If only they would make a real Fallout again, not FPS crap like 3 and 4.
Comment has been collapsed.
Like the original Van Buren version of Fallout 3 that was supposed to be?
Comment has been collapsed.
Like 1 and 2 and IIRC that too before it was sold to make cyberpunk Elder Scrolls instead.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1 to this. However, I cant see that happening anytime soon. Bethesda are going to do what they do as always.
Comment has been collapsed.
3 is still pretty okay. But then again, your actual reasons seem to be that your camera angle isn't the OG one, so... yeah...
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not about camera angle, it's about it not being an RPG where stats matter but an FPS where you have to react and shoot in real time.
Comment has been collapsed.
Reaction time is not relevant to be honest. Is not exactly a good shooter for the reaction time to matter and the stats actually have a big part on it.
I would say it's more of a first person action rpg than a shooter.
Comment has been collapsed.
Stats do matter. It's just that they matter less than in NV. It was a mismanagement of those available skills that was the issue. All talking went to speech, which is the bare minimum. But other than that, everything did something useful.
Also, if you actually look at gameplay at the time and the reviews that came out for the game, most people praised the VATS system and relied on it a lot. Why? Because how easy the game became through using it. But yeah, changing genres is bad, I guess. Just because you don't like that certain genre, doesn't make the whole game awful. Unless you also think that New Vegas is awful. If that's the case, then you are in the vast minority, which is very fine. I just hope that you don't turn out to be a hypocrite like many others who complain about the same thing in FO3 that they praise in FO:NV.
(Plus, I don't know where in FO3 you needed any reaction times)
Comment has been collapsed.
I have never praised any Fallouts other than the real ones, 1 and 2. I wanted to like 3 and tried it couple times but ended up uninstalling shortly every time. So can't really say what I hate or like more in NV since I haven't ever even tried it because it just seems to be the same game made bit better. Still not anything I'd be interested to play, but I would be very happy to be proven wrong.
I don't like any of the Elder Scrolls either, tried Morrowind and got bored after 10 minutes of just running around in bushes.
So in 3 you can stand still while thinking about stuff and ignore enemies shooting at you? Or do you perhaps need to react to them and start shooting back?
Comment has been collapsed.
Lol, you're kidding, right? So in turn based games you can advance by just thinking about stuff and ignoring everything?
Yeah, obviously you react to enemies. But you also have a turn based combat system, which is called using solely the V.A.T.S. system. Fallout 3 has never required good reactions because of the RPG style spongy enemies. The combat system's literally made for people like you with the only difference being that you now have a chance to advance at a faster pace... Also, you do realize that you react to situations in literally every single game, right? That's just a given as long as there are loss conditions.
Look, whatever. You obviously haven't really done much when it comes to Bethesda games or Fallout games after the second one (2/7 Fallouts isn't much). It's fine though. You obviously prefer them and that's all good. It's just odd seeing you make random statements and then just say "I haven't really played these games or given them much of a chance, but let me talk about what you need to play them and what they're about". You do you, dude... you do you :D
Comment has been collapsed.
No, in turn based games you can think all you want on your turn, go make some coffee, take a dump and come back to end your turn.
Didn't feel like anything turn based to me when I tried it, but it was years ago so might be wrong. 2 things I remember disliking enough to uninstall very fast were the FPS style combat and Open World style running around 1000 km.
I wanted to like them and gave them all the chances I could before uninstalling. Why would I continue forcing myself to play games that I don't like? Do you just have to eat enough shit to make it taste like ice cream or how does it work? I prefer playing games that I actually like for fun instead of grinding crap I hate just because.
And I wasn't saying I know what the games are about to anyone other than myself. Others are fully free to love them as much as they want and think they are turn based RPG and not FPS at all, still doesn't change how I feel about them one bit.
Comment has been collapsed.
Do you just have to eat enough shit to make it taste like ice cream or how does it work?
Comment has been collapsed.
Look, fair enough, again. But you say that you've played 3 "a couple of times", so I thought you'd know about the V.A.T.S. system. All you had to do was press V (if you were playing on the keyboard, that is. That stopped the time completely, gave you hit statistics, allowing you to strategically plan your hits, just like in Fallout 1/2 (given that you didn't have the Fast Shot perk).
You don't have to play it a lot, I agree. But you also seem to be missing the fundamentals of the games that you're talking about. You don't only have to play them to figure out what they're like. It's fine if you don't look into them, but it's just weird to see you talking about them without even knowing how the combat (that you get into in the first 20 minutes) differs from most other FPSs and so on. Don't play it if you don't like it, but going so much in-depth about a discussion about a game that you've barely played is just odd. I've played Bloodbowl for about 30 minutes and that makes me qualified to easily talk about what I found to be interesting and not interesting and what I found in my experiences. But what I can't really talk about is the gameplay mechanics, the story and other such things if I haven't learned anything about them.
"Others are fully free to love them as much as they want and think they are turn based RPG and not FPS at all" - You're making a strawman. No one said that. I said that the game's essentially a hybrid between the two if you want it to be. It'll never be a turn based RPG, mind you, but it can have their elements in it. The VATS system being the prime example.
Comment has been collapsed.
Where exactly have I said anything in-depth about the games? I just said I wish they would make real Fallouts again, not any kind of FPS crap I don't like. If I remember details wrong, it still doesn't change how I felt about it back then. Nor does it take the FPS hybrid part out of the game. And nitpicking about those details is like arguing about the color of the bike when you wanted a car.
How exactly is stating that everyone is free to have their own opinions a strawman? I just said that they are as free to feel that way, or any other way they can come up with, as I'm free to feel they are FPS crap. Freedom of thought and speech doesn't mean everyone has to agree about matters of personal taste.
I loved 1 and 2 because they were 2 of the best games ever, which makes me feel strongly opposed to the ruining of the series by Bethesda. This is the point, not details of the FPS system or anything else.
Comment has been collapsed.
Fallout 3 was very much not about reaction time or real time shooting. The shooting was so bad they created the V.A.T.S system
Comment has been collapsed.
That's what every FPS fan keeps saying because it's not as bad as their favorite games. But to someone who dislikes them it looks exactly like them. Just a matter of which side you look at things from.
Comment has been collapsed.
New Vegas has the FPS camera but is a real RPG, so no it's not about the first person view, but the game design and the writing.
Comment has been collapsed.
So I can point my gun just in the general direction of an enemy and if it hits or not is based on stats, not my aim?
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't believe that's the case in New Vegas, aside of course for the VATS. Plus I'm not sure what this has to do with quest writing, choices, role play, factions etc
Comment has been collapsed.
It has everything to do with not requiring to play FPS when you want RPG. That makes the other stuff irrelevant to me.
Comment has been collapsed.
So an RPG game CAN'T be in real time? It has to be 100% stats and luck based? Let's go back to the time when almost all the FPS shooters were in WW2, when almost all strategy games were in Medieval times and all RPGs were top-down, and the most popular online game was World of Warcraft or Runescape.
Comment has been collapsed.
There are plenty of real time RPGs, like Pillars of Eternity. But in them you click on enemies and the character attacks based on their stats, not the aiming skills of the player.
Comment has been collapsed.
We just differ a lot, I guess. I personally like to have involvement in games instead of having numbers determine the outcome. A good combat system would make most things possible to you as long as you're skilled enough. Even if it requires so much skill that it's almost perfection.
Comment has been collapsed.
I like to have involvement like thinking and planning, not reacting. You're the one that chooses the numbers and how to use them.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's fair. I can see the appeal in that. I personally go for the skill based stuff mostly. Though I also like building someone's stats up and seeing them destroy everything.
Comment has been collapsed.
One thing to note though, real time FPSs do have thinking and planning involved. Not so much in Fallout 3, I admit, but don't think that other FPSs don't have planning. It just happens on the spot and you have to think of your plan and execute it in seconds.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's still called reacting. Seconds sounds like dead to me, if an enemy jumps out of somewhere firing at you, it's milliseconds that decide who wins.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually, yes. High guns or energy weapons skills make all projectiles curve to the center of the mesh of the nearest enemy in real-time combat. This is how they implemented the usual console aim assist. There are a few ballistic mods that try to turn this off, even if it cannot be fully done.
Comment has been collapsed.
Come on, 3 was pure crap not because of the first person but because of everything apart from that. I don't want to spoiler, but if you played it then you know perfectly well what I'm talking about.
New Vegas on the very same engine in the very same first person setting made by Obsidian is what F3 should be. I enjoyed it even more than original fallouts.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's still Open World which translates to walking 1000 km in real time just so you can admire the scenery. Biggest thing I hate about Elder Scrolls and such.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah that's a big annoying flaw. That's why the fast running mod is a must have !!
Comment has been collapsed.
Very unpopular opinion: I prefer 3 over NV by miles.
Comment has been collapsed.
Let me guess: FO3 was the first Fallout game you ever met?
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, it was. Might be that exactly WE had this topic already some time ago, not sure. I know that it's generally said, that players, who played Fallout 3 as their first Fallout game are likely to prefer this, whereas players familiar with the old titles are likely to prefer NV.
I'm very serious when I say that I did not like these things in NV, which makes this title at least for me much less enjoyable than Fallout 3:
- Introduction (entry story) into the game, which felt sloppy for me in comparison to 3
- Design of the map which felt like a tube for me
- Look and feel of the boring Mojave and setting, I like the Wasteland and darker tones of Fallout 3 a lot better
- The lack of charismatic cities like Megaton, Rivet City, Washington, places worth revisiting in general
- The whole story, as I found this Ceasar's Legion thing just stupid (I know it's loved by veterans of the old titles. Overall let's face it, the stories of 3, NV, 4 suck alltogether in their own way)
- The look and feel of the Strip, beause I was very disappointed and thought it was underwhelming compared to what I had expected
I liked the endings though, also guns, The Kings and some missions like Hoover Dam. However that does not change my overall impression.
As said, I have not played the old titles (Fallout 2 is in my backlog), so I'm coming from another direction. Nevertheless even diehard Fallout veterans should accept that also Fallout 3 has qualities, which might not appeal to them but to a different group of players for sure. Stating Fallout 3 is crap (JustArchi) just lacks any objectivity.
Comment has been collapsed.
Fallout 3 has qualities, sure. It is a much better Elder Scrolls game than Oblivion was. Problem is, it is not supposed to be an Elder Scrolls game but a Fallout game, and the writer and lead designer managed to miss every single key element in the series's lore and intended original message, turning it into TES4: Oblivion with guns. A better one than Oblivion, but still, it is just Oblivion with guns that happens to have a Fallout name slapped on it.
Same with FO4, since its story is pretty much a carbon copy from FO3.
Comment has been collapsed.
3 wasn't pure crap and if you think that then you're jaded as all hell. Is New Vegas better by miles? Hell yeah it is. There's not even a question about it.
But was it pure crap? Well, what makes a game crap for you? Bad combat? Well, then NV is crap for you as well. The lack of minor gameplay mechanics that contrary to belief are not actually total game changers like fanboys claim it to be? Then there's an issue with you, not with the game.
Look, New Vegas is a dope ass game. But the contrarianism that surrounds this game is ridiculous. Like the idiots that at first loved Skyrim and were total fans of it and then saw some Youtube critics voice legitimate concerns and then started saying how it's the worst game ever.
What Fallout: New Vegas did different was the story and some minor gameplay mechanics. Huge differences in their own right, sure. But they're fundamentally extremely similar.
I don't know what spoiler would explain why it turns the game from a pretty good FPSRPG into "pure crap", so I'd love to know. Just hide it with this.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ending is a disgrace to entire RPG genre.
Like the idiots that at first loved Skyrim and were total fans of it and then saw some Youtube critics voice legitimate concerns and then started saying how it's the worst game ever.
I was never a fan of Skyrim, Bethesda can't make good games - they can make nice open worlds at best, but all of their games were more of "go sightseeing" rather than "go play RPG", maaaaybe except good old Morrowind, but mainly due to age and lower expectations back then.
I don't really want to argue since it's pointless as everybody has his own taste and will defend it as much as possible, but objectively speaking F3 wasn't good, not only today, not only after NV was released, but at the release date specifically, and many critics will tell you the same. Was it absolute worst? No, but it disappointed heavily at least me, a fan of old fallouts, in terms of all RPG mechanics, dialogues, storyline and everything that defines an RPG game. F:NV did all of that beautifully. If you realize how short deadline Obsidian had and how much content they had to cut (didn't you feel that Legion didn't have as interesting side quests as NCR? Yeah, that's why), then you'll come to conclusion that it could've been even better than it already was.
Then you got F4 which was even worse than F3, not to mention F:NV. FPS in RPG disguise, that no longer had anything good to offer, disappointing me even more :3. I'm still crying just mentioning myself that dialogue tree. Seeing how new fallout is probably not only made by bethesda but focusing on multiplayer, I'm not even remotely interested in disappointing myself again, I'll just entirely skip that one and call myself lucky.
Comment has been collapsed.
You're right, Bethesda definitely focuses on the world more than things that you can do in the world.
I won't defend my preferences really. It's just that I think you're blowing the whole thing out of proportion. I even mostly agree with you. I think objectively speaking F3 was actually good, it's just that in comparison to games like F1/F2/FNV, F3 is pretty weak (though not as bad as Fallout 4, amirite?). Because objectively the game has excellent world building, a solid story (not great, mind you), nice item variety, mediocre visuals, a great soundtrack, good voice acting and sound design and also an in-depth leveling system (yeah, it's in-depth overall. Just not as in-depth as in New Vegas or the Interplay's main games)
Fallout 4 is a mess and I was just more and more disappointed the more I played it.
Though just to mention, the ending was retconned and it was fixed with one of the DLCs, which actually even continues the story a bit. The ending wasn't thought through at all originally though, which is a shame. But the end sequence was pretty okay overall, imo. That's more of a matter of taste though
Comment has been collapsed.
See, now we can agree on that :3.
Although when you state that something is good or bad, then you always need a comparison based on which you state such thing. Without comparison target you wouldn't know what is good and what is bad, because you can't say that F3 is good or bad if you didn't play any of other fallouts. Sure, you can compare it to other games that you played, but you can't compare it as a fallout - I use that comparison, because I see it as a continuation of the serie, not just average noname RPG game.
For me, a person who played nearly all of them, I have a good comparison and I can state whether F3 is rather higher or lower in the ladder of quality, and it's definitely lower (for me). For a person that played only F4, F3 will be on the very top. This is called point of view, affected also by taste, and everybody will have it different. I can't call F3 a good game when it falls below average, the question is how much below average it is. For me it was greatly below average due to rather poor RPG elements, but for somebody else who likes shooting and exploring more than RPG, then he can even be satisfied with it. Compared to other games at that time, it wasn't >that< bad as a game, but in terms of fallout series, it was really on the very bottom.
Comment has been collapsed.
Every fallout that wasn't made by Bethesda was good, including 1, 2 and awesome New Vegas.
And every fallout that was made by Bethesda was pure shit :3.
🚫
Comment has been collapsed.
3 was awesome imo, played the crap out of that game haha. 4 is a good game ,just not a good RPG game, but it's fun for some time.
Comment has been collapsed.
Every fallout that wasn't made by Bethesda was good
Comment has been collapsed.
I knew somebody will insert that one or tactics :3.
Comment has been collapsed.
Damn, you're the first person to like Brotherhood of Steel. Plus, Tactics was pretty meh too.
They made great games, but don't try and claim that their shit doesn't stink.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think this is true but I haven't played 4. The more old Fallout 3 gets, the more shitty I think it is.
Comment has been collapsed.
Probably because that wouldn't sell? Think what you want but Bethesda is a company, and it has to sell products that will sell like hotcakes. Look at games like Wasteland 2. They're good games, but they don't and won't sell as many copies as Fallout 4 has, or any other "FPS crap RPG".
And I don't know, I enjoyed 3 and New Vegas thoroughly. Don't see why they're crap games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just like Pillars of Eternity didn't sell because nobody plays isomorphic any more? I don't like FPS at all, so they are crap games to me, simple as that. They can be the greatest games ever to people who like FPS for all I care.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't like adventure games. I don't, I find them boring, having to go back and forth is not for me. But I can not say monkey island games are bad. They were well written and had good animations considering the limitations of the time.
Just because I prefer different flavours of gaming it means I can say the rest are bad ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
I on the other hand don't have any difficulties voicing my opinions. They might be the best FPS ever like I said, but I just simply don't care because FPS = crap. What if they did a FPS version of Monkey Island, would you imagine people calling it a good adventure game?
Comment has been collapsed.
Sure it may have sold, but it didn't sell like Fallout 4, Skyrim, GTA V, PUBG or the Witcher 3. Because real-time FPS/RPG/Action games tend to sell a lot better. The fact is that games like ones mentioned are more modern, and they're what sells right now. That doesn't mean Pillars of Eternity is bad, because I haven't played it and I'm not one to say that a game is shit if I haven't even given it a fair chance, it just means that developers will be developing games that will sell well, because profit is, of course, important.
Comment has been collapsed.
Online Co-op centered around settlements & survival a la 7 Days to Die
Comment has been collapsed.
"Kotaku reported that Fallout 76 will be “an online game of some sort.” Polygon has also heard the game will feature multiplayer."
Fuck...
Comment has been collapsed.
Let's hope it'll look like New Vegas. :D
Damnit, now I HAVE to find a way to get the Fallout 4 season pass just to play the rest of them as well.
Please don't buy the Fallout 4 season pass. It's literally worthless.
Comment has been collapsed.
I only want it for Far Harbor and Nuka World. To this day I'm STILL kicking myself for not getting it when it was still $20 before they blatantly jacked up the price to $50.
Comment has been collapsed.
Far Harbor was great. Nuka World wasn't that good, but it had a few good missions. All the other dlcs are worthless. If I were in your shoes, I would only buy Far Harbor. Nuka World is trying to make you become a bad person. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Far Harbor is honestly better than the original game lol. Yeah, it's annoying how the lowest it went on a sale was 50% off, whereas you could pick up Fallout 4 for like 15-20€.
Comment has been collapsed.
The Season Pass was released for 30$ not 20$ (I don't think it even ever went to 20$ or below). Automatron is also decent-ish, just avoid any workshop DLC unless you truly love settlement building and even then...
Comment has been collapsed.
Honestly... just wait for the GOTY to be reduced to 50% or more and then get it, that's exactly what im planning on doing, been waiting to get the rest of the achievements on Fallout 4 for ages but i refuse to give those greedy bastards more money than they deserve
Comment has been collapsed.
It's going to be such a disappointment, if they make it an online game :(
Comment has been collapsed.
It would be awful to play BR inside a bunker, However the Boston Area is a pretty good map for a BR mod
Comment has been collapsed.
Meh. It looks like they recycled FO4 engine and assets and FO4 was bad as fuck.
Comment has been collapsed.
Kotaku reported that Fallout 76 will be “an online game of some sort.” Polygon has also heard the game will feature multiplayer.
Since Bethesda's management is too slow in the brain to make it a battle royale yet, my guess is a zombie survival game, something akin to a Killing Floorout. Or maybe they go ahead with Shelter and make it an MMO-like Sims ripoff.
But I'd guess the former. it would give them the best excuse to not bother with writing, their only real (but glaringly apparent to the point of meme-inducing) weakness.
Comment has been collapsed.
No settlements?? Thats all I've done for over 2000 hours lol
Comment has been collapsed.
Kinda happy that it's so early in timeline. As now I don't have to wonder how everyone is still living without viable food source after centuries. Or haven't cleaned up after themselves...
Comment has been collapsed.
FO3 was magical with populations that couldn't support themselves and literally not enough food / water for said communities, they were just magically there :D
Comment has been collapsed.
I think it's really important to reiterate this: Anyone who spends the next two weeks expecting Fallout: 76 to be a new traditional single-player RPG will be VERY disappointed
https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/1001832458164285442
:'(
Comment has been collapsed.
"Kotaku reported that Fallout 76 will be “an online game of some sort.” Polygon has also heard the game will feature multiplayer."
oh please. like some elder scrolls online shit?
Comment has been collapsed.
Probably worse - some battle royale or survival multiplayer bs.
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah, my wallet won't open for that any time soon.
Comment has been collapsed.
Tbh as long as they make something stylish MMO-like thing... I'm up for it. I have no expectations from them as they are fucking horrible at making proper RPGs, but their worldbuilding is pretty on point.
Comment has been collapsed.
Probably the setting will take place in one of the 13 original American colonies based on Vault 76's patriotic nature and the song "Take Me Home, Country Roads" referencing West Virginia (the state split from original Virginia decades after the American Revolutionary War, but I digress).
Comment has been collapsed.
Apparently it's true: "heavily inspired by games like DayZ and Rust"
Comment has been collapsed.
I feel like it will more and more like Borderlands.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't like the sound of "online" and "multiplayer", but hey, I'm optimistic.
Comment has been collapsed.
doubt it will be fallout 5 or anything similar.
seems more like some stuff ported to console or some crap like fallout shelter.
Comment has been collapsed.
The wait is over.... For now. Bethesda announced Fallout 76 today with a nice little teaser video set inside Vault 76.
It seems like it might be set in 2105, which is only 28 years after the bombs fell. The earliest timeline in the franchise.
Please, please, PLEASE don't make us build settlements again. And do NOT give us paid mods or lootboxes/microtransactions that seem to be all the rage these days.
Damnit, now I HAVE to find a way to get the Fallout 4 season pass just to play the rest of them as well.
Also, what happened to Fallout's 5 through 75? :P
Edit- Response from the New Vegas team.
Comment has been collapsed.