What was the Funniest Argument You've had with a Bethesda Apologist?

[mithrap]

What is funny, is how often people that don't do art or design, talk about how, art and design is opinion. Yeah. I guess that's why it requires years of practise, one way or another, to be a trully outsanding artist and/or designer. Because it is all opinion. And you don't have to learn anything about anatomy, colour, composition, lighting and all that technical stuff that makes the difference between a drawing that looks like from a 5 year old and a real masterpiece.
When you gauge something, then you can look at it from the technical side, or you can completely judge it on style, and what you personally prefer. For example, I am not a fan of impressionism, with the exception of Van Gogh - seriously, the guy was a genious. And I really don't like much of Picassos work. But I have a huge respect from the technical side and the knowledge some of those great painters like Monet and Picasso have shown in their work. I can easily see, why he is a master. You can see that they have years of knowledge and experimenting behind their work. What I really love, is Surrealism, not Dali though, but the works of Giger and Ched Zar. They are true masters of their craft. And yes, you can, objectively, measure quality here. What style you prefer though, that is of course opinion. And Surralism is not superior to Impressionism or Cubism or what ever.
Sadly people often mix those up, and think, that a game like Fallout 4 makes the same kind of RPG like Fallout 1 or Planescape Torment, just because it has the name Fallout.

When I hear the argument about "art and design quality" being a subjective opinion, I show them this :

My point is, sure, your appreciation of art is subjective. Doesn't mean that art itself is subjective.

 

[Ediros]

Well, here goes another one:

Me:
Change is a good thing? Really? Tell that to all megaman fans, metal gear solid fans or breath of fire fans or basically any other fanbase with such changes.

Sometimes change is not a good thing and Fallout is no longer a franchise for its' fans but for people who hate rpgs.

Him:
You think you're making a really good point, but you're actually just reaffirming mine.

The existence of other whining fanboys doesn't make you less of a whiner.

Me
I am not whining I am stating my opinion. You people are the ones who downvoted my post to hell for whatever reason.

Also I think you are wrong fanboy=\= fan. I am the letter because I love the franchise and I hate what bethesda has done to it.

You have accused me of being fanboy but the only fanboys are people who give Fallout 4 reviews like 10/10 best RPG EVER!

I don't understand you, people because you accept mediocority.

Let's all forget how NMS ended up or newest Deus Ex with its' paid one time use dlc. Bethesda is a company that wants our money and they do by making people fall for it with a clever marketing. If you think I am a fanboy, then what are you?

Because I really don't see you as a Fallout fan or anyone else who thinks Fallout 4 is a good game, let alone a good Fallout game.

Him
Nah, kiddo. A game isn't bad just because you have selective bias.

You can't forgive the bad parts in a game because it wasn't made by the people you prefer. Tell me honestly, if Fallout 3 were made by Interplay—exactly the same game, just by Interplay—would you be so harsh on it? Think long and hard; because we both know what your kneejerk reaction is going to be, but I think the truth is different.

The original Fallout game was a clunky mess. Its gameplay was utter shit. Fallout 2 was barely better. Yet we can look past that mess and see the story, the characters, and the setting. That's why we like it.

Fallout 3 and 4 have clunky stories, and characters yes. But, they ramp the setting up past anything Interplay could have ever done.

Interplay makes stories. Bethesda makes worlds. You can spend hundreds of hours on a good story; but you can spend thousands in a good world.

And I don't think you have any right to be telling other people that they aren't real fans, just because they like something you don't. Grow up and look past yourself, you infantine churl.

Me:
Very Well, I will answer your post and explain to you my stance because I don't think you get it.

1.It doesn't matter who makes the game only the end result. If Obsidian or anyone else made a bad game I would criticize it all the same. In fact I used to think bethesda is a good company, but after their recent moves like: raising a price of a season pass and giving us 4 shitty workshop dlcs; stealing an entire questline from a mod and screwing up modders made me hate them.

2.Do you honestly find Fallout 3 and 4 world's good? In that case I ask how? Sure Fallout 3 had some nice views but outside of that? Both are filled with a ton of dungeons filled with raiders, ghouls, supermutants etc. Let's not forget how a poor little settlement is surrounded from 3 sidea by ghouls or raiders or supermutants, but whatever our player character will save them all the time and nothing will change. Or how did people of megaton survive for 200 hundred by scavenging and live in a crater with an active atomic bomb. Bethesda creates themepark where nothing changes and happens until player character does something...

Not even once I found bethesda's world immersive or believeable in Fallout 4.

3. You are right I don't have any right. I am just a "infantine churl" who wanted to get more of games like NV not crap that is Fallout 4. You on the other hand are a guy who decided to insult me and called me a kiddo.

Guess that means you are just as immature as I am, if this is how I you act.

Have a nice day, I am done with you. Do me a favour and go to sugarbombed I am sure you will fit there nicely.

Him:
"
It doesn't matter who makes the game only the end result."



You and I both know that's not true, Mr. The-first-two-Fallout-games-were-wonderful-and-the-most-recent-ones-aren't-because-I-don't-like-Bethesda-and-that's-a-good-enough-reason.


"
but after their recent moves like: raising a price of a season pass and giving us 4 shitty workshop dlcs; stealing an entire questline from a mod and screwing up modders made me hate them."


Alright, so you hate them because:

1) They have a AAA game company to pay for.

2) They made optional DLC for a feature that you don't like, but thousands of other people do.

3) They took inspiration from modding—which is why they make their games so easy to mod in the first place.

and 4) Shocker of all shocks, they had to take extra time to make sure a new feature wouldn't break the game.

(I assume you're talking about the creation kit here. [Hard to tell when you're so fucking vague.])


"
Do you honestly find Fallout 3 and 4 world's good?"


I couldn't give a rat's ass if you do or don't. The point was that thousands of people do, and the fact that you are not among that number doesn't make a game you personally don't like objectively bad.


"
Guess that means you are just as immature as I am, if this is how I you act."


Insults aren't immature, they just mean I don't respect you. I guess the concept that there might be a reason for that just slipped your mind. You're a perfect little snowflake, after all. There's no way that your childish indifference to other people's opinions could cause disrespect.

Ps: should I continue writing with a guy like this? I think I might have lost a couple of my brain cells reading this.

 

[Earth]

Tell me honestly, if Fallout 3 were made by Interplay—exactly the same game, just by Interplay—would you be so harsh on it? Think long and hard; because we both know what your kneejerk reaction is going to be, but I think the truth is different.

 

[Millim]

^Ouch

BTW, "Bethesda makes Worlds" like fuck they do.
They create small playgrounds which are unconnected.

 

[Lucas9]

Tell me honestly, if Fallout 3 were made by Interplay—exactly the same game, just by Interplay—would you be so harsh on it? Think long and hard; because we both know what your kneejerk reaction is going to be, but I think the truth is different.

I like how these people believe they own the truth and know exactly what the rest of the people think. How can you even argue with people who claim to know your opinion on a game that wasn't even made?*

The original Fallout game was a clunky mess. Its gameplay was utter shit.

Having played FO1 AFTER FO3 and FNV... I actually like FO1's gameplay better. It just looks aged because it is an almost 20-year old game, but it could receive a facial lift, keep the same mechanics, and I would love it no doubt.

FNV's gameplay is a bore, thanks to Bethesda's amazing decision to make a 1st person shooter that plays like crap. Wasteland 2 was much more fun by comparison, and the combat in this game was really clunky compared to Fallout's.

Bethesda makes worlds. You can spend hundreds of hours on a good story; but you can spend thousands in a good world.

"Worlds" = skeletons in funny positions

Also, if you spend a thousand hours in a world, you are autistic. No game: Skyrim, Fallout 3, Fallout: New Vegas, Fallout 1 or 2, have that many hours worth of fun in a world.

It's literally exploring and shooting. Once you've seen one dungeon, you've seen them all. FNV is a big exception, alongside the original Fallouts, because you are actually encouraged to replay through the quests achieving different results and endings. Skyrim? It's the same quest, done exactly the same way, for the 20th time if you are playing for 1000 hours. I don't care about playing a Fire mage if my quest possibilities are exactly the same as playing as a Barbarian.

I couldn't give a rat's ass if you do or don't. The point was that thousands of people do, and the fact that you are not among that number doesn't make a game you personally don't like objectively bad.

This moronic "a lot of people like it so it must be good" point of view has to stop. Fallout 4 has glaring flaws everywhere. There's not a single mechanic in FO4 that isn't flawed. But we cannot say the game is objectively bad, even if:

- The dialogue system is ridiculous and completely unfit for a Fallout game.
- The voiced protagonist is ridiculous, half-assed, and completely unfit for a Fallout game.
- The settlement system is ridiculous (you literally build machines with no previous knowledge), half-assed (left the world building to the player), and completely unfit for a Fallout game.
- The Vault building is ridiculous and completely unfit for a Fallout game.

And so on and so on. Definitely 10/10 Game of the Year.

You literally have to be a fanboy to even be annoyed by people criticizing Fallout 4.

Ps: should I continue writing with a guy like this? I think I might have lost a couple of my brain cells reading this.

I'm assuming this was on Reddit, and you were either arguing with someone on Gamingcirclejerk, or a regular from Gamingcirclejerk.

Don't bother. These people literally work on a "must defend critcized games that are very popular" motivation. And if you argue on their sub, you get downvoted to death and have to reply every 20 minutes thanks to your negative karma.

Reddit truly is the worst site on the Internet. At least in 4chan you can reply with no one tracking your posting history, and without having to wait unnecessarily wrong to voice your opinion.

*Worth mentioning is that if Obsidian suddenly made a shit Fallout game, with all the key people working on it (Sawyer, Urquhart, Tim Cain, Avellone, etc), we would be doomed. There would be no whining, because there would be nothing to ask for. If a racing car driver loses his legs, we can't just whine for him to grow them back. But if a different driver takes the spot of a succesful driver and crashes the car, you bet I will be whining about having the other driver back.

EDIT: I'm sorry, it's just that these kind of comments really piss me off. It's like people can't understand some fans wanting the series going back to what made it different in the first place. Fallout 4 is Skyrim with guns now. You could literally shift the setting and would find no vestige of the original Fallout at all, whereas I see a lot of Fallout in a game like Arcanum. That's because Bethesda's Fallout is really The Elder Scrolls, but in a Fallout setting, and nothing more.

 

[TieAndSuitDude]

I don't know if that counts as funny, but on Fallout 4 Steam discussions, a thread called "Why Fallout 4 is a RPG" exists.
Well, if you have to explain why a game is a certain genre, than maybe the game isn't exactly that one genre. But the replies (+ the explanation of the OP what defines the RPG genre) made the thread hillarious. I don't have a link, but I'm certain the thread still exists.

 

[GlowHound]

Arguing with a very special person about how he thinks optional dialogue, like the Courier impregnating a woman in Montana, is canon simply because it's there whether you choose it or not.

Spoiler

Person 1: "Your past was never revealed , just because they put the options doesn't mean all of those are canon, you're aware multiple endings exist, but yet only one is canon, so your logic doesn't go well here, since is a story related feature"

Special Person: "So you're saying Obsidian game: Fallout New Vegas isn't canon? Everything they added with dialog, with clear indication about the courier's past including DLC were just added for no reason? Your past is canon, the progress and future of the mojave depends on your actions at the end of the game. Which is where the different ending comes into play. One is already defined, the other isn't."

Me: "He's saying that the presence of options like saying you've been to Montana or New Reno doesn't mean those things are canon for the Courier. They CAN be, but only if you CHOOSE those options, and even then, it's only for THAT specific version of the Courier.

They're potential canon."

SP: "They're options if you want to say it but they're canon as it happened. Much like the courier admitting to the lonesome Drifter he impregnated a 18 year old women years ago."

Me: "No. Like I said, they are not canon because you don't have to say those things.

This isn't hard to understand.

http://fallout.gamepedia.com/Courier#Other_background_information

'The player can make several suggestions about their past through in-game dialogue options. Since these are, as the name suggests, optional, they are down to player choice and as such, do not form part of the player's background until they have been selected.'"

SP: "I should point out that the wikia's aren't 100% official it just gives you a good idea about things. The way that particular quote is saying is that they "CAN" make suggestions about the past through in game options and saying it is optional. But they're just as canon as anything else the developers added in other wise with your logic I can say new vegas is not canon at all. It's a stupid game with all what ifs with no definitives.

But luckily this isn't the case seeing how Ulysses proves this during lonesome road. While you did, unbeknownst at the time, contributed to what became to the divide and the destruction you may have left in the Mojave you still define your actions and path at the end and therefor it's how you were able to persuade Ulysses. And just like with everything in life your actions and choices determines the future. Which once again backs my point up that the past is already written but the future is not, and you can write it however you want with choices."

Me: "They're written by people who understand how RPG protagonist backgrounds and dialogue work. This stuff wouldn't need to be cordoned off in another section with a disclaimer if it wasn't Schrödinger's Canon.

I like how you flat-out ignored this part "and as such, do not form part of the player's background until they have been selected." Most people don't have a problem with this concept.

You can make the Courier varying ages. A Courier that is in their twenties wouldn't have been able to impregnate the girl in Montana. Not to mention, to even get that line, you need to have Lady Killer. Oh that's right. The Courier doesn't even have to be a man. Or straight.

So..."

SP: "I was pointing out keywords in the quote which contradicts the point you were using it for. So it seems you failed to understand the quote really.

It doesn't even matter, that's just there to roleplay it doesn't change the fact that the canon courier is in there 30's and who's black.

No idea why you're bringing up gameplay elements as if it changes anything, it doesn't."

Like holy shit, how do you even talk to someone this fucking stupid?

The rest of the thread is pretty awful, too.

 

[Big No]

Arguing with a very special person about how he thinks optional dialogue, like the Courier impregnating a woman in Montana, is canon simply because it's there whether you choose it or not.

Spoiler

Person 1: "Your past was never revealed , just because they put the options doesn't mean all of those are canon, you're aware multiple endings exist, but yet only one is canon, so your logic doesn't go well here, since is a story related feature"

Special: "So you're saying Obsidian game: Fallout New Vegas isn't canon? Everything they added with dialog, with clear indication about the courier's past including DLC were just added for no reason? Your past is canon, the progress and future of the mojave depends on your actions at the end of the game. Which is where the different ending comes into play. One is already defined, the other isn't."

Me: "He's saying that the presence of options like saying you've been to Montana or New Reno doesn't mean those things are canon for the Courier. They CAN be, but only if you CHOOSE those options, and even then, it's only for THAT specific version of the Courier.

They're potential canon."

"They're options if you want to say it but they're canon as it happened. Much like the courier admitting to the lonesome Drifter he impregnated a 18 year old women years ago."

"No. Like I said, they are not canon because you don't have to say those things.

This isn't hard to understand.

http://fallout.gamepedia.com/Courier#Other_background_information

'The player can make several suggestions about their past through in-game dialogue options. Since these are, as the name suggests, optional, they are down to player choice and as such, do not form part of the player's background until they have been selected.'"

"I should point out that the wikia's aren't 100% official it just gives you a good idea about things. The way that particular quote is saying is that they "CAN" make suggestions about the past through in game options and saying it is optional. But they're just as canon as anything else the developers added in other wise with your logic I can say new vegas is not canon at all. It's a stupid game with all what ifs with no definitives.

But luckily this isn't the case seeing how Ulysses proves this during lonesome road. While you did, unbeknownst at the time, contributed to what became to the divide and the destruction you may have left in the Mojave you still define your actions and path at the end and therefor it's how you were able to persuade Ulysses. And just like with everything in life your actions and choices determines the future. Which once again backs my point up that the past is already written but the future is not, and you can write it however you want with choices."

"They're written by people who understand how RPG protagonist backgrounds and dialogue work. This stuff wouldn't need to be cordoned off in another section with a disclaimer if it wasn't Schrödinger's Canon.

I like how you flat-out ignored this part "and as such, do not form part of the player's background until they have been selected." Most people don't have a problem with this concept.

You can make the Courier varying ages. A Courier that is in their twenties wouldn't have been able to impregnate the girl in Montana. Not to mention, to even get that line, you need to have Lady Killer. Oh that's right. The Courier doesn't even have to be a man. Or straight.

So..."

"I was pointing out keywords in the quote which contradicts the point you were using it for. So it seems you failed to understand the quote really.

It doesn't even matter, that's just there to roleplay it doesn't change the fact that the canon courier is in there 30's and who's black.

No idea why you're bringing up gameplay elements as if it changes anything, it doesn't."

Like holy shit, how do you even talk to someone this fucking stupid?

The rest of the thread is pretty awful, too.

I presume the person you were discussing with had more to say than that one reply, otherwise I can sort of see where they're coming from. What with the option there, you might think the dialogue option is canon since... it's there. Unless it contradicted something else your character could say in another dialogue option about their potential backstory.

Obviously it's not the case here but most people I've noticed take RPG's at face value which can result in thinking all dialogue options are canon. It's not like there's thousands of different replies that a character can give to each person they meet (that and no developer is going to add in five million different possible questions per NPC obviously), so one would just assume the available options are the canon ones.

 

[GlowHound]

I labeled it a little better. Special is the guy.

...

I totally get it, but this guy takes it to an exceedingly pigheaded level.

 

[Lucas9]

Like holy shit, how do you even talk to someone this fucking stupid?

The rest of the thread is pretty awful, too.

Daily reminder those people are the same who say NMA is awful and the laughing stock of the "Fallout fanbase" (read: Fallout 3 and 4).

Also, regarding the Steam discussion someone mentioned, Fallout 4 is an RPG. It's just a very, very bad one, for a lot of reasons, including:

- Enforced background
- Voiced protagonist which, unlike Geralt from The Witcher, varies depending on the player's choice
- Ridiculous inability to say "fuck off, I don't want to belong to the Minutemen"

Among others. If I dug slightly deeper, I would never finish. But let's just say that the most hyped features of the game have no RPG elements involved whatsoever: settlement building, Power Armor functionality (involving customization and how my* female lawyer knows how to manipulate the most advanced piece of Pre-War technology), and weapon customization.

*never played FO4, never will

 

[Jogre]

Found this dickhead on Reddit. Didn't argue with him personally, but he seemed to be being an arse to anyone with even the slightest criticism of Fallout 4

Someone called him out on it later, and this was his response

"Condescending and Bitching" says the guy who is whining about hipsters, and patronizing anyone who criticizes the game.

Finally, look what he posted on the Witcher Forums

"Everyone's entitled to their opinion" -Really fucking rich dude.

 

[Deleted member 93956]

Yoh i'm tired of hipsters and hipster culture x12
I mean, when you get this kind of response, you bet that they'll won't offer literally ANY argument. They'll repeat that phrase, insult you a bit around and go nowhere. Good job man, too bad that the company you are backing only wants your money.

 

[Bubba Zanetti]

"Condescending and Bitching" says the guy who is whining about hipsters, and patronizing anyone who criticizes the game.

Jesus. The one dude brings up valid, oft-repeated criticisms of the game and all this doofus can offer in response is invective and ad hominem.

Of course he's right--we're all just a buncha leering contrarians. s/

 

[CerberusGate]

Found this dickhead on Reddit. Didn't argue with him personally, but he seemed to be being an arse to anyone with even the slightest criticism of Fallout 4

View attachment 5205

View attachment 5203

View attachment 5204
Someone called him out on it later, and this was his response
View attachment 5206
"Condescending and Bitching" says the guy who is whining about hipsters, and patronizing anyone who criticizes the game.

Finally, look what he posted on the Witcher Forums
View attachment 5207
"Everyone's entitled to their opinion" -Really fucking rich dude.

This is why gaming quality will continue to decline in the triple-A industry: Immature idiots like Drakonborn (any relation to Dragonborn?) are the majority who believe that they must support and defend their beloved titles against every form of critique or differing opinion.

What really grinds my gears are the people who claim that the fanbase is ungrateful for disliking a game in said fanbase's favorite franchise. Why should consumers love everything in a franchise if they like a franchise? I like games like Morrowind and the Thief trilogy but I should be free to say that Oblivion and Skyrim along with Thief 2014 are bad sequels to the former. There are so many Bethesdrones who say things like (found in the comments on the Vacationing in Nuka World video) this nowadays in light of Fallout 4's growing negative reception:

Bethesdas fanbase is nothing but spoiled brats who hates everything they post, just CAUSE THEY CAN.

It just makes them look like zealous fanatics incapable of living in reality.

 

[Dr Fallout]

any relation to Dragonborn?

Nah, he's got okay spelling.

 

[CerberusGate]

Nah, he's got okay spelling.

Oh right. Been a while since I skimmed through Fallout Wars. I guess I repressed the memory of the horrid spelling.

 

[Dr Fallout]

Oh right. Been a while since I skimmed through Fallout Wars. I guess I repressed the memory of the horrid spelling.

Yeah, so it can't be him. But still... the hipster mention does ring a bell.

 

[mithrap]

They're potential canon."

SP: "They're options if you want to say it but they're canon as it happened. Much like the courier admitting to the lonesome Drifter he impregnated a 18 year old women years ago."

Me: "No. Like I said, they are not canon because you don't have to say those things.

This isn't hard to understand.

http://fallout.gamepedia.com/Courier#Other_background_information

'The player can make several suggestions about their past through in-game dialogue options. Since these are, as the name suggests, optional, they are down to player choice and as such, do not form part of the player's background until they have been selected.'"

I just clicked on the link detailling the optional backstories of the courier, revealed through dialog. And here :

After hearing one of ED-E's recordings and discovers that ED-E is trying to find his way home, The Courier can remark that they feel the same way and adds "Why do you think I became a courier?"

Right in the feels.
The awkward moment when a single, voiceless line, delivered to a beeping floating toaster can express depth and feelings. Now, as opposed to "Where's SHAUN ? Where's my sh'on?"...

 

[CerberusGate]

After hearing one of ED-E's recordings and discovers that ED-E is trying to find his way home, The Courier can remark that they feel the same way and adds "Why do you think I became a courier?"

That and associating the word "Mother" with regret does create a backstory for the Courier as though the Courier left home due to falling out with their family but regrets their actions and has been working to earn money in order to make up for said falling out (when all the Courier simply could have rationally done is went home and apologized but is incapable emotionally due to said regrets).

Being able to hand-craft a backstory for the Courier was a good move by Obsidian (who obviously understands what role-playing means in a role-playing game). You can even fail certain SPECIAL/perk-checks to show that the Courier is not aware of certain things.

 

[Bubba Zanetti]

I also dig the options that allow you to fill in details regarding your Courier's past travels--you can tell Bruce Isaac you saw him at the Shark Club, inform Jed Masterson you've been to Utah before, or wonder aloud whether or not the Lonesome Drifter could be the son of a lady you banged in Montana.

No wonder I can't put this game down.

Fallout 4, on the other hand, I doubt I'll even bother to pick up.