Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Fallout 3 vs Fallout 4

Beans00

Erudite
Shitposter
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Messages
1,814
Bethesda games are a good litmus test for people who are too lazy to read or go outside. Even the biggest bethesda shills, regardless of which of their games they like. Don't usually try to defend their gameplay.
Completely empty and shallow experiences, where the only positives are exploration and 'lore'(for morrowind anyways).


Fallout 3 was like.... Fallout 1-2 in first person with severe brain damage. The amount of fan service they shoved into that game, while making everything so much dumber is a pretty big accomplishment.
Fallout 4 was good for incels so they could pretend to have a dead wife and a son.

If anyone thinks fallout 4 had good shooting gameplay... IDK how to help them, at that point they need to play some actual shooters.
 

Ash

Arcane
Joined
Oct 16, 2015
Messages
7,133
Retrospectively I think Fo3 was the last game where you could really feel Bethesda putting a lot of effort and love into the project - whatever people think of the end result, there are things in Fo3 that can only have been the result of a team genuinely trying their best, even if their talents might be judged harshly at times. You can really feel their excitement coming through in the quests and the variety in the world design.

I like Skyrim but it doesn't have the same feel, and Fo4 onward just feels soulless to me.
Yeah, I'm not going to go as far as Falksi calling it good, but Bethesda clearly put some effort and passion into Fallout 3. Skyrim is where the cynical, soulless design rears its head, and it has only become more overt in Fallout 4, 76, and Starfield.

You forget Oblivion exists? Both Skyrim and Oblivion are the very definition of bland and soulless. It's tragic how many fans those games have, but then again a lot of terrible bland sellout ARPGs are adored.
 

9ted6

Educated
Joined
Mar 24, 2023
Messages
903
For me 3 feels like Bethesda misunderstanding Fallout and 4 feels like them deliberately spiting it.
 

Butter

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 1, 2018
Messages
8,828
Retrospectively I think Fo3 was the last game where you could really feel Bethesda putting a lot of effort and love into the project - whatever people think of the end result, there are things in Fo3 that can only have been the result of a team genuinely trying their best, even if their talents might be judged harshly at times. You can really feel their excitement coming through in the quests and the variety in the world design.

I like Skyrim but it doesn't have the same feel, and Fo4 onward just feels soulless to me.
Yeah, I'm not going to go as far as Falksi calling it good, but Bethesda clearly put some effort and passion into Fallout 3. Skyrim is where the cynical, soulless design rears its head, and it has only become more overt in Fallout 4, 76, and Starfield.

You forget Oblivion exists? Both Skyrim and Oblivion are the very definition of bland and soulless. It's tragic how many fans those games have, but then again a lot of terrible bland sellout ARPGs are adored.
You're mostly right that Oblivion is very bland, but some of its constituent parts show signs of passion. I'm going to cite the UI.
oblivion_interface.jpeg

Ignore the usability for a second. Yeah, it's a console UI and it doesn't show enough information and the text is laughably huge. But look at the icons for the items and for the different submenus. Look at the skeuomorphic design that makes it look like parchment, and the font that looks like somebody's handwriting. Somebody at Bethesda wanted this to look good and to look like it belonged in a fantasy RPG.

Compare it to this garbage that somebody slapped together in an afternoon:

skyrim_interface.jpg
 

.Pixote.

Augur
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
700
I waited 15 years before playing F3...and I didn't really miss much.

The games starting quests (an intro into the retarded vault) is really disappointing, leaving the vault is such a relief. The quality of the writing and quest are really lacking. FNV puts it to shame in that area, and I can see why Bethesda were embarrassed by Obsidians superior work.

I have to give credit to the folk that built the environment, they are probably the most talented bunch in the team, but why is there so much trash in that world (so unnecessary).

The combat is meh - the game is too easy (I played it on hard mode). The Deathclaws in F3 are pathetic, now the Deathclaws in FNV are true monsters easily killing you with one or two hits.

Travelling through DC is frustrating, having to use a network underground tunnels is annoying. The ruins of DC itself is really nice ( I choose to play without any mods, other than patches to get the purest version of the game). I had no issues with the colour palette, I actually liked it.

After about 20 hours into the game my enjoyment started to take a big hit, and the ending was atrocious (the main quest was crap). I enjoyed the game the most just running around the world and finding new locations.

Choice and consequences were poorly designed, many quests were very simple events - unmemorable. The game is the 'Cadburys chocolate' of the RPGs, just a very average experience. 6/10.

:despair:
 
Joined
Jan 21, 2023
Messages
3,907
Yeah it ain't that good, the base game. It suffers from Bethesdaitis: the only interesting parts of the game are either sidequests and random places you just walk into, or are parts of the DLC. The Pitt and the swamp DLC were okay.
 

Lemming42

Arcane
Joined
Nov 4, 2012
Messages
6,806
Location
The Satellite Of Love
Choice and consequences were poorly designed, many quests were very simple events - unmemorable.
People say this but I never get it. I wrote a post earlier in this thread comparing some Fo3 quests to Fo1/2 quests and Fo3 doesn't really come up short; the sidequests often have a bit more going on than the average Fo1/2 quest in terms of alternate routes opened up by player skills, and c&c within the quest itself, sometimes on subsequent quests, and often in the wider game world outside it.

Obviously the tradeoff is that there's only like fifteen sidequests or whatever, which is clearly way too few and the game feels a bit sparse, so the quests that are relatively straightforward like Agatha's Song and Reilly's Rangers stick out a bit more.
 
Joined
Jan 21, 2023
Messages
3,907
The quest with the synthetic human is mostly open and with a lot of unmarked, "figure it out by yourself" kinda objectives. Almost like Morrowind's. There's some others that take relatively interesting twists and turns but yeah, the game is tiny.
 

Just Locus

Educated
Joined
Mar 11, 2022
Messages
621
Location
Termina
far harbor is genuinely good,
I can't entirely agree, it shares many of the same problems that the original FO4 does, but because it does some things better than what base FO4 and its subsequent expansions had to offer, then it is good on its own merits. It's not, it's better than Fallout 4 which is already a bar below rock bottom.
 

Ryan muller

Educated
Joined
Oct 10, 2021
Messages
439
far harbor is genuinely good,
I can't entirely agree, it shares many of the same problems that the original FO4 does, but because it does some things better than what base FO4 and its subsequent expansions had to offer, then it is good on its own merits. It's not, it's better than Fallout 4 which is already a bar below rock bottom.
i liked far harbor, it actually explored the synths living within human society thematic in a more cohesive way. i liked Dimas as a character and overall found quest design quite cool due to more CnC, the island design and most of its progression. it added perk checks either which was cool and the conflict had a bunch of different resolutions that felt enough to feel like a satisfying final point for everything.

I didnt like any of 3's dlcs

and from NV i only liked OWB and Dead money, so theres that.
 

Saint_Proverbius

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2002
Messages
14,163
Location
Behind you.
I have to give credit to the folk that built the environment, they are probably the most talented bunch in the team, but why is there so much trash in that world (so unnecessary).
There's quite a bit of evidence that Bethesda couldn't figure out the year that Fallout 3 was going to be set in until close to release. There's quite a few locations which make no sense that they're 200 years after the Great War, like Little Lamplight. I'm guessing a lot of that trash is there because they thought it might be earlier in the timeline than where it wound up.
The Deathclaws in F3 are pathetic, now the Deathclaws in FNV are true monsters easily killing you with one or two hits.
You can actualy kill the Deathclaw at the beginning of Fallout 4 with a pool cue. The attack animation for the pool cue is faster than the flinching animation of the Deathclaw. It takes a while, but it's easy to pull off without taking any damage once the flinching starts.

I remember deciding to try to go North from Goodsprings to get to Vegas the quick way the second time I played it. I figured I could just dodge and run. Boy, was that a mistake.
After about 20 hours into the game my enjoyment started to take a big hit, and the ending was atrocious (the main quest was crap)
Once you get the GECK and run across The Enclave, which basically follows the script of Fallout 2, yeah. It's pretty lackluster.

As badly as they botched the factions from Fallout and Fallout 2 in Fallout 3, I'd argue that the factions in Fallout 4 are significantly worse. The Brotherhood is the same Brotherhood from Fallout 3, just a few years later and they're completely and tonally different. The Institute is retarded considering there's quite a bit of evidence that they're trying to replace humans with Synths in the area which makes no sense considering how early they are in civilization development. You can even run across a Synth version of your character, which makes ZERO sense once you hit the big plot twist in the game. The Railroad is also pretty damned retarded considering the Synth plot and how all Synths have that Synth module which no one is sure exactly what it does. There's absolutely no way that they work with Synths as much as they do and haven't noticed the "replacement" stuff. The Minutemen are the only obviously "good" faction, but they're either too lazy to do anything or utterly inept because you have to do everything for them.

It's not a matter of there being "shades of grey" or something with the factions to where they all have flaws or cons, either. They're just all stupid or evil or both. There isn't a good choice or even picking the "lesser of the evils" because every single faction sucks. There's no reason to pick any of them other than the game says so. You're better off just killing them all and doing everything yourself. But I'm thinking Bethesda somehow knew this because there's a few members that are "essential" for at least part of the game.
 

Deuce Traveler

2012 Newfag
Patron
Joined
May 11, 2012
Messages
2,922
Location
Stuttgart, Germany
Grab the Codex by the pussy Divinity: Original Sin Torment: Tides of Numenera Shadorwun: Hong Kong Pathfinder: Kingmaker Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture
Fallout 4 and the importance of pacing...

Fallout 4 is free for Playstation Plus members on the PS5, so I thought I’d give it a whirl for a couple of hours. Unfortunately, I found it to be a shallow game put together by hacks. I know that sounds harsh, so let me explain.

The start of the game was promising, showing what life was like right before the bombs started to fall. The game doesn’t spend too much time on the tutorial before getting into the action, which I appreciated. Your child is taken, spouse shot and killed, you are released so you can get revenge. A nice and short starting rationale for a murder spree, a la John Wick. The starting dungeon is setup nicely for you to learn the controls and combat with enemies that aren’t too deadly. This is also where you can access part of the storyline and find out that the vault system was really created to experiment on social groups and psychologically mess with people, which is a non-sensical piece of the lore I always fucking hated, but I digress.

Now comes the hack writing part of the game. I left the first dungeon, found a robot that gave exposition dumps, explored the remnants of the MC’s town, and the next 30 minutes I was railroaded into events designed by a committee of attention-deficit sufferers.

- Do you like crafting? Here is a crafting bench and some recipes. Hop to it.

- Marketing tells us that the dog companion in previous Fallout games was a big hit. Have a dog.

- Look, we are giving you a shack that can act as a crafting and storing base right outside a town. Never know if you might need that.

- Oh noes! The path led you down a narrow street where raiders are attacking a museum and someone is yelling at you for help. No, you can’t choose whether or not to join the raiders or to quietly back away and go somewhere else, since now they are also attacking you and you have a new quest to save the museum and a person you have no reason to care about. Maybe the museum dude is an asshole and deserves what is coming to him. No time for questions, though, since you are being attacked. You should have plenty of weapons and ammo by now, so go help!

This is what I mean by Fallout 4’s pacing issues. The game starts promising, but the rail roading goes for too long and the speed of inputs and events are thrown at you too quickly with little chance to absorb the world around you. I can’t help but wonder if the frantic Borderlands franchise had a negative impact on the game design or whether these were marketing decisions who believe that their casual audience need to have shiny objects and jangled keys put in front of them every few minutes.

For a reference, I decided to start up Fallout New Vegas since it was also free for Playstation Plus members. The game’s premise is even simpler than Fallout 4. You are a courier carrying a package. You are shot, robbed of the package, and left for dead. You survive and are looking for revenge and to finish your mission. As soon as you get through character creation and a brief tutorial, you are advised to meet with some locals, but you can go in any direction you want.

Meeting with the locals helps you better learn combat and also gives you a few meager resources, such as a rifle, ammunition, and some coin. Bethesda never learned this in Fallout 3 or Fallout 4, but the game is better when the world seems to still be depopulated and struggling. You can walk outside the initial settlement without encountering a person, but there is dangerous wildlife outside of the worn roads. This gives a feeling of an environment of desolation and ruin, which sets the tone for the player. In comparison, Fallout 4 doesn’t give the player time to settle in and soak up the setting. You go from pre-bomb era to running to a shelter to headshot to your spouse to ruined settlement then new dog and then firefight. The pacing of events kills the ability to sense the environs of the world. Ironically, Fallout 4 manages to stay busier than New Vegas while simultaneously feeling as lifeless as a plastic toy.
 

Butter

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 1, 2018
Messages
8,828
The savvy Fallout 4 player turns on all quest markers so that he can avoid the game's narrative content.
 

Gargaune

Arcane
Joined
Mar 12, 2020
Messages
3,726
- Oh noes! The path led you down a narrow street where raiders are attacking a museum and someone is yelling at you for help. No, you can’t choose whether or not to join the raiders or to quietly back away and go somewhere else, since now they are also attacking you and you have a new quest to save the museum and a person you have no reason to care about. Maybe the museum dude is an asshole and deserves what is coming to him. No time for questions, though, since you are being attacked. You should have plenty of weapons and ammo by now, so go help!
Okay, now that's just gratuitous. You can back away and go somewhere else, pretty much anywhere else you want. You can kill those raiders and then just ignore the museum, or you can run away from the raiders, or you can just go around and never lay eyes on them to begin with. See that pile of irradiated trash? You can climb it.

In fact, you can safely leave Preston holed up in his museum forever and still go through the main quest. While Mama Murphy is the usual way the player's pointed to Diamond City, it's by no means necessary - you can also wander into DC randomly and pick up the main thread from Ellie at Valentine's agency, Trashcan Carla can give directions on the map, Irma in Goodneighbour is also set up to direct the player to Valentine if they haven't progressed to that stage yet, or you can even skip ahead to saving Nick from Vault 114 and resume progress that way.

So, really, the only gripe here is that you can't "join" the raiders attacking the museum, but that's hardly unusual RPG design - as I recall, the rats outside Vault 13 didn't wanna be friends either. There's plenty that Fallout 4 fails at, but while the game does frontload a lot of "excitment" and leave a thick line of breadcrumbs in its opening for Joe Gamer's benefit, it's quite decent about letting the player approach its main quest in the open world.
 

Nifft Batuff

Prophet
Joined
Nov 14, 2018
Messages
3,669
Fsllout 3 is a masterpiece when compared to Fallout 4. Fallout 4 Is where Bethesda stopped to even bother. Even Starfield is better than Fallout 4.
 

Vic

Augur
Bethestard
Joined
Oct 24, 2018
Messages
5,781
Location
[REDACTED]
Fsllout 3 is a masterpiece when compared to Fallout 4. Fallout 4 Is where Bethesda stopped to even bother. Even Starfield is better than Fallout 4.
Fallout 4 is just a better Fallout 3. It's the same game but with added outpost building, newer engine, better graphics, weapon and power armor mods, etc.
 

Nifft Batuff

Prophet
Joined
Nov 14, 2018
Messages
3,669
Fsllout 3 is a masterpiece when compared to Fallout 4. Fallout 4 Is where Bethesda stopped to even bother. Even Starfield is better than Fallout 4.
Fallout 4 is just a better Fallout 3. It's the same game but with added outpost building, newer engine, better graphics, weapon and power armor mods, etc.
Maybe if you enjoy Fallout 3 as a first person shooter, then Fallout 4 is a better game for you. But I dont't care about this in a game game that fancies itself to be the sequel of one of the most clebrated RPG for its freedom of approach to any obstacle and quest. And I still prefer the graphics of Fallout 3 style-wise. In Fallout 4 they managed to make the pipboy interface introduced in Fallout 3 even worse and cumbersome too.
 

Gargaune

Arcane
Joined
Mar 12, 2020
Messages
3,726
It is in terms of quest design which is gonna be the most important thing for most players, and where Fo4 massively falls down.
With the exception of the main quest, which is genuinely better in Fo4 than in Fo3.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom