[POLL] Is Fallout 4 better than Fallout 3?

[Phoenixia]

I know right? It's almost as if more intelligent people enjoy more intelligent forms of entertainment and giving them something with even less intellectual and emotional maturity than a Michael Bay film doesn't amuse them...

Let me preface this by saying: I'm not taking any side in the argument, I enjoy FO4 for what it is, there's a whole hell of a lot that could be better, but it is entertaining.

That said, while I frequently lurk around here, I had to join just to comment on the quoted section, arguments like this are beyond frustrating.

You cannot, at all, full stop, gauge someone's intelligence from what they enjoy; acting intellectually superior because of what video game you enjoy is like feeling athletically superior because you enjoy watching sports more than someone else - in other words, pure bullshit. I mean, c'mon, even if this held water, you aren't comparing Finnegan's Wake to Goosebumps; let's be serious here, while early Fallouts may be profoundly more sophisticated, relatively speaking, than modern incarnations, they are not profoundly sophisticated artifacts of culture on their own.

Moreover, plenty of intelligent people enjoy all sorts of low brow things; why wouldn't they, those things are, after all, cheap, easy fun. On the other hand, the type of people that eschew mindless fun tend to be middling, more than anything -- just smart enough to feel smug, far too stupid to realize none of us is that smart after all.

Finally, I am not profoundly smart, not by any means, but I can tell you the ins and outs of large cardinal axioms and the varied beautiful perversity of abstract model theoretic logics, yet I have no problem spending an afternoon watching Family Guy, playing mindless shooters, and enjoying a cheap fantasy novel (the same for most of my colleagues, most of which are far more than my equals). My point isn't, "I'm smart, I like dumb things", my point is, "I'm not an idiot, I enjoy all sorts of things, so do many others -- thus, you just look like an arrogant douche".

-----

Since I should be slightly topical:

Fallout 4 is great mindless fun. I love that I can fire it up when I'm half asleep, drop in a bunch of hours, then shut it off when it all runs together. It's also pretty damn awesome that when the GECK comes out I can mod it to no end (does this excuse bad design choices, no; but it's still pretty cool). Could the original FO games have been extended into a way deeper RPG series than what we got: yes, yes they absolutely could have. But, as it is, situations didn't work out that way, and I still have something I can amuse myself with -- and outside of a few rare outliers, games are exactly what they are intended to be, entertainment, not art, not profound cultural communications, not etc. So, since I'm entertained, I have a hard time acting like Bethesda is the devil and this is his fiery assault on things I hold dear. Plenty of things change and plenty of things stop being what they are, I completely understand the position of many on this board (and have my own things I wish were what they once were), however, let's not pretend this is some travesty of art, or that not liking Bethesda games makes one a cultural and intellectual superior to those who do.

 

[Irwin John Finster]

words

Fallout was a deep role playing game that required thought. Call of Duty is a mindless shooter. You can enjoy both and be of the same intelligence. Bethesda decided to turn one into the other so that now all we have is Callout of FarCry games that all look the same. Now people who don't want low-brow stuff are forced to choose from low-brow option A or low-brow option B.

And the paid critics and fanboys are all calling this mindless shooter a "hardcore RPG experience" implying it is of an intellectual maturity that it simply is not.

 

[Phoenixia]

Fallout was a deep role playing game that required thought. Call of Duty is a mindless shooter. You can enjoy both and be of the same intelligence. Bethesda decided to turn one into the other so that now all we have is Callout of FarCry games that all look the same. Now people who don't want low-brow stuff are forced to choose from low-brow option A or low-brow option B.

And the paid critics and fanboys are all calling this mindless shooter a "hardcore RPG experience" implying it is of an intellectual maturity that it simply is not.

Or they can read a book, or anything else. Please don't pretend that culture is somehow damaged by a dearth of intelligent video games, or that games are a major outlet beyond entertainment. They never were, I'd be half tempted to say it's inherent in the medium; but, even if not, I have yet to see an RPG that's deep in the way a book is, or aesthetic in the way an art exhibit is, or cultural in the way an opera is -- and I have yet to see any of those things be interactively engaging in the way a game is, which is much more in line with the axiology of games as a medium.

As for your argument:

If Bethesda ruined Fallout, why don't you play the games of the people who would have done something properly, "high brow", with it? If these alternatives also aren't making "high brow" games, then why would they have with FO? If they are, then there's your option C -- and Bethesda would have just made a different low brow thing anyways, so they aren't really forcing an option that would not be.

If there was a better alternative to Bethesda, then I'm not seeing how you're deprived of options.

It all sounds a lot more like:

"The name "Fallout" used to mean something I really enjoyed, now it doesn't." Or, "I liked this better, I wish it were this way.", etc. You have every right to feel that way, I do about some things, but drop the idea of cultural and intellectual superiority -- you have not lost some profound high brow work, you aren't getting sequels to something you like in the way you wanted (it sucks, it's frustrating, but that's the extent of it).

 

[Irwin John Finster]

rambling

Oh ok.

 

[Bubba Zanetti]

words

Fallout was a deep role playing game that required thought. Call of Duty is a mindless shooter. You can enjoy both and be of the same intelligence. Bethesda decided to turn one into the other so that now all we have is Callout of FarCry games that all look the same. Now people who don't want low-brow stuff are forced to choose from low-brow option A or low-brow option B.

And the paid critics and fanboys are all calling this mindless shooter a "hardcore RPG experience" implying it is of an intellectual maturity that it simply is not.

Yeah, what sticks in my craw is that Beth's "dumbing down" of Fallout to appeal to a broader audience is being hailed by the ignorant as progressive, when it is clearly a step backwards from the depth and substance of its predecessors.

All in the name of maximizing profits by the way... which is fine, they're a business after all. They got to do what they got to do.

Doesn't mean I, or anybody else who has been with Fallout since the beginning, should be happy with the direction the series is headed though.

It's less about a matter of taste and more about being aware enough to cut thru the bullshit.

 

[Phoenixia]

rambling

Oh ok.

You went from touting your intellect and desire for things high-brow, to needing to dismiss a handful of uncomplicated sentences as "rambling" and "words". To be a dick, you seem to prove my point.

 

[Stanislao Moulinsky]

Or they can read a book, or anything else.

What kind of reply is that? I like videogames. Even if videogames aren't high art I'd like to play games that don't insult my intelligence. I like action movies. Even if action movies aren't high art I'd like action movies that don't insult my intelligence.

 

[Dr Fallout]

Just as bad as each other. These games are bullshit.

 

[Irwin John Finster]

It is amusing this thread isn't "is Fallout 4 better than Fallout: New Vegas" because everyone already knows the answer.

 

[Rouce]

I personally liked F3 much better. While F4 is a huge upgrade in terms of graphics, game- and gunplay, power armor, equip modifications and the Workshop - which I do like quite a lot. It's a massive let down in terms of RPG aspects and a meaningful as well as coherent world. F4 is designed like a theme park with linear attractions even more than Skyrim was. While I had a lot of fun while playing and finnishing this game, as soon as I've noticed how bland everything is that I do (fetch quests) and that I have no impact on the gaming world, the immersion was dead for my as well as this game regarding replay value.

I'm playing games to feel immersed or to RP, also I do want to have a challenge. This casual "pew pew pew" run n' gun simulators where I'm an almighty allrounder and center of the world are more boring to me than watching High School Musical. x)

But that's just my opinion.

 

[RangerBoo]

It is amusing this thread isn't "is Fallout 4 better than Fallout: New Vegas" because everyone already knows the answer.

Expect for Someguy37, frajaq and Trannigan but they keep things amusing.

 

[Crni Vuk]

I know right? It's almost as if more intelligent people enjoy more intelligent forms of entertainment and giving them something with even less intellectual and emotional maturity than a Michael Bay film doesn't amuse them...

Let me preface this by saying: I'm not taking any side in the argument, I enjoy FO4 for what it is, there's a whole hell of a lot that could be better, but it is entertaining.

When you talk with some of the die-hard fans about those kind of let us say shallow entertainment, it kinda explains where the frustration is coming from. See, usually most people will agree that a product like Transformers, Call of Duty or Twillight (the books) are shallow as fuck and just mindless entertainment that you consume and treat exactly the same way as how you do it with fast food - and just as with fast food, it will have an effect on you if you consume nothing else but fast food!.

There is no reason to make fast food in in to something it isnt. And exactly that is the issue. Transformers, even before the movies, was just mindless entertainment. Call of Duty was never more than a shooter and mindless entertainment - I am old enough to remember the FIRST Call of Duty and Medal of Honor games, and honestly, they have never been build around complex plots and depth, but short lived and fun gameplay! If the new CoD games contain the same, than I guess it is still doing it's job. So that is no problem. Albeit I would argue the old CoD games gave you a lot more entertainment for your money, but that's a different problem.

However, there are a lot of people out there that treat fast food products like Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3 and Fallout 4 like Filet Mignons. And all of that only because Bethesda sells it as that. You can't help your self but question the sanity and intelligence of people that feel a game like F3 actually deserves an AWARD(!) for it's writing, particularly when you have to consider that there are games out there with a lot better writing, but much worse marketing! - And now we are getting closer to the problem here ...

Presentation. Marketing and advertisment are extremly strong tools. Particularly if used correctly. It's not that people buy games like F3 or F4. It's a problem that a lot of people seriously believe it contains better writing, dialog and quests compared to Fallout 1 and 2. How do you take someone serious who's claiming that?

Enjoying a happy meal from MC Donalds is alright. Telling me that it has the same quality like a filet Mignon is not.

 

[KillerBee256]

Yes, if only because they took all the good ideas to improve the game play from popular fallout 3 and New Vegas mods.

 

[Rouce]

If I think about it, F4 basically improved everything that was shit in F3 (gunplay i.e.) but also removed everything that made F3 great (RPG aspects, coherent overworld with story-telling locations, meaningful choices, having an impact on the world like blowing up Megaton). So yeah, you could also call F4 = Fallout 4: Borderlands of the Commonwealth. x)

 

[Irwin John Finster]

If I think about it, F4 basically improved everything that was shit in F3 (gunplay i.e.) but also removed everything that made F3 great (RPG aspects, coherent overworld with story-telling locations, meaningful choices, having an impact on the world like blowing up Megaton).

Agreed.

 

[Fall Out Boy]

If I think about it, F4 basically improved everything that was shit in F3 (gunplay i.e.) but also removed everything that made F3 great (RPG aspects, coherent overworld with story-telling locations, meaningful choices, having an impact on the world like blowing up Megaton). So yeah, you could also call F4 = Fallout 4: Borderlands of the Commonwealth. x)

If you're telling me that Fallout 3 had what Fallout 4 doesn't, Fallout 4 must just be empty air, an endless space of nothing...

 

[Irwin John Finster]

If I think about it, F4 basically improved everything that was shit in F3 (gunplay i.e.) but also removed everything that made F3 great (RPG aspects, coherent overworld with story-telling locations, meaningful choices, having an impact on the world like blowing up Megaton). So yeah, you could also call F4 = Fallout 4: Borderlands of the Commonwealth. x)

If you're telling me that Fallout 3 had what Fallout 4 doesn't, Fallout 4 must just be empty air, an endless space of nothing...

If you've played Borderlands by yourself, then that's what you're getting with Fallout 4.

IMO Fallout 3 had better writing, better RPG elements, and was a better game in every area except first-person shooting. So yea if you're one of those that thinks Fallout 3 was awful I would stay away from 4.

 

[Rouce]

If I think about it, F4 basically improved everything that was shit in F3 (gunplay i.e.) but also removed everything that made F3 great (RPG aspects, coherent overworld with story-telling locations, meaningful choices, having an impact on the world like blowing up Megaton). So yeah, you could also call F4 = Fallout 4: Borderlands of the Commonwealth. x)

If you're telling me that Fallout 3 had what Fallout 4 doesn't, Fallout 4 must just be empty air, an endless space of nothing...

Nah, it's full of locations. But there are there only for one reason: So the player can have some FPS action and do a little circle only to get back out. You're fighting hordes of random raiders/ghouls/super mutants, get to the legendary cariant at the end, loot the enchanted weapon from him and also the loot that's located at the end of the linear themepark road. Kill, loot, proceed. And mostly there are no interesting stories to be told.

 

[Fall Out Boy]

Ah well, I've played Borderlands 1 and 2 (Somewhat enjoyed it for a bit). I have no intention (until the game becomes dirt cheap) of playing Fallout 4.