justinlynch3
Member
What do I enter in here? Please god somebody tell me what to enter in here.
Posts: 966
Registered on: January 2016
|
Post by justinlynch3 on May 10, 2016 5:27:26 GMT
Anyone know how long I gotta keep MacCready as a partner to pass the Long Road Ahead mission?
I like to keep Strong as my partner, he carries a lot of weight and likes to actively fight opponents. MacCready doesn't carry as much and doesn't seem overall as useful. How long do I have to drag this jackass around before I can dump him back at the Castle settlement and get someone useful?
|
|
justinlynch3
Member
What do I enter in here? Please god somebody tell me what to enter in here.
Posts: 966
Registered on: January 2016
|
Post by justinlynch3 on May 10, 2016 5:33:41 GMT
I'm still playing and loving it every now and then. I'm planning to make a second character for the new survival mode when I find the time. I also just finished Automatron, put about 50 more lights and 200 letters in my Sanctuary with Wasteland Workshop. Now I'm eagerly awaiting Far Harbor. And even if the game itself gets boring soon, mods will keep me playing for some more time, because the world is just so damn beautiful.
I think it's a dumbed down, turgid pile of shit that doesn't deserve the Fallout name but has clearly been made consequence, depth and thought free for the console/millennial player base.
There was a time, in good Fallout games like Fallout 2, that your choice of companion had a number of downstream effects for you, the player, to consider. You already had to put up with a bit of discrimination because as the Vault Dweller in Fallout 1, and the tribal Chosen One in Fallout 2, you were a bit unsophisticated relative to those inhabiting the world around you. And if you ran with, say, Marcus as your companion in Fallout 2 it could be an issue if you arrived a location that didn't know you with a hulking great supermutant in tow. People tended not to take you at your word when you swore the super mutant or ghoul was intelligent and not a threat. So you had to avoid areas or work on earning enough of a reputation that people were willing to trust you on your companion.
Today's millennial, though, is unaccustomed to challenges or not getting 100% of their own way. They've been told by their parents that they're special little flowers and the world owes them - neither of which are true, and the fact is I've seen butter in the midday sun that's harder than these kids.
So you can't simply have them allowed to have Strong or Nick Valentine as companions then deny them access to the "cool" BoS airship with those companions in tow. Even though from a narrative standpoint the Brotherhood is emphatically opposed to both the synths and super mutants, and would either shoot both those companions on sight or best-case scenario take them prisoner until their lack of any actual threat had been established - this gets in the way of shooting stuff and being "cool" in power armour (which annoyingly has ammo to run, that you can easily obtain en masse so there's no issue here).
The proper Fallout games would make you chose. They'd impose hardships - like getting the childkiller trait from a stray shot in a firefight, which causes people to be generally hostile towards you in conversation and negotiation. Harsh, but so is the world. No, Fallout 4's average gamer has no time for this! And because depth isn't usually the remit of console games, they'll think the game is deep and layered.
It's a shitty game, and if you like it you can't have played a good fallout game before. It's to fallout what Game of Thrones is to a Song of Ice and Fire - dumbed down to the point of needing the slogan "by twits, for twits".
I've played 3 and New Vagas if I remember right, I think those are the two my buddy owns and loaned me. I actually prefer 4.
|
|
|
Post by endersai on May 10, 2016 5:57:47 GMT
New Vegas, over 3 and 4, is the closest to capturing the spirit of Fallout proper. Fallout 4 does not. It's really, really disappointing - I started with Fallout 1 when it was still a new game, and to get to this bloated, insipid mess...? Ugh.
|
|
justinlynch3
Member
What do I enter in here? Please god somebody tell me what to enter in here.
Posts: 966
Registered on: January 2016
|
Post by justinlynch3 on May 10, 2016 6:11:54 GMT
New Vegas, over 3 and 4, is the closest to capturing the spirit of Fallout proper. Fallout 4 does not. It's really, really disappointing - I started with Fallout 1 when it was still a new game, and to get to this bloated, insipid mess...? Ugh. To each their own then. I haven't played the first two so maybe I can't relate. But I like 4.
|
|
|
Post by endersai on May 10, 2016 6:13:24 GMT
You like a dumbed down, simplified, consequence free shooter in other words?
Sorry, I'll explain.
In Fallout 1, your Vault - Vault 13 - needs a vital component to function or its inhabitants will die. If you don't complete the game within a certain prescribed timeframe, the game is over.
In both Fallout 1 and Fallout 2, you could affect your standings with people int he world and sometimes unintentionally. I was playing through Fallout 1 I think, and I remember taking out a gang to free up a city. A las rifle shot missed my target because I was only 30% skilled in energy weapons, and hit a kid. The animation cut the little bugger in half.
fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Childkiller
The consequence?
•-10% for the purposes of dialogue and reactions. •Bounty hunters can be met during random encounters. Their equipment depends on your level, ranging from leather jackets and hunting rifles to power armor and miniguns (includes Avenger miniguns in Fallout 2).
This was an accident, but I went with it anyway. It's an RPG, you take the good with the bad.
Similarly at the first town in Fallout 1 I dug up the entire cemetery to search for loot. I got a grave robber reputation.
In Fallout 2, I slept with my shotgun wedding wife, as well as Bishop's wife and daughter in New Reno. I got this perk: fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Gigolo
This was pre-Google days so you found this out as you went in the game, and there was something nice to doing X and having reputation Y as a result.
Fallout 4 has none of that depth or layering to it.
|
|
|
Post by lodus (@nommasch) on May 10, 2016 10:01:53 GMT
I'm still playing and loving it every now and then. I'm planning to make a second character for the new survival mode when I find the time. I also just finished Automatron, put about 50 more lights and 200 letters in my Sanctuary with Wasteland Workshop. Now I'm eagerly awaiting Far Harbor. And even if the game itself gets boring soon, mods will keep me playing for some more time, because the world is just so damn beautiful.
I think it's a dumbed down, turgid pile of shit that doesn't deserve the Fallout name but has clearly been made consequence, depth and thought free for the console/millennial player base.
[Fallout 4 rant]
It's a shitty game, and if you like it you can't have played a good fallout game before. It's to fallout what Game of Thrones is to a Song of Ice and Fire - dumbed down to the point of needing the slogan "by twits, for twits".
I can relate to what you are saying to an extend. I didn't play Fallout 1 or 2, but spend quite some time with 3 and New Vegas. Those two were my first and only RPGs so far and even though they don't seem to be the pinnacle of the genre I really missed a lot of the freedom, importance of actions and the general RPG-feeling when playing Fallout 4. Things like the mostly pointless dialogues or the fact that almost every character that has something to do with the main story is essential and not killable, really turned me down. And every time I read about how great fallout 1 and 2 supposedly are in that perspective, I'm really tempted to play them. I even have them waiting in my Steam library... Along with 20 other games I really want to play. That being said, I still like to play Fallout 4, because I like to just explore the world and discover all the things the creators have put in it. Then there's the settlement building which is a nice addition too. The gameplay is enjoyable and the ambient soundtrack makes it easy for me to lose myself in the game. Besides the main quests there is still a small amount of enjoyable other quests, which even offer a bit of freedom. I agree that it's dumbed down and aimed at casual players. I see how it's not accepted as a true Fallout game and how people who expected a proper RPG are disappointed. I was disappointed by a lot of things in this game as well, but it's by no means a "turgid pile of shit" for me. I can still play it and enjoy it for the things it does well rather than hate it for the things it doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by endersai on May 10, 2016 12:37:21 GMT
Trust me - Fallout 2 is worth pushing to the front of the queue
|
|
semoz
Member
Posts: 54
Registered on: October 2015
PSN ID: semoz
Social Club: semoz_
|
Post by semoz on May 10, 2016 14:04:40 GMT
I agree they lost a lot of the atmosphere FO1 & FO2 had. FO2 was such a great thing at its time. I too felt very much bored by the storyline of FO4. And let alone those people on youtube playing it like it is "Call of Duty: Fallout" A while ago I talked to a FO4 player being like 10 hours into the game, and when I explained about luck and critical hits, he was all like "dude wtf?" because he never ever used V.A.T.S. before But in the end I also enjoyed many parts, so lets not get too cocky here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Registered on: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2016 15:33:54 GMT
endersai there's having a different opinion and there's being an arse about it. Quit doing the latter.
|
|
justinlynch3
Member
What do I enter in here? Please god somebody tell me what to enter in here.
Posts: 966
Registered on: January 2016
|
Post by justinlynch3 on May 11, 2016 2:59:39 GMT
I think it's a dumbed down, turgid pile of shit that doesn't deserve the Fallout name but has clearly been made consequence, depth and thought free for the console/millennial player base.
[Fallout 4 rant]
It's a shitty game, and if you like it you can't have played a good fallout game before. It's to fallout what Game of Thrones is to a Song of Ice and Fire - dumbed down to the point of needing the slogan "by twits, for twits".
I can relate to what you are saying to an extend. I didn't play Fallout 1 or 2, but spend quite some time with 3 and New Vegas. Those two were my first and only RPGs so far and even though they don't seem to be the pinnacle of the genre I really missed a lot of the freedom, importance of actions and the general RPG-feeling when playing Fallout 4. Things like the mostly pointless dialogues or the fact that almost every character that has something to do with the main story is essential and not killable, really turned me down. And every time I read about how great fallout 1 and 2 supposedly are in that perspective, I'm really tempted to play them. I even have them waiting in my Steam library... Along with 20 other games I really want to play. That being said, I still like to play Fallout 4, because I like to just explore the world and discover all the things the creators have put in it. Then there's the settlement building which is a nice addition too. The gameplay is enjoyable and the ambient soundtrack makes it easy for me to lose myself in the game. Besides the main quests there is still a small amount of enjoyable other quests, which even offer a bit of freedom. I agree that it's dumbed down and aimed at casual players. I see how it's not accepted as a true Fallout game and how people who expected a proper RPG are disappointed. I was disappointed by a lot of things in this game as well, but it's by no means a "turgid pile of shit" for me. I can still play it and enjoy it for the things it does well rather than hate it for the things it doesn't. So what if I do like the simplified game? There is no harm in that. I like the story and exploring the world, and the action is fun. Not everybody needs a hardcore RPG element to enjoy the game. If you don't like it, don't play it. But don't go around making it sound like people are doing something wrong by enjoying a game you don't.
|
|
|
Post by endersai on May 11, 2016 4:29:16 GMT
Because the name "Fallout" is linked to a certain type of product. Fallout 4 is not that.
There's nothing wrong with enjoying a less detailed form of game; arguably Skyrim also lacks a lot of this depth too and I'm not complaining about that.
But Fallout was a very defined Thing, over its history, and Fallout 4 is intentionally very far from that. It has dumbed down the complexity which was integral to the concept of what Fallout actually is. Like I said, I had to deal with negative reaction from people in a playthrough of #2 when my laz rifle missed a target and killed a child. Children, as the trait goes, are essential and sacred in this new world so killing on, which is already generally frowned upon, it exceptionally worse in the Fallout universe.
Now, I could have loaded a pre-fight save but the experience of an RPG is dealing with setbacks that affect your character. How would my Chosen One be affected by this? Would be forever try to atone or would he say "it's war, there are sometimes innocent casualties" and be hardened by it?
That I can, in Fallout 4, take Strong or Nick Valentine onto the Prydwen without their being instantly shot up is an indefensible outcome, unworthy of the franchise name. It's mostly a case, Justin, of this is not Fallout.
|
|
justinlynch3
Member
What do I enter in here? Please god somebody tell me what to enter in here.
Posts: 966
Registered on: January 2016
|
Post by justinlynch3 on May 11, 2016 4:58:40 GMT
Well that now is a fair enough argument. I have heard if your on the Prydwen for to long with Strong that he'll attack people turning the Brotherhood against you. I have heard Strong say he doesn't like machinery and Brotherhood say they hate super mutants, so that outcome is possible. However I've never tried it out. I'm usually in, sell stuff, buy ammo, out. Still your point about Strong even being allowed on that ship at all is very valid.
I wouldn't of mind if there was greater consequences in the game, but it's not a requirement for me to enjoy the game. While the rpg element has toned down the overall story theme of the game remains Fallout based. Maybe the devs thought the rpg based game play wasn't bringing in the sales they wanted so they shifted Fallout to more of a action based game. Who knows? But while some can accept or even enjoy the change, I can certainly respect your right to dislike it and see the reasoning why.
|
|
|
Post by endersai on May 11, 2016 5:21:07 GMT
I think the problem is the developer is cashing in on a strong intellectual property and has diluted core elements to make it more accessible, which it didn't need to do.
I remember Dragon Age 3 or Inquisition or whatever it was called - scheming for hours of gameplay to try and get Cassandra, my romance option, appointed Divine. I didn't get it in the end, that went to Vivienne, and I had a few NPCs turn against me etc. It was fantastic that I was that involved, and a hallmark of BioWare (save for the ME3 ending). In their mega-hit Knights of the Old Republic, I felt genuinely conflicted about the trial on Manaan you participate in.
It's a false dichotomy to assume complexity and nuance is anathema to sales, and I wish Bethesda didn't believe in it.
|
|
semoz
Member
Posts: 54
Registered on: October 2015
PSN ID: semoz
Social Club: semoz_
|
Post by semoz on May 11, 2016 11:00:07 GMT
I think the problem is the developer is cashing in on a strong intellectual property and has diluted core elements to make it more accessible, which it didn't need to do. You mean like putting power armor, a crashed vertibird, a minigun and a deathclaw into the first 20 minutes of the game because all promo articles will feature those first couple of minutes of the game?
|
|
|
Post by endersai on May 11, 2016 11:18:33 GMT
Precisely.
|
|