Thoughts on Fallout 4

CT Phipps said:
You realize Maxson is a bad guy, right? He's pretty much the co-antagonist with Father. We're supposed to realize the Brotherhood of Steel which we loved (albeit, that would only be me on these forums) have been corrupted to evil. It's supposed to be moving because they were supposed to be the heroes of the Wasteland and they've become murderous conquerors instead.

Your Sarah Lyons suggestion is Arthur Maxson's story.
Click to expand...
Yes but it would be far more interesting and believable had it been Sarah. Maxsons backstory doesn't add up. And yeah it could be propaganda except... Maxson grew up with those people so... I'm with @Prone Squanderer Sarah would have been far more interesting especially considering she was fallout 3's main character after James died.
 
CT Phipps said:
You realize Maxson is a bad guy, right? He's pretty much the co-antagonist with Father. We're supposed to realize the Brotherhood of Steel which we loved (albeit, that would only be me on these forums) have been corrupted to evil. It's supposed to be moving because they were supposed to be the heroes of the Wasteland and they've become murderous conquerors instead.

Your Sarah Lyons suggestion is Arthur Maxson's story.
Click to expand...

No I hadn't realized it. His huge scar and kill all mutants/synths attitude were quite subtle.

He's "bad" because...he is? What did he lose? What made him the man he is now?
 
R.Graves said:
Yes but it would be far more interesting and believable had it been Sarah. Maxsons backstory doesn't add up. And yeah it could be propaganda except... Maxson grew up with those people so... I'm with @Prone Squanderer Sarah would have been far more interesting especially considering she was fallout 3's main character after James died.
Click to expand...

I see it easier that a teenager given absolute power becomes a brutal murderer than the generic nice girl of Fallout 3 becomes evil. Then again, I actually liked the characters of Fallout 3 so I may have a different perspective than other people. My biggest emotional moment in Fallout 4 was reading Sarah Lyons was killed and thinking what a horrible thing that was.

Prone Squanderer said:
No I hadn't realized it. His huge scar and kill all mutants/synths attitude were quite subtle.

He's "bad" because...he is? What did he lose? What made him the man he is now?
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware racist conquest-hungry dickbags required a tragic backstory. Of course, I'm of the school that Maxson is the only character who could have worked as a central antagonist but they'd have to rewrite the game to make use of him.
 
  • The combat - big improvement on Fallout 3 and NV, I think we can all agree.
Not the guns though. There are what, 25 different type of firearms in this game? There are almost zero unique weaponry, that just look different from all the others. Kellogg's Pistol is just a Relentless .44, and so on. From the top of my head, the Deliverer is the only unique weapon I can remember.
  • The exploration, really enjoyed this. A varied and fun environment that I found it hard to get bored in.
You need to remember that the game takes place 210 years after a nuclear war. Where are all the settlements, besides the two? Where are the people? Why is their so many decent loot areas, when is should've been ransacked by raiders or just humans?
  • Another improvement on FO3 which was boring blasted rock and dead trees for most of the map. Bethesda wasted a massive opportunity here with the Capitol Wasteland in my opinion.
This, I agree on.
  • The story - I liked it. Controversial sure, but it is my favourite out of all the Fallout games. I liked the characters in it too. When I killed Kellog, I felt a real sense of gratification that I had finally gotten revenge for my wife. And when I assured the Institute would have a prosperous future and helped Shaun achieve his dreams, I felt achievement.
By all do you mean Fallout 3 and 4? Or do you mean all the games? If the second, you belong to the group that Bethesda clearly advistised for: No consequence, only satisfaction. In New Vegas, there were consequence for your action, making everything less satisfaction and like: But I thought I did right!; which is kinda the point of a game with choice and consequence.
  • The factions - most of them at least. All the factions were well put together, with the Institute being my favourite of them all (science for the win). The BoS needed changing and I think that was handled well. The Gunners were a massive breath of fresh air, making a big change from the spiky - punk rock masochist's we have had in the last couple of games. About time we had some new and different raiders.
Oh yes, MORE RAIDERS THANK YOU BETHESDA FOR BLESSING US WITH THIS ABSOLUTELY BARBARIC FACTION THAT DOESN'T DO OTHER THAN SHOOT YOU ON SIGHT. AND ALSO, THANK YOU FOR MAKING THEM MERCENARIES THAT SHOOT YOU AND OTHERS BECAUSE WHY NOT. They aren't even 'different' they are a cheap mans Brotherhood of Steel, gathering technology and thinking they are better than other groups etc.
The Institute... really? A faction that has no fucking plan, switching opinions fucking fast, replacing people with robots, USING THE FUCKING FEV WHICH WAS CLEARLY STATED TO BE A MARIPOSA THING and not justifying anything at all. CAESAR THAT WILL CRUCIFY PEOPLE CLEARLY STATES WHY HE IS THE RIGHT CHOICE, WHILE FATHER IS LIKE 'BUT I'M YOUR SON, SO SUCK ON ME YOU FUCKING TWAT AND BELIEVE ME WHEN I SAY THAT THE COMMONWEALTH WILL BE BETTER'

  • Settlements - nice concept, but far too much emphasis was placed on them and they should never have been marketed as a game making thing. They should be a side activity.
Nice concept? It was created so people could be like 'wow i've played 60 hours! 50 of them on settlements and 10 of them on other settlements that need my help.

Dislikes
  • Elder Maxson - he came across as a cartoon character. This entire thing about him killing a deathclaw at 16 and then killing some massive super mutant overlord at 18 then unifying the Brotherhood and building the Prydwen and and and.....naaah. Just naaaaah. And the fact he is the last of the Maxson line. FFS. I really dont want to kill the final Maxson, Roger was such a badass. Anyway the Maxsons were on the west coast and fucking belong there. The retarded excuse for Arthur on the East coast is his mum wanted him over there because he was a timid child. So your going to send your kid roughly 1800 miles across the country because he is a bit timid. No, come up with a real fucking excuse next time writers. His coat is the most overrated thing ever. Fathers Labcoat is so much better.
The only cartoon character? Not any of those from Reporter to goddess that fights Deathclaws... If you mention Maxson, you gotta mention the 5000 others (oh wait there isn't 5000 or any impressive number, unless Settler #550 counts, but his background isn't very big.)
  • Preston Garvey. Nuff said
Nono. Not nuff said. You liked what he stands for. Why not like him?
  • The Minutemen in general. Pretty pointless faction, with the most boring quests ever.
Yeah, the Railroad got quests like: Get that! Place that! Kill that! Much more immersive than the Minutemen.
  • The Triggermen - fucking stupid, they make no sense at all.
Yes, but the Gunners do? The Gunners are mecernaries. They. Don't. Shoot. Without. Reason.
  • There are about 2 pro BoS and Institute companions and a glut of about 6 or 7 pro Railroad/Minuitmen companions
Why be sad? There is no consequence. Help the Institute? Nick Valentine is fine with you. Only Deacon, Buzz Lightyear and that fuckhead from the Institute will leave you.
Help the Brotherhood? Strong is fine with you, besides Maxson promising genocide against the mutants.
  • Tinker. Fucking. Tom
Yeah. Crazy guy who is very cliche. Just like EVERY character in this game. Name a unique character. I dare you. I DOUBLE DARE YOU.
 
CT Phipps said:
I see it easier that a teenager given absolute power becomes a brutal murderer than the generic nice girl of Fallout 3 becomes evil. Then again, I actually liked the characters of Fallout 3 so I may have a different perspective than other people. My biggest emotional moment in Fallout 4 was reading Sarah Lyons was killed and thinking what a horrible thing that was.



I wasn't aware racist conquest-hungry dickbags required a tragic backstory. Of course, I'm of the school that Maxson is the only character who could have worked as a central antagonist but they'd have to rewrite the game to make use of him.
Click to expand...
1. Killing Sarah Lyons is a waste. nd reading about it? It would have been far more emotional having Maxson have small emotional breakdown about it to the player. And why is it more believable that the generic nice kid becomes evil over the generic nice girl?

2. No they don't REQUIRE a tragic backstory but it's better when they at least have one. See: Edward sallow.
 
CT Phipps said:
I see it easier that a teenager given absolute power becomes a brutal murderer than the generic nice girl of Fallout 3 becomes evil. Then again, I actually liked the characters of Fallout 3 so I may have a different perspective than other people. My biggest emotional moment in Fallout 4 was reading Sarah Lyons was killed and thinking what a horrible thing that was.
Click to expand...

Just because she was generic in Fallout 3 doesn't mean she couldn't have been developed for Fallout 4. Have her suffer loss, her frustration over the fact her brothers-in-arms were dying for what she saw as nothing, have her decide that she'd put a stop to it and have her own plan.

If she was generic and nice, why did you give a shit reading about her death?

CT Phipps said:
I wasn't aware racist conquest-hungry dickbags required a tragic backstory. Of course, I'm of the school that Maxson is the only character who could have worked as a central antagonist but they'd have to rewrite the game to make use of him.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying all "villains" need a tragic backstory, just something interesting. Caesar at first looks like a generic badguy but has a lot of backstory to him that you can look at and understand how he got to that point.

EDIT: Graves is on the same page.
 
therealyesman said:
Only Deacon, Buzz Lightyear and that fuckhead from the Institute will leave you.
Click to expand...
Nah Buzz and Cheap Terminator Knockoff only leave you if your affinity is lower than the perk reward limit, even if you betray their respective faction.

Deacon will leave no matter what... because when you go down a different faction path you have to kill him.
 
It's kind of weird that the first 2 games were capable of low-int dialogue in every single conversation, yet somehow 3 and 4 can't do it at all
 
R.Graves said:
1. Killing Sarah Lyons is a waste. nd reading about it? It would have been far more emotional having Maxson have small emotional breakdown about it to the player. And why is it more believable that the generic nice kid becomes evil over the generic nice girl?
Click to expand...

One is a seasoned adult and friend while one is an impressionable young kid. Do you think adults routinely turn evil over children?

2. No they don't REQUIRE a tragic backstory but it's better when they at least have one. See: Edward sallow.
Click to expand...

I really wish they'd gone with the paper triger route with Maxson. Reveal that he's nothing more than a puppet and a mouthpiece for Lost Hills and that he isn't even a great warrior but required Danse to murder his rivals as well as fight his fights. It would have made a more interesting character.

If she was generic and nice, why did you give a shit reading about her death?
Click to expand...

Luke Skywalker was a generic nice guy and he's still one of the single most important influences in my developing life. Sarah Lyons really made an impression on me and my character, like so many other players.

The embodiment of what the BoS should be versus the BS shitheads on the West Coast.
 
CT Phipps said:
I really wish they'd gone with the paper triger route with Maxson. Reveal that he's nothing more than a puppet and a mouthpiece for Lost Hills and that he isn't even a great warrior but required Danse to murder his rivals as well as fight his fights. It would have made a more interesting character.
Click to expand...
tbh if they had good writers a fascist militant leader hell bent on destroying technology that could bring humanity back to pre-war standards wouldn't need some epic 'le puppet all along' plot twist.
 
CT Phipps said:
One is a seasoned adult and friend while one is an impressionable young kid. Do you think adults routinely turn evil over children?
Click to expand...

Maxson had a comfy life at the Citadel as a young kid, Sarah would have seen the losses and all the horrible shit up close long before he would.

CT Phipps said:
Luke Skywalker was a generic nice guy and he's still one of the single most important influences in my developing life. Sarah Lyons really made an impression on me and my character, like so many other players.

The embodiment of what the BoS should be versus the BS shitheads on the West Coast.
Click to expand...

How can they make an impression if you say they're generic? If they're generic, they don't really stand out, yet they made a big impression?

CT Phipps said:
Fascist dictators are rarely RL badasses. :)
Click to expand...

Badasses or not, they tend to have interesting pasts before becoming dictators.
 
This is true. You do have the occassional Napoleon among Comrade Index Card.

As for generic, there's a line between "generic" and "archetypal" I suppose with the primary difference being archetypal characters like Luke Skywalker and Sarah Lyons are awesome while generic characters are boring and forgettable--point taken.
 
CT Phipps said:
One is a seasoned adult and friend while one is an impressionable young kid. Do you think adults routinely turn evil over children?



I really wish they'd gone with the paper triger route with Maxson. Reveal that he's nothing more than a puppet and a mouthpiece for Lost Hills and that he isn't even a great warrior but required Danse to murder his rivals as well as fight his fights. It would have made a more interesting character.



Luke Skywalker was a generic nice guy and he's still one of the single most important influences in my developing life. Sarah Lyons really made an impression on me and my character, like so many other players.

The embodiment of what the BoS should be versus the BS shitheads on the West Coast.
Click to expand...
1. Yeah he's an impressionable young kid surrounded by generic nice people. Not racist xenophobic dictatoers.

2. Lost hills is likely dead as it's deep in NCR territory and they're enemies.

3. Sarah Lyons isn't comparable to Luke as he had character development.

4. And how is a brotherhood who actively tries to wipe out an entire race better than one who just doesn't want humanity to kill itself again?
 
R.Graves said:
1. Yeah he's an impressionable young kid surrounded by generic nice people. Not racist xenophobic dictatoers.
Click to expand...

Eh, they both die at a formative period of his childhood. I have the theory after Lyons and his daughter died (possibly murdered by their subordinates) that he was taken under the wing of someone much more militant and xenophobic. Also, unlike the West Coasters, Arthur grew up in a war zone where mutants and monsters were undeniably pure evil.

Besides, Lyons and his daughter were both racist buttheads who shot ghouls on sight.

2. Lost hills is likely dead as it's deep in NCR territory and they're enemies.
Click to expand...

Well, they're mentioned in the game so unless we have a reason to think they're gone, they're probably fine. Presumably either NCR backed away from their territory due to the events in Nevada or the treaty with the BOS and NCR helped make a final peace between them. Either way, I doubt NCR is going to commit genocide on the BOS and even they're not stupid enough to fight to literally the last soldier. They're not the Enclave.

3. Sarah Lyons isn't comparable to Luke as he had character development.
Click to expand...

Yeah, she only had one game. I was really hoping to see her gaain.

4. And how is a brotherhood who actively tries to wipe out an entire race better than one who just doesn't want humanity to kill itself again?
Click to expand...

The East Coast BoS was an awesome heroic group which got corrupted into an evil one. I think that's an interesting story which got wasted in the overall mess of Fallout 4's plot. Imagine if you were, like me, a guy who really cared about the ECBoS and thought of them as fictional friends the way, say, Imoen and Viconia are to most of the people are here....or Veronica and boone.

Then you see their legacy twisted, perverted, and turned to something they'd despise.

That'd be an interesting story.
 
CT Phipps said:
This is true. You do have the occassional Napoleon among Comrade Index Card.

As for generic, there's a line between "generic" and "archetypal" I suppose with the primary difference being archetypal characters like Luke Skywalker and Sarah Lyons are awesome while generic characters are boring and forgettable--point taken.
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity, why do you think Sarah is awesome? What is it about her that makes you think that?

CT Phipps said:
Well, they're mentioned in the game so unless we have a reason to think they're gone, they're probably fine. Presumably either NCR backed away from their territory due to the events in Nevada or the treaty with the BOS and NCR helped make a final peace between them. Either way, I doubt NCR is going to commit genocide on the BOS and even they're not stupid enough to fight to literally the last soldier. They're not the Enclave.
Click to expand...

They hunted the Enclave down as much as they could and Colonel Moore is very willing to have the Mojave Chapter wiped out. I don't see why the NCR wouldn't completely wipe out the BOS in their weakened state if relations aren't fixed.
 
CT Phipps said:
Eh, they both die at a formative period of his childhood. I have the theory after Lyons and his daughter died (possibly murdered by their subordinates) that he was taken under the wing of someone much more militant and xenophobic. Also, unlike the West Coasters, Arthur grew up in a war zone where mutants and monsters were undeniably pure evil.

Besides, Lyons and his daughter were both racist buttheads who shot ghouls on sight.



Well, they're mentioned in the game so unless we have a reason to think they're gone, they're probably fine. Presumably either NCR backed away from their territory due to the events in Nevada or the treaty with the BOS and NCR helped make a final peace between them. Either way, I doubt NCR is going to commit genocide on the BOS and even they're not stupid enough to fight to literally the last soldier. They're not the enclave.
The East Coast BoS was an awesome heroic group which got corrupted into an evil one. I think that's an interesting story which got wasted in the overall mess of Fallout 4's plot. Imagine if you were, like me, a guy who really cared about the ECBoS and thought of them as fictional friends the way, say, Imoen and Viconia are to most of the people are here....or Veronica and boone.

Then you see their legacy twisted, perverted, and turned to something they'd despise.

That'd be an interesting story.
Click to expand...
Undeniably evil? Fawkes, unlcle Leo and every ghoul who isn't Roy Phillips or azreal in fo3. Posiibly? Game doesn't state it you can't excuse bad writing with fan theories. Also yes I'm well aware fo4 mentions lost hills just as you should be aware that is dumb and makes no sense at all as I just said. Its probably more of that propaganda you love to speculate about. More likely it's just bad writing. And it wasnt just the Lyons who were generic good guys. Evryone was. Are you trying to say the outcast took him under their wing?

And you can say the brother hood of fo3 were awesome... But I Think they were just generic and boring. Whatever to each their own I guess. Except when you're wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top