Show Posts
1891
Gaming / Re: How does FO4 compare to New Vegas and Skyrim?
« on: November 23, 2015, 06:34:20 PM »Well first off, don't compare Fallout with Elder Scrolls. Way too different to be compared.lol nobody's gonna read that
Secondly, read this.SpoilerSo I decided to write this because I've sank 80+ hours into this, and as a life long Fallout fan, having read way too much more, played all the games, etc, I figured I should write this. Now before you read, know this game is still something I HEAVILY enjoyed it, as any Fallout fan would, which is why I give it a positive despite the way I critique it. I just compare it to New Vegas because it's arguably the best modern Fallout game we have, so 1 and 2 will stay out for various reasons.
Overall, it's a fun game. Writing was better than FO3, as were companions. I'm glad the Brotherhood was actually handled properly too. Actually, I feel like Bethesda's main writing went into them. Every other faction falls short. However the story itself isn't nearly as bad as 3's, like I've said. It actually makes sense, there are twists here and there that I thought were somewhat clever, and the set piece moments are really cool, like the Brotherhoods arrival via the massive ship, and how the music kicks in when it happens.
However, my main issue is just how bad the dialogue is, and how they limit you down only a few paths. As in, you can never say no, or be a bad guy. Where is the CHOICE? Choice choice choice, THERE IS NO CHOICE! It's you saying no but people around you still saying yes. You've all seen the picture with the dialogue and what not, so I don't need to explain this any more. The fact that New Vegas within the first 30 mins gives you the option to help the people that saved you, or turn thug and kill them all right away, really speaks to how it actually gives you CHOICES!
Moving on, I think having the "unique" weapons drop from legendary enemies was a bad idea, because it means they're very generic, boring and not very exciting for the most part. I got a DB shotgun that deals some radiation damage. Whoopdy doo. I kill people in one shot with it anyway, why is that a thing that matters? Instead, these types of weapons should have dropped from legendary enemies, but then also have actual unique weapons to find like NV.
And make them ACTUALLY unique. Like NV. They all LOOK the same, and that's probably because of the mods they have for weapons. But the lack of diversity in looks is just awful. I also think NV had the better writing, better factions, and better design overall. I guess you can attribute that to the fact they had every other Fallout game to work lore off of for their universe, and it was more direct since it was next to FO 1 and 2, but still. The humor they managed to sink into NV and how it actually felt more post apocalyptic than 4 does, really stands out. Note I say POST apocalyptic. As in, it's already happened and settlements are already happening and things are moving on. It always bothered me in 3 (and 4 but not as much) how it felt like the bombs just dropped less than 5 years ago.
Another issue I have with this is the exploring for the sake of exploring, and while that's fine, a lot of what prompts people to explore is because games like this have a carrot at the end of the stick method, where they tease you into exploring in hopes of bigger rewards. You come across that random cave/building on your way to a destination? Why not explore it, you might find an interesting story or a really cool weapon or some neat looking armor if you do.
That's completely removed from Fallout 4 and it makes me actually think "do I want to waste 15 minutes in this building collecting things for my settlement, or just go to my objective?"
You know there won't be a good weapon in there, you know the armor won't be anything better than what you already have either. Your only hope is some legendary enemy in there drops something interesting, and odds are it won't be. I'm speaking from a high level perspective when I say this. By the time you're around level 20, it basically removes any real reason to explore anything unless you're naked or something.
The fact there isn't a realism mode kind of kills it for me too. They set up everything, from cooking, cover system, stims, rads, whatever, to be survival based. However it seems like they just forgot to turn the option on in game. I know mods will easily handle this (along with a lot of things like they have already), and they'd make it better than even the base realism if they threw it in, but still. Part of a sequel should be improving on aspects the past game had in the same series. Bethesda knows they have huge hardcore fans following this series, but I sometimes feel they just forget about it to always appeal to the casual masses. However that wouldn't matter because it's an OPTION like Survival would be. It just baffles my mind.
It also bothers me how much the narrative in the beginning just limits what you can do in a game that says it's an "RPG". It's kind of hard to make up my own backstory when my girl is a lawyer, and my guy in the war and they're an entire family. It just feels like they did a character creation, then gave you the finished character and only let you alter very small things. I mean, the personalities for each person are already set. You're either really nice, or snarky about it but still do it. You only really have a say in the tone in which they go about it. And yes, I hit f5 way too much in convo's because of "sarcastic", and a lot of dialogue really. KINDA HARD to do what you want when you're a family man back from the war, or a hard working woman who turned lawyer.
I get the narrative they were trying to push on you, but I don't think it matches in this game. First time through sure, but 2nd and 3rd time through? It just limits you. I enjoyed New Vegas's character because of how ambiguous their past was. You could decide many things from the dialogue too, whether it be if you had parents, were in the West, or other various things. The dialogue too was far more diverse.
Overall, I'd give it a 7/10 probably. Is it worth the $60? Absolutely, it's a Fallout game. As much as I ♥♥♥♥ on the game compared to arguably one of the strongest in the series, I did enjoy quite a bit to it. I praise the customization the game gives you, and building settlements just sinks hours into this. I also am glad they fixed the gunplay. It's not "amazing", but I mean, it's your run in the mill shooter with it. I also love how Power Armor actually FEELS like Power Armor now. That had to be one of the highlights for me. The perk system isn't as bad as I thought it'd be too. It's different, but I'm pretty indifferent. While the perks aren't the same, the points sank between 15, 50, 75, and 100 was meaningless in the old games too. So I mean... give and take.
However that's really about the only "new" stuff they've done with this. Everything else relies on things they've already done with 3, and companions are a step BACK (both in how effective they are in combat and what you can do with them) from New Vegas. I apologize if the review is too short or not as in depth as maybe Verbs. It's 4 AM, so sorry if the pacing is off as well. However I intentionally avoided talking about the story because I know it's still new and don't want to dare spoil it for anyone.
My final thought is, the more I play Fallout 4, the more I am reminded why New Vegas is the better game, even without the improved gun play. I'm more than certain if Obsidian got their hands on the new Fallout with this modified engine and gun play and all that, it'd be better in every aspect.
P.S. I hate how many Pipe Pistols there are. I get more excited opening an expert chest and seeing an aluminum can because I know it can DO SOMETHING. I don't need a ♥♥♥♥ing Pipe Pistol. And why are they in PRE-WAR CHESTS when the lore (and if you have eyes) clearly says they're post-war guns scavenged all around?
Also, Ron Pealman not doing the intro broke my heart. He's been there since the original and they push him aside to the News Anchor.
