Luck Fallout 4 SPECIAL video

[kostjamoscow]

Apple is a company built around selling overpriced gadgets that tend to be inferior to it's competitors alternatives. I guess fooling idiots into buying your inferior project and brainwashing them into being your unpai PR shills is brilliant.

All the big phone companies sell overpriced gadgets. I don't want to start a discussion about Apple here.

But whatever you think about Apples products you can understand why they market(so no marketing at all) their products like they do, not because they have something to hide but because they create the biggest hype that way. The same thing for Fallout 4 and yes it's brilliant.

 

[FedoricRhetoric]

I wouldn't go as far as to say Bethesda fans have worsened the games industry by a large amount but it does boggle my mind how there's so many people out there who mindlessly praise everything BGS does and post about how ridiculously hyped they are. Some people say they are more hyped for Fallout 4 than The Force Awakens. I mean, not saying that either of them will be amazing but how the fuck can you even compare the two?

I am a Star Wars fan, got my tickets for the premiere.

But I am way more hyped for Fallout 4 than for the new Star Wars. I can't even compare the hype I have for the new Fallout with the hype for Star Wars. This is my most hyped/anticipated game (hell most anticipated release of any sort) in my life.

Call me what you want; mindless, idiot, missing taste, Bethesda fanboy, whatever.
I played Fallout 1,2,3 and NV and I liked all of them, just like millions upon millions of other people. You can circlejerk all you want but the millions of people hyped for Fallout 4 aren't all stupid or Bethesda slaves. They are people who genuinely like all the Fallouts.

Many people on this forum however have a very snobbish, condescensing, often hostile approach to anyone with a different taste and that is quite sad.

You sound like you came straight from /r/Fallout.

 

[Mr Fish]

You can circlejerk all you want but the millions of people hyped for Fallout 4 aren't all stupid or Bethesda slaves.

You're right, they're not all stupid or Bethesda slaves, some are. I think that most of them are just blind, have no damn standards or principles and just don't give a damn about Fallout. If they did, their reaction to it being gutted would not be "yay!".

Let's say that Fallout 1 and 2 are like uh... Godfather I and II? Right, then Fallout 3 is Home Alone 3 and Fallout 4 is Paul Blart Mall Cop.
And you expect us 'not' to bitch about it?

By 'not' bitching about it you're allowing it to become fucking Paul Blart Mall Cop. So go ahead and enjoy your Paul Blart Mall Cop, but that don't mean you have a good taste in movies.

 

[kostjamoscow]

But for me Fallout 1,2 are Godfather 2, 3 and NV are Godfather 1 and 4 is shaping up to be Godfather 2. Everything I see from Fallout 4 seems amazing and promising.

But that's an onpopular opinion here. However most fans of the series agree with me.

 

[Crni Vuk]

popular opinion =/= fan of the series.

 

[Mr Fish]

Doesn't matter what they are 'to you', objectively they (3 and 4) are Home Alone 3 and Paul Blart Mothafucking Mall Cop 420blazeityo.
Skills are gone, overworld map is gone, traits are gone, choosing our age is gone, the way SPECIAL worked is gone, the way Perks was envisioned is gone, the turn-based combat is gone and the character skill over player skill is gone.

Doesn't matter what you think it is, I can consider a steaming pile of putrid shit to be a delicacy but that don't make it one.

Fallout 4 is Paul Blart Mall Cop. The only way for it to not be thatis for Fallout 4 to suddenly magically turn back into what Fallout 1/2 were. So long as Bethesda deviates from Fallout, the original game, they will never produce one that is a Godfather.

Hell, it may very well be PBMC 1 and 2 combined.

[edit]

(Oh and I'm just using Godfather as an example of a critically acclaimed film series. I don't think Fallout is the gaming equivalent of Godfather. I'm just saying; It isn't Pall Blart Mall Cop.)

 

[CRBASF23]

So do you also like the new color coded dialog system? Where if you want to play as a neutral character all you have to do is smash the blue X button, and if you want to play as a jerk, the red B button?:

The telling (and quite sad) thing about this image is that it's clear from the get go that the game was developed purely around the Xbox controller. The buttons on PlayStation's DualShock don't match this color scheme.

The 'A' button on the DualShock is an 'X' and is blue.
The 'B' button on the DualShock is a Circle and is red.
The 'X' button on the DualShock is a Square and is pink.
The 'Y' button on the DualShock is a Triangle and is green.

Those colors don't line up with Good, Bad, Neutral or Question like they do in that image. So people who are playing on PS4 will still probably see the pattern of the tone of choices and how they're arranged, but the colors only line up on Xbox. Clearly the team at BGS are either really big fans of Xbox or they have some kind of deal with Microsoft, same as they used to have with the DLC coming to Xbox consoles before everything else. (which isn't happening for this game cuz PS4 is outselling Xbone by a huge amount and Bethesda aren't *that* stupid to leave all that money lying on the table.)

Personally my money is on Todd Howard being a huge Xbot, but that's just me I guess.

Skyrim's DLCs came out one month earlier on xbox 360 before PC and PS3. And in this years e3, Todd only showed Fallout 4 gameplay on the Microsoft conference after their own, and announced PC mod sharing with Xbox One, and that PS4 mod sharing would come later. So either Bethesda got money from Microsoft, or they're just Xbots.

 

[kostjamoscow]

Doesn't matter what they are 'to you', objectively they (3 and 4) are Home Alone 3 and Paul Blart Mall Cop

Uhm, objectively? Objectively Fallout 3 has a 93 score on metacritic and was a financial succes.

I don't think your opinion (and you are absolutely allowed to have one!) is objective.

Saying Fallout 3 is the Pall Blart Mall Cop of the Fallout series is subjective.

 

[Mr Fish]

Uhm, objectively? Objectively Fallout 3 has a 93 score on metacritic and was a financial succes.

And what does that have to do with what Fallout 3 and 4 actually are? See, just because it gets a good metacritic score and is a financial success does not mean that Fallout 3 had a good turn-based combat. Wanna know why? Because there was no turn-based combat. How can there be good turn-based combat if there is none? Doesn't matter how acclaimed it is, doesn't matter how successful it is. What matters is what it is. And what it is is Paul Blart Mall Cop, not Godfather. See when I used the film analogy between the two I was not talking about their critical acclaim and their financial success. I was talking about the contents of the films. What Godfather is and what Paul Blart Mall Cop is are two completely different things. The only thing they really have in common is that they are both films. Other than that, they are completely different from one another. Fallout 4 ain't Fallout so to all those people out there that are "hyped" about it aren't hyped for a Fallout game, they're hyped for the latest shiny spoon by Bethesda.

So objectively? Objectively, Fallout 3 and 4 have bad turn-based combat. Why it's so bad that it isn't even there!
I could go on about pretty much everything in Fallout 3 and point out why it ain't good for a Fallout game. Not gonna, too lazy.
You don't get to use "subjectively" as a fucking retort in this. Does Fallout 3 have a turn-based combat system that is as good or better than the one in Fallout 2, yes or no? The answer to that question is no. Objectively, it is no. Your subjective view can fuck off for all I care. Objectively there is no turn-based combat. So objectively Fallout 3 is already worse off than Fallout 2 is to Fallout 1 as a sequel.
Same thing with traits and overworld map. Same thing could be argued for SPECIAL considering it has been gutted in Fallout 3 and mutilated and skinned in Fallout 4. Same thing could be said for skills now with Fallout 4.

 

[kostjamoscow]

Mr Fish What does your opinion have to do with what Fallout 3 and 4 actually are?

Just because they aren't Fallout to you it isn't some universal truth.

I think that metacritic+financial succes+all the positive internet reactions are more objective than your opinion.

 

[Walpknut]

Who even takes metacritic scores as indicative of quality? That's about as mindless as it gets.

 

[kostjamoscow]

Who even takes metacritic scores as indicative of quality? That's about as mindless as it gets.

I don't. But they are more objective than the opinion of a couple of guys.

 

[FedoricRhetoric]

I like how whenever Bethesdrones get cornered in arguments, the best they can resort to is "It's just your opinion! A lot of people (who never played a good RPG) bought into Skyrim's marketing campaign so it can't possibly be bad".

Guess what, your opinions are wrong. Skyrim follows the TES spirit of exploring and interacting with the world but it does an objectively horrible job at being an RPG simply because the mechanics are too slim and the lore is mostly irrelevant/underdeveloped. Fallout 3 ignores much canon from Fallout Classics while simultaneously ripping off its lore in a completely uninspired way while also delivering with writing you would see from a 9th grade school project. They don't deliver on the areas they're supposed to, get over it.

 

[kostjamoscow]

I like how whenever Bethesdrones get cornered in arguments, the best they can resort to is "It's just your opinion! A lot of people (who nver played a good RPG) bought into Skyrim's marketing campaign so it can't possibly be bad".

Guess what, your opinions are wrong.

So I am a Bethesdrone? Yet I haven't said that your opinions are wrong or invalid.. I merely said that they are just... well opinions and no universal truths.

 

[Walpknut]

Who even takes metacritic scores as indicative of quality? That's about as mindless as it gets.

I don't. But they are more objective than the opinion of a couple of guys.

Do you evne know what the Metacritic score is? Is an aggregate of reviews, so it literaly is THE OPINION of a bunch of people.....

The Algorythm is also skewed to give the big sites more value on the final score, there is nothing objective about Metacritic.....

 

[FedoricRhetoric]

There does come a point where taste becomes objective.

Do you support the news?

 

[Mr Fish]

Mr Fish What does your opinion have to do with what Fallout 3 and 4 actually are?

Everything.

Just because they aren't Fallout to you it isn't some universal truth.

It's not that they aren't Fallout 'to me'. It's that they simply are not Fallout. Anyone who says otherwise is wrong. Plain as that.

I think that metacritic+financial succes+all the positive internet reactions are more objective than your opinion.

The score of metacritic is objective, that's true. See the number that shows up is objective, you can't have a subjective view on it. Same as this; 3. See that number? It's a 3. You can't say it is a 4 because you feel like it is. Doesn't matter what you feel like it is, it is a 3. So is the score of metacritic objective? Sure. The finalized number is, the reviews that make it up are not. Currently Fallout 3 on PC has a score of 91 on metacritic. It doesn't matter if I "feel" it is different, objectively, if you go to this page: http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/fallout-3 You'll see that the score is 91.

So what?

I have a moll on my ass, doesn't mean it makes any of the Fallouts more of a Fallout game because of it.

And financial success? Yeah that's objective too. If you sink a 10.000 budget into a project and you make 100.000 then objectively it is a financial success.

So what?

Do you have some kind of a twisted world-view where the more cashmoney someone has the more right they are? Cause that's scary. Earning more money does not mean it is a good sequel.

And as to your last point, the keyword there is "positive". You consider "positive" reactions to be objective, but not negative or neutral?

 

[kostjamoscow]

nut;4082368]

Do you evne know what the Metacritic score is? Is an aggregate of reviews, so it literaly is THE OPINION of a bunch of people.....

The Algorythm is also skewed to give the big sites more value on the final score, there is nothing objective about Metacritic.....

I just think that 50 totally different reviewers are a little more objective than some people on 1 forum that are all here because of the same opinion they have.

Furthermore Metacritic was just one of the many examples of universal praise for Fallout 3 and NV.

 

[kostjamoscow]

It's not that they aren't Fallout 'to me'. It's that they simply are not Fallout. Anyone who says otherwise is wrong. Plain as that.

Just Wow

Want to be the next leader of North Korea mate?

I am going to do something more useful, this is just funny.

 

[Walpknut]

So 50 Subjective reviews become objective by magic of there being 50?

Do you know how many users we have here? We have a lot more than 50 people, and the majority of us here don't consider Fallout 3 to be good, so by your logic that has become an objective assesment too, so you can't complain about those either, because we are a lot of people and that turns our opinion into fact.