None of these bugs are a surprise. They have all happened before, they have fixed absolutely nothing in this regard.
Fallout 4 - Reviews thread
- Thread starter J 0 E
- Start date
None of these bugs are a surprise. They have all happened before, they have fixed absolutely nothing in this regard.
LookAtMeGo
Member
Thats where I fall in for sure. Always loved Bethesda games. Fallout 3 was my introduction to the series. I guess you can only be a true Fallout fan if you played the first 2, hated 3, and liked NV. Eh.
This is quite the opposite of how I feel. I like the fact that i'm playing a character and following a story the developer intended me to do. The problem I have with Bethesda RPGs is while I do enjoy running through the world exploring - there's absolutely zero reason for me to give a shit about what i'm doing. Witcher as a series (for me) takes a gigantic dump on both Fallout and Elder Scrolls at least in the story department.
I'm not entirely sure I understand this belief. You are following the main quest for both games are you not? Both being very personal tales that still have to be linear somewhat
We are talking 3 out of 5 (or 6 if you include Tactics). Bethesda took the license and did their own thing. It is just as valid as any other and there are plenty of people that like both, but it is something that aught to be contextualized. I like Bethesda Fallout well enough but with plenty of caveats.
Vault Dweller 111
Member
Anyone calling Fallout a crappy RPG surely isn't saying that Witcher is a good one, right?
Edit: just in terms of role playing elements.
Edit: just in terms of role playing elements.
Really can't agree that FO4 feels like my story, even FO3's terrible main plot felt more like "my story".
Ophiuchus
Banned
I love his reviews.This one is one of his bests.I wish all these reviewers there listened to this guy.Metascore of FO4 does not make sense.
I'm not. In terms of story though...
I like them for different things. And I certainly don't appreciate FO4 blending towards the other, because they have made a crappy version of the Bioware wheel among other things.
Witcher has terribly balanced game systems, most notably equipment scaling and leveling up. If the story was anywhere near the quality of a Bethesda game, it would have been torn to shreds.
As far as Fallout 4 is concerned, I see a good game with lots of bugs and Bethesda continuing their trend of streamlining/removing elements from prior games. Don't get me wrong, some of it is fine, but removing the old dialogue system alongside reducing roleplaying elements that were essential in prior Fallout games (even 3) is just not my thing.
LookAtMeGo
Member
Thats fair enough. I dont know if I would have enjoyed just any post apocalyptic FPS Bethesda game as much. I feel like its that Fallout asthetic (valut boy, 1950's futuristic style, ghouls) that appeals so much to me. One of these days I'll have to go and play the first 2 to see what it is that turned folks off of 3 so much. I'd say I'm a Fallout fan but it really is me being more of a Bethesda fan at the end of the day.
Every comparison between fallout 1 and 2 and modern fallouts outside of dialogue systems and story is an apple to orange comparison. And for the dialogue system and story front, New Vegas nails it anyway. If you played New Vegas, you'd have an idea what people want.
Vault Dweller 111
Member
Graphics
Characters
Presentation
Story
Polish
All amazing in Witcher 3 (much better than Fallout, you'd be a fool to disgaree).
But to get all that, sacrifices were made elsewhere. Fallout is like the polar opposite. Some people will like the direction Fallout took. Others (a majority on a website like Neogaf) will prefer the Witcher way.
Absolutely. Witcher 3 kills it. Fallout 4 is barely a RPG. Combat is just FPS shoot bang with no reason to use VATS. Dialog is inconsequential. You can just go through all of that shit by pressing X, you choices don't really matter and charisma barely has influence on anything. Interesting storytelling and influence on the world is also missing. It's the worst RPG Bethesda has ever made.
I'm not singing The Witcher's praises here. At all. I don't like it. I prefer the Fallout: New Vegas way, or even the Fallout 3 way to Fallout 4's abortion of a dialogue system and story. The shooting's fine now, though.
So far all of those games blow Fallout 4 out of the water. If I had to rate all those games Fallout 4 would get about a 7/10, DA:I would get 8.5/10, MGSV would get 9, and Witcher 3 gets 10/10. Witcher 3 is one of my top games of all time now, and the DLC so far is my top DLC of all time. Fallout 4 would have to pull some crazy shit out its ass later in the game to make the difference up.
Ascenion
Member
I totally understand that, but that kind of RPG just kills my immersion, especially since having read the books, I question choices made with the story and keep wondering what would Sapkowski have done and would he have (likely) done it better. I don't like that feeling. It typically don't like games where the universe isn't one of the devs own making and they kind of go off the rails for this exact reason. That massive world and open exploration. Gives me the freedom I believe and open world title should have. I can make my own motives and reasoning for my actions. I can't be Geralt and role play as a psychotic pig killing robber, because he wouldn't do that.
Yes, but I feel more like its my story due to me being the beginning and the end of it. Geralt has a few novels worth of backstory to his character and motivations that most people weren't present for and they really don't bring a lot of it up. There's so much mystery and I can't relate as well. That's more what I'm getting at. I can pretend to be the Fallout 4 protagonist better than I can Geralt if that helps.
I can understand that, given how both games began. FO4 is more established vs. you pretty much being present in Fallout 3 moment 1.
LookAtMeGo
Member
I say that because with DA:I, I never made it out of the Hinterlands. MGSV, I gave up just after making it to Africa. TW3, I just stoped careing by the end, I just wanted it to be over. I put about 30 hours into each game, maybe 40 into TW3 to this day. I've put 20 hours into FO4 already and I am fiending for more. I think I may have been a bit premature by saying it blows TW3 "out of the water"... I may get sick of it by the end. But FO4 has grabbed me in a way the other 3 have not. Something about the setting and sense of discovery mixed with the combat that just checks all the right boxes for me.
Vigilant Walrus
Member
After watching Bunny Hops review I am thinking of waiting with F4. I have it preloaded, but since I own New Vegas, I was thinking of trying that game instead. Give F4 a few months to let the kirks be patched out. Plus I hear New Vegas has a cool story!
Pollux
Member
I have to know - how is this on Xbox One? I have a PC with a 970 but I don't want to sit at my desk to play it and moving the PC isn't going to happen. I got steam link but hate the steam controller and the Xbox one wireless dongle doesn't work with steam link.
So basically, how is this for peopl on Xbox one?
So basically, how is this for peopl on Xbox one?
So this thread turned into witcher 3 v fallout 4.
I played witcher 3 and so far I much prefer fallout 4. I think the combat in fallout is excellent with some really cool long and short range weapons, and some of the death cams in VATS are great.
Bethesda just seem to have something. It's crazy as yes witcher had better graphics and was more polished, although that game had a ton of patches, but Bethesda have sold millions and millions of games for a very good reason..
They are great fun to play.
I played witcher 3 and so far I much prefer fallout 4. I think the combat in fallout is excellent with some really cool long and short range weapons, and some of the death cams in VATS are great.
Bethesda just seem to have something. It's crazy as yes witcher had better graphics and was more polished, although that game had a ton of patches, but Bethesda have sold millions and millions of games for a very good reason..
They are great fun to play.
Between New Vegas and Fallout 4 there's no way you can go right. If you play New Vegas first, Fallout 4's story and dialogue will disapoint you. If you play Fallout 4 first, you'll be disappointed by New Vegas's terrible gunplay.
This isn't Witcher vs Fallout 4 at all, they're not the same thing.
New Vegas is interesting in that, as the MC, you have a lot of flexibility on how you want to deal with the conflict in the main plotline. You're not any chosen, mythic hero - instead you're a courier who got shot in the head. You're given hints as to what went down, but it's up to you to deal with it however you want, if you even care about what happened.
If you have the game, grab some quality-of-life mods, and give it a spin.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Probably the most sensible post in this thread.
Ah thanks, that clarifies it perfectly.
A Serious Man
Member
I've tried very hard to make FO4 my own story but it's difficult so far due to the incredibly bland demeanor of my character in dialogue and being funneled into joining this Minutemen group. You can not join them but that feels like you're being locked out of a lot of content/rewards and that isn't satisfying either.
CraigerGamer
Member
So you can make it your own story but you are choosing not to because you feel its a bad decision?
How does one make a decision not to have a bland demeanor in Fallout 4's dialogue? Besides the joining the minutemen is pretty much a must if you want to participate in the settlement part of the game.
CraigerGamer
Member
That's not part of the quote I highlighted. Bland demeanor is an opinion and I am not going to argue that one way or another. But to say you don't have choice and then say you decided not to choose means you do have a choice...
CraigerGamer
Member
The game is amazing. I don't know what Bethesda did to squelch your hype.
I can only guess and say: They released the game...
Not sure about the majority comment. I played Witcher 3 for around 15 hours (to the end of the bloody baron quest line) and then put it down. The story and character elements were good, but the gameplay was poor. I play games for the gameplay, so if that suffers everything suffers. Because I didn't find the combat fun in Witcher 3 I had no compulsion to explore the world.
Fallout 4, on the other hand, has excellent gunplay that ties into a wonderful crafting system which makes me excited to explore every new area I come across. I also think, to my eyes, Fallout 4 looks better. Yea, I'm well aware that Witcher 3 has much more impressive tech credentials, but I find the art direction and lighting in Fallout 4 amazing, and that matters far more to me in the end.
Different strokes for different folks.
Manny Calavera
Member
Why would people randomly give bad scores to Fallout 4 without playing when rest of the big games this year get good scores. (Well other than Batman Arkham PC version). Also Fallout 3 and rest of the Bethesda games gets good scores. So I don't quite see why would people have some campaign against Fallout 4 without any reason..Maybe many people are just disappointed with the game. Also the Steam user scores are lower than rest of the Fallout games.
-MD-
Member
Same thing, obviously.
I didn't give a shit about Fallout 4 leading up to release, then I steam shared it and played 15 hours already.
I see his point. What they could have done is have some settlements that you had to be a bastard to join. Maybe some raiders that wanted help making a better camp. And then you could help them raid the settlements around you.
Well, there's no such thing as the perfect game, right?
(besides, I had a lot of fun with New Vegas's gunplay. But I admit I'm not picky as long as you give me iron sights).
Nah the caves have a couple of rooms.
Dungeons/buildings in Fallout 4 are like mazes.
None of that in The Witcher 3
Lowlander2
Banned
I took my own crack at reviewing the game, mostly the main storyline, if you guys want my take.
Zombie James
Banned
Angry Joe's review (8/10): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aorKjw71ckQ
After 150 hours of W3 on Death March, I came away thoroughly impressed and overly smitten.
30 hours into Fallout 4 on Survival and I am trying to justify playing further.
Starfield
Member
then dont play on Survival
Imp the Dimp
Member
Still higher than NV. I haven't played F4 but I can't possibly picture Bethesda developing a game remotely as good as NV. They haven't come close since Morrowind and apparently, F4 seems to not be their single best game since then.
I did this too. Game's really fun, but I do wish it had more RPG mechanics. Going down the Luck tree is giving me a lot of what I want, but I feel like at the end I'll feel the same way about Fallout as MGS V. They are really good games (MGS V > Fallout personally) that could do more. With MGS that's filling out Chapter 2 with worthwhile stuff, and with Fallout I wish there was an expansion of the mechanics. There's no reason to do anything with settlements aside from the intrinsic value of building the base. The VATS system is incredibly basic, and there's little need to use it since the shooting is better. There could be more RPG mechanics in general to make it feel less like a shooter with some perks. The upside is that while MGS is done, Fallout 6 could address these issues.
It's a good game that I just wish had a little more, but I'm satisfied with it, especially after loathing previous Bethesda games