Why do people hate Fallout 4 so much?

[enrikodalas]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-S-dOv9rPQ

[Aintiarna]

 

Bioware is funny and odd. DA:I has one of the best written NPCs in a game, but the quests were so boring, forgettable and pitiful I loathed doing them and beth throw lore at your face better. The combat felt like an mmo and the crafting was a joke. The world was fabulously boring and it just... Why the hell it was it game of the year?

 

Roleplaying options require branches which have to be written, animated and voiced. It all costs lots of money these days. It seems that both Bethesda and Bioware are making the decision to cut back on all of that and spend the money on other things which I suspect widens the target market and ultimately sells more copies of the game. Bioware is going for MP in all of their games which since they're not going to code completely separate crafting, looting and combat systems means SP uses the same mechanics as MP which gives it that grindy MMO feel. Many people would love a game like Origins on a modern engine, but obviously it doesn't make them as much money as an RP-lite action game with multiplayer. (And I say all that as someone who still likes the game, obviously, although I probably enjoy modding it more than I enjoy playing it)

 

Bethesda seems to be doing something similar in cutting down on the expensive stuff, like voice actors (except where it can used by marketing e.g. Codsworth knowing all those names), so dialogue options are curtailed and quests are less branching. Instead they're making things big so you feel like you're getting value from the sheer size of the game. Paying a couple of programmers to develop the crafting system gives the game tremendous longevity for many customers, and costs a lot less than writers and voice actors for 'evil' quest options that 95% of the customer base will never experience. In my experience, if something looks like a bad idea, there's usually a marketing/business excuse behind it, however unpalatable it might be.

[TeamBacon]

I loved playing Fallout 4, I think Bethesda did a great job.

[Aintiarna]

I loved playing Fallout 4, I think Bethesda did a great job.

 

It's possible to both enjoy playing a game you've paid a lot of money for and to find fault with it. They're not mutually exclusive concepts. Bethesda have indeed produced a great sandbox FPS with roleplaying elements. I've spent many enjoyable hours playing it, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't have preferred it if they'd made a game with a much more extensive roleplaying system instead.

[TeamBacon]

Everyone has their own personal views on what the perfect videogame is, and no two people will want the same thing. I think discussing how you can make things better is a very healthy thing for the modding community.

 

I was responding to the whole 'hate Fallout 4' by saying that it simply isn't true for most people. Most people love this game, and most of the people complaining also love this game, they just like speculating how things could be better. I understand and respect that greatly.

 

But from an outsiders perspective this website looks like one big Bethesda hate club, so I just wanted to inject some positive energy into the place.

[Aintiarna]

Everyone has their own personal views on what the perfect videogame is, and no two people will want the same thing. I think discussing how you can make things better is a very healthy thing for the modding community.

 

I understand. This site is better than some though it has to be said. In general, if I'm looking for an accurate review of anything to inform a purchasing decision, the first thing I do is skip the 10/10s and the 0/10s and head straight for the 5-7/10 section and look for the ones comprised of more than two paragraphs. That's served me well so far for everything from video games to holidays. :smile:

[Boombro]

 

Roleplaying options require branches which have to be written, animated and voiced. It all costs lots of money these days. It seems that both Bethesda and Bioware are making the decision to cut back on all of that and spend the money on other things which I suspect widens the target market and ultimately sells more copies of the game. Bioware is going for MP in all of their games which since they're not going to code completely separate crafting, looting and combat systems means SP uses the same mechanics as MP which gives it that grindy MMO feel. Many people would love a game like Origins on a modern engine, but obviously it doesn't make them as much money as an RP-lite action game with multiplayer. (And I say all that as someone who still likes the game, obviously, although I probably enjoy modding it more than I enjoy playing it)

Bethesda seems to be doing something similar in cutting down on the expensive stuff, like voice actors (except where it can used by marketing e.g. Codsworth knowing all those names), so dialogue options are curtailed and quests are less branching. Instead they're making things big so you feel like you're getting value from the sheer size of the game. Paying a couple of programmers to develop the crafting system gives the game tremendous longevity for many customers, and costs a lot less than writers and voice actors for 'evil' quest options that 95% of the customer base will never experience. In my experience, if something looks like a bad idea, there's usually a marketing/business excuse behind it, however unpalatable it might be.

A good main quest costs that much money?

 

Not really, It you looked at the changes Beth does to games. It seem like they are trying to look to fit into more of a middle ground. Not a hardcore, deep RPG but not the more streamelined game too.

Put fallout 4, oblivion and Skyirm together. No, we will not talk about fallout features here, but how beth does things.

 

Oblivion:All spawns scale to you, weaker foes down right disappear (rats, wolves etc.) and others became stronger (you would find bandits in daedric armor.)

Skyrim: All enemies scale to your level, but there is a bigger gab in difficulty, and loot makes more sense.

Fallout 4: Rubber bending effect. Some areas will dawn right wreak but drop better loot. Not that static yet not that easy. I personally like it.

 

 

Oblivion:you need to join a guild and have spells to enchant. Getting better gear is a visit to a nearby bandit fort, traders are useless after LV 15-20.

Skyrim: the whole crafting system makes crafting trees pretty OP. Exploring is hardly rewarding that much and traders sell some useful gear, but it rare.

Fo4: More personal crafting system for many play styles, the new loot system with placed items makes wondering rewarding. You can mods your gear if you have the mod from another scrapped item. Paying a trader a visit can get you a great item.

 

 

Oblivion: Bad houses.

Skyrim: Bad houses.

Fallout 4: Make your own houses you f*#@s.

 

In short, Skyrim is worse than fallout 4 and beth is getting back up like a baby deer. They have noted the voiced PC is for better story telling, so at least they are trying.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Boombro

[tnu]

I don't see why a voiced PC means a better story. New Vegas had a great sotry and no voiced PC. it had a fantastic story while still allowing m ore player choice than the average Beth game.

[Boombro]

I don't see why a voiced PC means a better story. New Vegas had a great sotry and no voiced PC. it had a fantastic story while still allowing m ore player choice than the average Beth game.

Better Story does not equal better story telling. They are not the same thing and differ greatly, but they go hand in hand in moving picture media.

 

You can make a movie with the best plot ever that fits it run time just right, but if your actors are half assing it just sucks in the end. Great actors can also make the movies with bad plot pass as okay or good. or even great.

 

It a very important aspect of visual entertainment that should not be ignored.

 

Beth thought it will deliver more impact on the player by seeing the pc reacts to the story and npcs, thus improving the questing aspect a little from one angle. But they should have focused on better lip sync and face animtions instead and they would have gotten better results from older fans.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Boombro

[FishBiter]

People are allowed to have opinions, you know.

Yes and the OP never stated otherwise so I'm not sure why this has to be pointed out.

 

Now see, some people can give an opinion, as an opinion. They can say "I don't like Fallout 4" or "I don't like these features in Fallout 4".

 

Then there are other people, who try to give an opinion as an objective fact. They say things like "Fallout 4 is a bad game", which isn't really that bad. Some of them however feel the need to go too far and say things like "This game is a failure" or "Bethesda is incompetent". These people view the fact that the game wasn't personalized to their preferences as a slap in the face. They would rather not have a voiced protagonist, so in their eyes Bethesda has failed as a game company because they made the protagonist voiced. Forget that Bethesda is rolling in cash after one of the biggest releases in history, in the eyes of these people Bethesda have failed, all copies of the game should be returned, and the project should be handed to someone else 'more competent'.

 

Essentially, the people "hating" on the game are delusional, egotistical narcissists who live in a fantasy world where everything needs to cater to them.

 

People who dislike various parts of the game, or even the game as a whole, but who can still acknowledge that this is clearly a very successful title made by a very successful company, are not hating on the game, they just don't happen to like it, but they are under no illusion that the game is inherently bad simply because they don't like it.

 

Also some people are hating on it because hating on stuff is popular right now thanks to certain Youtubers.