[QUOTE=TheRealRudy;49122333]Fallout 4 is not a RPG. It's a FPS with RPG elements. Your character is very railroaded, no matter how you play, you'll always be the predefined character of Bethesda who's looking for his son. You can barely play something like an evil character, the most evil you will get is how Bethesda predefined the character with their good-bad-neutral-question mass effect dialog system. Where you could skills and your S.P.E.C.I.A.L. stats to your advantage in dialog, it's all being thrown together in this sometimes appearing "persuasion" options that indicates the chance if you'll succeed with a color. Yes, a color you heard that right. We went from percentages and numbers to a color.
The S.P.E.C.I.A.L. stats have become pretty meaningless since you can now become a Jack of all traits, and they merely indicate only what perks you can get from the get-go. With the removal of the Skills system, the additional depth you could give your character mechanical wise has gone up in thin air as well, with all these skills now have been lamely being incorporated into the perk chart, where before you could pick perks ON TOP of skills to personalize your character even more.
Content wise (and the gunplay) I'm not disappointed with the game, the Commonwealth and it's characters and locations are pretty interesting (apart from the unsatisfying and actually pretty meh ending of the story), but mechanically this doesn't feel like a Fallout game at all. It just feels like a shooter that has been Fallout themed. The series is known for being a "A Post Nuclear Role Playing Game" series, yet I have to find something that gives me a certain degree of freedom with my character apart from having the option to walk where I want to on the map, something that's seen a lot in open world games.
[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmWrgwde7O8"]Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies.[/URL][/QUOTE]
Nothing you have said lead me to think its not an rpg.
I think the biggest hit to FO4 was still the fact that even if you make a nasty biker dude or something, none of the beginning or even the protagonist voice makes any sense.
[editline]15th November 2015[/editline]
So being a courier (or something else), it gives you more room to flesh out a distinctive save/character than what we've got in FO4, considering the voice and slightly worse dialogue system.
Oh, and the settlement system could do some improving/overhauling as well.
RPG as a genre always fascinated me because nobody really knows what exactly it is.
I mean, yes, it says it on the tin, Role-playing Game, you have the freedom to roleplay. But does that make Quake an RPG?
And is Fallout 4 not an RPG because you can't effectively roleplay in it, despite having gameplay elements characteristic of what we know as RPGs at it's core? Are RPGs solely defined by their narrative?
I'm pretty sure one of the biggest mods is gonna remove all the voiced dialogue and switch it back to the skyrim system, with so much backlash from the fan base.
[QUOTE=Drury;49108822]One thing I dislike both about FO3 and FO4 is that they both revolve around your family. A weird, weird family that is just assigned to you. It's not your real family. You feel zero attachment.
NV I really liked because you get shot in the head by this smug fucker right off the bat. You don't need to know anything else. You get back on your feet and he's one dead sunovabitch. It's as purely personal as it gets.[/QUOTE]
Fallout has always been pretty heavily surrounded by the whole family ties aspect and New Vegas is the only exception. Fallout 1 plays a bit on this since it's not directly your family but the game treats it as if it was.
[QUOTE=simkas;49117945]Fallout: New Florida would be rad. Imagine all the irradiated swamps with fucked up mutated alligators and other weird fucked up swamp creatures.[/QUOTE]
Point Lookout but better
[QUOTE=Saxon;49123489]I'm pretty sure one of the biggest mods is gonna remove all the voiced dialogue and switch it back to the skyrim system, with so much backlash from the fan base.[/QUOTE]
I didn't hear [I]that much[/I] backlash from the community regarding the voiced protagonist and the dialog wheel is only an issue because it's clumsy and difficult to keep on the screen.
The game still allows for plenty of roleplaying since your character's motivations, moral code and general behavior isn't set in stone - the options, despite being limited to four (three actual options related to choice making since a fourth one is always for asking questions), still allow the player to do most of the major character archetypes from a negative cunt to an overly pessimistic oaf, including more odd stuff like a sarcastic, distant weirdo. If you don't want your character to be attached to your kid, then just pick the options that relate to avenging your husband/wife. If you don't want your character to be attached to his family at all, just don't do the main quest and stick to side quests.
[QUOTE=Saxon;49123489]I'm pretty sure one of the biggest mods is gonna remove all the voiced dialogue and switch it back to the skyrim system, with so much backlash from the fan base.[/QUOTE]
There's a good chance that it might not even be possible.
The best you could probably do is fiddle with the UI so you have 4 choices lined up in a rectangle (like 3/NV) with the actual lines plastered in instead of just 'Sarcastic'.
[QUOTE=Jarokwa;49119239]NV is hilariously overrated[/QUOTE]
Bethedsa is even more hilariously overrated so
[QUOTE=Aldawolf;49123728]Bethedsa is even more hilariously overrated so[/QUOTE]
There's far more overly elaborate/nitpicky criticism of Bethesda going on than any form of criticism towards New Vegas though.
New Vegas has a lot of issues and every time anything related to fallout comes out, there is a bunch of people who appear and try to both deny these issues and assign even more qualities to the game - the same people who usually shit all over fallout 3 on aspects that weren't even perceptible issues.
Basically any time something negative about new vegas is mentioned there's people who respond with outright denial, with "obsidian didn't have enough time/it's bethesda's fault", or "bethesda did it worse".
New Vegas is overrated and it's pretty difficult to see it any other way and not be biased about it.
[QUOTE=HAKKAR!!!;49117580]Just btw to everyone that wants New Vegas 2, I don't think either of the writers still work at obsidian anymore.[/QUOTE]
If that includes the people who came up with Lonesome Road and the tunnelers then good riddance because that shit was dumb. The Tunnelers were borderline lore breaking.
Also speaking of lore breaking stuff, I never liked how New Vegas changed RobCo down to the core and turned it from a rather incompetent company that used really poorly thought out impractical designs and built shitty robots with huge design flaws and shoddy AIs to a super good company lead by a borderline mary sue genius who saved the entire mojave via technowizard magic and pretty much blew General Atomics out of the water, even though General Atomics is supposed to be the superior company in the lore.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49123785]There's far more overly elaborate/nitpicky criticism of Bethesda going on than any form of criticism towards New Vegas though.
New Vegas has a lot of issues and every time anything related to fallout comes out, there is a bunch of people who appear and try to both deny these issues and assign even more qualities to the game - the same people who usually shit all over fallout 3 on aspects that weren't even perceptible issues.
Basically any time something negative about new vegas is mentioned there's people who respond with outright denial, with "obsidian didn't have enough time/it's bethesda's fault", or "bethesda did it worse".
New Vegas is overrated and it's pretty difficult to see it any other way and not be biased about it.[/QUOTE]
Well, to be fair, Bethesda did do worse.
Not that New Vegas wasn't a buggy monstrosity on release, but it at least ended up being less buggy than Fallout 3 by the end of its support period.
I can't play a full patched Fallout 3 without it randomly crashing at some point (lots of other people report the same thing), but I rarely ever crash in a fully patched New Vegas. It could probably be due to Bethesda deciding to use GFWL for Fallout 3, but even with a mod to remove it, I still have major stability issues.
I mean, one of the many reasons people even install TTW these days is simply because the FO3 wasteland in New Vegas somehow ends up being more stable than FO3 itself.
And I'll just be frank here. I really don't see why you have such a hard on for hating New Vegas. As much as I prefer it over FO3 (which is a fuckton), I can still at least acknowledge that Fallout 3 is a decent game. And hell, if it wasn't for Bethesda at least trying to modernize Fallout, then Fallout would be forever dead. I may not like what Bethesda has done with Fallout, but I can at least respect their efforts. No idea why you can't seem to think the same for New Vegas outside of "everyone likes New Vegas so much, so it's overrated."
It's not that people like new vegas so much, it's that they defend it tooth and nail and sometimes even grant it qualities that it doesn't have.
And yeah I do think that people were and still are really salty over fallout 3 for no reason and they only like New Vegas because they were ultimately disappointed in 3.
no, fallout 3 just sucks. new vegas is practically on another level
yes i remember having so much fun walking around a sea of green tint while trying to find my way around giant collapsed road walls. the gameplay was just so dreadfully boring
[QUOTE=Rofl_copter;49123953]
yes i remember having so much fun walking around a sea of green tint [/QUOTE]
TBH, the same could be said about the yellow/brownish tint on NV.
ironically i think the desert was more interesting and fun to explore than any of the cities in the fallout games. there was at least variety in it, where as fallout 3 was just block after block of concrete nothingness. just such an unappealing game in every way
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49123944]It's not that people like new vegas so much, it's that they defend it tooth and nail and sometimes even grant it qualities that it doesn't have.
And yeah I do think that people were and still are really salty over fallout 3 for no reason and they only like New Vegas because they were ultimately disappointed in 3.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=27085[/url]
This is why I always get salty over FO3. It was a terrible Fallout game.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49123785]Basically any time something negative about new vegas is mentioned there's people who respond with outright denial, with "obsidian didn't have enough time/it's bethesda's fault", or "bethesda did it worse".[/QUOTE]
I don't see how that's any different than people who say "who plays Bethesda games for story" whenever someone says anything bad about Fallout 3/4's story.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49123785]
New Vegas is overrated and it's pretty difficult to see it any other way and not be biased about it.[/QUOTE]
Well considering Fallout 3 is one of the best reviewed RPG's out there, and New Vegas isn't; I think I can say New Vegas is underrated if anything.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49123944]It's not that people like new vegas so much, it's that they defend it tooth and nail and sometimes even grant it qualities that it doesn't have.
And yeah I do think that people were and still are really salty over fallout 3 for no reason and they only like New Vegas because they were ultimately disappointed in 3.[/QUOTE]
Once again I don't see how this is different from people who defend Fallout 3 tooth and nail and grant it qualities it doesn't have.
Fallout 4 is very vibrant and colorful and I love that
Both FO3 and NV were dull as bricks to me, and not just for empty worlds. But I did like NV's freeform nature, overall writing and changing things up as I played. I've barely scratched FO4 past the intro on my brother's rental so far, though, so I just gotta dig a bit deeper.
Also people who say NV is that much better than 3 forget that it had the same wretched gameplay as 3. Horrible everything except the story was OK at best.
[QUOTE=redBadger;49124070]Also people who say NV is that much better than 3 forget that it had the same wretched gameplay as 3. Horrible everything except the story was OK at best.[/QUOTE]
Which is better than FO3 which had absolutely terrible writing.
Also NV added the weapon modding, which was nice, and the settlement reputation system (which was a better way of tracking how places felt about), the addition of a survival mode for those who wanted it... lots of improvements. Sure, it was tied to the awful Bethbryo engine and all that entailed, but in the ways that Obsidian was free to improve, boy did they do so.
[QUOTE=redBadger;49124070]Also people who say NV is that much better than 3 forget that it had the same wretched gameplay as 3. Horrible everything except the story was OK at best.[/QUOTE]
nah, gameplay was better too. settings were cool. weapons didnt feel like airsoft guns anymore. story was better than ok
again, they feel like two totally different beasts. i never set any expectations for the games, this is just what it was like for me and most other people it seems
playing through fallout 3 was a chore and honestly i dont even remember beating it. i think i played through new vegas like 3 times
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49123944]It's not that people like new vegas so much, it's that they defend it tooth and nail and sometimes even grant it qualities that it doesn't have.
And yeah I do think that people were and still are really salty over fallout 3 for no reason and they only like New Vegas because they were ultimately disappointed in 3.[/QUOTE]
Maybe they just think the game sucks? Isn't that a good enough reason
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49123944]It's not that people like new vegas so much, it's that they defend it tooth and nail and sometimes even grant it qualities that it doesn't have.
And yeah I do think that people were and still are really salty over fallout 3 for no reason and they only like New Vegas because they were ultimately disappointed in 3.[/QUOTE]
Can you think of any examples?
On the latter I can technically agree though. There are some NMA-tier guys that'll bash Fallout 3's minor (but easily disputable) loregutting and come off as awfully butthurt about its success.
But the fact of the matter is that Fallout 3 is a far more popular title than NV. Many of its criticisms (apart from the story) are typically ignored or made light. NV received far less fan-fare when it came out, with complaints about level design, railroading(lol), bugs, and poor mechanics. All of these are the same issues that Fallout 3 had, the difference is that Fallout 3 already has a GOTY seal stamped on it and NV doesn't.
So when people start criticizing NV for the same issues that 3 had, of course it's going to get defended with tooth and nail, it needs that defense from nerds because it doesn't have the shield of the mainstream crowd that loved 3 oh so much but just "couldn't get into NV for some reason".
[editline]15th November 2015[/editline]
In the end, NV was a game was on the surface was both worse and better than Fallout 3 (depending on how you look at each game), but if anything, it as definitely a more thoughtful game. Fallout 3 felt like My First RPG whereas NV had a lot of parts where, if you looked closely, you could see the the devs had clearly [I]designed [/I]something a certain way. Everything felt purposeful with NV whereas Fallout 3 just felt like it tumbled out the door as literally: 'Oblivion with guns'
[QUOTE=cdr248;49117680]Josh Sawyer is still at Obsidian. And while Avellone is absent, he has expressed a desire to work on another fallout so I don't think he's out of the question.
However John Gonzalez seems to be gone but I'm not even sure how or where he was involved in the story writing aspect.[/QUOTE]
John Gonzalez was creative lead designer on New Vegas. He was responsible for much of the main quest. Here's Sawyer talking about designing places and characters in New Vegas
[video=youtube;YFvvr8_CtaI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFvvr8_CtaI[/video]
there's a fromspring somewhere where sawyer broke down who wrote what a little better but I can't find it.
I prefer NV because it oozes character whereas Fallout 3 is bland as fuck.
[QUOTE=Rofl_copter;49123989]ironically i think the desert was more interesting and fun to explore than any of the cities in the fallout games. there was at least variety in it, where as fallout 3 was just block after block of concrete nothingness. just such an unappealing game in every way[/QUOTE]
No don't even say that.
There is literally nothing fun about wandering the desert. At all. Just chances to run into Deathclaws or Cazadors.
deserts in games are boring and people should stop using them
it's a lazy excuse at level design
[editline]16th November 2015[/editline]
do you know whats in a real desert?
just sand and shit
wow how exciting
[QUOTE=Combine 177;49108937]At least now that Fallout 4 is out now we can wait Obsidian to do "New Vegas 2"[/QUOTE]
Rushed by Bethesda they will once again release a buggy mess and be left unable to bring about their vision.
[editline]15th November 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=J!NX;49124781]deserts in games are boring and people should stop using them
it's a lazy excuse at level design
[editline]16th November 2015[/editline]
do you know whats in a real desert?
just sand and shit
wow how exciting[/QUOTE]
You play the game? Grassy/greyish plains around Boston/Washing are hardly any different.
And you know what, since I'm on about critising Fallout New Vegas lemme say that it has the worst railroading ever.
So you don't care about going the long way to Vegas, you wanna just get to Vegas proper right? Ok let's go! There are three ways.
1. Through a fuckload of Deathclaws.
2. Through the hills littered with Cazadors AND some Deathclaws.
3. Taking the same route with every single new character and doing every single quest because XP, Money, and loot to sell for more money, so you can skip all the Freeside stuff and just get into Vegas proper, then turn in the shit to kill Benny and FINALLY get to the main quest proper.
Seriously, outside of Writing and Characters and two out of the four dlcs, New Vegas was not really fun to play with each new character.
and by two out of the four, I mean Honest Hearts and Lonesome Road.
Honest Hearts because it was just a huge Canyony place with only two characters that I really like. Joshua Graham the greatest badass in all of Fallout lore, and a dead character I won't spoil here because his story is just too amazing. Aside from the Ability to get said dead character's gun, as well as a Colt. 45 and Tommy Gun, there wasn't anything interesting about the place.
Lonesome Road is because like everyone else, the Tunnelers and their lore are just so fucking horrid. Also Ulysses is pretty boring after all the build up we're given about the big meeting. He's the one that goes like "Oh yeah those mutant growing lizard people? They're gonna start a Post-Apocalypse Apocalypse, come to my place and fire nukes for the fuck of it!".
[editline]15th November 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49124808]Rushed by Bethesda they will once again release a buggy mess and be left unable to bring about their vision.
[/QUOTE]
For the last fucking time, there was no bad blood between the two, it was a contract, and it's already been confirmed, multiple mother fucking times in this thread, that BOTH parties are happy and willing to come together for another Fallout game.
[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;49124817]And you know what, since I'm on about critising Fallout New Vegas lemme say that it has the worst railroading ever.
So you don't care about going the long way to Vegas, you wanna just get to Vegas proper right? Ok let's go! There are three ways.
1. Through a fuckload of Deathclaws.
2. Through the hills littered with Cazadors AND some Deathclaws.
3. Taking the same route with every single new character and doing every single quest because XP, Money, and loot to sell for more money, so you can skip all the Freeside stuff and just get into Vegas proper, then turn in the shit to kill Benny and FINALLY get to the main quest proper.
[/QUOTE]
Still better than the DC Metro.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
