• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

You can play Fallout 4 for 400 hours without seeing everything

I've played modded Skyrim for 500+ hours in one playthrough - with few quest mods, mostly immersion mods - and still haven't done Dark Brotherhood questline or Dawnguard questline.

I think 400+ hours without doing everything is entirely possible unmodded in Fallout 4, assuming the town creation & defense is as engrossing as we hope.
 
who does this sound good to anymore? maybe the 11 year old version of me that was starved for games but nowadays kids have even more distractions than i did.
 
when_someone_is_delusional.gif
 
Idk, between multiple characters with the new crafting systems, I could see it. 400 hours sounds a little exaggerated, but there's definitely a lot of game time to be had.
 
Elandyll said:
Call me crazy, but after 120+ hours in W3, not a good thing. Unless they somehow manage to make all those 400hrs interesting, but I somehow doubt it.
Click to expand...

I don't know how many hours I have in Witcher 3 cause the stupid timer I think accounted for when my PS4 was in rest mode but it took me 2 months and I usually get in a good chunk of gameplaying every day. And yes, I was ready for it to be done (I actually just finished yesterday. Started when the game came out).

But... I've never really had that feeling with any Bethesda game or Fallout game. I've had it to where I'm not as excited to play, but not where I'm just rushing to the end cause I'm ready to be finished. Usually with their games what happens is it gets to the point I'm not as enthralled by it and a new game comes along that enthralls me more and I just start playing the new one more.

So I'm not worried about it being too long honestly. And if it is, I'll just do like I did with Witcher, just focus on the main quest and stop messing around with the side quests.

Honestly, I'd rather the game be too long than too short. Fallout 3 actually disappointed me when I learned there really weren't any more side quests left and all I had left was to finish the game. And I had put in 200 hours I think in it according to the save files. I hate feeling like I want to play more but there's nothing left to play. That's a lot more sad to me than when I'm just ready for the game to be done.
 
Didn't they say the same type of thing about Witcher 3?

Sorry Bethesda. Way too many games out there these days to really care about this type of statement. A 40 hour JRPG will last me weeks. My gaming plate is far too loaded to care about 400 hours of potential " content ".

Good for those who just plan on getting this game only for the holidays though I guess
 
Bizzquik said:
I've played modded Skyrim for 500+ hours in one playthrough - with few quest mods, mostly immersion mods - and still haven't done Dark Brotherhood questline or Dawnguard questline.

I think 400+ hours without doing everything is entirely possible unmodded in Fallout 4, assuming the town creation & defense is as engrossing as we hope.
Click to expand...

This is true.

I have both Falskaar and Wyrmstooth as a permanent part of my Skyrim install, and I have yet to start either the Dragonborn or Dawnguard expansions, Let alone part of the Wyrmstooth or Falskaar landmasses.

I am currently just trying to clear out the central Skyrim landmass (all of the map markers explored, etc)

Almost 600 hours and about 80% done with the central Skyrim region, I will do Dawnguard next.
 
Xenoblade X was only 300 hours and roughly 5 times the size of Skyrim. Just how big is Fallout 4?

Have they nailed down what region of the U.S. it is supposed to take place in?
 
Disaster Nebraska said:
We live in a world with games like No Man's Sky.

Boasting about hours is no longer impressive. Devs need a new marketing hype tagline, IMO, especially in this case since Bethesda games are some of the most static and empty open-worlds out there.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between a handcrafted 400+ hours, and a randomly generated infinity+ hours.

One is more impressive.
I'm leaning more towards the handcrafted in general.

Im excited for both though. Please dont kill me gaf.
 
Teuoxton said:
Xenoblade X was only 300 hours and roughly 5 times the size of Skyrim. Just how big is Fallout 4?

Have they nailed down what region of the U.S. it is supposed to take place in?
Click to expand...
East Massachusetts, in and around Boston. I don't think they've said how far inland they go though.
 
At this point in my life with family, work and life- not sure I have 400 hours of gameplay in a year.

Just finished Bloodborne and loving Witcher 3, but yikes- no thanks.

Will depend on strength of story and characters. I am engrossed in a game when I think about it when not playing. Witcher 3 main quest has me engrossed and eager to return.

Hopefully Fallout 4 will do the same.
 
Statements like these are the reason why I sometimes don't pick these type of games up. I don't have the time nor the attention span to keep playing the same game for that amount of time (if the statement were to be true, which I mean... sure I get it, game is long).
 
Makes sense. If it's anything like the other poorly programmed/optimized games they put out starting with Fallout 3, most people will not be able to progresses far due to either crippling bugs or memory problems causing the game to run at a crawl. Game of the Year!
 
Yeah, but do I WANT to see everything in Fallout 4? Will hour 401 shows me this super-rare-special-awesome easter egg?
 
I played Fallout New Vegas something like six times with well over 400 hours in it and even in my very last playthrough ever I was still seeing shit I had never seen before. I kinda believe this statement about Fallout 4, even in the context of a single 400 hour playthrough. I wanna believe this game is absolutely chock full of shit to do.
Disaster Nebraska said:
We live in a world with games like No Man's Sky.

Boasting about hours is no longer impressive. Devs need a new marketing hype tagline, IMO, especially in this case since Bethesda games are some of the most static and empty open-worlds out there.
Click to expand...

this is the age of comparisons that would not hold up if context were considered for even a second. I wonder how many Witcher 3 mentions are in this Fallout thread...

I think it's implied that there's shit to go out and actively do that makes up those 400 hours
SirMossyBloke said:
My god what a cynical bunch of people.
Click to expand...
I ain't even this cynical about Fallout 4 and if you've seen my input in Fallout threads before you know that's sayin something
 
...I'm not sure I want this. In the few hours after work and the weekends, I really don't have time for a 400 hour game.

I kind of really hope this is just their PR department talking out their asses, I like a long game don't get me wrong, but 400 hours is excessive.
 
pantsonhead said:
...I'm not sure I want this. In the few hours after work and the weekends, I really don't have time for a 400 hour game.

I kind of really hope this is just their PR department talking out their asses, I like a long game don't get me wrong, but 400 hours is excessive.
Click to expand...

I dont' get this mentality (I'm talking about all of you people with this mentality that games should be shorter). No one says you have to play all the game and if you just do the main quest I promise you it won't even come close to 400 hours (note part of his 400 hours was doing town building which can take up a lot of time in itself if you really get into it. I mean look at Minecraft or sim city and how long people play those games).

Usually these times are given with all the side quests and other stuff you can do. Rarely is that the time it takes to finish the main quest (Witcher 3 for example said the main quest was like 40 hours or maybe 70 but their overall time included all contracts and other side quests). And Bethesda games have really short main quests honestly imho (least Skyrim and Fallout 3. If you just did the main quests the games were pretty short).

So, why is it bad the game has more than you want to play? If that's too much for you, just play the main quest and maybe some side quests. You don't have to do it all. It's a helluva lot better than it being short and finding you wanted more and there's nothing left. It gives you choice. Do a quick run through of the main quest and just do what you want.

Are you who are complaining the kind of person that is compelled to do everything in the game? Cause that's the only way I could see this being a bad thing honestly (and unless you are obsessive compulsive and really can't get yourself to let it go, maybe you should learn games are more fun when you don't force yourself to play parts just cause there is a trophy or a percentage it claims you finished. I mean I only ever aim for trophies that look like they'd be fun to actually accomplish, not just cause they exist).

And if you find Bethesda games boring, why are you even in this thread or care about Fallout 4? Shouldn't you be focusing on the games that cater more towards what you want?
 
Solid Samus said:
I played Fallout New Vegas something like six times with well over 400 hours in it and even in my very last playthrough ever I was still seeing shit I had never seen before. I kinda believe this statement about Fallout 4, even in the context of a single 400 hour playthrough. I wanna believe this game is absolutely chock full of shit to do.
Click to expand...
Except, you know, Bethesda didn't make FNV, and Obsidian never promised 400 hours.
 
This isn't necessarily a selling point for me personally but I certainly believe it. I put 200+ in to Skyrim and there is definitely stuff I never touched.
 
They clearly don't know my wife. She's absolutely devoured all of the Fallouts and Oblivion and Skyrim. She's sunk a few hundred hours into each title, but I'm sure she will see everything in Fallout 4 in less than 400 hours.

Me, I still haven't beaten Skyrim and New Vegas yet.

The only game she cares about this year is Fallout 4. No other games exist for her right now. Although she's highly entertained etching me play Hatoful Boyfriend.
 
So... exactly what it's supposed to be like. Huge world, thousands of things to do and even more ways to do them. Exactly what I'm here for.

Some games I've played and replayed for years and still haven't done everything I've wanted to.
 
Fairfax said:
Except, you know, Bethesda didn't make FNV, and Obsidian never promised 400 hours.
Click to expand...
Well, no shit. I'm just saying that if that's the game Obsidian was able to make in a year and a half of stressed development, I've got no doubt that after three or four solid years of work, Bethesda's second attempt at a Fallout wasteland is more impressively stocked with places to see and stuff to do than its predecessors, at the very least.

VlaudTheImpaler said:
Also, how many pages do I have to wait before we can have an actual discussion about this?
Click to expand...

By the time that happens this'll be a versus thread like all the rest

-COOLIO- said:
who does this sound good to anymore? maybe the 11 year old version of me that was starved for games but nowadays kids have even more distractions than i did.
Click to expand...

sounds fucking great to me, because I'm going to be replaying this game until like 2020 if Fallout 3 and New Vegas were any indication...
 
I've put that much into Oblivion, Fallout 3, and Skyrim individually, so that's not terribly hard to imagine. I anticipate a lot of baseless skepticism though, because reasons.

I'm glad I'll be doing nothing but play Fallout 4 when it releases because I sure as shit won't want to be on GAF that week.
 
I'd rather 4 hours of amazing fun gameplay rather than 400 hours of walking from place to place and doing checklist filler quest garbage.

This is going to be a worse "open-world" than Ubisoft games, I bet on that.
 
Verger said:
I'd rather 4 hours of amazing fun gameplay rather than 400 hours of walking from place to place and doing checklist filler quest garbage.

This is going to be a worse "open-world" than Ubisoft games, I bet on that.
Click to expand...
That's a bet so cynical, so 'not ever gonna happen' that I can't help but to laugh derisively at it. Sounds like some of y'all actively want to find every reason to knock this game.

I'm not saying you should be excited simply by the prospect of a video game you could spend 400 hours in, for the record. I'm saying that even Bethesda's worst open world, and game mechanics, are tighter and more capable of enabling interesting emergent experiences and personalized journeys than Ubisoft's best. And they've been working on this game for years and years.
 
Solid Samus said:
Well, no shit. I'm just saying that if that's the game Obsidian was able to make in a year and a half of stressed development, I've got no doubt that after three or four solid years of work, Bethesda's second attempt at a Fallout wasteland is more impressively stocked with places to see and stuff to do than its predecessors, at the very least.
Click to expand...
You put a lot of faith in Bethesda, but to each their own. F3's 200 endings and Skyrim's "infinite quests" are still a fresh memory for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Michael Scott in Fallout 4
Trailer 
4
248
adamsapple replied
Fallout 4 switch 2 DLSS patch out now
15
397
Hip Hop replied
Microsoft Patents unveil AI-Powered Xbox Helper System That Can Play Games for You
2
64
999
KanKamAndNob replied
  • Locked
Fallout 4 - Switch 2
1
432
Kacho replied
Fallout 4 | Switch 2 - PS4 - PS5 | Graphics Comparison
Analysis  2 3 4
167
3K
Hip Hop replied
Top Bottom