lust look at me!"
Atomic_Spawned
Radiation-soaked, needs a towel.
Gizmojunk said:
I'm not sure that's how it's going. I've played Fallout and Fallout 2 to completion. I enjoyed lots about them, but I also had my gripes. Same with 3 and 4. You act like people who like 3 and 4 are incompetent, and know nothing of what they talk about, and that's just blatantly ignorant. I know the series well, and I know there's some issues with the games. I never said there weren't. However, I get that you disliking the games doesn't mean you dislike me. You may dislike my opinion, but I see no evidence of disliking me as a person. That being said, Fallout 76 is set to be improved. I don't think it's already good, not at all. I think it's better, and I think it can be saved, but don't mistake that for me loving the game.