Print

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

[forsaken1111]

It's pretty much the only thing we have to discuss with relation to Fallout 4.

So we're going all chicken little because we have no other topics? oh ok.

[Krevsin]

Pretty much. There's not really much to talk about with Fallout 4.

It looks like a prettier Fallout 3 with voiced protagonists, a crafting system and revamped power armor. Oh and some redesign of the FO3 aesthetic to make it more in-line with the previous fallouts.

We have no information about the story besides "You are a prewar person from near boston who is released into the wasteland 200-ish years later and there's a dog" so we can only hope that it's better than FO3's was, since there is literally nothing about it from even a semi-reliable source (unless you feel like discussing that pre-E3 leak).

The only thing we can do is sit, wait and see what happens.

[forsaken1111]

Excellent. Well what we've seen of it so far leads me to believe that I will enjoy it. I'll probably buy it.

I won't preorder it, mind, because there's no reason to do so.

[Wimopy]

Here's a possibly good comparison:
Imagine having to buy Macromedia Flash. Now imagine, that they suddenly decide that they want all currently maintained flash games to be paid for.

Of course, you could still play the old games, but for the new ones you'd have to pay. Even if the developer only made the game to raise awareness for some cause.

Not a totally straight parallel, but I guess it's similar enough.

So the problems are:
-Having to pay for something that was previously free.
-Forcing developers to put a price tag on their product or risk being prosecuted.
-You'll get bored of the old content sooner or later, but now you'll have to pay for more additions which have appeared in the meantime.


Yeah, we really don't have anything to talk about here.
Oh, I know! Any special wildlife around Boston that would make interesting new mutated wildlife?

I'm kinda missing alligatormen, but we won't get those up north.
Real mutated rats?
Revenge of the fish?

Any special monuments that might spawn ridiculous cults?
I'm thinking that things like the Boston Tea Party or Bunker Hill may have some interesting Fallout versions.

I hope someone will bite at least one of those topics.

[Krevsin]

Hmmmm.... what's special about boston wildlife....

Oh, I know! Giant crabs! Bethesda will port Mudcrabs into Fallout 4!

[forsaken1111]

Here's a possibly good comparison:
Imagine having to buy Macromedia Flash. Now imagine, that they suddenly decide that they want all currently maintained flash games to be paid for.

Of course, you could still play the old games, but for the new ones you'd have to pay. Even if the developer only made the game to raise awareness for some cause.

Not a totally straight parallel, but I guess it's similar enough.

So the problems are:
-Having to pay for something that was previously free.
-Forcing developers to put a price tag on their product or risk being prosecuted.
-You'll get bored of the old content sooner or later, but now you'll have to pay for more additions which have appeared in the meantime.


Yeah, we really don't have anything to talk about here.
Oh, I know! Any special wildlife around Boston that would make interesting new mutated wildlife?

I'm kinda missing alligatormen, but we won't get those up north.
Real mutated rats?
Revenge of the fish?

Any special monuments that might spawn ridiculous cults?
I'm thinking that things like the Boston Tea Party or Bunker Hill may have some interesting Fallout versions.

I hope someone will bite at least one of those topics.

I imagine the outcome of your scenario would be me no longer playing flash games.

But to your points:

1. The mods for FO4 were not 'previously free'. Certainly OTHER mods were and are free.
2. Not sure what you're saying here.
3. Yeah that's what DLC already does so not sure why this is horrible? It's an opt-in system. You can pay for more content or not. Nobody is forcing you to buy it.


Hm... bostonian wildlife? Mutated skunks? Massive ridiculous dogs?

Actually the zoo would be a pretty cool area I bet. Imagine a few hundred years of FEV-soaked radiation induced mutation on all manner of wildlife from a zoo, interbreeding and other insanity.

[Tellemurius]

Hmmmm.... what's special about boston wildlife....

Oh, I know! Giant crabs! Bethesda will port Mudcrabs into Fallout 4!

So Mirelurks again? Also, Crabs People.

[scriver]

Scriver what exactly are you asking me to do here? Buying the game a month after release won't matter a damn bit as far as paid mods go. What is your objective? To hurt initial sales of fallout 4 because of a rumor on the internet about paid mods?

I'm not asking you to do anything. The point about not buying the game for a period of time after release was in response to you saying you didn't want to miss out on playing the game to make a "political statement". That making a statement doesn't mean you have to not play the game at all.

I did ask you to care for the sake of others, though, because I don't think "I don't care, so why should do something for you" is a very strong line of thought.

And then you say you don't care about the games industry, only bethesda games. So why would I care about you or listen to you? You don't even care about the industry, just the actions of a single studio.

That was my response to you putting words in my mouth and implying my position is that "Beth making paid mods will end the gaming industry", which it is not. The point you should be taking home is not "scriver doesn't care about the game industry!" but "scriver is not objecting to Bethesda going paid mods because he think it will destroy the industry but because he thinks it will destroy the Bethesda game's modding community and culture".

[UXLZ]

Oh, it won't destroy the games industry, just heavily damage it. It's 'kay.

[forsaken1111]

You've yet to explain how waiting a month to buy the game will have any impact on paid mods. And fair enough on the games industry comment, I think I was responding to someone else but shit now I'm confused.

[Krevsin]

But to your points:

1. The mods for FO4 were not 'previously free'. Certainly OTHER mods were and are free.
2. Not sure what you're saying here.
3. Yeah that's what DLC already does so not sure why this is horrible? It's an opt-in system. You can pay for more content or not. Nobody is forcing you to buy it.

1. He's not reffering specifically to FO4 mods, but mods in general.
2. He's reffering to the fear that Bethesda will enforce the paid mods policy by forcing modmakers to charge for mods and that free mods will be prosecuted legally.
3. He's reffering specifically to mods that add content, not DLC.

Overall, he is not making an aggressive statement, he is trying to sum up the conclusions this argument has led to.

[forsaken1111]

Okay but...

1. We're specifically discussing Fallout 4 and he didn't indicate otherwise.
2. I guess that is a possibility. It could potentially torpedo their own game and earn them the ire of the entire internet (again). It will be a tough business decision on someone's part.
3. DLC is just officially produced paid mods. My point stands. Paying for more content is normal and done all the time, where that content came from means nothing to most customers. I'd have gladly paid for falskaar and other mods like it for skyrim, and I did end up donating to their authors if they had a donations page.

[GiglameshDespair]

You found vanilla Skyrim to be enjoyable and a complete experience? My own experience differed, sadly, I found it to be a shallow, boring, horrible and clunky bug-ridden mess.

Yes, it's hyperbole, but I noted that. The point of hyperbole is to try and get something across, which unfortunately it seems I failed at. I believe Scriver's example is more accurate.

Excessive hyperbole undermines your point, really. If I stub my toe and scream about how I'm dying, people would rightfully tell me to shut up. The same thing applies here. I realise how the internet seems to produce all-or-nothing statements, but too much hyperbole just makes you sound... wrong. We do get what you're getting at... we just disagree.

Hmmmm.... what's special about boston wildlife....

Oh, I know! Giant crabs! Bethesda will port Mudcrabs into Fallout 4!

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[Urist McScoopbeard]

We should petition the government to destroy Bethesda and distribute their IPs to other companies.
#Radicalism

[BurnedToast]

Okay but...

1. We're specifically discussing Fallout 4 and he didn't indicate otherwise.
2. I guess that is a possibility. It could potentially torpedo their own game and earn them the ire of the entire internet (again). It will be a tough business decision on someone's part.
3. DLC is just officially produced paid mods. My point stands. Paying for more content is normal and done all the time, where that content came from means nothing to most customers. I'd have gladly paid for falskaar and other mods like it for skyrim, and I did end up donating to their authors if they had a donations page.

I'm not even sure #2 is possible. They could restrict you from using the official mod tools, but if someone made a mod using their own tools they couldn't do anything about it. Of course that would mean a lot less mods, but a dedicated modder could still release stuff for free if he wanted.