How many of us are going to stay on...

[DoctorKaizeld]

Brohood, minutemen, and settlers are random npcs with a fist full of dialog that never changes. Not to mention they already are quite bland and boring by themselves. That isn't even life they are boring and one note. On top of that FO3 had a far wider assortment of random encounters many of which were quite intresting on comparison.

[HadToRegister]

Except 4's map isn't empty and there is plenty to do unlike 3's map that was entirely featureless brown wasteland with very little interesting stuff to do save the occasional quest in the few places that had them.

 

Fallout 4 actually has enemies and people walking around save 3's occasional hunter npc or a group every mile. 4's map was entirely not empty and it was filled with life unlike 3's map that was, again, a barren boring wasteland. Even 1 and 2 had more interesting map design and encounters then 3.

 

Except it is.

I think your rose-colored glasses aren't letting you see the emptiness that is Fallout 4's map.

It's really pointless to argue

The Fallout 4 map is big, but a 1/3 of it is water.

The map is empty, and most of the buildings can't be entered

 

"No it's not!!, yes they can!!!"

 

Yes, it actually is, and no, most buildings are boarded up.

 

"No it's not!!!, no they aren't!!!"

 

*sigh*

[dikr]

I'll probably stick around for a good while as FO76 is a completely different kind of game. It has the FO4 looks and flavor and shares some mechanics but the experience will be very, very different. Not too keen of jumping aboard a multiplayer, instanced lobby train again where 'open moddability', the persistence of the game world, your personal rp experience and the story will be very much sacrificed for multi player viability.

 

Fallout 4 might not be the best possible Fallout game in terms of story and writing but to me it has always been a highly entertaining sandbox which does a LOT of things reasonably well. Also by far the most stable & optimized Bethesda game I've played with a ton of mods (had to get used to not crashing every hour or so when I first played it, hehe). The only thing that gets stale after a few years is redoing the same old quests and dialogue for the xxth time but mods keep it fresh enough for me.

Edited September 9, 2018 by dikr

[HadToRegister]

 

 

There are enemies and npcs all over the place in 4, especially in random events that trigger more then FO3's random events. If you think 4's map is desolate then you definitely didn't play 3 because it's worse in 3.

 

 

If that were even remotely true, I wouldn't need to be using FOUR, count 'em, FOUR Spawn mods in my current game to actually make the world feel alive and populated.

Without spawn mods, I've spent the first year in Sanctuary without seeing anybody except the hand placed "Hunt the bloatflies with Codsworth" quest

Otherwise, without the spawn mods I can pretty much walk to the lighthouse settlement while engaging a couple of bloatflies or mosquitoes on the way.

BTW, I still have FO3 and FONV installed.

[CiderMuffin]

 

Except 4's map isn't empty and there is plenty to do unlike 3's map that was entirely featureless brown wasteland with very little interesting stuff to do save the occasional quest in the few places that had them.

 

Fallout 4 actually has enemies and people walking around save 3's occasional hunter npc or a group every mile. 4's map was entirely not empty and it was filled with life unlike 3's map that was, again, a barren boring wasteland. Even 1 and 2 had more interesting map design and encounters then 3.

Except it is.

I think your rose-colored glasses aren't letting you see the emptiness that is Fallout 4's map.

It's really pointless to argue

The Fallout 4 map is big, but a 1/3 of it is water.

The map is empty, and most of the buildings can't be entered

 

"No it's not!!, yes they can!!!"

 

Yes, it actually is, and no, most buildings are boarded up.

 

"No it's not!!!, no they aren't!!!"

 

*sigh*

 

Yes most buildings are boarded up, that's something 3, NV and 4 all share the difference is NV and 4 have actual art design then just grey dull buildings

 

also you really want to talk about rose tinted glasses when you're defending 3 which is as empty as I claim

 

 

There are enemies and npcs all over the place in 4, especially in random events that trigger more then FO3's random events. If you think 4's map is desolate then you definitely didn't play 3 because it's worse in 3.

If that were even remotely true, I wouldn't need to be using FOUR, count 'em, FOUR Spawn mods in my current game to actually make the world feel alive and populated.

Without spawn mods, I've spent the first year in Sanctuary without seeing anybody except the hand placed "Hunt the bloatflies with Codsworth" quest

Otherwise, without the spawn mods I can pretty much walk to the lighthouse settlement while engaging a couple of bloatflies or mosquitoes on the way.

BTW, I still have FO3 and FONV installed.

 

And I bet you have similar mods for NV and 3 but forgot about them, there is more life in 4 then 3 in the world, the problem is you just want ultra mega wars constantly going on if you "need" 4 spawn mods. I'm sorry none of the Fallout games do spawns like that, not even the classic ones.

 

There isn't a "4 has no random stuff in it's world!" it's "4 doesn't have the ultra mega constant warfare I want"

 

You don't need 4 spawn mods, you want 4 spawn mods. There is a difference.

 

Brohood, minutemen, and settlers are random npcs with a fist full of dialog that never changes. Not to mention they already are quite bland and boring by themselves. That isn't even life they are boring and one note. On top of that FO3 had a far wider assortment of random encounters many of which were quite intresting on comparison.

So you're upset that it's the industry standard of random encounters as it's the easiest and best way to show a populated world because writing new dialogue for over 20 different random encounters that are suppose to be random is extremely difficult and time consuming, the point of these encounters is to show the world but be simple, because not every settler or trader has a complex story behind them. Fallout 3 didn't do anything different from 4, only 4 has random encounters trigger more and yes it does show that the world is populated. Games have been doing this system for years and even games that are often praised for writing have done this.

 

For instance games like Yakuza have been doing extremely populated maps since the first game, all of the npcs are randomly generated and most don't even talk, the reason for this is that it makes the world feel alive and populated. Again this is an industry standard.

 

You're literally complaining about the same thing 3 did, but again the only difference is 4 does is better and it's more common.

Edited September 9, 2018 by CiderMuffin

[DoctorKaizeld]

We aren't defending 3 we are saying 4 is no better. They are both bland games. Just 3 feels like it tried harder in many aspects and is a slight bit better.

[CiderMuffin]

3 didn't try harder, 4 did, that's the point I've been making and you've been ignoring.

[DoctorKaizeld]

Ignoring is not the same thing as disagreeing. I don't think you are correct and I am saying why. But you are to busy thinking I'm ignoring your arguments to realize that.

[CiderMuffin]

Cept you're saying 3 tried harder with no proof and I've given examples of how 4 actually tries to make it's world feel more alive with NPCs roaming around everywhere, scavengers, bandits patroling around their bases, BoS fighting people and doing scavenge patrols etc etc.

 

Fallout 4 actually does more with random encounters to portray an alive and interesting world whereas 3 just places enemies around save an occasional hunter. Again, this has gone from disagreeing to just ignoring.

Edited September 9, 2018 by CiderMuffin

[DoctorKaizeld]

Except I am countering your claims with he same level of "proof" not to mention 3 has roaming npcs, scavengers, patrolling raiders, and Bos patrols.