[QUOTE=Ruh-roh;50592363]I dont think this is particularly true, the previous 3d games had terrible combat but good story/rpg elements and Fallout 4 has good combat and terrible story/rpg elements. And seeing as no one enjoyed F3 and NV for the combat...
[/QUOTE]
I think you could say this about New Vegas, but the target and main audience of Fallout 3 and 4 overlap pretty well.
Besides, Fallout 4 still hits certain RPG marks. It tickles the same sorta gameplay, so I think it's a pretty good general rule. I also don't think that the average shooter fan will actually enjoy Fallout 4 that much, just because of the RPG elements that are still in the way of the shooting.
[QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;50592639]I think you could say this about New Vegas, but the target and main audience of Fallout 3 and 4 overlap pretty well.
Besides, Fallout 4 still hits certain RPG marks. It tickles the same sorta gameplay, so I think it's a pretty good general rule. I also don't think that the average shooter fan will actually enjoy Fallout 4 that much, just because of the RPG elements that are still in the way of the shooting.[/QUOTE]
Wow wow, fallout 3, altought having RPG elements, was a VERY bad RPG that was VERY badly written with badly placed and tought check. "You're an abortion of science, Eden!" literally "All your bases are belong to us" tier level writing. Little fucking lamplight. How is it possible? Why slavers haven't took those retarded child yet?
Tenpenny, Republic of dave,Vault 87, they were badly made. I love tenpenny, but he is really lacking in quest and the same thing can be said about the location, and Tenpenny itself is a ridiculous, wacky man that "WANTED TO DESTROY MEGATON BECAUSE, WELL, IT'S AN EYESORE!"
Fallout 4 is even more wacky and ridiculous than that, literally retconing one of the fallout 1 ending with that child who survived 200 years in a fridge (The good necropolis ending where you repairs their water pump), and magic with their lovecraftian quest, the cabots, even tought it's one of the BEST quest in the game.
Fallout 4 still hit a certain RPG marks? Sure, with the dialog and charisma check, but it's even less of a RPG than fallout 3 itself.
[QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;50592639]I think you could say this about New Vegas, but the target and main audience of Fallout 3 and 4 overlap pretty well.
Besides, Fallout 4 still hits certain RPG marks. It tickles the same sorta gameplay, so I think it's a pretty good general rule. I also don't think that the average shooter fan will actually enjoy Fallout 4 that much, just because of the RPG elements that are still in the way of the shooting.[/QUOTE]
Dunno, actually saw lot of Fallout 3 fans (many that even didnt liked NV at all) still bothered by how different Fallout 4 is. Shooters these days all have some sort of level up/skill progression system, they're not as distinct as they once were (specially if you consider stuff like Fallout 4 to be an RPG)
I'm definitely not claiming every shooter fan will pick Fallout 4 and love it but they sure won't have a hard time with it, my dudebro cousin spent an entire month just walking around and shooting stuff before even discovering Diamond City. The few times he had to talk with anyone the "yes - no" ~choices~ made it really simple to him just like his favourite "press F to pay respect" shooters
[QUOTE=Ruh-roh;50592363]I dont think this is particularly true, the previous 3d games had terrible combat but good story/rpg elements and Fallout 4 has good combat and terrible story/rpg elements. And seeing as no one enjoyed F3 and NV for the combat...
Just pretend it's a shooter (because it actually is) and you will have a lot of fun
Don't remind yourself it was supposed to be a RPG or you'll get annoyed by how basic and limited it is[/QUOTE]
Fallout 3 had a terrible story, way worse than Fallout 4. 4's story may be incredibly boring and lacking in choice but at least it makes some amount of sense, unlike the story in 3.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;50592699]Fallout 3 had a terrible story, way worse than Fallout 4. 4's story may be incredibly boring and lacking in choice but at least it makes some amount of sense, unlike the story in 3.[/QUOTE]
As i said, everything was wrong with fallout 3 in the first place
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;50592699]Fallout 3 had a terrible story, way worse than Fallout 4. 4's story may be incredibly boring and lacking in choice but at least it makes some amount of sense, unlike the story in 3.[/QUOTE]
Fallout 3 had a terrible and incredibly dumb ending, which is different. The main quest till that point wasn't amazing but not nearly as tedious as Fallout 4 is. And at least Fallout 3 was honest about putting you on rails unlike giving you all the options that amounts to nothing like 4
I don't know id say they were on similar levels. I mean it's not "STEP INTO THE RADIATION, IT'S UR DESTINY!" but none of the faction's motivations in 4 made any sense.
The institute see's itself as humankind's future but they are content to [sp]hide underground indefinitely like a bunch of glorified vault dwellers, performing pointless experiments that serve no obvious purpose and just make life worse for everyone else [/sp] The brotherhood has always been about preserving and hoarding technology, and now they want to destroy technology because it's "GODLESS AND ABOMINABLE!". And the railroad want's to free the synths, by [sp] destroying the only method of producing them[/sp]
[QUOTE=Ruh-roh;50592719]Fallout 3 had a terrible and incredibly dumb ending, which is different. The main quest till that point wasn't amazing but not nearly as tedious as Fallout 4 is. And at least Fallout 3 was honest about putting you on rails unlike giving you all the options that amounts to nothing like 4[/QUOTE]
I'd rather have options that end in the same place where I can actually encounter completely different sets of quests and characters in different playthroughs rather than one super linear path where every playthrough is pretty much the same.
[QUOTE=ApertureXS200;50592696]Wow wow, fallout 3, altought having RPG elements, was a VERY bad RPG that was VERY badly written with badly placed and tought check. "You're an abortion of science, Eden!" literally "All your bases are belong to us" tier level writing. Little fucking lamplight. How is it possible? Why slavers haven't took those retarded child yet?
Tenpenny, Republic of dave,Vault 87, they were badly made. I love tenpenny, but he is really lacking in quest and the same thing can be said about the location, and Tenpenny itself is a ridiculous, wacky man that "WANTED TO DESTROY MEGATON BECAUSE, WELL, IT'S AN EYESORE!"
Fallout 4 is even more wacky and ridiculous than that, literally retconing one of the fallout 1 ending with that child who survived 200 years in a fridge (The good necropolis ending where you repairs their water pump), and magic with their lovecraftian quest, the cabots, even tought it's one of the BEST quest in the game.
Fallout 4 still hit a certain RPG marks? Sure, with the dialog and charisma check, but it's even less of a RPG than fallout 3 itself.[/QUOTE]
But I enjoyed Fallout 3 more than anything New Vegas had to offer despite it's story. maybe it had to do with all the unmarked stuff you could just discover. Something New Vegas lacked entirely since EVERY location was tied to a quest.
[QUOTE=fulgrim;50592771]I don't know id say they were on similar levels. I mean it's not "STEP INTO THE RADIATION, IT'S UR DESTINY!" but none of the faction's motivations in 4 made any sense.
The institute see's itself as humankind's future but they are content to [sp]hide underground indefinitely like a bunch of glorified vault dwellers, performing pointless experiments that serve no obvious purpose and just make life worse for everyone else [/sp] The brotherhood has always been about preserving and hoarding technology, and now they want to destroy technology because it's "GODLESS AND ABOMINABLE!". And the railroad want's to free the synths, by [sp] destroying the only method of producing them[/sp][/QUOTE]
They're both bad, i'm not saying F3 story is amazing in any sense.
But F3 had better side content to distract you from it. Also, if you ask people about the worse parts of F3 main quest, probably 8 out of 10 people (source: pulled from my ass how the hell would i even average this properly) would say something from the final 3/4 which is indeed incredibly stupid and full of bad decisions all around. If you do the same with F4, it's hard to answer because the entire main quest during the entire game is so uninspired and... utterly boring that you can't single out a bad moment, most are. The coolest thing that happens in F4 is a 20 second setpiece. At least Tranquility Lane and Vault 108 were interesting, regardless of how little sense they made
[QUOTE=Itauske Roken;50592798]But I enjoyed Fallout 3 more than anything New Vegas had to offer despite it's story. maybe it had to do with all the unmarked stuff you could just discover. Something New Vegas lacked entirely since EVERY location was tied to a quest.[/QUOTE]
Jesus Christ people still fucking think this? New Vegas has MORE locations than Fallout 3, the only reason so many more are tied to quests is because New Vegas has almost 3 times as many quests as 3.
[QUOTE=ApertureXS200;50592718]As i said, everything was wrong with fallout 3 in the first place[/QUOTE]
Trash talking a game that's 8 years old, don't act like nobody liked a Game of the Year.
The plot wasn't bright, the combat wasn't fleshed and the game was riddled with glitches, but Fallout 3 was fun, and by far the most interesting of them all.
The mix of secret locations, interesting side quests, suspense, mysteriousness, scarce meaningful loot, unique weapons and overall creepyness it had was far above it's successors.
If anything I was hoping Fallout 4 would be the love child of Fallout 3's uniqueness and New Vegas' lore.
[QUOTE=sh4d0w;50592937]Trash talking a game that's 8 years old, don't act like nobody liked a Game of the Year.
The plot wasn't bright, the combat wasn't fleshed and the game was riddled with glitches, but Fallout 3 was fun, and by far the most interesting of them all.
The mix of secret locations, interesting side quests, suspense, mysteriousness, scarce meaningful loot, unique weapons and overall creepyness it had was far above it's successors.
If anything I was hoping Fallout 4 would be the love child of Fallout 3's uniqueness and New Vegas' lore.[/QUOTE]
That was because of how big it was and the possibility it offered. Let go back to 2008. We offers you a game, where you are free to move.
- Where you can take everything going from spoon to armor.
- Where you can interact the way you want to every NPC. Trash talk them, seduce them, or terrify them.
- Where every action you do has some sort of consequence - Assassins if you got bad karma. You must manage your karma.
- A game that is also First person and third person. That kind of thing can only be done by Turn based RPG, right? Top down RPG, right???
- With different possible ending with broken steel.
So yes, for me it's not really the plot and the combat and the engine that was the thing people liked : But how the RPG elements were done. The innovation the game was. Looting everything is one of the thing i wish it was on every RPG. Looting is one of the thing i will always respect bethesda for. You mean I CAN TAKE EVERY JUNK EVEN BONES AND BROOM?? Wow!
I.. don't think fallout 3 has as much interesting side quest, suspense and mysteriousness as fallout new vegas. The loot were effectively scarce compared to new vegas but that's because the capital wasteland is.. well, a wasteland where nobody try to build and create some sorts of governments or ruling faction that gives security,food,water to each civilian. You are wrong in the part about "Unique weapon" and i don't see what do you means with "Creepyness" but if you means atmosphere then yes, it is indeed more creepy than fallout new vegas with all the placed impaled body of the raider in the school, with the fucked VATS subject and the centaurs. ( New Vegas has centaurs btw!)
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;50592896]Jesus Christ people still fucking think this? New Vegas has MORE locations than Fallout 3, the only reason so many more are tied to quests is because New Vegas has almost 3 times as many quests as 3.[/QUOTE]
every location in new vegas was connected to a quest.
not every location in 3 was connected to a quest. It was more enjoyable to explore in 3 than in new vegas and I could actually complete it without hating every character in the game :U
The atmosphere, the dunwich building, what you mentioned about impaled corpses and the raider camps, the FEV experiment vault, the hallucinogenic vault, the creepy social experiment vault.. shit every vault... the freaking deathclaw den, the numbers radio stations, the abandoned buildings, the way holotapes were handled, the metro stations, the fact nobody pretended to know what was out there or why and it was your job (if you were into it) to find out.
I'm missing a lot of things, but you can't just sit there and be like [I]New Vegas has Centaurs too[/I]!
New Vegas came after Fallout 3 for crying out loud, if NV improved it that doesn't make FO3 bad, it makes sense someone would want to improve the game lol.
[QUOTE=Itauske Roken;50592995]every location in new vegas was connected to a quest.
not every location in 3 was connected to a quest. It was more enjoyable to explore in 3 than in new vegas and [B]I could actually complete it without hating every character in the game[/B] :U[/QUOTE]
Was that because New Vegas had actual characters with personality and flaws rather than Fallout 3's 2D quirky good guys and bad guys.
[QUOTE=BusinessRed;50593040]Was that because New Vegas had actual characters with personality and flaws rather than Fallout 3's 2D quirky good guys and bad guys.[/QUOTE]
Ultimately this comes down to taste.
Most people are very confused about what 'better' means, Fallout 4 is better than New Vegas, NV is better than Fallout 3. That's fact.
For XYZ reason I liked Fallout 3 more than NV, that's taste.
Hopefully ya'll get it and stop arguing pointless shit.
uh no, Fallout 4 being better than NV is in no way fact.
[editline]25th June 2016[/editline]
"the game I like is better than the game you like why cant you just get it"
[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;50593173]uh no, Fallout 4 being better than NV is in no way fact.[/QUOTE]
Don't be a donkey, would you rather play Fallout 4's story in NV's engine or New Vegas in Fallout 4's engine.
That's why its factually better, not because you didn't happen to like it.
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Derailing/Pointless Arguing" - rilez))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=sh4d0w;50593189]Don't be a donkey, would you rather play Fallout 4's story in NV's engine or New Vegas in Fallout 4's engine.[/QUOTE]
this doesn't make any sense
of course i don't want the bad story in the bad engine, and of course i'd want the good story in the good engine :V
[QUOTE=BusinessRed;50593040]Was that because New Vegas had actual characters with personality and flaws rather than Fallout 3's 2D quirky good guys and bad guys.[/QUOTE]
more of a personal preference of having characters that have flaws yes but also are likeable. if you hate everyone in a game the game becomes increasingly less fun to play.
[QUOTE=_charon;50593196]this doesn't make any sense
of course i don't want the bad story in the bad engine, and of course i'd want the good story in the good engine :V[/QUOTE]
That means the Game (Fallout 4) is better, has better potential, etc.
It was written by poo flinging creatures, but the game is still better.
Yeah sure if I could have literally everything from Fallout NV in a modern engine then yes, I would rather it.
But that's because the shooting's better and the graphics are better, I find literally every other thing about the game to be inferior. The gameplay, RPG elements, the story, the characters.
So since I like one or two things about one a bit more, that makes it the better game? How does that make any sense?
[editline]25th June 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Itauske Roken;50593200]more of a personal preference of having characters that have flaws yes but also are likeable. if you hate everyone in a game the game becomes increasingly less fun to play.[/QUOTE]
How would you hate everyone in NV when the cast is extremely diverse.
Fallout 3 characters don't even really have character sans a handful of them.
[editline]25th June 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=sh4d0w;50593202]That means the Game (Fallout 4) is better, has better potential, etc.
It was written by poo flinging creatures, but the game is still better.[/QUOTE]
No it means it's slightly prettier and the guns are more fun to shoot.
[QUOTE=sh4d0w;50593202]That means the Game (Fallout 4) is better, has better potential, etc.
It was written by poo flinging creatures, but the game is still better.[/QUOTE]
In theory at least, Fallout is an RPG. Writing is [I]extremely[/I] important for an RPG.
Also New Vegas' levelling is better. Fallout 4's system is interesting, but Bethesda used it poorly and even if they'd used it well I'm not sure it'd be as good as New Vegas. That's a pretty significant gameplay mechanic to fuss up.
[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;50593203]Yeah sure if I could have literally everything from Fallout NV in a modern engine then yes, I would rather it.
But that's because the shooting's better and the graphics are better, I find literally every other thing about the game to be inferior. The gameplay, RPG elements, the story, the characters.
So since I like one or two things about one a bit more, that makes it the better game? How does that make any sense?
[editline]25th June 2016[/editline]
How would you hate everyone in NV when the cast is extremely diverse.
Fallout 3 characters don't even really have character sans a handful of them.
[editline]25th June 2016[/editline]
No it means it's slightly prettier and the guns are more fun to shoot.[/QUOTE]
Maybe JUST maybe people like things you don't :v:
[QUOTE=Itauske Roken;50593220]Maybe JUST maybe people like things you don't :v:[/QUOTE]
i'd accept it if I felt you actually played the game, but you're saying you hate all the characters. How do you hate all the characters in a game with characters over such a wide spectrum?
[QUOTE=fulgrim;50592573]I still feel that melee combat was woefully underdeveloped in Fallout 4.
Unarmed was one of the best builds in new vegas thanks to the variety of powerful power-fists, perks and Special attacks you could find and learn throughout the game. In fallout 4 there is something like 3 unarmed weapons, and hand to hand combat never really progresses beyond standing in-front of the enemy either spamming power attacks or lining up hits in VATS.[/QUOTE]
Let's not exagerate here, melee combat in New Vegas felt the best because the gunplay is garbage (but fun) *and* because melee was downright overpowered the second you had any way to knock an enemy down, which would be the same for FO4 if it wasn't for blocking mechanics (tho not by much).
Though I wouldn't say it's underdevelopped in Fo4, I'd say it's not tuned properly, blocking should be more or less effective for both the user and enemy depending on the weapon used, so a random raider shouldn't block much other than fist and maybe switchblade, and certainly not block anything above that, New Vegas went overboard by giving you a perk that pretty much means if they blocked, they died.
Also the addition of attacks that can interrupt is nice, but can seriously screw you over in some cases, I like that a deathclaw or yao guai or even other humans can interrupt me with a swipe / hilt bash, but a molerat shouldn't interrupt a weapon (at least if I'm using a large one).
New Vegas didn't have much in the way of fist weapons but it certainly had more than fo4 for sure, I'm not certain how they managed to make powerfist / deathclaw gauntlet feel less impactful than NV, I think sound might be a big part, and the whole blocking of course.
[QUOTE=sh4d0w;50593202]That means the Game (Fallout 4) is better, has better potential, etc.
It was written by poo flinging creatures, but the game is still better.[/QUOTE]
the game is better if you ignore the bad parts
:what:
[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;50593229]i'd accept it if I felt you actually played the game, but you're saying you hate all the characters. How do you hate all the characters in a game with characters over such a wide spectrum?[/QUOTE]
I did play the game, I got up to a certain point and said "Fuck this" and played Fallout 3 through TTW which was a better experience :U
[QUOTE=Itauske Roken;50592798]But I enjoyed Fallout 3 more than anything New Vegas had to offer despite it's story. maybe it had to do with all the unmarked stuff you could just discover. Something New Vegas lacked entirely since EVERY location was tied to a quest.[/QUOTE]
In what fucking world is that a bad thing????
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
