Dr Fallout
Centurion
Ughh... sure...
I think Nuka World and Far Harbor were quite good.
- Thread starter GingerSwan
- Start date
CT Phipps
Carbon Dated and Proud
Here's a nice article on NUKA WORLD.
http://www.therichest.com/expensive...lout-4s-nuka-world-dlc-and-6-things-we-hated/
http://www.therichest.com/expensive...lout-4s-nuka-world-dlc-and-6-things-we-hated/
Jogre
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
I've actually been thinking a bit about Far Harbour recently, and come to a new opinion.
I'd say it's a bigger, slightly better version of San Fransisco in Fallout 2.
I mean, 2/3 of the groups you interact with feel like they are easter eggs that extended too far in both(Shi and Hubologists definitely, Children of Atom feel like they should have been one off silly fun, And I personally believe Synths, unless they are handled right(Which they weren't, and would be very difficult for even competent studios to handle right), shouldn't have extended beyond a bladerunner reference)
A lot of the different approaches feel slightly forced(The Veritibird Plans, and siding with the Hubologists feel like shoehorned options, and the skill checks in Far Harbour feel shoehorned, rather than having actual thought put in to how different characters could approach situations)
Far Harbour has a lot more choices than San Fransisco, but a lot of them come down to who you do or don't nuke, or just faction choices added to tie it to the main game.
I'd say Far Harbour is slightly better than San Fransisco, because some isolated parts of it are actually very good quality. The decision on whether to replace Tektus with a Synth or whether to let the people of Far Harbour execute DiMA are actually rather well thought out decisions, and almost on the level of the end decisions of Honest Hearts(Honest Hearts was of course, ahead since the decisions not only were ambiguous, but also tied in to Joshua Graham and his anger/retributionism, so relating the decisions to a character you've become emotionally invested in and understand is definitely a plus).
So in short, I'd say the quality of Far Harbour is comparable to San Fransisco through most parts, with a slight leak of Honest Hearts level quality.
Modern Bethesda's magnum opus feels mostly like a shoehorned end game area but has hints of high level quality. I overall liked San Fransisco, despite it feeling rushed, so I guess I have to admit Far Harbour was good, but if this is really the very best Bethesda in it's current state can do, well that speaks volumes.
I'd say it's a bigger, slightly better version of San Fransisco in Fallout 2.
I mean, 2/3 of the groups you interact with feel like they are easter eggs that extended too far in both(Shi and Hubologists definitely, Children of Atom feel like they should have been one off silly fun, And I personally believe Synths, unless they are handled right(Which they weren't, and would be very difficult for even competent studios to handle right), shouldn't have extended beyond a bladerunner reference)
A lot of the different approaches feel slightly forced(The Veritibird Plans, and siding with the Hubologists feel like shoehorned options, and the skill checks in Far Harbour feel shoehorned, rather than having actual thought put in to how different characters could approach situations)
Far Harbour has a lot more choices than San Fransisco, but a lot of them come down to who you do or don't nuke, or just faction choices added to tie it to the main game.
I'd say Far Harbour is slightly better than San Fransisco, because some isolated parts of it are actually very good quality. The decision on whether to replace Tektus with a Synth or whether to let the people of Far Harbour execute DiMA are actually rather well thought out decisions, and almost on the level of the end decisions of Honest Hearts(Honest Hearts was of course, ahead since the decisions not only were ambiguous, but also tied in to Joshua Graham and his anger/retributionism, so relating the decisions to a character you've become emotionally invested in and understand is definitely a plus).
So in short, I'd say the quality of Far Harbour is comparable to San Fransisco through most parts, with a slight leak of Honest Hearts level quality.
Modern Bethesda's magnum opus feels mostly like a shoehorned end game area but has hints of high level quality. I overall liked San Fransisco, despite it feeling rushed, so I guess I have to admit Far Harbour was good, but if this is really the very best Bethesda in it's current state can do, well that speaks volumes.