Well not every game, but its a trope indeed. I think Bethesda does that trope well though, but i feel like the Sole Survivor is actually abit more grounded than their previous protagonists, which i appreciate a great deal.

Dragon Age Origins is a nice example of a protag that can get away with doing anything, because in the end they are the only ones that can defeat the threat, but it does not mean that left the world a better place.

They also gave those troll ratings.

Every game has troll ratings, but some companies attract butt hurt fans and trolls more than others. Take a look at the latest Bioware games aswell, there is a pattern. Some will rate Dragon Age Inquisition 1/10 just because its published by EA.

Evil isn't like "Bwahahahah I enslaved this family and tied them to this railroad track for deathclaws to get at because EVIL -mustache twirls-" You can play a serial killer in Fallout 4, you can play a cannibal, you can support a faction literally building a slave race, you can play a raider, you can convince people to give up large amounts of caps and their own personal treasures in Fallout 4, you can do a lot in Fallout 4 that can be considered not heroic or good in Fallout 4.

Saying "well I can only be a hero" is pretty wrong, there is a vast amounts of ways you can play a non-hero or a evil character.

Yeah, if they were smarter they could of lowered the score more naturally putting more 4,5,6 but no, so they can't even use this as a real argument.

IMO Fallout 3 only upset the Fallout fans, not the TES/Bethesda fans. It was too early, a new project for Bethesda and it did feel very much like Oblivion. It was much more like TES than Fallout 4 is, so many TES/Fallout 3 fans voted on Metacritic and with all the "efforts" of old Fallout fans, the score settled pretty high ( 8 - 8.5 ).

The trouble with Fallout 4 is it managed to upset people from both crowds, Fallout (old) fans and TES/Bethesda fans. A good portion of the negative reviews, if you take your time to read them, compare Fallout 4 to Fallout 3, not to the old ones.

So I think Fallout 4 objectively has a poorer reception than Fallout 3, there is no conspiracy going on. The critic score says the same.

Another thing to consider (by those who like the conspiracy theory that the Fallout 4 score was "bombed" with premeditation), is that we're talking about a mere 6423 user votes on pc, 3429 on ps4 and 1395 on xone. Supposing everyone voted for just one platform, we're looking at a mere 11.000 total votes, compared to 8-10-12? million copies sold. What I mean is this average score could very very easily be turned up side down if the pleased BGS fans who appreciate the game would bother to spend 1 minute to register on Metacritic and vote a 10 It would only take like 10.000 fans out of 10 million of satisfied customers. Why doesn't that happen? Maybe because the average is actually a fair representation of what those 10 million think about Fallout 4.

Skyrim was influential sure, but nothing any individual game should strive to replace.

Skyrim was a freakish oddity, overly popular even by TES's own standards. Fallout 4 is Fallout 4, it doesn't need to do/have/be/live up to anything Skyrim.

exactly!... all that magic and whoooo stuff....

I wonder why someone started a topic with this subject, if you don't like FO4 , you think Skyrim is much better..keep it to yourself or go to a skyrimforum.

that's my humble opinion, no offence..

This, I'm more into TES than fallout so I returned to Oblvion after Fallout 3.

One benefit for FO4 is the building and mod system who also is an excellent hook for mods.

And mods is that keeps the game running for years.

What?? lol my first play through, I slapped on fashionable glasses, a red dress and a sailor cap!

Although my grenades, pipe pistol and shotgun may have balanced it out

You are too loyally blind if you are saying F04 has a better roleplay system than any other FO or TES Bethesda game to date. I love F04 for many reasons which I think are huge improvements over other games but the decision to use a voiced PC with a forced primary mission, damages the "play how you want" experience that Bethesda used to be kings of and for that reason, it lets itself down in a big way compared to the rest of them.

In FO3 you could be pretty mean and get the stats and recognition to show for it. Chaotic/evil, no. This isn't D&D after all.

Voiced protagonist is one of the best decisions Beth made and I love every minute of it. I'm sick of mute protagonist.

I'm actually okay with a voiced protagonist. Its just that Bethesda hasn't been able to make it work within the framework of their game, because it pushed out player agency and options. It essentially threw the baby out with the bathwater, and what we lost was not worth it.

Given the choice, I would rather have a mute protagnist with an array of unique dialogue options and choices, than a voiced protagonist that says the exact same thing 4 times.

Totally agree, if we could have the best of both worlds that would be amazing, but given the choice I'd rather have the dialogue system from Fallout 3/New Vegas anyday

I don't think the voiced protagonist is the problem here, the lack of ( preferable branched ) quests, that have nothing to do with the main quest, is IMHO the bigger problem. The voiced protagonist however might be a problem for modders, if they want to add quests, because they don't have access to the voice actors. I have some hope that DLCs might fix that.

lol if you see the comments he shows in the video, they don't say they've gone back to skyrim, they say they're playing oblivion.

skyrim is the same as FO4, in fact FO4 is skyrim with guns, with the same dumbed down banol gameplay.

I don't believe the author when it comes to the graphics and the world. I love both worlds.

But I do believe him when he says that there are more meaningful side quests in Skyrim than Fallout 4. Skyrim has really creatively designed and memorable quests. Alright, so there weren't many choices how to do the quests but gosh...Blood on the Ice and a Night to Remember were awesome and weren't just "go there, kill 10 raiders, come back."

Also, Skyrim's blank slate allow me to RP two completely different characters. They have different voices, different backgrounds and different builds. But in Fallout 4, I have to massively headcanon for characters who didn't actually live Pre-War. And what's worse, people mention that the PC is the SS, so an alternate start would be really difficult to make as a mod.

We'll see what the DLCs and mods would do to fix those problems I have with the game.

Skyrim (in a heavily modded form) is my preferred fantasy RPG . That means, I like the game more or less although combat mechanics are lacking. I like Fallout 4 too. It's the first Fallout game I played longer than a few hours. Much longer.

However, when I had to decide between the both I would chose Skyrim. For the sole reason that the quests are more and especially more located. There are several quest-hubs and you get the feeling that you are in a massive world and have lots of landscapes and perhaps stories to discover. I for example never did the Windhelm quests (too cold there) till now although I had several chars since start of Skyrim. I remember my deep disappointment in FO4 when I hiked to Warwick and discovered that I had seen the borders of the map fairly soon in the game. Does not help my immersion that much that you see little new things everywhere between.

I do like Skyrim better, because I like to use magic and old histories of an ancient time long time ago without any nukes and laser weapons. A world we can make better, a world we can change. We cannot make the FO 4 world better since alot of area that is filled with radioactivity. Humans and creatures who are damaged from the environment, cannot be fixed. Robots that do humans work. World of cold and darkness. Skyrim's world is light and magic. Some may like to play "future" games and some like to play games something that could happened several 1000 years back - like me.

Cheers,

-Klevs

Elder Scrolls will always be Bethesda's main focus. Its entirely their creation, unlike Fallout which they just bought the rights to.

Playing Oblivion and comparing it to Fallout 3, or playing Skyrim and comparing it to Fallout 4 may be arguably unfair comparisons because the games are intrinsically different, have different worlds, and play differently. But you can certainly make comparisons between those games in terms of content and replayability. And when you take that approach, Elder Scrolls beats Fallout every time. Every. Time. The Elder Scrolls IP is Bethesdas baby, and it shows. I don't think there's anything wrong with that either, really, and in fact its understandable. Bethesda just has a longer history with Elder Scrolls than Fallout.

Yes, and that's why I want another TES. It's more easy to make games such as TES, because it's more about fantasy and "dreams". FOs it's about the future and there are 2 ways, peace or war. War using nuclear or none nuclear weapons. Not much of fantacy.

Cheers,

-Klevs

Social media and the way people use it evolves over time. Trying to use social media to cyber bully companies into giving the bullies what they want wasn't so much a thing when Fallout 3 came out. Now rather than being a tool to inform other potential buyers, sites like Metacritic and Yelp are more and more often used as weapons to wield against a company or business in order to attempt to intimidate and coerce them into catering to the bully's desires.

I also do get the impression that alot of people want developers to cater directly to them. I do not like that attitude, and it has become more prominent the last few years.

You got insulted on the radio by three dogs and you got attacked by regulators occasionally, karma in Fallout 3 was beyond useless and meaningless.