Support NeoGAF

[Katana_Strikes]

Sounds like everything I expected it to be; slow, dull and boring. But that's how I always find these games anyways. Looks like people who lapped the others up will find no difference here despite those problems. Graphically is feels old too and by the sounds the gameplay hasn't got any better either. But people love them so what can you do.

And Bethesda sending out PS4 copies for review...?

 

[squadr0n]

The things in Fallout that are the most interesting to me are all the little side stuff you find just wandering the wasteland. Some of the best "story telling" from Fallout 3 came from places I was randomly finding like the amazing vaults that had nothing to do with the main quest. People complaining about the main quest line and saying they're not buying it because the ending is stupid is missing out on 90% of the actual reason these games are great.

Once the reviewer mentioned Dragon Age Inquisition I stopped reading. These games are nothing alike.

 

[Auctopus]

Sounds like Fallout 3.

I was coming round to this game last week but after remembering how stale Skyrim eventually became and watching gameplay footage, this really doesn't look like it's going to be that enjoyable for me. I think The Witcher 3 might have spoiled me in terms of open-world RPGs, especially after reading in this review that the side-quests might be a repeat of the last instalment.

Whether this game reviews badly or not, we've already seen here that fanboys (some of which are legit journalists) will ignore the game's assumed shortcomings and it will be awarded countless GOTYs.

 

[Lunarwhale]

""Fallout 4" is a very, very slow game. And I'm not exaggerating this point for effect: The first five to 10 hours after you leave Vault 111 is mostly spent trying not to die at the hands of a random mole rat and on farming side quests to gain enough strength to push through main ones."

Really hoping this is less a sign of him being bad and more a sign that Bethesda finally decided to put in a difficulty curve again rather than making you a god from the get-go. I didn't get much of a sense of character growth from Skyrim (or, on a recent replay, Fallout 3). If there's one thing I loved about New Vegas in comparison to 3, it's that it required some actual thought when it comes to combat, and that it wasn't afraid to gate off parts of the world behind skill/stat requirements (i.e. how you have a few routes to Vegas available, but only one's viable because the others are full of enemies that would rip you apart that early only).

 

[Ridley327]

Sounds like everything I expected it to be; slow, dull and boring. But that's how I always find these games anyways. Looks like people who lapped the others up will find no difference here despite those problems.

And Bethesda sending out PS4 copies for review...?

Not that surprising, since CDPR sent out PS4 copies of The Witcher 3 for review, despite MS's co-marketing on that game. I actually get the feeling that MS's deals aren't nearly as all-encompassing as Sony's are.

 

[Solid Samus]

Which is probably why the game feels like it was created in 2008. Assets don't lie and the empty world seems like a waste. I'd much rather have them create a smaller world full of interactivity than a big ass world that feels sterile.

The impressions and leaks up to this point have largely given the impression of a big ass world filled fairly densely with unique locations and characters so I'm not sure where you're coming from there.

 

[Auto_aim1]

Now I don't know what to do... buying, not buying? I never played any fallout game...

Jeez, wait for more reviews. A Fallout game usually has a lot of undesirable stuff associated with it. Once it grabs you though, you will not play any other game for weeks.

 

[three_muffins]

Now I don't know what to do... buying, not buying? I never played any fallout game...

Maybe start with fallout 3 or new vegas if that is a possibility for you? They are very cheap and you can get a taste of what makes fallout great and decide for yourself.

 

[Sorc3r3r]

So a classic Bethesda rpg.

I'm shocked.

 

[Fleet_of_Foot]

All the people discounting this review because it's not what they wanted to hear would be really excited about it if it was.

 

[Linkyn]

sounds like he never played a fallout game before... and just isn't into fallout in general. pretty much a non-review

It's a fair point to make. The review states that fans of the series will probably like Fallout IV, but not everyone is familiar with these games, and for those who aren't, this kind of perspective might actually be more valuable than a review written by an expert. In fact, because potential buyers are so hugely diverse, having more diversity in review approach is really important.

 

[Lulubop]

You'd think people would wait for more reviews, from more relevant outlets, to see if a consensus has formed, before acting as though all of their worst fears have been confirmed.
oh wait no you wouldn't lol

You be doing some heavy pr the last few days man, hope Bethesda is compensating you.

 

[Venom Fox]

Sounds like everything I expected it to be; slow, dull and boring. But that's how I always find these games anyways. Looks like people who lapped the others up will find no difference here despite those problems.

And Bethesda sending out PS4 copies for review...?

They're not problems to us "others" though. Just because you think it's slow, dull and boring doesn't mean that it has problems.

Edit: Ah I see you've stealth edited your post. Tell us more about how the gameplay hasn't been updated?

Edit: No, actually don't, it's clear your just shitting on it and it's fans.

 

[Solid Samus]

All the people discounting this review because it's not what they wanted to hear would be really excited about it if it was.

Most of the people who are practically excited because this particular review aligns with their expectations wouldn't even be posting in this thread if it didn't.

You be doing some heavy pr the last few days man, hope Bethesda is compensating you.

fuck it I have been going over the top so I'm just gonna stay out of fallout threads til I've played the game and have something to talk about

 

[Quonny]

Confirmation bias alive and well in this thread.

 

[mgs2master2]

You be doing some heavy pr the last few days man, hope Bethesda is compensating you.

Probably works for Bethesda

 

[120v]

I don't think that makes it a non-review. In fact, it makes it a particularly interesting review for the many people who will be entering the franchise and wondering what first impressions will be like.

yeah i mean it's fine as a blurb from a non-gaming publication... i just think most people clicked on the link expecting a more thorough a run-down over the game. review has nothing none of us here already know

 

[Fracas]

pls be good

 

[Gator86]

For us Fallout fans, there is nothing this guy or any other critic is going to say to make us not enjoy the experience. If you allow the opinions of others to affect your experience/enjoyment of a game, I don't think this hobby is for you.

The point of a review isn't to try and hurt the feelings of franchise fans. The author gave his opinion on the game. I don't agree with his praise of Dragon Age but I haven't played FO4 so I cant judge the meat of the content. The defense force is gonna be apoplectic when the bulk of reviews come out with minor to major critiques of the game though. People need to remember what Evilore and various mods said in the other topic-the point of Gaf isn't to nurture your hype or baby your emotions, it's to critique and discuss games.

 

[PositronicMan]

I realize a lot of Bioware vs. Bethesda comparisons are being made, but you also have to remember that Bethesda really excels at contextual storytelling, especially when it comes to the Fallout series.

Go back and play through Fallout 3 and see how much is being said at every location without dialogue, and just with objects being placed in the environments. This has always been the real meat of these games: exploration + contextual storytelling.

 

[Coffee Dog]

Now I don't know what to do... buying, not buying? I never played any fallout game...

Are you more interested in it being more shooterlike or an RPG? If you don't mind RPG elements you should try New Vegas considering how cheap you can get it.

 

[Wagram]

Saying that you're bored after 10 hours and that the pacing isn't fun is an alarming sign. Remember folks - don't preorder and look at footage.

 

[Stealth_Cobra]

The hype is so big, reviews like these are bound to happen.

I think it's important to manage expectations.

Graphically, what we've seen so far is okay, but not breathtaking. I'm not too find of the highly colorful palette and character design i've seen so far, and I'm expecting the gameplay to be nearly identical to FO3 and New Vegas, with a few tweaks here and there to give it a new vibe. I'm expecting it's share of bugs too, since open world Bethesda would not be complete without them.

As for the story/setting, I like the premise and the flashback, but I have a feeling it'll be the best part of the game from a lore perspective... Bethesda games aren't always that good in terms of main storyline, and I'm hoping side quests will be more like FO3 than Skyrim. I dunno why, but to me FO3 managed to make me care about NPCs and what I had to accomplish, whereas the usual Bethsda quest often feel like filler grind questing.

Hopefully the reviewer is wrong in his assertion that quests are booring and the game lacks a sense of direction, because one of the thing I loved about Fallout versus TES was precisely that personality. It felt like an open world where locations were memorable, characters were interesting and such... Whereas in Skyrim, it feels like the scope of the game means repeat NPCs with nothing interesting to say and such.

Then again, the guy in the review apparently played a short amount of time, perhaps as low as 20 hours... Meaning he probably just scratched the surface.

In the end though, I'm mostly waiting for the mods anyway... Vanilla Bethesda games are always a little rought around the edges until "fixed" with hundred of mods.

I personally expect a somewhat meh looking game filled with glitches and that reuses most of the stuff from F03, but that grows with time and mods into one of the best post-apocalyptic games there is.

 

[Karspankey]

Not a good review at all unfortunately. Barely any talk about the actual game and the mechanics.

 

[RichiRamjag]

Seems like Bethesda carried over their template from Fallout 3 without making the world feel anymore alive.

Exactly, I prefer the characters and world of new Vegas over 3. Guess we're getting more of the same style from 3.

 

[samn]

To be honest it sounds like a typical Bethesda game. Not especially well made, not particularly well put together, but enough 'stuff' in there that quite a few people will be happy to play it anyway.

 

[jesu]

The last line is promising for me, no spoilers

If you’re a "Fallout" fanatic, "Fallout 4" will be more of what you love -- I'm just not seeing what's really in it for newcomers.

 

[Markoman]

""Fallout 4" is a very, very slow game. And I'm not exaggerating this point for effect: The first five to 10 hours after you leave Vault 111 is mostly spent trying not to die at the hands of a random mole rat and on farming side quests to gain enough strength to push through main ones."

Really hoping this is less a sign of him being bad and more a sign that Bethesda finally decided to put in a difficulty curve again rather than making you a god from the get-go. I didn't get much of a sense of character growth from Skyrim (or, on a recent replay, Fallout 3). If there's one thing I loved about New Vegas in comparison to 3, it's that it required some actual thought when it comes to combat, and that it wasn't afraid to gate off parts of the world behind skill/stat requirements (i.e. how you have a few routes to Vegas available, but only one's viable because the others are full of enemies that would rip you apart that early only).

No, you are exaggerating. Sorry. What have ou been doing in those 5-10 hours? I was surprised that every feature from the E3 presentation is covered within the first 5 hours

Spoiler

Spoiler

crafting and building

. And my first main quest

Spoiler

after leaving the vault has put me in a power suit against numerous Raiders and one legendary creature

BTW I was not rushing it.

 

[ClosingADoor]

""Fallout 4" is a very, very slow game. And I'm not exaggerating this point for effect: The first five to 10 hours after you leave Vault 111 is mostly spent trying not to die at the hands of a random mole rat and on farming side quests to gain enough strength to push through main ones."

Really hoping this is less a sign of him being bad and more a sign that Bethesda finally decided to put in a difficulty curve again rather than making you a god from the get-go. I didn't get much of a sense of character growth from Skyrim (or, on a recent replay, Fallout 3). If there's one thing I loved about New Vegas in comparison to 3, it's that it required some actual thought when it comes to combat, and that it wasn't afraid to gate off parts of the world behind skill/stat requirements (i.e. how you have a few routes to Vegas available, but only one's viable because the others are full of enemies that would rip you apart that early only).

Sounds like Morrowind. Just walking out there at the start, you'll be dead pretty soon also. Got to level your character first. I don't have a problem with that and see it as a positive thing instead of a negative for these games.

 

[PositronicMan]

Interesting to get a bit of an outsider's perspective, and find the usual complaints about Bethesda's formula show up still.

A specific type of person finds this formula amazing either way, and there are millions of them. But I guess it's nice to see that it isn't just die hard Fallout/cRPG nerds who are unnerved by the sheer emptiness of their style of writing and pace of gameplay.

Technically we were all outsiders before Fallout 3, and that got GOTY by a wide margin. The pacing he describes in the review sounds exactly like Fallout 3. Nothing is given to you for free in these games, you earn them. I don't see how that's a negative. Until you reach that turning point where you can buy or stockpile enough ammo/ weapons, your first 5-10 hours are always a slog.

 

[Katana_Strikes]

They're not problems to us "others" though. Just because you think it's slow, dull and boring doesn't mean that it has problems.

I should have put "problems" like that cause I know people still love them even though they are like that. But I don't believe not trying to do something about those "problems" is a positive sign. It just seems stale and that shouldn't be an excuse to not try and make it fresher or better. The whole release looks and sounds lazy to me.

Oh I see your edit: I'm being negative about the title so I'm shitting on the game and fans. That must be it...

 

[legacyzero]

Phew, glad I didn't read the opening spoilers and ruin it.

The last line is promising for me, no spoilers

Yep

 

[commish]

To be honest it sounds like a typical Bethesda game. Not especially well made, not particularly well put together, but enough 'stuff' in there that quite a few people will be happy to play it anyway.

Pretty much. His review is probably applicable to nearly every Bethesda game. I happen to love them.

 

[IcyRhythms]

The point of a review isn't to try and hurt the feelings of franchise fans. The author gave his opinion on the game. I don't agree with his praise of Dragon Age but I haven't played FO4 so I cant judge the meat of the content. The defense force is gonna be apoplectic when the bulk of reviews come out with minor to major critiques of the game though. People need to remember what Evilore and various mods said in the other topic-the point of Gaf isn't to nurture your hype or baby your emotions, it's to critique and discuss games.

Oh, I wouldn't say that's ALWAYS the case. There are reviews that exist with an agenda and it's not one that favor the fans. Not saying this review of Fallout is one of those. Just pointing out that the opinions of others shouldn't stop someone from playing/enjoying a game.

People one or two bad reviews from a site that they respect and suddenly it's "pre-order canceled" "damn, guess I'll wait until it's $5 on Steam"

It's like they forget that someone else played that game, and not themselves.

 

[Basketball]

He liked Inquistion


OPINION DISCARDED

'To be fair, I praised the sheer number of activities and quests available in "Dragon Age: Inquisition," a game similar to "Fallout 4." However, "Dragon Age" had a decently captivating plot and, more important, charismatic characters to invest you in their world, make you laugh and pull the story along.'

 

[jesu]

Phew, glad I didn't read the opening spoilers and ruin it.

I scrolled straight to the bottom looking for a score!

 

[Inuhanyou]

That's a Bethesda game, yes.

If you liked Fallout 3 and Skyrim, you should know exactly what to expect

 

[Phrozenflame500]

A single review doesn't necessarily give a good overall view of the game, so I'll avoid making too many assumptions based off of it.

That being said, a lot of his complaints aline with my already existing list of "things I don't like in Bethesda games." So I'm expecting the Fallout 3/NV divide will carry on with 4.

 

[banefirelord]

Sounds like a Fallout game, alright.

 

[ZeroMaverick]

He says FO fans will love it and newcomers may not.

And that's all I needed to know. Loot. Progression. Survival. Discovery. VATS. That's all I need baby

 

[Darkangel]

Sounds like a typical Bethesda game; mediocre writing, mechanics, and characters in a big open world with decent art direction.

How alive are you expecting a nuclear wasteland to feel?

210 years after the war? Pretty developed.

For us Fallout fans, there is nothing this guy or any other critic is going to say to make us not enjoy the experience. If you allow the opinions of others to affect your experience/enjoyment of a game, I don't think this hobby is for you.

I guess it depends on what Fallout games you're a fan of.

 

[-tetsuo-]

It was all fine until...

"To be fair, I praised the sheer number of activities and quests available in "Dragon Age: Inquisition," a game similar to "Fallout 4.""

 

[Deleted member 17706]

So a classic Bethesda rpg.

I'm shocked.

Pretty much by the sound of things.

Anyone who's played an Elder Scrolls or Fallout game of the last 8 years will know what they're getting into.

"To be fair, I praised the sheer number of activities and quests available in "Dragon Age: Inquisition," a game similar to "Fallout 4.""

Sounds like I have wildly different tastes to that guy.

 

[PositronicMan]

He painted the main story, sidequests and NPC interactions as fairly empty and unmemorable. That goes way beyond his comments about early difficulty.

I'm not sure what you mean with "all outsiders before Fallout 3". Bethesda games and Fallout games both existed before that.

Fallout 3 was the first iteration that combined Fallout and Oblivion to that scale. Fallout 4 is obviously iterative.

 

[Lunarwhale]

No, you are exaggerating. Sorry. What have ou been doing in those 5-10 hours? I was surprised that every feature from the E3 presentation is covered within the first 5 hours

Spoiler

Spoiler

crafting and building

. And my first main quest

Spoiler

after leaving the vault has put me in a power suit against numerous Raiders and one legendary creature

BTW I was not rushing it.

Sorry, should have made it more clear but the top line of my post was a quote from the review. The rest was just wishful thinking, I haven't had a chance to play the game yet.

Sounds like Morrowind. Just walking out there at the start, you'll be dead pretty soon also. Got to level your character first. I don't have a problem with that and see it as a positive thing instead of a negative for these games.

Morrowind was what I was thinking as well when I read that. I see it more as positive as well.

 

[Pastry]

I wonder if the Fallout review thread will be as embarrassing as the Uncharted Collection one. The responses so far indicate yes.

 

[GreatNumber]

I'm going into this game expecting Fallout 3 but with better shooting and graphics.

If you're new to the franchise, be warned that the wastelands are not a forgiving place. "Fallout 4" poses a challenge, and it will slap you down any chance it gets. It's purposefully difficult -- there's limited ammunition and most of the guns aren't that powerful at first.

This idea has me somewhat more intrigued than anything just because I found Fallout 3, New Vegas, and Skyrim to be beyond easy when it came to that.

 

[Basileus777]

It sounds like it suffers from the same Bethesda writing and quest design problems that Fallout 3 did.

And the review is not spoilery.

 

[Lulubop]

Fallout fanatic? Uh, a lot of people perfer NV over 3 because it felt more like a traditional Fallout game. This seems to follow more a long the line of 3. So does he mean Fallout 3 fans?

 

[Anung]

I wonder if the Fallout review thread will be as embarrassing as the Uncharted ones. The responses so far indicate yes.

It'll probably be Halo 5 2.0. Should be entertaining at least.