Yeah, I know Bethesda's writers cant write a good story, but this immature content (I mean dialogues, characters, motives and fractions) makes me more and more angry as a Fallout fan. Why cant Bethesda hire good writers or even better - let to do writing job to Obsidian? When will they understand Fallout is not about naive love between dad and son? When will they understand it is not suppoused to be a cartoon-like product for brainless teens about wars between idiotic fractions with 'cool' weapons and explosions? When will they understand what Fallout really is? [censored]*!


There is nothing in Fallout 4 what can make the story an ambitious piece of work. Nothing. Compare its writing to Witcher 3, the game that is not affraid of being mature and brutal. Compare it to Fallouts 1,2 and New Vegas. Or maybe you better not. There is no point in comparing well written games to immature FPS created by Bethesda.


Please, just give the license away to sb who know how to make a proper Fallout RPG game. Im so pissed on that game.

Keep in mind the entire Fallout world stems from the perception of the 50's culture, to include how they foresaw the future in the 50's. So yea in that sense Fallout 4, and for that matter all the Fallout games tend to seem immature. This series was never intended to be a serious SciFi game.

Look, I'm on board with a lot of your points, but I think it is unfair to call FO4 immature if you've played FO2. There are plenty of absurd, ridiculous and immature things in the original Fallouts.

But, yes, the writing in FO4 is no good. It's a fun open world shooter, just a crappy RPG.

so New Vegas was a well written game?

The main reason, why Fallout 1 & 2 had more deep dialogue, is that there was absolutely no voice... they didn't have to record anything, no matter how much text the put into the game.

New Vegas on the other hand was exactly the same as Fallout 3 and 4. The only thing missing were the skill checks, but they don't make a dialogue good or bad.

The factions in 4 feel 10 times better than they did in New Vegas. The Legion, as the counterpart to the NCR, was a complete joke.

Now we have 4 more or less balanced greyed out interesting factions, which is a great improvement over New Vegas.

What is this with the Obsidian hype? They did a great job on New Vegas, just as Bethesda did on 3 and 4. You wouldn't even notice any difference, if you didn't know who made which game.

i don't see how, say, fnv's main story is "better" than fo4's, care to elaborate?

dunno. they were pretty much what real world "is" ("islamic state") is, and though it might be debatable if that's a joke, it's certainly not a funny one.

might even have been a source of inspiration. i mean, these folk _do_ use computers after all...

Agreed. But the point is F4 is not a mature game. Previous Fallouts (except 3) werent SERIOUS but remained full of mature content. Its a huge difference. They still used six, drugs and strong language as universe builders. Just compare dark sense of humour or heavy atmosphere included in old Fallouts and colorful, naive vision here in F4. Dammit.

Fractions are absolute. Therefore neither immature or mature.

We have a support group.

It's just part and parcel of Beth's focus. It's a big name game, which means it will sell without any particular technical or professional merit, and which is appealable to many age groups (or, 'appropriate' to many age groups). A game like Witcher 3, following on the trend of eastern European game developers, focuses on a lot more technical and professional merit.

Personally, I see it as part of a wider issue within the video game industry, where most developers can't get past the concept of the stereotypical gamer, being a teenager (predominantly male), when in reality the average gamer is 30'ish, and the gender balance is pretty even. Until the industry accepts they are catering to an advlt audience, there is no hope of decent advlt content gaming....and by content I don't mean nudity, but real storylines, and decent themes.

I really don't think anyone buys Bethesda games for the artistry. The writing, acting, animations, etc... have always been terrible. It's the game engine and interactivity of the world - engineering stuff - that gets us all excited.

I'm not talking about their concept.

Just the content that you get from them. There is barely any dialogue with legionaries, barely any quests.

The final main missions are mainly about killing the others.

They just felt unfinished and like Obsidian didn't want us to choose them.

Compare the amount of NCR quests, to those from the Legion. Doing a legion playthrough was barely possible, because all you had from them were 4-5 missions, and that's only in the late game.

There were several Legion overhaul mods because of that.

Even the Brotherhood had more depth in New Vegas, being only a 'side-faction'

Welp Obsidian got mention. Time fight for your favorite dev guys. Who we got on Team Edward and Team Jacob.... I mean Bethesda and Obsidian.

Oh God. Another FNV fan.

FNV was not mature. It had no content. There was no point.

It was fun in a "shoot'em'up" kind of way, but the storyline was bland and uninspired.

Personally, while I enjoyed the game, it was hard to invest a lot of time in a character that had no motivation to even care about any of it. Like, why would I care who's in charge. I'm a courier. I'll work for whoever pays me.

Yes this new Fallout game seems very immature compared to the highly mature Monty Python references from Fallout 2, 3, & NV not to mention the lifelike alien blasters that seem very mature, remember when drinking out of toilets was a thing? Ya, I do, very mature indeed. So mature those games should come with a free martini with a silly straw.

Nothing like Fallout 3 and 4 I'm sure

Yup, it's probably time to switch back to indie games and small studios.

Actually, Witcher 3 had some very well done Monty Python references and easter eggs....even the humour was darkly mature.

I dont buy a Fallout game as a Bethesda game. I buy it as a Fallout game. I require good writing, deep characters, strong atmosphere and mature content. I did receive stupid story written by the guy on the wrong place. They could create their own universe instead of destroying the best franchise in history.

There was a intelligent rad scorpion who played chess in Fallout 2. The only way to win against him was to cheat. You could also find a crashed starfleet shuttle out in the wastes and also do time travel to set in motion the events of Fallout 1.

In New Vegas you also had a quest that involved scavenging up a six bot. You get to try it out yourself, and hand it over to one of the Garrets who can hardly contain his excitement at getting a sixbot - err, I mean his excitement for pleasing those damn robot fetishists, disgusting customers, right?

I suppose those were all examples of heavily mature writing that is worth getting all elitist about.

I'm not sure I'd describe this as maturity. I do think Fallout 3 and 4 had worlds that felt like they were sanitized at times, especially in comparison to Fallout 2 and New Vegas which had entire cities dedicated to vice. I don't think Fallout 3 and 4 are immature, but I do think that Bethesda's writers and world builders have been intentionally glossing over topics like drug abuse and prostitution which would certainly be more prominent realities in a world like Fallout's, and indeed are more prominent in the non-Bethesda Fallouts.

Why do they do this? I don't know, maybe they don't feel comfortable about exploring those topics. I doubt it has anything to do with the media or who they perceive as their audience for the Fallout games since they obviously didn't care about Obsidian including that type of stuff in New Vegas.

True. Very true.

Yeah, why don't we compare Fallout 4 to 1 & 2? Fallout 1, where the opening cutscene used gratuitious violence as a joke (a theme common to all of the Fallouts - cartoonishly over the top gore) and a Simspons reference with the Radiation King TV. Or the dozens of other pop-culture references scattered throughout the entire game as random encounters (or blatantly made in dialog, especially in Fallout 2) - canon or no, they're still a part of the experience of the first two Fallout games. How many actual quests in those games are just stupid?

Fallout has never been "mature". It's always been an anachronistic dark comedy modeled after 50s era sci-fi.

Not only 1950s sci-fi, the first two Fallouts were also modeled after 1980s/1990s action films. The final boss of Fallout 2 was named after Clint Eastwood's In The Line of Fire character, and had all the trappings of a cheesy 1980s action movie villain, including one liners.