[QUOTE=GunFox;49059985]And yet they manage to be just good enough at keeping exploration interesting to keep me intrigued.
Which is, honestly, probably the reason they continue to do well. It is about the exploration into the unknown.
Some people certainly seem to appreciate the role play aspect, but I enjoy the atmosphere and the exploration. The graphics are irrelevant so long as they accomplish their objective. The world can border on shallow and theme parkish, but I appreciate having things to motivate my adventures into various nooks.
I don't see much blind fanboyism, mostly just people who are willing to accept the flaws in return for a product that really doesn't have much in the way of competitors in its little niche. Also mods which provide an ever more refined (naked) experience.[/QUOTE]
I think that Bethesda's greatest strength is making amazingly detailed and fun to explore worlds and as such they can do great with the Fallout setting. Perfection would be them doing the world stuff, and Obsidian (mainly comprised of people who worked on the first two) doing the story and writing. But this isn't a perfect world and we're going to have to accept FO4 for what it is, flaws and all. I'm really hoping that they pumped more money into their voice acting budget, I'd rather have a bunch of average VAs doing minor rolls and stuff than a handful of good ones doing a large amount of characters.
[QUOTE=GunFox;49059914]Yeah I'm down for no condition.
Its presence really just meant I had to dump points into repair.[/QUOTE]
I kinda liked it on my very first playthrough of FO3 ever. There was something special about trying to clear out the Gary vault, having my plasma rifle break, and the ensuing moment of panic as I turned to my shitty 10mm instead.
After that though? Tedious as fuck. It's a nice [I]idea[/I] but it doesn't add anything major.
I think people are just trying to say, if Obsidian was contracted to develop another Fallout title with the Fallout 4 assets, they would do a better job in terms of story. And they come up with other minute distractions to try and flesh out their point; like the roof tops thing.
In reality they're just snobbish like a lot of kids are nowadays, trying to make it seem like their taste is what everyone elses needs to be.
I find it so weird that people who like games like The Witcher and Mass Effect and the likes have strong negative opinions of Bethesda games, and I mostly find it weird cause those are games can easily play and enjoy but I don't get as lost in them as Bethesda games. It's something about the way they build the world and let you explore it at your own pace that reminds me of more open metroidvanias, which ends up making the entire experience so much more memorable for me, while The Witcher (1 and 2 at least, I haven't gotten around to 3), Dragon Age 1, 2 and inq, and ME all just end up with me liking the characters and the story but not the WORLD.
To each their own basically? I can't wait for F4 personally, but I've loved all the games in that series so of course I will
[QUOTE=Ekalektik_1;49060122]I kinda liked it on my very first playthrough of FO3 ever. There was something special about trying to clear out the Gary vault, having my plasma rifle break, and the ensuing moment of panic as I turned to my shitty 10mm instead.
After that though? Tedious as fuck. It's a nice [I]idea[/I] but it doesn't add anything major.[/QUOTE]
I think NV did it a lot better, you can get a perk that allows you to repair weapons that are "close enough", this made it so even rare weapons could be kept in shape without a ton of work. I wouldn't mind if it came back in FO4 with the same system (by default, no perk) and/or was only on hard mode.
I'm sorry I must have missed something.
Why did everyone start hating graphics that weren't as good as the Witcher 3 again?
Cause before that game came out I don't remember seeing anyone so "pole up the ass" before about game graphics.
No more weapon condition? Well, I already have the game preordered but it seems like I was the only one who liked that feature.
[QUOTE=yellowoboe;49060161]I'm sorry I must have missed something.
Why did everyone start hating graphics that weren't as good as the Witcher 3 again?
Cause before that game came out I don't remember seeing anyone so "pole up the ass" before about game graphics.[/QUOTE]
I blame leaks with their subpar console footage and god-awful interior lighting. They provoked this whole thing and kicked off some concerns on E3 footage/actual thing disparity again.
[QUOTE=Coyoteze;49054747]Lip syncing is definetely bad, BUT it is a MASSIVE step up from their other games. So while not necessarily on part with other games, it's still an improvement!
I'm hyped![/QUOTE]
Yeah no. Skyrim at least tried to have some phonemes in there.
The trailer looks like "We didnt go for shapekeys, and we only rigged the jaw and a bit of the lips, so we kinda moved it up and down a bit to make it look like he was talking"
[QUOTE=GunFox;49059914]Yeah I'm down for no condition.
Its presence really just meant I had to dump points into repair.[/QUOTE]
Then why play Fallout?
I like games in spite of their weapon durability systems, never have I liked a game with its weapon durability system.
[QUOTE=Swilly;49060372]Then why play Fallout?[/QUOTE]
I know you're trying to make a point about the scavenging thing, but honestly... was finding spare weapons to repair your near-broken 10mm pistol [I]the[/I] Fallout experience? There wasn't even weapon condition before Fallout 3.
[QUOTE=Swilly;49060372]Then why play Fallout?[/QUOTE]
Repair was introduced in the series with Fallout 3 and was solely there because at that point Bethesda was used to putting weapon degradation in TES, and after F3 they realized it was bullshit anyway and removed it in their following titles.
Weapons and equipment degrading with use was just tedious and annoying. Finding material to repair with or a trader with good repair skill and the caps to pay the repair was easy enough, so you'd basically end up wasting time by quickly fast travelling back and forth to get your weapons up to par.
Not to mention that weapon repair was more or less replaced by gun modding entirely so there's honestly no ground to complain here. It's an annoying feature gone in favor of a lot of cooler ones like weapon crafting and layer based armor.
When you make survival based systems in a game where survival is a secondary feature rather than a core mechanic it's important to make these mechanics rewarding rather than punishing - ie, if the player takes the time to scavenge and look around for parts, he's rewarded with better guns and gear via the gun modding/armor layer/PA customization systems rather than punished with shittier equipment.
Same goes with hunger, thirst and whatnot. Fallout 3 doesn't directly have a needs system but it rewards a player for sleeping regularly in a good bed by granting them bonus experience.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49060553]Repair was introduced in the series with Fallout 3 and was solely there because at that point Bethesda was used to putting weapon degradation in TES, and after F3 they realized it was bullshit anyway and removed it in their following titles.
Weapons and equipment degrading with use was just tedious and annoying. Finding material to repair with or a trader with good repair skill and the caps to pay the repair was easy enough, so you'd basically end up wasting time by quickly fast travelling back and forth to get your weapons up to par.
Not to mention that weapon repair was more or less replaced by gun modding entirely so there's honestly no ground to complain here. It's an annoying feature gone in favor of a lot of cooler ones like weapon crafting and layer based armor.
[b]When you make survival based systems in a game where survival is a secondary feature rather than a core mechanic it's important to make these mechanics rewarding rather than punishing - ie, if the player takes the time to scavenge and look around for parts, he's rewarded with better guns and gear via the gun modding/armor layer/PA customization systems rather than punished with shittier equipment.[/b]
Same goes with hunger, thirst and whatnot. Fallout 3 doesn't directly have a needs system but it rewards a player for sleeping regularly in a good bed by granting them bonus experience.[/QUOTE]
I'm sorry but this is the BEST way I have seen to describe this idea. I've been trying recently to come up with more elegant ways to describe certain things dealing with game mechanics due to wanting to improve the way I convey information for my videos, and this way of describing it really resonates with me, so thanks for that.
In the same vein, I feel like the shelter building idea is also meant to be a kind of extra thing to help break up late-game monotony when it comes to the "open world routine." Right? You go to your favorite traders, you find a smaller undone side-quest and do it, you check any repeatable quests/loot farms or whatever game equivalent, you go back to maybe a different trader to offload the loot, rinse and repeat. I think the building and exanded crafting will (hopefully) give a better sense of a larger goal to strive for, for a long time.
I also hope there are more random events, and denser dungeons etc. That would kind of discourage fast travel to a certain extent and incentivize more exploration. Open world games need goals to reach all throughout, you always wanna be trying to get the money to buy that cool new thing you just saw, getting that awesome new piece of loot, exploring new areas to find uniques and nice little side stories and self contained quests (something Bethesda has actually been better at than their main quests often times in my opinion) and things to look forward to doing the next time you log on so you don't fall into a routine.
[QUOTE=aydin690;49059687]In 2004 maybe. Those roofs are just perfectly flat surfaces with some shitty textures. They don't even have normal mapping for fucks sake. This is how you do a roof:
[t]http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/witcher/images/c/c2/Downwarren.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20150515210606[/t] [t]http://cdn.akamai.steamstatic.com/steam/apps/292030/ss_ed23139c916fdb9f6dd23b2a6a01d0fbd2dd1a4f.1920x1080.jpg?t=1444689672[/t]
You see those perfectly flat roofs? /s
Let's forget about graphics and shitty animations for a sec. I'm genuinely baffled by all the hype for fallout 4. Bathesda is absolute wank at story telling, their worlds are always shallow and uninteresting and their games are always buggy as fuck. Like what exactly are you guys excited about?[/QUOTE]
Oh god, the Witcher 3 is better than anything. We fucking get it.
[QUOTE=spekter;49059505]Given they're based off replicants I wouldn't be surprised at some memory implant business. But that wouldn't explain Codsworth knowing you.[/QUOTE]
He recognizes your face, simple as that.
If the player character is a replicant, it doesn't mean that the person the replicant is based off hasn't lived before.
[QUOTE=aydin690;49059930]Holy shit you guys, the blind fanboyism in this thread is unreal. I just said i'm genuinely baffled by all the hype fO4 is getting because, IN MY OPINION, bathesda is fuckin atrocious at story telling and making interesting quests (unlike obsidian, CDPR, etc). Their worlds often feel empty, shallow and uninteresting. Their games are always buggy and the graphics and animations are subpar (again imo).[/QUOTE]
You act just like the kind of fanboy you encounter on Xbox Live. You drag something else trough the mud AS HARD AS POSSIBLE and search for more and more tiny details to make it bad for everyone else.
First it's the roofs, then the UI (which nobody has ever complained about since Fallout 3), then the story, then the quests, then the animations, then the world and the graphics and then you blame everyone in the thread.
You don't like X because it's popular, we get it.
And the roofs are perfectly fine if distributed corretly throughout the games environment.
[thumb]http://cdn4.gamepur.com/images/feature/fallout-4-gamersyde-screenshot-6.png[/thumb]
Extreme fanboyism of the game (FUCK YOU GUYS WHO HAVE LEGIT CRITICISMS!!!) is just as bad as extreme hate towards the game (FUCK YOU GUYS WHO ARE EXCITED FOR SOMETHING THAT I DON'T LIKE).
Middle grounds people. Manage your expectations. It's very much possible that Fallout 4 is not going to be a massive piece of shit and blunder of the entire age of the universe, nor a gift given from all deities that you play while Todd strokes your dick.
Could be possible the game could just be great, or good, or alright.
And as much as I love The Witcher 3, why are you comparing a medieval-esque fantasy RPG to a post-apocalyptic RPG? They're both completely different themes, times, and settings. Compare Witcher 3 to Skyrim instead. You know, like people have been doing since Witcher 3 was even announced?
[editline]asdlfj[/editline]
Also, the person pointing out team size as a potential factor is both right and wrong. Right in the sense that having more on the team means having more skilled people in general, thus potentially higher quality, but wrong in the sense that just throwing more people at something will make it better or be done faster.
I mean, look at Ubisoft. They tend to put teams of 500+ on a single game, and all they can manage to come up with is the exact same formula as Asscreed 2 with good, but not really noteworthy, visuals.
As with generally any piece of time and effort, it's not about how many people you have working on something, it's more about how you make use of the people you have, and even the quality of the talent/skill you have onboard.
There are teams of 30 indie devs that are doing more noteworthy things than teams of 200 AAA devs. It's not too much of a stretch to think that Bethesda could do better than CDPR with a smaller team, especially since they've been in the business MUCH longer and were even making RPGs since before CDPR even existed as a company.
I mean, consider this. The team behind Morrowind was merely 30 people. Almost down to 10 before the game shipped, I believe. Look at what Bethesda managed to accomplish back then with a relatively small team, and look at how every game they've made since is basically just a larger and larger variation on the core idea of Morrowind.
Holy shit roof tiles.
Honest to God, grow up.
Honestly the only thing I'm worried about exploration-wise is that it's like skyrim, where you can't go ten feet without the game plastering across your screen something new you discovered before you've even noticed it.
It's a nitpick, but it made it feel less like I was exploring and more like I was hopping from compass marker to compass marker.
[QUOTE=Bloodshot12;49061950]Honestly the only thing I'm worried about exploration-wise is that it's like skyrim, where you can't go ten feet without the game plastering across your screen something new you discovered before you've even noticed it.
It's a nitpick, but it made it feel less like I was exploring and more like I was hopping from compass marker to compass marker.[/QUOTE]
I'm fine with that, but there's a similar thing from Skyrim I didn't like - sidequests at every goddamn step, sometimes forced onto you by NPCs running up to you when you enter a town or a building.
I'm okay with there being a lot of quests, and the quest givers should be somewhat obvious, but holy shit calm down with it
hahah oh man complaining about fucking roof tiles in a videogame. what the hell is wrong with some people.
[QUOTE=Bloodshot12;49061950]Honestly the only thing I'm worried about exploration-wise is that it's like skyrim, where you can't go ten feet without the game plastering across your screen something new you discovered before you've even noticed it.
It's a nitpick, but it made it feel less like I was exploring and more like I was hopping from compass marker to compass marker.[/QUOTE]
Fallout 3 was much the same way, so I'm not expecting Fallout 4 to be any different.
Bethesda worlds almost always have hundreds of POIs crammed close to one another, and I feel that while it's sort of a pro in an Elder Scrolls game, it's a con in a Fallout game.
A post-apocalyptic world is supposed to feel barren and lonely, not filled with things to do every half a mile and events happening every 5 minutes. At least, that's my opinion.
[QUOTE=Thunderbolt;49061989]I'm fine with that, but there's a similar thing from Skyrim I didn't like - sidequests at every goddamn step, sometimes forced onto you by NPCs running up to you when you enter a town or a building.
I'm okay with there being a lot of quests, and the quest givers should be somewhat obvious, but holy shit calm down with it[/QUOTE]
I'd say expect this as well, especially since Skyrim's "radiant quest" system was basically just the random encounter system from Fallout 3, but tweaked slightly.
With 80% of the criticism I see, it's like some people have never played a single Bethesda game. Yeah for a lot of people the hype is real, but the amount of shit people bitch about is absolutely atrocious.
I pre-ordered the game. I'll play the game and enjoy it. It'll probably fall short of expectations in a few ways, but you know, I can't think of a single game that lived up to the hype.
[QUOTE=aydin690;49059930]Holy shit you guys, the blind fanboyism in this thread is unreal.[/QUOTE]
"H-hey guys, stop getting excited about something I don't like!"
One could argue that people are over-hyping it.
You know, any one of us could just wait another month or a fucking year even, and buy Ultimate Edition later on. Safe some cash.
But it's a wasteland full of mutant bastards [I][B]in Excruciating Graphical Detail![/B][/i] so who the hell am I kidding?
[QUOTE=Medevila;49062177]Yea, us veterans of Bethesda games tone our expectations and know what we want & what we'll get
and every half-decade or so we have to put up with the filthy masses cluelessly
A: jacking off to Todd Howard
B: shitting on everything about the game[/QUOTE]
Can I shit on Todd Howard while jacking off to the game?:what:
But yeah. There was a time when I got overhyped about Bethesda games as well (I got super hyped about Fallout 3), but after being rather disappointed in retrospect, I learned to manage my expectations concerning their games.
They make great games, just not "THE BEST GAMES EVER." They're like Ubisoft in the way that they've been using the same formula for years (longer than Ubisoft even), but they at least put some effort into changing things that matter.
And so far, every one of their games since Morrowind has had the same highs (great open worlds, great mods) and the same lows (generally bad NPC animation, bad quest writing).
I'm expecting that I'll have fun with Fallout 4 initially, but that I'll eventually have to start installing mods to keep up the fun. Pretty much what happened to me with Skyrim.
The graphics debate is silly. I think the game looks fine, at least in outdoor environments.
The lighting in doors seems pretty ugly however. Very flat and with a noticeable lack of shadows.
[QUOTE=BananaFoam;49062729]The graphics debate is silly. I think the game looks fine, at least in outdoor environments.
The lighting in doors seems pretty ugly however. Very flat and with a noticeable lack of shadows.[/QUOTE]
It's especially silly if you're getting the game on PC, where I wouldn't doubt that things like ENB/SweetFX presets will be a thing on day 1, and the graphical capabilities of the game will only be extended even more so with time.
By default, I think it looks decent in motion, but a bit dated in still shots. Sub-par interior lighting and bright night lighting are just some of the "Bethesda quirks" you can expect with any of their games though.
I really do hope a darker night brightness mod comes relatively soon though, as I really do hate how bright Bethesda thinks night time is. I understand that making it at least somewhat dark decreases playability for most, but isn't night supposed to be a hindrance in some way? Like how it sometimes can be in real life?
[QUOTE=mr apple;49058553]In soviet wasteland, institute finds you![/QUOTE]
Drier than the Sahara desert
[QUOTE=RichyZ;49062862]No amount of post processing is going to add dynamic shadows to the game though.[/QUOTE]
Although someone will undoubtedly allow light sources to use it.
Creation engine is capable of doing it, it just isn't enabled by default for framerate issues (shadows on dynamic objects can't be "baked in" and take a big performance hit).
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
