[video=youtube;Ty2hU0Y7kAg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty2hU0Y7kAg[/video]
Guys, there is like 5 seconds of new footage
Those storms sound like the blow outs in Stalker:CoP
5 SECONDS OF WALKING IN A BASEBALL FIELD CITY!
Real talk it's really awesome to see how much Todd is putting into this one, I have confidence it's going to be a solid game no matter what.
[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;48283509]5 SECONDS OF WALKING IN A BASEBALL FIELD CITY!
Real talk it's really awesome to see how much Todd is putting into this one, I have confidence it's going to be a solid game no matter what.[/QUOTE]
I mean he was just as invested in fallout 3. I like the new colors of fallout 4 but im rly worried about their "new store front" that they are going to try to implement
Take out the stupid shit about paid mods, muzzle flashes that rotate in a circle(the fuck were they thinking??), and the idiotic hit markers. I will be fine with those out of the picture.
I am literally jumping out of my skin for this game.
Seeing footage of this reminds me of the nostalgia from playing FO3.
[QUOTE=SatansSin;48283702]Take out the stupid shit about paid mods, muzzle flashes that rotate in a circle(the fuck were they thinking??), and the idiotic hit markers. I will be fine with those out of the picture.[/QUOTE]
I think hitmarkers are fine (through sound or visuals or both) It's nice to know when you hit something or not.
I like the idea of the Radiation Storms. Blowout soon fellow wanderer! Everything so far in general looks promising in terms of graphics. And it's great to see all the variations of color in the game.
I can't wait to see what the modding community comes up with once we're 6 months to a year in with this game. I'd love to see AWOP with this.
Yes, details like how supermarkets can somehow still be stocked with food 200 years after the war.
[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;48284630]Yes, details like how supermarkets can somehow still be stocked with food 200 years after the war.[/QUOTE]
Pretty sure they take the piss out of that in tactics to a degree, explaining that it's [url=http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Phil,_the_Nuka-Cola_dude]Phil[/url] who goes around stocking the machines with nuka cola even after all these years.
[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;48284630]Yes, details like how supermarkets can somehow still be stocked with food 200 years after the war.[/QUOTE]
Dude.
The game takes place in a retro-futuristic 1950s where you fight Robbie the Robot using Flash Gordon Laser guns, while your cyborg dog with a brain in a jar bites it with it's metal teeth, and your possibly over 200 year old Mexican ghoul sidekick shoots at it while wearing a Bandito outfit.
And you're on about Food surviving 200 years? :v:
[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;48284630]Yes, details like how supermarkets can somehow still be stocked with food 200 years after the war.[/QUOTE]
My headcanon is now just that Mister Handies do all of it. Just... every single bit of it. They even irradiate the food they create and bash up its packaging just to make it more authentic.
It just works.
snip, don't want to start an argument
The food in Fallout is loaded with shitloads of preservatives, because in the turbo-capitalist culture of the Fallout's America they really didn't give a crap how much cancer they gave people.
[QUOTE=rshunter313;48283647]I mean he was just as invested in fallout 3. I like the new colors of fallout 4 but im rly worried about their "new store front" that they are going to try to implement[/QUOTE]
"Details matter" was a huge thing they harped on for Skyrim as well and we all know that game turned out. Amazing promise in the first impressions and first several hours of gameplay but totally fell apart when you got to the meat of it
I'm not really convinced at all they are going to do any better for FO4 considering they've not shown anything yet that alleviates fears that this isn't just going to turn into Skyrim again. Especially seeing as they been focusing their game previews in the same way they did for Skyrim, even saying the same kinds of things.
I just revisited the Super Duper Mart in FO3 a couple minutes ago and I still don't completely understand the food complaints. There's barely anything on the shelves but empty tin cans and cola bottles. Am I missing something here?
[QUOTE=zeldar;48286976]I just revisited the Super Duper Mart in FO3 a couple minutes ago and I still don't completely understand the food complaints. There's barely anything on the shelves but empty tin cans and cola bottles. Am I missing something here?[/QUOTE]
People complaining so they can complain
Admitedly, it wouldn't be interesting nor rewarding to explore if everything of value had been looted 150 years ago.
The world is built for the player, after all.
[QUOTE=KorJax;48286716]"Details matter" was a huge thing they harped on for Skyrim as well and we all know that game turned out. Amazing promise in the first impressions and first several hours of gameplay but totally fell apart when you got to the meat of it
I'm not really convinced at all they are going to do any better for FO4 considering they've not shown anything yet that alleviates fears that this isn't just going to turn into Skyrim again. Especially seeing as they been focusing their game previews in the same way they did for Skyrim, even saying the same kinds of things.[/QUOTE]
It has to do with atmosphere, not story or gameplay.
[QUOTE=KorJax;48286716]"Details matter" was a huge thing they harped on for Skyrim as well and we all know that game turned out. Amazing promise in the first impressions and first several hours of gameplay but totally fell apart when you got to the meat of it
I'm not really convinced at all they are going to do any better for FO4 considering they've not shown anything yet that alleviates fears that this isn't just going to turn into Skyrim again. Especially seeing as they been focusing their game previews in the same way they did for Skyrim, even saying the same kinds of things.[/QUOTE]
Apparently being the most played strictly single player game on steam [b]to this day[/b] makes it a bad game.
Honestly, I used to nitpick Skyrim for all the things it COULD'VE been, but at the end of the day it's really fun.
[QUOTE=Mobon1;48288577]Apparently being the most played strictly single player game on steam [b]to this day[/b] makes it a bad game.
Honestly, I used to nitpick Skyrim for all the things it COULD'VE been, but at the end of the day it's really fun.[/QUOTE]
Not as much fun though as Morrowind or even maybe Oblivion.
That sounded rather promising. I still remember they said similar about skyrim, so i am a bit wary, though the more i see of the game, the more hyped i get.
It indeed looks like they went for this details matter view, and that is simply great.
I wonder if all this talk about how much they focus on small details, and showing concept art, is because of Adam Adamowicz passing away a few years ago.
[QUOTE=Mobon1;48288577]Apparently being the most played strictly single player game on steam [b]to this day[/b] makes it a bad game.
Honestly, I used to nitpick Skyrim for all the things it COULD'VE been, but at the end of the day it's really fun.[/QUOTE]
Just because a game has enough hooks into it doesn't make it a flawless game, or even great at what it's trying to do. Frankly, the fact that [I]nobody[/I] makes games like Bethesda helps them a lot in that they have no competition (despite plenty of developers making games with the same scope/scale of bethesda games yet succeeding in their vision very well). And massive modding support helps tons. Who can honestly say here that they would play Skyrim without heavily modding it? That is the one big thing that saves it for me.
This argument is like saying that call of duty and candy crush are the best games in their genre because they are the most popular. That simply isn't true at all. Of course they are good [I]enough[/I] to actually be enjoyed, otherwise they wouldn't get the sales they do. But being the biggest franchise on earth has nothing to do with quality and facepunch of all places I thought should know that.
My biggest issues with Skyrim are that they really drop the ball on fulfilling the promise, the potential, and design they hype up about those games. Serious issues with storytelling+pacing, world building, balance, character progression, repetitive dungeon design, poor shallow quests, no real focus (not as important, but still would be good to hit), etc. Objectively weak key elements in their games that other games of similar scale/scope do not struggle with. But apparently we should excuse all of that simply because nobody else makes a game in which you can kill bears with swords in an 8kmx8km size map.
I'm just frustrated because Morrowind got all of those things right or pretty close to right. It just super fucked up on the game mechanics (blame 2002 era standards for that). Every bethesda game since has improved game mechanics by borrowing mechanics from other games (fine), but at the cost of creating the most shallow possible version of the style of game they are making. This has been a complaint that the overwhelming consensus has had against their games for [I]many years[/I] now but apparently it is easy to forget in the pre-game hype cycle, instead of looking at their new game with a critical eye.
Objectively weak/poor design choices are still poor even if the overall game has enough in it to not get bored after a few hours. I don't think bad design should get a free pass just because of that, especially when they've been repeat offenders of this for several games in a row. It is easy to forget that when they are the only guys in town.
[QUOTE=KorJax;48291072]A bunch of really good arguments[/QUOTE]
You make a bunch of really good arguments KorJax, and they make me wanna revisit skyrim and do a second (more like seventh) take on it, I just can't make myself think Skyrim was a bad, or even "just decent" game, because I remember playing it for hours, just hiking with a dumb grin on my face, being amazed with the game, I never really played it for the story, I only completed it one time, and that was just to get the story quest out of the way. I guess the game just suited my playstyle
[QUOTE=xeo xeo;48291210]You make a bunch of really good arguments KorJax, and they make me wanna revisit skyrim and do a second (more like seventh) take on it, I just can't make myself think Skyrim was a bad, or even "just decent" game, because I remember playing it for hours, just hiking with a dumb grin on my face, being amazed with the game, I never really played it for the story, I only completed it one time, and that was just to get the story quest out of the way. I guess the game just suited my playstyle[/QUOTE]
TES never grasped me, not like Fallout 3/new vegas did, but I still spent around 300 hours in Skyrim, and I'm not gonna spend so much time on a bad game, and that was before I started modding it
[QUOTE=Mobon1;48288577]Apparently being the most played strictly single player game on steam [b]to this day[/b] makes it a bad game.
Honestly, I used to nitpick Skyrim for all the things it COULD'VE been, but at the end of the day it's really fun.[/QUOTE]
Popularity doesn't mean its good.
Fucking CoD is the same rehashed shit with broken mechanics but its heavily played as well.
[QUOTE=Swilly;48292406]Popularity doesn't mean its good.
Fucking CoD is the same rehashed shit with broken mechanics but its heavily played as well.[/QUOTE]
Popularity is a good measure to see what people like.
As long as the dungeon areas aren't like they were in Fallout 3 where you were constantly spelunking into ghoul filled decrepit metro stations. Or like in Skyrim where it was copy/paste falmer dungeon, dwarf dungeon or nordic dungeon.
Thankfully it seems like they're trying to detour from sameness, but I'm still taking certain stuff Bethesda says with a grain of salt. Regardless this game looks really really good.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
