The 'MrMattyPlays' Fallout 4 Review "A Near Perfect Game"

[Doctor 0]

Matty is well known as the ultimate Bethcuck. Ignore anything that piece of trash says.

 

[MercenarySnake]

Just to add to the near perfect discussion- Baldurs Gate, A Link To The Past, Deus Ex and FF6.

I ment anyone that said Fallout 4 was near perfect if you were thinking I said games in general. I agree with Deus Ex, it's a really good game.

Yeah I really want to give it a go. It seems really nice.

Damn I feel like going through it again now. I recommend it, the game is really good as long as you can get past the dated graphics. It's funny how it gets hard to go through a game with modern day graphics a second time but yet playing a old classic game that doesn't have graphics like today is very enjoyable to run through again and again.

Dated graphics? I can play Morrowind and get awed by the art, and play Fallout without worrying at all. Dated graphics, what's that?

I've had friends tell me they wouldn't play through those kind of games because the graphics. Honestly I think that Fallout and Fallout 2 have aged pretty well, if it's a good game with "dated" graphics that's considered a good game I'll play it.

 

[Dr Fallout]

Just to add to the near perfect discussion- Baldurs Gate, A Link To The Past, Deus Ex and FF6.

I ment anyone that said Fallout 4 was near perfect if you were thinking I said games in general. I agree with Deus Ex, it's a really good game.

Yeah I really want to give it a go. It seems really nice.

Damn I feel like going through it again now. I recommend it, the game is really good as long as you can get past the dated graphics. It's funny how it gets hard to go through a game with modern day graphics a second time but yet playing a old classic game that doesn't have graphics like today is very enjoyable to run through again and again.

Dated graphics? I can play Morrowind and get awed by the art, and play Fallout without worrying at all. Dated graphics, what's that?

I've had friends tell me they wouldn't play through those kind of games because the graphics. Honestly I think that Fallout and Fallout 2 have aged pretty well, if it's a good game with "dated" graphics that's considered a good game I'll play it.

Yeah same here. Who gives a crap about graphics? It's about the gameplay and story.

 

[Irwin John Finster]

The most hardcore crappy graphics game I ever saw was a YouTube let's play of a Rogue-like called Unrealworld. It uses 2D sprites and is set in iron-age Finland. That is just about as hardcore as it gets when it comes to crappy graphics with deep gameplay, though I never actually played it. I think it predates Fallout 1 by 5 or 6 years.

 

[Dr Fallout]

The most hardcore crappy graphics game I ever saw was a YouTube let's play of a Rogue-like called Unrealworld. It uses 2D sprites and is set in iron-age Finland. That is just about as hardcore as it gets when it comes to crappy graphics with deep gameplay, though I never actually played it. I think it predates Fallout 1 by 5 or 6 years.

Good writing and gameplay?

 

[Irwin John Finster]

The most hardcore crappy graphics game I ever saw was a YouTube let's play of a Rogue-like called Unrealworld. It uses 2D sprites and is set in iron-age Finland. That is just about as hardcore as it gets when it comes to crappy graphics with deep gameplay, though I never actually played it. I think it predates Fallout 1 by 5 or 6 years.

Good writing and gameplay?

It's some kind of hardcore survivalist rogue-like so I don't know if you can say it has good writing. The writing is good in the sense that it makes an effort to describe in the scrolling text what is happening. For example it reads like "Your arrow pierces the deer's abdomen, blood spills out from the wound and it falls dead" when you fire an arrow and successfully hunt.

Gameplay appears to be entirely keyboard based. Considering this game came out in 1992 and still receives updates last time I checked, gameplay is good. You basically just try to survive in the game world - you have to fish, hunt, avoid certain groups who are hostile on site (I think they are some kind of slavers or something), find villages to trade in, craft and maintain weapons. Actually it's kind of a pioneer in terms of survival games in that regard - it makes you do a lot.

 

[AgentBJ09]

The stuff from A+Start is far superior to anything MrMatty puts out. Especially this one.

 

[Dr Fallout]

The most hardcore crappy graphics game I ever saw was a YouTube let's play of a Rogue-like called Unrealworld. It uses 2D sprites and is set in iron-age Finland. That is just about as hardcore as it gets when it comes to crappy graphics with deep gameplay, though I never actually played it. I think it predates Fallout 1 by 5 or 6 years.

Good writing and gameplay?

It's some kind of hardcore survivalist rogue-like so I don't know if you can say it has good writing. The writing is good in the sense that it makes an effort to describe in the scrolling text what is happening. For example it reads like "Your arrow pierces the deer's abdomen, blood spills out from the wound and it falls dead" when you fire an arrow and successfully hunt.

Gameplay appears to be entirely keyboard based. Considering this game came out in 1992 and still receives updates last time I checked, gameplay is good. You basically just try to survive in the game world - you have to fish, hunt, avoid certain groups who are hostile on site (I think they are some kind of slavers or something), find villages to trade in, craft and maintain weapons. Actually it's kind of a pioneer in terms of survival games in that regard - it makes you do a lot.

Wow, that sounds good! I'll give it a try certainly!

 

[Crni Vuk]

Just to add to the near perfect discussion- Baldurs Gate, A Link To The Past, Deus Ex and FF6.

I ment anyone that said Fallout 4 was near perfect if you were thinking I said games in general. I agree with Deus Ex, it's a really good game.

Yeah I really want to give it a go. It seems really nice.

Damn I feel like going through it again now. I recommend it, the game is really good as long as you can get past the dated graphics. It's funny how it gets hard to go through a game with modern day graphics a second time but yet playing a old classic game that doesn't have graphics like today is very enjoyable to run through again and again.

There are mods that can help you with that. Make no mistake! It won't look like the last Crysis or what ever, it's a 20 year old game after all. But it definetly makes the game look better. I have to say though, since I recently played Deus Ex 1 again - what an awesome youth it was to grow up with such games, it didn't aged that badly. The level design for the most part is alright. And the NPC interaction and writing has more to offer than most modern RPGs today ...

I really wish though the guy working on the totall conversion mod for Deus Ex 1 finished it, he wanted to modernize the game, making it look more believable. The screenshots looked promising.
- Looks like some of it got released http://www.moddb.com/mods/deus-ex-revision

 

[Mr Fish]

I remember him bitching about the rubber-banding system when it came to enemy levels in the wasteland and how they wouldn't level up along-side you. And now it is a near perfect game. Consistency? What's that?

 

[Juza The Cloud]

Anybody watch LGR's review of Fallout 4 ?

 

[Orb]

I've been a *long* time lurker on NMA. The amount of whitewashing of Bethesda is frankly insulting, and to consider Fallout 4 as anything but mediocre is delusional at best.

I'm a developer (environment artist) at a mid-sized studio and generally everyone who is involved in development (artists, programmers) in this industry can 'read' or see under-the-hood of any game very quickly. Anyone can, honestly, if you've had enough experience with engines like UE or Cryengine.

Fallout 4, to me, was the epitome of lazy development. The scripting and environment, the physics, while slightly upgraded, is essentially the same as Skyrim and the preceding titles. I kept on asking 'What did this team DO for years?' because it seems like they kit-bashed their previous work and released it. Their technical artists literally carry this title and no review has either had the knowledge nor priority to call that out.

How can anyone review this game without mentioning that the A.I., the scripts, the modeling (this stands out, the tessellation of certain set pieces seems like they were carried over from Gamebryo), and in the behavior of assets are unchanged in any innovative way?

 

[Gaddes]

LGR's review was pretty solid. He did note the performance issues as well.

 

[Irwin John Finster]

Just to add to the near perfect discussion- Baldurs Gate, A Link To The Past, Deus Ex and FF6.

I ment anyone that said Fallout 4 was near perfect if you were thinking I said games in general. I agree with Deus Ex, it's a really good game.

Yeah I really want to give it a go. It seems really nice.

Damn I feel like going through it again now. I recommend it, the game is really good as long as you can get past the dated graphics. It's funny how it gets hard to go through a game with modern day graphics a second time but yet playing a old classic game that doesn't have graphics like today is very enjoyable to run through again and again.

There are mods that can help you with that. Make no mistake! It won't look like the last Crysis or what ever, it's a 20 year old game after all. But it definetly makes the game look better. I have to say though, since I recently played Deus Ex 1 again - what an awesome youth it was to grow up with such games, it didn't aged that badly. The level design for the most part is alright. And the NPC interaction and writing has more to offer than most modern RPGs today ...

I really wish though the guy working on the totall conversion mod for Deus Ex 1 finished it, he wanted to modernize the game, making it look more believable. The screenshots looked promising.
- Looks like some of it got released http://www.moddb.com/mods/deus-ex-revision

So that mod is incomplete or complete? Because I'd jump on that.

 

[Irwin John Finster]

How can anyone review this game without mentioning that the A.I., the scripts, the modeling (this stands out, the tessellation of certain set pieces seems like they were carried over from Gamebryo), and in the behavior of assets are unchanged in any innovative way?

Most reviewers are just schmucks with a microphone and YouTube channel who have no experience in the industry or knowledge outside of how to use a controller, and people posting rave reviews of Fallout 4 on November 9th like Mr Matty above are quite simply fanboys.

Companies offer discounted products on Amazon in exchange for reviews. In the same fashion, review copies and other access are offered to YouTubers who have a certain number of viewers, and that faucet would get turned off real quick if they started producing anything less than stellar reviews. Reviewers will point out negatives that would have the game at a 5/10, but then give the game a 9/10 anyway because they know this.

 

[Irwin John Finster]

The most hardcore crappy graphics game I ever saw was a YouTube let's play of a Rogue-like called Unrealworld. It uses 2D sprites and is set in iron-age Finland. That is just about as hardcore as it gets when it comes to crappy graphics with deep gameplay, though I never actually played it. I think it predates Fallout 1 by 5 or 6 years.

Good writing and gameplay?

It's some kind of hardcore survivalist rogue-like so I don't know if you can say it has good writing. The writing is good in the sense that it makes an effort to describe in the scrolling text what is happening. For example it reads like "Your arrow pierces the deer's abdomen, blood spills out from the wound and it falls dead" when you fire an arrow and successfully hunt.

Gameplay appears to be entirely keyboard based. Considering this game came out in 1992 and still receives updates last time I checked, gameplay is good. You basically just try to survive in the game world - you have to fish, hunt, avoid certain groups who are hostile on site (I think they are some kind of slavers or something), find villages to trade in, craft and maintain weapons. Actually it's kind of a pioneer in terms of survival games in that regard - it makes you do a lot.

Wow, that sounds good! I'll give it a try certainly!

It's apparently a free game now. Here's a link to a Let's play of it if you want to see it in action:

 

[Fall Out Boy]

I've been a *long* time lurker on NMA. The amount of whitewashing of Bethesda is frankly insulting, and to consider Fallout 4 as anything but mediocre is delusional at best.

I'm a developer (environment artist) at a mid-sized studio and generally everyone who is involved in development (artists, programmers) in this industry can 'read' or see under-the-hood of any game very quickly. Anyone can, honestly, if you've had enough experience with engines like UE or Cryengine.

Fallout 4, to me, was the epitome of lazy development. The scripting and environment, the physics, while slightly upgraded, is essentially the same as Skyrim and the preceding titles. I kept on asking 'What did this team DO for years?' because it seems like they kit-bashed their previous work and released it. Their technical artists literally carry this title and no review has either had the knowledge nor priority to call that out.

How can anyone review this game without mentioning that the A.I., the scripts, the modeling (this stands out, the tessellation of certain set pieces seems like they were carried over from Gamebryo), and in the behavior of assets are unchanged in any innovative way?

As far as big reviewers go (IGN, Gamespot, etc) do we not return to the point that they are all just shit-scared to give a AAA title like Fallout a bad (fair) review?

 

[Irwin John Finster]

I've been a *long* time lurker on NMA. The amount of whitewashing of Bethesda is frankly insulting, and to consider Fallout 4 as anything but mediocre is delusional at best.

I'm a developer (environment artist) at a mid-sized studio and generally everyone who is involved in development (artists, programmers) in this industry can 'read' or see under-the-hood of any game very quickly. Anyone can, honestly, if you've had enough experience with engines like UE or Cryengine.

Fallout 4, to me, was the epitome of lazy development. The scripting and environment, the physics, while slightly upgraded, is essentially the same as Skyrim and the preceding titles. I kept on asking 'What did this team DO for years?' because it seems like they kit-bashed their previous work and released it. Their technical artists literally carry this title and no review has either had the knowledge nor priority to call that out.

How can anyone review this game without mentioning that the A.I., the scripts, the modeling (this stands out, the tessellation of certain set pieces seems like they were carried over from Gamebryo), and in the behavior of assets are unchanged in any innovative way?

As far as big reviewers go (IGN, Gamespot, etc) do we not return to the point that they are all just shit-scared to give a AAA title like Fallout a bad (fair) review?

Well IGN was publishing pictures of Metal Gear Solid that tried to make it look like the PC version was worse graphically than the PS4 version so I think it's not that they are scared, it's that they are lovingly shilling for these developers.

Here is the picture: http://imgur.com/MbnY91v

 

[Romanophile]

Well IGN was publishing pictures of Metal Gear Solid that tried to make it look like the PC version was worse graphically than the PS4 version so I think it's not that they are scared, it's that they are lovingly shilling for these developers.


Here is the picture: http://imgur.com/MbnY91v

Wow, I never liked IGN before but I didn’t think that they were dishonest. Reminds me of FOX News.

 

[Kilus]

Last week on a podcast someone from IGN said:

When I'm playing Counter-Strike and I get a really cool, like, triple kill or something I'm like, "Xbox record that!" That's one thing you can't do on PC.

And got hyper defensive when called out on that.