Officerrob
Banned
Jeff Gerstmann said the framerate gets so bad at times that it becomes really hard to shoot stuff. This was on PS4, and by all accounts the XB1 is worse.
Fallout 4 - Reviews thread
- Thread starter J 0 E
- Start date
Jeff Gerstmann said the framerate gets so bad at times that it becomes really hard to shoot stuff. This was on PS4, and by all accounts the XB1 is worse.
Extremely second-hand embarrassing to read.
Its OK if someone else doesn't like something you do. And its ok to like something that has clear, blatant issues - why, its even ok when people point them out.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Yet they don't punish with the scores. Which ultimately effects the developers to invoke change. True story.
Solaire of Astora
Death by black JPN
Why? That's what digital foundry and the likes are for. When Jim plays on PC, he has access to programs like fraps, which isn't an option on ps4. At least not without purchasing optional, expensive hardware, which I don't think Jim has considering some of his YouTube videos featuring ps4 gameplay were recorded with the share function, which Jim himself makes a point out of acknowledging. Point being, not everyone is perceptive to frame drops. Especially those which are in the 5-10fps range. He may have noticed them, but perhaps didn't perceive them to be that bad.
And I don't recall Jim ever trying to pass himself off as an expert on technical analysis. Not many reviewers do, hence why most game reviews are very vague when it comes to such topics. Having said that, if you'd like to try your hand at writing combined reviews/detailed technical analysis, where performance is factored into the verdict, I suggest you go for it. It seems like an obvious hole in the review market.
If memory serves, that's what my favourite (sadly, now defunct) ps3 mag was sent for review.
hodayathink
Member
Skyrim PS3 is what made me realize that I couldn't trust reviewers. And not necessarily because I believe they're dishonest, but because a publisher is going to try their hardest to diminish a game's flaws, and without digging a reviewer might not find them as well.
v0mitg0d
Member
In case anyone missed it, I recorded a video review of the game. I put a lot of time, thought and effort into it. Hope you guys like it!
https://youtu.be/rKPjJoAIJgU
https://youtu.be/rKPjJoAIJgU
SpaceHorror
Member
Yes. And it's not just the title, the fact that he calls out other critics in the first paragraph is really off putting. Come on, you've got an opinion that's contrary, so express it clearly and get on with it, there is no need to call out other critics for not taking issue with the same things you do. He didn't even let it go there, he want on to call it disappointing. It feels like he sat around reading all the good reviews thinking,"No! No! NO!" But shit, I'm sure the folks who agree ate that up and said,'Thank you!" in their heads.
I can see why the stuff he goes on about bothers people. I've been reading it in threads about Fallout 3 for years, so clearly it does. He just went about it in a complete shit way.
I can't say whether or not I agree with him about Fallout 4 as I haven't played it, but for 3 and Skyrim? I disagree. I was lost in those worlds and the weird shit that happens in Bethesda games have never really made me have that moment when I sit down my controller and say,"Nah, fuck this, I'm out."
Beelzebufo
Banned
I always thought of reviews as a way to express whether someone would like/should buy a game or not. It's not really about spiting or congratulating publishers.
While I'm trying to avoid videos until after launch (why am I even in this thread?) - looks cool & subbed!
Here's my 5 out of 5 review of Fallout 4: http://www.savingcontent.com/2015/11/09/fallout-4-review/
Chiggs
Gold Member
First sentence is pretty bad, man.
What if being on the brink of war meant actually meant going to war?
RichiRamjag
Member
I feel ya, and he should of definitely left that bullshit out. It's not Bethesda games turn me off or that I see things that make me immediately stop playing or anything crazy like that. It's just little things I notice that bug me at times and pull me out of the immersion. Nothing completely ruins the game for me and I wouldn't say it's a major issue by any means, but I'd love to see a little more work in the details. Maybe some improvements to animations, AI, etc.
I can't comment on 4 either though, gotta wait for FedEx to arrive tomorrow morning, but I'm too excited to sleep lol.
SpaceHorror
Member
I'm in the same boat, man. I got work tomorrow, I'm too excited to sleep, and my copy is in the hands of the USPS. My local office sucks too, so while I'm not concerned, I'm concerned. They have been better about not losing shit lately so here's hoping.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Considering that how a game scores is usually written in contracts with publisbers for bonuses, etc, they do effect them.
Then as you said, scores can effect sales. Sales invoke change (or lack there of).
Nope. It's the craftsmanship put into the world, and the sense of freedom their games give you like no other.
"Loot" is the domain of the lazy developer.
I think it's both, having loot for each arm and leg definitely appeals to me.
The annoying thing from playing Fallout 4 so far is that, honestly, it's improved in a lot of areas. The act of firing a gun is smoother, melee combat is better, enemies actually have decent AI and movement(they retreat, take defensive positions, strafe and dodge like a motherfucker, etc...), character creation is actually pretty damn good for once(doesn't take years to make a non-shitty face), gun customization is off the charts, crafting is good, and settlement building is pretty good, stimpaks no longer being instant use and actually taking awhile to heal you is good...
But... It actually took a step back in a lot of areas that needed to be improved from 3 as well. They somehow managed to make the dialogue options even worse than 3. I have no idea what the hell my character is going to say when I choose a dialogue option, which makes the entire dialogue system pointless. Also, the way they streamlined the level up process down to a single choice of either a stat or a perk is just... Sad.
Overall the game somehow took a further step back from RP part of RPG than Fallout 3, but at the same time the G part is pretty damn good. Unfortunately, given the reviews, Bethesda doesn't have much incentive to fix the problems in their next game.
But... It actually took a step back in a lot of areas that needed to be improved from 3 as well. They somehow managed to make the dialogue options even worse than 3. I have no idea what the hell my character is going to say when I choose a dialogue option, which makes the entire dialogue system pointless. Also, the way they streamlined the level up process down to a single choice of either a stat or a perk is just... Sad.
Overall the game somehow took a further step back from RP part of RPG than Fallout 3, but at the same time the G part is pretty damn good. Unfortunately, given the reviews, Bethesda doesn't have much incentive to fix the problems in their next game.
(From the ElderGeek review)
I don't know if it's 'cause I'm listening to some mad disco-inspired music but holy shit hahaha
Admiral Woofington
Member
I think 88/89 was my guess for the metacritic score. So I guess cool.
RichiRamjag
Member
I wish mine was usps, they show up early, same with fedex. Amazon used ups for mine so chances are I'm not playing until 4pm-5pm sadly.
The "Messed Up Stuff" you speak of is a city later on, where people experience drop from 60+ to 40-60. Beyond that the main glitch with the game is that if people try to go much over 60 FPS they crash.
Maybe I'm just paranoid but Jim's review, despite applauding lack of microtransaction, makes me wonder if they might be thinking of adding them later. It's the wording where he says "despite the game being easily structured for such a horrible business practice to slide right in. " That almost seems like they designed it to add later...
Honestly, it does seem like the settlement stuff would be the place to put microtransactions.... But considering how mod support is, that really couldn't work without limiting what modders could work with.
exmachina64
Banned
And miniscule data caps to go along with them.
Andodalf
Banned
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.
ginger ninja
Banned
Given the technical troubles with the xbone version, why is it rated at 91 while PC/ps4 are at 89 on metacritic.
Daphnes Nohansen Hyrule
Member
12 hours in and 0 technical issues on xbox one
Probably worth a watch, Ben Moore sitting down with Brandon Jones at Gametrailers and talking Fallout 4 which give some insight as to why it deserves a high score in spite of technical issues. The game clearly got its hooks into him and wouldn't let go.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VJ-a5n4Ryw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VJ-a5n4Ryw
Yautja_Warrior
Member
Xbox One version - 23 Reviews.
PS4 version - 42 Reviews.
PC version - 15 Reviews.
I wouldn't read too much into that because according to Digital Foundry the Xbox version is the worst performing version of the 3.
It's just different reviews for the different versions that's all. Most reviews have been on PS4, so with more reviews, it has a higher chance of a lower score. Also I find that PC reviews don't usually hand out higher scores so easily and are probably more critical / realistic in scoring, than console reviews.
I think you misread that post.
It wasn't a call to stop trusting Jeff, it was questioning how the reviews could be so high when apparently this game runs like shit.
krameriffic
Member
I don't think the point of stating "I played 80 hours and looking back... I don't know why" is to say that the game is or isn't for him. It's a statement of the kind of games these are. Everything in this kind of RPG feels so important and interesting in the moment, but ultimately the substance of the overall experience is very dilute and hollow in retrospect. Everybody hits a breaking point with this kind of game where they say "what the fuck am I doing?"
For me, it follows the MMO pattern. It's addicting... it pulls me in really strong for a while. But eventually the bag of tricks gets used up at some point and even if there are a lot more things to do, I just don't see any gameplay incentive or personal motivation to do them. I look back at my time with an MMO and feel that exact same hollowness, that same sense of "I don't know why I was really into this". I never even finished the main story of Skyrim in spite of playing it for like 50 hours. I just reached a point where I was donezo with the janky combat and tedium of traveling the world, and the story was not enough to keep me involved.
They get away with it because these kinds of massive RPGs don't come out that often. I get fatigued by a single game once every few years and then I can't stand the thought of playing one again for about that amount of time.
The actual answer is that the XB1 version has had fewer and different reviews submitted.
Breakfast at Noon
Member
Gurgelhals
Member
I think that, at the end of their shift, everybody just goes to the staff cafeteria located right outside the post-apocalyptic amusement park that constitutes the game's world.
At least that's the most sensible in-game explanation I could think of...
lol. you almost beat him
Good review there mate, summed up how I feel pretty much 100%. Subbed now back to Fallout.
Count of Monte Sawed-Off
un33dab@dpu$$y
Well they were the first to implement immortal companions in these games.
Edit: and yes, I know there was a way around it.
This shit should really be bannable. Like Mr Schrier suggested.
Reinforces my concerns about getting the game. Looks like the core gameplay design issues I take with Bethesda's approach are still there. Think I'll skip it. This quote a good example:
That's a really good video.
It reminded me that some of my favorite games of all time have been incredibly flawed in execution, and how none of that really mattered in the end when my overall takeaway was an engrossing, memorable experience. I'm looking at you, Deadly Premonition & Farming Simulator!
Reading through all the dissent leveled against the positive review scores for Fallout 4, I think it's fine if some want to hold Bethesda's feet to the fire for the game's technical and design flaws. That's their choice and it's not unwarranted.
It certainly won't stop me from enjoying the game. I'll take it at face value, understanding that it's not perfect, yet by all accounts engrossing, memorable and more than deserving of my focus & time.
vpance
Member
So are they lazy or not.
I totally get the draw of exploring and finding stuff though. I'd give it a shot if it didn't look so bad and outdated.
Fuck. I totally read that in a different connotation. Sorry about that man.
So according to the bit about 'Destiny as a benchmark' in the GameInformer Making Of article, Bethesda constantly referred to Destiny in an effort to make the guns and gun combat in FO4 as good as possible.
Has this come to fruition at all? Is gun combat any good? The Guardian says no, and I'm very sceptical.
Edit, I'm going to put this in the OT. Thought I was in the OT!
Has this come to fruition at all? Is gun combat any good? The Guardian says no, and I'm very sceptical.
Edit, I'm going to put this in the OT. Thought I was in the OT!
Ooccoo
Member
Shows reviews are ireelevant and have been for years. It began once gaming magazines stopped having world exclusives (except GI) and started dying. Embargoes can die too. Letting reviewers publish less than one day before release is scummy and shows Bethesda didn't want people to see how the game really is (i.e. F3 with a coat of paint).