Ravensmash
Member
Not particularly.
Performance issues can be very subjective. It's not stretching to say that some people can enjoy an experience and overlook some negatives.
Fallout 4 - Reviews thread
- Thread starter J 0 E
- Start date
Not particularly.
Performance issues can be very subjective. It's not stretching to say that some people can enjoy an experience and overlook some negatives.
Ravensmash
Member
In what sense? Genuinely curious because I don't necessarily see it as a negative if mechanics have been significantly improved.
It's a good game to pair with TW3 for me. Base-building, sci-fi, quirky. I'm enjoying it and kinda going OCD on Sanctuary cleanup and rebuild + looting every single item ever. Though I can't wait until weight has been modded out. Maybe it already has. I've barely scratched the surface with modding and crafting, or the main storyline.
But it still has all the same Bethesda issues. Character faces/animation are terrible, even if the environment itself has some great areas and visuals (Ultra on PC), there are strange bugs, dialogue is very "meh" and quests are tedious. TW3 annihilates it in all of those categories and, to me, is a much more advanced game that actually feels next-gen.
I'm comparing them simply because they're both huge and ambitious open-world next-gen RPGs from known IPs. I much prefer CDPR at this point, though. Makes the wait for Cyberpunk 2077 harder. If they can pull off TW3 awesomeness in a futuristic world, I'll be lost in there for a long time.
But it still has all the same Bethesda issues. Character faces/animation are terrible, even if the environment itself has some great areas and visuals (Ultra on PC), there are strange bugs, dialogue is very "meh" and quests are tedious. TW3 annihilates it in all of those categories and, to me, is a much more advanced game that actually feels next-gen.
I'm comparing them simply because they're both huge and ambitious open-world next-gen RPGs from known IPs. I much prefer CDPR at this point, though. Makes the wait for Cyberpunk 2077 harder. If they can pull off TW3 awesomeness in a futuristic world, I'll be lost in there for a long time.
The graphics fells very similar.
The animations feels identical.
The combat feels similar.
I guess I should not have had high expectations after Skyrim.
How does the combat feel similiar? They don't on my end at all, enemies are nowhere near as brain dead and the gunplay is so much better as to have little in common with 3. I mean, if you were complaining about the RPG aspects I'd get where you're coming from, but the combat?
Ravensmash
Member
Fair enough.
I'm still optimistic that I'll enjoy it. I got really into the previous titles, despite flaws.
Trickster
Member
I'll give you that the combat feels similar overall.
But fucking lol at saying the graphics and animations feel similar/identical.
I agree that the combat feels better. But I am still running backwards shooting rats and dogs in the face.
I dunno perhaps the horrible opening story wise turned me off and i became negatively biased on everything else also.
still pretty dang good. glad to hear the game wasn't a surprise bomb. My guess was 83. I look forward to playing it next week. stoked to hear the gunplay isn't as awful as 3.
Animations are identical to last gen games.
There have been several threads highlighting what i consider to be legitimate issues with Fallout 4, from the rushed beginning, to narrative and dialogue weaknesses, lack of meaningful choice, etc. I wonder, how many reviews actually mention this? I have read a few and they arent that insightful when it comes to potential weaknesses, aside from the low hanging fruit of technical problems. Gametrailers did however briefly criticize the dialogue system. Im not sure if its just another instance of the "professionals" in general being unable to match the masses when it comes to meaningful critique, but it sure looks like it from what ive read.
It just seems so backwards that the people who do this professionally arent able to spot potential weaknesses and engage in meaningful discourse, which more often appears later on gaming forums. A lot of the time, reviewers and games writers only stumble across what would seem to be "obvious" issues later on when they are layed out explicitily on some forum discussing the games, which then get traction. They then act as if its something that they had preached all along when talking about the game in retrospect. And im not talking about uncovering any hidden problems or balance issues which would take lots of people and very specific circumstance to stumble upon, but things that are at the core of the experience.
It just seems so backwards that the people who do this professionally arent able to spot potential weaknesses and engage in meaningful discourse, which more often appears later on gaming forums. A lot of the time, reviewers and games writers only stumble across what would seem to be "obvious" issues later on when they are layed out explicitily on some forum discussing the games, which then get traction. They then act as if its something that they had preached all along when talking about the game in retrospect. And im not talking about uncovering any hidden problems or balance issues which would take lots of people and very specific circumstance to stumble upon, but things that are at the core of the experience.
Justice_Bolt
Member
The game is great. The problem is some people won't buy games that are not perfect.
Maybe I was too harsh and I obviously have rose-tinted glasses since I really liked Fallout 3 but I remember it to be similar. I have mostly fought lower level raiders and ghouls so maybe the animations will be better later.
Papacheeks
Banned
And why is that? Why can't we compare a large open world game to another large open world game?
What? Witcher 3 you can't pick up garbage like in fallout? Both are open world games, with user defined narratives, and user defined experiences.
Why not compare them? One of them took the time to make all the changes necessary off of feedback from previous title. The other seemed to have the same to similar problems as it's predecessor.
Both are open world RPG's made by western developers. Big difference being there's more "Stuff" that can be done in Fallout, but both are super large. Mechanics are going to be different. CDPJRED thought having a strong narrative that the player controlled it's outcome was a priority, the same goes for the strong narrative on side quests.
The other would want to give more freedom to what ever he/she desired, and that includes character creation.
One company still is supporting it's game in making the experience better, for even old and new adopters.
The other will more than likely at a certain point let the community enhance the game.
I see it is worth discussion and so didn't Jeff Gertsmann.
djplaeskool
Member
That doesn't really work on most enemies anymore. Mosquitos are incredibly hard to hit, and will run away and then prepare to ambush you if they're injured, raiders and the like will suppress you while their buddies flank you, death claws dodge and weave, throw cars in the air and are generally agile as fuck, ghouls, rats, and dogs are the only things that behave like they used to, really.
Fair enough, I will save judgement on combat until I meet stronger enemies even though I have yet to be flanked by raiders.
Trickster
Member
Thats a broad as fuck definition. And irrelevant when the comparison as far as I can tell is being made between FO3 and FO4.
Let me rephrase: the animations are identical to last gen Bethesda games.
It's better but it's still balancing the RPG elements along with FPS elements. It's iffy because the gun play is like any other FPS but the enemies are still build with RPG elements. I'll be doing head shots but only a chunk of the enemies' health would be reduced. So most of the time it feels like the game has shitty hit detection. Not sure if it does yet or if it's just the massive amount of hit points the regular enemies because most of them aren't scaled to your level. Which is funny because I hate it when enemies all scale to your level.
The combat is really iffy still for me. I haven't decided I liked it or not. Unlike with the dialogue, main character VA, and UI. Those 3 are definite shit to me. I'll judge the story, side quests, and world map once I've finished the game, but my early impression could easily be described as "boring." That intro sequence had a lot of potential but it was severely rushed. Just a simple little thing like going to get some sugar cubes from your neighbor would of made it more alive.
There's no point to even praise the graphical upgrade. Of course it was going to look better. It had to. It's not on the PS3/360 anymore. I would praise them for not having a shitty port like Skyrim PS3, but, again, they're on entirely new hardware, and despite that, the game still runs pretty bad in interiors or when a lot of shit is happening.
It has nothing to do with the devs, it has to do with their bosses thinking the gamebryo engine is still acceptable.
BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO
Junior Member
Gamebryo needs to be tossed into the bushes. Sad thing is that ES VI is likely in development right now with the same engine. Just use UE4 like everyone else. That new ID tech engine or cry engine (which they licensed) wouldn't be bad either.
Zombie James
Banned
Thank fuck there's at least one honest person in the industry telling it like it is.
It certainly seems like reviewers are tripping over themselves to get these published before everyone else. I usually wait for the more thoughtful reviews to come out from places like RPS and ignore all the launch day perfect score BS. Plus, GAF comments can be pretty insightful (like yours) and I look to them before making a purchase.
Well...this is 2 games in a row now where they've said "brand new engine" when it's really the same old shit, right? If they can keep saying it and people believe them for it, why should they care? Until they sell a significantly less amount of copies because of their shit (PS3 Skyrim, being a major example where sites said 'oh, this game doesn't exist on PS3, 360/PC versions get GOTY) they have no real motivation to do so.
This is getting more talk than it ever has before now because SO MANY GAMES are releasing like this. It makes the spotlight on developers burn even brighter when shit like AC: Unity, Arkham Knight PC and others all have major problems.
Trickster
Member
Uuuuuuh, no.
This post is extremely confusing. He gave a game that has massive technical issues with subpar graphics and terrible animation a 3 out of 5. Please explain what is wrong with that.
Keep on fighting the good fight rofl.
Yeah they're definitely better. Not that much better, though.
You read that wrong.
Guess I did. I'm just after seeing lots of people ripping into Jeff for this review so I decided to post. My bad.
CambriaRising
Member
Okay this one got me, lol.
Joseph Merrick
Member
the time to stop blaming gamebryo on bethesda's technical failures was a long time ago.
Ooccoo
Member
To me it just proves a lot of so-called journalists aren't meant to be critics. That Paul guy in the video with Gertsmann looked like a huge tool. "I think it's great" yea sure, even if there are blatant technical issues that you turn a blind eye on. Of course he is entitled to his own opinion, but a lot of reviewers pass as big fanboys rather than critics. Every publication right now that scored Fallout 4 a 9+ is basically lying. There's just no way in hell this game deserves such awards. Again, I feel like a lot of reviewers are inexperienced or just not unbiased enough to do their job. It kinda reminds me of that guy who got Skyrim a couple years ago, a "journalist" that was SO EXCITED to be given a copy before others. Can't find the video though.
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
He's already going to Gaming Hell for hating Yoshi.
OrlanisWorks
Banned
Currently playing on the PC, I really love the game and enjoy it immensely even with FPS drops and such.
I can't know what it is for console players though. Bugs and such I can easily believe being more prevalent on Xbone/PS4. If they were able to make these games in Unreal 4, I think the games would be improved all around. At least they took the good stuff from Skyrim, jammed it into Fallout, and it feels to me like a great improvement over Fallout 3. Still suffers from what could have been if they had actually used a new engine. It's like Call of Duty's modified engine use at this point.
Animations and some visuals are a lot better since even Skyrim, but they are somewhat sub-par in comparison to most other AAA games. ~85 meta would be a right score for this game. Looks infinitely better than Fallout 3 and a lot better than Skyrim. Bethesda is lucky to make games are very fun for a lot of people. /rant
I can't know what it is for console players though. Bugs and such I can easily believe being more prevalent on Xbone/PS4. If they were able to make these games in Unreal 4, I think the games would be improved all around. At least they took the good stuff from Skyrim, jammed it into Fallout, and it feels to me like a great improvement over Fallout 3. Still suffers from what could have been if they had actually used a new engine. It's like Call of Duty's modified engine use at this point.
Animations and some visuals are a lot better since even Skyrim, but they are somewhat sub-par in comparison to most other AAA games. ~85 meta would be a right score for this game. Looks infinitely better than Fallout 3 and a lot better than Skyrim. Bethesda is lucky to make games are very fun for a lot of people. /rant
Heh. I'm happy to join him.
How horrible of the man for having standards. It's so badd.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Lol, what?
Agreed.
Yoshi is Mario's Jar Jar, yeah I said it.
Though I did like him in Super Mario World, and ONLY SMW.
Heh. Me too. It was also the last game where I liked Mario.
Every VATS kill is the same janky shit as ever. Even worse at times, with the ragdolls going apeshit.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Same.
Ivan Amiibo
Banned
Interesting, I find both the VATS system (with how it slows, rather than stops time), and the overall gunplay far, far better than Fallout 3, this making Fallout 4 the far superior game for me. Surprised more people aren't loving the gunplay, it's excellent. Sure, it still has RPG elements, so a headshot is rarely gonna be a one hit kill, but hit reactions, recoil and sense of power are all very well done.
Doesn't hurt that the world is fucking gorgeous.
NaDannMaGoGo
Member
Even if these reviewers are 100% genuine with their reviews, that would just mean that they have ridiculously low standards for my liking and are essentially worthless for me when it comes to forming an opinion on games.
Someone doesn't notice any framerate drops even from 30 to 20? A 33% decrease at an already low starting rate? Well, if you don't notice that, you can be sure I won't take your view on all things fps serious anymore.
Shit-tier writing manages to excite you into a 90+ rating? Heavily flawed gameplay systems or mechanics don't even get noticed by you? Animations that were 'alright' a decade ago don't stand out badly?
There's no reason for me to care for anything you say then. And I really haven't cared for these reviewers in years. It's not even like that's an elitist's attitude about it. After all there are plenty reviews that actually pay attention to and properly address all these aspects. It's just not from the usual suspects of these 'AAA reviewers'.
No, they just disagree with you. Big difference. The game is an easy 9 for me so far (20 hours in) and is on course to compete with Life is Strange for my goty.
But a lot of that is subjective. Like there's no universal "shit-tier" writing measurement. Different people just enjoy different things.
I agree about the technical stuff, though, that's kinda baffling. It's why I always appreciate when outlets hold off on reviewing a game until it's out in the wild. Or if they do what Gerstmann did and separate the scores for the different platforms.
I tried playing fo3 in preparation for fo4. Games broken as shit, apparently you have to turn off auto saves because they corrupt your save. This was on PC. So several hours in my save is unplayable, fuck that. If the game is buggy then the reviews should reflect it. I'm not buying fo4 until it gets several patches.