*sigh* which one?

I wouldn't try to bring realism into this.

Cause you'd have to take things like pollination into account as well. A lot of plants depend on insects and other animals for their survival and when the bugs are gone or turned into giants it would have a huge inpact on all life on earth. The eco system is a delicate balance.

Best to just accept the way the things are portrayed in the game and enjoy it.

Anyway, I also prefer the atmosphere of Fallout 3, but it might also have to do with companions in my case.

This is the first Bethesda game where I enjoy having companions tag along and that does have a big impact on the feel of the game.

I know, the Fallout series have always been my fav. and I really hope they give us an option to calm the colors down...on another note, I use a pair of yellow tinted Gunnar glasses in the office since I'm staring at a screen all day and decided to use them while playing F4. It's not game changing, but it does help a little in neutralizing the saturation. Just an FYI

and Chernobyl actually still looks somewhat scary ^^

just compare those two pictures:

http://i3.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article6614124.ece/ALTERNATES/s1227b/The-former-Chernobyl-nuclear-power-plant.jpg

https://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/ptG_QLdRhkAPxWv5BL5tDzNMeWA=/1020x0/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/4244277/Fallout_4_20151105154102.0.jpg

I think that glaring super-shiny nvidia lighting is just too much

making the game look more 'autumn-winter' like would already be enough

Yeah, I statred in my earlier posts that I don't care about the realism but, quite a few people completely ignored what I said in my posts and begun constantly saying '200 years. 200 years'! etc... I think you're right, I should probably just accept it until mods come out. You have to hand it to Bethesda they are great for adding mods to console and allowing their game to be changed so much so, I suppose my little niggle are not a problem when they can be changed so easily. I think my next playthrough that I start @when mods are out' I'll feel much more immersed with the colours 'fixed'

Lik you, I also quite enjoyed the companions in this game. They feel more like you'e with a person rather than a walking, hollow empty husk. even though they repeat their lines a fair bit I think Bethesda did a great job of brining them to life and made the game more immersive because of it.

I like. Congratulations to Bethesda to leave the cliche that was the world of F3. Okay, the colors could be a little less vibrant, but that's ok.

actually I think it got the feel back. New Vegas did not feel like a post apocalyptic world to me compared to Fallout 3. Fallout 4 brought that back for me.

Sure there is more color and that is fine by me. But the destruction and overgrowth from the past 200+ years looks great. I like how buildings are not just rubble, they have growth on them. I enjoy the weather patterns and effects. Seems pretty post apocalyptic to me.

I agree with you there. I just think it's cartoonishly over vibrant. just tone it down a little. The destruction and design of downtown Boston though... WOW! Just WOW! Amazing!

Yup, and now take the Chernobyl accident and convert it into bomb form, then replicate that around the world a couple of times...yikes.

I must disagree with the OP and realism has nothing to do with it. Walking in sunshine and then suddenly being struck by a radiation storm provides a stark reminder of exactly what kind of world you are in. I love it and IMO it is far better than FO3.

I have to agree, it's just a liiiiitttle bit too colourful. I'm waiting for a good non-ENB lighting mod if one doesn't already exist and doesn't nuke performance.

I liked things like the rain though, and the radstorms. Just wish they lasted a bit longer. They're over before they start.

Music also plays an important role, and the music in FO4 while good, seems a bit too out of place by being a bit too upbeat and, well.......nice. Thankfully a STALKER music mod took care of most of that.

Opinion of course.

I would add that if a 'Grim and Somber' ENB is ever released for FO4, like the one in Skyrim, it may be just what the OP is looking for.

Fallout 4 is post-post apocalyptic so it came out how it is supposed to.

As I just posted in another thread, never thought I'd say this but I miss slavery and prostitution.

Probably because it was empty as [censored] due to the ram limitations of consoles.


That's what probably made it feel more apocalyptic to you. No than you please is what I say.


3 was the worst. But everyone I'm sure will have their least and most favourite

FO3 had a very 'isolating' and desolate feeling to it...that's what is missing in '4. Perhaps it had something to do with the ambience and broad areas of not much, whereas in '4 you can't travel far before you trip over someone or something.

I'm glad it's vibrant. I can't stand seeing bland world.

Glowing Sea is the example. That area is full of nothingness. If the whole map is like that minus the yellow fog, my eyes would be tired.

Old story, comment that Fallout area would look far more like Oblivion than FO3, Forrest and overgrown ruins, New towns or towns build on top of the ruins, just a few parts would be pre war outside of decorations,

No this would not feel post apocalyptic so they made FO3 instead.

FO4 is a bit more colorful but pretty much like FO3,

Eh. I've never really understood the "cartoony" complaint that I've seen made over various games. I guess some people just don't like color. (or they jumped on board the "grey & brown! realism!" bandwagon when all the Modern Military? games went nuts with bland palettes.)

But like I said, I turned up the saturation on Fallout 3 & NV.

(That's not to say it can't be overdone - some of the ENB presets that people have put up on the Nexus are a bit strong. Still wouldn't call them "cartoony"....)

Just the opposite for me. I think that FO4 has a much greater post-Apocalypse feel than either FO3 or FNV. What I dislike about ALL three games is that the vibe is more like just 50 years after rather than 200. I would expect that after 100 years, Society and Civilization would be very much on the rebound. 200 years? Things would be looking more like 2076.

For me FNV nailed it the best. I love the post apocalyptic desert. For me it's blends perfectly.

I know what you're saying, spunky onion, but I'm not certain I agree. The atmosphere is not the same as it would be 6 months after an apocalypse.

Here's the thing. Nothing stays the same, and change is the only constant, eh? So, if we were to be stuck in a post-apocalyptic game world that spanned centuries with nothing changed, it would soon begin to be quite boring. Familiarity breeds contempt, or something like that. While I love the "I just survived the complete destruction of the civilized world and now I have to survive in the ruins of that world" atmosphere, things had to change.

Perhaps it would have been better if their had been a plague, and radioactivity actually reduced the human population of the earth to 0.01% of current values, and 97% of all plant life died as well, and the planet was covered in a radioactive cloud that obscured the sun for two centuries... but what are you left with? After a period of time, mankind would either learn to feed, clothe, and house itself, or there would be no mankind. Do you really want to play a savage dressed in uncured animal skins carrying a stick for a weapon? Or would you rather the world (and mankind) began healing itself? I think it'd have to be one or the other.

What amazes me is that post-war technology won't allow people to create a shelter with a roof that doesn't leak... when groups like Native Americans have been creating secure shelter with far less in the way of materials for centuries. Personally, I think that most of the ruins should be gone, swallowed by vegetation, and there should be many log cabin and wooden fort style settlements defended by bow and arrow, or spear.

Else there should be only about 10 people alive in the entire Boston area...

Hunting parties should roam the land instead of raiders. As to color being vibrant, I have to wonder if post-apocalypse, neon oranges, greens, and yellows might be the new norm, eh? mutations occur, but generally natural selection sees to it that only mutations that grant a greater chance of survival will breed true and be viable.

EDIT: As a bit of an afterthought, I kindofthink that if one wants to see the effects of a "apocalypse" after a few centuries, one should take a peek at the Khmer ruins of SE Asia. You could literally be standing in the middle of the ruins of a huge city, and not realize it until you walk into a gigantic stone head or some such.

Examples of the Khmer ruins after the site was cleared: http://www.culturefocus.com/cambodia-angkor.htm

Eh, I do not mind the look or feel of the game, I do think it is a streamlined story that leaves out a lot of role play options by putting already set situations though.

I think the colour palette would be ok if it weren't for the lighting, the game is "over lit" for want of a better description which makes the colours stand out too much. Im getting round it at the moment by enabling a setting on my fancy pants tv that monitors the light that the screen is giving off and adjusts itself accordingly.


I wish they'd included a gamma adjust in the settings menu so we could just set it to look as we pleased, cant for the life of me understand why they didn't, seems standard fair on most games, including their other titles.