"Your not allowed to have a opinion of Fallout 4 if you didn't finish the game!"

RangerBoo

RangerBoo

Resident Schizo Poster
This is the excuse I have been seeing a lot on YouTube. Apparently those that have only played the game for a few hours but returned the game because they didn't like it are not allowed to have a opinion of the game or are they allowed to say that its bad because they didn't finish it. This excuse is so bullshit that I am at a lost for words. If the game is so bad that the player couldn't finish it and they returned it then shouldn't the player be allowed to voice their opinion?
 
They're grasping at straws. Its really pathetic. This is basically the same excuse that I heard for Final Fantasy 13. "It gets better after the first 20 hours!" I do not want to force myself into playing a chore of game just to get to a few good stuff. That is ridiculous. No wonder AAA devs get away with so much. Funny how this goes the other way around for high scoring reviews that have only played the game for a few hours.
 
I am of the belief that any kind of game should be able to entice the player to continue forward/get involved in the first few hours to be considered a good game.
It is this first part that can really make or break a game for a gamer as they at that moment are still open for impressions.

If it becomes clear that a game is rather slow and feels unrewarding it doesn't matter if it 'gets better' later.
It needs to be good at first, it can then have a quiet period to allow the player to get their bearings and then build up the pace/world/involvement, enticing the player only more and more to continue to the end.

Saying "It gets better later but first you have to pull through several boring hours" is not a good way to sell a title to a new or existing gamer, especially when they are not in the mood to have to do boring or repetitive stuff in the first half or quarter of the game.
 
Last edited:
Only counts for criticism, you can jump on the hypewagon and declare it 'GOTY' all you like even if you didn't play it.
 
What bothers me more than this statement is looking at the Bethesda forums and seeing how many people are applauding the voiced protagonist and dialogue system because the old system had "too much text thrown at you at once" and because its "more realistic." Those are actual things I read that a human somewhere thinks. Basically they've come up with an excuse for every complaint one might have regarding the new game.
 
Irwin John Finster said:
What bothers me more than this statement is looking at the Bethesda forums and seeing how many people are applauding the voiced protagonist and dialogue system because the old system had "too much text thrown at you at once" and because its "more realistic." Those are actual things I read that a human somewhere thinks. Basically they've come up with an excuse for every complaint one might have regarding the new game.
Click to expand...
Yep, to defend a thing that takes their money. Nothing more.
 
I don't have to eat a turd to know it's a turd. If some people feel they have to confirm before voicing an opinion... well, power to you. Go ahead. I'll be over here, maintaining a safe distance.
 
Most Bethesda Fanboys go more for the "You can't have an opinion of Fallout 4 unless it's bathing it with praise" Line of thinking than anything.
 
Walpknut said:
Most Bethesda Fanboys go more for the "You can't have an opinion of Fallout 4 unless it's bathing it with praise" Line of thinking than anything.
Click to expand...

It's surprising how anti criticism they are. Even worse then we are of anti-praise (unless it's well deserved)!
 
Dr Fallout said:
Walpknut said:
Most Bethesda Fanboys go more for the "You can't have an opinion of Fallout 4 unless it's bathing it with praise" Line of thinking than anything.
Click to expand...

It's surprising how anti criticism they are. Even worse then we are of anti-praise (unless it's well deserved)!
Click to expand...

Of every gaming fandom I've encountered, Bethesda's is the most sycophantic by a mile. Maybe because they do the same game over and over and thus give their core fanbase what they want over and over, I suppose.

Only that in memory that compares is Blizzard's fanbase, and WoW and Diablo 3 have shattered that one to pieces. Yet no matter how many overly simplified, shoddily designed, atrociously optimized, poorly written and bug-infested products Bethesda shells out, for their fans its always GOTY, must buy, must defend at all costs fare.

I mean, I am warming up to the game a bit as I play it. The writing and quest design improves (slightly but still) once you reach Diamond City, the place itself and its surroundings is pretty nice and the most Fallout-ish content Beth has produced IMO, and you start encountering the companions that have some amount of depth; nothing on the level of Bioware or Obsidian, but at least they seem to somewhat try with Cait, Piper and Nick. I am not afraid to give the game credit where it is due, and if keeps picking up it might be a severely flawed yet fun enough game to me.

But all this blind love for a product that has such obvious flaws is just utterly puzzling. Like, I could get it with Witcher 3, whose flaws (IMO) reveal themselves later on. But FO4 hits you in the face with all its worst parts as soon as you begin the game.
 
Ilosar said:
Yeah, but don't worry, anything bad about the game will be fixed by mods, so releasing a poorly designed and half broken game is totally justified /sarcasm.
Click to expand...
2363284ae8.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top