Fallout 4 - Reviews thread

Jeff had not spent much time at all with the PC version when they did that Quick Look. He had to spend his available time finishing his in-progress review on the PS4, where he was experiencing the technical shortcomings inherent with Bethesda games on console.

Lol at that being a call to stop trusting Gerstmann.

It's fine if you don't care for him, but come on with this shit.

This is a misunderstanding, I adore Jeff as a one of the honest video game journalists around

edit. Ah this already was sorted by a third party, no hard feelings
 
Wow equating people critical of fo4 to gamergaters, that's fucking low

I guess that makes you a FJW lmao

you could have just read the metacritic user reviews, but apparently not

i guess that makes you illiterate

And dropping, I'm glad reviewers have balls these days, Game is a broken mess on ps4, 87 is pushing it.

With that said, Tomb Raider now has a better Meta than FO4 =)

i played for over 7 hours or so today and only encountered some slight frame rate drops. i would hardly call it a broken mess. arkham knight on pc is a broken mess.
 
From what I have read the game has:

1. crappy dialogue
2. crappy rpg elements implementation
3. fps combat
4. freaking building sim

The wasteland is said to be the same as ever, lots of fetch quests and dead boring npcs.

Basically fans of past games (mainly 1,2) state that instead of making it an RPG with decent gunplay they have made it into and FPS with some questing and in inventory.

Sad if true. Seems very likely though coz thats what mainstream is these days.

This sounds more honest than most reviews. will wait for some great mods before I jump in.
 
Maybe it'll go down to 84. Karmic justice for Obsidian.

Because lower reviews might make Bethesda get off their asses and stop using a ancient buggy engine.

They're not gonna care. It's still going to sell like 20m copies and that's all that matters to Bethesda. They're gonna use the same crap for Elder Scrolls VI.
 
This sounds more honest than most reviews. will wait for some great mods before I jump in.

If the game had actually good writing and good VA performance then the changes they've made would of been okay with me. However, the dialogue system is extremely nuttered. A lot more than I was expecting. The VA in both the main character (even the female) and NPCs are bad, worse than F3 for some reason. The game lets you either do really bad cinematic angles or let you wander around when characters speak to you. This is something Skyrim actually did well in which it didn't pause the game but it also locked your character still. It's off putting and I just don't care what most characters say. I get more interested in reading the stories in the terminals.
 
I'm really liking the VA. That's the part I was thinking had the biggest step up from FO3/NV.

Dialogue system so far is the main thing I am finding a step back though. Shouldn't have simplified that part, although I do appreciate I can be a sarcastic fuck in most situations.
 
Jeffs review is pretty spot on. He's not even a big rpg guy, but even he gets that some of the stuff presented is just too binary and simplified.
 
I did not expect this. Well, now that its out of 90+ club that leaves Bloodborne, Phantom Pain and Witcher 3 as the best recieved AAA games of the year right? I really thought F4 would sweep all the goty awards this year.
 
They're too busy playing Underrail now to care that Fallout 4 is even out, the people pissed now are fans of Fallout 3.

Thanks, I had not heard of this game. Just added it to my wishlist. Will look it up when it is released.
Fans of Fallout3 eh? I am a big fan of both Fallout 3 and NV (and 1&2..), I will see if I join them in 20 hours.

Maybe it'll go down to 84. Karmic justice for Obsidian.

Though this game is much much more stable than NV was at release.
 
I did not expect this. Well, now that its out of 90+ club that leaves Bloodborne, Phantom Pain and Witcher 3 as the best recieved AAA games of the year right? I really thought F4 would sweep all the goty awards this year.

I think it might still be getting them, I feel this game was more hyped than those you mention.
 
Doesn't seem to be quite comparable. Fallout 1 has a 24 hr peak of about 270 players. Fallout 4 had something like 450,000 players today.
The originals don't have many reviews, that's true, although I doubt people who actually played them would not place them as the best.
Anyway, FO3 has 12k reviews and FNV has almost 33k. I'd say it's comparable.

Maybe it'll go down to 84. Karmic justice for Obsidian.
Too late for that, unfortunately. Metacritic has a weighted average and the major media outlets all gave it extremely high scores.
 
It's nice to see some reviewers will punish Bethesda for refusing to ship a finished game. Hopefully they will finally retire gamebryo for good, but I'm not holding my breath.
 
This metacritic obsession is weird. 90 or 87 or 85, the point is that most reviewers thought it was a good game despite issues. It could very well be a GOTY contender, if people deem it so.
 
Well, at least the technical issues are mentioned in the reviews so people who absolutely can't live with them can hold off for now.

I'll see for myself once I get home. Can't wait to start playing.
 
I think it might still be getting them, I feel this game was more hyped than those you mention.

Ive had the opposite impression since the witcher 3 arrived. Im predicting that Fallout 4 will get barely any recognition in the GOTY or RPG of the year categories because of Bloodborne and The Witcher 3.
 
Ive had the opposite impression since the witcher 3 arrived. Im predicting that Fallout 4 will get barely any recognition in the GOTY or RPG of the year categories because of Bloodborne and The Witcher 3.

I think I have to agree with you. I don't quite see the universal love to Fallout 4 that The Witcher 3 and Bloodborne got. Some of the user reviews are being quite harsh on Fallout 4 and it has some mediocre reviews from the critics as well that The Witcher 3 and Bloodborne hardly got. But we have to wait and see.
 
It's nice to see some reviewers will punish Bethesda for refusing to ship a finished game. Hopefully they will finally retire gamebryo for good, but I'm not holding my breath.

Yeah, they just refused. Not only are they lazy devs, they're straight up assholes. /s

At a certain point, no matter how much more polish you add to your game, you're not going to achieve any more sales by continuing to pump money into development. I promise you the devs absolutely wanted to continue working on it. But the reason video exists is because they're funded by money.
 
Yeah, they just refused. Not only are they lazy devs, they're straight up assholes. /s

At a certain point, no matter how much more polish you add to your game, you're not going to achieve any more sales by continuing to pump money into development. I promise you the devs absolutely wanted to continue working on it. But the reason video exists is because they're funded by money.

That's because consumers will buy the game at that state in the first place, if they didn't you can be damn well sure they'd spend extra time on it, like EA now does on certain release and AC L definitely took a hit because of it.

TBF I'm not sure Bethesda is entirely out of the clear on this it'll of course sell really, really well, but the user score and general perception may in fact have a hit on the legs what this game could have done without that perception.
 
Companies like Bethesda, Konami, Ubisoft and Activison are just being dishonest by dumping these broken AAA games on the front page for $60 with a Season Pass and every other thing, when their games are obviously still in beta and sometimes take 6 months to a year to fix.

What did they release that was "broken"?
 
Steam Early Access exists now. If a game is buggy and incomplete it should go there until it isn't.

Companies like Bethesda, Konami, Ubisoft and Activison are just being dishonest by dumping these broken AAA games on the front page for $60 with a Season Pass and every other thing, when their games are obviously still in beta and sometimes take 6 months to a year to fix.

Other companies like Tripwire and Codemasters put their products on Early Access at a discount and are actually honest about the state of their games.

Bethesda has an embargo on the review embargo and they are tweeting that the game has a solid framerate and everything is a-ok! It's bullshit.

siren.gif

jerks.

Steam early access is a bad business practice. Tripwire and Codemasters might be the acceptation, but even then Killing Floor 2 has been on sale since April, and it's still not out of early access? WTF?

It's a cheap way to get money upfront. And since people have put shit load of time into it, only to at one point have their stats erased, doesn't help your game. Put out a free beta when you confident in the state of your game, get feedback(server load, network, performance, balancing) then finish the game.

Early access promotes only unfinished games, and not in a good way.

To your other points, Ubisoft has had a bad track record as of past couple years.

Activision though, what did they make that was broken? Millions of people playing destiny, call of duty, and guitar hero seem to be happy?

What game has Konami put out that was broken? Maybe their soccer game?

Castlevania, MGS series seem to be complete when they ship, minus maybe multiplayer component for MGSV.
 
Can't say I'm too impressed with the game myself. The PC port is pretty bad, and the game itself seems a step back in terms of choices etc. But hey they added voice acting and minecraft.... weeeeee /s
 
After dropping 6+ hours into the game I can easily understand why it scored 9's at all the major outlets. I can also see why many additionally claim that it feels like a modernized Fallout 3.

One definitive thing I've also realized, anyone comparing this game to Witcher 3 have lost their goddamn minds. The games couldn't be any different, and expecting parity of any kind between the two is not only foolish but incredibly naive.

Having a blast so far, but realize the game is not perfect. I guess much like all those 9 scores indicate, Fallout 4 doesn't need to be in order to create a compulsory experience.
 
So I guess the GOTY is now between MGS:V and TW3? seems right.
BB deserve it but the souls series will be shafted like always
 
So where does Fallout 4 rank amongst the series? Are New Vegas and Fallout 3 superior?
It's still early in the game for me, but I think it's a lot better than 3 so far.

New Vegas seems to have the better plot and it's writing was really strong throughout, so maybe slightly inferior to New Vegas. Though I haven't seen a ton of quests in 4 yet and it's definitely mechanically superior to New Vegas.
 
So where does Fallout 4 rank amongst the series? Are New Vegas and Fallout 3 superior?

obvs that's a huge can of worms to open. especially since FO4 came out yesterday...

but new vegas will be tough to surpass. not every day a game that well made comes along
 
So where does Fallout 4 rank amongst the series? Are New Vegas and Fallout 3 superior?

On the Gameplay end: Leagues better than 3 and New Vegas in most ways.

On the RPG end: HAHAHAHAHA.... Not even better than 3. Dialogue system especially is abhorrent.

Misc.: Settlement building is hit or miss, some people like it(I do, it scratches my inner minecraft fan). Character creator is the best Bethesda has ever done, and better than many other series to boot. They got rid of durability, so struggling to maintain your weapons is gone, and there's so much ammo laying around you don't have to worry about that either, a plus if you didn't like that aspect, but I did so...
 
The shocking thing is how many reviewers out there still gave this game a 9+ despite the technical issues they experienced.
 
Bought it day 0, hype was high thought the negativity in this thread was way over the top. However, after 5 or so hours I am very disappointed. It feels just like Fallout 3 hell it even have the same music.

I liked fallout 3 at the time but did not think I was buying an expansion pack yesterday..
 
Top Bottom