subaverage Posted June 22 Posted June 22 (edited) The vanilla crafting system is not logical at all in my eyes. I can craft e.g. furniture for which I need resources, but instead of looking freshly buildt they look worn. Even without fabric one could have used leather instead. I never felt that the world of Fallout fitted to the amount of time that elapsed after the war. Regarding clothing it's not believable for me that people run around in more than 200 years old fabrics. Or shoes. Same with still working mashines, vertibirds, power armors, robots, etc. when nobody produces or maintaines things (why does Saugus Ironworks still have molten metal and what do they do with that?). Edited June 22 by subaverage 1
Deshebist39 Posted June 22 Posted June 22 4 часа назад, subaverage сказал(а): Система крафтинга в оригинале, на мой взгляд, совершенно нелогична. Я могу создавать, например, мебель, для которой мне нужны ресурсы, но вместо того, чтобы выглядеть свежесделанной, она выглядит изношенной. Даже без ткани можно было бы использовать кожу. Я никогда не чувствовал, что мир Fallout соответствует времени, прошедшему после войны. Что касается одежды, мне не верится, что люди бегают в тканях, которым больше 200 лет. Или в обуви. То же самое касается все еще работающих машин, винтокрылов, силовой брони, роботов и т. д., когда никто не производит и не обслуживает вещи (почему на заводе Saugus Ironworks все еще есть расплавленный металл и что они с ним делают?). All these logical inconsistencies play into the hands of Fallout 1 and 2 fans. My explanation for the “oddities” of Fallout 4 is that you have to look at the personalities who created these games. The people who created the idea, plot, and script for Fo1 and Fo2 are individuals with broad horizons and a background in the humanities (literature). The people who created the idea, plot, and script for Fo4 are “pure programmers.” They probably despised and laughed at humanities scholars. In addition, they were already very wealthy people, which meant they had a superior opinion of themselves. Fact: 80% of the negativity towards Fo4 is criticism of the plot and logic of the game. That is, it is directed at what the developers of Fo4 were fundamentally weak at. But they don't think so. And that makes them angry. Maybe that's why the meme “Todd Howard detest Fallout 4” can be explained this way. 1
fraquar Posted June 23 Posted June 23 It should be said that game development between Fallout 1 and 2 and Fallout 4 - there was a complete 180 degree shift. Back in the day you told stories (in the grand scheme of things they took up little of the distribution space (CD). You optimized everything you could. Today? It's all about "selling" you game, marketing the bejesus out of it. Story telling? Meh. Optimizing? Why, we have no limits to distribution size - it can be as sloppy as you want.
Deshebist39 Posted June 24 Posted June 24 6 hours ago, fraquar said: It should be said that game development between Fallout 1 and 2 and Fallout 4 - there was a complete 180 degree shift. Back in the day you told stories (in the grand scheme of things they took up little of the distribution space (CD). You optimized everything you could. Today? It's all about "selling" you game, marketing the bejesus out of it. Story telling? Meh. Optimizing? Why, we have no limits to distribution size - it can be as sloppy as you want. All of this is technical and programming stuff. The plot (story, dialogues, etc.) and game mechanics don't need a ton of resources. I think the math in Fo4 is pretty weak and not up to the high standards the game is trying to hit. Technically, Fo1-2 is, in fact, a board game with dice that has been transferred to a computer. The Fallout video series is fundamentally different, representing a higher level of programming artistry and technology. And I can only repeat what has already been said 100,567 times before me: “It's a shame that Bethesda refused to improve Fo4.” Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
NeinGaming Posted June 24 Posted June 24 15 hours ago, fraquar said: Back in the day you told stories (in the grand scheme of things they took up little of the distribution space (CD). You optimized everything you could. Today? It's all about "selling" you game, marketing the bejesus out of it. Story telling? Meh. Optimizing? Why, we have no limits to distribution size - it can be as sloppy as you want. I would say the era of hardcore optimizing ended with the CD actually. As for optimizing performance, that was always hit or miss. Same for quality. There was no internet and less marketing sure, but it was the time of HUGE box art and TINY screenshots on the back of it. I mean, slop was once so bad, in the early 80s, that the whole video game industry crashed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_crash_of_1983 It's not like I disagree with what you're saying in spirit. I don't even get "upset" about modern games anymore because it's so naff, such an exercise in wasting my time, while trying to "get me engaged", that I just tuned out. But let's also not pretend it was ever super pure and not beset with charlatans looking for easy money.
Recommended Posts