Having been gifted the game by a very generous friend, and giving it a shot (if only for him). I will say 3 things.
This just verifies my position that it might be for the best if Bethesda just stopped pretending to make RPGs since they clearly cannot make them. Either that, or they play some D&D sessions, to learn what an RPG should play like. Maybe then, they can understand several of the design choices behind Fallout 1 and 2.
@sts106mat: But you are assuming I hate the game enough to stop playing it entirely. I enjoy the game enough to continue playing it, but it does some very important things poorly enough to be frustrating overall.
You're on a gaming forum, the idea here is to discuss games. That is what this thread is doing, and it's not just blindly hating or unnecessary negativity, it's a thread that backs up any points it is making with articulated reasons and evidence inasmuch as evidence is possible. That's not negativity, that's discussion. Negativity is calling someone out on negativity that never existed or was never intended to begin with.
Char, play games and have fun. Seriously that's whats wrong with gamers now and days cause all they do is ***** and complain, hell they'll even complain about a game w/o even playing it!.
If you constantly bring out the flaws in a game then why even bother playing video games?, that would be miserable cause as the saying goes "there's no such thing as a perfect game" and you would spend more time qqing about a game than playing it. I don't know about you but I don't have time to ****** and whine constantly on the internet cause I work 40 hours a week and I have better shit to do then pretend to criticize games constantly.
Cause lets face it if we both compared our top 50 games together we could easily scrutinize each others choices of games, wondering how that game that person picked for number 15 with all it's bugs or w/e issue you or I might think of to qq about, but you know what I don't care if RE6 was your fav game. The same thing can be said for missing elements like RPG elements, which honestly I like how they are done in Fallout 4.
-Dialogue system makes you think on what you're gonna say before you can even react, by that I mean for example if you choose "Tell me where shaun is" answer, and the character replies with "where is my son *** hole, I'll rip you a new one if you don't tell me" it kinda makes me think my character is a bamf that takes no shit. Or another example is choosing sarcastic and all of a sudden my character says ether something whitty and I'm like daaamn or I can say something really stupid.
-While fallout 4 streamlines a lot of rpg elements it's honestly for the better (I know the rage of all the rpg hardcore plebs out there are gonna explode reading this), I for one am sick and tired of all the useless stats in rpgs and so far fallout 4 has trimmed the fat a little. As for heavy armor ect ect specializations, fallout 4 still has it, it's just not as night and day or explained clearly. You're not gonna be a pro stealthy/assassin build character if you're wearing heavy armor.
-The thing I never see people mention when they want to criticize fallout 4 is the sanctuary building system, a system so awesome people just mind fart it like it's not even in the game. Home building was a pretty popular mod in Skyrim and they brought that over to fallout 4 and the insane stuff people are building is nuts.
/end rant
Because some of us are getting increasingly concerned with the dumbing down of gaming.
And really, calling us plebs for wanting RPGs that are not heavily dumbed down. Wanting games that require some degree of thought and mastery makes us plebs. Expecting some research to go into the actual writing and overall game design makes us plebs?
Maybe what you just said demonstrates the celebration of ignorance which Carl Sagan talked about in the quote above.
@Maroxad:
This is true to an extent.
But then...people still come to games or game genres differently... Some more critical than others. I myself am quite picky when it comes to RPG's.
The thing I don't understand is when Bethesda promises us a well written story. While it might be well written, the way their world and quests are presented acts as a component that works against the writing. One person can play it in the correct way and immerse himself in the correct parts of the world for the story to be relayed in the optimal way. But the next person can have the most atrocious experience...he's ever had.
I agree with you. People don't always want to think about what they are buying with their money...
As long as an RPG does something well, I should be able to enjoy it for what it is. Unless the other aspects of the game impact the enjoyment too much.
I am not sure anyone ever expected a good story with FO4. Afterall, it has the same writer as Fallout 3. Maybe he did his homework though this time, since he didnt completely mistreat every single faction in the game.
Yes, I do.
So I've read through the thread and various responses and replies but most of my comments still apply to this post so I'm replying directly to this one.
At first, my reaction to the streamlined perks system wasn't awesome. I'm a big pen and paper RPG fan, and CRPGs that use pen and paper systems (or systems that closely resemble pen and paper systems) are among my absolute favorites. I loved the idea of the individual skills in the original Fallout games which were based on a percentage, but could be increased to (if I remember) a max of 300% because of "modifiers" in practical situations so you could overbuild your skills. Those games used a very traditional "earn XP then get points to spend per level based on your INT" system, with the ability to increase a base stat by a point presenting itself every X number of levels/perks.
Skyrim's system wasn't my favorite for a lot of reasons. Yes, it had the granularity of individual skills -and- it tried to opt for the "realistic" option where your skills increased based on what you used, but the leveling system stacked on top of that wasn't very good nor was the scaled difficulty based on your "on paper" level that followed you throughout the world. It was too easy to "game" the skill system in various ways, and if you made poor choices in how you leveled your skills then the world got more difficult without you actually getting stronger. These features felt "arcadey" to me, like rubber-banding in racing games.
So no more scaled levels on monsters in Fallout 4 is awesome. I wasn't sold on the streamlined perks system until I started using it more. I did like the granularity of individual skill numbers, but if the exchange is this new system when you also have the option of spending points on SPECIAL stats every level at the cost of not increasing your actual skill in something that level then I'm OK with it. Also, I don't miss the "karma" system of the previous games because I'm of the general opinion that Karma systems in games are often BS because they are too binary. I like "Witcher" style games that don't try to assign judgement on your actions based on some cosmic scale pre-determined by the devs but instead of system of choices and consequences of those choices.
-Byshop
Good points, I like how some abilities are out of my reach simply because I dont have the stats necessary. I cannot intimidate people, because my charisma is at 1. I can not build firearms because my intelligence is equally low as my charisma. And overall, I actually prefer the system in FO4 than the one in Skyrim. If only due to the fact that some perks here actually give access to new abilities, and allows you to combine more perks in better ways.
In Skyrim, there were only flat armor perks. In Here there is a flat armor perk, but there are also 2 perks that give situational armor. Rooted and Moving Target. Giving far more versaility to active playstyle (lets not kid ourselves here, light and heavy armor in Skyrim were near identical).
Like you said, the raise by use system in Skyrim was terrible. Due to how easy it was to game amongst other things. Have you played Elona, Jagged Alliance, Wizardry 6-8, Dwarf Fortress or Rune Factory? I felt like all those games handled the raise by use system FAR better than Bethesda ever did. Bethesda honestly has one of the worst implementations of said system, if not the worst.
I never understood why Fallout had Karma in the first place. The first 2 games pretty much ignored it, as did New Vegas. And Fallout 3 it just restricted my morality to good guy or bad guy. Ultimately though, I didnt really grow a dislike towards these systems until I played Mass Effect. The nice thing about the system that The Witcher popularized is that it allows us, the gamer to determine what is right and what is wrong. I could bring up my morality and moral stances, and you could bring up yours, I am sure there would be differences here and there.
@Maroxad:
Argumentum ad lipidem, why am I not surprised?.
Go ahead, tell us why wanting games to have a shred of intelligence or research put into them makes us plebs? I and a lot of the other RPG fans are fed up of these games appealing to the ignorant and lazy.
@Maroxad: Again pointless ******* qqing coming from you, really you're gonna **** and whine about Fallout 4's "research" and call it bad while Fallout NV had it waaaaaaaaaaay worse. Cause let's pretend our character didn't get shot in the face, then left for dead in a pile of dirt and somehow we survive with no fing scars....But you know what it's a fraking video game.
Log in to comment