• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Fallout 4 PC Ultra screenshots

How did they fuck Obsidian over? Obsidian agreed to the terms of the deal, they agreed to get the bonus only if they hit certain criteria, they missed the criteria, thus they didn't get paid.

If 85 metacritic rating was a ridiculous criteria, then Obsidian should have negotiated for different terms.
 

Remmy2112

Member
How did they fuck Obsidian over? Obsidian agreed to the terms of the deal, they agreed to get the bonus only if they hit certain criteria, they missed the criteria, thus they didn't get paid.

If 85 metacritic rating was a ridiculous criteria, then Obsidian should have negotiated for different terms.

It's ridiculous criteria when it is by Zenimax's own hand that they did not meet the criteria. They fucked them over pushing the game out and mishandling QA then fucked them over again when that contributed heavily to not meeting the magical 85 number, instead reaching 84.
 
Getting tired of people being so dismissive of games having poor visual presentations. While, yes, graphics are not necessarily the be all end all for every single game, to say that the visuals of a VIDEO game aren't important is patently absurd. I feel like those who say that graphics aren't important are like the hipsters of the gaming scene. The "I was there before graphics WERE graphics maan!!" type. There used to be a time where reviews actually *gasp* RATED the quality of a game's graphics!! And I find it bothersome that we've entered this time where graphics are looked at as being "unimportant" when the visual fidelity of a game is vital to our own mental immersion in said game, ESPECIALLY considering how much more dense and complex the worlds of these games are becoming. When a developer goes through that much trouble but everything looks "wrong" it shatters the illusion. Imagine if Marvel released a new Avengers title that featured effects on par with a sy fy channel movie. People would flip. Same thing goes here. Games are, at their core, a visual medium. It's a bit silly to say that the quality of those visuals don't matter. As for this game in particular, it very much looks as if Fallout 4 was initially fully intentioned to see release on the last gen consoles. Before they hit a memory ceiling with the size of the world they wanted to create and thus HAD to migrate it to the new consoles but lacking the time necessary to make significant changes to the renderer. I'll still buy the game and play it next week and probably enjoy it a great deal. But the visuals ARE a disappointment. And it's OK that that matters to some people.

Couldn+_52f3a6272b3b3a059988c39398680ebc.gif


Damn it though, I"m still excited to play it.
 

Piggus

Member
As long as you overclock that shitty CPU to 5ghz+ and overclock the core of the 970 to 1600mhz then you should be good for 1080p/30fps at Ultra Low settings.

Fuck, my 5820k only runs at 4.4 GHz. :( Do you think if I bump up the core clock on my SLI 970s I could at least use medium-settings at 30 fps?

Maybe I should just stick with the PS4 version... *sigh*
 

Trickster

Member
The kind of people who pop up to say shit like "I don't play graphics" are generally just defensive fanboys who need to defend the sacred honour of their favourite franchise/company.

What about the people who pop up and say things like "game looks like fallout 3"?

Criticism is possible without using dumb and obviously incendiary hypebole
 

televator

Member
Getting tired of people being so dismissive of games having poor visual presentations. While, yes, graphics are not necessarily the be all end all for every single game, to say that the visuals of a VIDEO game aren't important is patently absurd. I feel like those who say that graphics aren't important are like the hipsters of the gaming scene. The "I was there before graphics WERE graphics maan!!" type. There used to be a time where reviews actually *gasp* RATED the quality of a game's graphics!! And I find it bothersome that we've entered this time where graphics are looked at as being "unimportant" when the visual fidelity of a game is vital to our own mental immersion in said game, ESPECIALLY considering how much more dense and complex the worlds of these games are becoming. When a developer goes through that much trouble but everything looks "wrong" it shatters the illusion. Imagine if Marvel released a new Avengers title that featured effects on par with a sy fy channel movie. People would flip. Same thing goes here. Games are, at their core, a visual medium. It's a bit silly to say that the quality of those visuals don't matter. As for this game in particular, it very much looks as if Fallout 4 was initially fully intentioned to see release on the last gen consoles. Before they hit a memory ceiling with the size of the world they wanted to create and thus HAD to migrate it to the new consoles but lacking the time necessary to make significant changes to the renderer. I'll still buy the game and play it next week and probably enjoy it a great deal. But the visuals ARE a disappointment. And it's OK that that matters to some people.

Truly. This sentiment resonates especially for me in that I've gotten heavy into WRPGs on PC. I really wanna feel like I'm in the role of my character and when I see a stair stepped low res shadow on a character's face in the middle of a conversation... it really feels like a downer. Luckily there's usually some ini tweaks to help on PC.
 
It's ridiculous criteria when it is by Zenimax's own hand that they did not meet the criteria. They fucked them over pushing the game out and mishandling QA then fucked them over again when that contributed heavily to not meeting the magical 85 number, instead reaching 84.

How do you know this? How do you know it wasn't the development schedule that the 2 parties agreed to at the beginning. If the contract did allow Zenimax to push up the development date without any form of compensation then either Obsidian agreed to it (and got screwed over by their stupidity) or Obsidian didn't realize it was in the contract (and got screwed over by their attorneys failing to catch it)
 

AMDman18

Neo Member
Fuck, my 5820k only runs at 4.4 GHz. :( Do you think if I bump up the core clock on my SLI 970s I could at least use medium-settings at 30 fps?

Maybe I should just stick with the PS4 version... *sigh*

Yeah my 2600k is only OC'd to 4.6 paired with a 980ti so I might go with the xbone version lol.
 

NBtoaster

Member
Afaik it was actually a million. Zenimax royally fucked Obsidian over, despite what some local fanboys might have you believe.

And yet Obsidian is willing to work with them again, so they probably werent screwed as hard as some people seem to imagine.

"We would love to work on Fallout again," Urquhart said. "Hell, we would love to work in the Elder Scrolls universe. Nothing is going on at this point in time, but we talk about it all the time... I'd love to do a Fallout: New Vegas 2. I think a Fallout: New Vegas 2 would kick ass."
 
Fallout 4|OT| [Child at Heart] You know what? Your game looks like my butt.

It's gonna be a long weekend. Gonna probably play some more Skyrim and then FO4 on Monday!
 

fatchris

Member
I really like the art direction and colors. It almost has a Stingray / Captain Scarlet thing going on, which is why I'm not holding out for texture mods; they often screw up the art style.
 
I really like the art direction and colors. It almost has a Stingray / Captain Scarlet thing going on, which is why I'm not holding out for texture mods; they often screw up the art style.

I like the art style too. I've only seen mods improve on art styles mostly. A shitty texture mod is a shitty texture mod no matter how ya put it. There were some remarkable things done to Fallout and Skyrim that enhanced the style big time.

Dude, your setup will make mincemeat of the game at 1080p.

They're joking. Or at least I hope so. I assume so.
 

diamount

Banned
Fuck, my 5820k only runs at 4.4 GHz. :( Do you think if I bump up the core clock on my SLI 970s I could at least use medium-settings at 30 fps?

Maybe I should just stick with the PS4 version... *sigh*

Dude, your setup will make mincemeat of the game at 1080p.
 

Denton

Member
And yet Obsidian is willing to work with them again, so they probably werent screwed as hard as some people seem to imagine.
Obsidian is perpetually a step away from bankruptcy (at least until Eternity was a success), so of course they would take even a shitty contract over going out of business. Plus it's Fallout. That was why they took New Vegas contract in the first place, despite its shitty conditions like zero royalties, metacritic based bonus, only 18 months development time, or publisher handled QA.
 
It's never gonna happen, but I'm already starting to hope I can go pick up my copy today. Ah, one can dream, I guess.

Fallout 4 |OT| It's good to be back

Because it really is + the PC says the same exact line in the Trainer.
It was my first thought, but I decided to go with something different.
 

NoRéN

Member
Getting tired of people being so dismissive of games having poor visual presentations. While, yes, graphics are not necessarily the be all end all for every single game, to say that the visuals of a VIDEO game aren't important is patently absurd. I feel like those who say that graphics aren't important are like the hipsters of the gaming scene. The "I was there before graphics WERE graphics maan!!" type. There used to be a time where reviews actually *gasp* RATED the quality of a game's graphics!! And I find it bothersome that we've entered this time where graphics are looked at as being "unimportant" when the visual fidelity of a game is vital to our own mental immersion in said game, ESPECIALLY considering how much more dense and complex the worlds of these games are becoming. When a developer goes through that much trouble but everything looks "wrong" it shatters the illusion. Imagine if Marvel released a new Avengers title that featured effects on par with a sy fy channel movie. People would flip. Same thing goes here. Games are, at their core, a visual medium. It's a bit silly to say that the quality of those visuals don't matter. As for this game in particular, it very much looks as if Fallout 4 was initially fully intentioned to see release on the last gen consoles. Before they hit a memory ceiling with the size of the world they wanted to create and thus HAD to migrate it to the new consoles but lacking the time necessary to make significant changes to the renderer. I'll still buy the game and play it next week and probably enjoy it a great deal. But the visuals ARE a disappointment. And it's OK that that matters to some people.
Hard to take a wall of a text seriously. I just imagine fast talk and heavy breathing.

If the "graphics aren't important" folk are the hipsters of the gaming scene then their opponents are the snobs.

I guess simply enjoying games became too boring or something.
 

Lanrutcon

Member
NoRéN;184393076 said:
Hard to take a wall of a text seriously. I just imagine fast talk and heavy breathing.

If the "graphics aren't important" folk are the hipsters of the gaming scene then their opponents are the snobs.

I guess simply enjoying games became too boring or something.

Your post is embarrassing. The guy you quoted provided a rational argument and your response is to belittle the formatting of his post, and then vaguely snipe at the general populace.
 

valkyre

Member
Getting tired of people being so dismissive of games having poor visual presentations. While, yes, graphics are not necessarily the be all end all for every single game, to say that the visuals of a VIDEO game aren't important is patently absurd. I feel like those who say that graphics aren't important are like the hipsters of the gaming scene. The "I was there before graphics WERE graphics maan!!" type. There used to be a time where reviews actually *gasp* RATED the quality of a game's graphics!! And I find it bothersome that we've entered this time where graphics are looked at as being "unimportant" when the visual fidelity of a game is vital to our own mental immersion in said game, ESPECIALLY considering how much more dense and complex the worlds of these games are becoming. When a developer goes through that much trouble but everything looks "wrong" it shatters the illusion. Imagine if Marvel released a new Avengers title that featured effects on par with a sy fy channel movie. People would flip. Same thing goes here. Games are, at their core, a visual medium. It's a bit silly to say that the quality of those visuals don't matter. As for this game in particular, it very much looks as if Fallout 4 was initially fully intentioned to see release on the last gen consoles. Before they hit a memory ceiling with the size of the world they wanted to create and thus HAD to migrate it to the new consoles but lacking the time necessary to make significant changes to the renderer. I'll still buy the game and play it next week and probably enjoy it a great deal. But the visuals ARE a disappointment. And it's OK that that matters to some people.

Excellent post... I have said the same things over and over, but it is like you say it man, hipsters.

Also people need to understand that we expect different standards when it comes to major devs like Bethesda. The guys have a ton of resources and it is inexcusable to offer such a visually sub par game. Its not like they are some indie or low budget dev...and no its not because they "focused their resources in player interaction", you guys act as if this game is ages ahead of previous Fallout titles.

Its clear as day that this game was intended to release on last gen systems.
 

Hip Hop

Member
The game requires Steam, right?

And does anyone know if the Pip Boy Edition comes with a Steam key in the case?
 
Top Bottom