The Fallout 4 review by members of No Mutants Allowed

[CerberusGate]

It's nice to know that there are still Fallout fans who care about the integrity of the franchise.

You can try looking at other independent reviewers too. They also did not care for what 4 did to Fallout (though I think they are more concerned with how problematic 4 was as a game).

D'aww, we should have posted it ourselves and never respond any comments

How quickly do you think people will start down-voting posts agreeing with the review? Not trying to bash r/Fallout but the initial comments aside from the more intelligent ones are not promising.

Still, in the long run, it's good to get the review some exposure outside the site (perhaps the review will be more fairly judged on sites like r/pcgaming).

EDIT: Ignored Member, you do realize that double posting is against the sites rules along? Try using the edit button next time.

 

[AccountNameM]

You can try looking at other independent reviewers too. They also did not care for what 4 did to Fallout (though I think they are more concerned with how problematic 4 was as a game).


How quickly do you think people will start down-voting posts agreeing with the review? Not trying to bash r/Fallout but the initial comments aside from the more intelligent ones are not promising.

Still, in the long run, it's good to get the review some exposure outside the site (perhaps the review will be more fairly judged on sites like r/pcgaming).

EDIT: Ignored Member, you do realize that double posting is against the sites rules along? Try using the edit button next time.

Care to explain why I'm being ignored?

In all honesty, I want to know.

 

[Black Angel]

Mind explaining these "facts"?

The perk system in F4 is being perceived differently by two individuals, which by definition these perceptions are subjective.

Fact = the perk system doesn't work properly in just about any RPG ever, as explained by MisterCaption with this video


There are objective reasons why the perk system won't work in a game defined as an 'RPG', and those reasons are game designs. One could argue all day long how they think the perk system worked because it enhanced the shooting experience, but that required judging the game from a shooter game designs's angle. Fortunately, Bethesda called Fallout 4 an 'RPG' based on the tag they officially pinned on Steam, and so we are going to objectively judge it from the designs aspect of RPG.

Also, you're probably ignored because of the things you said in the past before you 'disappeared'.

 

[CerberusGate]

Also, you're probably ignored because of the things you said in the past before you 'disappeared'.

I'm a relatively new member and I already know to ignore folk like Ignored Member from my time and experience here dealing with folk of similar nature (like some guys and their alts).

I wonder how the trolls were like during the time of Fallout 3.

 

[Deleted member 93956]

"It's a well deserved shitting at least, and while most fallout 4 fans can only say it's fun because i like it's because it's fun, these reviews/this review at least plainly states the facts it has to back it up.

F4 Fun fans vs Facts.

I'm smelling a triggered safe-space needing special snowflake."

I'm assuming this is from CerberusGate.

Mind explaining these "facts"?

The perk system in F4 is being perceived differently by two individuals, which by definition these perceptions are subjective.

You literally just claimed a fact is an opinion.

For fucks sale.

Hey buddy. CerberusGate has his own Reddit account and used it already on that thread. Not everyone makes Alt Accounts

 

[CerberusGate]

. CerberusGate has his own Reddit account and used it already on that thread. Not everyone makes Alt Accounts

I was about to bring that up actually but... I can't reply to Ignored Member after all.

Not that I'm complaining.

 

[AlphaSlayerZX]

Looks like r/Fallout got a hold of NMA's review and of course, the folks there are judging it based on their preconceived notions of the site (and I'm in the comments there too since I'm quite the masochist):
https://www.reddit.com/r/Fallout/comments/5mp9gk/nma_releases_its_community_review_of_fallout_4/

Hmm. I can see most of them have the "Calling Fallout 4 a bad game is disrespectful and laughable" mindset.

Like can these guys accept that there are people besides NMA that think Fallout 4 is a bad game? Or that there are people who think it's a bad game.

 

[AccountNameM]

Fact = the perk system doesn't work properly in just about any RPG ever, as explained by MisterCaption with this video


There are objective reasons why the perk system won't work in a game defined as an 'RPG', and those reasons are game designs. One could argue all day long how they think the perk system worked because it enhanced the shooting experience, but that required judging the game from a shooter game designs's angle. Fortunately, Bethesda called Fallout 4 an 'RPG' based on the tag they officially pinned on Steam, and so we are going to objectively judge it from the designs aspect of RPG.

Also, you're probably ignored because of the things you said in the past before you 'disappeared'.

This all depends on the definition of an "RPG", or, in this sites case, one's own preference for how one should play.

In the end, to put it simply without looking over every perk/skill, both perks and skills do the same thing in the end (aside from a couple exceptions), which is:

* Allow unique dialogue in random situations (Perks), or allows access to unique dialogue that was already listed (skills).
* Improve overall stats.
* Access crafting (plus bonuses), skill checks and mini games.

Because Fallout 4 limited speech checks to charisma, the need for perks that introduce unique dialogue (the majority in NV) became obsolete, and Bethesda decided to just combine the two and call it a day. Also, I assume they applied the level limit to their new system to encourage players to put points into perks that allow them to access specific parts of the game.

In reality, from a neutral point of view, any proper personal character development in any Fallout game is based on dialogue, and unique dialogue for that matter. While I simply see this aspect as a means to skip bullshit quests (looking at you OWB), many fans see it as one of the significant ways of impacting the world.

Admittedly, the Fallout series, as a whole, uses a majority of its perks for unique dialogue, so the player can express their own identity.

Fallout 4, in this manner, has distinguished itself from the rest of the heard by simplifying dialogue, and the way I look at it completely differs from you because my character is always a projection of me in an escape of reality, while your character is a whole other person which you create.

Listen, the way I apply what an RPG is and isn't is completely different to yours. The Fallout series, on the most basic level, is about putting someone into a world and seeing how you can affect it, just like any other RPG for that matter.

Applying a strict interpretation of what an RPG is and expecting others to follow suit is quite a narrow approach when dealing with this sort of thing. Using Fallout 1 as a means of determining whether a game in the series is appropriate or idiotic alienates other fans who arrived through F4, and their opinions on what defines an RPG are largely based on their own experience, instead of the preconceived notion that F1 is the barometer for the series.

Thus, to conclude, what you look for in the series is a subjective thing, and stating that the new perk system factually doesn't work is a opinionated viewpoint.

 

[Lexx]

It would be better to put this review stuff in here and link to it from the news. Otherwise it will be lost somewhere among the news in the future and nobody is going to see it anymore.

 

[Practicat]

In the end, to put it simply without looking over every perk/skill, both perks and skills do the same thing in the end (aside from a couple exceptions), which is:

* Allow unique dialogue in random situations (Perks), or allows access to unique dialogue that was already listed (skills).
* Improve overall stats.
* Access crafting (plus bonuses), skill checks and mini games.

What skills can do that perks cannot is allow for a greater range of character requirements and expression, such as through dialogue, tasks, weapon skill requirements, recipes, and perk selection, using a 100 point range. Perk ranks are limited to only a handful and lack the range available through skills.

 

[Walpknut]

Please Someguy9, this is your third account, you already know Double posting isn't allowed here

 

[joevonzombie]

This all depends on the definition of an "RPG", or, in this sites case, one's own preference for how one should play.

In the end, to put it simply without looking over every perk/skill, both perks and skills do the same thing in the end (aside from a couple exceptions), which is:

* Allow unique dialogue in random situations (Perks), or allows access to unique dialogue that was already listed (skills).
* Improve overall stats.
* Access crafting (plus bonuses), skill checks and mini games.

Because Fallout 4 limited speech checks to charisma, the need for perks that introduce unique dialogue (the majority in NV) became obsolete, and Bethesda decided to just combine the two and call it a day. Also, I assume they applied the level limit to their new system to encourage players to put points into perks that allow them to access specific parts of the game.

In reality, from a neutral point of view, any proper personal character development in any Fallout game is based on dialogue, and unique dialogue for that matter. While I simply see this aspect as a means to skip bullshit quests (looking at you OWB), many fans see it as one of the significant ways of impacting the world.

Admittedly, the Fallout series, as a whole, uses a majority of its perks for unique dialogue, so the player can express their own identity.

Fallout 4, in this manner, has distinguished itself from the rest of the heard by simplifying dialogue, and the way I look at it completely differs from you because my character is always a projection of me in an escape of reality, while your character is a whole other person which you create.

Listen, the way I apply what an RPG is and isn't is completely different to yours. The Fallout series, on the most basic level, is about putting someone into a world and seeing how you can affect it, just like any other RPG for that matter.

Applying a strict interpretation of what an RPG is and expecting others to follow suit is quite a narrow approach when dealing with this sort of thing. Using Fallout 1 as a means of determining whether a game in the series is appropriate or idiotic alienates other fans who arrived through F4, and their opinions on what defines an RPG are largely based on their own experience, instead of the preconceived notion that F1 is the barometer for the series.

Thus, to conclude, what you look for in the series is a subjective thing, and stating that the new perk system factually doesn't work is a opinionated viewpoint.

I don't recall any actual dialogue checks based on my perks in Fallout 4 and even if they were there, it's still just three ways to say yes and one way to say no because there are no real branching paths in the game outside from the faction bullshit at the end of the game which doesn't really matter because there are only two endings.

 

[AgentBJ09]

Looks like r/Fallout got a hold of NMA's review and of course, the folks there are judging it based on their preconceived notions of the site (and I'm in the comments there too since I'm quite the masochist):
https://www.reddit.com/r/Fallout/comments/5mp9gk/nma_releases_its_community_review_of_fallout_4/

Took them long enough. Good to see the OP is being neutral too.

D'aww, we should have posted it ourselves and never respond any comments

These people are the reason bethesda is not making the game the true fans want.

Because they invalidate the saner side of criticism.

If we stop giving these assholes any attention maybe you can see more positive change in the games.

That would've been fun.

Last comment: I wonder what would've become of Zelda: Breath of the Wild if fans didn't harshly criticize Fi and everything else wrong with Skyward Sword, as well as ask for the series to return to the roots. I.E. exploration being the core around which everything is based, including the story you uncover.

 

[Deleted member 93956]

Last comment: I wonder what would've become of Zelda: Breath of the Wild if fans didn't harshly criticize Fi and everything else wrong with Skyward Sword, as well as ask for the series to return to the roots. I.E. exploration being the core around which everything is based, including the story you uncover.

Don't know if it really was about that, but A Link Between Worlds for the 3DS was like a - To The Past remix/remake/refrito, and it was fairly popular. Not breaking the roof, but hey, not a failure.
Some more games; even maybe 30$ shorter or paired ones, ala Oracle of Time/Seasons on the 2D classic style would be pretty cool.

Another note; the Owl from Awakening is the most i'm taking of tutorializing and unskippable text. Those were easily 10 minutes of mumbo jumbo and tutorial.

 

[AgentBJ09]

Don't know if it really was about that, but A Link Between Worlds for the 3DS was like a - To The Past remix/remake/refrito, and it was fairly popular. Not breaking the roof, but hey, not a failure.
Some more games; even maybe 30$ shorter or paired ones, ala Oracle of Time/Seasons on the 2D classic style would be pretty cool.

Another note; the Owl from Awakening is the most i'm taking of tutorializing and unskippable text. Those were easily 10 minutes of mumbo jumbo and tutorial.

The owl was a weird one, now that I'm out of my N64 days. Makes me glad I didn't start playing Majora's Mask until three years ago.

As for A Link Between Worlds, I love that one. Fleshes out the Dark World more than it was in Link to the Past, and the hints are spaced far enough apart that you're free to explore everywhere Ravio's weapons will take you. Plus, searching out Heart Pieces is far more important to pad your health and hence stop losing rented weapons when you die.

 

[Deleted member 93956]

As for A Link Between Worlds, I love that one. Fleshes out the Dark World more than it was in Link to the Past, and the hints are spaced far enough apart that you're free to explore everywhere Ravio's weapons will take you. Plus, searching out Heart Pieces is far more important to pad your health and hence stop losing rented weapons when you die.

Looking forward to Breath of The Wild's "Little Brother" that would be the handheld Zelda. Putting my bets in another like this one, as the NES Zeldas are already on the NES Mini and the imo upcoming SNES Mini.

It felt so damn short, though! Yeah, the item overhaul was pretty interesting. Made money helluva preocupation early on. Some levels like the Dark East (Stealth Maze) were very welcome being out of the ForestDesertVolcanoMountainPlain biome pack.

 

[Jogre]

This all depends on the definition of an "RPG", or, in this sites case, one's own preference for how one should play.

Well given that the first things you could really describe as "RPGs" were probably tabletop games, which gave you the most freedom to define your character that would ever be possible for that sort, that in my view is what defines the term RPG.

CRPGs obviously can't mimic the pure freedom tabletops give you, but they can try. If a game doesn't even try to give you freedom to develop your character, or interact with the world(Or at least trades it out for gimmicky stuff), it doesn't count as an RPG in my books.

Care to explain why I'm being ignored?

You have earned a reputation for being a troll, probably due to your alt accounts, and your constant threads about Brotherhood of Steel.

You can't really blame a guy for ignoring you.

In the end, to put it simply without looking over every perk/skill, both perks and skills do the same thing in the end (aside from a couple exceptions), which is:

* Allow unique dialogue in random situations (Perks), or allows access to unique dialogue that was already listed (skills).
* Improve overall stats.
* Access crafting (plus bonuses), skill checks and mini games.

That video that Black Angel posted explains why both skills and perks are important.

Skills do the boring number-work. They handle all the static bonuses, and dictate how skilled you are at certain tasks. It is necessary to have this kind of stat, as they define how your game plays out, yet at the same time, they couldn't be the most interesting part of character creation. Perks on the other hand do all the interesting stuff. They are the game-changers that you choose especially, and tend to do big dramatic things.

By removing Skills, they now have to make sure that the 70 or so perks not only do all the heavy lifting that skills previously did, but on top of that handle all the interesting sides of the perks. This means that most of the perks end up doing nothing more than static combat bonuses.

Because Fallout 4 limited speech checks to charisma, the need for perks that introduce unique dialogue (the majority in NV) became obsolete

"Because Fallout 4 dumbed down the dialogue system, and removed a big part of the franchise, they no longer need perks that actually add something interesting to the game."

You can't justify a shit decision, just because it's the best way to accommodate another shit decision.

Fallout 4, in this manner, has distinguished itself from the rest of the heard by simplifying dialogue, and the way I look at it completely differs from you because my character is always a projection of me in an escape of reality, while your character is a whole other person which you create.

Even if you treat your character as if it is only a projection of you, surely simplifying the dialogue will limit that as well, since you can't express yourself as much in game.

Using Fallout 1 as a means of determining whether a game in the series is appropriate or idiotic alienates other fans who arrived through F4, and their opinions on what defines an RPG are largely based on their own experience, instead of the preconceived notion that F1 is the barometer for the series.

Let me put it this way: Say hypothetically chess was too complex for most people's tastes, so in order to accommodate more people, the rules of chess were rewritten so that the aim was to knock over as many pieces with tennis bats as possible.

Since all the strategy was gone from it, it would no longer be chess.

If we apply similar logic to Fallout, it's fine to accommodate newer fans, however if the series gives up its fundamental design principles, for the sake of accommodating newer fans, it is no longer Fallout.

 

[danielje]

An interesting review. Thought New Vegas sucked myself, but one can only expect a team a quarter of the size to make an inferior product in a development cycle a quarter of the length. Fallout 4 did what it needed to do, firmly separate itself from the original two games, so long time fans of the series can stop comparing it to them. Thankfully Beth was able to purchase a well fleshed out IP with a ton of untouched canon to go with it, and they've the money to spend many hours doing iteration on their art process which is what Fallout really is at its core, a piece of art, a piece of alternate timeline sci-fi art, and the "deep and meaningful" choices of the old pnp rp mechanics bring almost nothing to the table, unless you are specifically looking for that type of game, which there are many, that all sell at a fraction of what a game like Fallout 4 does. Partly because of lack of advertising spots, but mostly because human beings like to be stimulated by quality art, quality cinematics and brain candy that makes you think "what if..." mashed into a visceral fast paced game, which Fallout 4 does. I would LOVE to see Beth farm out an isometric crpg based in the Fallout Universe to InXile, unfortunately we live partly in the same world that Fallout comes from, one where greedy fucks dont share good things, so I'm resigned to never playing a "good" Fallout game ever again and felt that way since Fallout 2 ended which has let me enjoy and sink many dozens of hours into the newer games coming out, except New Vegas where I had to force myself to put in 60 hours just to see what the game had to offer, which wasnt very much. *hides in a vault*

 

[AccountNameM]

Well given that the first things you could really describe as "RPGs" were probably tabletop games, which gave you the most freedom to define your character that would ever be possible for that sort, that in my view is what defines the term RPG.

CRPGs obviously can't mimic the pure freedom tabletops give you, but they can try. If a game doesn't even try to give you freedom to develop your character, or interact with the world(Or at least trades it out for gimmicky stuff), it doesn't count as an RPG in my books.

You have earned a reputation for being a troll, probably due to your alt accounts, and your constant threads about Brotherhood of Steel.

You can't really blame a guy for ignoring you.

That video that Black Angel posted explains why both skills and perks are important.

Skills do the boring number-work. They handle all the static bonuses, and dictate how skilled you are at certain tasks. It is necessary to have this kind of stat, as they define how your game plays out, yet at the same time, they couldn't be the most interesting part of character creation. Perks on the other hand do all the interesting stuff. They are the game-changers that you choose especially, and tend to do big dramatic things.

By removing Skills, they now have to make sure that the 70 or so perks not only do all the heavy lifting that skills previously did, but on top of that handle all the interesting sides of the perks. This means that most of the perks end up doing nothing more than static combat bonuses.

"Because Fallout 4 dumbed down the dialogue system, and removed a big part of the franchise, they no longer need perks that actually add something interesting to the game."

You can't justify a shit decision, just because it's the best way to accommodate another shit decision.

Even if you treat your character as if it is only a projection of you, surely simplifying the dialogue will limit that as well, since you can't express yourself as much in game.

Let me put it this way: Say hypothetically chess was too complex for most people's tastes, so in order to accommodate more people, the rules of chess were rewritten so that the aim was to knock over as many pieces with tennis bats as possible.

Since all the strategy was gone from it, it would no longer be chess.

If we apply similar logic to Fallout, it's fine to accommodate newer fans, however if the series gives up its fundamental design principles, for the sake of accommodating newer fans, it is no longer Fallout.

I think you're missing the point of what I'm saying:

"While I simply see this aspect as a means to skip bullshit quests (looking at you OWB), many fans see it as one of the significant ways of impacting the world."

"Listen, the way I apply what an RPG is and isn't is completely different to yours. The Fallout series, on the most basic level, is about putting someone into a world and seeing how you can affect it, just like any other RPG for that matter."

"Thus, to conclude, what you look for in the series is a subjective thing, and stating that the new perk system factually doesn't work is a opinionated viewpoint."

I'm basically saying that different viewpoints can affect a person's interpretation of something, and stating that the perk system is objectively worse is literally a subjective statement.

You hate Fallout 4, that is true, but ignoring dissenting opinions on the basis that what they say is "objectively wrong" is just plain wrong. I'm listening to your interpretation of things, and counting it as a valid point, but ignoring what I'm saying ("While I simply see this aspect (Unique Dialogue) as a means to skip bullshit quests") and how I view the series as a whole comes off as incredibly headstrong.

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

Looks like r/Fallout got a hold of NMA's review and of course, the folks there are judging it based on their preconceived notions of the site (and I'm in the comments there too since I'm quite the masochist):
https://www.reddit.com/r/Fallout/comments/5mp9gk/nma_releases_its_community_review_of_fallout_4/

I know I should not read these things as the basic gist is always "Wahh, they criticize something I like and there must be good without question. They are a bunch if idiots who should be insulted for their different opinion."

I can not deny that our own fandom has not suffered from this from time to time as well but it is always about trying to find a way to create a "US vs Them" mindset.
Sure I don't like Bethesda fans in general and I may have said some nasty things about them but I don't really wish them dead or permanently injured.

But I am a but sick of this whole "well a lot of people on review websites, youtube, and the public in general think it is good there for the quality is a fact" repeating.
It is also a reason why I think Fallout should end

Before something is remade to appeal to these people they consider the original "fine for its time but obsolete now", and once it is made that it appeals to their particular tastes, any previous fan who criticizes the new direction is basically being said to shut their mouth because their opinion hurts that of the majority.