Fallout 4 Pre-Announcement Bullshit Thread [GO TO NEW THREAD]

[buzz]

He says that graphics matter and moving to a brand new engine is going to matter this gen. I'm saying it doesn't, arguing that marketing, brand appeal and the actual disinterest of casual gamers towards super-edge graphics as reasons why. Where is he agreeing with me?

 

[Nikaido]

Will their lying whoremouth let them stand against games like The Witcher 3 and DA:I on next gen consoles ? I'd think not, but then again, I might just be underestimating the mainstream public.

I think you really do.You're confusing hype, fake PR speak, bullshots, talk of improving things and so on with actually wanting to impress the players with state-of-the-art graphics.
Watch Dogs looked pretty bad even by last gen's standards, is a totally new IP and yet it fucking sold 4 million copies in a week. Rage was hyped at the next best thing in terms of graphical fidelity,but it essentially ended as a insignificant mediocre fart with lots of issues.
You are working on the assumption that Witcher 3 and DA:I (especially this one) will actually look as good as the scripted trailers make them out to be, especially the console versions which are the big money makers. If anything, Bethesda should be much more afraid of those games tapping into the open-world RPG market, where they pretty much used to be undisputable champions.

As you said, both games are trying to tap into that open world rpg market which, up until now, was a complete Bethesda monopoly. And they are going to do so with much more modern engines and design. Will they look as good as the current E3 trailers ? Of course not. Will they look 100000x better than anything made by Bethesda? Of course, yes. Frostbite (DA:I's engine) works really well on consoles, and the Witcher 2 port to xbox 360 has proven what CDProjekt could do on very limited hardware. Next gen consoles aren't great compared to current PCs, but they're nothing like the previous generation.

Bethesda will not stand out anymore as the lone provider of sandbox console RPGs. They will have actual competition and that competition is going to crush them where it hurts in terms of marketing. The next Elder Scrolls will, without doubt, be compared next to these games in the gaming media. Can they get away by making yet another anemic hiking simulator with animations that feel like throw back to 1998? up until now the Beth marketing machine had the privilege of literally owning the whole genre all for itself. Their games have as much depth as a puddle and heavily relied on bullshit, be it about graphix, AI (RADIANT AI1!!11!!1) and so on to garner mainstream attention. Now that bullshit will be put next to slightly less worse bullshit in direct comparisons. I honestly don't feel like Beth can survive as-is in the near future without some dramatic internal change.

 

[Decado]

L-O-Fucking-L @ "making moral choices." Will you blow up this town for no goddamn reason, or will you not blow up this town for no goddamn reason?!?! MORAL CHOICES, MOTHERFUCKER, DO YOU SPEAK IT?

 

[buzz]

Nikaido Well, since we're talking about Fallout 4 in here, they still technically have a monopoly on "sandbox" console-friendly post-apocalyptic hiking simulators with RPG elements . But really, I just wouldn't worry about Bethesda at this point, both DA:I and W3:TWH don't really seem to promote that freeform sandbox experience, with 1st person IMMERSHUN mode, complete control over the character's appearance and ability to pursue whatever guild or doing any LARP-like thing on the world. I mean, I'm a Gothic fanboy and I deeply loathed TES games for most of my life, always wishing that PB's games would be the ones that get super popular. It never did of course , and that series was as close to a competitor that they had. Kingdom Come: Deliverance is pretty much the only game that somewhat tries to take a direct jab at the TES formula.

 

[Akratus]

He says that graphics matter and moving to a brand new engine is going to matter this gen. I'm saying it doesn't, arguing that marketing, brand appeal and the actual disinterest of casual gamers towards super-edge graphics as reasons why. Where is he agreeing with me?

He's not saying it matters, he's saying it makes the fanbase inexplicably exuberant, it's good marketing.

 

[Spectacle]

Witcher 3 and DA:I may have open worlds, but they don't seem to be pushing the "go anywhere, do anything" stuff that people love about bethgames. And in any case the sandbox console RPG market won't be anywhere near saturated, there will hardly be any competition to speak of for a long time.

 

[Akratus]

Nikaido Well, since we're talking about Fallout 4 in here, they still technically have a monopoly on "sandbox" console-friendly post-apocalyptic hiking simulators with RPG elements . But really, I just wouldn't worry about Bethesda at this point, both DA:I and W3:TWH don't really seem to promote that freeform sandbox experience, with 1st person IMMERSHUN mode, complete control over the character's appearance and ability to pursue whatever guild or doing any LARP-like thing on the world. I mean, I'm a Gothic fanboy and I deeply loathed TES games for most of my life, always wishing that PB's games would be the ones that get super popular. It never did of course , and that series was as close to a competitor that they had. Kingdom Come: Deliverance is pretty much the only game that somewhat tries to take a direct jab at the TES formula.

Although I get extremely aggrevated at the lack of good design in Skyrim, there is a slight glimmer of possible imporvements in the future. Because you see, even bethesdrones realize the world of skyrim was unreactive and not interconnected. They mostly disliked the faction/guild questlines too for being short, having no choices, and having no impact. They too complained that the civil war was the same on both sides, and nothing had consequences.

It's only a small part of the official forums, at least, that criticizes the design, writing, c&c and gameplay of Skyrim, but it's something.

 

[DalekFlay]

Witcher 3 and DA:I may have open worlds, but they don't seem to be pushing the "go anywhere, do anything" stuff that people love about bethgames. And in any case the sandbox console RPG market won't be anywhere near saturated, there will hardly be any competition to speak of for a long time.

Yes.

What Bioware is missing about Skyrim's success is that it's about the freedom to mess around and do random shit at all times that make Bethesda games appeal to people not usually into RPGs. Bioware can make DA:I as open world as possible all day long, but unless you can throw chickens with your voice or put pots on merchants' heads it's not going to sell the same numbers.

 

[Decado]

Bethesda does quest design like that because it is harder for those designs to break. It isn't that their writers are incapable of thinking them up. Simple quest designs mean it is less likely bugs will arise due to weird states in different quests that have interconnectivity with each other and other game elements. Bethesda is somewhat concerned about their reputation for being a buggy game studio and have taken steps to remedy that. Skyrim was a considerable improvement for them and was quite a bit less buggy than their previous games, aside from the PS3 performance issues which are based in technical problems with the engine.

Howard is a huge proponent of "simplicity" and I have no doubt that bleeds into the areas of quest design. Bethesda doesn't want to wow the player with deep and intriguing quest lines, they want you blown away by graphics, voice acting, the ability to cast two fireballs at a time, and the fact that you can set a loaf of bread down on a table in 360 degrees.

 

[Athelas]

There was an interview where Feargus said he felt kinda sorry for the people working at Bethesda because the tools they had for branching quests and dialogues were very primitive . It's not something Bethesda is very interested in either: story-wise, they seem more concerned about getting celebrities to voice prominent characters.

 

[Onholyservicebound]

There was an interview where Feargus said he felt kinda sorry for the people working at Bethesda because the tools they had for branching quests and dialogues were very primitive . It's not something Bethesda is very interested in either: story-wise, they seem more concerned about getting celebrities to voice prominent characters.

^And they can't even do that right, NV has a more solid voice cast than any Bethesda game yet.

 

[DragoFireheart]

There was an interview where Feargus said he felt kinda sorry for the people working at Bethesda because the tools they had for branching quests and dialogues were very primitive . It's not something Bethesda is very interested in either: story-wise, they seem more concerned about getting celebrities to voice prominent characters.

^And they can't even do that right, NV has a more solid voice cast than any Bethesda game yet.

When did the brain drain happen at Bethesda?

 

[GrainWetski]

Howard is a huge proponent of "simplicity" and I have no doubt that bleeds into the areas of quest design. Bethesda doesn't want to wow the player with deep and intriguing quest lines, they want you blown away by graphics, voice acting, the ability to cast two fireballs at a time, and the fact that you can set a loaf of bread down on a table in 360 degrees.

So, you think they're actually trying to have good voice acting? Here I thought it was some kind of in-joke to hire a bunch big name actors and then have a game filled with fucking terrible voice acting.

 

[groke]

Bethesda will never be able to get away from Gamebryo because they groom their employees from the modding community.

 

[Decado]

I'll never understand how they can so repeatedly and spectacularly fail at voice acting. Part of it is the voice actors themselves, but I would guess that most of it comes down to writing shitty dialog. Even Patrick Stewart is going to sound fucking dumb when he has to say schlock like "Let me see your face . . . you're the one from my dreams!"

Holy shit that writing, 10/10 would play again!

 

[Infinitron]

I'll never understand how they can so repeatedly and spectacularly fail at voice acting. Part of it is the voice actors themselves, but I would guess that most of it comes down to writing shitty dialog. Even Patrick Stewart is going to sound fucking dumb when he has to say schlock like "Let me see your face . . . you're the one from my dreams!"

Holy shit that writing, 10/10 would play again!

Zenimax's voice acting directors (or whatever the role is called) have this sort of stilted-sounding diction style that they mandate. You can even hear it in non-BGS games like Dishonored. Instantly recognizable.

Of course, that may also have something to do with them reusing the same voice actors for the bit parts in all their games...

 

[DalekFlay]

I never really thought of that, but you're right, they focus on steady clarity over inflection.

 

[chestburster]

Witcher 3 and DA:I may have open worlds, but they don't seem to be pushing the "go anywhere, do anything" stuff that people love about bethgames. And in any case the sandbox console RPG market won't be anywhere near saturated, there will hardly be any competition to speak of for a long time.

Yes.

What Bioware is missing about Skyrim's success is that it's about the freedom to mess around and do random shit at all times that make Bethesda games appeal to people not usually into RPGs EA's hype machine is not good as Bethesda's. Bioware can make DA:I as open world as possible all day long, but unless you can throw chickens with your voice or put pots on merchants' heads it's not going to sell the same numbers.

Fixed.

Seriously, throwing chicken and many other "sandboxy" feature of Skyrim are only because of Havok physics, which every other game since 2007 has (I suspect you can use Aard on chicken in Witcher 2 as well). Pot on head is just a laughable stupid bug, but Beth marketing machine and Bethtards turned it into an awesome feature.

I swear Bethesda has the best PR team in the gaming industry. I always feel their trailers are better than other companies'.

 

[Metro]

I'm surprised they got Christopher Plummer and Max Von Sydow for Skyrim. Those guys have to be eighty... guess they need more cash for the grandkids trust fund.

 

[DalekFlay]

Fixed.

Seriously, throwing chicken and many other "sandboxy" feature of Skyrim are only because of Havok physics, which every other game since 2007 has (I suspect you can use Aard on chicken in Witcher 2 as well). Pot on head is just a laughable stupid bug, but Beth marketing machine and Bethtards turned it into an awesome feature.

I swear Bethesda has the best PR team in the gaming industry. I always feel their trailers are better than other companies'.

I don't want a long debate about it but I don't agree with you. You can't mess around and do stupid open world stuff in any RPG like you can Oblivion and Skyrim. It's just a different feel, a different kind of openness, that makes people not normally into RPGs enjoy it, make videos and memes about it, talk to friends about it, etc.

 

[Nikaido]

Besides the glitchy physics dumbfuckery you can do in the TES, I don't see the difference between them and many classic cRPG like Fallout in terms of open worldness. If anything the classics's form of open world is a lot more meaningful because not every single thing scales to your level, which means that doing things like murdering a particular npc or stealing can reward you in some ways, while stealing (and the whole idea of a thieves guild) in the TES is pretty much useless. They could remove the pickpocketing skill in Skyrim and nothing of value would be lost.

The whole open world/sandbox thing breaks down so fast when you realize that you can't even benefit from doing something like raiding a merchant. What can you actually *do* in Skyrim's sandbox beside *LARP*?

 

[shihonage]

Besides the glitchy physics dumbfuckery you can do in the TES, I don't see the difference between them and many classic cRPG like Fallout in terms of open worldness

wat

 

[chestburster]

Oblivion and Skyrim. ... that makes people not normally into RPGs enjoy it, make videos and memes about it

People do that or even notice that because the PR machine hyped it up. There are equal or more "openness" (whatever that word means) in F:NV than in Skyrim. Yet people consoletards don't make memes about F:NV.

 

[DalekFlay]

Besides the glitchy physics dumbfuckery you can do in the TES, I don't see the difference between them and many classic cRPG like Fallout in terms of open worldness. If anything the classics's form of open world is a lot more meaningful because not every single thing scales to your level, which means that doing things like murdering a particular npc or stealing can reward you in some ways, while stealing (and the whole idea of a thieves guild) in the TES is pretty much useless. They could remove the pickpocketing skill in Skyrim and nothing of value would be lost.

The whole open world/sandbox thing breaks down so fast when you realize that you can't even benefit from doing something like raiding a merchant. What can you actually *do* in Skyrim's sandbox beside *LARP*?

A lot of this doesn't apply to what I'm talking about. For one thing I'm talking current market, not comparing Skyrim to fucking Fallout (that's a weird game to jump to when talking about similar titles to Skyrim by the way). We're talking about why now, today, Skyrim sells 20 million copies and Dragon Age sells 4 million or so, Witcher 2 sold 2 million, and on and on. It's not just "more open" or whatever, it's about stupid videos of people putting 20 land mines at the feet of Tenpenny and watching him fly into the sky. It's endless videos of buckets being put on merchant's heads or people resurrecting chicken armies or giants flinging you into the sky. It's that random open world bullshit stuff that sells a lot of copies of that game to people who would never even think of buying an RPG otherwise.

On top of those people are of course others who enjoy other aspects of the game, from IMMERSHUN to story to whatever else. I'm not saying otherwise. I'm saying Bioware can make the next Dragon Age as open world as they want, unless it has that kind of weird environment interactivity, randomness and silliness it's not going to catch on the same way. It's not going to become a thing random assholes around the neighborhood feel like they HAVE to play, even if they don't play RPGs, because little Timmy made a chicken dance.

 

[Excidium]

Oblivion and Skyrim. ... that makes people not normally into RPGs enjoy it, make videos and memes about it

People do that or even notice that because the PR machine hyped it up. There are equal or more "openness" (whatever that word means) in F:NV than in Skyrim. Yet people consoletards don't make memes about F:NV.

FNV isn't as open as Skyrim because if you head to Vegas by the shorter north road you get slaughtered by deathclaws and cazadores so you are forced to go south as it is an easier route

Warning: This argument was actually defended by somebody somewhere.