Fallout 4 1.3 Steam Beta Update Live

[HadToRegister]

In response to post #33369190. #33385585, #33396780, #33418570, #33453780 are all replies on the same post.

Verz wrote:

 

In response to post #33337215. #33340415, #33340785 are all replies on the same post.

Ethreon wrote:

Lel, CTD on using workbench with or without mods. GG

tarblex2010 wrote: +1

HippeusOmega wrote: ugh... was going to try out the beta patch but I guess I'll wait. Sometimes I wonder if it'd be a good idea for them to just release GECK and let modders fix the game.

They didn't even fix the damn wandering vendors.

Damn, give them SOME credit will ya? I know 'hur dur modders are better at video game development than bethesda' is a cool joke to be in on but they don't just sit around with their thumbs up their asses. Beta patch is a beta patch and you have no idea what state this guy's installation is in. Considering nobody else seems to have the same problem i'm betting it's on his end.

 

A joke? you're the one acting like a joke, modders are way more competent clearly, the only advantage Beth has as a studio over them is the fact they actually pay their workers so the team doesn't get split up. If modding wasn't there, all of Bethesda games would be NOTHING. They would be steaming piles of s#*! that only fanboys would buy, losing their value after 40 hours of gameplay max. I'll give them credit once GECK is released, as somehow Obsidian had NO issues with releasing GECK on same day the game was released. Not to mention I'm 80% sure that GECK will be delayed just so consoles can get (official) modding at same time as PCs, which is an extremely ridiculous concept because if you want to mod games you should've bought a game for PC in the first place, it's a waste of time. So no, don't force people to give credit to a company that's just DOING WHAT ANY COMPANY DOES, aka making patches. Did gaming standards really sink so low that we're thanking studios for patching their games shortly after it was released? you're probably one of those people who pre-order every AAA title game.....

Rioplats wrote: Bethesda always delay the CK. It allows them to get feedback, and to build up hype. Note that NV used the same exact engine and CK as Fallout 3, so there was no need for further CK development. Same deal though for Skyrim, there was no modding support for that for several months.

I think what you fail to understand is that these beta patches are not only fixing bugs, which many companies don't even do properly, but adding new features requested by the fanbase, and will being doing so for the forseeable future. They don't have to do this. I'm not gonna be condescending and order you to be thankful to Bethesda for fixing their own s#*!, which they should be doing regardless, but at least acknowledge that they're making an effort.

Because right now? You're not winning anyone over. You just, and forgive my language, sound like an entitled prick. We get it, you bought the game, and expect full credit for doing so. Sorry 'bout the Ad Hom, couldn't think of a more subtle way of getting my message across.

dw420 wrote: @Rioplats
What you fail to understand is that you are asking us to thank someone for PARTIALLY fixing a broken product they have already sold us.

Lets say you bought a car from me...and it was missing its brake pads. Would you appreciate the effort if i gave you a stick to drag along the ground in order to create friction and stop??? How about if i gave away a free mirror ornament?

If you ordered a pizza from me...and all you got was the base and sauce...Would you appreciate the effort if i sprinkled cheese on it but not the toppings you ordered??? How about if i threw in some cheese and chive dip??

Bottom line is ...Quit making excuses for dodgy company practices and defend your consumer rights..because when you don't, you mess up MY consumer rights as well and i don't feel the need to be treated like a money tossing idiot just because YOU like to behave as one.

PS. Feel free to call me a prick..correct > politically correct ANY day of the week.

Rioplats wrote: @dw420
As I said, not asking you to thank them; it's expected that they offer patches. They offered a product and you've purchased it. You've every right to a fully functional product. But that's the point. It IS a functional product. Not liking the product does not mean you deserve for the company to cater for your desires.
It's like ordering a jalapeño pizza from a pizza place, then demanding a refund, or complaining, because it's not spicy enough for you. Can you? Yes. It's your right to complain. Will anyone take you seriously? Not likely.
It does need improvement, but why hate on them for making the effort?
And this has nothing to do with being politically correct; it's common sense. Your examples are of incomplete products, which this isn't.

Bunik wrote: I thought we were used to this kind of handling by Bethesda.
If you take into account how huge the game is and how much they have done in there, the issues I have seen so far are just minor things.
The product was complete when it was released. However it is a good service they keep updating it to fix the issues.

A modder already fixed the perk bugs using FO4Edit, way back in November.
The Beta patch Bethesda just released fixes just one or two of the well-known perk bugs.

Bethesda really needs to start releasing the CK WITH the Game.

[jdb1776]

In response to post #33374230. #33396750, #33399830, #33419400, #33425650, #33427940 are all replies on the same post.

jdb1776 wrote: Don't know why, but whatever they did with 1.3 caused ridiculous loading times. I have some of the fastest OCZ SSD's available, and I never had the 5 minute loading times everyone was complaining about on release. It would be like 5 or 10 seconds tops, with two dozen mods even! Now suddenly it's up near a minute or two. That doesn't make any sense.

printerkop wrote: same here.. 2 minutes with SSD, instead of 20 seconds what it was before.

wanstaag wrote: Yup, there is something wrong with that patch. Maybe it´s called beta1.3 couse of 1-3 mins loading times? Anyway, rolling back to previous version seems to make FO4 fast and familiar once again.

Keeping this release on hold for now.

DarthCruciare wrote: I can also confirm this. I have a SSD and am used to absolute max, 30 second load times, average is about 15 seconds. This patch increased to about a minute or two. I reverted back to the last stable patch.

Camonna Tong wrote: I have a SSD and haven't experienced this problem. I know a lot of people are reporting it though, and it only applies to SSD users.

Shnordy wrote: I also had long load time until I turned off HBA0+ and went back to SSAO.
Then load times were normal.

I did some quick testing to see if HBAO was a culprit of making longer load times. This is just one quick test, as I don't have all day to do Bethesda's job for them lol.
From Commonwealth Into ArcJet Systems
SSAO: 42.66 sec
HBAO: 45.21 sec
Initial Savegame Loading From Startup (Commonwealth outside ArcJet Systems)
SSAO: 1min 14.18 sec
HBAO: 48.02 sec (this might be a fluke, I expected it to be longer than SSAO).

So HBAO might add a couple secs to interiors.

Still, this is all on a OCZ SSD. Load times in 1.2 and prior were all between 5 and 10 secs maybe 15 secs for an initial savegame load from startup. Most interiors were loading in just a couple seconds, feeling fluid and immediate. This all now feels clunky and really breaks up immersion sitting there half the time waiting for things to load. This is with a brand new R9 380x 4gb oc, 8-core FX-9370 @ 4.8ghz, 2400mhz G.Skill oc ram, so I knowwww it's not struggling for hardware resources. It's simply bad code.

[CZukoff]

In response to post #33374230. #33396750, #33399830, #33419400, #33425650, #33427940, #33469180 are all replies on the same post.

jdb1776 wrote: Don't know why, but whatever they did with 1.3 caused ridiculous loading times. I have some of the fastest OCZ SSD's available, and I never had the 5 minute loading times everyone was complaining about on release. It would be like 5 or 10 seconds tops, with two dozen mods even! Now suddenly it's up near a minute or two. That doesn't make any sense.

printerkop wrote: same here.. 2 minutes with SSD, instead of 20 seconds what it was before.

wanstaag wrote: Yup, there is something wrong with that patch. Maybe it´s called beta1.3 couse of 1-3 mins loading times? Anyway, rolling back to previous version seems to make FO4 fast and familiar once again.

Keeping this release on hold for now.

DarthCruciare wrote: I can also confirm this. I have a SSD and am used to absolute max, 30 second load times, average is about 15 seconds. This patch increased to about a minute or two. I reverted back to the last stable patch.

Camonna Tong wrote: I have a SSD and haven't experienced this problem. I know a lot of people are reporting it though, and it only applies to SSD users.

Shnordy wrote: I also had long load time until I turned off HBA0+ and went back to SSAO.
Then load times were normal.

jdb1776 wrote: I did some quick testing to see if HBAO was a culprit of making longer load times. This is just one quick test, as I don't have all day to do Bethesda's job for them lol.
From Commonwealth Into ArcJet Systems
SSAO: 42.66 sec
HBAO: 45.21 sec
Initial Savegame Loading From Startup (Commonwealth outside ArcJet Systems)
SSAO: 1min 14.18 sec
HBAO: 48.02 sec (this might be a fluke, I expected it to be longer than SSAO).

So HBAO might add a couple secs to interiors.

Still, this is all on a OCZ SSD. Load times in 1.2 and prior were all between 5 and 10 secs maybe 15 secs for an initial savegame load from startup. Most interiors were loading in just a couple seconds, feeling fluid and immediate. This all now feels clunky and really breaks up immersion sitting there half the time waiting for things to load. This is with a brand new R9 380x 4gb oc, 8-core FX-9370 @ 4.8ghz, 2400mhz G.Skill oc ram, so I knowwww it's not struggling for hardware resources. It's simply bad code.

This is also one of the reasons it's a beta update and not a full fledged live patch, because "it happens". Make sure you file a report about it.

[regiear1991]

In response to post #33374230. #33396750, #33399830, #33419400, #33425650, #33427940, #33469180, #33482180 are all replies on the same post.

jdb1776 wrote: Don't know why, but whatever they did with 1.3 caused ridiculous loading times. I have some of the fastest OCZ SSD's available, and I never had the 5 minute loading times everyone was complaining about on release. It would be like 5 or 10 seconds tops, with two dozen mods even! Now suddenly it's up near a minute or two. That doesn't make any sense.

printerkop wrote: same here.. 2 minutes with SSD, instead of 20 seconds what it was before.

wanstaag wrote: Yup, there is something wrong with that patch. Maybe it´s called beta1.3 couse of 1-3 mins loading times? Anyway, rolling back to previous version seems to make FO4 fast and familiar once again.

Keeping this release on hold for now.

DarthCruciare wrote: I can also confirm this. I have a SSD and am used to absolute max, 30 second load times, average is about 15 seconds. This patch increased to about a minute or two. I reverted back to the last stable patch.

Camonna Tong wrote: I have a SSD and haven't experienced this problem. I know a lot of people are reporting it though, and it only applies to SSD users.

Shnordy wrote: I also had long load time until I turned off HBA0+ and went back to SSAO.
Then load times were normal.

jdb1776 wrote: I did some quick testing to see if HBAO was a culprit of making longer load times. This is just one quick test, as I don't have all day to do Bethesda's job for them lol.
From Commonwealth Into ArcJet Systems
SSAO: 42.66 sec
HBAO: 45.21 sec
Initial Savegame Loading From Startup (Commonwealth outside ArcJet Systems)
SSAO: 1min 14.18 sec
HBAO: 48.02 sec (this might be a fluke, I expected it to be longer than SSAO).

So HBAO might add a couple secs to interiors.

Still, this is all on a OCZ SSD. Load times in 1.2 and prior were all between 5 and 10 secs maybe 15 secs for an initial savegame load from startup. Most interiors were loading in just a couple seconds, feeling fluid and immediate. This all now feels clunky and really breaks up immersion sitting there half the time waiting for things to load. This is with a brand new R9 380x 4gb oc, 8-core FX-9370 @ 4.8ghz, 2400mhz G.Skill oc ram, so I knowwww it's not struggling for hardware resources. It's simply bad code.

CZukoff wrote: This is also one of the reasons it's a beta update and not a full fledged live patch, because "it happens". Make sure you file a report about it.

I second this. I nearly doubled my loading times!

[messiahgov]

In response to post #33374230. #33396750, #33399830, #33419400, #33425650, #33427940, #33469180, #33482180, #33483000 are all replies on the same post.

jdb1776 wrote: Don't know why, but whatever they did with 1.3 caused ridiculous loading times. I have some of the fastest OCZ SSD's available, and I never had the 5 minute loading times everyone was complaining about on release. It would be like 5 or 10 seconds tops, with two dozen mods even! Now suddenly it's up near a minute or two. That doesn't make any sense.

printerkop wrote: same here.. 2 minutes with SSD, instead of 20 seconds what it was before.

wanstaag wrote: Yup, there is something wrong with that patch. Maybe it´s called beta1.3 couse of 1-3 mins loading times? Anyway, rolling back to previous version seems to make FO4 fast and familiar once again.

Keeping this release on hold for now.

DarthCruciare wrote: I can also confirm this. I have a SSD and am used to absolute max, 30 second load times, average is about 15 seconds. This patch increased to about a minute or two. I reverted back to the last stable patch.

Camonna Tong wrote: I have a SSD and haven't experienced this problem. I know a lot of people are reporting it though, and it only applies to SSD users.

Shnordy wrote: I also had long load time until I turned off HBA0+ and went back to SSAO.
Then load times were normal.

jdb1776 wrote: I did some quick testing to see if HBAO was a culprit of making longer load times. This is just one quick test, as I don't have all day to do Bethesda's job for them lol.
From Commonwealth Into ArcJet Systems
SSAO: 42.66 sec
HBAO: 45.21 sec
Initial Savegame Loading From Startup (Commonwealth outside ArcJet Systems)
SSAO: 1min 14.18 sec
HBAO: 48.02 sec (this might be a fluke, I expected it to be longer than SSAO).

So HBAO might add a couple secs to interiors.

Still, this is all on a OCZ SSD. Load times in 1.2 and prior were all between 5 and 10 secs maybe 15 secs for an initial savegame load from startup. Most interiors were loading in just a couple seconds, feeling fluid and immediate. This all now feels clunky and really breaks up immersion sitting there half the time waiting for things to load. This is with a brand new R9 380x 4gb oc, 8-core FX-9370 @ 4.8ghz, 2400mhz G.Skill oc ram, so I knowwww it's not struggling for hardware resources. It's simply bad code.

CZukoff wrote: This is also one of the reasons it's a beta update and not a full fledged live patch, because "it happens". Make sure you file a report about it.

regiear1991 wrote: I second this. I nearly doubled my loading times!

I have no SSD and my loading time (heavily modified Sanctuary or Diamond City) is under 2 min. if not under 1 min. Maybe the problem is your SSD?

Only problem I had, CTD at loading Sanctuary etc., because some modded texture compression is not longer supported. I had to remove some DDS files.

Anything else, play like more "stable" (never had a crash with v1.2 and prior). I think they really optimized some stuff, at least it's not getting worse for me and just that is positive. ^^ Edited January 19, 2016 by messiahgov

[messiahgov]

In response to post #33458975.

bladexdsl wrote:

Does this patch make it a RPG?

LOL WAT?

Yeah it's no real RPG. Just because you get levels, doesn't make it an RPG. ^^
But it's more RPG than Fallout 1-2 ever was, if you ask me.

[bladexdsl]

 

In response to post #33458975.

 

 

 

bladexdsl wrote:

Does this patch make it a RPG?

LOL WAT?

Yeah it's no real RPG. Just because you get levels, doesn't make it an RPG. ^^

But it's more RPG than Fallout 1-2 ever was, if you ask me.

 

so because it doesn't have magic and spells, anime characters in tight skimpy clothing and little girl characters with big tits it's not an rpg?! :laugh:

[Darg727]

In response to post #33369190. #33385585, #33396780, #33418570, #33453780, #33463685 are all replies on the same post.

Verz wrote:

 

In response to post #33337215. #33340415, #33340785 are all replies on the same post.

Ethreon wrote:

Lel, CTD on using workbench with or without mods. GG

tarblex2010 wrote: +1

HippeusOmega wrote: ugh... was going to try out the beta patch but I guess I'll wait. Sometimes I wonder if it'd be a good idea for them to just release GECK and let modders fix the game.

They didn't even fix the damn wandering vendors.

Damn, give them SOME credit will ya? I know 'hur dur modders are better at video game development than bethesda' is a cool joke to be in on but they don't just sit around with their thumbs up their asses. Beta patch is a beta patch and you have no idea what state this guy's installation is in. Considering nobody else seems to have the same problem i'm betting it's on his end.

 

A joke? you're the one acting like a joke, modders are way more competent clearly, the only advantage Beth has as a studio over them is the fact they actually pay their workers so the team doesn't get split up. If modding wasn't there, all of Bethesda games would be NOTHING. They would be steaming piles of s#*! that only fanboys would buy, losing their value after 40 hours of gameplay max. I'll give them credit once GECK is released, as somehow Obsidian had NO issues with releasing GECK on same day the game was released. Not to mention I'm 80% sure that GECK will be delayed just so consoles can get (official) modding at same time as PCs, which is an extremely ridiculous concept because if you want to mod games you should've bought a game for PC in the first place, it's a waste of time. So no, don't force people to give credit to a company that's just DOING WHAT ANY COMPANY DOES, aka making patches. Did gaming standards really sink so low that we're thanking studios for patching their games shortly after it was released? you're probably one of those people who pre-order every AAA title game.....

Rioplats wrote: Bethesda always delay the CK. It allows them to get feedback, and to build up hype. Note that NV used the same exact engine and CK as Fallout 3, so there was no need for further CK development. Same deal though for Skyrim, there was no modding support for that for several months.

I think what you fail to understand is that these beta patches are not only fixing bugs, which many companies don't even do properly, but adding new features requested by the fanbase, and will being doing so for the forseeable future. They don't have to do this. I'm not gonna be condescending and order you to be thankful to Bethesda for fixing their own s#*!, which they should be doing regardless, but at least acknowledge that they're making an effort.

Because right now? You're not winning anyone over. You just, and forgive my language, sound like an entitled prick. We get it, you bought the game, and expect full credit for doing so. Sorry 'bout the Ad Hom, couldn't think of a more subtle way of getting my message across.

dw420 wrote: @Rioplats
What you fail to understand is that you are asking us to thank someone for PARTIALLY fixing a broken product they have already sold us.

Lets say you bought a car from me...and it was missing its brake pads. Would you appreciate the effort if i gave you a stick to drag along the ground in order to create friction and stop??? How about if i gave away a free mirror ornament?

If you ordered a pizza from me...and all you got was the base and sauce...Would you appreciate the effort if i sprinkled cheese on it but not the toppings you ordered??? How about if i threw in some cheese and chive dip??

Bottom line is ...Quit making excuses for dodgy company practices and defend your consumer rights..because when you don't, you mess up MY consumer rights as well and i don't feel the need to be treated like a money tossing idiot just because YOU like to behave as one.

PS. Feel free to call me a prick..correct > politically correct ANY day of the week.

Rioplats wrote: @dw420
As I said, not asking you to thank them; it's expected that they offer patches. They offered a product and you've purchased it. You've every right to a fully functional product. But that's the point. It IS a functional product. Not liking the product does not mean you deserve for the company to cater for your desires.
It's like ordering a jalapeño pizza from a pizza place, then demanding a refund, or complaining, because it's not spicy enough for you. Can you? Yes. It's your right to complain. Will anyone take you seriously? Not likely.
It does need improvement, but why hate on them for making the effort?
And this has nothing to do with being politically correct; it's common sense. Your examples are of incomplete products, which this isn't.

Bunik wrote: I thought we were used to this kind of handling by Bethesda.
If you take into account how huge the game is and how much they have done in there, the issues I have seen so far are just minor things.
The product was complete when it was released. However it is a good service they keep updating it to fix the issues.

HadToRegister wrote: A modder already fixed the perk bugs using FO4Edit, way back in November.
The Beta patch Bethesda just released fixes just one or two of the well-known perk bugs.

Bethesda really needs to start releasing the CK WITH the Game.

@dw420

If you want a proper comparison, think of it as bethesda is handing over a newly constructed city made with 100,000 residents and 10,000,000 tourists yearly in mind. Nobody but a few 100 people were living there until now. Do you think everything is going to run smoothly right out of the gate? Yes, coding a game is that complicated.

[Evilken42]

In response to post #33485500.

bladexdsl wrote:

 

In response to post #33458975.

bladexdsl wrote:

Does this patch make it a RPG?

LOL WAT?

Yeah it's no real RPG. Just because you get levels, doesn't make it an RPG. ^^
But it's more RPG than Fallout 1-2 ever was, if you ask me.

 

so because it doesn't have magic and spells, anime characters in tight skimpy clothing and little girl characters with big tits it's not an rpg?! :laugh:

More like the pacing and the perk system is completely antithesis of common Western RPG's. Say what you want, but the perk system is completely against any common logic of RPG's.

[bladexdsl]

so because of the perk system it's not an rpg....

http://cdn.meme.am/instances/46547555.jpg