Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[PTTG??]

If nothing else, I'm happy to see a Fallout game with more than one color.

[Krevsin]

Ditto. Like I said as far as I'm concerned the only way Bethesda can mess this up for me is if they turn it into a linear shooter with premade characters.

[Harry Baldman]

AFAIK there is a time limit in Fallout 2 too. The medicine man will pop up in dreams telling you to hurry the fuck up every once in awhile.

It's more of a suggestion on his part so that you don't forget in the middle of your pornstardom and gold mine acquisition/resale that you technically have a quest that needs to be done, in much the same way as the "I'm the Chosen One come here in search of the holy GECK" do, in fact. It doesn't really change anything if you get the GECK before the fourth dream or not, as the result is exactly the same. There is technically an instance of Arroyo where you can go back and that guy whose dog you rescued has had his dog eaten by the increasingly hungry tribesmen, but that doesn't appear in the actual game, it just jumps to the "shot up by Enclave" instance when you get the fourth dream if I understand correctly. It also doesn't have a note in your Pip-Boy with a progressively ticking day counter, which further diminishes the impact.

I remember the first time when I played Fallout 1 for some time - got the water chip, sure enough, but then I ran out of stimpaks when I didn't realize I had to go down into the basement to get rid of the Gun Runners' deathclaws permanently, and decided to sleep off the Deathclaw-induced injuries. Eventually just got the bad ending cinematic, which came a little out of the blue, to be honest.

Tell you what, though, if the towns getting taken over by Super Mutants wasn't dependent on you being there to observe it and gave you bad endings regardless of if you went there or not after the time elapsed, it would have been much more stressful.

But yeah, also agreeing with the posters above - I'm feeling quite positive about Fallout 4 already.

[SealyStar]

AFAIK there is a time limit in Fallout 2 too. The medicine man will pop up in dreams telling you to hurry the fuck up every once in awhile.

Yeah but it's not a hard time limit, he just harasses you with skippable still pictures every once in a while.

Anyway, I'm still addicted to FO4 hype but I am getting pissed off at the hatejerkers. There's nothing wrong with being cynical about a game and refusing to buy into the hype, and plenty of people are doing just that, but "hatejerk" is the only fitting word for some people talking about it (not so much here as on other sites, thankfully).

1. "Teh graphics suck!"
While I will concede that the graphics aren't as advanced as some AAA games recently, they're far from terrible and honestly pretty damn good when you look at the bigger picture. Furthermore, I can't get over the hypocrisy of people complaining about a trailer honestly showing what a game will look like, after years of complaining about prerendered movie trailers and bullshots.

2. "It's running on Gamebryo!"
Saying Skyrim and, apparently, Fallout 4 run on Gamebryo is like saying Half-Life 2 runs on the Quake Engine or Bioshock Infinite runs on the same engine as Deus Ex. It runs on a heavily updated fork of what was originally Gamebryo and so people are acting like it's literally Morrowind with guns.

3. "M'lady Sandra Reed said you can only be a dude!"
Countless people have skewered "The Reed Post" already, myself included. I don't hope to win anyone over by repeating the message, but if just one person stops treating the post as divine and infallible because of this I'll be happy.

First, the story behind it is fishy. Trusting the post means accepting that Bethesda let a single grunt programmer who had worked there less than a month access a nearly-finished game more than a year ago, and provided her tons of specific insider business and marketing information, that she presumably had no reason to know anyway, such as launch dates of the game itself and literally all DLC for it, and plans for projects that hadn't even started yet.

Second, most of the things in the post that do correspond to the currently-available information from the trailer and website can be Occam's-Razored as coincidence or based on information that was already available at the time it was made. For example, rumors that FO4 would be in Boston go back literally years and Bethesda employees were reportedly snooping around Beantown several months before the Reed Post.

Third, from the limited information we have, a lot of Reed's claims are demonstrably false. The plot she gave for the game doesn't seem to correspond with the scenario from the trailer that you come out of a Vault, the game has so far only been revealed for PS4/XBone/PC, with no references to last-gen versions, and the "brand new engine with 100% new from scratch code" looks remarkably like the Creation Engine. The last one really sticks in my craw because many of the people who believe the Reed post are the same people who bitch about how FO4 runs on Gamebryo.

4. "DAE paid mod$?"
While it's obviously possible and I wouldn't be shocked if they were announced, the rejection of paid mods for Skyrim was so strong and near-unilateral that even if Bethesda implemented it for FO4, they would probably be protested away again, unless the system was seriously revamped, or even cause boycotts if they were announced ahead of time.

[GiglameshDespair]

Ditto. Like I said as far as I'm concerned the only way Bethesda can mess this up for me is if they turn it into a linear shooter with premade characters.

Fall Out Duty: 1950 Warfare

[BigD145]

Dwarf Fortress nerds: "OMG GRAFIKS SUX"

:/

[Flying Dice]

That's the thing, though. I don't care about the presence/absence of graphics, but when a AAA title launches with graphics that would have been cutting edge a decade ago, that's a problem. When a AAA title launches with enough bugs, unfinished work, and poor design that you need half a dozen fix-mods just to make the vanilla game playable (and that it's easy to call that as an issue long before the game launches), that's a problem.

If there wasn't a huge modding community, I'd almost rather have FO4 be ASCII or even a bloody text adventure just to avoid looking at those ugly-ass Bethesda graphics. It'd probably be less buggy, too.

[Rakonas]

Geography, during the height of the cold war (which is a strong component of how Black Isle decided what survived and what didn't) the estimated total nuclear arsenal of Earth could destroy approximately ten percent of the Earths land area, based on cold-war era documents, Europe would have been blanketed with nuclear weapons adequate to completely destroy every square mile of the continent due to the fact that Europe would have been the site of all ground combat on that front.  the rest of the world's nuclear arsenal was slated for major military, industrial and commercial sites in Russia and the US, as well as all major ports across the world.

This is ridiculous logic. The Great War happens in 2077. nearly a hundred years after the height of the cold war. And the war is between China and the USA anyway. The nuclear arsenal is going to be enough to wipe out the entire planet if the story wants to say it is.

[NullForceOmega]

Are you seriously going to dredge up a post from yesterday just to perpetuate a fight I no longer wish to involved in?  Grow up.  That's the logic Black Isle used.  Deal with it.

[Virtz]

For me it's more like "this style is upleasant to my eyes". Personally I don't care about graphics quality that much. Like I'd rather look at Morrowind or Mount & Blade than Binfinite.

1. "Teh graphics suck!"
While I will concede that the graphics aren't as advanced as some AAA games recently, they're far from terrible and honestly pretty damn good when you look at the bigger picture. Furthermore, I can't get over the hypocrisy of people complaining about a trailer honestly showing what a game will look like, after years of complaining about prerendered movie trailers and bullshots.

Hypocrisy. I do not think the word means what you think it means.

Also, who's complaining about the trailer showing in-game graphics instead of pre-renders? Where has that happened? Cause that sounds a bit surreal.

[BigD145]

That's the thing, though. I don't care about the presence/absence of graphics, but when a AAA title launches with graphics that would have been cutting edge a decade ago, that's a problem. When a AAA title launches with enough bugs, unfinished work, and poor design that you need half a dozen fix-mods just to make the vanilla game playable (and that it's easy to call that as an issue long before the game launches), that's a problem.

If there wasn't a huge modding community, I'd almost rather have FO4 be ASCII or even a bloody text adventure just to avoid looking at those ugly-ass Bethesda graphics. It'd probably be less buggy, too.

Cutting edge = "we don't know what bugs will crop up"
older gen = "we've had years to shake out the dust bunnies"

[Putnam]

Geography, during the height of the cold war (which is a strong component of how Black Isle decided what survived and what didn't) the estimated total nuclear arsenal of Earth could destroy approximately ten percent of the Earths land area, based on cold-war era documents, Europe would have been blanketed with nuclear weapons adequate to completely destroy every square mile of the continent due to the fact that Europe would have been the site of all ground combat on that front.  the rest of the world's nuclear arsenal was slated for major military, industrial and commercial sites in Russia and the US, as well as all major ports across the world.

This is ridiculous logic. The Great War happens in 2077. nearly a hundred years after the height of the cold war. And the war is between China and the USA anyway. The nuclear arsenal is going to be enough to wipe out the entire planet if the story wants to say it is.

...2077 was the height of the cold war. It's when the cold war went hot.

[Rakonas]

Geography, during the height of the cold war (which is a strong component of how Black Isle decided what survived and what didn't) the estimated total nuclear arsenal of Earth could destroy approximately ten percent of the Earths land area, based on cold-war era documents, Europe would have been blanketed with nuclear weapons adequate to completely destroy every square mile of the continent due to the fact that Europe would have been the site of all ground combat on that front.  the rest of the world's nuclear arsenal was slated for major military, industrial and commercial sites in Russia and the US, as well as all major ports across the world.

This is ridiculous logic. The Great War happens in 2077. nearly a hundred years after the height of the cold war. And the war is between China and the USA anyway. The nuclear arsenal is going to be enough to wipe out the entire planet if the story wants to say it is.

...2077 was the height of the cold war. It's when the cold war went hot.

Right, in the fallout universe, which is why basing speculation on real life cold war plans is silly. Europe was already ravaged by the resource wars and the war was between China and the USA. Assuming that europe would be leveled by nukes and the USA only targeted at major centers makes no sense in the context of a hundred year long cold war between China and the USA.

[miauw62]

Also note that Fallout bombs were salted bombs, intended for radiation AND destruction,significantly increasing their effective radius, since radiation-hardened targets are generally pretty small and the radiation can deal with the surrounding area.

[Flying Dice]

That's the thing, though. I don't care about the presence/absence of graphics, but when a AAA title launches with graphics that would have been cutting edge a decade ago, that's a problem. When a AAA title launches with enough bugs, unfinished work, and poor design that you need half a dozen fix-mods just to make the vanilla game playable (and that it's easy to call that as an issue long before the game launches), that's a problem.

If there wasn't a huge modding community, I'd almost rather have FO4 be ASCII or even a bloody text adventure just to avoid looking at those ugly-ass Bethesda graphics. It'd probably be less buggy, too.

Cutting edge = "we don't know what bugs will crop up"
older gen = "we've had years to shake out the dust bunnies"

Or, at Bethesda, the worst of both worlds: shitty graphics and mountains of bugs and performance issues. It's like you've never played one of their games before.

It's not like it's difficult; even Far Cry 2 tier graphics would be a massive step up, and that's about seven years old. There are games that'll be 3-4 years older than FO4 when it releases that'll be a decade or more advanced visually, and without being buggy messes to boot.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe FO4 will ship with no significant issues and with an option for HD textures. But I seriously doubt it. What I'm calling now is that it will be the same mountain of bugs and poor design that make it an unplayable mess for a couple months until the first community patch and UI overhaul are released, and the same two-generation-old console graphics that'll make your monitor look like a moldy vaseline-smeared potato until the first HD textures mod is released.

Which works, I suppose, because no way in hell am I paying $80 or whatever it was to preorder, it can sit and rot until it goes on sale for $20 or so.