Fallout 4 Review - Post-Apocalyptic Warlord Simulator 2287

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

Fallout 4 Review - Post-Apocalyptic Warlord Simulator 2287

Fallout 4 has some concessions to make a more accessible game, but the wasteland is as alluring as ever.

Read Full Article

Not long now, my pretty...not long at all.

Thanks for the words, Paladin Rad.

Disappointingly high final score for a disappointingly lacking final product(I've seen the leaks).

Even on a scale from 7 to 10, Fallout 4 is a 6 at best.

Naqel:
Disappointingly high final score for a disappointingly lacking final product(I've seen the leaks).

Even on a scale from 7 to 10, Fallout 4 is a 6 at best.

Same. It's a pretty lackluster game. Map is somehow smaller than Fallout 3 and just as empty. Gunplay is rather subpar. RPG mechanics seem like last minute additions hastily shoved in there. The real dealbreaker is how awful the story and characters are. It's just so laughably bad, especially the main story's ending.

That's not even mentioning the bugs and poor performance on some platforms. And yet people will gobble it up and when confronted with something bad they'll state "mods will fix it". They better hope they don't have to pay for them too.

Oh, and just like Fallout 3 before it, the ending is only influenced by a binary choice you make at the very end of the game. No nuance, no taking accordance of your previous choices in the story, just ending A or ending B. Just as bad as Mass Effect, but at least this didn't have a whole trinity of choice-making to ignore.

Sounds closer to Fallout 3 than New Vegas.

Ah well. I'll probably pick it up at some point, but it can wait.

Crafting seems awesome, but until I actually get to play with components and see how create I can get, it's up in the air whether it's just a bloated gimmick or something genuinly clever.

Settlements are by far the biggest concern I have. I can't imagine it'll be very good and you just know that whenever you're off into the wasteland, that you'll get messages of "X has broken down in Y - Go replace it" or "Y has been raided, you've lost all the effort and time you've spent".
Even if that's not the case, I'd imagine that since it's built for the console player generation (oh Bethesda, will you ever learn?) it won't be very in depth. As my friend pointed out, it'll be like the WoW Garrison all over, it'll seem cool, but mostly it'll just be a burden and more looks than content.

Dialogue is what it is. If it's at least well written like Mass Effect was, then it's... okay. Knowing who made the game though, my expectations are very low. Beth is not known for exceptional dialogue and it seems whoever wrote in Morrowind has either gotten lazy or fired.

Companions has me a bit worried... I'm replaying Dead Money for New Vegas and it didn't take long before I got sick of hearing Dog/God spout the same lines over and over while sneaking around and avoiding ghosts - RIP immersion.
There should be an option to disable those comments. If they don't serve to immerse you and have impact whenever they're uttered, then they do the reverse.

-

I'm guessing that this review had to be churned out in no time, but I miss more information on a lot of things like how varied the locations are, if factions are interesting and lock eachother out or not, does the setting make sense (What do they eat?) and more things of that nature.
How mature is the game? Is prostitution still around or has it been shoved to the side in this age of political correctness?
If it's still there, is it cheesy or does it aptly show the desperate situation of the wasteland?

Believe it or not, Fallout used to be an RPG and that meant being in an immersive setting and not just a gimmicky shooter, which leads me to this:

Conrad Zimmerman:
Long time fans may be disappointed with the game's new direction.

In what way are we going to be dissapointed, apart from the minimalized dialogue options?
Will someone like me who obsessively keeps an eye out for details be wasting all my time actually discovering the game?
Is it just a sandbox shooter without actual content?

-

The real fans of the series have ever since before the release of Fallout 3 forseen pretty much all that has happened, that Fallout has become an eyecandy shooter with little else to offer. So whenever a new Fallout game comes out, this should be the focus of any and all reviews - how the series has changed and not just a short statement that it has somehow.

Doesn't seem that bad. The streamlined dialogue sucks but you said the characters are interesting, so I think I can get over it.

Settlements sound like a bucket of fun.

Smilomaniac:
In what way are we going to be dissapointed, apart from the minimalized dialogue options?
Will someone like me who obsessively keeps an eye out for details be wasting all my time actually discovering the game?
Is it just a sandbox shooter without actual content?

It drifts further away from the style of writing from the originals/NV, it is mechanically less RPG and more shooter than F3.
The world is about as detailed as it was in F3, there's things to find, but they have little meaning and lack impact.
For the most part, yes: you're engaged primarily through gunplay, rather than intellectually or emotionally.

Naqel:
Disappointingly high final score for a disappointingly lacking final product(I've seen the leaks).

Even on a scale from 7 to 10, Fallout 4 is a 6 at best.

Oh, well, if you've seen the leaks, that's exactly the same as having played it. Despite effectively killing myself to play this thing for 60 hours in a week to write this, I'll bow to your superior knowledge.

Setting aside that numerical scores in reviews are pretty much bullshit, sorry, the game is really good. It may not be the game you wanted. It's not the game I wanted in many, many ways, but I cannot deny that it is a soundly designed game that does the most important things in Fallout right.

Smilomaniac:

The real fans

Oh don't pull that No True Scotsman ploy. I got into the series on Fallout 3, loved New Vegas, tried to go back to 1 and 2 and thought they were boring as sin. Do I have to revoke my true Fallout fan card?

Smilomaniac:
I'm guessing that this review had to be churned out in no time, but I miss more information on a lot of things like how varied the locations are, if factions are interesting and lock eachother out or not, does the setting make sense (What do they eat?) and more things of that nature.

It's also already over 3000 words. There's a limit to how much you can expect the average person to want to read. The setting doesn't make sense because Fallout has never made sense, so there's no problem there. The locations are decently varied, though the game classifies them in some different ways based on their function pre-war to help you figure out what materials you may scavenge there.

Smilomaniac:
How mature is the game? Is prostitution still around or has it been shoved to the side in this age of political correctness?

If it's still there, is it cheesy or does it aptly show the desperate situation of the wasteland?

I can't confirm prostitution, as I haven't run across it (and I wouldn't say the inclusion of it makes a game mature; hate it when used as a catch-all for sexual content, as sexual content can be totally juvenile) but the game does feature some romance options that can develop with companions, and you can be in a polyamorous relationship, so it's really kind of progressive in some ways.

Smilomaniac:
Believe it or not, Fallout used to be an RPG and that meant being in an immersive setting and not just a gimmicky shooter]

Believe it or not, Fallout is still an RPG, and Fallout 3 was too. The application of first-person shooting in combat doesn't invalidate the RPG elements of a game.

Conrad Zimmerman:
Long time fans may be disappointed with the game's new direction.

Smilomaniac:
In what way are we going to be dissapointed, apart from the minimalized dialogue options?
Will someone like me who obsessively keeps an eye out for details be wasting all my time actually discovering the game?
Is it just a sandbox shooter without actual content?

If you hated the direction Fallout 3 went, then I wouldn't even bother. Just go No Mutants Allowed and grumble with the other people who have been left behind.

So many differing opinions... Eugh.

Then again why do I care, the only time I would pick up this game is when Bethesda (more likely modders) fix and polish the game and when I (if ever) get a gaming PC. Mods on Skyrim and New Vegas are just amazing.

Conrad Zimmerman:

Oh, well, if you've seen the leaks, that's exactly the same as having played it. Despite effectively killing myself to play this thing for 60 hours in a week to write this, I'll bow to your superior knowledge.

Setting aside that numerical scores in reviews are pretty much bullshit, sorry, the game is really good. It may not be the game you wanted. It's not the game I wanted in many, many ways, but I cannot deny that it is a soundly designed game that does the most important things in Fallout right.

I can't really see how a 5 star rating system is any way better/different from numerical scores.

Bob_McMillan:
So many differing opinions... Eugh.

Then again why do I care, the only time I would pick up this game is when Bethesda (more likely modders) fix and polish the game and when I (if ever) get a gaming PC. Mods on Skyrim and New Vegas are just amazing.

Conrad Zimmerman:

Oh, well, if you've seen the leaks, that's exactly the same as having played it. Despite effectively killing myself to play this thing for 60 hours in a week to write this, I'll bow to your superior knowledge.

Setting aside that numerical scores in reviews are pretty much bullshit, sorry, the game is really good. It may not be the game you wanted. It's not the game I wanted in many, many ways, but I cannot deny that it is a soundly designed game that does the most important things in Fallout right.

I can't really see how a 5 star rating system is any way better/different from numerical scores.

I don't think he's saying it is. He's just stuck with it because of Metacritic.

Bob_McMillan:
So many differing opinions... Eugh.

Yeah, I haven't read any other reviews just yet (need my coffee), but I was sure this would be a game that gets generally high praise, with strong feelings about the things people didn't like and people not agreeing on which things to like or dislike.

Bob_McMillan:
I can't really see how a 5 star rating system is any way better/different from numerical scores.

It's not. In fact, I didn't even remember that Escapist uses stars when I made the comment. It certainly wasn't to indicate that stars are somehow better. Any distillation of complex, nuanced ideas into a number is pretty gross to me, but I don't set editorial policy.

Conrad Zimmerman:
snip

Nice review, and kinda what I expected, so I doubt I'll either be disappointed or blown away when I get to play it.

Could you - or anyone else - confirm whether components of the HUD can be disabled individually? I kinda detest Bethesda's HUD's post-Morrowind, and would love to learn I can make it so locations and enemy don't show up on a realtime radar/navbar. I know [some] mods are coming to console, but I've no idea if tweaked UI's are something that'll be supported.

Conrad Zimmerman:
It's not the game I wanted in many, many ways, but I cannot deny that it is a soundly designed game that does the most important things in Fallout right.

Soundly designed, yes, but a minimum of competence achieved through rather heavy handed methods is not something that should get 9/10.

It doesn't really do Fallout things right, since the writing is done by Bethesda again(they aren't particularly famous for being good at it, don't want to spoil anything though), and the whole SPECIAL thing becomes much less meaningful.

It doesn't really do the Gamebryo/Bethesda thing right either, since modding tools are going to only come in a few months, and the game's core design choices prevent anything substantial from being made.

It's lacking in pretty much all technical aspects as well, with plenty of the usual glitches and bugs, some of which date back to TES: Oblivion, and graphical fidelity from half a decade ago.

Conrad Zimmerman:

If you hated the direction Fallout 3 went, then I wouldn't even bother. Just go No Mutants Allowed and grumble with the other people who have been left behind.

The real fans of the series have ever since before the release of Fallout 3 forseen pretty much all that has happened, that Fallout has become an eyecandy shooter with little else to offer. So whenever a new Fallout game comes out, this should be the focus of any and all reviews - how the series has changed and not just a short statement that it has somehow.

Yeah, we'd love to consider New Vegas the third fallout but it seems that we can't have nice things anymore (Thanks to Metacritic ratings and Bethesda). At least they took us into account one time.

Whoops! I managed to miss some tagging in this here forum post. Just noting that I didn't say the second bit in the preceding quote. Here's how it probably should have looked.

Fcbook Del Orto:

Conrad Zimmerman:

If you hated the direction Fallout 3 went, then I wouldn't even bother. Just go No Mutants Allowed and grumble with the other people who have been left behind.

Smilomaniac:
The real fans of the series have ever since before the release of Fallout 3 forseen pretty much all that has happened, that Fallout has become an eyecandy shooter with little else to offer. So whenever a new Fallout game comes out, this should be the focus of any and all reviews - how the series has changed and not just a short statement that it has somehow.

Yeah, we'd love to consider New Vegas the third fallout but it seems that we can't have nice things anymore (Thanks to Metacritic ratings and Bethesda). At least they took us into account one time.

I'll probably buy it 2 years down the line when it lies in the bargain bin and FO5 is released/underway.
Rule of thumb with Bethesda games is waiting a year or 2 when the biggest issue are patched. In my book atleast.

Conrad Zimmerman:

It's also already over 3000 words. There's a limit to how much you can expect the average person to want to read. The setting doesn't make sense because Fallout has never made sense, so there's no problem there. The locations are decently varied, though the game classifies them in some different ways based on their function pre-war to help you figure out what materials you may scavenge there.

Hey, it's not a bad job, I like the review as it is, but I want more :)
Thanks for taking the time to answer me, it's nice of you.

Conrad Zimmerman:

I can't confirm prostitution, as I haven't run across it (and I wouldn't say the inclusion of it makes a game mature; hate it when used as a catch-all for sexual content, as sexual content can be totally juvenile) but the game does feature some romance options that can develop with companions, and you can be in a polyamorous relationship, so it's really kind of progressive in some ways.

If you haven't come across it in 60 hours, I'd say it's safe to assume that it's not there - good to know.

To me it's part of the setting, it's something that belongs in a dystopian world where your survival hinges on what's available to you. It's not unreasonable to include at all and the absence of it is telling.
I don't see how it can't be mature because we know that there wouldn't be any porn included anyway, which was never the point - none of the previous games had sexual content in them (any that you'd see anyway).
The potential sexual visuals don't interest me, but I do care whether building a settlement and having prostitutes would have an effect, such as heightening morale and making settlers work harder.

Conrad Zimmerman:

Believe it or not, Fallout is still an RPG, and Fallout 3 was too. The application of first-person shooting in combat doesn't invalidate the RPG elements of a game.

Technically, you're right. In practice however, the time spent making the shooter portion work (which you wrote it didn't in many cases) means less money for the other departments.
Besides that, there's certainly something to be said for immersion and how playing it as an FPS has a large influence on how you perceive the world.

Conrad Zimmerman:

If you hated the direction Fallout 3 went, then I wouldn't even bother. Just go No Mutants Allowed and grumble with the other people who have been left behind.

The entitlement of my fandom is very strong, I agree. Too bad it's often seen as all negative, when there are several very valid points to the grumbling :)
It's interesting that you say I shouldn't bother at all though, I take it the story and setting is that bad?

The dumbed down dialoge system just breaks my heart. I mean, I kinda saw it coming, but it's still incredibly disappointing.

Welp, imma stick with New Vegas for now.

erttheking:

Smilomaniac:

The real fans

Oh don't pull that No True Scotsman ploy. I got into the series on Fallout 3, loved New Vegas, tried to go back to 1 and 2 and thought they were boring as sin. Do I have to revoke my true Fallout fan card?

Yes it does (edit - it does mean you should revoke your fandom card). I'm not joking.
It's like people who were introduced to Star Wars through chapter I-III and want more content to revolve around Jarjar Binks.

Look, I don't care that you enjoyed Fallout 3, but I hate what you represent - a new generation of people that probably screwed up the entire IP forever.
Yes, you might be like one of my friends, just as old as I am and just didn't happen to play the originals when they came out - It doesn't matter, because it comes down to the absence of appreciation of the work - in your case you don't even know the REAL work.

It's not a no-true-scotsman fallacy when we're two very different fans of two very different kind of games. The difference is that your fandom is based on a sandbox game with little to it.

Smilomaniac:

Conrad Zimmerman:

I can't confirm prostitution, as I haven't run across it (and I wouldn't say the inclusion of it makes a game mature; hate it when used as a catch-all for sexual content, as sexual content can be totally juvenile) but the game does feature some romance options that can develop with companions, and you can be in a polyamorous relationship, so it's really kind of progressive in some ways.

If you haven't come across it in 60 hours, I'd say it's safe to assume that it's not there - good to know.

To me it's part of the setting, it's something that belongs in a dystopian world where your survival hinges on what's available to you. It's not unreasonable to include at all and the absence of it is telling.
I don't see how it can't be mature because we know that there wouldn't be any porn included anyway, which was never the point - none of the previous games had sexual content in them (any that you'd see anyway).
The potential sexual visuals don't interest me, but I do care whether building a settlement and having prostitutes would have an effect, such as heightening morale and making settlers work harder.

It's certainly setting appropriate and, I agree, it wouldn't be unreasonable to see included. Having prostitution as a settlement feature, however, that might be a bit more exploitative than I think anybody would take a risk on, let alone a major publisher.

Smilomaniac:

Conrad Zimmerman:

Believe it or not, Fallout is still an RPG, and Fallout 3 was too. The application of first-person shooting in combat doesn't invalidate the RPG elements of a game.

Technically, you're right. In practice however, the time spent making the shooter portion work (which you wrote it didn't in many cases) means less money for the other departments.
Besides that, there's certainly something to be said for immersion and how playing it as an FPS has a large influence on how you perceive the world.

I think that's a pretty simplified view on how game development works. It isn't necessarily just a money/time budgeting issue. It could simply be the developer putting effort where it thinks efforts are best applied. I certainly wouldn't want to assume anything about that process.

Smilomaniac:

Conrad Zimmerman:

If you hated the direction Fallout 3 went, then I wouldn't even bother. Just go No Mutants Allowed and grumble with the other people who have been left behind.

The entitlement of my fandom is very strong, I agree. Too bad it's often seen as all negative, when there are several very valid points to the grumbling :)
It's interesting that you say I shouldn't bother at all though, I take it the story and setting is that bad?

If you're an old school Fallout fan and hated what happend with Fallout 3, you'll probably hate this too. It goes further in directions established by that game. There are too many games out there, in my view, to waste time on something that you no longer like.

Conrad Zimmerman:
Believe it or not, Fallout is still an RPG, and Fallout 3 was too. The application of first-person shooting in combat doesn't invalidate the RPG elements of a game.

Indeed, but other elements do seem to have that effect. What I loved about Fallout: New Vegas was the pretty decent variation of quest resolutions it gave us. Reading now that the dialogue system has been so dumbed down makes me fear that the game has also become more linear. Is that true? And are there really only a few Charisma checks in dialogue now, instead of the myriad of skill and attribute checks we're used to?

Also, I heard that the Karma system has been largely replaced by likes/dislikes by companions. That's fine with me. But does that also include settlements and/or factions? Or is the world largely indifferent to your exploits this time around?

Smilomaniac:
Look, I don't care that you enjoyed Fallout 3, but I hate what you represent - a new generation of people that probably screwed up the entire IP forever.

I can't help it but:

image

Cowabungaa:

Conrad Zimmerman:

Believe it or not, Fallout is still an RPG, and Fallout 3 was too. The application of first-person shooting in combat doesn't invalidate the RPG elements of a game.

Indeed, but other elements do seem to have that effect. What I loved about Fallout: New Vegas was the pretty decent variation of quest resolutions it gave us. Reading now that the dialogue system has been so dumbed down makes me fear that the game has also become more linear. Is that true? And are there really only a few Charisma checks in dialogue now, instead of the myriad of skill and attribute checks we're used to?

It's not *entirely* linear, in that you can have some quest lines closed off based on actions you take. But, yes, there is a more noticeable lack of alternate resolutions. Persuasion in dialogue seems solely based on Charisma, likely down to the merging of Skills and Perks as much as the decision to move to a more Mass Effect style interface. That's my biggest sticking point with the game and, while it doesn't ruin the experience of playing it, it does have an impact on potential replay value.

Cowabungaa:
[Also, I heard that the Karma system has been largely replaced by likes/dislikes by companions. That's fine with me. But does that also include settlements and/or factions? Or is the world largely indifferent to your exploits this time around?

Factions will still cut you off from quest lines and their resources if you act in a manner not befitting membership. Settlements have their own "happiness" rating, which really only seems to impact their productivity.

I can live with the atrocious interior graphics. I kinda like the paired down perk system.

Why is everyone going with the button specific dialogue with hints though? I could see always having one bland response being on a fixed button, but at least give the dialogue writers flexibility on the rest and show the player what they are saying. Blah.

Conrad Zimmerman:
Having prostitution as a settlement feature, however, that might be a bit more exploitative than I think anybody would take a risk on, let alone a major publisher.

Nonsense, it was OK in New Vegas. We had a Ghoul dominatrix, FFS. If it isn't ok now, then only because the publisher is a bloody coward.

Smilomaniac:

erttheking:

Smilomaniac:

The real fans

Oh don't pull that No True Scotsman ploy. I got into the series on Fallout 3, loved New Vegas, tried to go back to 1 and 2 and thought they were boring as sin. Do I have to revoke my true Fallout fan card?

Yes it does (edit - it does mean you should revoke your fandom card). I'm not joking.
It's like people who were introduced to Star Wars through chapter I-III and want more content to revolve around Jarjar Binks.

Look, I don't care that you enjoyed Fallout 3, but I hate what you represent - a new generation of people that probably screwed up the entire IP forever.
Yes, you might be like one of my friends, just as old as I am and just didn't happen to play the originals when they came out - It doesn't matter, because it comes down to the absence of appreciation of the work - in your case you don't even know the REAL work.

It's not a no-true-scotsman fallacy when we're two very different fans of two very different kind of games. The difference is that your fandom is based on a sandbox game with little to it.

So you're getting mad at people who bought and liked Fallout 3 and New Vegas, for them not making games in the style of the originals? That's fair and rational.

Sounds amazing, even with the changes I'm iffy on. *glances at dialogue system*. But I'll found out how I like it around midnight tonight when I play the game for 20 hours straight.

urishima:

Conrad Zimmerman:
Having prostitution as a settlement feature, however, that might be a bit more exploitative than I think anybody would take a risk on, let alone a major publisher.

Nonsense, it was OK in New Vegas. We had a Ghoul dominatrix, FFS. If it isn't ok now, then only because the publisher is a bloody coward.

I'm not talking about the existence of prostitution. I'm referring to the idea of the player performing essentially the role of a pimp by making it a commercial aspect of settlements built by the player. It's just a step I can't see any game taking.

Smilomaniac:
Snip

Fine. Though if that's what it means to be a true fallout fan, my true fallout fan card doesn't really seem to have much value. That's a strawman fallacy, considering Jar-Jar was never really the focus considering he had a reduced role in II and never spoke in III. Even his role in I was just a supporting character.

PFT! Oh please. The IP was DEAD before Fallout 3 came out. It was either Fallout 3 or no new Fallout games at all. So either you were expecting a type of Fallout that wasn't going to happen or the existance of 3 somehow (Oh and please tell me how Brotherhood of Steel didn't screw up the franchise)

Oh. I know the real work. I own the classic Fallouts. I tried to play them. They were boring. I imagine they have great stories but I can't get to them because of how bored out of my skull the make me. I'm still interested in the characters, I know who The Master, Marcus and Frank Horrigan are, I know what Vault City is and that Vault 12 is mainly populated by ghouls. I'd know more if the game hadn't aged to horribly. I want to finish those games one day but it reflects poorly on a game when you essentially have to force yourself to play it.

Little to it? I'm sorry, I didn't imagine that massive expansive world in Fallout New Vegas, complete with countless fleshed out factions, well developed companions, a world that was painstakingly based on the real life Mojave, with a main conflict that was much more complicated than NCR good Legion bad, in a world that just felt alive. You're thinking of Fall out 3, which I just moderately like, and not Fallout New Vegas, which I downright love. In fact, New Vegas made me think 3 was just mediocre by comparison. It's gameplay is fun but its story was just bleh. Also no, still a no True Scotsman fallacy. You basically just said that it just doesn't apply to your example.

Frankly New Vegas is the best fallout game as far as I'm concerned. It has the gameplay of 3 and the story of 1 & 2

Conrad Zimmerman:

It's not *entirely* linear, in that you can have some quest lines closed off based on actions you take. But, yes, there is a more noticeable lack of alternate resolutions. Persuasion in dialogue seems solely based on Charisma, likely down to the merging of Skills and Perks as much as the decision to move to a more Mass Effect style interface. That's my biggest sticking point with the game and, while it doesn't ruin the experience of playing it, it does have an impact on potential replay value.

I would say taht the move to the ME style dialog interface is the main culprit here. DA:Origins had huge complexity in it's dialog options and the impact those had on the progression of the story, and it only had a Stat + Perk system just like Fallout 4 does now (correct me if I am wrong).

It just comes down to the conversation wheel limiting the number of dialog options that can be available at any given time, coupled with 'lazyness' on part of the developer when it came to implementing truly branching conversations.

But hey, imho.

What platform was this played on? The FO3 UI on PC was abysmal, wondering how this is on PC.

Thank you for the informative review! :)

It sounds fantastic and I'm pretty eager to get my hands on the game now. Perhaps I'll wait for a major patch or two, but still, my main desires for Fallout 4 seems to be addressed by making the gunplay more weighty/expanded crafting system/more interesting NPC's.
Not too troubled by the streamlining of the levelling system since it seems like I can make more meaningful levelling choices without faffing about with percentages which might/might not be useful later on.

I don't really see the complaints about limited dialogue choices. Fallout 1 basically consisted of goody-two-shoes response/sarcastic response/aggressive response/ask for more information/leave conversation --- yet it dressed up the dialogue list in varying/longer sentences. With the inclusion of a voiced protagonist, it seems to get straight to the point while still allowing personalisation.

Cryogenically frozen for 200 years in this particular vault? Interesting. It allows a unique glance at the world before the bombs fell, followed by viewing the aftermath over time. It isn't any less "restrictive/limiting" than Fallout 1: Find a water chip. Fallout 2: Find a G.E.C.K. Chosen One. Fallout 3: Find your dad, Vault Dweller. Fallout New Vegas: Find the dude who shot you, by the way you're a courier, roll with it. It's about the journey, not the destination. So that's why I'm more intrigued by what the game has in store for me to discover, instead of dismissing it on the backstory presented.

All in all, I'm looking forward to this.

urishima:
I would say taht the move to the ME style dialog interface is the main culprit here. DA:Origins had huge complexity in it's dialog options and the impact those had on the progression of the story, and it only had a Stat + Perk system just like Fallout 4 does now (correct me if I am wrong).

You're probably not wrong (I have never had any interest in Dragon Age and can't speak from experience regarding its mechanics), but I think the statistical range of Fallout's prior Skill system was really conducive to allowing those interactions. By merging them with Perks, it would have required a new approach to it. Reducing the range would represent a path of least resistance.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here