Fallout 4 Day -1 impressions

[Atlantico]

People like pizza. People like icecream. ICECREAMPIZZA
-Bethesda marketing/design

 

[Lord Azlan]

I kicked my nephew out of his room last night and locked myself in for about 3-4 hours playing Fallout 4 on his PC. He likes shooters - a lot.

RANT FROM LORD AZLAN

Afterwards these retards just move on to the next CoD or Destiny or FIFA. We are left with dust in our mouths.

People just like you love to wax on about the decline. You need to vent.

I got news for you. There's no decline. Fallout 4 is incline in the sense it's expanding its audience. YES it's losing some old fans, but those fans will eventually go to other games. Dude, indies! Indies! What's so crazy to me is there have always been indies. There have always been smalltime programmers doing shareware or freeware and then smaller groups and then the much bigger AAA. Kickstarter just made everything obvious and easy to find for the commoner. So indies are alive and they'll continue to put out games which people like yourself will play because you can't find what you want from AAA studios.

I played Everquest for years and hated as they mainstreamed it. i eventually left in disgust, hating WoW and hating mainstream gamers in general. I could have spent the past, oh, 3 years complaining about WoW and consolisation too, but instead I played Wurm Online and was happy. That's a niche game and would never survive 1 second in the mainstream. People like yourslf just don't realize yet that indies will pick up the slack and make you happy. If not today then sometime in the near future!

I'm not saying you're wrong about your criticisms. I agree Bethesda is streamlining their RPG engine, cutting out things their console players might not enjoy. Yet they're adding things to try to keep their old fans. They're also trying to grab players who like minecraft builders. Really the game is a blend of borderlands/gta/fallout/minecraft/skyrim/etc.

The game isn't bad, it's just different and it might not appeal to the same fans it has appealed to in the past.

I agree with a bit of what you said. I agree that indies is the way for us now - good recent examples is Lord of Xulima (my game of last year) and others like Dungeons of Dredmor (crazy addictive).

Of the recent mainstream - I think only WL2 cut some mustard. PoE and DoS were missing something. Blackguards and M&M X were pretty good.

Paper Sorcerer - not so good.

I agree that mainstreaming games ain't so bad - I really loved Oblivion - probably makes me a retard.

But - about all this mainstreaming and accessibility stuff on Fallout 4 - I read a bunch of comments from people that were left handed or had some other issues and they found the PC version of the game impossible to play. By all means make the franchise for a new, younger audience. But treat people with respect and if you want accessibility - god damn do it properly. Are all the newer players in the market brought up with consoles unable to read to hold their concentration for more than 20 seconds?

A lot of people bought this game as a RPG, or RPG lite - it was even marketed like that. It was worse than they ever thought. Bethesda lied about that and kept it all hush hush. They were dishonest.

People who like shooter - best game evarrrr - apparently.

As for your point about adding things that keep the oldies happy - I would like to ask what you think they are.

The Build a chair stuff is rubbish - and inaccessible. The modding of equipment make me think they were too lazy to provide different stuff.

Many of the items you make can't be read on screen as it's too long.

As you walk around the land you often hear lots of shooting. The majority of traders I encountered were dead.

Compare to New Vegas where you often walked around in silence.

So, for someone that played Wasteland when it first came out - what did they put into Fallout 4 for me?

 

[belowmecoldhands]

The game isn't bad, it's just different and it might not appeal to the same fans it has appealed to in the past.

Do you have an example of a game that is bad? It's just that the argument in your post could, pushed to its logical conclusion, shield anything from being described as bad.

Yes it's bad if it can't pay what it put in and some extra. For that it needs a paying audience. Right now, far as I know, they're selling enough units. If it turns out FO4 isn't pulling its weight and assisting the financially burdens of their next game, well then you'll be right: It's a bad game.

A game that's different doesn't necessarily have to be bad. It might be bad to some people, but it only has to be good for enough people to achieve its financial aims. I think that's what's occuring with FO4: it's good for enough people.

I strongly support criticising FO4 if you don't like it. Just don't act like it's a bad game for everybody. And don't act like ti's the end of gaming. I'll agree it's the end of gaming IF indies die and only AAA's produce games.

 

[belowmecoldhands]

(......)
But - about all this mainstreaming and accessibility stuff on Fallout 4 - I read a bunch of comments from people that were left handed or had some other issues and they found the PC version of the game impossible to play. By all means make the franchise for a new, younger audience. But treat people with respect and if you want accessibility - god damn do it properly. Are all the newer players in the market brought up with consoles unable to read to hold their concentration for more than 20 seconds?

A lot of people bought this game as a RPG, or RPG lite - it was even marketed like that. It was worse than they ever thought. Bethesda lied about that and kept it all hush hush. They were dishonest.

People who like shooter - best game evarrrr - apparently.

As for your point about adding things that keep the oldies happy - I would like to ask what you think they are.

The Build a chair stuff is rubbish - and inaccessible. The modding of equipment make me think they were too lazy to provide different stuff.

(.....)

So, for someone that played Wasteland when it first came out - what did they put into Fallout 4 for me?

Hey it doesn't have to be a perfect game or even appeal to all old fans or yourself. It just has to pay what it puts in and have some profits leftover to fuel the next game. If it fails that it's a bad game and deserves every word of criticism. Otherwise I feel the hate should just be rechanneled towards supporting indie developers and indie gaming in general. Why? Because AAA is always going to try to serve the largest audiences because AAA spends millions, now hundreds of millions of dollars. They need huge audiences. This means it's harder for them to focus on small crowds of players. It's also too much risk to do that. Indies right now are coming into their own and players are starting to realizing just how important it's we wake up and suppor them.

I think another thign which makes me forgiving is the modding capacity of FO4. Eventually a lot of things some players currently don't like will either be removed, fixed or added. That gives it a lot of potential value to be realized later.

 

[Lemming42]

The game isn't bad, it's just different and it might not appeal to the same fans it has appealed to in the past.

Do you have an example of a game that is bad? It's just that the argument in your post could, pushed to its logical conclusion, shield anything from being described as bad.

Yes it's bad if it can't pay what it put in and some extra. For that it needs a paying audience. Right now, far as I know, they're selling enough units. If it turns out FO4 isn't pulling its weight and assisting the financially burdens of their next game, well then you'll be right: It's a bad game.

A game that's different doesn't necessarily have to be bad. It might be bad to some people, but it only has to be good for enough people to achieve its financial aims. I think that's what's occuring with FO4: it's good for enough people.

I strongly support criticising FO4 if you don't like it. Just don't act like it's a bad game for everybody. And don't act like ti's the end of gaming. I'll agree it's the end of gaming IF indies die and only AAA's produce games.

If commercial success is your criteria for good or bad, then that classifies many classic beloved games as terrible. Would it be fair to call Fallout 4 a bad game, but one that's commercially successful?

It's "good enough for" some people, sure. I don't think anyone is attempting to say it's impossible for anybody to enjoy it. They could have made a game where you just sit and watch paint dry and someone, somewhere would have enjoyed it. But, even if you don't count excessive streamlining or "dumbing down" as a bad thing, we can still point to some objective faults with the game:
The story is a nonsensical mess that would never fly in any medium other than videogames, the dungeon design relies extremely heavily on copypasting the same place over and over again (compare with previous Bethesda games Fallout 3 and Skyrim), the combat still ultimately ends up relying on HP bloat, quest design is almost univerally go-somewhere-kill-something, you frequently have no idea what your guy/gal is going to say from the dialogue wheel (especially the sarcastic options, about two of which are actually sarcastic), almost all the perks are the same exact thing revolving around dealing extra damage, etc. Many more but I'm sure you've read all these in the thread already.

It's also surely fair to describe it as an objectively bad Fallout game, using Fallout 1, 2 and New Vegas as the standards. Honestly, though, even if we compared it only against Fallout 3 it still fails at being a Fallout game, which it markets itself as.

 

[Grathanich]

When I obtained a pirated CD of Morrowind in the university years and later fiddled with the creation kit, the first thought that came to my mind was that it was possible to recreate a resemblance of a D&D game with the engine. Then another spark was lit in my mind and I said "hey! I think it's possible to mod this thing to hell and create a 3D Fallout game with all the great graphics, equipment slots and real time combat!". Many years later Fallout 3 came up and it turned out that I was right but the game was BAD. It was messy, seemed unfinished, completely incoherent, it was so many years after the apocalypse but everywhere was like hell broke loose only a month ago, quests were stupid, NPCs were retarded, bugs were abundant. But I persevered. I persevered for the sake of the feeling in Fallout 2 where I joined the shootout in the Den with Lara's gang. I endured for the funny Monty Python references and wacky inhabitants in those former games.

It was in fact so meaningless, boring and ineffectual in creating a story that after modding the game for a year, uninstalling then reinstalling and vowing to myself that I will complete it this time in spite of all the boredom and overwhelming lack of satisfaction, I found myself at the door of the final fight of the game, saved it at that point and left it there. 3 months later I uninstalled the game forever without completing it at 99% progress level and never touched it again.

Then came New Vegas, about which I had lots of suspicions, but again for the sake of Fallout 1&2 I started the game. At that moment my faith in the Fallout franchise was mostly restored because there were a ton of quests (some of them were even fun), you could affect so many things and see their results, you could roleplay as many different characters with different objectives, methods, likes and dislikes and this was what a roleplaying game was meant to be!

Now having watched gameplay videos about Fallout 4 and reading people's comments I see two things: people hyping about the game and posting in Reddit about how awesome it is are actually RETARDS who did not play a single RPG in their lifetimes and only enjoy things that are common to ordinary people with ordinary lives with no spark of creativity and imagination in their empty brains. This is not elitism, it is just an observation. Then someone who actually knows about gaming and roleplaying criticizes the game and that person is called a "backward thinking dinosaur who is afraid of change" (says the moron who never even saw a screenshot of Fallout 1&2 and plays Call of Duty to have fun with his retarded teenager friends).

The other thing I see is that without indie game developers and a very small number of niche studios, gaming that I enjoy will be lost in a few years.

 

[belowmecoldhands]

If commercial success is your criteria for good or bad, then that classifies many classic beloved games as terrible. Would it be fair to call Fallout 4 a bad game, but one that's commercially successful?

It's "good enough for" some people, sure. I don't think anyone is attempting to say it's impossible for anybody to enjoy it. They could have made a game where you just sit and watch paint dry and someone, somewhere would have enjoyed it. But, even if you don't count excessive streamlining or "dumbing down" as a bad thing, we can still point to some objective faults with the game:
The story is a nonsensical mess that would never fly in any medium other than videogames, the dungeon design relies extremely heavily on copypasting the same place over and over again (compare with previous Bethesda games Fallout 3 and Skyrim), the combat still ultimately ends up relying on HP bloat, quest design is almost univerally go-somewhere-kill-something, you frequently have no idea what your guy/gal is going to say from the dialogue wheel (especially the sarcastic options, about two of which are actually sarcastic), almost all the perks are the same exact thing revolving around dealing extra damage, etc. Many more but I'm sure you've read all these in the thread already.

It's also surely fair to describe it as an objectively bad Fallout game, using Fallout 1, 2 and New Vegas as the standards. Honestly, though, even if we compared it only against Fallout 3 it still fails at being a Fallout game, which it markets itself as.

A game needs enough commercial success to keep a series going or at least to keep the people working on it able to make a career on it. It can't receive too much bad reception either. If it fails to do that, no business is going to do want to do it. If game designers say the game is designed badly, their argument only holds if they can impede its commercial success (maybe by enacting new laws to restrict it?) or it fails to achieve commercial success. Given the only other way to measure whether a game is bad or not is if YOU like it and that's entirely subjective, I just don't feel confident about other measures of a game's success.

There might be games I've liked in the past which were freeware and only played by a couple people. I know for a fact I liked many games which game designers said were badly designed. I might have played a few games which were commercial failures and enjoyed htem. But those points are subjective. I can't objectively say those games were good.

I use (enough) commercial success as a marker only because $$$ rules our world and it speaks for itself.

EDIT: Bethesda uses the same repeated streamlining formula--tied to a open world 'hiking simulator' with lots of combat--in their Elder Scrolls series which they're now using in their Fallout series. Each successive game in the Elder Scrolls series was streamlined and integrated with new things. Same is occuring with Fallout. Streamlining is the process of combining or removing previous past features in favor of a simpler system that can readily adopt other/different/new systems. It has worked for them commercially thus far, so they have no reason to stop doing it. To my older eyes, none of this surprises me.

Here's some posts I did about the changes between Daggerfall <-> Skyrim:
http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...-skyrim-objectively.95239/page-7#post-3636029
http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...-skyrim-objectively.95239/page-8#post-3638093
http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/morrowind-vs-skyrim-objectively.95239/page-11
http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...skyrim-objectively.95239/page-12#post-3646577

So I saw how they cut out skills/slots and added other things. They seem to focus on removing technical or same-y things. To make it more action-oriented? Maybe console gamers don't like RPG character development systems.... But I don't think this means a BAD game. It just means some gamers won't like it. There just needs to be enough who do.

 

[Duellist_D]

I'm having more fun with this game than with Skyrim, which i still can't bother to play because its boring the fuck out of me. Similiar to Fallout 3 (not NV, that was enjoyable), which i also quit after reaching the main city.

The Dialogue System is beyond retarded, the Skillchecks non-existant, the lore is raped in every orifice and the gunplay is (as to be expected from this engine) horribad except when you are shooting zombies with your 10mm from the hip.

Yet the sandboxy-feel where you can build shit in your settlements is fun.
Building something, setting up a nice fortress and then watching Supermutants with Gattling guns getting torn assunder by Lasers, Mines and Machinegun-Turrets is amusing enough to keep me going collecting materials to build more stuff.


Shitty RPG, shitty Fallout-Game, shitty shooter but a decent interactive Lego Box.
Or rather Playmobile, it doesn't have enough tiles yet to be really lego. Might change when the Creation Kit is released.
Then, it might actually be worth paying for it.

 

[belowmecoldhands]

I'm having more fun with this game than with Skyrim, which i still can't bother to play because its boring the fuck out of me. Similiar to Fallout 3 (not NV, that was enjoyable), which i also quit after reaching the main city.

The Dialogue System is beyond retarded, the Skillchecks non-existant, the lore is raped in every orifice and the gunplay is (as to be expected from this engine) horribad except when you are shooting zombies with your 10mm from the hip.

Yet the sandboxy-feel where you can build shit in your settlements is fun.
Building something, setting up a nice fortress and then watching Supermutants with Gattling guns getting torn assunder by Lasers, Mines and Machinegun-Turrets is amusing enough to keep me going collecting materials to build more stuff.


Shitty RPG, shitty Fallout-Game, shitty shooter but a decent interactive Lego Box.
Or rather Playmobile, it doesn't have enough tiles yet to be really lego. Might change when the Creation Kit is released.
Then, it might actually be worth paying for it.

And also Fo4 is moddalbe so it'll only get better on all fronts.

So ya I kind of find myself agreeing, although I won't hand over $60 when I can play Dwarf Fortress or Unreal World (or others) for free or on the cheap. Of course, Fo4 is infinitely more accessible and graphically pleasing.

I want to highlight lots of gamers favor open world hiking simulators. And there's a lot of playrs who like sandbox builders (like DF or Minecraft). And of course some playres derive enjoyment from the shooter gameplay. A thread poster earlier criticised Fo4 for being a ICECREAMPIZZA, but it seems to be working for Bethesda, even if that's what it's.

I understand Fo4 is a different game than past Fallout games. But again it doesn't really matter if 20% or 40% or more of old fans hate the game. What matters is enough people are buying Fo4 and enough will stick with it as a series. It's commercial. It's all about money in this world. Companies don't care about anything else unless it affects their $$$.

There're indies and smalltime game makers (and modders). They're there for gamers like us who don't like AAA. Once all of the people are exhausted from complaining in these forums about Fo4, they'll slowly realize this more clearly.

 

[Duellist_D]

Its absolutely not worth the money as of now.
Wait, Pirate it, borrow it if you have a console or wait for a sale.

 

[Sarkile]

Obviously Fallout 4 is terrible.
I'm just here to say holy shit, Saint is alive!

 

[Immortal]

I kicked my nephew out of his room last night and locked myself in for about 3-4 hours playing Fallout 4 on his PC. He likes shooters - a lot.

Graphics seemed to be sufficient - no glitches experienced. No problem with the FPS. I did have problems acclimatising to the controls/ interface - I remember having the same problem with Skyrim. Probably fiddling about with the .ini will fix all that. Or patches.

Plant harvesting as in Skyrim. I like the approach taken to crafting. D:OS could learn something here. I did not experience the building towns stuff but I think this was probably added as a bunch of people enjoyed making your own home in Skyrim and the user mod that proceeded Hearthfire was quite popular.

Combat - I got killed about 4 times in whatever the standard mode is. Mostly from Zombie/ Ghoul types that sneak around and then rush you very quickly. That is reassuring. The new VATs slows time rather than pauses it.

I am slightly concerned to read about the number of complaints from players encountering too early the Dog, the Deathclaw and the Armour. When I play the Fallouts, I do my own thing and certainly do not follow the main quest or the compass arrows telling you where to go. Four hours into F4 and I have not found any of these. When I first played Fallout I was pleasantly surprised that the game kicked me off when I failed to deliver the water chip on time. One of the best things about these games is exploring on your own. I hate companions. I went South.

On the character build I like each of your SPECIAL's start from one and therefore with an initial pool of 21 attribute points to distribute you can really make different builds. I have some dark thoughts about this. Fallout 5, you will just have ten points to add to Health or Stamina and one point for perks - ala Skyrim but worse. I hope you really can specialise in builds such as thief, sharpshooter, electrician, talker - I have my doubts.

The lack of Skills in a Fallout game is just beyond redemption. I cannot believe it. It is a betrayal.

I hate that a bunch of people in user reviews are saying one of the good things about F4 is the character appearance module. This just makes me think how shallow this franchise has become and how shallow the sort of people that think they know what Fallout is. It's depressing.

Going south I came across a farm and experienced the dialogue wheel for the first time. I thought that was okay. If it was okay for the Mass Effects I don't see a big problem. Obviously without skills, without the sort of character builds you find in WL2 or POE - all you need is a wheel. However, having just come out of cryo - I was surprised I was able to prompt a conversation about Diamond City - how the heck did I know about that?

I liked how radiation poisoning reduces your maximum health.

So far the game feels a bit like F3 - but its retarded inbred cousin.

I LOVED Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim. I LOVED Fallout 3 and New Vegas.

Inside me there is a small fire of hate about F4 and I can't see any way a modder or patch can fix it. I hate consoles and those parents that bought them for their children.

I hate how so many people have bought this game on Steam as if they had not there might have been a way to send a message to Bethesda.

I hate how consoles killed the CRPG and here we have final evidence of that fact.

Everything done to my beloved franchise was so that some teenage retards who can't read, have zero attention span, have no logic can play another shooter.

Afterwards these retards just move on to the next CoD or Destiny or FIFA. We are left with dust in our mouths.

People just like you love to wax on about the decline. You need to vent.

I got news for you. There's no decline. Fallout 4 is incline in the sense it's expanding its audience. YES it's losing some old fans, but those fans will eventually go to other games. Dude, indies! Indies! What's so crazy to me is there have always been indies. There have always been smalltime programmers doing shareware or freeware and then smaller groups and then the much bigger AAA. Kickstarter just made everything obvious and easy to find for the commoner. So indies are alive and they'll continue to put out games which people like yourself will play because you can't find what you want from AAA studios.

I played Everquest for years and hated as they mainstreamed it. i eventually left in disgust, hating WoW and hating mainstream gamers in general. I could have spent the past, oh, 3 years complaining about WoW and consolisation too, but instead I played Wurm Online and was happy. That's a niche game and would never survive 1 second in the mainstream. People like yourslf just don't realize yet that indies will pick up the slack and make you happy. If not today then sometime in the near future!

I'm not saying you're wrong about your criticisms. I agree Bethesda is streamlining their RPG engine, cutting out things their console players might not enjoy. Yet they're adding things to try to keep their old fans. They're also trying to grab players who like minecraft builders. Really the game is a blend of borderlands/gta/fallout/minecraft/skyrim/etc.

The game isn't bad, it's just different and it might not appeal to the same fans it has appealed to in the past.

 

[Nahel]

I guess Twlilight, Fifty Shades of Grey, Call of Retards and others dumb products are not decline if they are a commercial success....The problem is people like you saying "live with your time" or this is "how games are now, deal with it". Well change is not always fucking progress and people should remember that....

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

Obviously Fallout 4 is terrible.
I'm just here to say holy shit, Saint is alive!

Another of the ancients!

Look there, folk!

 

[ArchAngel]

I'm having more fun with this game than with Skyrim, which i still can't bother to play because its boring the fuck out of me. Similiar to Fallout 3 (not NV, that was enjoyable), which i also quit after reaching the main city.

The Dialogue System is beyond retarded, the Skillchecks non-existant, the lore is raped in every orifice and the gunplay is (as to be expected from this engine) horribad except when you are shooting zombies with your 10mm from the hip.

Yet the sandboxy-feel where you can build shit in your settlements is fun.
Building something, setting up a nice fortress and then watching Supermutants with Gattling guns getting torn assunder by Lasers, Mines and Machinegun-Turrets is amusing enough to keep me going collecting materials to build more stuff.


Shitty RPG, shitty Fallout-Game, shitty shooter but a decent interactive Lego Box.
Or rather Playmobile, it doesn't have enough tiles yet to be really lego. Might change when the Creation Kit is released.
Then, it might actually be worth paying for it.

And also Fo4 is moddalbe so it'll only get better on all fronts.

So ya I kind of find myself agreeing, although I won't hand over $60 when I can play Dwarf Fortress or Unreal World (or others) for free or on the cheap. Of course, Fo4 is infinitely more accessible and graphically pleasing.

I want to highlight lots of gamers favor open world hiking simulators. And there's a lot of playrs who like sandbox builders (like DF or Minecraft). And of course some playres derive enjoyment from the shooter gameplay. A thread poster earlier criticised Fo4 for being a ICECREAMPIZZA, but it seems to be working for Bethesda, even if that's what it's.

I understand Fo4 is a different game than past Fallout games. But again it doesn't really matter if 20% or 40% or more of old fans hate the game. What matters is enough people are buying Fo4 and enough will stick with it as a series. It's commercial. It's all about money in this world. Companies don't care about anything else unless it affects their $$$.

There're indies and smalltime game makers (and modders). They're there for gamers like us who don't like AAA. Once all of the people are exhausted from complaining in these forums about Fo4, they'll slowly realize this more clearly.

I think you missed a forum. You actually want to post this on Bethesda forums you Bethestard.

It does matter to us here, it matter a lot. Fuck off.

 

[Innsmouth Dweller]

It's all about money in this world. Companies don't care about anything else unless it affects their $$$.

That's why i need to buy new fridge every two years (just after the warranty is expired), and rust is starting to eat my car (which is 5 years old). Don't buy products from companies that care only about profit, don't support the decline.

 

[an Administrator]

How i felt when i was making my settlement in fallout4

 

[Bradylama]

Bullshit. Minecraft actually works.

 

[MWaser]

You wish Fallout 4 would offer as much choice as Minecraft

 

[RK47]

You wish Fallout 4 would offer as much choice as Minecraft

I duno man, there's just no pressure to 'excel' at the builder crap in F4. I struggle to imagine why it's important.
What is the difference between Happiness 90 and 70? Nothing. Why is the defense rating is considered sufficient even though the turret is facing a wall?
Sturges said it's better to build beds underneath roofs, but is it really? I lay all beds on the streets and they still lie there in the open when the time comes to catch some Zzzz.
You're nothing but an empty threat and promise, sandbox. And to that, I can safely say: ignore it.
Even the crops aren't worth waiting for. It's quicker to just go around, shop for the ones you need than plant it.
And since the world is small even with self-imposed no fast travel rule you can find a prosperous farm within 5 minutes walk from Sanctuary with enough crops to start a new farm.

 

[ArchAngel]

You wish Fallout 4 would offer as much choice as Minecraft

I duno man, there's just no pressure to 'excel' at the builder crap in F4. I struggle to imagine why it's important.
What is the difference between Happiness 90 and 70? Nothing. Why is the defense rating is considered sufficient even though the turret is facing a wall?
Sturges said it's better to build beds underneath roofs, but is it really? I lay all beds on the streets and they still lie there in the open when the time comes to catch some Zzzz.
You're nothing but an empty threat and promise, sandbox. And to that, I can safely say: ignore it.
Even the crops aren't worth waiting for. It's quicker to just go around, shop for the ones you need than plant it.
And since the world is small even with self-imposed no fast travel rule you can find a prosperous farm within 5 minutes walk from Sanctuary with enough crops to start a new farm.

Crops at least have a purpose, at least Tato, Corn and that third one do (that starts with M) since you use them to get critical components for crafting your weapon and armor mods.

Also bones are needed to create Cutting Oil which gives you Oil for crafting. I feels hilarious to collect all bones everywhere :D

 

[potatojohn]

What is the difference between Happiness 90 and 70? Nothing.

That's not true. Settlers are more efficient (produce more) at higher happiness

Why is the defense rating is considered sufficient even though the turret is facing a wall?

Because that's just the idle animation. Turrets in combat can turn in any direction.

Sturges said it's better to build beds underneath roofs, but is it really?

It is. It makes them happier

You're nothing but an empty threat and promise, sandbox. And to that, I can safely say: ignore it.

Yeah, it's clearly to complex for you to learn.

 

[ArchAngel]

What is the difference between Happiness 90 and 70? Nothing.

That's not true. Settlers are more efficient (produce more) at higher happiness

And why do you need settlers to produce more? What does it matter overall?

 

[RK47]

lol. if you stop by Diamond City, you don't even need workers.
Oh look, all dat free water pumps, but no bottles to bottle it up with. Holeeee shit.

 

[potatojohn]

And why do you need settlers to produce more? What does it matter overall?