Fallout 4 - A Nuclear Disappointment

Summer Haze

Banned
Jun 10, 2014
10,758
0
0
I'm really enjoying it so far, I've played it for hours (is there a way on the PS4 to check how many hours you played it?). The only thing I don't like about it is the lack of quests and crappy repeatable quests, that is a real lazy way out of writing good quests.
It tells you how many hours you've played when you load a save.

Oops, DP. My bad.
 

Orniletter

Member
Nov 20, 2013
5,196
1
315
Even though it's been years since their last title, the game screams churned out, annual sequel somehow.
Exactly.

Fallout 4 has this bland, soulless Assassin's Creedness to it, where basically everything you do is of low quality ,gamedesignwise, but there is a lot of it.

It's a 6.5 / 10 game on it's own, but like a 2/10 as a Fallout.
 

KorrZ

Member
Jun 7, 2011
6,062
1
0
I agree Fallout 4 is disappointing.

It's still not a bad game though. It's good, I had a fun 70 hours with it and enjoyed all of my time immensely.

It's disappointing because it's still ultimately a regression from 3/New Vegas and even Skyrim.
 

Thatonemoor

Member
Apr 10, 2013
3,349
7
415
I agree Fallout 4 is disappointing.

It's still not a bad game though. It's good, I had a fun 70 hours with it and enjoyed all of my time immensely.

It's disappointing because it's still ultimately a regression from 3/New Vegas and even Skyrim.
I've series only enjoyed one quest in the whole game
The Silver Shroud one
and the rest of the quest have just felt so samey. Go here, kill everything. I swear to god doing anything for the minutemen is volunteering to beat your head against the wall.
 

KorrZ

Member
Jun 7, 2011
6,062
1
0
I've series only enjoyed one quest in the whole game
The Silver Shroud one
and the rest of the quest have just felt so samey. Go here, kill everything. I swear to god doing anything for the minutemen is volunteering to beat your head against the wall.
That was my main problem with the game. The quests are completely non-descript for the most part. The fun of exploring areas and scavenging around is still there but eventually I want some context for the areas I'm exploring and it seems that the game never gives you anything meaningful.
 

Coll1der

Banned
May 11, 2015
219
0
0
That's fine if you think that, but using stealth and smaller arms with no agility is stupid as you wont have the AP to take advantage of stealthier arms, neither would you take advantage of gun-fu without agility. You also can't take advantage of concentrated fire unless you have 10 perception, a perk which enables you to quickly eliminate targets combined with high agility. But those choices would mean you couldn't have high strength therefore you can't get too deep into armour customisation and carry much until late game. It would also likely mean that you would have a low charisma and luck, meaning you can't utilise those perk trees. If that's not different builds I don't know what to tell you
But aren't you able to raise any SPECIAL stat at any given time? That alone nullifies your whole point.
 

Thatonemoor

Member
Apr 10, 2013
3,349
7
415
That was my main problem with the game. The quests are completely non-descript for the most part. The fun of exploring areas and scavenging around is still there but eventually I want some context for the areas I'm exploring and it seems that the game never gives you anything meaningful.
This along with fact that my actions don't seem to matter in the game made me quiet it. Every faction I enjoyed could hate each other but they don't care as long as you do their story. I lost the will to keep playing after I enjoyed
The Institute
after I was a card caring member of the Railroad and they hate each other.
 

mxgt

Banned
Jan 28, 2011
9,440
0
0
England
Fallout 4 is a terrible RPG and a terrible Fallout game.

I played New Vegas again afterwards and it really does put 4 to shame. Then I started The Witcher 3 and the difference in quality is enormous.

Regardless, it was pretty fun - but I have to wonder what the fuck Bethesda have been doing for the last few years.
 

erragal

Member
Jul 2, 2009
1,838
0
0
It was only a disappointment if you didn't realize what the game was from the trailer. I got shouted down and told I'm 'no fun at parties ' when I vehemently blasted the FO4 trailer for narrative inconsistencies and being completely off fallout aesthetic. Just look at the 'hype' in that old thread...Bethesda didn't hide this game many consumers just had blinders on for the message they sent out.

Stranger that FO4 is an amazing wasteland exploration sandbox and could have shined not being attached to the conflicting Fallout constraints. Even more powerful could have been ditching a structured narrative at all; especially with how few people even complete games what is even the point? Missed opportunities.

Whoever did Conclave and the S.A.V.E. test knows what Fallout is however. It was the only part of the game I truly felt hit a bullseye on tone and aesthetic.
 

Doc_Drop

Member
May 7, 2014
2,942
0
0
Nottingham,UK
But aren't you able to raise any SPECIAL stat at any given time? That alone nullifies your whole point.
Only at the expense of picking a perk, so sure if you're happy to not take perks for several levels you can change your special levels. But then you wont access perks for even longer essentially meaning you're going to have to grind out for longer or miss out on the higher levels of each perk for longer. Unless you cheat you can't be the master of everything until god knows what level
 

Mr. Nice_Guy

Member
Jun 25, 2014
4,235
0
0
Yeah I'll agree with you OP. I put maybe 10+ hours into it and felt bored to death, and I adored Fallout 3. I wasn't even comparing it to The Witcher III or anything else current, it just felt bland and boring compared to 3 and New Vegas. I doubt I'll ever go back to it.
 

Interfectum

Member
Nov 14, 2008
20,817
14
845
going from Witcher 3 to F4 is disappointing
For sure. The first thing I noticed in F4 was how bad and awkward the dialogue was. Even the intro seemed poorly paced and badly acted. I think I could have gotten over this had the game not been such a piss poor RPG and the final blow was lack of many moral choices throughout the game and the laughably atrocious dialogue system. Easily my biggest disappointment from 2015.
 

AHindD

Member
Jul 29, 2012
394
3
0
Brisbane, Australia
Totally agree with the OP here, but this is obviously down to personal preference. A few of my mates are absolutely OBSESSED by the game. Makes no sense to me.

I'm also interested to hear what the OP thinks of Xenoblade Chronicles X considering my views align with his. Don't leave us hanging!
 

General Lee

Member
May 4, 2014
1,157
46
290
I've had a lot more fun with the game than I thought I would, so to me FO4 has been less of a disappointment. I still see the faults in it and it really plays best as an open world sand box to explore. Everything else you might expect from this gen AAA title it falls short, and at times it's jankier than Skyrim that was full of jank. I don't think Bethesda or rather Todd Howard cares much about making their games all that polished or realistic, but rather just make the gameplay fun, sometimes at the cost of any kind of coherent logic.
 

Steejee

Member
Mar 12, 2015
2,236
0
0
FO4 was a fun, goofy post-apocalyptic shooter with some RPG aspects included, but it was a pretty lousy follow up to New Vegas.

I took it for what it was and enjoyed it, but in the end the whole thing felt more like a FO3.5 or a supplementary game ala Tactics than a full sequel. I'd love to see a FO4: New Providence or something along those lines ('cause no one would nuke Providence, so it'd survive) by Obsidian, as the engine is much better in a lot of ways even if it still has more than its share of issues, but that's clearly a pipe dream.

I actually started playing FO3 again after beating 4, as I had never done the expansions, and was a little stunned to see some identical (or nearly identical) assets littering the landscape. Like so nearly identical I wasn't sure if they had done anything with them at all, even texture wise.
 

Spaghetti

Member
Nov 4, 2013
8,905
0
0
fallout 4 has some awful, awful writing in a multi-million dollar rpg with supposedly hollywoodian production values. the combat sucks still. the base building is bad. the world is kinda forgettable. it doesn't look great either, so what i'm left asking is, what is there really to praise about fallout 4? what does it do really, really well? that's my problem, it just does everything in a halfassed way. it feels like millions and millions of dollars went down the drain because i don't see any of that time, effort, or money on the screen.
 

Bluenoser

Member
Nov 12, 2014
2,419
0
0
I was motivated enough to platinum FO4 (mostly because it was a pretty easy plat) but I agree with the OP. The story in particular took a disastrous turn once you had to pick a faction, and it went downhill from there. The animations and graphics were pretty bad for a modern game, and the frame rate was a nightmare. Settlements were a chore, and I wanted to stab Preston Garvey in the eye with a bobby pin after the 15th time he had me saving sanctuary from ghouls.... SANCTUARY!! The home base I had gun turrets lined up by every house. Any ghoul would be destroyed in seconds if they come near it.

Bethesda needs to completely scrap everything about both ES and FO and build them from the ground up. It's simply laziness at this point, and they obviously can't optimize their ancient engines to work optimally with modern hardware.
 

Coll1der

Banned
May 11, 2015
219
0
0
Unless you cheat you can't be the master of everything until god knows what level
But it's not required really, the game is very generous on experience and there is no need to max out everything. You can just be a strong, smart and agile guy with top skills developed even before lvl 50. Most of the perks that you have to spend a lot of points in are just percentage damage growth, or percentage damage reduction or some RNG influence. I tried to make a stealthy assassin, switching to shotgunning power armor wielding crit midway, only because I didn't see where else should I invest my points.
 

Sotha_Sil

Member
Sep 2, 2013
3,362
0
0
I had a ton of fun with the game, but yeah, there were a lot of things that could have been greatly improved. Quest design for side quests was quite disappointing. Narrative design for main quests was laughable. This game really could have been something special, it had a lot going for it.

I thought the gunplay felt good and enjoyed the art direction. There were some cool set pieces and plenty of individually strong moments when all of the open world aspects came together just right.

Bethesda needs to ditch the Mass Effect style conversations that pan from character to character. The animations make it look horrible.
 

Doc_Drop

Member
May 7, 2014
2,942
0
0
Nottingham,UK
But it's not required really, the game is very generous on experience and there is no need to max out everything. You can just be a strong, smart and agile guy with top skills developed even before lvl 50. Most of the perks that you have to spend a lot of points in are just percentage damage growth, or percentage damage reduction or some RNG influence. I tried to make a stealthy assassin, switching to shotgunning power armor wielding crit midway, only because I didn't see where else should I invest my points.
I think we've got to the point of arguing minutia, certainly the 'builds' aspect has been lessened due to removing putting stats into individual skills a la FO3 and FNV. But at level 50 in those last two games you're essentially a god anyway, but for the first 0-10 hours you can't have it all and do have to adhere to at least a 'build-lite' method. I would say it then continues on for longer, but it depends how strictly you are staying to a particular archetype or whether you are just building towards a game beating/utilising build
 

Felix Lighter

Member
Oct 2, 2007
20,750
1
0
The most substantial addition to their formula that this game brings, the new voiced player character and new dialog system, hurt the game for me. I was prepared for the typical Bethesda style, bugs, terrible animations and all but I wasn't prepared for my character to be so stupidly limited in personality due to VA delivery and lack of options. It also made it even harder to look past the absurdity of the character's immediate coming to terms with and thriving in the wasteland. With the old system at least my imagination could fill in some gaps, the limited options and voiced character meant the most I could influence my character's personality was whether I wanted him to have a terrible snarky sense of humor or not.
 

mephixto

Member
Aug 28, 2009
2,161
0
645
I just wanted to play more Fallout 3, and 4 delivered on that aspect. Better graphics new quest, new characters, different setting, new mechanics, etc.

I have like 150 hours with the game and yet to complete the main quest, lvl 50 on survival. It's a flawed game no doubt and probably too safe, but like I said at the start, I just wanted more Fallout.
 

Bluenoser

Member
Nov 12, 2014
2,419
0
0
Oh, reading some other posts reminded me, I do want to praise the game for one thing (and I think OP called this out too) and that is the astonishing reduction in glitches and bugs from previous games. Sure they still exist, but I'd be hard pressed to think of more than a few that occurred through almost 100 hours of gameplay. So well done on that front I guess?
 

silvermember

Banned
Feb 16, 2014
2,505
0
0
OP negated their entire argument with accusations of moneyhattings.

Now the massive rant just looks like the ramblings of a lunatic.
What you said would have been true except you ignore.

The fact that some of the reviewers were given money to make fallout 4 content then those reviewers got mad at jef for trashing fallout.

It also ignored how noone mentioned the giant bug in the ps3 version of skyrim.

It Also ignores how any reviewer after playing w3 could even consider fallout 4 an average game. The animations the story/plot and graphics are both objectively worse than the witchers. I am ignoring combat because it comes down to people taste.
 

Woo-Fu

incest on the subway
Jan 2, 2007
13,620
620
1,130
Really disliked the bit near the end where regardless of what faction you pick
They make you go out and kill everybody else, regardless of what type of relationship you had with those people throughout the game.
 

Comet

Member
Jan 17, 2012
1,474
0
0
Dallas
www.QuetzalEntertainment.com
I'm just now going through Fallout 4 (The Witcher 3 is next on my queue actually). I have found the game to be great for all the same reasons I enjoyed New Vegas and FO3. But OP, I'd have to agree with you. The story is basic, a bit lazy really. The game does nothing but add a settlement building mini-game in terms of innovation from a whole generation ago. In other words, this is a game that should have existed just fine last generation but instead it's being put into our current generation with the likes of The Witcher 3 and suddenly the lack of innovation is stark! I hope Bethesda hears the criticisms for FO4. It's still a very enjoyable game with a ton of hilarious and rewarding quests but it's just not anything special. If anything, I'm starting to get real bad "Ubisoft formula" vibe out of Bethesda ever since they made Oblivion (Morrowind felt like a completely different experience that last gen's Bethesda rpgs). They need to shake it up badly.


Hell with all that said I am still eager to leave work today so I can play more so I guess at the end of the day if people are still enjoying the game and buying it there is little incentive for true change.
 
Sep 2, 2007
17,992
1
0
I was here thinking...
Whats going on at Bethesda, is just Todd Howard having a massive ego to not see all the flaws his games have becuase it won so many GOTY's with his other 3 games? Or maybe he want to defend his team to death and doesnt see the flaws of them to actually fix and expand his team?
Or maybe he just doesnt give a fuck and knows simplifying everything will make it sell more?

Because with the man power and money Bethesda has, he could actually fix the majority of this mistakes from one game to the other. Like getting better writters for starters, from the mod community (Interesting NPCs in Skyrim just makes Bethesda's work much more embarrasing) or other people in the industry.

Is he going to change after the change of standards CDPR brought to open world rpg's for their next game, or will he still make this no RPG games anymore? Yes, maybe TW3 is maybe different from their kind of Bethesda RPGs, but Cyberpunk is coming, and the liberty of choice creating your own character is going to be more similar to those open world RPGs. And wouldnt be surprised if Bethesda's next game releases on the same year as Cyberpunk.
 

K' Dash

Member
Sep 7, 2006
9,165
3
1,040
My God, what happened to all those people banned in the first page?!

I completely agree with OP.
 

jred250

Member
Aug 26, 2008
2,657
0
775
.

All the complaints that Fallout 4 receives are the same negatives I would've applied to Fallout 3. I don't understand why people were rudely surprised by a shallow RPG with muddy graphics.
As stripped down as people say Fallout 3's RPG mechanics were, they were miles above the RPG mechanics of 4. People keep trying to paint this retroactive picture that Fallout 3 was some FPS with leveling mechanics and try to paint the game in the same light as 4. The FPS gameplay was so tacked on in 3 that the only reasonable way to play the game was in VATS.

You had a wild amount of choices that impacted the world and individual quests and differently spec'ed characters would have very different outcomes available to them. New Vegas took this to the next level, but even Bethesda still did a good job with those elements with Skyrim. Is it so crazy that people were expecting a game with at least the RPG depth of Skyrim?
 

Coll1der

Banned
May 11, 2015
219
0
0
for the first 0-10 hours you can't have it all and do have to adhere to at least a 'build-lite' method.
Yeah, I would also go on to say that the first 0-10 hours are the best gameplay-wise. Not much of the plot is revealed, factions are still sane, you have still not felt the pain of hoarding etc, etc.
 

Doc_Drop

Member
May 7, 2014
2,942
0
0
Nottingham,UK
Really disliked the bit near the end where regardless of what faction you pick
They make you go out and kill everybody else, regardless of what type of relationship you had with those people throughout the game.
I mean I will be slightly off topic but that's not necessarily true. For example I just finished whilst
only having to kill the worst of the institute (saved a load of synths even) and no-one is hostile.
It's a tad convoluted and difficult organisationally to achieve, but still possible

Yeah, I would also go on to say that the first 0-10 hours are the best gameplay-wise. Not much of the plot is revealed, factions are still sane, you have still not felt the pain of hoarding etc, etc.
Apart from not finding a great deal of the main locations, getting a great deal of the gear with upgrades, and meeting a great deal of the better characters and scenarios
 

Dangansona

Member
Feb 10, 2015
6,554
0
0
As stripped down as people say Fallout 3's RPG mechanics were, they were miles above the RPG mechanics of 4. People keep trying to paint this retroactive picture that Fallout 3 was some FPS with leveling mechanics and try to paint the game in the same light as 4. The FPS gameplay was so tacked on in 3 that the only reasonable way to play the game was in VATS.

You had a wild amount of choices that impacted the world and individual quests and differently spec'ed characters would have very different outcomes available to them. New Vegas took this to the next level, but even Bethesda still did a good job with those elements with Skyrim. Is it so crazy that people were expecting a game with at least the RPG depth of Skyrim?
This is where my disappointment comes from.

But honestly I'm being sick of reminded of my disappointment. Do we really need so many threads for the same thing on here? I'm a newer member so I don't know how the feelings on this are.
 
N

Noray

Unconfirmed Member
I agree Fallout 4 is disappointing.

It's still not a bad game though. It's good, I had a fun 70 hours with it and enjoyed all of my time immensely.

It's disappointing because it's still ultimately a regression from 3/New Vegas and even Skyrim.
This is pretty much my experience. I had a great time with that game for a week, and as soon as I finished the story I dropped it completely. That part was hugely disappointing. But it doesn't take away the fun times I had.
 

PrivateRyan

Member
Feb 19, 2007
1,165
0
0
The beach
Only about 25 hours in but it hasn't really hooked me like FO3/NV did. There's just a weird… blandness to it. I think it's mostly the neutered character interactions but also there aren't any environments that pulled me in like FO3's Megaton/Tenpenny Towers or NV's Vegas strip.

Dunno. I'm enjoying it but I'm not really all that engaged with it. It's odd.
 

anddo0

Member
Jan 13, 2007
9,884
0
0
Brooklyn, NY
My only regret is not waiting for a major price drop. i purchased the game knowing that it was essentially Fallout 3.5. I had my fun with it, got 100%.

Fallout 4 felt like a game on training wheels. It played and looked like a launch title. I expected more from an established studio this far into the current gen.
 

kamineko

Does his best thinking in the flying car
Oct 7, 2014
5,245
1
435
This is where my disappointment comes from.

But honestly I'm being sick of reminded of my disappointment. Do we really need so many threads for the same thing on here? I'm a newer member so I don't know how the feelings on this are.
Well, some fans (maybe you, too), waited years for Fallout 4. It's not like someone else is going to make a "good" Fallout game to make up for this one. People will let it go eventually but grieving is a process.

While I'm not a mod, I would assume that now that the OT is in Community that a poster can express his/her disappointment in a new thread as long as there aren't already a bunch of other threads active.
 

Kosma

Banned
Feb 22, 2007
10,842
0
0
I put in 10 hours and quit, it never grabbed me as F1 or F3. The most fun was building the settlement but that didnt really work it seemed and I spent loads of times on a wiki. The story and dialogue were a huge letdown too.

I also quit Skyrim (and Oblivion) after 15/20 hours because it bored me

Think bethesda just isnt for me.
 

Varjis

Member
Mar 16, 2006
365
0
0
Was incredibly excited for Fallout 4, and just everything about it was meh. Graphics, Gameplay, Story..

.. I actually re-upped my WoW subscription and stop playing my console because of it.. It literally drove me right back to Warcraft.
 

Primethius

Banned
Jan 20, 2008
17,874
0
0
U.S.
twitter.com
Fallout 4 was my biggest disappointment of 2015.

Once the initial loot and upgrade cycle wore off, I absolutely despised turning on the game and trying to finish it (and I didn't, it's just far too boring). It didn't help that the writing and quest design was awful, thus the game gave me absolutely no reason to continue along many of the quests and side-quests.

The settlement building is largely useless and I often ran into far too many issues to make the actual creation process worthwhile when the game provided no meaningful rewards to do so.

Oh, and fuck the quests where you have to follow brain-dead NPC's who get caught in every little thing and who stop moving if you venture too far ahead of them. I'm not sure why anyone thought that was a remotely good idea.
 
Jul 6, 2015
187
0
0
I've already said my piece but I dont understand some of the criticism in this thread tbh.

AI for one,its way ahead of FO3 and NV and I reckon most people couldnt even articulate on how to make AI better other than fixing the occasional glitches where the npcs dont go into cover or something.I havent seen an improvement in the AI of FPS enemies since F.E.A.R,most AAA FPS games have you play whack-a-mole with the npcs that periodically pop their heads out of cover,toss in a couple of scripted moments and thats it for single player FPS gameplay.How do you even go about balancing it? It's entirely possible to make the npcs hit you 100% of the time,wouldn't make the game fun.If they start throwing grenades to make you run from cover to cover,you get "oh but i hate grenade spam" criticism,if they rush and flank you with their numbers,its "I cant deal with all of em at the same time,come on and its not even realistic you're alone killing hundreds of them",if they rush you with body armor,people start crying about "bulletsponge" enemies.

If people have trouble beating a game,the "AI is unfair shit",if they mow down enemies you either dont hear about it at all or "AI is too dumb" is the go to answer. So no I dont think people actually know what they want themselves,especially after hearing that they were calling TLOU's AI shit which is lightyears ahead of any TPS in recent years (inb4 "but-but the allies are not seen by enemies while stealthing").Hard mode without listening mechanic was easily the best way to play that game and the npcs shined there.

Someone mentioned the "manpower" argument which again is simply not true,Fallout 4 was made by 100 people as opposed to Witcher 3 which had 300+ at its peak.100 is not much at all for an open world game with this scope.Both of these are eclipsed by AC for example or GTA 5 which had much more than 1000 people working on it.

(Edit: Maybe Halo has better AI,I dont have an xbone,the last one I played was Reach at a friend's house and I remember the franchise had good AI as well.)
 

papo

Member
Jul 28, 2015
1,093
0
0
It really sucked to go from enjoying the game in the first 10-20 hours to being bored for the remainder just because th game was to samey.
 

Vitor711

Member
Nov 20, 2010
2,959
0
0
Someone mentioned the "manpower" argument which again is simply not true,Fallout 4 was made by 100 people as opposed to Witcher 3 which had 300+ at its peak.100 is not much at all for an open world game with this scope.Both of these are eclipsed by AC for example or GTA 5 which had much more than 1000 people working on it.
I HATE this argument. This game sold 12 million. Skyrim is one of the best selling games of all time. And they STILL keep their team size lower than average. It's a money saving measure and that's it. It's not an excuse. They're clearly not investing sufficiently in the tech.

I don't accept that it's a culture thing at Bethesda either. When people claim that these games are just too complex and that throwing more people at it during dev time won't help iron out all the issues, I don't believe it. Would we have a perfect game? No. But I can guarantee that increasing the team size would certainly help.

Also, lol at the number of bans on the first page. OP writes a thoughtful, considered opinion on Fallout 4 and people reply with 'but I liked it'.
 
Jul 6, 2015
187
0
0
I HATE this argument. This game sold 12 million. Skyrim is one of the best selling games of all time. And they STILL keep their team size lower than average. It's a money saving measure and that's it. It's not an excuse. They're clearly not investing sufficiently in the tech.

I don't accept that it's a culture thing at Bethesda either. When people claim that these games are just too complex and that throwing more people at it during dev time won't help iron out all the issues, I don't believe it. Would we have a perfect game? No. But I can guarantee that increasing the team size would certainly help.
That's entirely valid but people still act like these games were made by big ass international teams and judge it accordingly.I wish they'd increase the size of the dev team as well for their next game however I don't know how fair it is to ask developers in general to change the entire way they work if they're content with their work environment.If they wanna evolve,they definately should hire more people but from their pov,they're doing perfectly fine with this many and the NPD numbers back them up for now.
 

jahasaja

Member
Mar 31, 2015
396
0
0
I already made clear my opinion of this game and especially the story in the spoiler thread.

It is "grass is always greener on the other side" the game. Except that it is almost never greener it is just bland hell they even managed to make the vaults bland. But you keep on searching until you realize that there is nothing interesting to find.

They did the same mistake as they did with skyrim and went quantity over quality.
 
May 31, 2010
3,621
14
590
32
Durham, England
www.infinitedaremo.co.uk
Its insulting this reviewed higher than New Vegas. People like to drop the "But New Vegas at launch was a buggy mess"... so is this game or "Bethesda builds better worlds"... there is nothing memorable about Fallout 4's world. The base building features aren't even fully implemented, happiness doesn't work at all, certain shops you build are bugged, you can't loot food items some times, there are probably more but I gave up on it. Its like the designer looked at what shit was in the top sellers on Steam... "Woah survival craft seems to be popular amongst the kids nowadays but they sure as fuck hate reading, lets shoe horn this shit into the game so neck beards on Reddit can post dickbutt bases"

Here is what I hate about this game:
  • Balancing - This game is so imbalanced. For the first few levels the game holds well. You feel like anything could kill you, legendaries are scary, Blood Bugs are scary. Everything feels deadly if you don't plan ahead. Then you get a few perks and the balancing goes out of the window. I'm stomping everything now on Survival difficulty, from level 10 onwards the game difficulty became a joke.
    Weapon balancing. Pistols are absolutely useless, Minigun damage is pathetic, the unarmed variety is a joke and its most powerful variant can't hold a candle to the super sledge. Sure the paralyze perk is useful but im one shotting most enemies with the super sledge now so whats the point?
    Legendaries. How could they allow the fires two shots perk to be on weapons? I've had two drop on two separate characters. The first was a musket which could sneak attack crit a Deathclaw at level 4. My current character a regular Sledge dropped with double shot putting the damage around 300. The other thing with legendaries, why does everything else in the game scale like weapon drops and armour drops but legendaries can still be Leather with a crappy resist damage from bugs buff.
  • Weapons - As mentioned above the variety is poor and the mods don't really make up for it. Some weapons are completely useless Pipe weapons, Minigun, 10mm pistol. At least the ammo is worth money. Its strange that 2 rifle blasts can kill a Super Mutant but it takes me 500 rounds with a Minigun to put one down...
  • Speech - This is a joke. As someone who was done high INT/CHA runs through every Fallout just for the dialogue options the streak is over. NPC's and the MC are lifeless. The dialogue system is horrible and no matter what you say it always seems to lead to the same solution. Everyone greets you as a friend without any reluctance and the also instantly know your name, likewise for the MC's voice acting.
  • NPC's - Forgettable in every way. I can't say theres a single NPC's i've liked besides Dogmeat and he doesn't even do anything besides block me in doorways. Im sure the AI never used to be this bad. I don't recall Boone ever getting me stuck in places.
  • Factions & Story -
    Boring, boring, boring. Son was stolen, go into the world and save him, plot twist he's older than you, make big decision at end with no impact at all... Im sure this was written by a 10 year old. And every faction wants the other dead for no reason at all.

    "But now, I know. I know I can't go back. I know the world has changed. The road ahead will be hard. This time, I'm ready. Because I know, war...war never changes." - I haven't cringed so hard at an ending... if it can be called that in a long time.
With all that being said I can't stop playing it. Its a good game but a terrible Fallout game. The two things I really though were dramatic improvements however were gunplay and Power Armour. Being able to pick up any weapon and use it effectively was a nice feature but it dwindled once you'd settled into your perks. Power armour I felt was a big improvement. Its felt like you were an actual juggernaut over some typical damage reduction. It was also however too imbalanced, fusion cores were supposed to be minimal and not last long (Fuck lore right) but if you had the ammo perk they dropped constantly. I think i have 48 on my current character.

I doubt i will ever be hyped for a Bethesda game again. Like everyone says, they aren't about RPG's anymore, just god simulators and most likely soon base building god simulators.
 

Kunan

Member
May 21, 2007
3,955
0
0
32
Montreal, QC, Canada
Played it for a few days and haven't touched it since.
Same. The dialog system killed it for me, and things felt too samey for their own good. I did enjoy a few hours of building up sanctuary though! The quests seemed to just revolve around shoot up a building or area for the part of the game I got through (up through meeting valentine).
 
Oct 23, 2013
15,330
2
0
I've enjoyed it but I definitely agree with a few of your points. All three endings are underwhelming. I was expecting some kind of variety between the three but they're basically all the same. I still think the game world's fun to explore and there's been some enjoyable quests along the way.

It's nowhere near as good as the Witcher though.