What is the purpose of this forum?

[Atomic_Spawned]

So, I get it. Fallout 76 didn't measure up. It failed. Big whoop. However, instead of pointing the finger at Bethesda for 'trashing' Fallout, why not come up with ways to improve it? not modding it or anything, but I'm sure if you sent solutions in earnest instead of sarcastic rants about how they ruined the game, they'd be more eager to fix it. Now, I don't condone some of their actions, like the 'canvas bag' screw up, or the essays for modding the game. They also released the beta as the finished product, which sucked. but I think you need to cut them some slack. they're venturing into an uncharted territory with multiplayer Fallout, and I think if they just replicated what they did for Elder Scrolls Online, people would complain it's too similar. So, is this forum here just to complain about the failure of Fallout 76?

 

[Big No]

You're entering dangerous waters with this.

 

[Atomic_Spawned]

I get that, but everybody needs to not be so set in the 'It's my way or the highway' bullshit, y'know?

 

[Norzan]

You will fail then. We have dissected the franchise from front to back and Fallout 3, 4 and 76 are objectively inferior to what the other games have offered. You are not the first to try, because we have seen more people trying.

 

[R.Graves]

why not come up with ways to improve it?

Why do that when Bethesda has had not one but 3 games made by them all of which are failutes as fallout games? Hell two of three even had a shining example for how fallout as an first person ARPG should work.

 

[Atomic_Spawned]

We have dissected the franchise from front to back and Fallout 3, 4 and 76 are objectively inferior to what the other games have offered.

And there it is. Inferiority of the newer games. You can't compare them though! They're apples and oranges, dude. The amount of differences in design is staggering between 2 and 3.

 

[Norzan]

And there it is. Inferiority of the newer games. You can't compare them though! They're apples and oranges, dude. The amount of differences in design is staggering between 2 and 3.

Then i'll compare them to New Vegas and they are objectively worse. See how easy it is? Plus, writing, story, characters, world building and everything that is not tied to the genre can be compared with each other. And Fallout 3, 4 and 76 are worse.

Then i can compare their gameplay with other FPS. It's absolutely terrible. And i can actually compare the gameplay of the first two with the 3D games: it's a much worse vessel for RPG gameplay. FPS is objectively a worse vessel for RPG gameplay.

You are trying so hard to dissociate Fallout 3, 4 and 76 from the other games in the series, but you can't. They HAVE to be compared, they are sequels in the same franchise.

 

[Atomic_Spawned]

Even though NV was made with the same engine? With just as many faults as 3 and 4? I don't follow. New Vegas is good for the story, but the story of 3 was good also. The idea of attempting to salvage the water, Eden being a ZAX supercomputer, the moral choices of sacrificing yourself, doing nothing, or taking over at the end, it wasn't bad. It's not to say that some of the characters weren't bad, but there were good characters too.

 

[Norzan]

As many faults as 3 and 4? Are you serious? New Vegas is miles ahead of those in basically everything. Story, characters, world building, respect for lore, continuing the fanchise in a logical direction, good quest premises, characters with motivations and personalities. 3 and 4 lack all of these.

The story of 3 is just blatant mishmash of 1 and 2, with none of the nuances or good writing. It's literally doing the water is needed plot from 1 and shoving in the Enclave from 2 as a villain. Even though they were thouroghly destroyed in 2. It's also nonsensical, a wasteland that daddy claims needs water, but it's been surviving fine for 200 years. Why does it need water NOW? Characters do stupid shit like sacrificing themselves for no reason and the Enclave makes some of the most retarded decisions i ever seen a villain do.

The way John Eden can be convinced to stop everything is so laughable. While convincing the Master to stop the Super Mutant invasion requires a long quest that you collect clues in to convince him that the Super Mutant are sterile. John Eden literally gets stopped by you saying that he will never succeed.

What moral choices for sacrificing yourself? There's none. At release you had no choice but to sacrifice yourself, even though Fawkes, a Super Mutant immune to radiation was there. The backlash to this was so big that they added the ability to send Fawkes there in the Broken Steel DLC. There's no moral choice when one of the choices is clearly the perfect one.

Not to mention the Broken Steel DLC makes one ending canon.

 

[HydroFlame]

I made a point about the Fawkes argument in another thread. He is a super mutant immue to radiation, and sending him in would ensure the survival of both you and him. BUT, you are still called a coward for doing so. WTF? Mind blown! BOOM!

 

[KingArthur]

What is the purpose of this forum? Shit talking and jokes about homosexuality. And I love it.

 

[HydroFlame]

This place was created in 1997, so... I'd wager that the answer to the OP is no.

 

[KingArthur]

Unless the people that made this forum had help from the ancient aliens and saw the future or however the fuck that supposedly works.

 

[Alphons]

Main story of Fallout 3 is just bad. You're supposed to care about the water problem, but there is only ONE character affected by lack of clean water.
Enclave as a main succeeds in being less funny and at the same time even more retarded than FO2 Enclave(they didn't succeed with air-borne virus in FO2, so they've decided to upgrade it's capabilities and made it water- borne only?).
Your dad kills himself, because someone else wants to turn the purifier on, so later you slaughter everyone wanting to turn the purifier on and then kill yourself to turn the purifier on (yes, Emil won an award for this story).

And then Fallout 4 arrived with the Institute- the worst faction in all Fallout games (all main games, Tactics, New Vegas and TCs).

 

[Deleted member 98605]

Bethesda isn't going to change jack shit, even if we're 'nicer' about it. They got their money from 3, 4, and 76. That's their only concern. 76 was only a tumbling block because it was a rushed Battle Royale that was an obvious cashgrab, not because it was a 'bad Fallout game' to our eyes.

Bethesda doesn't care about the old fans; there was some outreach back in '05-'06, I believe, but Bethesda saw how much 3 sold and saw a moneybag that wasn't 'us' or old-style RPG guys and hasn't looked back.

There was NV, but NV sold little and Bethesda hasn't touched jackshit from it since. I'm sure everyone else can chip in with rumors about how Beth hates Obsidian and likewise stuff, yadda yadda.

This Forum exists because people are damned enough to talk about it from a general view of 'WOW THIS IS A DOWNGRADE' and goes from there. That's all there is to it.

 

[naossano]

I am not sure why the admin still bother to maintain subsection about Beth Fallout. We are obviously not the demographic target.

 

[Deleted member 98605]

I am not sure why the admin still bother to maintain subsection about Beth Fallout. We are obviously not the demographic target.

Some of us play the games, mod a few, etc. It could all be lumped in one forum, however, rather than specialized ones.

 

[Norzan]

Bethesda isn't going to change jack shit, even if we're 'nicer' about it. They got their money from 3, 4, and 76. That's their only concern. 76 was only a tumbling block because it was a rushed Battle Royale that was an obvious cashgrab, not because it was a 'bad Fallout game' to our eyes.

Not to mention the majority of people here don't even play the game (or anyone at all), so why should we care for 76 improving? If anything, i want it to continue to crash and burn, to show how incompetent Bethesda is. I know Fallout will never go back to quality like New Vegas and the first two games, but i sure do like seeing Bethesda getting trashed by people.

Bethesda never gave a shit about the fans of the first two games in the first place, Todd Howard clearly said this when he claimed he would be as pissed as the old fans that got pissed at Fallout 3. We also know bitching about the franchise isn't gonna change a thing, but we do it because fuck it. I have fun explaining to people why Fallout 3, 4 and 76 are shit.

 

[R.Graves]

So, is this forum here just to complain about the failure of Fallout 76?

Naw we celebrate the failure of 76. The game had no potential even concept. May as well make a fallout kart racer.

 

[Gizmojunk]

And there it is. Inferiority of the newer games. You can't compare them though! They're apples and oranges, dude. The amount of differences in design is staggering between 2 and 3.

You are wrong in this, they can compare; and FO3 & 4 come up lacking.

Fallout 1 & 2 are like the apples, and FO3 & 4, are like the failed franken-fruit attempts at making —better— apples for the modern-mass consumer. The results are great for those who had never seen or tasted an apple, but for anyone who has, the new ones neither look nor taste like an apple—yet they are proudly called such; (and the real apples aspersed by the studio as out dated). FO3 and FO4 occupy positions in a series... and for which they are ill equipped—and in some cases unequipped to fulfill the necessary tasks of a proper sequel; and they don't even try.

Case in point: These new "apples" are generally reddish in coloring, but have no vitamin C, K, antioxidants, dietary fiber or potassium; they are laced with aspartame, and taste like cotton candy. Would kids love'em? Sure.

What FO3 tries (and succeeds at) is to simulate a superficially Fallout~esque looking sand-box environment to walk around in; and to shoot at things. FO4 [predictably] improves the visual aspects of this while stripping out even more of the vestigial RPG mechanics. See... FO3 is a stripped down FOBOS grafted onto Oblivion; and FO4 is a stripped down FO3 grafted on to what is essentially Doom.

This guy is their market—not Fallout series fans.

To this guy, the series starts at FO3; and he views FO4 as a massive improvement for the very reason that they stripped out the RPG mechanics.