Well, if you've only been together for a few months, then that "newness" spark is just gone. Either you're spending too much time around em I would think, or you're just not doing anything exciting much. Try doing something together if that's the case.

Quote from: Luciana on November 22, 2015, 03:49:21 AM

You nailed what I couldn't put my finger on, Cindy. You have a personality pre-established in game, but the only thing given to you is the tone in which you do it.

Also, Ron Pealman not being there broke my heart. He's been there since the original and they scrap him.

Apparently he is in Fallout 4, as the anchorman on TV who talks about the bombs dropping

...Is that really him? What a way too subtle add in.

Quote from: Luciana on November 22, 2015, 03:39:55 AM

Quote from: ObamaLover69 on November 22, 2015, 03:37:04 AM

10/10 review fam

I agree in pretty much every aspect

Really? Thank you. I felt it was very... ill paced. I was just kinda typing out my thoughts. I compare it to reviews like Verbs and just tremble when comparing.

Naw, it's really good, and other than the thing that I mentioned in the Fallout thread it pretty much sums up my views perfectly

NAW

Thank you, best friend. <3

Yeah I agree, maybe the backstory for the character wasn't the best one given the circumstance. Like, if the Sole Survivor wasn't from before the war and already had themselves established in the world, at least partly, (And they had the title "Sole Survivor" from experiencing something else) then a set character could've worked a lot better.

Maybe from a village, had a wife and kid, and they got killed by raiders and you manage to get out or something and have to find out who ordered the hit, and it changes into something much more.

I like the idea of pre-war and it sets up interesting dialogue at times, but the trade off for the disconnected character in the world kinda kills it.

Beautiful girl with incredible wit, normally happy and willing to help her friends. The name means light and bright, and is believed to bring incredible luck to those who name their kids this way.

Well, throw in a sprinkle of sarcasm and you have me.

So I've sank about 83 hours or so into this. Beat the story and all that. 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. 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.

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. 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 shat 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 fucking 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?

Edit: I wouldn't add this but Cindy helped me articulate what I wanted to say. You have a personality pre-established in game, but the only thing given to you is the tone in which you say it. You're either really nice, or snarky about it but still do it. And yes, I hit f5 way too much in convo's because of "sarcastic", and a lot of dialogue really.

Also, Ron Pealman not being there broke my heart. He's been there since the original and they scrap him.

So I've sank about 80 hours or so into this. Beat the story and all that. 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, 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.

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. I also think NV had the better writing, better factions, and better design overall.

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. 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.

The more I play Fallout 4, the more I am reminded why New Vegas is the better game, even without the improved gunplay.

I'm more than certain if Obsidian got their hands on the new Fallout with this modified engine and gunplay and all that, it'd be better.

Overall, I'd give it a 7/10 probably. I praise the customization the game gives you, and building settlements just sinks hours into this. 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 combat and what you can do with them) from New Vegas.

YouTube

Best one yet.

Quote from: Luciana on November 21, 2015, 11:04:32 PM

We pretty much agree, though I think the story, dialogue, humor, and choice to DO SHIT makes Fallout NV better than 4. Customization is great, but I always felt the atmosphere, and story were more important in NV.

I'm sure if Obsidian got another crack at a Fallout with the stuff Fallout 4 is using, it'd blow it out of the water. Though I do like the characters to Fallout 4. Companions and all. It's good to know I can hate Cait for her personality instead of a lack of one.

wow you just stole what i said

D...Did I? >_>

This is really just something for Fox to get into some spotlight. Who cares.

We pretty much agree, though I think the story, dialogue, humor, and choice to DO SHIT makes Fallout NV better than 4. Customization is great, but I always felt the atmosphere, and story were more important in NV.

I'm sure if Obsidian got another crack at a Fallout with the stuff Fallout 4 is using, it'd blow it out of the water. Though I do like the characters to Fallout 4. Companions and all. It's good to know I can hate Cait for her personality instead of a lack of one.

This is good news. People uniting and media actually reporting it.

I'm sorry you're playing that game :<

Again, I think you've got me pegged all wrong. I am not anti-refugee. I do not believe that there is a significant chance that refugees will commit acts of terror within our borders. Please stop acting as though I've presented myself that way.

Okay :<

Quote from: Azumarill on November 21, 2015, 07:02:27 PM

I'm much more open to the idea that mass surveillance is actually helpful, despite being a unilateral human rights abuse. The recent tensions re: refugees and the possibility of extremists hiding among them is what prompted me to have a little more faith in the PATRIOT Act and America's ability to keep the people safe.

There are no extremists hiding among refugees and even if there were the Patriot Act has nothing to do with the screening of refugees.

Also the Patriot Act hasn't prevented any acts of terrorism since its enactment.

Pretty much this. The Patriot Act in the traditional sense of which we know it, has expired anyway.