[video=youtube;dejO6aiA7bs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dejO6aiA7bs[/video]
Haven't seen Bunnyhop posted here in a while.
I think he places a bit too much value on Skyrim's presentation. But other than than idk, I haven't played the game yet, though his points seem to be pretty popular with fans and critics who aren't simply hating on the game.
The conversation problems blow my mind, I'm constantly struggling to hold conversations with people as they float in and out of dialogue trees.
The comment on comparing it's look to skyrim can be put down to style one is 1950's Americana and sci-fi and the other is Nordic Fantasy.
Honestly the loading screens scream copy and paste from Skyrim. Like what happened to the slideshow ones that I always loved and told about the lore in a unique way?
Yeah, having played TW3 and MGSV, I'm wondering why the textures and the post processing look so terrible. I mean the tbh TW3 dwarfs all Bethesda games in all aspects with a smaller budget, less development time and a less experienced team.
A few tidbits about the movement, it's because the third-person animations have acceleration. It's not instant like it was in skyrim or fallout 3. (which is have the reason they looked so odd was they were driven by input and not animation.)
I must be very lucky. Apart from some spazzing out ragdolls I haven't encountered any bugs or glitches so far.
Oh yeah?
I didn't play the game because my PC apparently can't even though I ran the Witcher 3 just fine a couple months back, but I agree with the points he's made. Skyrim was great and this looks great, but after seven years you'd expect a little more.
Fallout 4 is so weird because it's both really great and really awful at the same time.
The game can look beautiful and ugly simultaneously. It's like one great studio took over 75% percent and the worst developer on the planet handled the other 25%.
I'm enjoying it, but when it's bad, it's REALLY bad.
[QUOTE=Stiffy360;49103286]A few tidbits about the movement, it's because the third-person animations have acceleration. It's not instant like it was in skyrim or fallout 3. (which is have the reason they looked so odd was they were driven by input and not animation.)[/QUOTE]
I love how that's even [I]worse[/I] than what they previously had. By now you would have thought that people would know to avoid these types of systems after all the problems Witcher 3 and various Rockstar games had.
I should had pulled a Postal and cropped the images when I said this game will have a max of 4 choices in dialog.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;49103295]there probably is a better way around it since most third person games control fairly well without locking you into a .5 second animation before you start moving
though who even plays these games in third person[/QUOTE]
:worried:
[QUOTE=cdr248;49103689]I love how that's even [I]worse[/I] than what they previously had. By now you would have thought that people would know to avoid these types of systems after all the problems Witcher 3 and various Rockstar games had.[/QUOTE]
It makes animations look much more fluid which is why people do it. After all, in real life you don't instantly accelerate.
I don't mind it too much unless you're doing finnicky movement.
[QUOTE=Stiffy360;49103780]:worried:
It makes animations look much more fluid which is why people do it. After all, in real life you don't instantly accelerate.
I don't mind it too much unless you're doing finnicky movement.[/QUOTE]
who gives a shit if it looks more natural when you lose a large amount of control over your character
In games like Hitman: BM and Max Panye you could turn on a fucking dime and the animations for those games weren't grossly offensive.
Seeing my character spin around in place by rapidly turning around harms 'muh immersion' far less than having trouble walking [I]indoors[/I] properly or being unable to perform a straight 180 without bumping into anything.
Nice to see you still can't shoot through the windows and frames of old cars, I figured with their emphasis on combat they'd see to that.
[QUOTE=DasMatze;49103369]I must be very lucky. Apart from some spazzing out ragdolls I didn't encounter any bugs or glitches so far.[/QUOTE]
There's been a few here and there. Sometimes the companion pathfinding gets a little weird, but I've encountered quite a few graphical glitches and the longer I play the more the game falls apart.
Sometimes weapons will take forever to load, leaving me unable to use the gun at all. Sometimes distant LOD objects render up close in a blocky, low-res mess. The ammo counter when entering a suit of power armor doesn't display properly until I fire my weapon.
None of those are particularly big but they were still easy to find and should have been caught in playtesting. It's clear that, above all else, Bethesda needs to get rid of their shoddy jury-rigged mess of an engine and get a new one. I don't know what they did, but man they completely fucked Gamebryo up.
The engine is seriously reaching the limits. It's obvious that not even the developers can handle it. They really should consider making a new one or using a different one. Tacking some shit onto current one is really hurting the quality of their games.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49104207]The engine is seriously reaching the limits. It's obvious that not even the developers can handle it. They really should consider making a new one or using a different one. Tacking some shit onto current one is really hurting the quality of their games.[/QUOTE]
at this point people are pretty much enabling the engine jank. it always takes like a year for them to realize all bethesda's usual problems are still there in full force and by then they've already started work on their next game. they just keep getting away with it by the skin of their teeth
i refuse to buy another gamebryo game.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49104207]The engine is seriously reaching the limits. It's obvious that not even the developers can handle it. They really should consider making a new one or using a different one. Tacking some shit onto current one is really hurting the quality of their games.[/QUOTE]
That shitty gamebryo engine was already stretched well beyond it's capacity back when Fallout 3 came out.
I cannot even begin to understand why people are letting Bethesta get away with it.
If a product this flawed had come from any other developer there would have been a massive outrage.
Fallout 4 looks like it's Fallout 3 with a new coat of paint
Problem is, Fallout 3 needs much more than a new coat of paint
[QUOTE=Fish Muffin;49104551]i refuse to buy another [B]bethesda [/B]game.[/QUOTE]
FTFY
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49104207]The engine is seriously reaching the limits. It's obvious that not even the developers can handle it. They really should consider making a new one or using a different one. Tacking some shit onto current one is really hurting the quality of their games.[/QUOTE]
It's not so much the engine as it's bad programming being caked on top of each other with each new iteration. For example there's still leftovers from skyrim, which means they just iterate rather than branch the engine.
That in itself isn't bad, but it can generate a lot of issues later on down the pipe.
[QUOTE=xamllew;49103893]Nice to see you still can't shoot through the windows and frames of old cars, I figured with their emphasis on combat they'd see to that.[/QUOTE]
There are so many areas where the enemies can shoot you but you can't hit them because there is a hitbox between them and you, this is egregious when you're out fighting a bunch of super mutants, they're usually in built up, poorly made areas with holes in the buildings.
The worst is that some of the houses have 3 foot x 3 foot holes in the ceilings you can't shoot through because effort.
[QUOTE=Rossy167;49103278]Yeah, having played TW3 and MGSV, I'm wondering why the textures and the post processing look so terrible. I mean the tbh TW3 dwarfs all Bethesda games in all aspects with a smaller budget, less development time and a less experienced team.[/QUOTE]
The problem is that open world RPGs are a dime a dozen. Good ones are too. For years now if you wanted a solid, immersive open world RPG Bethesda was your go to. They almost had the monopoly on open world RPGs for so many years that they didn't need to innovate particularly, because everyone just buys up bethesda games every time they come out like hotcakes.
And then CD Projekt came and showed us how it [I]should[/I] be done with TW3. Honestly Witcher 3 is probably my favourite game I've played in my life. It's how open world RPGs should be, and now that I've been so spoiled this year, I've found it really, really hard to go back and enjoy a Bethesda game at the same level I used to. Witcher 3 built a convincing world with such a great set of questlines and just did almost everything right - and to top it off, in 80 hours of playing, it crashed on me once.
Bethesda just needs to up their game. The company used to be so cutting edge but because of that they've become complacent and other companies have far exceeded them by now, and fallout 4 is the first game where that really shows. I really hope Elder Scrolls VI begins with a long period of them developing a new engine and revamping their story writing team or they're going to see the start of a short decline
[QUOTE=Fish Muffin;49104551]i refuse to buy another gamebryo game.[/QUOTE]
Gamebryo is fine, it's just Bethesda+Gamebryo that creates awfulness.
Rocksmith, Sid Meier's Pirates, Catherine, Bully and Civ 4 were all pretty good games and all used Gamebryo.
This would have been panned if weren't for being a Bethesda game. Framerate locked to gameplay speed, no FOV options in the game proper, and an unacceptable amount of "jank" for a major AAA release. Fallout 4 supposedly cost around $100m dollars and took 7 years to develop, and this is the best they can do?
Why do people bend over when it's Bethesda?
[QUOTE=Xonax;49105654]Why do people bend over when it's Bethesda?[/QUOTE]
I'm not going to make apologies for their games but that doesn't mean I felt taken advantage of by the product I got
I think people put waaay too much faith in Beth and ride the hype wave as opposed to looking at their track record and saying "I think I'll just wait and see how it turns out." While I do like Beth's games, it's becoming frustrating to see them waste their potential and produce a shoddy game, [I]then get away with it[/I].
We should honestly put them up to a higher standard at this point. No longer are they doing experimental shit like Fallout 3 that is excusable for being jank. No longer are they making games with unfamiliar turn-of-the-generation tech like they did with Oblivion. No longer are they pushing awkward C-RPG mechanics in ARPG gameplay like they did with Morrowind. Fallout 4 was supposed to be the Big One. The one where they make a game for the next-gen that for once allows them to break the mold of limited resources and finally create a polished experience. An experience that I can both love and be addicted to for its scale and content, and genuinely respect and enjoy unconditionally for its gameplay. But it honestly doesn't seem like Fallout 4 is the Bethesda Big One that I had hoped for.
[QUOTE=Rossy167;49103278]Yeah, having played TW3 and MGSV, I'm wondering why the textures and the post processing look so terrible. I mean the tbh TW3 dwarfs all Bethesda games in all aspects with a smaller budget, less development time and a less experienced team.[/QUOTE]
The Witcher 3 was developed by a considerably larger team and didn't exactly have a small budget, CDPR is flooded with cash thanks to GOG.
[editline]13th November 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49104207]The engine is seriously reaching the limits. It's obvious that not even the developers can handle it. They really should consider making a new one or using a different one. Tacking some shit onto current one is really hurting the quality of their games.[/QUOTE]
Then you'd lose the huge modding capability and thus kill a large portion of the Fallout playerbase.
[editline]a[/editline]
Bethesda aren't exactly masters of programming or truly outstanding in the way CDPR is outstanding but they're really good at worldcrafting and they have a unique ability to make charming memorable games that have their own identity. Despite The Witcher 3 being a good game (that a lot of people would likely argue is superior to Fallout 4), I still didn't like and found it to be a boring chore for the twenty hours I played it, while I'm sitting at 870 hours on Skyrim despite the game's many flaws. It's mostly due to modding but also because the games have a unique feel and charm to them, if only for the fact they offer you a fuck-huge world to explore with close to no actual limitations where other games like The Witcher tend to gimp exploration in some ways, or to make exploration just not interesting at all (which was an issue I had with MGS 5).
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
