• Fallout 4 announced by bethesda
    544 replies, posted
You fuckers keep complaining about graphics when I guarantee the first fucking week of release their will be 10,000 graphical enhancement mods. Jesus Christ shut the fuck up.
[QUOTE=minilandstan;47872693]Wish people would look past the hype of Fo4's announcement and realize that none of the gameplay has been revealed, so for all we know it might as well be a character action game MMO with candy crush gameplay added in. You should be skeptical of it too until you know about how it works and how it plays, otherwise you're blindly defending a product you know nothing about and are riding a hype train which, let's be honest, leads to disappointment 99% of the time.[/QUOTE] While you are right that we should be sceptical, I don't really think we should be worried. The 3D Fallouts have been of consistently good quality, and with New Vegas showing us how it's done, I think we can expect it to be better and better. Plus, everyone knows what to expect from a Fallout game, why would the company do anything different? Either way on the 14th there'll be a gameplay reveal so I guess that'll clear things up
[QUOTE=Llamalord;47872751]You fuckers keep complaining about graphics when I guarantee the first fucking week of release their will be 10,000 graphical enhancement mods. Jesus Christ shut the fuck up.[/QUOTE] I don't think the game looks bad, but you shouldn't handwave any flaw away by saying "mods will fix it" That doesn't encourage healthy game development.
[QUOTE=Llamalord;47872751]You fuckers keep complaining about graphics when I guarantee the first fucking week of release their will be 10,000 graphical enhancement mods. Jesus Christ shut the fuck up.[/QUOTE] There will be obviously, but most graphical mods tend to screw up the vanilla feel of the game, the original design is lost very often, in my opinion Bethesda should at least use proper high resolution textures and materials.
[QUOTE=EuSKalduna;47872645]Yeah it's not the Frostbite engine but it looks fine and hey, the less work that has to be done the engine them more quality content can be made.[/QUOTE] I don't particularly dislike Bethesda's games or anything but come on, when was the last time this was ever the case?
[QUOTE=Starlight 456;47872660][IMG]http://media.gamerevolution.com/images/galleries/1363/FalloutNV2010-10-2312-37-32-64.png[/IMG] how can this seriously be considered passable graphics for a triple A title in 2010 [IMG]http://i.gyazo.com/af0ce125559027095ccde05f00610ed4.png[/IMG] Oh hey, guess graphics don't matter after all![/QUOTE] looking dated is one thing. I still enjoy plenty of games released years or even decades ago. new vegas flat out looks like ass no matter what year it came out in. of course I still have 88 logged hours in new vegas and god knows how many that didn't get logged properly due to running NVSE. I have 2 minutes logged in fallout 3 and I know for a fact FOSE screwed that up.
The problem is you guys are confusing the artifacts of video rendering with how it will actually look in-game. A video game isn't actually blurry like that, you can tell when AA is off but some of those scenes are just poorly rendered in the video editing software they used. EDIT: Notice how the most still scene in the video looks the best because of the shit motion blur that was done. [img]http://i.imgur.com/fdF2xcl.png[/img] Now look how bad this looks when there is motion involved. [img]http://i.imgur.com/4eo1RD9.png[/img] Still we don't know if Bethesda purposely retouched these areas of the game for the trailer.
[QUOTE=mugofdoom;47872796]I don't particularly dislike Bethesda's games or anything but come on, when was the last time this was ever the case?[/QUOTE] New Vegas was kneecapped by the development time. I'm surprised they made as much as they did that was actually good, and Fallout 3 had some background mess concerning the developers. Skyrim is pretty fucking big at the expense of the prettiest graphics, and it was made in 2-3 years. I'd say Bethesda has a history of this, but I might not be entirely right
[QUOTE=Llamalord;47872822]The problem is you guys are confusing the artifacts of video rendering with how it will actually look in-game. A video game isn't actually blurry like that, you can tell when AA is off but some of those scenes are just poorly rendered in the video editing software they used. EDIT: Notice how the most still scene in the video looks the best because of the shit motion blur that was done. [media]http://i.imgur.com/hz8gc0s.jpg[/media][/QUOTE] that's true, think of how bad GTA V's teaser looked whenever things weren't moving around
[QUOTE=Hamaflavian;47872520]mmm look at those agrees compared to all those dumbs, you really are some kind of rebel standing up to the facepunch hivemind. All we have in this trailer is graphics, no story, gameplay, only one full sentence of dialogue, it's all just graphics--so why shouldn't we talk about it? And you're right, graphics can and do change from trailer to release, but when was the last time a AAA game's graphics got better during that intervening time instead of staying the same or even getting worse?[/QUOTE] Oh so just because I write an opinion about other people and how they are being shitheads I'm suddenly a rebel now? I genuinely believed believed I would get dumbed for that post, as a lot of alternative opinions seem to be, but it didn't end up like that and I'm thankful. And exactly, all we have is one trailer. We haven't seen the actual full graphical scope of the game yet...
I've got a feeling that they might try to reintroduce paid mods for Fallout 4. The reason for their removal from the Skyrim workshop after all was that they thought the game already had an established modding scene. Maybe they'll try again on a new release.
[QUOTE=EuSKalduna;47872827]New Vegas was kneecapped by the development time. I'm surprised they made as much as they did that was actually good, and Fallout 3 had some background mess concerning the developers. Skyrim is pretty fucking big at the expense of the prettiest graphics, and it was made in 2-3 years. I'd say Bethesda has a history of this, but I might not be entirely right[/QUOTE] I found Skyrim came across as incredibly sloppily put together. It was huge and had a lot of content, but it all seemed kind of half-assed and rushed. I'd honestly rather see Bethesda aim for quality rather than quantity for once.
[QUOTE=mugofdoom;47872892]I found Skyrim came across as incredibly sloppily put together. It was huge and had a lot of content, but it all seemed kind of half-assed and rushed. I'd honestly rather see Bethesda aim for quality rather than quantity for once.[/QUOTE] I think I understand what you mean when you say it was sloppy, but I still found it to be good quality, and I go to Bethesda for great, giant, messy games that could probably have done some more bug testing on a graphical time lag. And on the bright side, while Fallout 4 may not be the harbinger, the quality is bound to improve as our technology does, and soon enough we will have all of the wonders with none of the fatty bits
Oh and: [url]https://twitter.com/perlmutations/status/606103480504180737[/url]
[QUOTE=The Ultimate;47871177]That would imply that your character is over 200 years old[/QUOTE] Vampire protaganist confirmed
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;47872936]Vampire protaganist confirmed[/QUOTE] ? [t]http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20121002001346/elderscrolls/images/9/98/Babette.png[/t]
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;47872936]Vampire protaganist confirmed[/QUOTE] [img]http://new2.fjcdn.com/comments/5510970+_fd12f9f2ffbaef2e9079278a192311b7.jpg[/img]
I'll be alright as long you can enter shit without loading and they don't make the story black and white like fucking skyrim with the blades and dragons or FO3 with enclave and BoS. I like the side-quests and the environment in bethesda's games and the basic FPS stuff.
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;47872936]Vampire protaganist confirmed[/QUOTE] No even better: Ghoul protaganist.
I bet the storyline is gonna be that you and your family get into a vault and it turns out to have hyperbolic sleeping chambers and when you wake up your family is gone and you gotta find them I'd watch it if it was a late 80s apocalypse movie
[QUOTE=Judas;47872625][img]https://36.media.tumblr.com/5cc9715cd73abe7ea72073262bb2060b/tumblr_npdqiqPEmJ1si0naco2_1280.jpg[/img] how can this seriously be considered passable graphics for a triple A title in 2015[/QUOTE] Can someone point me towards the poor graphics? I'm not seeing them. There aren't any noticeable low res textures, there aren't any noticeable polygon edges, the lighting looks good, the terrain blends together well and the shadows are high resolution and look good even up close between two moving objects. Look at when the vault guy puts his hand on the dog and casts a shadow on the dog's neck. There are no artifacts and no visible blurring/pixelation there and that's pretty impressive. The only thing I can really pick out is the 2d background scenery not being quite high res enough but that's minor and took me a while to notice.
I don't know but, it has this action figure feel, aesthetic to it, it looks plastic sorta.
Made this little thing because I was bored and wanted to speculate: [url]https://imgur.com/a/LrSEd[/url]
The only graphics I care about really are environments, fallout 3's were woeful
[QUOTE=rampageturke 2;47873271]The only graphics I care about really are environments, fallout 3's were woeful[/QUOTE] yeah personally I did not notice them being bad at all the environments had a lot of strong art direction, they were colorful, and there are apparently actual crowds of people, which is a new one for bethesda
If I was a developer making a game like Fallout, I'd rather it be average graphics rather than a benchmark game so that the majority of the people playing the game can get a similar experience, as intended by the artists, rather than a game that requires a flagship graphics card to run at a reasonable level.
[QUOTE=KorJax;47870129][IMG]http://puu.sh/ib1Jr/5510338d41.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] There is always some fucktard comparing something they see that even looks similar to a game they love. I don't get all the hate on the FO3 Engine at all, I spent hours on both Fo3 and Fo3NV. When I finished everything I could I just loaded some mods on for longer playability.
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;47873243]Made this little thing because I was bored and wanted to speculate: [URL]https://imgur.com/a/LrSEd[/URL][/QUOTE] For the record, the stadium is probably Fenway Park.
No they're right, everything that isn't graphically as good as TW3 or Crysis is shit. Galaga is shit DK Country is total shit Fuck Half Life 1 that pos wtf is super mario 64? a piece of fucking shit
[QUOTE=FingerSpazem;47873488]No they're right, everything that isn't graphically as good as TW3 or Crysis is shit. Galaga is shit DK Country is total shit Fuck Half Life 1 that pos wtf is super mario 64? a piece of fucking shit[/QUOTE] Fallout? Ew, what is this 2D shit? get it out of here
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.