Why do people hate Fallout 4 so much?

[miikka78]

Bethesda games are supposed to be about freedom to play however you'd like.. but they're also supposed to be RPGs.

 

Tell me, if your spouse were murdered and your son kidnapped, would you spend the next several months hunting down raiders, establishing settlements, chilling with the Brotherhood of Sleel, and sleeping with an ex-junkie? No, you would not. The starting sequence of the game is very clear in showing that you are a kind, loving parent and devoted spouse. That is what you are. That is established canon for your character.

 

Can't you just use your imagination and pretend the intro did not happen and you are not looking for your son? I can't believe this would be a major issue.

[neonie]

 

Bethesda games are supposed to be about freedom to play however you'd like.. but they're also supposed to be RPGs.

 

Tell me, if your spouse were murdered and your son kidnapped, would you spend the next several months hunting down raiders, establishing settlements, chilling with the Brotherhood of Sleel, and sleeping with an ex-junkie? No, you would not. The starting sequence of the game is very clear in showing that you are a kind, loving parent and devoted spouse. That is what you are. That is established canon for your character.

 

Can't you just use your imagination and pretend the intro did not happen and you are not looking for your son? I can't believe this would be a major issue.

 

 

"Major" issue doesn't really matter. A bunch of small issues add up, and the problem is far from just the intro. Because of the voice acting, and because of the limited dialogue options in the questing system, it takes away the ability to play a different character type.

 

I want to completely forget I'm looking for that baby, but there's a part in Pipers quest which basically forces you to make your character "I'm looking for my baby Shaun." in a very distraught, shaken up tone.

 

The problem is: There are a BUNCH of moments like this in the game, not just one, and that's not the character I want to play. That's the character Bethseda's forcing on the player. If I had my way, my character wouldn't give a damn about that baby, and wander the wastes in a Saints Row esq blaze of badassery, kicking ass and taking names, and while I can play the game that way, if I try to do the story quests, I'm forced to play (and see cutscenes of) my character acting in a way I very specifically don't want them to act that goes completely against the personality I want for them.

Edited November 17, 2015 by neonie

[Boombro]

Exactly, and that is something Bethesda has been shying away from. Fallout: New Vegas was a massive improvement over Fallout 3. It still had many flaws, but it was a working formula that people enjoyed.

 

Why did Bethesda completely ignore it? Why did they take Fallout 3, rip out a ton of RPG elements, and force it as an FPS game down our throats after advertising it as an RPG?

 

I don't get it. I really don't, and I would give anything -- ANYTHING -- for Bethesda to let Obsidian make another Fallout game.

I don't get it. I really don't, and I would give anything -- ANYTHING -- for Bethesda to let Obsidian make another Fallout game.

Why? Because it not their game.

While I also want the same thing, I understand not wanting to copy the the ways of another game and try to improve themselves instead.

But I don't understand why they can't at least use it as a learning experience, while questing in fo4 improved it an angle, since you can always ask for more cash, say no or later, end gun fights by ending them peacefully or scaring them or force the fight, and side with the other party most of the time.

Example is that old lady, she asks you for chems. You can pick to help her, say no, or pick one of the charisma choices, threaten her to stop or reason her to stop. It seems they didn't thought of using perks instead of skills as ways to improve questing, using only charisma. So one can see charisma was expanded in a way for badasses and mercs. Which is a good thing to help expand RPG elements, for other play styles than a charming gal/guy, but it not much.

And skill removal seems like their way of trying to to balance the game. Since one in older fo games can max his damage very early and become op by focusing on one or two skill in every level up, that why perks now have level and skill walls. It seems that the only why they were think solve.

One can see that in oblivion and Skyrim. While oblivion had att points that you get from leveling skills that improve their stats, players said it was grindy, tiring and found ways to cheat the system and mess up builds. Like a sneaky assassin being a ponge because he leveled his end state. If you played dark souls, think fast rolling havel mages kind of broken. One can max all their states in game that was capped. Yes, fo4 is not capped, but it harder to max one stats.

So that why they where thinking of some kind of a middle way and changing stuff, while in way it worked because I struggle in fo4 more than older fo titles and find myself thinking more about perks. It removed the RPG sense for many.

For the voice the and the wheel, they said they wanted better impact on the player in terms of story and writing to be better at it ( at lest they know that they are not the best at that.) it seems they thought it offered enough RPG elements for the player since many other RPG were doing it already, we had no idea to voice they didn't want expect WAY later.

[JimboUK]

Exactly, and that is something Bethesda has been shying away from. Fallout: New Vegas was a massive improvement over Fallout 3. It still had many flaws, but it was a working formula that people enjoyed.

 

Why did Bethesda completely ignore it? Why did they take Fallout 3, rip out a ton of RPG elements, and force it as an FPS game down our throats after advertising it as an RPG?

 

I don't get it. I really don't, and I would give anything -- ANYTHING -- for Bethesda to let Obsidian make another Fallout game.

 

I get the feeling that Obsidian embarrassed them by making a proper RPG, there must be a reason why Bethesda ignore the game, I don't remember them mentioning New Vegas once in the prerelease hype.

[Pthalo]

I just played a month solid of FO3 since I never had. I wanted to know 101's plot and such so I'd be up to speed on any tropes/references in FO4, get a feel for things. I'd have played the older Fallouts, but I am surprisingly terrible at isometric turn-based systems. Which is sad, I know. That one's on me.

 

 

I forgive FO3 for it's overwhelming brown-smudgeness because it is an older game that was being super apocalyptic in looks - when not a lot of other games were doing anything similar. So it stood out. At worst, it's aged really badly.

 

The main story of being ditched by dad and having to grow up in a hurry in the wasteland kept creeping up on me during my journey, I liked that, added an emotional element. Seeing other families lose kids, accidentally orphaning the son of Megaton's sheriff because I narked on that ass who wanted me to rig the nuke. Helping that Grayditch kid, or seeing Tranquility Lane's Overseer just crippled with his own unhealthy attachment/ inability to move on. Could I move on? Should I? There was a lot of opportunity for emotional roleplay - sadly, it was often compromised by the fact a lot of npc's were limited in their responsiveness to their environment/me. It left a lot in my imagination. NPC interaction comparable to Oblivion is to blame for this (A game which I used to LOVE, and now CAN'T COPE WITH because I've been spoiled by technological progress).

 

Now Fallout 4.

 

Immediately after playing 3 it's amazing to be in this world with colour?? Side-by-side: FO3 looks like someone smeared mud on a perfectly good canvas and deemed it radioactive. FO4 looks like somebody married a 1950's sexy car poster to Pripyat's exclusion zone and left it to fade in the storefront window, but in a sort of nostalgic way. I'd argue that's not so much 'graphics' for the latter as like, 'art direction'? Frankly, I think it's great art direction, but it delivers a very, very over-sunbleached view when I'm trying to shoot things. Bit too washed out, I feel like my eyes never quite thawed after that nap in Vault 111's fridge. I'd say the primary flaw is just that: Nice to look at, kinda hard to live in.

 

NPC's will converse with me or one another inside AND outside of the dialogue box - it's different than Skyrim and way better than FO3. Feels more like these people have their own natures and priorities. I feel the biggest flaw is that the UI presents us with four options at a time, feels kind of game-controller port-y, and doesn't necessarily give me a heads-up that I won't be able to go back and ask other questions earlier in the dialogue tree. It's not much of a tree right now.

Mass effect was no perfect angel either but It was good on keeping all the 'more info' dialogue on the left, so you knew you'd come back to the present conversation, and the righthandside was the 'no return' point related to karma.

 

I will admit I'm still getting the hang of it.

 

I think what the game needs most is some lighting tweaks so it can have it's distinct aesthetic while not making me feel like I need sunglasses on at night (TOO BRIGHT), and a UI overhaul tailored to PC users - which would help clean up the majority of fiddlyness like conversation progression, town-building, item-crafting, inventory sorting. UI would aid all of those so I don't complain about them individually.

 

PERSONAL PREFERENCE TIME: I have not played NV. But I did run a series of mods on Skyrim and FO3 both that converted them into survival sims with very harsh weapons. I've gotten so used to bullets being these horrible things that kill everybody, npc and player alike. Medical care is scarce, takes time, and is pivotal. Food is solely for not starving. If you have a gun and he doesn't, you probably win. If he has a gun and you also do, PREPARE TO USE COVER because nobody runs around in real life thinking "I can take a few before I go down. I don't really need both arms anyway."

 

So playing FO4 on Survival and realizing my enemies are bullet sponges and my crippled limbs seem to auto-heal after 10 seconds is just surreal. And nowhere near as tense. Firefights are just... Yeah I intend to mod the heck out of this. But I enjoy the process of tweaking and adding mods too, so I did pay for the game with that expectation in mind.

 

Seriously though, are crippled limbs supposed to do that? I'm not using stimpaks, they're just resolving themselves. I've had nosebleeds irl that have lasted longer than having my entire body crippled in FO4, ingame time OR realtime. Is. ...Is that right? Is it supposed to do that?

[Twisted1232]

Criticizing is easy, creating is hard. If you're going to attack something, have something to present that can fix it.

People should not have to fix something they pay for it should be polished from the start but in reality I have no problem with this game its quite fun for me and I hope that the dlc's pleases me even more.

Edited December 1, 2015 by Twisted1232

[alqp]

Bethesda can't even use an "oh well, guess we learned nothing" defense because Skyrim was significantly improved,

Skyrim took a few years of patching by both Bethesda and the Modding Community to reach what it should have been on release.

 

Skyrim's has a more vibrant color palette, which is most likely what has led you to your conclusion that it has better visuals, but Fallout 4 definitely has better graphics. The similarities in color palette between it and it's previous installments is also probably what also lead you to the conclusion that they were not that different graphically either.

[Lachdonin]

a good RPG won't shoehorn y ou in to a orle but let you define your own role..

Define a 'good RPG'. Is Wild Hunt a bad RPG because it has a defined character? Are the Final Fantasy games bad RPGs because they lack choices? Is Dark Souls a bad RPG because you can't be anything but Undead?

 

RPGs are a far broader category than just allowing you to do whatever you want.

 

Tell me, if your spouse were murdered and your son kidnapped, would you spend the next several months hunting down raiders, establishing settlements, chilling with the Brotherhood of Sleel, and sleeping with an ex-junkie? No, you would not

Would I? No. I do know people who would, mind you. Which basically disproves you're entire complaint. All the intro does is establish a background, it doesn't impose motivation on you. Other shortcommings MAY, but the into certainly doesn't, any more than barely surviving a Dragon attack did in Skyrim.

 

I get the feeling that Obsidian embarrassed them by making a proper RPG, there must be a reason why Bethesda ignore the game, I don't remember them mentioning New Vegas once in the prerelease hype.

 

I am of the rather unpopular opinion that New Vegas was inferior in almost every way to Fallout 3. Slightly better non-VATS combat and a better implementation of skill-related dialogue options, sure, but in terms of character personalization, world design, story telling, character design and overall feel... It was a major step backwards. But I've found that Obsidian has a tendency to make games that do one thing REALLY well, but lack much substance beyond that one thing. It's DLC was also inconsistent, with 2 being great, one being mediocre, and one single handedly changing my opinion about their being no such thing as too much dialogue...

 

That's not to say Fallout 4 does not have problems. The 'where's my baby' thing crops up far too much in dialogue. The options on the wheel are far too brief, and despite the fact the system can handle far more than 4 options you're never given more than that number of choices (even if that still gives you more than you had in Skyrim, even with a 'proper' dialogue system). The single voice for the PC is tollerable, but definately lacking the range of options which mitigates the problem with Voice Acting.

 

In exchange, we got a more differentiated character progression system, better interpersonal interactions, more fluid gameplay, far more varied loot, more meaningful interaction with the world, far better NPC characters, probably the best story Bethesda has written in a decade (and still better than that Hoover Dam crap Obsidian churned out) and those unique boss-enemies people have been demanding for years.

 

I see the hate as mostly the same as when any Bethesda game comes out. 'Its not exactly like the last one!'. It turns into a nit-pick frenzy as people blame, misblame, shift blame and in some cases outright ignore other elements to suit their complaints. How many people rmember New Vegas using enemy levels to force you to go south-east, then north to Vegas? How about Oblivions hugely important charge from the Emperor (or the prophetic summary of the entire main quest line in a single paragraph of dialogue?). How about Fallout 3's not so subtle prodding towards Rivet City? Hell, even Daggerfall outright reminded you that you had a job to do, and someone to meet.

Edited December 1, 2015 by Lachdonin

[UhuruNUru]

Why do people hate any sequel, because they loved the previous version, got hyped then felt decieved and betrayed when the game released isn't what they expected.

 

You can truly hate something you once loved, when it changes.

Indeed lovers will flip to haters, much easier than a don't care will become mostly don't care.

 

I bought Witcher 3 for the game and hoped modding would be truly supported early and well. CDPR failed with modding, but made the best open world RPG, I've ever played (You can disagree, but only I get a vote, it's my opinion).

 

The PC port of Fallout was as bad on release as Batman.

Bethesda claimed no loading screens in a swipe at Witcher's isolated regions, but they lied. Fallout's full of internal loading screens, for all but the empty houses. All quest houses get loading screens.

Yet knowing Fallout 4 was broken and buggy on release, I still bought it.

 

I bought Skyrim as a modding sandbox and Fallout 4 as well.

It doesn't matter what I think is wrong with it and there's lots wrong. It's not my Fallout yet, it takes a year or two for the mods to develop fully.

 

So haters are jilted previous lovers. Modders never loved the vanilla game, they love the modded one they make it into.

 

I firmly believe if Fallout 4 hadn't been moddable, it would have been another Batman type refunded game debacle. Without modding many of the fixes, would've been unknown.

 

Bethesda do one thing well, making the game moddable.

They don't even support mods. Just provide the tools (Support is information and Tools).

 

The haters expected something that they never got and hyped changed to hated overnight.

[KiCHo666]

In all seriousness, Fallout 4 is open world FPS with stats.
Yes, it's fun, shooting is fun.

But RPG?

I want to play as a stealth character, pacifist, and progress the story in that way (or ROLE).....Nope, here's a minigun and a power armor, go shower everything with a rain of bullets!

So, I dropped the idea of role playing and play it as the game wants me to play. I see a red tick on a compass, I kill it.

I wait for a GECK, script extender and Niftools to mod a game in a way I want it to be. :laugh:

Yes, I was a bit sour there, I'll admit.