Who is FO76's Target Audience?

[RS13]

It's clearly not the same as their typical audience, but they keep telling us this isn't for the Rust crowd either. So... who is this for?

[WastelandAssassin]

and what is their typical audience?

if you are going by Bethesda's games , do you think that FO3 and FO4 were meant for the same audiences?

because I've heard plenty of the Fallout community outraged about how FO4 dumbed down so many things that FO3 did right (and I won't mention NV , which I think most consider to be the best of the bunch)

 

so you really need to first define what is the "typical" audience , before you ask such a question

and another thing worth considering , is that FO4 was released back in 2015 . that's 3 years . New Vegas was released in 2010 , that's 8 years ago . so just consider how many people that have played FO4 have never played NV or FO3 . imagine how many new players they'll have with this game , and how many of the older games may have already left , for whatever reasons . I would say that games aren't just about recapturing old fans , but instead making new ones . this is why game companies are going wild for any new successful idea (for example , look at how many new games will have a Battle Royale mode , trying to capture some of that Fortnite glory)

 

honestly , I really have no idea who this is aimed at

to me , it looks like the worst elements of FO4 getting even worse , with the two good aspects of that game (the shooting and settlement systems) either staying the same or getting dumbed down

I definitely know it's not for me , but even if they remade FO3 in a multiplayer game I probably wouldn't care about it

so I think this is going after new players , and those that are still waiting for the co op mods in Skyrim and Fallout , or maybe those that waited for Fallout online (or whatever that game was supposed to be called)

[Rabbit1251]

It is aimed at 13 year old boys who want to play games socially rather than do their homework and learn to spell.

 

 

The Rabbit

[Mavkiel]

Typical fallout audience are rpg players. Really, the shooting mechanics tend to be fairly horrible. Each iteration of fallout improves the combat mechanics, but it still wouldn't compete with say a rainbow siege game or any other dedicated shooter.

 

New audience are survival game enthusiasts. Which is going to be a tough sell since there are more then a few of those out there, with fairly good mechanics. Rust and Conan come to mind. (Not my cup of tea, which goes to show how likely I'm going to get 76)

 

 

I keep getting the feeling that Beth misread the reaction of fallout 4. That they got a large group of folks together, and asked "what was your favorite aspect of the game?". The reaction of many myself included would be the city building. Why the answer could be misleading is, I didn't buy the game for that feature, nor would I have bought the game at all if I knew the quests sucked that bad.

[zanity]

It's clearly not the same as their typical audience, but they keep telling us this isn't for the Rust crowd either. So... who is this for?

I've said it over and over here. Over the last five years, the gaming industry has attended conferences on maximising profit by exploiting addiction mechanisms found mostly in children and males with low self-esteem. Two types of expert gave speeches at these conferences- psychologists (linking to the military industrial complex psychological operations - psy-ops - experts), and ecomomic/statistic experts.

 

The prophets of exploitation gaming explained how traditional computer gaming (single player, male targeted, mostly console) would reach a saturation point regardless of console quality, or conventional game design. How the most ambitious publishers had to let go with ideas of 'moral' 'innocent' entertainment, and embrace the same mechanisms used by the drug industry (mostly alcohol marketing of course), and gambling industry.

 

We all know about EA's and Steam's moves in this direction. Both these giants directly employed many of these prophets, leading to an explosion of loot boxes in EA games, and clearly illegal child targeted gambling via rare 'collectibles' and auction sites at steam (that were so illegal, Gabe had to shut most of his gambling operations down when he was warned the US government were about to act).

 

Other publishers are not so self-defeating. They wish to be far cleverer in exploiting addiction gaming mechanisms (for which "gaming as a service" is a code phrase). Clever in the sense of running ahead of legislation, so the hammer of the law never quite catches up with them.

 

THIS is Beth and Fallout:76 (or their other services like Quake, Doom Eternal, Fallout Shelter, Elder Scrolls on your phone etc etc etc).

 

Fallout 4 made one billion plus- but due to Todd's extreme incompetence, games in this sequence(inc Skyrim) turn up after bigger and bigger time gaps- now accepted at Beth central as 6 years+. This is no good for Zenimax. But when you have the GTA V model, the SAME game earns year after year after year- that dev game becomes irrelevant.

 

Now Todd is like that loser Intel finally dumped a few days back. He is nutty enough to believe his own idiotic thinking simply cos he is head of a publisher that has had some success, and a lot of fan love. Todd literally thinks "I'm the top dog cos i'm so very clever". And now Todd's 'clever' means jumping head first into the foul world of online addiction gaming, and watching US receed into the far horizon. And what does Todd think of US? That we are the ancient fuddy-duddy losers that no company wants to associate with any more. We are the 'dinosaurs' that the 'kids' like Todd (yeah- I know- but look at the guy) laugh at.

 

Who is Todd's new audience? The mythical BILLIONS registered and playing on Minecraft, or Fortnite, or PUBG, etc etc. And I don't mean those player bases are mythical (OR stupid- those games have a lot to offer- well maybe except the horribly incompetent PUBG). I mean the mythical idea those player bases are up for grabs by clueless devs who previously produced games for very different gamers bases.

 

Look, if Todd had one brain cell working, he'd get that Fallout:76 must be FREE. For heaven's sake, the Fornite "people can fly" coded was a giant bomb UNTIL it went free and introduced the Battle Royale game mode. But Todd is so impossibly clueless, he thinks success in this industry comes from the type of greed that means you try to have your cake and eat it too.

 

THIS is why you, RS13, still suspect Fallout:76 must in some sense be targeted at people like you and I. It isn't- but the feeling comes from Beth's insanity in not selecting one clear choice or the other.

 

When the existing online gaming community laugh themesleves to death over how hopeless Fallout:76 is as an attempt to muscle in to their base, Todd is rather left with falling back on Fallout 4 fans. And like a really really rotten film sequel to a very very successful prior movie, roll over business will give a lot of early success.

 

ALL the initial success to Fallout:76 will come from good will purchases from the betrayed fans of Fallout 4. Todd couldn't care less if the fans go on to really regret spending their money on this. They are not the fans Todd wants any more, but their spend will help paper over all the early cracks of this first serious experiment in this new direction. Like how Disney still tries to claim the 200 million domestic box-office for 'Solo' proves that film is not a failure.

 

Anyway, all that matters is that Zenimax is NOT going to turn Fallout:76 over to the 'community' if it bombs (or sees its online player base drop to near zero within a year). The new improved modernised codebase of Fallout:76, combined with the netcode, would be FAR TOO DANGEROUS. Beth is never going to allow the modding community to produce better examples of a given IP than it does itself- EVER. Mods on Skyrim and Fallout 4 were 'safe' cos their engines were help together with sticky tape and bubblegum, and usuable mods could only focus on making the core game experience 'better'.

 

to the contrary, day two FREE COMMUNITY mods on Fallout:76 would introduce every kind of online game mode, all kinds of vehicles, and multiple game worlds. Yeah you all drool at this prospect, rightfully- never understanding that Todd has tasted your drool and knows it is the purest poison for his business plans.

[Evangela]

Everyone in the Fallout fanbase.

[Deleted2433418User]

As it´s going to be on-line i would say not RPG fans.. and since it´s gonna be even more dumbed-down than fo4 ... basically we´re looking at an audience who dislikes thinking,scorns tactics and flee at the very mention of the harshness of reality,you know where your choices affect your environment and s#*! happens while you´re away doing whatfore... the "Bob the builder" element will probably attract some Minecrafters and Lego-kids ,i personally despise it, and the "time stops when you´re out" element will please the 5 year olds that can´t deal with loss or reality,you choose ;-) i won´t buy it,play it or have anything to do with it.. it´s fo4 made worse,which is a feat in itself ;-) so,we´re looking at an audience who likes being cuddled,lives on the net and basically don´t know what an RPG or a FPS is and really don´t care as long as it´s on-line and not too hard... basically kids...

[sopmac45]

Fallout 76 = 7 + 6 = 13 .... for teenagers mainly .... I am playing Fallout4 and I will not jump to play an online game not matter how good and how many people are playing it. Sorry Todd, you won't get my money dude !!

[WastelandAssassin]

Fallout 76 = 7 + 6 = 13 .... for teenagers mainly .... I am playing Fallout4 and I will not jump to play an online game not matter how good and how many people are playing it. Sorry Todd, you won't get my money dude !!

 

at this point , why not just go 7+6=13 , 1+3=4 , ergo it's Fallout 4 all over again , just with a flashier name

or that it's actually meant for 4 year olds , which won't really surprise me.......

[RS13]

and what is their typical audience?

if you are going by Bethesda's games , do you think that FO3 and FO4 were meant for the same audiences?

because I've heard plenty of the Fallout community outraged about how FO4 dumbed down so many things that FO3 did right (and I won't mention NV , which I think most consider to be the best of the bunch)

 

so you really need to first define what is the "typical" audience , before you ask such a question

Why yes, I DO think FO4 and FO3 was aimed at the same audience. No one could objectively look at FO4 and not notice the massive similarities to the previous three games Bethesda's made. Of course, FO4 was the worst received of those games, so it obviously didn't deliver what it's target audience expected or hoped for. But that just means that Bethesda failed, not that they succeeded at delivering something else.