-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Rumor: Fallout 4 might take place in Boston
- Thread starter sflufan
- Start date
The time frame seems to indicate so. Its obviously not going to be Elder Scrolls VI and they have had quite a few years to work on it already so.......
radios shipping overview
Member
Yep. NV made me remember what I missed in FO3. I will be content to ignore FO4 entirely in favor of WL2.
Mr.Wreckless
Banned
IMO the interesting settings in FO3 make up for it. There isnt a single place in NV that made you sit back and say wow like Tranquility Lane, Little Lamplight, the Liberty Prime sequence, or Oasis. The settings in NV go from Casino, sand, more sand, shack, repeat.
Also and ill repeat, Fallout NV is the poster child of why it may be a bad idea to buy a game at launch. It was unplayable. Game breaking bugs were around every corner. Their involvement in Wasteland 2 is nothing but a huge DANGER: STAY AWAY sign for me.
Plus, with Wasteland 2 you have the benefit of probably having good RPG mechanics.
And yet every conversation I had with New Vegas NPCs was just as poorly developed as the ones I had in F3. Perhaps the overarching story of New Vegas was better, but it was still the same mundane experience.
Agreed. That was my experience with NV. Just a really poorly imagined world. That's why I call Obsidian professional modders. They rarely make fully-fledged games, they just add a twist on the existing foundation.
I hope that the game has a 'feel' more like Far Cry 2. That was actually totally intense, your weapons degraded very quickly and jammed often, situations would turn sour and you'd frantically have to scramble around to react. You felt very situated in the world because of the quality of the gunplay.
In the Bethsoft Fallout games (I'm including NV in this because it was on the same engine), I never really felt immersed because the gunplay was so monumentally awful.
In the Bethsoft Fallout games (I'm including NV in this because it was on the same engine), I never really felt immersed because the gunplay was so monumentally awful.
EmCeeGramr
Member
All of this is objectively false. NV's NPCs were infinitely more developed, and the world was imagined perfectly. FO3 didn't have a world, it had a collection of unconnected ideas thrown into a sandbox.
I play NV for a world, not lame gimmick theme park attractions in the middle of a desert.
Hasphat'sAnts
Member
What? I don't remember a single NPC from Fallout 3 other than Liam Neeson.
New Vegas had fantastic characters.
What does this even mean? You play NV to walk around a barren desert? Kudos. Fallout 3 actually has surprises for the explorer.
That's why they're getting hate. Their specialty is in Elder Scrolls-like exploration but they are awful at most other RPG stuff. New Vegas coming out later only exposed those problems more because Obsidian ran circles around them in plot, quest structure, RPG gameplay and writing.
You do know that Obisidian has since gone on to make their own engine in-house and it's far more stable than any of the hand-me-downs that they've been forced to use in the past, right?
Mr.Wreckless
Banned
They may be lame gimmicks to you but the environments play a huge part for me in a game that relies on exploration so much. I need a reason to want to keep playing and look over that next hill, NV didnt do that for me at all. I knew what was over that next hill, more desert.
Trickster
Member
Have they shown off this engine, I'd be curious to see what it looks like.
Red Blaster
Member
Fallout 3's world lawl
because 200 years after a nuclear holocaust people are still scrounging for food at the bombed out supermarket
because 200 years after a nuclear holocaust people are still scrounging for food at the bombed out supermarket
EmCeeGramr
Member
I play New Vegas for a world that actually makes sense, with inhabitants who are aware of the environment they live in, who have lives and motivations during a time of change. Not an empty boring pile of rubble filled with substance-less gimmicks. I knew that every place I'd turn in New Vegas, I'd find someplace with a story to tell that fit in with the world. Not something annoyingly "wacky" like the Republic of Dave or Little Lamplight.
You can play with it right now in Dungeon Siege 3, and it's also powering the South Park game.
They share a lot of mechanics but Obsidian had more crafting skills, better FPS aiming and made skills have a much bigger effect on the world. It was also possible to finish the game without killing anyone as water_wendi proved.
MightyHedgehog
Member
Only if people from that region and know it well were responsible for it. FO and WL are rooted in American ideals and concepts, so I'd rather see someone create a new franchise built for those cultures.
That's only thing Bethesda does right. NV is infinitely better in every other respect.
RukusProvider
Banned
I was going to recommend Detroit but then realized that'd just be a reality show.
Dungeon Siege III is running on Onyx engine.
hbkajshdvfbkjhvgkahsgdfka
Member
Liberty Prime was hilariously terrible.
Did you somehow ignore Jacobstown, all of the vaults (Vault 22 is better than all of Fallout 3), Caesar's camp, Camp McCarran, Nellis Air Force Base and a few others I'm probably forgetting?
The Oasis and Little Lamplight were pretty cool but everything else was pretty gimmicky or unmemorable.
Give examples rather than listing abstractions out of thin air. Ran circles in plot? No. The two games have a similar focus: water. Quest structure? HELL NO! New Vegas was just one fetch quest after another. RPG gameplay? Like what? Weapon modification? Cooking food? First off, it was poorly executed because Obsidian half-asses even their good ideas. Secondly, it was almost as pointlessly irrelevant in New Vegas as eating and working out were in GTA San Andreas. Writing-wise, again not really. If you happen to remember the characters from New Vegas, that doesn't mean they're memorable in their own right. I remember how annoying they were. The Elvis guy. The King gang. They're not good characters. New Vegas lacks the appropriate nihilistic tone that Fallout 3 carries. The lame-ass attempts at humor should not be appreciated.
Do you mean physical world building? I'd agree, if yes. If you mean area design, Fallout 3's is ridiculously bad.
Mr.Wreckless
Banned
Are you guys sue you want to use Dungeon Siege 3 as the shining example of what Obsidian can do? Who is to blame for the mediocrity of that game?
EmCeeGramr
Member
New Vegas isn't about water. Like, at all.
There's barely any fetch quests in New Vegas.
Like the skill system is overhauled to be far more balanced than FO3 (where you can become an invincible demigod early on) and there's far more ways to complete quests and roleplay a character.
Chris Avellone is far better at writing dry witty humor than Bethesda's "lol monkey cheeze!!" jokes like Liberty Prime. A gang that mistakes Elvis for a religious leader and emulates him as a cult-like activity is funny and plays with the Vegas setting and the theme of legacies in New Vegas.
FO3's tone was unearned. It shoved "THIS IS BAD IT'S THE APOCALYPSE" down your throat even though it took place after FO1 and FO2, where big cities and farming were thriving on the West Coast and fledgling governments were forming.
I was talking specifically about the engine itself, since it was coming up about how "bad" Obsidian is at programming when their games have often been marked with having to work with hand-me-down engines that barely worked in the first place.
People are using dungeon siege 3 as an example that Obsidian can make a polished game with their new engine.
Mr.Wreckless
Banned
A polished game that isnt good. Is that something to brag about?
It seems like Obsidian needs to be bought out by someone so they can just take someones idea, tweak a few things, then hand it back off to the original team.
Err no, DSIII is used to say that since they have their own tools to work with for once, they can make a well-programmed game.
I guess. It's more than Bethesda has.
The Wrongest Post, ladies and gentlemen.
Eh it's a mediocre game but they were trying to make a game in line with the series and the DS series is sub par so they didn't have much to work with. But like with the other series they were given control over for a game, they made a game that was the best one in the series.
But that's not the point. The point was "lol obsidian can't make a polished game" and when proven wrong it's "lol but it's a bad game".
hbkajshdvfbkjhvgkahsgdfka
Member
Republic of Dave is nihilistic as fuck.
Cooking and eating were there to support hardcore mode, which I'm guessing you didn't play.
Most fetch stuff could be circumvented with skill checks, which is one of the major things NV does much better the FO3. All your skills become useful, and all your skills get used in speech checks, instead of just basically speech.
Also, NV does a much better job carrying on the narrative tone and series plotline of Fallout 1 and 2 than Fallout 3 does.
For the rest of your points, I think I'll just respectfully disagree. I don't think Fallout 3 is a bad game. I wouldn't go nearly as far as Em Cee does. In fact, it's a game that I played and quite enjoyed. However, it is a much lesser game than NV was.
EmCeeGramr
Member
I personally preferred the magical silven faerie glen, or the town of little children.
Mr.Wreckless
Banned
Polish up a turd and its still a turd. Not gonna give credit to something thats bad because it actually runs well for once. Make a good game that runs well.
