Survival Mode...ridiculous or just not fun?

[mcguffin]

I love it.

The good news: it's optional

[minngarm]

Can we all agree it makes the game a more challenging one, but it is far from perfect? It has ideas that are good, yet some were executed poorly?

 

I have only fought one "bullet sponge" so far, and it was a Yao Guai. I had to jump on an overturned train and blast it, then hop down to lure it back out from cover, and blast it again and jump back on the carriage before it ate me. It took a fair while because it was a 'skull icon' enemy. I enjoyed every minute of it.

BUT the enemy in mention was a beast, and it seemed feasible that a massive irradiated beast would feel less pain, and be able to withstand such injuries.

Human enemies taking 2 chambers of lead to the face in a sneak attack should NOT be able to get back up and keep fighting though. Totally agree about that.

I've seen a bear IRL go up like that, and they really are bullet sponges in a real sense. Those things don't go down easy even to larger caliber rounds.

[Burnout122812]

Some love it and think it the only way to play the game and get can't play without it.

If you find it not fun, it just not for you.

 

I agree. If you just like building settlements then really survival is not a priority. Traveling the wasteland, finishing quests and/or just love destroying enemies, then survival is right up your alley. I'm not saying its the worst thing ever, but Survival Mode fails to capture how the majority of Fallout 4 players play the game. There are flaws and its not perfect and I can understand why it was done the way it was. Hopefully mods can fix some of the issues I have with it, but if not, its not a big deal. I enjoyed mods like "Frostfall" and "Realistic Needs and Diseases" in Skyrim and those mods made the game SO much more fun without changing the essence of the game.

 

It is poor game design, simple as that.

 

The same way someone can claim that giving a boss 90,000 hp makes for a challenging boss fight. In reality it is just poor design and a gimmick to try to make a challenge. To create a real challenge you have to think outside the box and not just make the player do menial tasks and repeat things because they can't save.

And I agree with this. Poor design that I have seen in so many games. Enemies and Boss fights so ridiculously OP that you are just repeating the same fights over and over again. I'm all for challenges but i'm also playing the game for progression as well. Real survival challenges is not OP enemies. But actual survival situations...weather, food, shelter, water, disease. Disappointed that these are not the main focus of Survival but more like additions to an annoying "gimmick" to make the game more difficult.

[minngarm]

 

Some love it and think it the only way to play the game and get can't play without it.

If you find it not fun, it just not for you.

 

I agree. If you just like building settlements then really survival is not a priority. Traveling the wasteland, finishing quests and/or just love destroying enemies, then survival is right up your alley. I'm not saying its the worst thing ever, but Survival Mode fails to capture how the majority of Fallout 4 players play the game. There are flaws and its not perfect and I can understand why it was done the way it was. Hopefully mods can fix some of the issues I have with it, but if not, its not a big deal. I enjoyed mods like "Frostfall" and "Realistic Needs and Diseases" in Skyrim and those mods made the game SO much more fun without changing the essence of the game.

 

It is poor game design, simple as that.

 

The same way someone can claim that giving a boss 90,000 hp makes for a challenging boss fight. In reality it is just poor design and a gimmick to try to make a challenge. To create a real challenge you have to think outside the box and not just make the player do menial tasks and repeat things because they can't save.

And I agree with this. Poor design that I have seen in so many games. Enemies and Boss fights so ridiculously OP that you are just repeating the same fights over and over again. I'm all for challenges but i'm also playing the game for progression as well. Real survival challenges is not OP enemies. But actual survival situations...weather, food, shelter, water, disease. Disappointed that these are not the main focus of Survival but more like additions to an annoying "gimmick" to make the game more difficult.

 

That's the entire point. It is a mode made for those of us who like the gritty challenge. Those that do not like it should not play it. That is why games have multiple modes/difficulties.

[Burnspot]

Well, Bethesda said Survival Mode won't be for everyone and, surprise surprise, that statement turns out to be true. That said, I absolutely love it; I'm glad Bethesda at least did SOMETHING. If you stick fairly close to the ground rules they laid out, flawed or not, it does pump the excitement level up to something the normal game never had. I've been playing it since the beta and have reached level 49 with my second character in it; it took until the mid-30's before my char started working south of DC (MQ not advanced beyond having to find Nick...which I still haven't done). Up to this point, I've had more than a few close calls, bullet sweating sessions, and bitter failures. I'm playing with a pistols-only stealth-focused character who shuns heavy armor and PA. The longest I've run without saving is about 1.5 hours and that was uncomfortable...FO4's only crashed 4 times since launch day, so that sort of thing is never really a concern of mine, but my tactics have sometimes gone off the rails and cost me, lol. I really enjoy it.

 

I run with a few mods, but nothing that drastically changes the core gameplay. Perhaps the closest would be SoS - Sleep or Save, which hews close to my main desires throughout the beta...having the option to either sleep/save or simply save at beds. Considering that Bethesda wanted to severely limit save opportunities in the mode, beds were a good choice since they are indeed almost everywhere, but hard to find sometimes...I just think the method they finally went with (sleep/save) was flawed and SoS goes a long ways towards solving that problem. The one downside to such a mod is that it slightly lessens the other big factor in Survival Mode, disease, since you're not laying down for an hour's nap on a dirty mattress to get the save. I've countered that somewhat through getting all of the Lead Belly perks so I can drink irradiated water...you run a risk of infection from that stuff. While SoS makes things a tiny bit less painful, it keeps the core of Survival Mode intact (the thrill, fear of death)...something all the new quick save mods pretty much completely nullify with their safety net approach. The other big mods I run are True Storms, Darker Nights, and Interiors Enhanced, which give me a environment that suits Survival Mode and DEF_UI/DEF_INV in conjunction with Valdacil's sorting mod to clean up the UI and round out my loadout. I also run the UFO4P (unofficial patches) mod and Spring Cleaning (I do like having cleaned up settlements, lol).

 

I can't really imagine playing Fallout 4 on anything less now; the old Survival difficulty was kind of a joke really...I'm glad they started tinkering...it's a good start.

[crawe1x]

There are some interesting aspects to the mode (diseases, hunger, etc), but some really dumb things as well. The whole sleeping thing, for instance, is a nice idea but very poorly implemented. The inability to save is also stupid - and I don't particularly want to add a mod to my game that is basically just there so that I can save my progress in a convenient manner. Not sure what Beth was smoking when they came up with that idea.

 

Anyway, I'm finding that the Very Hard setting with mods such as Arbitration, Better Explosives, Super Mutant Overhaul, Darker Nights, True Storms, etc. plus my own personal tweaks, makes for a more stimulating and immersive experience.

[TeamBacon]

Can we all agree it makes the game a more challenging one, but it is far from perfect? It has ideas that are good, yet some were executed poorly?

 

 

No, I cannot agree that it makes the game more challenging.

 

I like to set my game up in a way that I die a lot... like a whole lot... like I am just walking down the street and bam! I just got killed because I didn't see the Yao Guai coming up behind me and it got one hit on me, instant kill.

 

I like to play the game where when I square off against 10 super mutants who have secured a facility, that I die at least 10 times trying to beat that fight, because pretty much any mistake I make is instant death. I like to die, repeat, improve my strategy a bit, die again, repeat, improve my strategy a bit more.

 

 

With survival mode I am forced to put stats into things like endurance and actually wear armor and do the kind of things that make the game too easy. Why? Because I can't die and repeat because a fight is just too intense. If I get one shot killed by every super mutant I run into, then on survival mode I would be spending all of my time repeating the same portion of the game over and over and over again.

 

The save feature on survival mode makes me not able to play the game as hard as I want to.

 

 

 

 

I'm not mad about it or anything, I am glad Bethesda attempted something new. It is also really simple for me to fix this issue I have with mods.

 

So I am totally happy with what I got.

 

But my honest critique from a design perspective is that the save feature is a very, very, very dumb design decision. It is a cheap shortcut way to try to make things seem harder, and not in the least bit clever.

Edited May 6, 2016 by TeamBacon

[mcguffin]

 

No, I cannot agree that it makes the game more challenging.

I like to set my game up in a way that I die a lot... like a whole lot... like I am just walking down the street and bam! I just got killed because I didn't see the Yao Guai coming up behind me and it got one hit on me, instant kill.

 

 

 

 

Actually it's up to you to improve your gameplay.

All enemies in fallout4 announce very clearly they are around you. Why some people could do great in survival otherwise? do you think it's luck? well guess what, it's not.

Besides, difficulty in mostly all video games of that kind (rpg, action etc...) relies only on "how long you can stand without making mistakes". So , yes, not being able to save anytime anywhere increases difficulty and challenge.

And it's especially true for fallout4 since nothing is hard *at all* if you save at each step.

However, it' s perfectly fine to not seek difficulty in fallout4. You can step back, and use mods to make survival easier.

Edited May 6, 2016 by mcguffin

[TeamBacon]

 

 

No, I cannot agree that it makes the game more challenging.

I like to set my game up in a way that I die a lot... like a whole lot... like I am just walking down the street and bam! I just got killed because I didn't see the Yao Guai coming up behind me and it got one hit on me, instant kill.

 

 

 

 

Actually it's up to you to improve your gameplay.

All enemies in fallout4 announce very clearly they are around you. Why some people could do great in survival otherwise? do you think it's luck? well guess what, it's not.

Besides, difficulty in mostly all video games of that kind (rpg, action etc...) relies only on "how long you can stand without making mistakes". So , yes, not being able to save anytime anywhere increases difficulty and challenge.

And it's especially true for fallout4 since nothing is hard *at all* if you save at each step.

However, it' s perfectly fine to not seek difficulty in fallout4. You can step back, and use mods to make survival easier.

 

 

Repetitive and menial is not the same thing as being more difficult.

[TheBoogerMan]

 

I agree. If you just like building settlements then really survival is not a priority.

 

Actually, I find building settlements to be a useful tool in Survival Mode - they provide safe haven, merchants and supplies if set up properly.

 

I establish two kinds - Settlements and Outposts:

 

Settlements are the fully functioning villages that are usually built in the vanilla game; they have farmers growing food ("adhesive" foods of course), crafting stations, security and merchants (of which, one is always a Doctor). Generally speaking, I'll only have one Settlement in a given region.

 

Outposts are there only to provide a place to sleep, a place to cook, a flesh water supply and a supply cache; a small cottage with no settlers present. Outposts make up the majority of player-controlled locations in a given region.

 

That way, you spend less time traveling back and forth between home and radiant quests, because the your "home" is your entire settlement network.