• 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 Officially Revealed for PC, Xbox One, PS4 [Reddit Rumor = Ban]

You should go back and play vanilla Skyrim to see why you're wrong.

I play sometimes vanilla Skyrim (dont like mods besides 3 armor mods i got) and lets stop beeing fanboys and praise not good looking game in 2015 - when we all expected MUCH more. F4 looks average at best for now - and trailers usually show "best it can". Remember F3 trailer? How many years passed?
 

DOWN

Banned
The lighting looks great

look again
but the rest looks dated RIP
47164_2_0.jpg
 

Al-ibn Kermit

Junior Member
It's just very disappointing. Fallout 3 had groundbreaking visuals for its time, and Skyrim pushed the envelope of console technology. Like many high-profile titles of this "next generation", the new Fallout seems to offer nearly no technical change over its predecessor.

No load screens every time you open a door is an amazing upgrqde..

But it looks nice and about what I expected (barren wasteland but with much better lighting and shadows than last time). And the last two Fallout games were pretty rough around the edges even at the time from textures to poly count to the animation and effects as everything took a backseat to the draw distance and rooms cluttered with loot.
 
I play sometimes vanilla Skyrim (dont like mods besides 3 armor mods i got) and lets stop beeing fanboys and praise not good looking game in 2015 - when we all expected MUCH more. F4 looks average at best for now - and trailers usually show "best it can". Remember F3 trailer? How many years passed?

Haha, what? Anyone who thinks the game genuinely looks good is a fanboy just because you don't find it impressive? Whatever you say. And since when do you speak for everyone?

If anything, this thread has been great for my ignore list.
 

Trickster

Member
I play sometimes vanilla Skyrim (dont like mods besides 3 armor mods i got) and lets stop beeing fanboys and praise not good looking game in 2015 - when we all expected MUCH more. F4 looks average at best for now - and trailers usually show "best it can". Remember F3 trailer? How many years passed?

So much wrong in one post

1) if you play vanilla skyrim, then you know saying F4 almost looks worse is a big fat lie

2) lets stop calling others fanboys for pointing out some of the dumb and silly stuff people say

3) we didn't all expect much more. No need to make up shit to try and strengthen your poor arguments

4) Trailers can focus on things other than showing off it's flashiest and more visually impressive parts
 
Keeping in mind that I hold no interest in the Fallout franchise, this trailer was thoroughly unimpressive to me. The visuals elicited a negative reaction if anything and the narrative didn't grab me whatsoever.

However, at least one can be pretty sure this isn't some vastly doctored bullshit trailer a la Watchdogs and Witcher 3, so props in that regard.
 
It's either cross-gen and they're holding off on that bomb-shell for as long as they can, or it was cross-gen until the last year or so when adoption rates of current gen convinced Zenimax to drop the larger install base of last gen consoles.

This was a game that started full development back in 2011 (two years before current gen went on sale), and pre production began after Fallout 3. Internally they'll expect it to sell 10 million + plus copies. Either it is cross-gen, or it was cross-gen until very recently.

Besides, who plays Bethesda games for the graphics, unless they play on PC in which case... what are you worrying about? Mods will fix up the eye candy.
 

Patison

Member
I think that's the most boring discussion I've ever witnessed on GAF. 60 pages of talking about how graphics aren't impressive. Yeah, we get it, Wasteland 1 looks better than this and dog's fur is straight out of mobile game. Can we move on now?

I hope those pre-nukes scenes aren't just part of intro or something because they look truly fascinating. Threads: The Game? Yes please.
 

Denzar

Member
I hope those pre-nukes scenes aren't just part of intro or something because they look truly fascinating. Threads: The Game? Yes please.

Hmmm. I don't know.

We've got and idea how the Fallout apocalypse happened. We've read and heard about it in the games.

I don't know if I want to play it, though. It would diminish the sense of mistery. I think.

About the graphics. At first I had the same reaction as most people...Then I watched the trailer again, and I don't care.

This game shot to the top spot on my hype list.
 

Palpable

Member
I dunno, because it's vastly superior? Because some of us want the best? Because it costs money to refine an engine, as they have been doing for years and years now? Because time and resources spent building an engine could be time and resources spent making a better game? Because four years spent solely on making the game could result in a better product than splitting that time with engine development?

I dunno, I can't think of a good reason. But you're right, id be a poor businessman. I'd want to put out the best game possible using the best assets possible, and licensing the fox engine would (hypothetically) almost gaurantee that. But it likely wouldn't generate more sales, since we will all eat this stuff up no matter how crappy (currently) it looks.

I definitely shouldn't do business.


Edit: Was half joking about licensing the engine but.... you seemed to think there's no good reason.

#rekt

I thought it did.

TtTQOhU.gif
 
I think that's the most boring discussion I've ever witnessed on GAF. 60 pages of talking about how graphics aren't impressive. Yeah, we get it, Wasteland 1 looks better than this and dog's fur is straight out of mobile game. Can we move on now?

I hope those pre-nukes scenes aren't just part of intro or something because they look truly fascinating. Threads: The Game? Yes please.

Were going to have to wait till we see some gameplay before Gaf can talk about anything else but graphics. Its such a waste of time. The game is going to sell over 10+ million copies and the mainstream audience are digging it. Just look at the reaction on twitter.
 

Lego Boss

Member
Never played any Fallout game before and this looks amazing, that's what i call a trailer.

Neither have i. Not sure why I've never taken an interest in the series, but it's always been one of those I've overlooked.

Is it really as great as all that? I'm scared that I'm going to need 120 hours to get past the tutorial.
 
That's totally different from saying you thought it was a mobile game.

No, not at all. I am talking about the technology, not art direction. And in 2015/2016 I expect at least some kind of actual fur, not just a flat 2D texture. Especially when this is one of the main characters in the game.
 

RE4PRR

Member
I rewatched the trailer earlier in 4K and the first time on a 1080P monitor I was a bit let down but after seeing the same 1080p trailer on a 4K screen I'm excited and it looks a lot better.

Loving they've fixed the Power Armour, the shoulder pauldrons are now fixed down and the suit is much bigger and bulkier like it's supposed to. Pure badass.

Hopefully Nvidia get involved with their Gameworks. Would love to see Hairworks etc in F4.
 
It would explain pretty much everything when it comes to underwhelming technical stuff :/ I so hope this rumor isn't legit.

It makes too much sense not to be legit. This game started pre production in 2008, full development in 2011, and has sales expectations of 10 million + copies. Of course they gambled in making it cross gen two years before current gen consoles went on sale. They would be mad not to.

If it's not cross gen, it's because they dropped cross-gen support last year after seeing high adoption rates of current gen consoles. That's your best case scenario. The bulk of this game's development time has definitely been cross-gen focused.
 

DOWN

Banned
what do you mean by desperate?

Sacrifice all that scope and potential to sell only in the low thousands on last gen (last gen sales are ridiculously low now). That's just pathetic. EA, Ubisoft, Sony have all dropped cross gen. Even Activision seems to be. Bethesda didn't do cross gen for Wolfenstein: The Old Blood and Doom. How could they force that kind of ball and chain on their flagship studio? Boo
 

DOWN

Banned
It makes too much sense not to be legit. This game started pre production in 2008, full development in 2011, and has sales expectations of 10 million + copies. Of course they gambled in making it cross gen two years before current gen consoles went on sale. They would be mad not to.

If it's not cross gen, it's because they dropped cross-gen support last year after seeing high adoption rates of current gen consoles. That's your best case scenario. The bulk of this game's development time has definitely been cross-gen focused.

Not sure I get this sentiment. They would have had access to current gen early in development on Fallout 4. Barely over a year after Skyrim released we saw PS4 revealed with a bunch of games slated for later in the very same year. They'd have spent easily less than a year without current gen dev kits at worst. No reason for them to get stuck on cross gen.

Knowing they were going to go at least 3 years developing like usual, they would have been releasing it a year into the generation. They easily would have had time to drop cross gen long ago if it was ever planned. If they keep it now, it will potentially be the very last cross gen AAA released and that's pathetic.
 

Alienous

Member
Sacrifice all that scope and potential to sell only in the low thousands on last gen (last gen sales are ridiculously low now). That's just pathetic. EA, Ubisoft, Sony have all dropped cross gen. Even Activision seems to be. Bethesda didn't do cross gen for Wolfenstein: The Old Blood and Doom. How could they force that kind of ball and chain on their flagship studio? Boo

It's probably just a case of the game having been made with both generations in mind. It has been in development for ages. So not releasing it on last-gen wouldn't be the smart money move. Not talking about a last-gen version is also smart, sales-wise, as the enthusiasts who will preorder probably have current-gen hardware or PCs, and a fraction of them could be put off by it being cross-gen.

Keeping hush about an existing last-gen version is the smartest business move. That way you can have the mass market appeal of Skyrim without alienating the die hard.
 
Not sure I get this sentiment. They would have had access to current gen early in development on Fallout 4. Barely over a year after Skyrim released we saw PS4 revealed with a bunch of games slated for later in the very same year. They'd have spent easily less than a year without current gen dev kits at worst. No reason for them to get stuck on cross gen.

Knowing they were going to go at least 3 years developing like usual, they would have been releasing it a year into the generation. They easily would have had time to drop cross gen long ago if it was ever planned. If they keep it now, it will potentially be the very last cross gen AAA released and that's pathetic.

Zenimax and their shareholders expect this game to sell at least 10 million units (Skyrim sold over 20 million). They had no idea how well consoles that weren't even officially announced at the time would sell. They were probably not even sure if Fallout 4 would launch in 2014 or 2015. From a business perspective of course it makes sense to go cross-gen on a game that absolutely requires a huge install base.

Maybe they regret that now after seeing the amazing sales figures of current gen? Who knows. But they didn't have a crystal ball. The smart money, from a business perspective, from a shareholder's perspective, was to make the game cross-gen back in 2011.
 

DOWN

Banned
It's probably just a case of the game having been made with both generations in mind. It has been in development for ages. So not releasing it on last-gen wouldn't be the smart money move. Not talking about a last-gen version is also smart, sales-wise, as the enthusiasts who will preorder probably have current-gen hardware or PCs, and a fraction of them could be put off by it being cross-gen.

Keeping hush about an existing last-gen version is the smartest business move. That way you can have the mass market appeal of Skyrim without alienating the die hard.

It's been in development no longer than many of the current gen only AAAs. Unity started development around the same time Bethesda would have transitioned out of Skyrim. At the very least, they should have dropped cross gen well over a year ago with the sales trends.
 

Alienous

Member
Not sure I get this sentiment. They would have had access to current gen early in development on Fallout 4. Barely over a year after Skyrim released we saw PS4 revealed with a bunch of games slated for later in the very same year. They'd have spent easily less than a year without current gen dev kits at worst. No reason for them to get stuck on cross gen.

Knowing they were going to go at least 3 years developing like usual, they would have been releasing it a year into the generation. They easily would have had time to drop cross gen long ago if it was ever planned. If they keep it now, it will potentially be the very last cross gen AAA released and that's pathetic.

Exactly.

There were a ton of cross-gen games a year into this generation. They probably didn't forsee the fast adoption rate.
 
It's been in development no longer than many of the current gen only AAAs. Unity started development around the same time Bethesda would have transitioned out of Skyrim. At the very least, they should have dropped cross gen well over a year ago with the sales trends.

And that's exactly why Rogue was released alongside Unity... They still gambled on needing the last gen install base to keep investors happy.
 
where's our Obsidian spinoff to save us? Bethesda softworks please

Graphics aren't everything, don't worry about it =) The awesome open world gameplay will still be there, and if graphics bother you that much, buy it on PC and mod it to high heaven. Skyrim is still one of the best looking games available when you mod it.
 
T

Transhuman

Unconfirmed Member
It's just very disappointing. Fallout 3 had groundbreaking visuals for its time, and Skyrim pushed the envelope of console technology. Like many high-profile titles of this "next generation", the new Fallout seems to offer nearly no technical change over its predecessor.

Literally ground breaking.

 

Tovarisc

Member
Graphics aren't everything, don't worry about it =) The awesome open world gameplay will still be there, and if graphics bother you that much, buy it on PC and mod it to high heaven. Skyrim is still one of the best looking games available when you mod it.

inb4 "Mod Access Pass, only 14.99!". I think modding shouldn't be used to excuse developer falling short when it comes to technical and/or gameplay design. It's little weird that people give Bethesda pass on janky design and lackluster technical development because "modders will fix their game / make actual game on torso they release".

More than graphics are hurt by cross gen. BioWare talked openly after Inquisition about how they removed features across the board that largely had to do with RAM issues of cross gen.

Oh well. I'm overly enjoying the look at it we got so far.

It will be so rough to return into loading screens each time I want enter 2m x 2m shack to check if there is anything of importance. Witcher 3 has spoiled me with its loading screen free design :(
 

DOWN

Banned
Graphics aren't everything, don't worry about it =) The awesome open world gameplay will still be there, and if graphics bother you that much, buy it on PC and mod it to high heaven. Skyrim is still one of the best looking games available when you mod it.

More than graphics are hurt by cross gen. BioWare talked openly after Inquisition about how they removed features across the board that largely had to do with RAM issues of cross gen.

Oh well. I'm overly enjoying the look at it we got so far. I make due on PS4.
 
Top Bottom