-
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.
No Todds, No Masters: A Fallout 4 review/ critique
- Thread starter SENPAIatLARGE
- Start date
RichiRamjag
Member
Being the courier is a little different than being the soldier with a wife and child. As the courier, I didn't feel like I was all that defined as a character. In 4, you're married and have a kid. Your immediate goal is to find him. I'd even say that as a father irl, it feels a bit silly to be doing other random stuff when your kid is missing.
There are some good points made about design decisions that go against it being a role-playing game. I've only watched one hour of the video, and I'm unsure if I'll watch more, but that's a complaint I understand.
They obviously wanted to make a more engaging narrative, but that's antithetical to the open ended nature of what Fallout aspires to be. They don't let you fill in a lot of the blanks. It can create a jarring ludonarrative dissonance - I don't give a shit about Shaun but my character does, so I spend hours doing everything other than look for my son which betrays the motivations of the character I'm playing as.
This is a weird comparison, but it reminds me of the 'Stories' games that released for Sims 2. I never played them but they were an attempt at having a narrative for a game that's open-ended at its core - I believe you played through several stages of life for a pre-defined character. That's sort of what Fallout 4 felt like. It could probably work, but maybe as a spin-off or story DLC. But mainline Fallout entries should aspire to enabling the player to interact with a world with as little pretense as possible.
They obviously wanted to make a more engaging narrative, but that's antithetical to the open ended nature of what Fallout aspires to be. They don't let you fill in a lot of the blanks. It can create a jarring ludonarrative dissonance - I don't give a shit about Shaun but my character does, so I spend hours doing everything other than look for my son which betrays the motivations of the character I'm playing as.
This is a weird comparison, but it reminds me of the 'Stories' games that released for Sims 2. I never played them but they were an attempt at having a narrative for a game that's open-ended at its core - I believe you played through several stages of life for a pre-defined character. That's sort of what Fallout 4 felt like. It could probably work, but maybe as a spin-off or story DLC. But mainline Fallout entries should aspire to enabling the player to interact with a world with as little pretense as possible.
Phatosaurus
Member
I've got a bone to pick with that.
The Courier 6's background, or personality are not at all dictated by the story.
Only their current occupation, and that they took a job to deliver the platinum chip prior to game starting, and also that at some point in their past they delivered another package to the Divide.
Everything else is up to the player to decide. They can be hetro/a/bi/homosexual, can have past allegiances to the NCR or Legion, or neither.
They aren't shoehorned into being in a heterosexual marriage with child, and being frozen for 210 years.
They don't have a distinct personally due to limited dialogue options and one voice actor.
Even if you, as the player, try to avoid ever mentioning your spouse and child as you play through the game, you'll find yourself locked out of some important quests until you admit that part of your character's past to a NPC.
New Vegas doesn't have that problem, and I do believe that's a real problem for an RPG.
blankempathy
Member
What about it isn't what I expected from a series? If you're a a sequel in a franchise then yes certain things should be expected. People clearly enjoyed the past dialogue systems/deeper rpg mechanics of the past games. And its not just Fallout. Plenty of AAA games have been made to appeal to a wider audience *cough dead rising 4*. But we've also seen a resurgence of companies willing to pick up the slack and create games that appeal to the demographic of gamers who still enjoy those older gameplay mechanics. In the end I feel like fallout 4 and other games following the trend only hurt themselves by doing so. Fallout 4 isn't a bad game but imagine if it were truer to the past games plus keeping the improvements made? It would be a far better game in my opinion.
Thats where the disconnect comes in for me because outside of the opening and occasional moments during the main quest my character barely seems to care about Shaun either. Which makes it impossible for me to care at all.
Hes just an objective for the player to follow or return to if they get overwhelmed/tired of exploring the open world. The game doesn't care if you don't pursue him and theres really never any urgency or reminder from the player character to make you want to return to your search for him. I don't think its a problem with Fallout 4 being so open ended. I think the problem is that the quest to look for Shaun just isn't interesting or compelling. Maybe instead of a direct questline it should have been handled as an investigation done by the player on their own where its up to them to find clues through out the game or possibly gain favor with certain people/factions in order to find information about what may have happened to him. That way it would feel far more engaging yet wouldn't conflict with the game design behind fallout which has become look around for neat stuff to do.
Roni
Gold Member
So only haters allowed for the first, what, five pages?
packy34
Member
And that's all well and good but the fact remains that it's still nowhere close to what we were expecting after the excellent New Vegas.
But why would anyone think Bethesda of all people would make something that is even remotely like an Obsidian game? They are extremely different game devs and will always be.
If people are disappointed because they expected more compared to Fallout 3, I definitely understand. I don't agree, but I can clearly see where they are coming from. But people saying "it's not New Vegas 2" baffles me.
ronaldthump
Member
some of the responses here from gamers show the divide between people who get what fallout was and then the other crowd that's just happy to play hot garbage
The game lost me when I had to fight a monster crab. Really. That's what you come up with? Not complex plot lines/depth. A giant crab
And the base building was junk also
The game lost me when I had to fight a monster crab. Really. That's what you come up with? Not complex plot lines/depth. A giant crab
And the base building was junk also
Unaha-Closp
Member
For a 3 hour video you have to like the narrators voice and delivery. I got 35 mins in but bounced. Not unlike what happened to me in Fallout 4. It was more than 35 mins I grant you. If you go by hours to money value I got enough hours out of Fallout 4 before I realised I was not a fan.
Zoso
It's been a long time, been a long time, been a long lonely lonely lonely lonely lonely time.
I made it 30 minutes in. He makes good points, but it's far too long/unedited for me.
I much preferred Errant Signal's Fallout 4 critique.
I much preferred Errant Signal's Fallout 4 critique.
Phatosaurus
Member
I wouldn't call it hot garbage, but there's a definite disconnect between long time fans of the series that enjoy Fallout for the deep RPG mechanics and the average players that are only in it for the explosions.
I can understand why the latter were mostly happy with Fallout 4, mechanically the shooting was good and the explosions were pretty.
Rushersauce
Banned
If you are going to post, and I mean a post, not shitpost. At least,watch the video.
packy34
Member
Idk, I think it's pretty reasonable to expect Bethesda to have taken all the criticism for Fallout 3 and all the praise for New Vegas into account when planning Fallout 4. I don't think ANYONE asked for the complete removal of the skill system.
Rushersauce
Banned
Nor a voiced protagonist with a shitty reason to play it.
Tinfoilhatsron
Banned
There's a difference between a fan willing to make thoughtful discussions with others in the thread (I'll point to a post talking about the background of the courier vs the soldier in F4 as an example) and one who just came here to fucking whine at the length of the video and state that "I ain't watching this!". On a thread. For the video.
I wouldn't even minded much if the poster asked for a bullet point list of the main arguements.
Randy Monk
Member
Tom is right on the money here, the settlement system sucked donkey balls.
The voice over stuff was fine, but cutting out or severely limiting the dialogue options and influence in the game killed one of the best parts of Fallout. Yeah, I know there were checks here and there, but knowing your chances and how your stats affected those chances took a large part out of how the game felt. Plus, most of the dialogue stuff was varying shades of yes, sometimes sliding into making a binary choice between one option or the other at the of a quest line. No nuance and no way to game the system by being a smooth-talker.
Outside of the lackluster quests, the dialogue was the worst "improvement" the game had. I have a bad feeling the next Elder Scrolls game will follow suit in cutting systems out to make the game more broadly appealing.
blankempathy
Member
I liked it at first but boy is it badly implemented. I can't believe they didn't take into account the amount of garbage characters would want to gather now that its actually used for settlements. Unless they fixed it in the dlc after a while I quickly got a weight mod because making 3 trips just to clear out one area was getting tiresome. While I like the ability of having different settlement locations it also kind of bugs me that I'm single handedly rebuilding the wasteland on my own. Next game I want to see the same amount of options for settlement locations but a restriction placed on how many you can have. Also a focus on settlements having deeper mechanics including the ability to send workers to clear out areas for you. A leveling system for your workers that increases their ability to build/maintain/gather resources. A randomized event system would be nice too. Not just enemy attacks but internal conflicts and other random stuff. And FFS let me clean up my locations of debris and trash without a mod.
Lightning_Roller
Banned
It's a real shame that Fallout 4 took out the varied dialogue options and such for this game. I never played it, but plan on getting it when it's marked down to play it, but I expect it's not going to be an enjoyable rpg with Fps elements. Just a pretty Fps with rpg elements and limited dialogue options.
And to the person who talked about how the courier was not defined in new Vegas is right. You made a mistake in delivering that package to the divide and had to deliver a chip, but other than that, who the courier was and how they acted all relied on the choices of the player.
Also I'm no voice all the way, as long as I can be a caring, helpful person with a bit of snark to them and is also a crack shot with a rifle, fine by me. I don't need voice acting to enjoy a well crafted rpg as long as I have many ways to solve a situation instead.
And to the person who talked about how the courier was not defined in new Vegas is right. You made a mistake in delivering that package to the divide and had to deliver a chip, but other than that, who the courier was and how they acted all relied on the choices of the player.
Also I'm no voice all the way, as long as I can be a caring, helpful person with a bit of snark to them and is also a crack shot with a rifle, fine by me. I don't need voice acting to enjoy a well crafted rpg as long as I have many ways to solve a situation instead.
As someone who had a really good time with Fallout 4, I really don't see the value of spending 3 hours watching someone who clearly dislikes the game critique it. I also have no interest in watching someone praise the game for 3 hours. I've already read many reviews and followed many gaf threads discussing/analysing the game. It's definitely not amongst the best of games - but I had lots of fun.
I'm certainly not saying we should/shouldn't have threads like these, but I personally wonder what value they serve. After this much time I don't think anyone's mind is going to be changed, pretty much every argument has been made and remade - all people do is reiterate the same arguments from their respective trenches.
F4 was a terrible rpg. The combat was decent so I kept playing (and I pre ordered because 3/NV were great) but thry really lost me at the Institute. Their motivations and entire story made NO sense. The story was garbage its actually impressive how bad it is.
Then the base building to get the mine craft crowd in...yeah ill probably never play anothet beth rpg again.
Then the base building to get the mine craft crowd in...yeah ill probably never play anothet beth rpg again.
Oh wow, didn't realize this video was so new. I watched two thirds yesterday and going to finish up the last hour today. I'm a sucker for longform youtube analysis videos so the length didnt deter me at all. And even though I largely enjoyed my time with Fallout 4, this video is pretty incredible in highlighting all the faults and changes for the worse in this game. I would say it's definitely worth a watch, even if you absolutely loved Fallout.
shawnbuddy
Member
I've been playing it since the original. Really liked Fallout 4. I think that I'm willing to accept a somewhat different game in the Fallout Universe as long as it's good. Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel, was different and not good, for example.
Phatosaurus
Member
What was it that you enjoyed about F4?
shawnbuddy
Member
Emergent gameplay, shooting, base-building, settlements, missions, characters, the locale and all of the little secrets in it.
I had fun. At one point in Fallout 4 I helped a bunch of robot pirates launch their wooden ship into the sky. On a whim, I jumped on this ship while they were taking off and rode it into the sky. It was awesome. That's one of the funniest and fondest memories of my nearly 40 years of gaming.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
This is a comment I've seen a number of times regarding FO4 from fans and I still don't get it.
We critique and discuss movies, music and books for decades, if not centuries, after their release. Games aren't going to be any different just because you think the discussion is played out. If you're sick of it, just bugger off.
Phatosaurus
Member
That's a completely fair opinion to have.
I'm by no means a "hater" of Fallout 4, the shooting mechanics were a huge improvement over F3/NV, and I found many of the quests enjoyable.
I wasn't a fan of the settlements/base building, at least not the implementation of them, or particularly a fan of the characters (I just found them boring and shallow).
My main gripes were the dialogue system, voiced protagonist, and how skills were scrapped and worked into perks.
Gotta take the time to watch this. Could be interesting. I don't hate Fallout 4 but just really disappointed and annoyed by it.
That was one of the things that bugged the hell out of me to be honest. Whenever I encountered a person or a group of people out in the middle of nowhere with no real way of defending themselves in a land with tons of creatures roaming around and marauders all over the place with no active patrols by a stronger and larger force. It largely made no sense. It's one of the reasons why I actually find FO3 to be the better of the two Bethseda made Fallout games. People grouping up into large locations make sense instead of trying to wing it themselves outside of taking the risk to travel to a location.
There is one farm settlement in FO4 that made me face palm and really roll my eyes. It's one that starts with two people and literally just right over the hill (like a 5 to 10 second run at most) is a super mutant camp with like a dozen or so of them there. Why are these two people alive being that close. Not to mention all the other dangerous enemies around them. It's not like it's a defended location or one that really could be defended well. It's out in the open on all sides.
The game as a lot of stuff like that that just gets to me over time that could have been caught or not even done if a closer look was taken at things.
That was one of the things that bugged the hell out of me to be honest. Whenever I encountered a person or a group of people out in the middle of nowhere with no real way of defending themselves in a land with tons of creatures roaming around and marauders all over the place with no active patrols by a stronger and larger force. It largely made no sense. It's one of the reasons why I actually find FO3 to be the better of the two Bethseda made Fallout games. People grouping up into large locations make sense instead of trying to wing it themselves outside of taking the risk to travel to a location.
There is one farm settlement in FO4 that made me face palm and really roll my eyes. It's one that starts with two people and literally just right over the hill (like a 5 to 10 second run at most) is a super mutant camp with like a dozen or so of them there. Why are these two people alive being that close. Not to mention all the other dangerous enemies around them. It's not like it's a defended location or one that really could be defended well. It's out in the open on all sides.
The game as a lot of stuff like that that just gets to me over time that could have been caught or not even done if a closer look was taken at things.
Rushersauce
Banned
Watch the video. It actually discusses those points.
Fallout 4 world makes cero fucking sense and Bethesda mutilated every bit of lore they could.
Fallout 4 doesn't need your protection.
You may want to lose the pointless attitude, it doesn't help the conversation. I specifically pointed out that I personally don't see the point, and was responding to someone who thought that 'everyone needs to watch the video'. If I wasn't interest in conversation I wouldn't have posted in the thread.
The descriptions of the video so far are very mixed - some good arguments, possible some bad/weak arguments, but many seem to suggest the critic has poor presentation, an obvious bias, and is very repetitive. What then is the value of spending three hours watching someone harshly critique a game I enjoyed?
Rushersauce
Banned
You are interested in the conversation, yet you refuse to watch the video we are supposed to be discussing. A OK!
packy34
Member
The value is that you would be more informed on this person's opinions and could then make a more informed rebuttal against them, if you really are/were interested in the discussion.
Phatosaurus
Member
In his defence, he's probably in this thread for the wider discussion of Fallout 4, and not the video about Fallout 4.
I know that's why I'm here. I'm perfectly capable of articulating the pros/cons of Fallout 4 and putting them forth without watching a 3 hour long critique with questionable production.
So this thread is, and can only be, specifically about this person's opinions? Seems to me the vast majority of gaf threads are an ongoing and evolving conversation. I would bet half the thread isn't talking about the opinions, and a lot of it is the same old sniping back and forth between people who liked the game and those that didn't.
I still don't have an answer to my question either - and I'm genuinely curious. There's lots of review threads - gaf does discuss movies, books, and games months or years after their release. I could be wrong but I doubt that the video contains a critique I haven't already come across in the many threads I've read on the game, or of the shorter critiques I've watched. Three hours is a long time to dedicate to watching someone be completely negative about a game I enjoyed. Even with games I've hated I can't imagine wanting to spend three hours watching someone critique the game. What value/enjoyment do people get out of that?
I mean, yes?
That is literally the catalyst for this thread existing.
There are, and have been, and likely will continue to be, tons of threads discussing Fallout 4. Some general, some specific.
This one was specifically made because of this guy making a 3 hour video about it.
You can defend/attack Fallout 4 all you want, but it's supposed to be in support/in defiance with the video in the OP.
If you came in here to defend Fallout 4 in general, and don't care to try and refute or even listen to any of the critique made by the video in the OP, then you can just go find another thread to fight that battle in.
Essentially, coming into the thread to say:
"I didn't bother watching the video, I have no intention of watching the video, it's probably wrong, goodbye" is like one step up from just shitposting.
Seriously? I doubt there's many gaf threads where the topic hasn't shifted and evolved. Numerous posts on this page alone aren't specifically about this video. Honestly you are being extremely disingenuous if you are suggesting my posts equate to "I didn't bother watching the video, I have no intention of watching the video, it's probably wrong, goodbye". I haven't defended Fallout 4. I would argue that my question is probably more on topic, and inviting of conversation, then a majority of the posts.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
Having left this on in the background, it's clear that this reviewer is trying to replicate the Plinkett Star Wars thing.
I just don't know if Fallout 4 is really worth the effort, since people have said the same thing about the game in a much more concise manner.
I just don't know if Fallout 4 is really worth the effort, since people have said the same thing about the game in a much more concise manner.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
The value in watching the video would be so that you could intelligently engage in a discussion. In the case of this thread, given that you're a fan, watching the video would presumably allow you to make some kind of intelligent rebuttal against various arguments. If you don't see a value in doing that, then leave.
Otherwise if you're still around, I'm not sure why you're here. As I responded to your comment, we critique other forms of media for years after their release. Games are not and should not be any different because you have some notion about the discussions being played out. If you want to have some general space to whine or discuss the merits of these kinds of critiques, you might check out the "Post New Thread" button on the main page of the forum.
Frozenprince
Banned
I am not watching a review of a game that's over 2 1/2 hours long.
thanks for letting us know
More_Badass
Member
Same value one might get out of reading a book analyzing a movie's themes or whatnot, when they could just get the same info watching a ten minute Youtube video
Also, he's not completely negative
But either way, everything has flaws, even stuff you enjoy. Being able to enjoy something while also being able to critique it and discuss the good and bad of something you like is a good thing, especially if it's a medium or hobby where you're partake in for more than just causal enjoyment.
So why would you want to watch criticism of something you enjoy? To gain a more well-rounded perspective on that thing, to perhaps learn more about it in ways that you hadn't considered, to take part in discussion about the thing you enjoy and provide counter-point and arguments for critiques you disagree with, and so on
runnin_blue
Banned
Having just finished Fallout 4 and finding a few problems with it whilst still enjoying it, I'm interested in watching a well thought out critique of the game. But...3 HOURS?! Seriously, life is already busy enough. Who's got time for that?
If this guy releases a condensed video summarising his points, I'd be interested.
If this guy releases a condensed video summarising his points, I'd be interested.
Zombie James
Banned
Finished watching it and I agree with pretty much every point he makes, even the positive ones. There are positives to Fallout 4, like the combat, but the negatives and regressions strip all that away.
And God damn at that last 10-15 minute rant. Spot on, fuck the YouTube shills.
And God damn at that last 10-15 minute rant. Spot on, fuck the YouTube shills.
There's a little more to the protagonist in Fallout 4 than being a solider. He's a named character with a specific motivation for the entire game, with a specific history, with specific knowledge and specific relationships.
That's a problem for role playing, especially in an open world RPG.
The Courier really doesn't have any of those problems. The Courier has no specific motivation, no specific history, no specific knowledge and no specific relationships.
If the Courier decides to fuck around for 50 hours collecting bottlecaps, they totally can because why not? As the video points out, maybe they're terrified of Benny and don't want anything to do with him or the package they were meant to deliver.
If Nate does the same, it's super weird because he's constantly saying he needs to find his son and he's concerned. It creates a narrative dissonance.
Fallout 4 is the Phantom Menace of the Fallout franchise.
Anyway, I listened to the review/critique a few days ago and agree with pretty much every point.
I will never get the people who try to deflect the criticism by saying "but he's an Obsidian fanboy". Post-Bethesda buy-out Fallout has had two developers, Bethesda and Obsidian. So why the hell is it that whenever somebody compared Bethesda Fallout games to the Obsidian Fallout game and says that the Obsidian one is better the Bethesda defense force comes out in full? It's a perfectly fine comparison and there are some valid reasons why someone who loved the old Fallout games would be more excited for Obsidian's Fallout than Bethesda's Fallout (for instance, New Vegas was made by the people behind the original Fallout games, it continued some storylines of the original Fallout games and it was made using the same design filosophies as the original Fallout games). Why can't the people who like Bethesda Fallout more just come to terms with that instead of just attacking and completely dismissing everyone with a different opinion?
Anyway, I listened to the review/critique a few days ago and agree with pretty much every point.
I will never get the people who try to deflect the criticism by saying "but he's an Obsidian fanboy". Post-Bethesda buy-out Fallout has had two developers, Bethesda and Obsidian. So why the hell is it that whenever somebody compared Bethesda Fallout games to the Obsidian Fallout game and says that the Obsidian one is better the Bethesda defense force comes out in full? It's a perfectly fine comparison and there are some valid reasons why someone who loved the old Fallout games would be more excited for Obsidian's Fallout than Bethesda's Fallout (for instance, New Vegas was made by the people behind the original Fallout games, it continued some storylines of the original Fallout games and it was made using the same design filosophies as the original Fallout games). Why can't the people who like Bethesda Fallout more just come to terms with that instead of just attacking and completely dismissing everyone with a different opinion?
runnin_blue
Banned
I don't really have a stake in this game (played all Fallouts and enjoyed them), but from observation I can confidently say that I see just as many (if not more) comments in Fallout related threads that denigrate Bethesda Fallout and mock it's fans whenever the subject arises.
It works both ways. Fanboys, in general, are pathetic.