Why is it funny?
In any case, I disagree. The story isn't much better in my opinion, just a reverse of 3 (and the factions don't feel very... authentic or interesting); but I can live with mediocre at best writing.
Still don't see people pointing out what's mediocre in the writing. It's mostly just parroting one another.
The taste in factions is personal, but I found them to be interesting, especially the rebirth of the Brotherhood - which is actually what was planned all the way back in Fallout 1. Ask Vree or Tycho what the purpose of the Brotherhood is. Maxson's reformation is precisely that.
The more important part is that I don't think the game got any better as a series title by what it supposedly fixed with its design. Call me old fashioned, but making it a slickier first person shooter didn't make it better ('cause it just further drifted away from being an RPG it was), removing the pause from VATS (instead of building it a more comprehensive combat feature) also didn't, as didn't introducing the perks-for-skills dumbfuckery. And that's not even mentioning the crafting and basebuilding that clutter up the whole thing and push it into being a trashbin scavenging simulator. These all made it worse in my eyes. I can't find fun in a sloppy nor slick and seemingly directionless sandbox FPS, least of all one that's painted to be Fallout. It just doesn't work.
The game doesn't even work very well as a harmless occasional timesink like Skyrim since it lacks the minute to minute progression incentive (for what little it helped to compensate for the banality of the actual content) Skyrim had with it's learn-through-grind character system.
De gustibus. I like it, especially the settlement building which is a core part of the story.
The Witcher's RPG mechanics work because you aren't creating a character and seeing them interact with the world, but instead interpreting an already existing character.
And Fallout 4 does the same thing, by virtue of providing a defined background.
Fallout 4 doesn't let you create your own character and see them get on, because you are always limited by few actual choices, a voice for your character, few ways to interact with the world beyond the occasional speech check and a character building which rarely if ever offers you alternate way round things, instead giving you static combat bonuses.
So, basically Witcher 2/3.
Fallout 4 also doesn't do the Witcher style RPG game well because the character
It's like having a burger which is burnt on one side and raw on the other. It fails utterly as both kinds of an RPG.
I wonder, did Bethesda come and violate you personally for you to have an irrational hatred of them?
You say that they have the capacity to restore the wasteland to pre-war standards and beyond, but they literally mention over and over again that they have no interest in the world above, and believe it's doomed.
That's why you get the mantle of leadership at the end, at Shaun's insistence, and can turn it around. It's kind of part of their selling point.
They make robots with the abilities to question there orders for no apparent reason. And instead of making few, they are making them every 5 minutes for no good reason
Speaking of that: Think of the implications of an organisation making new workers every 5 minutes.
Workforce, kiddo. Kind of the whole point of synths, repeated every single time.
Also, you do realize that it's a looped animation to spare the player the need to wait for half an hour or the whole day, right? Repeat after me: Technical. Limitation.
Literally everyone on FalloutLore is saying that they have the capacity to take over the entire wasteland like that, but Bethesda didn't even explore this, instead adding a thing with huge implications without thinking of the costs.
Yes, they do.
But they don't.
They waste valuable resources on making synthetic gorillas for no apparent reason
Again, part of the story. The Institute is extremely advanced and prosperous, but lacks actual leadership that would unite it. The gorillas are part of it: A pet project of BioSciences, because there's nobody to step in and tell them to shut the fuck up.[/quote]
They literally do not mention any long-term goals, what they intend for the future or anything. They assume you'll side with them because they are supposedly the future, but give no actual reasons to.
That's because the goals are completely ephemereal and change from Director to Director. That's why you get to be its leader and get a chance at using its powers for good. Hell, you even get to record a manifesto outlining your policy.
But you don't like it, because "Bethesda r dumb amirite"?
There entire schtick is about redifining mankind, but gave up on FEV and Cybernetics research and did nothing to try and redefine mankind.
Liberating Mankind of the need for manual labor and focusing on science and deepening its knowledge is kind of revolutionary. Post-scarcity, at the very least, is a redefinition of manking as labor is a quintessential part of our lives.
FEV and Cybernetics were shuttered because this particular Director didn't like them.
They notice Synths are escaping, so instead of thinking "Gee is this project flawed maybe?", they make more synths to hunt the synths they lost.
They do. And the numbers that do are trivial. If you look up the Railroad's tally, most years have about a dozen or so escapees, including successful ones. The Railroad is also classified as a distant security threat, because rogue synths are really not much of a problem.
There only remotely useful invention is teleportation. They spend the rest of there time with silly Synths that don't really do much except think and rebel. Shouldn't they be trying to find things that actually improve quality of life?
Gee, if only they have developed some sort of technology that allowed them to build large subterranean habitats, filled with lush greenery and amenities that give every human a high quality of life, perhaps one where synthetic laborers do the menial labor for them...
They send hundreds and hundreds of failed supermutant experiments above ground despite it being quicker and less chance of backfiring if they just killed them off.
Why waste a good mutant when you can set it loose on the surface and make it distract the surface dwellers from you?
Because, as the game explicitly shows, if the Commonwealth unites, the Minutemen will try to take the fight to the Institute. Because, you know, showing, not telling.
But in a world where there are so many other troubles, literal slavery, starvation, ect., why would anyone dedicate themselves to the freedom of a very small, very irrelevant group of people in a world where so many other forms of slavery and starvation exist?
Relative privation fallacy, ahoy! The Railroad is dedicated to synth liberation and in a broader sense, destruction of the Institute. Maybe they work with synths precisely because it's a small, "very irrelevant" group of people?
I just love how you consider yourself to be judge of all. "HOW COULD ANYONE DO THIS. HOW CAN ANYONE LIKE HAMBURGERS. HOW CAN ANYONE DEDICATE THEMSELVES TO [insert niche interest, like worshipping twenty year old games on an obscure Internet forum]!!!!!?!?!?!?!1oonenennenene."
Cute.
Also why is there password "Railroad" and why do they have instructions leading to there mainbase.
That's like staying logged in to a public computer and setting your password as "Password"
It's a weakness. But given that the first thing you get when you open that door is a minigun shoved into your face by Glory and several other heavies, not to mention the Railroad's time-honored tradition of getting the fuck out of Dodge fast and relocation, it's not as much of a weakness as you make it to be.
Do you have any examples of good stories or lore additions in Fallout 4?
Plenty, but you won't listen, will you?
Except the reasons the Brotherhood and Railroad want to wipe each other out is literally there differing views on Synths?, find me a piece of dialogue that says "We want these guys dead because they could kill us"
Sure.
Kells: "Now, before we launch our attack on the Institute, we need to address another threat... the Railroad. They're a small, but capable group that uses subterfuge and guerilla tactics to harass their enemies. Our tactical analysis says they could possibly hamper, or harm our operations which is a risk I'm not willing to take. If we strike them now, we should be able to maximize the amount of damage we do to their organization."
Survivor: "Hit them before they hit us. I like it."
After: "Precisely. Destroying the Railroad hinges on completely eliminating their leadership, otherwise they'll simply regroup somewhere else."
and
Survivor: "Why is the Railroad such a threat?"
Kells: "Even with their relatively small numbers, the Railroad is a constant threat to our operations. They've already proven to be resiliant against superior forces, with a knack for disappearing when cornered. Worse still, they possess the capability to help synths flee the Institute. If we intend to end the synth menace, we need to plug the leaks."
You did play the game, right?
Also, showing that the Railroad can wipe out the BOS isn't done for storytelling purposes, it's done so that the player can tie up lose ends if they side with the Railroad. You are clearly overthinking this as something clever, when it's just a simple justification for "Wipe out the other 2 factions"
Your bias is showing.
It's part of the story, deal with it.
Ah yes the barely justified interference of the Institute, which is never explained why they do it, and is just there to make them look evilz.
Yeah, because the invasion of the Institute by a pissed off militia backed by an organized Commonwealth is totally not an example of why the Institute tries to keep the surface disorganized.
Seriously, did Todd Howard kick your dog?
The Minutemen Ending was literally just intended to give the players the option to lead there army in to the Institute and win without the help of the other 3. You are overthinking it majorly if you think it was there to "Show what it looks like if the commonwealth organises and retaliates". The game doesn't even imply that was the motive in that ending once.
"Overthinking."
lol
OVERTHINKING.
Taking a game at face value and understanding what it communicates to me is OVERTHINKING.
I wish we still had Rosh's custom user titles.
It also pays to overanalyse everything to try and make up some faux good writing in the game, rather than seeing the simplistic game how it actually is apparently.
Oh yes, someone disagrees with your BRILLIANT NOTION of "Bethezda r dum" and it's automatically overthinking and overanalyzing.
Trouble is, it takes no real effort to connect this.
This thread is beginning to remind me of the Bethesda apologist argument topic. Specifically the mag fest individual I encountered...
http://www.nma-fallout.com/threads/...e-had-with-a-bethesda-apologist.205750/page-2
One side reinforced by logic and peer reviewed observation, the other well, I don't know what to call it. Can we at least try to identify some common ground before we continue debating? Or is this going to be like smacking 2 rocks together until there is nothing left but dust?
Yeah, I have trouble finding a name for Jorg's attitude too.
