Why do people hate Fallout 4 so much?

[tartarsauce2]

Story/Roleplay Gripes

1. There's less room for role playing than previous games--especially New Vegas. This is largely because...

2. The dialogue sucks. Several reasons for this: (I) It's almost always the same four options: Yes, Sarcastic yes, no, more information. (II) There's rarely (outside of Nuka World) bad dialogue options. There's rarely even Han Solo-options. It's always "don't worry, I'll save Timmy from the well." "It's never 'Just have my money ready.'" (III) Your dialogue is boring. What you actually say is almost as short and perfunctory as the topics you chose from. There's hardly ever any flavor. (IV) Your character build doesn't affect your dialogue options. In FNV you had all these cool skill-based dialogue options, many of which dramatically affected the outcome of the conversation. In Fo4 it's all based on Charisma, and it amounts to nothing more than extra xp and a few extra caps.

3. The story feels out of place. Bethesda games are best when you're just wandering aimlessly, discovering new places and chasing down whatever quest grabs your attention. Here, your a loving parent who not is looking for their child, but who tells everyone they meet that they're desperate to find him.

4. The main story sucks. Sure Bethesda's never been known for their main stories, but when you feel compelled to do it...

5. And last but certainly not least: Almost every quest is resolved by violence. This gives every-quest a samey feeling. Even the quest--one of the least samey in the game--where you play a golden age comic book character resolves in violence. There's no option to batman your way through these it with stealth and rubber bullets. It's just a cooler way to kill.

Gameplay:

1. The Perks suck. Sure there are some fun ones, (the luck tree is great and a blitz-melee build is OP as hell), but there's a lot of perks that either (I) suck (VANS, Lead Belly, Aquaboy, Big Sale, scrounger, cap collector) or (II) are boring (all the more damage and more dam resistant perks) or (III) feel necessary: all. the. crafting. perks. Lockpicking. Hacking. When you've cut your whole leveling system down to just 70 perks and focused your game on combat, you can't afford to have any duds. But the Perk tree we got is littered crappy, boring or necessary perks. This has the effect that...

1A. Leveling up now is more of a chore than it ever was in FO3 or FNV because I'm just not excited about getting new perks. Very often I wander the wasteland with a perk point in my back pocket, and it's not uncommon for me to rack up 2 or 3 before I finally spend them.

1B. All the characters feel samey. Basically there's two distinct builds: melee and ranged. After that, there's not a terrible amount of difference.

That's not to say *I* hate the game. I don't. Stiil, these are the reasons commonly given and I do think most of them are real problems.

I'd also add, that I think following new vegas was really hard. If all we'd ever had was Fallout 3, I think this game would be better received, since a lot of these problems (Boring perks, mismatched story, crappy story) are present to some degree or another in FO3. But because FO3 was so long ago and FNV is more recent, people tend to roll them together. I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone lament the loss of skill-based dialogue options from Fallout 3! Play the game again guys; there's not many (if any?) skill checks in FO3's dialogue.

 

ummm, yes
I'm considering just saying flat out "never use dialogue wheels ever again" because the dialogue did suck, and like borgelt13 mentioned, it lacks the west coast vibe, like someone else mentioned, why is the junk all so perfect?

I didn't mind the story's setup, but.... well basically I have this thing, also the "crazy good" link , for a setup, I wanted a really crazy interwoven situation instead of just a walkalong railroad ride

https://forums.nexusmods.com/index.php?/topic/4784215-yet-another-government-mod-idea/

 

the dialogue does suck, it's got a bit of an SJW trend like in dragon age inquisition where you're simply not allowed to dick over NPC's en masse and still carry on the storyline, I mean, granted I liked the individual side characters for the most part, but "no here's a shotgun to the face" to danse right off the bat would've been amazing, and then looting the info on the quest to do the transistor thing, and doing cleansing the commonwealth and tech things for proctor teagan and captain uhh, captain black vulcan from star trek guy, kells? who cares if I'd miss the danse questlines? why am I not allowed to simply miss the companion quests because they're apparently a part of the rest of the world not super special and plot armoured?
it's bad writing - I'm able to constantly spam "sarcastic" but where's "hi I'm here to enslave you/murder you and take your stuff" or "naw I'm not cooperating" etc mostly
there's an encounter at a bridge but there's absolutely no consequence to it other than you simply fight or don't against a few raiders, which is a generic thing
I literally passed some speech checks just for the exp and then blew them apart for loot and exp - it was okay but it was pretty lacking, I wanted something absolutely stupid and ridiculous to happen like maybe a mirelurk bursts through the bridge floor and starts tearing them apart - like, scripted event, the thing could be invulnerable while they both play out with it shaking the guy in one of its claws eventually having their body snap apart under the pressure

or someone running from a behemoth in the distance as a deathclaw pops up from some bushes, lunges in, gets him... only to be instantly smashed by the behemoth that was trying to get the guy who didn't even realize it was there until the swing was started, and thus it was squished

god I mean, imagine if hallucigen inc was a quest where you could join some gunners to break in and you started hallucinating purple deathclaws and all that jazz

the worldbuilding through RP elements really didn't get done :s the story aspect really was disappointing in how it played out, like an interactive story like the japanese apparently are fond of as opposed to open world RPG with dynamic story techniques

 

why can't I kill desdemona and take over the railroad or drive it into the dust without the institute or brotherhood of steel allowing me?
why can't I betray them to the various residents of diamond city etc?
why can't I convince the mechanist to absolutely tear the living hell out of the commonwealth anyways?
why does there have to be a resolution in far harbour satisfactory to anyone?

Edited September 14, 2016 by tartarsauce2

[cossayos]

wasn't morrowind non-linear somewhat?

 

a lot of the games appear to have linear main quests, but these are designed MORE to bring you to new and interesting places than to keep you on a rail you purposefully have to jump off the rail of and run as far from it as you can to get interesting areas, granted the main quest takes you around the areas but there's very little in the way of interesting pointer or marker quests that tell you of some of the more neat places (which are also fully discoverable on their own like usual)

 

Where was Morrowind non linear. You had to get the favor of the houses and then go kill the prentender. That was about all there was to the main quest. Nice back then, since the whole open world concept was novel, apart from 2d pixel adventures. But not so nice by being repeated over and over. There's never anything to it, other than you having the choice to go with four factions now instead of just one big bogeyman. But apart from that it's still kill, fetch, repeat with quest markers to make it easier on you.

 

I'm not sure, but it might just be that Morrowind had one over that. I can't remember quest markers back then.

[tartarsauce2]

I think it did, I knew some people with it and while I wasn't hugely impressed at the time because I guess the gameplay didn't impress me, I do remember a bit of the stuff being fairly interesting and different, there were a variety of quests if I recall, although my one friend got bored of it pretty quick but I think that was because the combat was terribly unfun
now OBLIVION on the other hand, same friend played over 500 hours, literally like through everything

Edited September 14, 2016 by tartarsauce2

[cossayos]

From todays standpoint there was nothing original about Morrowind. It was go, kill, fetch all the way. With some generic speech checks involved to taunt and get better deals.

 

Nothing, virtuall nothing, that made it better than we have today. Time hasn't moved on for Bethesda as far as quest design is concerned. Only back then you didn't notice, because it was new.

[EveningTide]

Morrowind apparently had better writing and did things the way most of the fans wanted. Oblivion saw a few departures from what worked well in Morrowind, and only further deviation occurred in Skyrim.

That's just my take from what people have said on the official boards who never shut up about the game.

[TypeAlias07]

 

My biggest problem is the lack of depth in quests. Most of them are too linear and don't feel meaningful. They also don't take advantage of all of the game mechanics. I believe in FNV I was able to use pickpocketing in a few quests. There's honestly not any reason at all to pickpocket in FO4.

 

 

But to repeat. FNV was Obsidian. They made a bit more of the quests and probably would have elaborated further if Bethesda hadn't stepped on their toes for early release.

 

I challenge you all to point out non linear and meaningful quests in any previous Bethesda game. I haven't played them all, but I played them all since Morrowind, which is a 14 years period. So, yes, I don't understand the hate, since Bethesda always pulled more or less the same tricks.

 

As I said before, I hesitated a bit before buying FO4, but when I bought it I was aware of getting yet another Bethesda game. And that's what I got. Add to this the knowledge of a fully voiced game and I knew very well that I would get limited dialogue options.

 

It's not rocket science, actually. Only observation and not buying into the prerelease PR hype.

 

 

Doesn't matter if it was Obsidian. FO4 and FNV are extremely comparable. It's been years; if Bethesda wasn't able to analyze the advantages FNV had over FO3 and focus on them in FO4, then I have a lot of reason to be upset about it.

 

You can't just tell me to expect lazy writing.

 

Not to mention, if you take out the sentence where I compare to FNV, my argument is still just as strong. FO4 fails to capitalize on the very mechanics that exist in the game, and that's true no matter how you interpret my opinion.

 

 

Unfortunately, Bethesda simplified FO4 too much. I completely understand why they did it, but there's quite a satisfaction when the game surprises you at every corner. For example, in Oblivion you had to murder someone to gain access to one of the best questlines in Bethesda history (Dark Brotherhood: Oblivion). That's a very indirect mechanic, yet insanely cool.

[tartarsauce2]

it's the quirky fun imaginative stuff that makes it for the world!
if it's just a choo choo kiddie ride why bother making it open world?
it's like those games that advertise a full planet but it's just no man's land sand dunes for 90% of it
or no man's sky

Edited September 15, 2016 by tartarsauce2

[RS13]

 

My biggest problem is the lack of depth in quests. Most of them are too linear and don't feel meaningful. They also don't take advantage of all of the game mechanics. I believe in FNV I was able to use pickpocketing in a few quests. There's honestly not any reason at all to pickpocket in FO4.

I challenge you all to point out non linear and meaningful quests in any previous Bethesda game. I haven't played them all, but I played them all since Morrowind, which is a 14 years period. So, yes, I don't understand the hate, since Bethesda always pulled more or less the same tricks.

I don't know exactly what "non-linear" means, but in many quests in previous games either had multiple ways of finishing them, or included a number of quests that emphasized different ways of playing. In FO3 for instance, Moira sent you to Minefield, but you could pick up a mine from anywhere take it back to here and tell her it was from minefield. And then you had any number of different things you could when she asked for info for her book. And those things had an affect on what perk you got as a reward. Or the megaton quest. You could tell Burke to f*ck off and never see him again, shoot him in the head, tell the sheriff--who then gets killed by Burke--or gleefully nuke megaton. That's two off the top of my head and I haven't played FO3 in years--and I rank it well below Oblivion and Skyrim.

 

The TES games on the other hand made much better use of their world and their mechanics. They had a whole questlines related to theft and stealthy murder. Oblivion had a quest that required you rain flaming cheese down on a town so that they thought the apocalypse had come and another in which you turn everyone at a dinner party naked.

 

Finally--and this is really and truly the last I'm going say on this--times have changed. What was acceptable in 2000, just isn't anymore. New Vegas was a thing. The Witcher is a thing. Tons of games are doing open world now. None of them quite scratch the same itch that Bethesda games do, but they're getting closer. Meanwhile, Bethesda feels like they scratch it less than they used to.

 

If Bethesda hasn't learned from New Vegas or the Witcher... like I'm sorry, but how damn hard is it? Put some f***ing speech checks in the game. Give us perks that do more than increase damage; give us perks that alter the way the game is played. Give us multiple ways to finish quests. Allow us to kill main characters--Yes man, House, Benny any of the faction leaders.

 

I'm not asking to do anything difficult. I'm not asking them to innovate. I'm not asking them to write believable characters. I'm not even asking them to pull off an emotional opening sequence. I'm not asking them to write complex moral choices.

 

I'm asking them to steal ideas that others came up with and clearly illustrated work well in an open-world rpg--in their own franchise in FNV's case. And if that's too damn hard, then call in outside help. I have a feeling Josh Sawyer would love to help, especially if you offered him Fallout New Orleans. But they don't even have to do that. They f***ing own Arkane, who just delivered a semi-open world game where could finish every quest in multiple different ways. Have them help you out on the main questline or major side quest lines. They did this very thing with iD and the shooting. There's simply no excuse for Bethesda not improving.

 

PS. It's not like Bethesda hasn't tried new stuff. They absolutely have. The multiple endings was a first at least since oblivion. The factions tied into the story was new. They clearly tried for an emotional resonance that they hadn't tried for in previous games. They absolutely tried new stuff here. But they tried all the *hard* stuff and failed, instead of trying the *easy* stuff and succeeding.

Edited September 15, 2016 by RS13

[tartarsauce2]

 

 

My biggest problem is the lack of depth in quests. Most of them are too linear and don't feel meaningful. They also don't take advantage of all of the game mechanics. I believe in FNV I was able to use pickpocketing in a few quests. There's honestly not any reason at all to pickpocket in FO4.

 

I challenge you all to point out non linear and meaningful quests in any previous Bethesda game. I haven't played them all, but I played them all since Morrowind, which is a 14 years period. So, yes, I don't understand the hate, since Bethesda always pulled more or less the same tricks.

 

I don't know exactly what "non-linear" means, but in many quests in previous games either had multiple ways of finishing them, or included a number of quests that emphasized different ways of playing. In FO3 for instance, Moira sent you to Minefield, but you could pick up a mine from anywhere take it back to here and tell her it was from minefield. And then you had any number of different things you could when she asked for info for her book. And those things had an affect on what perk you got as a reward. Or the megaton quest. You could tell Burke to f*ck off and never see him again, shoot him in the head, tell the sheriff--who then gets killed by Burke--or gleefully nuke megaton. That's two off the top of my head and I haven't played FO3 in years--and I rank it well below Oblivion and Skyrim.

 

The TES games on the other hand made much better use of their world and their mechanics. They had a whole questlines related to theft and stealthy murder. Oblivion had a quest that required you rain flaming cheese down on a town so that they thought the apocalypse had come and another in which you turn everyone at a dinner party naked.

 

Finally--and this is really and truly the last I'm going say on this--times have changed. What was acceptable in 2000, just isn't anymore. New Vegas was a thing. The Witcher is a thing. Tons of games are doing open world now. None of them quite scratch the same itch that Bethesda games do, but they're getting closer. Meanwhile, Bethesda feels like they scratch it less than they used to.

 

If Bethesda hasn't learned from New Vegas or the Witcher... like I'm sorry, but how damn hard is it? Put some f***ing speech checks in the game. Give us perks that do more than increase damage; give us perks that alter the way the game is played. Give us multiple ways to finish quests. Allow us to kill main characters--Yes man, House, Benny any of the faction leaders.

 

I'm not asking to do anything difficult. I'm not them to innovate. I'm asking them to write believable characters. I'm even asking them to pull off an emotional opening sequence. I'm not asking them to write complex moral choices.

 

I'm asking them to steal ideas that others came up with and clearly illustrated work well in an open-world rpg--in their own franchise in FNV's case. And if that's too damn hard, then call in outside help. I have a feeling Josh Sawyer would love to help, especially if you offer him Fallout New Orleans. But they don't even have to do that. They f***ing own Arkane, who just delivered a semi-open world game where could finish every quest in multiple different ways. Have them help you out on the main questline or major side quest lines. They did this very thing with iD and the shooting. There's simply no excuse for Bethesda not improving.

 

PS. It's not like Bethesda hasn't tried new stuff. They absolutely have. The multiple endings was a first at least since oblivion. The factions tied into the story was new. They clearly tried for an emotional resonance that they hadn't tried for in previous games. They absolutely tried new stuff here. But they tried all the *hard* stuff and failed, instead of trying the *easy* stuff and succeeding.

 

fallout 3's questing and world stuff is definitely noticeable to me, and I've only played a bunch of megaton, and some grayditch?

and yeah even the "lazy way out" with the landmines thing is like, you still have to do it, and it recognizes that you're totally lying, and it's hilarious that you're *lying*

you're not just [lying] you're *lying* you actively select how you're going to tell them and it's one of the most hilariously cynical things you can do, also that one scientist guy, man, I wanted to punch his lights out, what an amazing performance by the voice actor

Edited September 15, 2016 by tartarsauce2

[cossayos]

Morrowind apparently had better writing and did things the way most of the fans wanted. Oblivion saw a few departures from what worked well in Morrowind, and only further deviation occurred in Skyrim.

 

That's just my take from what people have said on the official boards who never shut up about the game.

 

 

You know, for lack of a better word, I call that nostalgic. I remember very well how excited I was playing my first open world game ever. The music, the atmosphere. But today I'm well aware of it's shortcomings. Many probably down to lacking technology. In 2002 you couldn't do what you can do now. And after all, Morrowind came on 4 CDs, one of them containing the creation kit. Now it's what? A 26 Gigs download on steam with FO4.

 

If you want to criticise FO4, you better not look to the past but to the past still being the present with Bethesda games. They carried over all the weaknesses of previous games and mostly added eye candy to add a little bit of polish. But again. I for one came to expect that from Bethesda. If Bethesda games were unmoddable and wouldn't attract a thriving community, I wouldn't buy them, Apart from Morrowind in it's very early stages, I never played a vanilla Bethesda game.