The making of Fallout 4 - Game Informer article

Hmm, it will still score 10/10 everywhere. Just what I assume though. Who knows? The gaming press does surprise you once in a while ... and what I can get from the streams, not ALL people are happy with what they saw. I mean hey, there has been quite some heavy competition out there recently, and the Witcher 3 has shown that decent writing and interesting NPCs can be a part of an RPG - who would have thought! Not to mention a few of the more popular kick-starter projects out there which have shown that yeah, even the more old-school way of making RPGs is not completely dead yet. But nothing I have seen from F4 really screams awesome, in my opinion, I agree with the review though, the game's not bad, the problem is, it's simply mediocre for this time and age. It's like Bethesda is still stuck in 2005 or something.

But we have to wait and see I guess. We are all hipsters anyway in NMA ...
 
Hmm, it will still score 10/10 everywhere. Just what I assume though. Who knows? The gaming press does surprise you once in a while ... and what I can get from the streams, not ALL people are happy with what they saw. I mean hey, there has been quite some heavy competition out there recently, and the Witcher 3 has shown that decent writing and interesting NPCs can be a part of an RPG - who would have thought! Not to mention a few of the more popular kick-starter projects out there which have shown that yeah, even the more old-school way of making RPGs is not completely dead yet. But nothing I have seen from F4 really screams awesome, in my opinion, I agree with the review though, the game's not bad, the problem is, it's simply mediocre for this time and age. It's like Bethesda is still stuck in 2005 or something.

But we have to wait and see I guess. We are all hipsters anyway in NMA ...

10/10 everywhere you say?

I'm going to hold you to that. Come Monday I'm gonna look at all the big review sites and see how many perfect scores of 10 it gets. But if you really want to see a game that got close to 10/10 everywhere from the same gaming press you're not all fond off, just look at... oh, the Witcher 3.
 
Well, the Witcher 3 deserves much of the praise it gets - at least from what I can tell, I havn't played it. But it seems to be a solid RPG as far as the Witcher goes. So yeah, Fallout 4 has kinda to beat that. Also I said, I ASSUME it, not that I KNOW it.
 
I wonder if Bethesda Game Studios will ever become respected by everyone again. How long would it take honestly? Will it even happen? With the gaming industry these days..
 
Well, the Witcher 3 deserves much of the praise it gets - at least from what I can tell, I havn't played it. But it seems to be a solid RPG as far as the Witcher goes. So yeah, Fallout 4 has kinda to beat that. Also I said, I ASSUME it, not that I KNOW it.

It would be fine with FO4 getting 10/10s as an action game. But it will get that praise as an RPG game that gives you freedom. Even the thought of it upsets me.
 
Well, the Witcher 3 deserves much of the praise it gets - at least from what I can tell, I havn't played it. But it seems to be a solid RPG as far as the Witcher goes. So yeah, Fallout 4 has kinda to beat that. Also I said, I ASSUME it, not that I KNOW it.

I do sort of wonder if in light of things like the Witcher 3 and DA:I (and Fo:NV, but that's less recent) people will realize that having a big open world game with lots of different things to do does not, in fact, prevent you from writing interesting characters or good stories and will thus hold this against Fo4. The pacing problems are sort of unavoidable when the game is content to let you faff off and cut down trees or pick herbs or whatever whenever you want, though.
 
1. Dialogue wheel? No inherently bad, good tool if you want to make conversations feel more 'real'. Not sure why designers want to emulate it in a crpg, conversations are key ways to provide information about the world to the player, hence why crpg's traditionally have lots and lots of questions. It's not like you need to ask about everything in RL, in a game you have to.

2. Nice amount of companions, hopefully it's not quantity over quality approach.

3. Writing, main story? Well, Skyrim made me think there's slight improvement but I still expect Fallout 4 to be a Bethesda game in the things I like them for and the things I dislike them for. Unfortunately the things I value the most in games like this they still seem to.. well.. do differently than what I'd prefer.

4. Lore was already hosed in Fallout 3, this is just continuation. They could improve it and make it better but.. I don't know. From what I've seen and heard they seem to continue on with some silly, silly things. Not to say they don't have a part in Fallout games, they always did.. but.. I dunno. I don't even know how they originally managed to convince themselves that an alien DLC was a great idea for Fallout 3, that was probably biggest lowpoint I saw in their games.
I really wish Bethesda had the courage to get creative instead of doing 'fanservice' which led to screwing up the lore.. They could have really turned capitol wasteland / east coast into their own playing field but instead they chose to fill it with a whole lot of things from the west coast that.. shouldn't have been there at all. Meh. Morrowind remains a proof that creativity does exist and it was a pretty bold attempt to steer away from the usual fantasy cliches..
 
One of the first reviews
'Fallout 4' Review: The Dangers Of Hype

"Fallout 4" is the most anticipated game of the year, although you probably didn't have to be told that. Odds are, you've heard of the game through its ubiquitous marketing (including the mobile game "Fallout Shelter" that's been teasing eager players for months) and you've got more than a passing interest in getting your hands on Bethesda Softworks' latest post-apocalyptic adventure. You may want to take a seat, however.
Here's the setup: In 2077, humanity is heavily reliant on nuclear energy. As a result, the world stands on the brink of war -- and, as you might guess, somebody detonates a few atomic bombs on U.S. soil. You and your family are evacuated to the nearby Vault 111, run by the seemingly benevolent Vault-Tec, to wait out the bombs' effects. Instead, everybody is cryogenically frozen. More than 200 years later, somebody defrosts you, kills your partner and kidnaps your infant son. So you must venture out into the world you used to know to find your son -- and to fix the broken mess the world has become while you're at it.
You'll probably want to stock up on Nuka Cola. Like other open-world games released this year, "Fallout 4" doesn't respect your time -- it will consume weeks of your life. There's so much content here that it'll probably take you 100 or more hours to truly finish the game.

The Good
If you're new to the franchise, be warned that the wastelands are not a forgiving place. "Fallout 4" poses a challenge, and it will slap you down any chance it gets. It's purposefully difficult -- there's limited ammunition and most of the guns aren't that powerful at first.
That's where the definitive feature of "Fallout 4" comes in -- the Vault-Tec Assisted Targeting System, aka VATS. With the press of a button, time slows and the game allows you to shoot at specific parts of your enemies. There's something incredibly satisfying about blowing an enemy away with a shotgun in slow motion. To new players, this may feel a bit like cheating at first -- but the wastelands are stacked so highly against you that you'll need to use VATS at every possible chance to stay alive. At least until you build an arsenal of superweapons.
You won't be doing that for a while, though. This is the post-apocalypse after all, so you'll have to wander far and wide to find materials and people to help you survive. Through all that exploration, you'll see just how broken nuclear war has left this once-proud section of Massachusetts, dubbed the Commonwealth.
The wastelands are more often than not some mix of gray and brown, and it's easy to get bogged down in that -- although that’s kind of the point the game is attempting to make. There are remnants of the old world, but they've lost their vibrancy. The new world feels hopeless. Until you look up: You'll see the brightest, clearest skies that humanity has viewed in a long time. The evening sunset is positively gorgeous, and there's really nothing that touches the brilliance of the Commonwealth's star-studded night sky. Too bad humanity had to bring itself near extinction for anybody to pay attention, a metaphor "Fallout 4" conveys subtly.

The Bad
As I was picking my way through an abandoned brewery somewhere in the wastelands about 10 hours into the game, I blurted out, "When is something interesting supposed to happen?" I was bored, even after running through a few of the main story quests. "This is the hill I'm going to die on," I thought then. "Fallout 4" has very dedicated fans, and I imagine the reaction to these statements won't be particularly positive.
To be fair, I praised the sheer number of activities and quests available in "Dragon Age: Inquisition," a game similar to "Fallout 4." However, "Dragon Age" had a decently captivating plot and, more important, charismatic characters to invest you in their world, make you laugh and pull the story along. "Fallout 4" doesn't have either of those things. It's not that the game doesn't give you things to do -- it gives you far more than anybody could reasonably expect -- it's that it doesn't really supply a consistent set of reasons to want to do those things.
The story itself isn't the problem: It's the pacing. "Fallout 4" is a very, very slow game. And I'm not exaggerating this point for effect: The first five to 10 hours after you leave Vault 111 is mostly spent trying not to die at the hands of a random mole rat and on farming side quests to gain enough strength to push through main ones. But the side quests often involving boring nonplayable characters (NPCs) you’ll never interact with after the quest is done. There's never really a reason to care about what's going on, even as some quests have you defending struggling settlements.
The main characters don't really help matters, either. Some of your companions are mildly interesting, but for the most part there's not much to talk about. Conversations are usually bland and boring, aside from the sarcastic lines your character can spit out assuming you're so inclined. Nobody grabbed my attention right away, and nobody will stick in my memory (with the possible exception of Codsworth the robot). After 20 or so hours, when you've got a nice set of perks and a decent arsenal to complete some of the bigger quests with, the story does get a bit more interesting, but I'm not confident saying that the payoff is worth the investment.

Conclusion
"Fallout 4" is by no means a bad game, but, past the veneer of ruined Americana, I'm having a difficult time believing it's going to live up to the hype preceding it. The pacing ruins an otherwise interesting character motivation. But there is a staggering amount to do, places to find and Deathclaws to challenge. If you’re a "Fallout" fanatic, "Fallout 4" will be more of what you love -- I'm just not seeing what's really in it for newcomers.
"Fallout 4" was reviewed with a PlayStation 4 copy of the game, provided by Bethesda Softworks.

http://www.ibtimes.com/fallout-4-review-dangers-hype-video-2174132

Haha, he enjoyed Dragon Age Inquisition. No comment. Just stopped reading after that.
 
If you think Fallout 3 is a bad game you should think that Dragon Age:I is just dog shit.

Oh yeah, I didn't care much for Dragon Age: Inquisition, but I know that some people like it and that is their prerogative.

I'm not close-minded enough to completely discount a reviewer's opinion on an entirely different game because they liked Dragon Age.

Fuck, if you had bothered to actually read it, you'd see that he in no uncertain terms said that Fallout 4 wasn't a bad game, it just wasn't his cup of tea.

But the Bethdrones came out in full force anyway because 8.8 ISN'T A 10, BLARGLAHRHRHRHETHAHTA
 
If you think Fallout 3 is a bad game you should think that Dragon Age:I is just dog shit.

Oh yeah, I didn't care much for Dragon Age: Inquisition, but I know that some people like it and that is their prerogative.

I'm not close-minded enough to completely discount a reviewer's opinion on an entirely different game because they liked Dragon Age.

Fuck, if you had bothered to actually read it, you'd see that he in no uncertain terms said that Fallout 4 wasn't a bad game, it just wasn't his cup of tea.

But the Bethdrones came out in full force anyway because 8.8 ISN'T A 10, BLARGLAHRHRHRHETHAHTA

You are not close-minded enough to discredit a reviewer based on their preferences for other rpgs (you should be holding him accountable for breaking the review embargo and releasing his early), but you don't have a high opinion of the fans who will like Fallout 4. When Monday comes and the reviews are out, I hope you will not equate every fan who likes the game and disagrees with certain review scores with being a "Bethesdrone".
 
There is a difference between being a fan and being a Bethdrone.

A fan will just like it, they might try to defend it from criticism but will be rational enough to accept the flaws it has.

A Bethedrone will bitch at every review that doesn't give it a perfect 10, will probably come here to bitch about us being meanies and biased against bethesda even when giving in depth reasons or reviews and will probably say thing like "Godd Howard" and such.
 
Nearly the entirety of that article's comment section was people threatening and insulting the reviewer because they dared to say that Fallout 4 was good, but not amazing.

That mindless fanboyism is creepy as all get out.

I honestly don't care if people like something, but when they get vicious over a fair review, wooooo, that's terrible.

And it's not even like the review was like "I played for two hours and then I got bored, but it wasn't bad", it was actually pretty good for a review from a website I don't normally associate with reviews.

I mean, sometimes I think reviewers aren't always honest because they're afraid of these sorts of jerkwads.
 
Those kinds of fans aren't exclusive to Bethesda. The more hardcore subset of fans who seem to view every element of Fallout 4 as perfect are caught up in their hype and imagining that it will fufill their own expectations on account of not having played it. Some months after release, I hope these folks will look back on the game with a more level-headed opinion and admit they were getting caught up in the hype of it.

And I would recommend holding judgement until Monday when the full reviews come out, followed by the game itself before making a statement about the fans on a comments section.
 
Review scores are meaningless. That's the thing. I'm sure these "bethdrones" are obsessed with them.

I wonder where this hype/fanboy mentality comes from and how can people honestly buy so much into it. Would there be any way to stop it...
 
Last edited:
Back
Top