[QUOTE=EpikEnvy2.0;48232773]I see where Proch is coming from though. The gunplay in this does remind me a bit of CoD. It just seems...off. Certainly an improvement from FO3/NV but still.[/QUOTE]
you do realize that cod isn't the only other shooter that exists right
and that proch is trying to fuck with people?
oh god it's looking really good, I can't wait :smile:
[QUOTE=LoneWolf_Recon;48233077]The facial animations are leagues better than 3, NV.[/QUOTE]
When they first showed the game at E3 one of the biggest things that struck me was how much better the animations in general were. The dog in particular was very well done.
[QUOTE=TheWhiteFox1;48235326]while i agree with you i don't think you can even call Fallout 4 an RPG. it looks to be going down the route of being a straight-up shooter[/QUOTE]
It's a very light RPG but it's still an RPG
still involves building a character, quests, exploration, stats, and levels
it might not be the most intricate RPG ever made and it definitely is very action oriented but it's still an RPG
[QUOTE=Jackald;48234253]They know what keys to jangle to get braindead idiots to go "OH MAN THE SHOOTIN'S ALL GOOD NOW" and ignore things like 4 dialogue options and abysmal dialogue decisions.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/zXbeTEZ.jpg[/img]
What the fuck does "YOU'RE A MUTT" mean. Am I going to tell the dog it's a mutt? What the fuck Bethesda, it's "[INTELLIGENE 9] So you fight the good fight with your voice here at GNR" all over again.[/QUOTE]
Dialogue options rely on keywords now instead of full sentences since you speak a lot more via voice acting (meaning putting the full sentences would take a lot of space and be redundant). You could tell Dogmeat in Fallout 3 that he was a pretty shitty dog but he'd do as a pet, this is the same deal.
[QUOTE=NoobSauce;48234676]Fallout 3 was Bethesda's first developed Fallout game too, which also paved the way for New Vegas to be spectacular since Obsidian had many assets to work with already, and saying that Bethesda will never improve is shortminded thinking that you should feel ashamed of.[/QUOTE]
I'd be more excited if Obsidian was announced to make the game after Fo4.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;48235638]I'd be more excited if Obsidian was announced to make the game after Fo4.[/QUOTE]
Obsidian has amazing writers but the actual development/game design segment of the team is trash. I know they've always been on a tight schedule but they typically take piss-poor design decisions, User Interface is almost always one giant glaring oversight, their models and textures are usually terrible, and their games reek of shoddiness on a lot of aspects.
New Vegas shines for its writing and pretty much nothing else.
I'm glad they focused on improving the gunplay. I always love going back to STALKER because of how good the firefights are, especially with the AI, while fallout is more about the character building and quests/freedom for me.
Good to see I'll probably be able to have some good firefights in this too. I hope they've made AI use flanking and cover properly, seems like all there'd be left to make the shooting satisfying enough.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;48235748]I dunno, I thought NV did everything better than Fallout 3, including world design.[/QUOTE]
Fallout 3 was more compact and didn't really require a lot of walking from one area to the next (and when it did, you had stuff in between). New Vegas has gigantic expanses of nothing where you run rather slowly across mostly empty areas, and the fact the game slows you down when wearing medium armor (even more so when carrying certain weapons) makes it worse.
The UI was also terrible and while the UI for 3 was also pretty basic, it didn't have indepth crafting or any other function that'd require good UI. New Vegas added crafting but the actual menus which you have to navigate are utter shit. The gambling also suffers from the piss poor controls and menu design. Same goes for challenges, gun mods, your caravan deck, the multiple currencies, so on and so forth.
Also, Fallout 3 actually felt like a post apocalyptic game 100% of the time whereas New Vegas has moments where it's easy to forget you're in a post apocalyptic wasteland.
They could actually have good menus though, considering even modders did a better job at incorporating new menus than Obsidian - and Obsidian had full access to the source code, while modders were stuck with the GECK.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;48235794]
Also, Fallout 3 actually felt like a post apocalyptic game 100% of the time whereas New Vegas has moments where it's easy to forget you're in a post apocalyptic wasteland.[/QUOTE]
Isn't that the point of the series ? It's about civilization being rebuilt in a post-apocalyptic world, you're supposed to briefly forget that you're in a shitty wasteland when visiting the larger settlements.
Yeah, fallout isn't meant to be post-apocalyptic as it is known today. It's more akin to post-post-apocalyptic, where societies have not just been built, but existed for a longer periods of time.
[QUOTE=BLOODGA$M;48235598]When they first showed the game at E3 one of the biggest things that struck me was how much better the animations in general were. The dog in particular was very well done.[/QUOTE]
Out of all gaming dogs in recent time, Fallout 4's dog looks the most adorable. I literally want to hug it.
But then again I want to hug poor Cogsworth.
[editline]18th July 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=RichyZ;48235748]I dunno, I thought NV did everything better than Fallout 3, including world design.[/QUOTE]
Yeah New Vegas was such a nice place.
Until you had to go out of it, and it was pretty much mostly desert, mountains, and rocks.
[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;48235985]
Yeah New Vegas was such a nice place.
Until you had to go out of it, and it was pretty much mostly desert, mountains, and rocks.[/QUOTE]
So pretty much like the mojave desert
I can't be arsed to check right now but FO:NV had more or less the same amount of locations as FO3, you just had a bunch of open desert areas and dried lakes and whatnot because it makes sense, as he mentioned before.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;48236016]F3 was literally green soil, rocks, and buildings with hardly any stories about them and generic loot.
But it had Megaton and Rivet City![/QUOTE]
Yeah but it also let you explore the ruins of downtown Washington D.C.
With the Capitol, the Washington Monument, Jefferson Memorial, History Museum, Tech Museum, That building you steal the [sp]declaration of Independence[/sp] from, The fucking Dunwich building, numerous houses, stores, a hospital, a hotel.
Honestly I can go on with my memory.
Also that one set of towers up north where you can [sp]Launch nukes[/sp].
Mojave has some stuff too but between those places were alot of sandy deserts filled with hostile ants.
My biggest complain with New Vegas is all the walking you have to do, the literal start of the game you HAVE to walk a literal learning curve to get to Vegas, you cannot go the short route unless you want to deal with either Deathclaws or Cazadors.
[QUOTE=wheel_user;48236022]So pretty much like the mojave desert
I can't be arsed to check right now but FO:NV had more or less the same amount of locations as FO3, you just had a bunch of open desert areas and dried lakes and whatnot because it makes sense, as he mentioned before.[/QUOTE]
New Vegas had quite a lot more locations than Fallout 3. People like to point out that Fallout 3 had a bunch of one off shit like Tenpenny Tower or the Dunwich building, but they always fail to mention that literally half of the 'locations' outside of D.C. are power switching stations with literally, not figuratively, literally nothing to do or find.
Also Fallout 3's map is much more barren then New Vegas' map. For people who go on about how amazing the exploration in Fallout 3 was these people seem to be incapable of leaving the highways in New Vegas.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;48235670]
New Vegas shines for its writing and pretty much nothing else.[/QUOTE]
It was better in every single way. If they had been given more time (eg not rushed out) they would have done so much more and have had a not as buggy release.
there's a lot of stuff that both concerns me and excites me about fallout 4. i really love all the new features they've added and the gameplay looks much more polished. but there's this gut feeling i have that this will be a disappointment, mostly with what seems to be only 4 options of dialogue and the fact that the game world looks fresh out of the apocalypse rather than 200 years after.
still, there's a good chance bethesda with nail this one right on the head so i'm trying not to worry so much.
I think fresh apocalypse style wasteland areas are perfectly fine as long as there's at least a few built up towns that show some signs of development. If you think about it would make sense that maybe everybody developed in/around the institute and left the harsh wasteland alone, because there's just too much nasty mutant shit to try rebuilding out there.
How exactly is the gun-play improved? I've seen all media and failed to notice.
The new VATS is basically the only new thing? Which is an improvement yes, better than a time-halting VATS.
Sure there's tons of customization and a power suit and whatever, but the [I]gun-play[/I] itself.. seems as good as ever to me.
[editline]18th July 2015[/editline]
Or, can you even compare FO4 to FO:NV?
Because anyone can admit that there's a pretty huge improvement from FO3 to FO4, considering FO3 didn't "even" have aiming down sights.
That laser musket looks rad as shit.
But I'm probably not gonna use it when I get my hands on the junk launcher and proceed to fire everything out of my inventory at dudes :v:
Something I noticed in the Combat Gameplay video.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/mwMXCSE.png[/IMG]
The red bar next to the HP seems to be the RAD counter, because we can see that when Mr Howard get's hit by the Mirelurk queen it goes up
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/BW9XPQX.png[/IMG]
It seems like it's a health "capper", as you never see the health go above the red meter.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/5YRRMGj.png[/IMG]
I really don't hope they simplified radiation down to a point of just being something that reduces your max HP temporarily, but knowing bethesda...
[editline]18th July 2015[/editline]
But when in the power armor it shows up as a different meter, so maybe there's more to it
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/UAHh3rP.png[/IMG]:xfiles:
[QUOTE=Max;48237470]Something I noticed in the Combat Gameplay video.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/mwMXCSE.png[/IMG]
The red bar next to the HP seems to be the RAD counter, because we can see that when Mr Howard get's hit by the Mirelurk queen it goes up
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/BW9XPQX.png[/IMG]
It seems like it's a health "capper", as you never see the health go above the red meter.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/5YRRMGj.png[/IMG]
I really don't hope they simplified radiation down to a point of just being something that reduces your max HP temporarily, but knowing bethesda...[/QUOTE]
I am so fucking glad that they changed it. Radiation was pretty much not even threatening, unless you were in like the singular area with like 50 rads per second, but even then, just get the point and keep pumping rad-x and RadAway
Honestly rads pushing your HP down like that would be kinda neat, provided it puts those other debuffs you'd get at higher intensities.
Radiation sickness was rarely an issue in FO3 and NV
[QUOTE=-Iker-;48232730]The roar making the screen shake, running four legged and swiping with the claws so hard it makes the player stumble.[/QUOTE]
That and how it reacts to attacks, and dodges. Reminds me of a certain monster known as Zinogre.
[video=youtube;e4JHzAvtqR0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4JHzAvtqR0[/video]
pre ordered this a few days ago, cant wait
[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;48237545]I am so fucking glad that they changed it. Radiation was pretty much not even threatening, unless you were in like the singular area with like 50 rads per second, but even then, just get the point and keep pumping rad-x and RadAway[/QUOTE]
It may be seen as a "dumbdown" but honestly, i'm in the same boat as you, radiation was only ever an issue in areas that had obnoxious amounts - personally I think if it acts as a health cap it's actually more threatening than before.
That Power Armor HUD looks so good.
[QUOTE=Instant Mix;48237947]It may be seen as a "dumbdown" but honestly, i'm in the same boat as you, radiation was only ever an issue in areas that had obnoxious amounts - personally I think if it acts as a health cap it's actually more threatening than before.[/QUOTE]
It probably won't be any more threatening, but it's safe to say that it never really was. Well, unless plot dictates to have certain area inaccessible without certain equipment.
I'm totally fine with that. Radiation is honestly not something I expect to be all that threatened with. It's actually a pretty minor feature.
[QUOTE=JCDentonUNATCO;48234574]People always have to find a way to shit on Bethesda, no matter what they do.
>Gunplay improved
IT'S JUST LIKE CALL OF DUTY
>Graphics noticeably better
LOL GAMEBYRO AGAIN
>Voiced character
MUH IMMERSION
>Minor lore change (often debatable)
GG NICE RETCON
Also typical thread cycle:
1. Gameplay video posted
2. "ALL THIS SHIT IS AWFUL I HATE EVERYTHING"
3. "But that's wrong because X Y and Z"
4. "JUST MAKING SURE YOU REMEMBER NOT TO BE HYPED LOL"
Come off it.[/QUOTE]
Now to be fair while I think a lot of the complaints are stupid there is a reason why they spring up. Bethesda has a history of under delivering their promises and their vision, and not really improving as developers as time goes on all that much.
I still think Morrowind is their best game they've made to date despite how dated it is and how clunky it plays compared to their newer stuff, because they really made some cutting edge advancements on their world building/dev process/game engine/etc for that game, while really understanding what made that style of game good. Since then they've gotten a lot lazier and tend to iterate simply by taking elements from other games and tacking them on (skyrim magic system = bioshock, FO4's voice actor system = mass effect, etc), while just having the actual structure of their game not improve dramatically at all (and in many cases get much weaker).
There isn't inherently wrong with taking elements from other games that work alright, but it feels like to me they do that because they don't understand what about their own games is good and how they can improve on their own core formula. Morrowind is their best game because you really got the sense that they knew the strengths/experiences an open world fantasy RPG could provide over other genres.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
