Fallout has been struggling quite a bit in recent iterations, I am hopeful that Microsoft could return Fallout to it's story roots and produce some good games in the series...
I don't understand the butthurt over Fallout 4. I'm not a purist, in that I didn't play anything prior to Fallout 3, so that my come into play. 3 was good. New Vegas was good. 4 felt on-par with those. (We can all agree that 76 was a steaming pile of excrement.)
I'm sure my feelings about going from 4 to 76 is probably on par with how the people that have been with it since the beginning felt when they went from the 2-d turn-based to Fallout 3.
4 isn't on par with those and they try very hard to hide it. Your dialog options for example, ever notice it doesn't actually list what your character is going to actually say?
Here is one encounter which shows the example. 4 options to say the same thing. There is no choice in the vast majority of your conversations.
I think that dialog would probably illustrate my biggest issue with the plot of the game. There's really no way to "escape" allying with the Minute Men at the beginning of the game. You can be a dick all you want, but Preston always stays around.
I'm in the camp that just doesn't get the hate aimed at FO4. I played a bit of the original Fallout as a kid and liked that, yes. And I played 3 and liked that. 4 was an entirely decent game with a lot of voluntary endgame in building up the settlements and getting to a point where you felt that these people were going to be okay.
I'm with you on this one. I thoroughly enjoyed the game. I think the only other game that I have close to that many hours into is CounterStrike, and I lost many an evening and weekend on that game.
It's an MMO. Everyone should know by now that an MMO based on source content is never as good as the original. To be an MMO there are certain game play elements that need to be there, because they need the players to continue playing long after the normal game duration is over. Ie, keep players subscribing, or keep them buying expansions, or keep them buying micro-transactions, and thus you get a game that never ends. Usually this transition is terrible, but sometimes it works out.
I don't play so I don't know exactly, but have watched a lot of video about the game and it seems like there are a lot of general complaints that if addressed, would maybe make the game a lot more enjoyable... like far more intelligent NPCs that added to the story, or maybe fixing the glitched long term storage system (maybe that's already fixed).
Basically, surely there is some way to make a Fallout multiplayer RPG fun, and they could just transform 76 into that to reward the VERY loyal people that bought a
There are many ways to do this, but there's really just an MMO persisted world style that makes money. That means central server, controlled by the company, game updates come when the company decides, not when you're ready to play. Ever show up in an old MMO that's been around for many years; you will find that all effort is in place to appease the end-game players, content for newcomers is a rarity. Usually they just have some way of accelating the level ups for newcomers, skip them past the existing co
I think 76 is beyond saving. Unless they completely ripped out the mmo aspect, but at that point why bother? They need to put 76 in the corner and just keep the lights on until Fallout 5 comes along. And I really do hope they are intending on spending a bunch of money on the series.
As I've said in another response, I've not played it but... it seems like maybe there is a fun single player game in there if a bunch of NOC and story elements were added? That seems like a lot less work than a whole new Fallout game as you could at least use the large graphic assets and story assets and basic gameplay it already has...
I played for a few hours shortly after it came out. My biggest issue (other than it wasn't playable because it would crash every 10 minutes) was the lack of NPCs. (I assume that's what you meant by NOC?) It just made the story feel less "real". I gave up when there was a spot in the game where low level players and high level players had to be in the same spot for the same part of a quest, the high-level people would bring their high level "monsters" with them making it impossible for me to get where I
The clothes have no emperor.
-- C.A.R. Hoare, commenting on ADA.
Can only help Fallout (Score:2)
Fallout has been struggling quite a bit in recent iterations, I am hopeful that Microsoft could return Fallout to it's story roots and produce some good games in the series...
Heck, maybe they could even improve Fallout76!
Re: (Score:3)
Microsoft wont return it to the New Vegas era. Microsoft will turn it into a generic 1st person shooter.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it's gone downhills. Do you have any idea how hard it is to keep things fresh and new when you make 76 versions of the same damn game?
Re: (Score:3)
I don't understand the butthurt over Fallout 4. I'm not a purist, in that I didn't play anything prior to Fallout 3, so that my come into play. 3 was good. New Vegas was good. 4 felt on-par with those. (We can all agree that 76 was a steaming pile of excrement.)
I'm sure my feelings about going from 4 to 76 is probably on par with how the people that have been with it since the beginning felt when they went from the 2-d turn-based to Fallout 3.
Re: (Score:2)
4 isn't on par with those and they try very hard to hide it. Your dialog options for example, ever notice it doesn't actually list what your character is going to actually say?
Here is one encounter which shows the example. 4 options to say the same thing. There is no choice in the vast majority of your conversations.
https://i.imgur.com/zLiI3Ri.jp... [imgur.com]
In other instances you'll have 2 or even 3 dialog options that are the same thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm in the camp that just doesn't get the hate aimed at FO4. I played a bit of the original Fallout as a kid and liked that, yes. And I played 3 and liked that. 4 was an entirely decent game with a lot of voluntary endgame in building up the settlements and getting to a point where you felt that these people were going to be okay.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How do you improve Fallout76? By releasing Fallout77?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's an MMO. Everyone should know by now that an MMO based on source content is never as good as the original. To be an MMO there are certain game play elements that need to be there, because they need the players to continue playing long after the normal game duration is over. Ie, keep players subscribing, or keep them buying expansions, or keep them buying micro-transactions, and thus you get a game that never ends. Usually this transition is terrible, but sometimes it works out.
So it will stick aroun
Re: (Score:1)
I don't play so I don't know exactly, but have watched a lot of video about the game and it seems like there are a lot of general complaints that if addressed, would maybe make the game a lot more enjoyable... like far more intelligent NPCs that added to the story, or maybe fixing the glitched long term storage system (maybe that's already fixed).
Basically, surely there is some way to make a Fallout multiplayer RPG fun, and they could just transform 76 into that to reward the VERY loyal people that bought a
Re: (Score:2)
There are many ways to do this, but there's really just an MMO persisted world style that makes money. That means central server, controlled by the company, game updates come when the company decides, not when you're ready to play. Ever show up in an old MMO that's been around for many years; you will find that all effort is in place to appease the end-game players, content for newcomers is a rarity. Usually they just have some way of accelating the level ups for newcomers, skip them past the existing co
Re: (Score:2)
Considering MS owns Obsidian and now owns Bethesda there might be a chance for that.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, just like they did for Halo.... oh wait...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
As I've said in another response, I've not played it but... it seems like maybe there is a fun single player game in there if a bunch of NOC and story elements were added? That seems like a lot less work than a whole new Fallout game as you could at least use the large graphic assets and story assets and basic gameplay it already has...
Re: (Score:2)
I played for a few hours shortly after it came out. My biggest issue (other than it wasn't playable because it would crash every 10 minutes) was the lack of NPCs. (I assume that's what you meant by NOC?) It just made the story feel less "real". I gave up when there was a spot in the game where low level players and high level players had to be in the same spot for the same part of a quest, the high-level people would bring their high level "monsters" with them making it impossible for me to get where I