Really? did the person who wrote that play Fallout 3? I mean come on, this is as dumb as saying Godzilla the game 2015 looks like a ps2 game....ahhhhh have you played a ps2 game? they don't look alike at all. that was just said for sheep to quote. Same thing here but unlike that game Fallout 4 does look great & as many have said before me the article is clickbait a person clearly trying to get people who love fallout talking.

Not everyone who says, "looks" means it visually. One can look at a red sports car, and a blue one, and say that they are the same [model of] car. FO4 looks to be vastly improved from FO3 in some respects, but from what I saw, they are effectively the same game under the hood [but with new mini games tacked on]. That is not a problem for a sequel with tweaked gameplay...

~unless a Fallout fan says it when referring to the original game.

It's really hard to take you seriously especially with the evidence to the contrary of what you are saying. See E3 footage, interviews, Quakecon info, etc.

Yes. Although without the "over and over".

I've seen all the footage and read the interviews. It's not hard to draw the big picture from that.

Anyone with eyes and a brain can clearly understand that FO4 is nothing like FO3.

As for the engine, I wish people would get this straight: BGS' engine (Creation Engine, formerly Gamebryo and prior to that NetImmerse) is the ONLY engine on the market that can do what they do (i.e., have hundreds to thousands of interactive objects throughout an open game world). If you can make a better engine to do this, please do and I am sure that Bethesda would be very happy to consider buying the source from you. Otherwise, understand that there is NO other engine that can do their games. It's that simple. They've looked, believe me. If they used another engine, you'd have 1) a far less interactive and living world, and 2) a game that performed far worse than what they have offered throughout the years.

People need to understand that BGS knows what they are doing and certainly has the money now to use any engine they can find that would do what they need to do. There isn't one, that's all, except for theirs of course.

We need to ignore Undecaffinated as he is obviously a troll. BGS deliberately refuses to simply make the same game as sequels, unlike many other developers, and the outrage of their consumer base for changing things with each game is more than enough to support this fact. One thing that anyone can count on with any new BGS game is that it will not be the same as their prior games. If you just want the same old game with a few tweaks to graphics and such, don't play BGS games because they are the exact opposite of that.

FO4:FO3 is example of what I would have preferred of FO3:FO2.

I'd say this is clearly wrong based on the publicly available evidence.

Well, it's understandable. It takes hours to get there, there's a mix up with the room at the hotel and the staff aren't being very helpful. You turn up hot and flustered with minutes to spare only to be ushered into a viewing room with no complimentary champagne and no go-go dancers. Verdict:

This game svcks!

(I'd say the same thing)

Yeah, that's how it should've gone (and normally does with sequels...).

Yeah this terrible Fallout 2 which looks to be vastly improved from FO1 in some respects, but from what I saw, they are effectively the same game under the hood. It's terrible how we get ripped off all these years. Always making the same game over and over again. They are all terrible.

Then why are you commenting? If you're set on it being a let down why not just stay away from the game and go play something else. Don't feed me that bs line about taking a stand against companies so they make a "better" game next time. That doesn't actually work.

Fallout 2 was more of a stand-alone expansion pack, unfortunately.

tho judging from Van burren, if Black Isle would have kept up with the IP then the line over and over would have applied.

What? 20-30 secs was my average load time for a save game. I never had any problem with Skyrim loading my 255 mod deck---wait...oh I've always played on PC.

"Skyrim was atrocious with its loading times on the 360..."
There's your problem right there.
1. Console
2. Old gen console with imaginary CPU, GPU, and RAM capabilities
3. Unrealistic expectations of game performance on gaming platform's limited capabilities.

"It's inexcusable to have Skyrim load times with FO4. If this is the case, I will cease to play it."

No you won't. I really love disingenuous fan boy hyperbole like this. They're very entertaining. Then again, if you can't afford a decent PC gaming rig or XB1 then it's your loss.....

See with the expectation that nothing is allowed to change because everything is holy and isn't allowed to touch you end up with a stand-alone expansion pack.

Which btw. I disagree with you here even with FO2.

Because I can.

All in good time. I've followed the seires this far, so I might as well look this through too even if I do seem to have hit a wall with it.

Don't make bs assumptions about the responses.

But it didn't happen.

How was Fallout 2 anywhere close to an expansion? Sure it uses the same engine and the same mechanics but almost nothing else is the same. New enemies, new plot, new weapons, new armor, new locations. What else do you need to consider a game to be an actual sequel?

True, but all of the evidence we have about Van Buren seems to suggest it, and we know a lot more about Van Buren then we do about Fallout 4.

A game that throws out many previously core mechanics and replaces them with things never part of the previous game?

technically no, but it would have happened, just saying, in that regard Black Isle was no better then Beth.

He isn't so wrong here with his assumption I heared it several times here (the speculation threads) from you .

[quote name="Vexen" post="24226630" timestamp="1438800740"]

Yeah most likely that is exactly [\quote] Or perhaps it's because Beth didn't pay him to do the review the way Exceptional A$$holes have been known to bribe their reviewers in the past

Over and over? How many Fallout's has Bethesda made?

I don't think you're seeing the big picture. I think your obvious contempt for Bethesda has blinded you to the changes they've made. Combat has been completely overhauled, character animation is much smoother, textures, lighting and color palette has been greatly improved, and you can see that the AI has been upgraded because enemy NPCs actually take cover during fights instead of blindly charging, UI and item manipulation is different, speech is now interactive - you can talk to someone while doing other stuff or talk to someone else at the same time and the skill system has been completely revamped.

What exact improvements are you are looking for?

I'm seeing more PC version of Skyrim in Fallout 4 then anything. Personally I want a game that is not going to have that many issues over graphics.

Count me as one who is skeptical of reporters and I'm always going to be skeptical, especially after the whole Mass Effect 3 debacle where the vid game media was so far up EAware's butt, thinking that there was nothing wrong with the game, yet there was. A whole bunch of stuff wrong, so I will take this news with a grain of salt and wait for someone who is more knowledgeable about Beth games and their mechanics commenting on it.

Bethesda actually shows very little of FO4 even to journalists (also gaming journalism has become so terrible bad that it's better not to pay attention to their stuff in the meantime). So they speculate wildley as we do. I will make my judgement of FO4 when I have played it.

From all the footage I've seen so far, it's PC Skyrim with some improvements, that's not bad at all IMO. I don't know if that's what a lot of people want but I'm ok with that type of game assuming stuff has been advanced like AI, combat and so on. We have to wait on that news though but that's not a big deal.

Well...

You know, these little debates gets so hyperbolic and exaggerated so quickly, it starts to become kind of silly doesn't it?

It's not like Fallout 4 is an underwater racing game that takes place in the 1800s - that would be "nothing like FO3."

...

Anyway, at some point this thread is going to be locked for at least a good clean-up and possibly to hand out some warnings, but I'm short on time.

In the meantime, let's all remember the rules of this forum.

Don't insult other members.

Don't call other members names.

Don't call other members trolls.

Be respectful and civil in discussing your differences of opinions.