Im sorry, but I think you're jumping a bit too hard to defend Fallout 4, and take this from someone who is as die hard a fan of Bethesda as there can probably exist. Its a logical progression in a developers work that one release would be weaker than others since thats just how gaming works in general. Fallout 4 is a lot like Oblivion in that I don't think its really the height of Bethesda, but it also shows that Bethesda's worst is much better than most anyone else's work, atleast for my tastes with what I like in games.

Also for the statement earlier in the thread about releasing Daggerfall today, I am sure that it would get completely slammed as a "kill, loot, return" game since the entire game is pretty much radiant quests. Some people just like something because its old, and not much else.

I don't get the whole conspiracy thing. Both Skyrim and Fallout 3 are overall beloved and considered some of the best games last gen. Fallout NV isn't viewed in that same light by most gamers so why all of sudden the negativity this game get is from a combination older Fallout fans, NV fans and people who just hate Bethesda? Wouldn't Skyrim and Fallout 3 get the same treatment?

Also let me say this again. I think Fallout 4 is a very good game and is favorite this gen so far but I do think there is serious room for improvement.

uhm... first of all ^^

the internet gets more and more popular with time... barely someone rated their games online, when Fallout 3 was released. That's a trend that came in the last years

But I also don't think that Twitch is a good indicator on how good a game is

People mostly watch online games on there. Fallout had like 10 times the views it has now, when it was released... and so did Witcher.

Single Player games aren't a big thing on Twitch ^^ People just want to get a sneak peak on the new games and watch games like Fallout or Witcher or even Just Cause for the first days of release.

My favorite marked location in NV is the overturned dumpster/truck right out side of novac, I like how someone actually wasted there time making it marked.

FO4 is way more complex than FNV? If you're talking about options to "kill" or "kill later" as complex, then FO4 is indeed is more "complex". I wouldn't say FNV was complex at all, but had a lot of options and ways to complete something. FO4 has a mediocre options at best. You didn't understand the point of the rocket quest. The point was that almost all quests in FNV were designed this way, where you had many options. In FO4 this is only regarding the MQ and even then you have radiant missions or filler missions. Rarely have i seen any interesting quest that had any options at all, let alone a complex quest.

Skyrim is a different franchise set in a different universe. So comparing Skyrim with Fallout 3 and Fallout 4 is more a thing for Bethesda Fans themself, not persons that only prefer a single special franchise for their taste.

And as i am a fan of the Fallout franchise i only compare the different Fallouts internal and i would never allow me to compare with Skyrim as i totally lack on knowledge about that.

So i compare with F1, F2, F3 and F:NV.

And from a classic fallouts fan view (mine) F:NV was the one that catched the classic spirit from the isometric games best in combination with modern 3d elements. I can′t explain why other users prefer Fallout 3 or Fallout 4 over new Vegas - either they simply don′t know Fallout 1 and 2 and simply loved running through ruins shooting things, or it was more that the Bethesda fans for the first tried fallout out, jumped over to the franchise with Fallout 3 (cause: Bethesda) and liked it just more cause: it was closer to their elder scrolls franchise they know better.

However, if i start to compare Fallout 3 in this row it was ... better then Fallout 4 in my opinion. When i look now at Fallout 4 and then back to Fallout 3 it looks like Bethesda did not have the courage in the first step to hardly punch the classic fallout fans into the face and added the most classic charme to the game they where able to provide with their world/writing skills in combination with what they can do best: elder-scrollerize.

The funny fact is that the things the classic fans would love to get back would not hurt the fans of the new style in any way.

Here is fought with tooth and nail that the classic franchise fans shall take off their retro glasses and shut up and understand, but the Bethesda fans forget that they just do the same thing at the same moment, defend their elder scrolls bethesda style gameplay.

yup!! You munchin on anything? I got the classic butter popcorn with some soda whatta ya havin?

It certainly beats Oblivion where I purposefully took all my primary skills as things I could avoid. I would use them only when I wanted to level, as I wanted to avoid leveling as much as possible so I didn't run into trolls when I was a massively underpowered archer in a game not really designed for archery.

just for the records, npc's don't level with you in beth's games, with only few exceptions (but not for spawned enemies).

there's a certain "bandwidth" for every enemy type, like, say, raiders from lvl 1-10, raider psychos from lvl 5-15 etc, but these never change throughout the game.

when your level increases, tougher enemy types get spawned (and they went VERY far with that this time, i encountered new enemy types (like clunky steroid ghouls) even >lvl70)

I find it amusing that overly dramatic/over the top thread titles get this much attention. CHOCOLATE MILK HAS RUINED ALL MILK! Sounds nuts right?

You either like it or you don't. If you don't, well you don't. People like different things and Bethesda has a different take on RPGs which I happen to like. It's pretty simple really.

That sounds nuts because chocolate milk is easily the best kind of milk. Those who disagree are sub human.

OP, while I understand your logic, I disagree with it. I find it good that enemies level up with you, however I would like to point out in fallout 4 this is actually a two tier system. First tier is location scaling. As in if you go say to far east. Enemies could be a great deal higher then you and are shown as skulls. This is to get rid of invisible walls. Unless you want to cheese the system. Or really have good skill. The second tier comes after you hit a hard cap though. So, say 1 - 49 you have one set of NPC's to fight. at level 50 you will have new types thrown in to give a challenge. Not to say that is the only hard cap as there are others. This is a good system IMO as it keeps you engaged.

Now that is a bit of why a lot of people including myself say that fallout 4 is a great action game. But not a good RPG. As it is the combat is spot on in every regard. The AI may be a bit bad but it is very fluent. On one hand this is not supposed to be a FPS so that means AI should not be super hard. However, it is not strong on it's own for a RPG. mostly the RP which has us look hard at AI. Anyways I dont want to ramble on about AI, it's just hard to not point it out, and the fact that this is a RPG not a FPS.

Anyways, I feel the bigest problem with Fallout 4 is not enough choices, via voiced PC and wanting to tell a very specific story as to leave one wondering at the end more about the ending.

Bottom line, is IMO I love the system that is in place. I respect you do not, and want to point out at any time you can scale the difficulty down. Or if are on PC hit ` and type tgm. Where as us that want harder can not do that without changing NPC packages...

well obsidian is very good at story writing and structuring, its a strength of theirs, i've said it before if we could get the writing and structuring of obsidian and world building including enemies of BGS to me that would make a game that would have more depth in the quests with a lot more consequences and the world building/locations and combat which to me are much better from BGS that would make a for really complete type of game.

I already said that idea too somewhere, first time we match i think. And then a switchable overlay for either the players that prefer the Skyrim distribution design and the other for the ones that prefer the classic Fallout design (i expect that all the distribution points for perks and skills are still there and just hidden in the background controlled by the new overlay). As this game is still not for multiplayers i don′t expect it to be that way hard to implent that.

Well I dunno what really is considered a true RPG. All I know is that I always chose to be nice in game like never giving a sarcastic answer and returning a death claw egg back to its nest instead of selling it.


And the biggie, and I think this is a biggie, is that even if it's not some kind of extra far right hard core RPG, I just passed 125 hours of gameplay last night on my only character, and I'm still having fun.

I don't know what y'all are looking for in an RPG, honestly. F4 is fine. It's Fallout. It gave me what I expected.

Sure you have a set storyline, but it's not like you HAVE to do it. You can play any way you want to and make up your own story as you go along. That's what I love about Beth. You can do what you want (particularly if you disregard the rather stupid beginnings - look at Skyrim - I usually just breeze through Helgen and THEN get on with it as I want to do it).

Don't get me wrong, sure it would be nice to have more choices (I think F3 did a good job with that. You could be bad, good or anywhere inbetween), but, in the long run, there is still a storyline to complete. What more do you want?

People are always saying FNV was so awesome. Sure, I love the game, but, to me it had no heart, no soul and no motivation for my character to do anything in the way of the storyline. Admittedly that made RP much easier, since I wasn't really obligated to do much of anything, but, constant wandering and random encounters got boring quick. The factions were boring and non motivational. The moral compasses were complete stereotypes and, on the whole, the environment was so boring that fast travel was the only way to go.

I understand that folks think that Dragon Age and Witcher (recently) or even Dark Souls are RPG's, but, to me, an RPG is where you create your own character and that character's personality, motivations and life. None of those games do that. You are who they make you to be, particularly Witcher. Sure, in DA you can chose how your character looks and what choices they make, but the end results are always the same. To me they are just very linear (Don't get me wrong I love them too).

F4, to me strikes a good balance. Sure, it could be a little looser, but, hey, who am I to complain. They've earned the $100 I spent.

That's all I ask.

no offense but i find these kinds of comments "you like it or you dont" in a forum with the whole purpose is to discuss stuff pretty ridicoulos

imo nv had stuff that i thought were executed better and others that werent

one thing that is for sure

bethesda is streamlining things more...this has benefits and drawbacks...it certainly makes the game more accessible but it certainly hurts the rpg aspects

well said

It is the purpose to discuss, but when someone like it and the others don't, then what is left to say? It seems like the people that dislike the game, or atleast aspects of it are trying to make us that like the game feel bad about it. This isn't true or everyone, but that is the feeling i get.

This sentence can cause some giant explosions as the definition "what Fallout is" is highly depending on the experiences people had with previous types of Fallout.

And again a lot of people say that Fallout 4 is far away from anything a "real" Fallout ever would have been.

Very true. However, I think you're taking that a bit out of context.

The entire line was: "I don't know what y'all are looking for in an RPG, honestly. F4 is fine. It's Fallout. It gave me what I expected." I think the last sentence is very important in this instance. "It gave me what I expected." Nothing more. I have spent countless hours on F3 and on FNV and enjoyed them immensely as well, so I am quite satisfied with my purchase and have enjoyed more than 400 hours on it.

For $100, it was well worth my money. I am quite happy with it.

If people want to take the statement as incendiary, that is their prerogative. It is simply meant as my opinion and I certainly do not expect everyone to agree with it.

Its the Internet, need a conspiracy theory or two to keep things Interesting.

For sure i understand, even if "It's Fallout. It gave me what I expected" is somehow a statement of what to expect from fallout. "It′s the Fallout i expected" would have fit more, but i am just nitpicking i think

The question here is, and it′s already been partially answered some times, how Bethesda can change/improve things for to keep the lovers of the actual direction of the game happy while the fans of the older style of the franchise don′t run away. I am talking about a better matchup of the old system with the changes on the new system.

We already had suggestions that Beth could engage themself to write their quests a bit more like Obsidian did (don′t think that this would scare actual fans, it′s simply a different design angle then the actual one), and a possible dual system for how to handle the skill/perk system.

Don't disagree, but I would warn Beth to be careful with the Obsidian model. Admittedly, the Obsidian model contained more depth of choices and, even to a degree, more depth to the NPCs and Companions, but, IMO it also washed out any true motivational depth for those of us who prefer to play a relatively "good" or "moral" character. IMO FNV was all about being horrible in most things. Sure you were nice to the towns and they often came to adore you, but the morality of the major factions was so reprehensible 99% of the time and the actual main quest so absolutely unnecessary to your character that, for me it made the game almost unplayable as an RPG.

I guess I just need a purpose. A "Why?" if you will. I found myself not really caring about Hoover and the motivations of all of the factions was so muddy, not to mention that their behavior was questionable, if not outright idiotic most of the time (honestly NPC, you can't handle some ants? Really Caesar? You honestly think that slavery, wanton slaughter and terrorism is the way to make friends? And so many other examples).

If Beth could add depth to their story and add the moral depth of choices that Obsidian, admittedly, did very well and still maintain a clear main story line that had some relevance, I say go for it.

I love Beth and they, IMO have always been very good at actually writing a story in the TES games, a motivation, if you will, but, a weakness I have found in all of the Fallout games is the moral ambiguity of the main storylines. There is no way to actually come up with an ending that actually doesn't involve wanton slaughter and genocide.

That's just my interpretation. I realize that you're not expected to "Save the World" as you are in many TES games, but... then again..., yes you are. In F3, you were expected to save the Capitol Wasteland from itself.

My only real criticism of F4 is that there is no end game that is satisfying. All those settlements don't really mean anything if you're still at war. There is no real solution to the Sups. There will always be monsters. Either the BoS or the Institute have to go down (or both).

Beth: I admire the effort, but I do have to agree that, while you engaged those of us that are fans of your series, perhaps you did go a bit to far in watering down the moral equivalencies of the storyline to appeal to a broader audience. You can do both you know. Good writing and good action are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

I'm guessing you weren't around the Skyrim forums back when it was first released? The amount of hate and venom against Skyrim on this forum was unreal the first few weeks after release. Just page after page of negative threads about how the game was 'dumbed down', not a real 'elder scrolls game', not a 'real RPG' (sound familiar? lol). People claiming that Skyrim was going to be a financial disaster for Bethesda, and that this was the end of the Elder Scroll series, etc etc.

It was nothing even comparable to what we're seeing from the anti-FO4, but it was all about the same criticisms and complaining.