Fallout 4 is Amazing, What’s the Problem?

[Bob Gray]

It’s not just whining though. Their success was from building big beautiful worlds. The story/rpg side of Bethesda games have always been been in the mediocre side. So when 4 started showing its age, people were less wowed by the world and it didn’t have a great story or great gameplay to cover for the aging graphics.

I’ve always felt they should stick to the technical side and let someone else write it. New Vegas is the best FO imo for that reason

Theres always valid criticisms, sure. What i mean is, let's say for ES 6 they do totally new engine, without persistence and they do something else really well. Lets say they polish up the quests and writing or something. But since they change the engine, either things won't be persistent, then theres just gonna be tons of crying about it, even if it isnt anything that most people would have done.

Take Avowed for example. Haven't played it yet, ill probably wait for a sale. But there's tons of complaining about it because it isnt Skyrim. Specifically about stuff thats not even core gameplay of anything. Like you can't steal the pants off a shopkeeper and then put a bucket over their head to rob them while they can't see you. Just anythijg they can harp on, despite the fact that they aren't even gonna play the game, and even if they did they wouldn't care about the activities they're complaining about.

Sometimes they just bitch about anything.

 

[The Clinch]

Great game, really liked the Far Harbor dlc. Been meaning to give it another play through as there is a lot I haven’t done. Hell, I don’t think I ever finished the main storyline.

Only real negative is being bombarded with settlement attacks and whatnot that basically required you to be there, regardless of any defenses you set up. It got to the point I disabled the radio/call out systems and would just have to sorta retakeover areas if I went to them.

 

[HereticBD]

Only real negative is being bombarded with settlement attacks and whatnot that basically required you to be there.

I'm not so sure about that. You'll still get distress calls, but the settlements that I do have set up with like 50 turrets all strewn about, always defend themselves and I get the mission completed without stepping foot in the place.

Ignoring them really isn't a big deal, though. Nothing really happens. I think I heard that there's a unique ending tied to keeping them safe, but that's about it.

 

[The Clinch]

I'm not so sure about that. You'll still get distress calls, but the settlements that I do have set up with like 50 turrets all strewn about, always defend themselves and I get the mission completed without stepping foot in the place.

Ignoring them really isn't a big deal, though. Nothing really happens. I think I heard that there's a unique ending tied to keeping them safe, but that's about it.

Maybe I didn’t have enough defenses? Who knows, it’s been 7-8 years since I’ve played the game. I just left the settlements alone once Far Harbor dropped and I ran that out.

But that was my experience. Whether you’re sure or not.

 

[method115]

I don't get the hate either. I thought it was great. I did hit a game ending glitch on my first run though so that sucked.

Same thing happened to me. MQ line got stuck and I couldn’t continue the story. Needed to talk to some women but she would only sell me stuff and not talk to me about the quest.

Other then that I did enjoy the game.

 

[rikwebb]

For me the DLC stuff was loads better than the vanilla game

 

[Bob Gray]

I don't know this particular reference, but I understand it and appreciate it hahah!

I made it up, lol. But they do pretty insane stuff.

 

[GtehMVP]

Their engine is a bit of a blessing and a curse for Bethesda. One one hand, absolutely no studio creates the kind of persistent reactivity that Bethesda does on the same scale. None. The sheer amount of coding required to pull off every item being permanent, persistent and memorizing its location is nuts in and of itslelf, but then all the meshes for every single AI in the game being autonomous, keeping a schedule, etc only multiplies the sheer insanity of it. They couldnt build a new engine from scratch that could do all that. So they have to re-use a lot of their tech.

Its sort of a double edged sword. The code underneath the hood of their games does something that other games just dont do, and its one of the studios defining features. If they were, say, to dial back on that sort of reactivity for ES 6, the backlash would be enormous even though most gamers are just cry-babies and arent actually lamenting that they cant pick up every potato in the game and pile it up in the courtyard of the games biggest city.

On top of that, since gamers just cry about everything, they start to argue that every RPG game should have this insane sort of reactivity, so something like Avowed gets a lot of flack for not having that persistence. But it isnt insane that other games dont do what Bethesdas games do, its insane that bethesda manages to do it at all.

Its one of those "price of success" kind of deals. Ultimately they cant win. They have to re-use a lot of assets and every game will have the beloved "jank", or they have to redefine what their game does, and then overcome the inevitable backlash.

After Starfield's non existent exploration, and the swath of shitty games coming out, I think people will be more receptive to a classic Bethesda offering than they would have after Witcher 3.

With an Oblivion official remaster coming, the Skywind/oblivion fan remakes, and KCD2 invoking Bethesda, people are going to be hungry for a new elder scrolls, warts and all.

It’s not just whining though. Their success was from building big beautiful worlds. The story/rpg side of Bethesda games have always been been in the mediocre side. So when 4 started showing its age, people were less wowed by the world and it didn’t have a great story or great gameplay to cover for the aging graphics.

I’ve always felt they should stick to the technical side and let someone else write it. New Vegas is the best FO imo for that reason

Writing is always going to be their weak point. I recall reading that they didn't use design documents, which is why so many things are half baked.

When Starfield took away their world building/exploration bread butter, it really exposed that.

People wanted the writing of New Vegas and FO 2, those were prob the biggest critics.

For anyone who doesn't like settlement building, try the first Sim Settlements mod. Makes it more interesting and you can change the mod setting to make it easy if you want.

Sim Settlements is awesome, especially SS2. It became a giant narrative quest.

America Rising is also a really awesome mod. You get to rebuild the Enclave.

 

[Berserker13]

It's fine until basically you have to maintain the settlements even though they have weapons peolpe they can't defend themselves...

 

[High Test With da Best]

I made it up, lol. But they do pretty insane stuff.

Part of the fun of interacting with a game's programming is pushing it to the absolute limit and testing out border parameters of capability IMO

 

[TeTe]

I spent so much time on settlements that I made I think four walkthrough videos on YouTube of each of most built up ones. I even used the build size glitch to make them ridiculously big.

 

[Fury]

When Starfield took away their world building/exploration bread butter, it really exposed that.

Starfield was trash. I'm sure it plays better and quality of life stuff is improved but I just didn't care about anything in it.

Sadly, bought it at launch.

 

[Fury]

I spent so much time on settlements that I made I think four walkthrough videos on YouTube of each of most built up ones. I even used the build size glitch to make them ridiculously big.

I just used a mod on PC but my settlements were huge. I also added a ton of turrets on top of sim settlements defenses (which were some crazy add ons to the mods). It was quite the show when anyone attacked.