Fallout 4 - I have nothing but heavy criticism

The game was never praised on its quests or story, don't be a jackass.

The one con almost every sites gave it was those two things, even places who scored it 10/10. Skyrim had the worst writing in history. Bethesda suck at that. Morrowind wasn't too bad actually but that was before lolTODD

Even New Vegas > Skyrim.

Yea it does look a bit "last gen-ish" but it still looks good. I'll wait for a final build. (i.e. Patch #35)

Coz they are relying on modders to pimp the game out...both in graphics and most likely features. Probably expect the modders to release unofficial patches for 'em bugs too.

This. I worry about this being a Bethesda game that will have their usual quality dialogues and quests. Also how they will manage the lore and themes of the game. That flying ship worries me for instance and the fact that most of the city seems relatively intact.

Well you haven't been looking on this site then, because the storytelling was one the pro's , not con's. I'm sure even jackassess can see the difference between pro's and con's.

What are those sites actually where they say the storytelling is a con?

the sites that only exists in your head don't count btw

@mirgamer: That seems to be what Bethesda does.

I don't have criticisms, just worries. Mainly, I worry Bethesda when working on Skyrim decided to do away with writing side quests and instead decided to develop an auto-generated quests like we got in Skyrim, and my worry is they'll bring this bullshit over to the Fallout games. And, because nobody in the position to hold Bethesda's feet over the fire for it did so, we could see it used again, and that's really going to piss me off if that's the case.

Anyhow, yeah, about that graphics engine, that dog did look pretty awful.

all ill say is it better run in 1080p/60fps with this kind of visuals and the 'but but but its an open world game' doesn't apply here.

lolbox version? Did that even have the special fur physics enabled? Fallout4 is a gen behind when CoD has better dogs.

http://pcgmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/dog.jpg

http://physxinfo.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Fur.jpg

Why would Bethesda create a new engine? They've been releasing the same game for the past 10 years (albeit with a different coat of paint) on the same engine and people keep coming back for more. They have a good thing going.

They're probably scared to use a new/different engine because all of the modders would need to learn to use it before they can fix their game!

I knew we'd see a... Mixed reaction here but I for one am pumped. I don't need every game to fight for the prettiest, most technically amazing looking game in history for me to be interested. And Bethesda's world games, with thousands and thousands of objects to be placed or manipulated throughout the world (wayyyyyy more than any GTA, DA, or Witcher game for example) SHOULDN'T be the (Unmodded) open world graphics king unless the other game devs are slacking.

Just gimme a release date and I'll start clearing my calendar...

Looks good, not mind blowing but it doesn't really need to. People saying it looks just like fallout 3 need to play that game again (vanilla) and see it's a significant jump.

You can bet your ass this game will have paid mods.

I was confused by the way the game looked.. It honestly looks like a modded fallout 3.. I'm guessing the game will simply have more things going on at one time in the world, like more NPC's, random events going on with the AI, etc.. But in short I'm not impressed with the game graphically at all, especially with the witcher 3 just coming out.. Lets hope this is intentional and this is the look they were going for.

It has me thinking we could see the game get released on last gen consoles shortly after release.. Which is unfortunate they need to let those old ass systems die already.

I wouldn't mind having downgraded graphics if it means we get a stable 60 fps and an overall better performance.

Outdated engine aside, I still believe Fallout 4 will end up being a great game..

Could never get into Fallout, myself. I liked the Diablo style ones, but the 3d ones feel lifeless imo. I wonder if it will make any advancements unlike the Elder Scrolls games which still have two frame combat.

Mods will fix everything

I've watched the trailer around 3X and I think the environments look pretty good. It's the character models that need work. But regardless of what it ends up looking like I think the majority of us will love the game.

I really doubt it'll be 60 fps on consoles. The types of games Bethesda makes don't need that kind of framerate. They're about openness, exploration, and vastness ... don't need a high framerate to enjoy those types of things and I just don't see them putting in the extra work to deliver it when it really isn't necessary in the first place. A STEADY and CONSISTENT 30 fps would be damned nice though ... something almost none of the supposedly 30 fps games as of late are delivering.

The only thing that disturbs me is the lack of detail on the face/hand and lack of wrinkles in the clothes. It just doesn't look right for a current gen game. I can forgive the dog for looking like a solid block of marble. Hell, Skyrim on last gen consoles had better character models.

I get that it's an open world game and all, but I just expected a NEW ENGINE. As long as Bethesda released screen shots occasionally, I wouldn't have minded Todd Howard and his coworkers learning a newer engine and slating FO4 for a late 2016-mid 2017 release window.

Oh well, I hope Todd Howard and Bethesda atleast learned something about proper storytelling and choice from FNV. My guess is they didn't even play it.

I can't believe there are people who actually don't like the Fallout games or Bethesda.

A: the term is isometric
B: they play nothing like Diablo

@Boddicker said:

The only thing that disturbs me is the lack of detail on the face/hand and lack of wrinkles in the clothes. It just doesn't look right for a current gen game. I can forgive the dog for looking like a solid block of marble. Hell, Skyrim on last gen consoles had better character models.

I get that it's an open world game and all, but I just expected a NEW ENGINE. As long as Bethesda released screen shots occasionally, I wouldn't have minded Todd Howard and his coworkers learning a newer engine and slating FO4 for a late 2016-mid 2017 release window.

Oh well, I hoped Todd Howard and Bethesda atleast learned something about proper storytelling and choice from FNV. My guess is they didn't.

Yeah, that hand is pretty shocking looking for a AAA game nowadays.

Graphics whores man, the so called elitists pretend they have standards, really they want sparkly visuals.

Personally I think it looks fine, the textures are yuck, the art direction is neat, and at the least you know Bethesda's world isn't going to be corridors. There are plenty of other things I'd rather Bethesda focus on improving than the actual visuals. Their gameplay for starters, their world design, the part where their games launch buggy is inexcuseable, their writing, their commitment to tone and atmosphere, etc. Those things are more interesting.

Eh, lots of pointing and clicking. I liked Diablo, as well. Commandos, too. That entire genre that shared a similar interface. I do think they are similar.

It's not even remotely similar other than camera angle. Diablo is literally just click, click, click, click. Fallout was a turn based game.

Still similar imo. Similar control interface, layout, and graphics.

There is no "imo" to that, that's not similar in anyway than the superficial shit.

I'm looking forward to it...

it just doesnt need to be buggy

we all know that the AAA industry is incredibly unhealthy for expectations and they literally have to raise the bar with each new AAA game. It can have shitty graphics and quests, i just want my immersion and fallout atmosphere

@StormyJoe:

Its not so hard to believe is it ? Their games are buggy and when they eventually fix that theres just nothing special about the gameplay.... kinda like GTA.

@silversix_ said:

all ill say is it better run in 1080p/60fps with this kind of visuals and the 'but but but its an open world game' doesn't apply here.

Sure it applies

Over the last 2-3 days there's been a bunch of rumors that Fallout 4's map is roughly 3x bigger than Skyrim's.

If they're making a game world that huge, then I can easily forgive them scaling back the graphics a bit.

And besides, within 2-3 months after release there is going to be a shitload of model, texture and lighting mods all over the internet. I think that's why us PC gamers couldn't care less about how it looks during launch.

Looks good to me. I wasn't a fan of Fallout 3 so I don't know if I should get too excited for this but I'll keep it on my radar. Will be hard not to with how much damn press the game is getting. >_<

I find the open world , the humor, the mood, the concept to be fantastic. I really enjoyed Fallout 3 and New Vegas - i logged at least 200 hours in each. IDK, i just don't get the hate. To each his/her own, I guess.

@frank_castle: 3x times bigger than the map of skyrim doesn't even make sense. This is the kind of rumors you don't believe in if you stop and think for a sec...

@StormyJoe:

Well my excuse is no matter how many other areas a game excels at..... its ultimately the game play that does it for me.

However thats not a popular excuse..... I'm sure other people hate it ffofor other reasons.

I don't buy it 100%, just like I never bought when Rockstar said that GTA V was bigger than GTA IV, San Andreas and RDR combined.

But I think it'll certainly be a lot bigger than Skyrim's map if just for the sole reason that Bethesda doesn't have to accommodate 10 year old hardware anymore.

I'm with you 100% on this one.

To each his own, I guess.

I don't get it either

The only place I see people bitching about Bethesda is...well...here.

They make huge, open worlds that are actually interesting and invite exploration. They make the kinds of games that I could only dream about as a kid. They make NOTHING BUT GOTY contenders.

Yet they suck because their animations are a bit dated?

LOL get the **** outta here

I've already pre-ordered for PC

Not looking very hard then?

http://www.nma-fallout.com/showthread.php?203284-Fallout-4-announced-with-official-trailer

And that is just on a Fallout fansite.

Also, every single bethesda gmae has been bad since morrowind, only redeemed by superb mods. Oblivion had copy paste content everywhere, horrible combat mechanics, mostly uninspired quests and piss poor RPG elements. Fallout 3 had no respect to fallout lore, some of the worst gunplay I have seen since well... some really bad shooters out there. Skyrim was even more dumbed down than oblivion (though it actually benefited from it), but the quality of quests got somehow even worse, contained music composed by Jeremy Soulless, dragons fucking everywhere and a crafting system that made you get the best items only a few hours in *facepalm*.

Todd is a hack.

I don't know how the hell anyone can sit there with a straight face and say that every Bethesda game over the last 15 years with the exception of Morrowind has been "bad".

Now, was/is Morrowind the gold standard?

You bet your ass

But I don't consider games like Fallout 3 and Skyrim to be "bad", even the vanilla versions.

I couldn't invest 200+ hours in a game that I consider "bad".

Oblivion is the only Bethesda game I've played that didn't blow me away.

Bottom line to me is this, Bethesda makes open world games that are actually fun to explore. At least to me they are.

Meanwhile, the map in a game like DA: Inquisition was a fucking snooze fest to trek. Hell, I'm loving The Witcher 3 so far, but as gorgeous as its gameworld is...it's still not nearly as fun to explore as a Bethesda title.

If the game actually comes out this fall, I promise I won't complain about the looks. A generous trade-off: looks in exchange for release date.

I can say it with a straight face because I actually have standards.

Wanting things like good mechanics, good quests and high quality content in my RPGs. The only thing post oblivion bethesda games have going for them is the quantity of content they have. But ultimately, I dont give a crap that you are swimming in a bigger swimming pool than me, especially considering that you are swimming in shit. I prefer quality over quantity, and quality is something that modern Bethesda games seriously lack. You shouldnt have to swim through hours of uninspired low quality content to find the rare gem or two.

Morrowind may be the gold standard these games tend to be compared to, but not necessarily deserved so. It may be one of the best freeroam RPGs of all time, but not the best. That honor goes to Gothic 2.

Then I'd say you should lower those standards a bit.

Because if you're waiting for a huge, open world RPG with drop dead gorgeous visuals, novel-esque story telling, and a combat system that totally blows your tits off...then my guess is that you'll be waiting a very, very long time.

Until that day, I'm sure I'll be having shitloads of fun with Fallout 4.

Yeah, in FO3 the US' capitol would be a smoldering radioactive crater from multiple nuke hits. So would all the major population centers like Boston. Only isolated small towns would survive the initial attack only to fall quickly to radioactive ash raining down on them (fallout). Atleast FNV gave us a viable reason why New Vegas was still standing.

It would be alot more realistic if Fallout took place in of these small isolated towns high up in mountains above the cloudline (since most portrayals of the Vaults are in the mountains). If Bethesda is at the helm I fully expect black/white dialogue/quest options and none of the morally grey options that FNV had.

Why would I want a bloated RPG?

All I want is an RPG that actually does something well, rather than an poorly thought out pseudo-RPG that tries to be too much only to end up being sub-par in every category. This trailer has already shown that they are going to do 2 things poorly, that is the treatment of an existing IP and the visuals. That hand in that image looks like something from a gen 5 game ffs.

There is a saying that goes, "chase 2 rabbits and you will lose them both", bethesda are chasing more than just two rabbits. That is why they have been consistantly bad as of late, with only mods redeeming the games they make, albeit, these mods also make them quite excellent.

Agreed for the most part. I never go into their games thinking I am going to get a fluid, Ninja-esque representation of combat. It's clunky, especially in ES but it has its own charm to me with the VATS system. I would like them to hire more than three voice actors and would be willing volunteer. The bugs on launch? As inexcusable as going 6 home periods without scoring a goal.