Fallout 4 - Five Biggest Flaws

[wolfing]

What bothers me is that seems clear that the future of AAA "RPGs" is going to be basically build a big world, and put fully voiced NPCs with MMO quests. Nothing else really matters, critics will love it and you'll sell millions of copies.

 

[Stingray]

The future of AAA "RPGs" hasn't looked particularly bright for a long, long time

To be precise, though, critics haven't "loved" Fallout 4. It's got an 84 on Metacritic which, for an AAA RPG made by Bethesda, is actually pretty bad. Skyrim 94, Fallout 3 91, Oblivion 94, Morrowind 89. So the critics say it's their worst game in at least 19 years, and by a large margin, since on Metacritic the difference between 89 and 84 is quite substantial.

 

[Archangel]

What bothers me is that seems clear that the future of AAA "RPGs" is going to be basically build a big world, and put fully voiced NPCs with MMO quests. Nothing else really matters, critics will love it and you'll sell millions of copies.

He will not let that happen:
https://youtu.be/L4Eq2na6neI

 

[joxer]

What bothers me is that seems clear that the future of AAA "RPGs" is going to be basically build a big world, and put fully voiced NPCs with MMO quests. Nothing else really matters, critics will love it and you'll sell millions of copies.

What you're describing is the openworld games mainstream. Not necessarily RPG.

Do you honestly believe FC4, AC:Unity, Watch Dogs, GTA5 and MGS5, none of them RPG, were not grind grind grind under fully voiced "quests" renamed as missions, tasks, objectives or something?
While I played those five, I didn't play Mad Max, but I bet it's MMOish grinder too.
Same goes for a couple of jRPG titles recently released I refused to buy on endless mobrespawns reason.

It's too early to say for RPGs.
DA:I had the most despicable grind design I've recently seen with it's bears and sonar.
TW3 dropped grind to minimum and left silly barrels for those who can't imagine games without grind.
FO4 went more grind than normal but thanks to mods it's cureable.

What will upcoming openworld RPGs do is hard to predict.
DX:MD, if will continue DX tradition should not contain any respawns or repetitive main and "sidejobs" as it's predecessors don't have it.
Technomancer as continuation of Spiders' games should contain respawns, but not in unbearable amount.
Elex comes from Pluto13 and the only game they ever made with nonintrusive mobrespawns was Risen 3, but quests in their games sometimes did "like" to be just fetchquests.
None of ME games had endless grind except missions constructed specifically to make you where you're supposed to escape/endure, but it doesn't mean Bioware won't take the low road and change it in ME4.

 

[BoboTheMighty]

What bothers me is that seems clear that the future of AAA "RPGs" is going to be basically build a big world, and put fully voiced NPCs with MMO quests. Nothing else really matters, critics will love it and you'll sell millions of copies.

This is nothing compared to what will happen once VR technology kicks in.
The whole market may end up being reduced to these "matrix" games and small budget titles, barely surviving and meant for a select audience.

 

[joxer]

Good point but I still think VR will end up as Kinect.
Great ideas, bad executions, once promising tech sent to oblivion.

 

[JDR13]

To be precise, though, critics haven't "loved" Fallout 4. It's got an 84 on Metacritic which, for an AAA RPG made by Bethesda, is actually pretty bad. Skyrim 94, Fallout 3 91, Oblivion 94, Morrowind 89. So the critics say it's their worst game in at least 19 years, and by a large margin, since on Metacritic the difference between 89 and 84 is quite substantial.

The only thing that tells me is that the critics don't have a clue as to what the hell they're talking about. There's no way you're going to convince me that Fallout 4 was worse than FO3 or Oblivion.

The problem isn't that they're underrating FO4, it's that those previous games (with the exception of Morrowind) were vastly overrated.

 

[Stingray]

The only thing that tells me is that the critics don't have a clue as to what the hell they're talking about. There's no way you're going to convince me that Fallout 4 was worse than FO3 or Oblivion.

Yeah, the critics are idiots. I never said they had good taste or were worth paying attention to, only saying they didn't love Fallout 4

I don't have the slightest idea how Oblivion ever got a 94. It's one of the worst RPGs I ever played. I'm not sure about FO3 vs FO4, though. I'd probably give them about the same rating personally.

 

[JDR13]

I'm not sure about FO3 vs FO4, though. I'd probably give them about the same rating personally.

I'd rate FO4 a little higher. I enjoyed FO3 a lot, but I had to use a ton of mods to get it to where I was satisfied with it. I only used 2 or 3 minor mods in FO4.

Of course a lot of that has to do with the fact that FO4 is still new and there aren't many good mods for it yet. If you compare the base games without mods though, I think FO4 is definitely superior in most ways. The only thing I liked better about FO3 was the prologue.

 

[Aubrielle]

Still would like to see something closer to FNV and keep the main protagonist less defined (not married with a kid). But a hard line to have an open character design AND have a detailed story.

Yep. FNV managed to give you a fairly detailed role (You're the Courier), give it depth, and give it ambiance; somehow as you got into the game, "The Courier" felt creepy and ominous, like some kind of deadly wanderer from the desert. They gave you all that without presuming to tell you who you were as a person. They left that up to you.

To me, that's where Fallout 4 failed.

 

[Drithius]

Well, here's hoping Bethesda gives Obsidian the reins once again in a couple years' time. There's remarkable promise in the foundation of FO4; promise that should have really been fulfilled without having to resort to, yet again, the modding community or a different studio.

 

[moonmonster]

Huh. While I think FO4 has quite a few flaws, I wouldn't have picked any of the ones in the article.

My main issue is that it feels very samey. The buildings/dungeons are designed wonderfully, I love the vertical aspect of a lot of them, but every quest and location is just somewhere to run through, killing everything that moves. I mean, I know that's essentially what most games are, but there's very little variety or motivation here.

 

[Emerwyn]

Thing is, Fallout 3 may not be better than Fallout 4, but you can't compare them directly. They need to be compared both in the moment of time they were released, and the competition they had. Fallout 3 was a great hit when it came out, because even if doing less and worse than Fallout 4, in comparison with the market of its time, there was nothing similar.

Fallout's 4 biggest problem is that there are a ton of great open world games these days, and also how close was its release date to TW3, which shamed FO4 and put it in evidence in the sense of "this is how you do open world".

I keep saying the same as in other threads about FO4. I can't say a game I've played 80ish hours is a bad game. FO4 is to me, a pretty good game. The problem is that when it comes from Bethesda you expect "more", just as I expected "more" from DA:I, and just as Mass Effect fans won't accept anything sort of an absolutely mind-blowing masterwork when judging the upcoming Andromeda, and will expect it to be the best game of its time.

 

[rune_74]

There was no 12 million sold. They shipped 12 million to sell but they are not sold already.
From what I read on Codex, game is selling less than Skyrim.

Well, they definitely didn't sell one to you since you pirated and admitted that....so you showed them!

Why are these articles from obscure websites now the trend on here is it because they paint the game in a negative light?

 

[Archangel]

Well, they definitely didn't sell one to you since you pirated and admitted that….so you showed them!

Why are these articles from obscure websites now the trend on here is it because they paint the game in a negative light?

Nope they didn't sell it to me for sure. They have no chance to sell it to me. Even if it was best game ever I don't pay full price for AAA games. At worst I would wait for 50% off and at best 75% like I got FNV (which was not worth that money as well).

 

[TimtheTaxMan]

This guy pretty much nails it. Well worth a listen. It specifically taking about Fallout 3 but the same holds true for fallout 4. It has over 200k views and an overwhelming positive response.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvwlt4FqmS0

 

[luj1]

I couldn't care less about voice acting and graphics, but the rest of this article is spot on.

 

[luj1]

12 million sold is a testament to the modding community around Bethesda games.

No it just means people have low standards nowadays and that they are willing to reduce their standards even more by letting Todd fuck them . Bethesda always ships a good toolset with a shitty console port. They are focused primarily on consoles while letting the community finish the PC versions of their games (which is why those games are so good on the PC btw). Brilliant or not, this is why I hate BethTodd with a passion

Star wars also broke box office records , but how good was it exactly? Numbers are not always a measure of quality, especially nowadays

 

[rune_74]

No it just means people have low standards nowadays and that they are willing to reduce their standards even more by letting Todd fuck them . Bethesda always ships a good toolset with a shitty console port. They are focused primarily on consoles while letting the community finish the PC versions of their games (which is why those games are so good on the PC btw). Brilliant or not, this is why I hate BethTodd with a passion

Star wars also broke box office records , but how good was it exactly? Numbers are not always a measure of quality, especially nowadays

I seriously just need to ignore you.

 

[luj1]

Obviously I must've hit a nerve