Jump to content

Photo

Am I the only one who feels Bethesda dropped the ball on the Fallout 4 beginning?

fo4 bethesda big sweaty ball

  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#41
Duckfromportal

Duckfromportal

    Journeyman

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 25 posts

I feel they dropped the entire case of balls on the beginning on every game sadly, lol, most are great in general but there's so much missed opportunities and revoked freedom in their beginnings (skyrim is a prime example, but name any game and you can feel the chains of railroading). Like it would have been cool to have a small area to explore in prewar, like the neighborhood, socializing with your neighbors, vault tech and the ilk and then either by your choice or after a certain amount of time, you decide to go to the vault and check it out. make it so you feel for the loss of the neighborhood and the families lost in the great war.

 

I hated the frozen stuff, I think being awakened ruined the surprise of your wifes death, imiagine instead you awaken after cryo, cold, alone, you see you wife's pod, you open it only to find Shaun gone and your wife shot. checking other pods you find everyone else's life support had been cut, and after a small dungeon crawl you find out the name of the man responsible, the man who kidnapped your son; Kellog. 

 

As you go out into the wastes, you have a newfound goal: Find Shaun and kill his Captor.

 

Idk i think the added freedom would have improved the intro to the game. I think the railroad to start off actually kind of hindered the game.



#42
Mudran

Mudran

    Fan

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 423 posts

@Mudran - You know whats funny? In hindsight, it really does feel like F4 was the 'warm-up' for '76. Like they were playtesting certain concepts on us (the CC, and not to mention getting us used to lunch-boxes {'loot boxes'} IG, etc.) There did seem to be an awful lot of story elements that revolved around people getting 'stuck' that didn't make much sense to me; why include SO MANY instances of hearing radio beacons for events that happened 200 years ago? Then you get there and no-one needs saving - they all died in the distant past (around the same time everyone was dying in FO'76). So we had lots and lots of terminal entries telling us about some of the evil crap that went down soon after the apocalypse, that was completely irrelevant to the story we were playing (more like being 'railroaded' through).

 

But here's the thing - the settlement-building seems like it would have been the perfect fit for the world immediately following the Apocalypse. you should have had to go around gathering what was left of the human race and forming them into communities. But '76 doesn't have people... except for other players. How many players per server? Its supposed to be 24-32, right? Just about the same number of people you can get in your settlements in FO4. I am starting to think that the 'big things' they announced they had plans to add included this settlement building, but now it will be cooperative building instead (like a lot of survival games).  They basically turned us all into each other's NPCs.

 

That building feature is quite fitting, maybe if it would be connected to more of mechanics from the game than just settlements,  but maybe that would require advanced engine. or would be without settlements, just basics and settlement variation would be an online spin-off, something like that. 

I think the biggest problem with Fallout franchise is that even since Fallout 3 they try to make it more serious military oriented, but originally it was maybe meant to be RPG like Skyrim and there is no game like that existing - post-apocalyptic RPG like Skyrim - with guilds and all, while there is a lot of survival games. And with all those factions/races it would be so cool, but they have now new group of players who love those more serious games, so I guess it will never happen. 

 

And I could even imagine Fallout 76 as a game for all kinds of players, with really cool online features - for explorers, builders, pvp groups players, even RPG, but it wasn't intended that way- that was probably what made me so against it - it felt like they wanted some players angry.

And then all those controversies - it is so confusing, because I cannot imagine why they would do it - maybe using old engine because of modding, then trying to patch it, but anything more complicated didn't work, so they left NPCs out, but why they would continue creating a game, where you cannot do everything you wanted? Then they added that atom shop which reminded me of ESO experience even more, but what makes ESO running is RPG high quality, why they would destroy that aspect in their announced online game, made by a studio which was known for RPG?

So my overall feeling is that they tried hard, altered Fallout 4 to create a game, which feels like B quality product they don't care about and is intended to be with microtransactions - it doesn't make sense. 

Maybe they simply wanted another version of that mobile spin-off of Fallout, only online games are harder to create, but they didn't really try to create something unique and cool. So another theory is that they were only part of PR marketing to sell the game, first test the engine, because they didn't intend to fully create the game, they used their Fallout 4 for testing, and it was always intended to be run by a different studio. But then everything around it is all such a big lie. 

 

 

Those settlements - it really points at Fallout 76. I was still hoping that it is an idea of someone else than BSG team, but I guess it was theirs after all :sad:.

After all those things which happened since Fallout 4 I don't understand 1 thing - why they were willing to downgrade RPG in the name of testing of multiplayer elements... (noclip F76 youtube source of info) All other companies when they decide to do anything, they just do it - they do the best 1 thing and then they do another one, but BSG spoiled Fallout 4 with repetitive empty crap, then with CC in the name of testing, they didn't care that those players bought the game without it - there was already that kind of behavior of Fallout 76. They really stopped to care about players enjoying their games, did they? I think like half a year before releasing Fallout 4 there were hiring and the wording was something like: the new generation of players for the new generation of consoles or devices and their new webpage was quite against RPG players saying that nobody plays RPG games, everyone wants an action game. I guess with Fallout 76 I started to care too much about news from this company - they are quite depressing, so I guess it will be better to force myself to stop listening to all of it and just focus on something positive for me :sad:

Don't let it get you down. I may have plenty of complaints about FO4, but I keep coming back and playing it again. So I must like something about it. The models were good I think as well as some of the animations- I adore my character right now because she is the best I have ever made in any game with the help of some mods. Enemies sort of have roles in that one or two Raiders will chunk a grenade and rush you while two more will find cover and fire on you with maybe a sorta sniper in the back somewhere making encounters challenging. Areas in the game are interesting to explore even for the 10th time. Trying to navigate the maze of rubble downtown is fun and full of enemies. Building things anywhere (mod) is fun even if it's just to have a place to sit down for awhile and enjoy a view. Hearing some of the convos between npcs is still fun if you haven't heard it a bunch of times. There is still enough to keep me playing it seems. :smile:

 

 

I would enjoy it more if there would be more of RPG mods :smile: but even after 3 years there is almost 0. It looks like most of RPG players simply moved on or joined some big projects or that F4 Creation kit is harder to use. It would be sad if CClub would have them, not because of their rewards, but because I have bad feeling about it - like if corporate boss would have them :tongue:

 

EDIT:

I have to add:

1. I don't have anything against military shooters - some of them in 3rd person I enjoy even when some youtubers said that they are boring - I just see the potential in that strong Fallout RPG IP, which shrinked into different types of enemies in Bethesda version, probably because they do have strong RPG IP already and wanted something different. But with ESO taking all ideas for the next Elderscrolls, maybe that would be their only option for another RPG IP, but I guess they had to come with some solution to this problem before they were thinking about MMO TES.

2. I couldn't believe it when I was told they are using the singleplayer engine for their MMO - I was told by some modders when I was asking about Skyrim MMO, that it is almost impossible because online games have different coding, so that's why I assume that they didn't intend to create anything big or complicated because the question is if their engineers can do it online. 


Edited by Mudran, 20 January 2019 - 07:43 AM.


#43
MarkusTay

MarkusTay

    Old hand

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPip
  • 629 posts

If they can only allow 24-32 players per server, in this day and age (when WoW allowed for THOUSANDS over a decade ago), then they never intended it to be a true MMO. They wanted a multi-player survival game, with base-building. They just need to add the building now.

 

Eventually, some good may come out of that travesty. Perhaps a few community-based servers where you can RP. And with private servers they can allow modding, and then it would really take-off.

 

The problem is, they want to CONTROL THAT, and in my experience, every time a game company tried to control a 'feature' that players themselves came up with in-game (like Diablo II's economy), it NEVER worked out. They WANT modding. They just want to monetize it.

 

And that will kill it...



#44
Fkemman11

Fkemman11

    Filthy Animal

  • Premium Member
  • 2,662 posts

 

 

The problem is, they want to CONTROL THAT, and in my experience, every time a game company tried to control a 'feature' that players themselves came up with in-game (like Diablo II's economy), it NEVER worked out. They WANT modding. They just want to monetize it.

 

And that will kill it...

They need to come up with another good game or two before they can start worrying about the bit of money they make from mods. Not a lot of profit to be made if no one likes the game or wants to mod it- which was sort of the case with FO4. Many authors would not touch it due to a number of things, but the main reason I read over and over was that they just didn't like it. Maybe StarField will be the game that rights the ship and puts Beth back in everyone's good graces. I mean they have been working on it for a decade now. Anyone notice how Todd's eyes sort of light up when he starts talking about it? He seems excited about it anyway.



#45
MarkusTay

MarkusTay

    Old hand

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPip
  • 629 posts

He always seems excited about the prospect of Bethesda making more money. I don't attribute that to the quality of the games themselves.

 

As for Fallout 4, I am fairly new to modding (not the concept, just the level I am getting involved in it in this game - I've modded other games through the Steam Workshop), and I don't think people are avoiding modding it. Sure, some projects have died-off, but that's normal, and people are still working on some major ones - I think FO4 is just going through a 'mid-life crisis', and to be perfectly honest, I think the failure of FO'76 has actual helped FO4 - anyone looking to get their fallout fix and was disappointed by '76 are coming (back) to FO4. I see new stuff - and not just 'slooty' stuff - appearing everyday on the Nexus, even though the game is 3 years old. Take the new Anti (pasta) Material Rifle - that's a work of art. As I've seen some other (far more knowledgeable concerning Beth games than I) people saying that Skyrim modding "only came into its own" after the first three years - that the best is yet to come for us.

 

I personally hope to eventually contribute to that. :smile:



#46
Undeadbob666

Undeadbob666

    Fan

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 429 posts

People are still making mods for minecraft, so think about that for a minute and let it sink in.



#47
MarkusTay

MarkusTay

    Old hand

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPip
  • 629 posts

According to my two youngest sons (who are grown men because I am so friggin' old) whom I went to the movies last night (the new Spiderman one - it was good, but didn't live up to the hype, methinks), there is currently a 'minecraft renaissance', and people are returning to it.

 

I never undertsood the appeal, personally. It looks like something I would have played in the 1980's.



#48
steamteck

steamteck

    Fan

  • Premium Member
  • 303 posts

 

I have a thread about my speculations about Father and Shaun. But let me say this, I think that Bethesda did drop the ball, and it wasn't just Fallout 4, but also Skyrim. They haven't done decent writing for a game since, IMO, Fallout 3 and Oblivion. 

Decent, yes. But still not good. It really struck me in early 2012, when I still wasn't able to enter Whiterun due to a bug and even I as a experienced BGS Games Player couldn't bother with cheating my way through anymore. I should be so fair to mention that I didn't have any game breaking bugs with any of their previous games before.

While waiting for the next patch I was looking for something to play and for whatever reason chose to buy "The Witcher - Enhanced Edition". It felt quite similar to my first Morrowind experience back in 2002. The combat system was atrocious to get into, but the story was good enough to keep me going. It even stopped me from checking for Skyrim Updates until I finished the game (weeks later, btw. since I had a job and a life going on).

Since then I played all three Witcher games and that raised my bar quite a bit. Needless to say that BGS won't impress me with anything if their next TES and FO games aren't at least at a "Hearts of Stone" level regarding the story and the character depth.

 

So, the story telling is not the only problem I had with Skyrim. Combat was still bad, there were so many bugs, so many problems with narrative design and once you realize that you actually don't play Skyrim but a combination of Frostfall, iNeed, Wet&Cold and maybe half a dozen other mods to keep you entertained you realize that there is a fundamental problem with that "game".

 

The "sarcastic" comments are a joke, to me. I think that they need to just not be in the game. And what's with the console version of dialogue choices? Did we, as PC gamers get dumb all of a sudden? Do we need only 4 choices? I know Mass Effect had their limitations as to choices, but frakk me if BGS did drop the ball on that one as well. And the perk, skills, and special crap they made? what a bloody joke. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

 

Well, since they make 80% of the money due to console sales, it's no wonder they "optimize" the games for that kind of audience.

 

Exactly the opposite of what I want but different strokes for different folks. I hated being forced into the main quest. I go as far  just before the glowing sea then live my life instead.  I want the main quest to optional and activate only when and if I want it to







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: fo4, bethesda, big sweaty ball

Page loaded in: 1.053 seconds