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

[DalekFlay]

Right now Bethesda don't feel they need to make their games any deeper in order to succeed. But that could change if a credible competitor shows up on the scene and gets lots of kudos from the gaming public and press about its greater depth compared to Bethesda's games. It doesn't even have to sell as much as a Bethesda game. It just needs to sell enough and gain enough positive word of mouth that the Bethesda designers get worried and realize they need to improve their game.

Fallout: New Vegas could have been that game, but I guess its status as a spin-off and reputation as a "buggy Obsidian game" prevented that from occurring.

Oh I agree with that for sure, all kings of the hill are only there until someone knocks them off. I think the way to do that is to make a better playground though, more than anything else.

 

[Dreaad]

I don't think that really changes anything as far as why Bethesda games sell.

Right now Bethesda don't feel they need to make their games any deeper in order to succeed. But that could change if a credible competitor shows up on the scene and gets lots of kudos from the gaming public and press about its greater depth compared to Bethesda's games. It doesn't even have to sell as much as a Bethesda game. It just needs to sell enough and gain enough positive word of mouth that the Bethesda designers get worried and realize they need to improve their game.

Fallout: New Vegas could have been that game, but I guess its status as a spin-off and reputation as a "buggy Obsidian game" prevented that from occurring.

There is however a very strong possibility that things develop the down the pathway. For example a competitor does come along that challenges Bethesda's hiking simulators.... the natural way forward in today's age of bromance would be for Bethesda to leave everything as is and add herp a derp companions whilst further removing rpg elements. In my opinion this is in fact far more likely, then them suddenly realizing the error of their ways and going back to something interesting and mildly complicated like Morrowind.

 

[Azrael the cat]

Right now Bethesda don't feel they need to make their games any deeper in order to succeed. But that could change if a credible competitor shows up on the scene and gets lots of kudos from the gaming public and press about its greater depth compared to Bethesda's games. It doesn't even have to sell as much as a Bethesda game. It just needs to sell enough and gain enough positive word of mouth that the Bethesda designers get worried and realize they need to improve their game.

Fallout: New Vegas could have been that game, but I guess its status as a spin-off and reputation as a "buggy Obsidian game" prevented that from occurring.

I can imagine Bethesda being sufficiently aware of the market to start diversifying to folk who want more depth in their games, if they faced significant competition (1-2 competitors wouldn't mean much) - but not with their flagship series now that it's moved into the mass market. More likely they'd start a spinoff or separate franchise, or more likely still a substudio under a different name so that fans don't confuse the two, and use that for crpgs aimed at smaller market segments.

 

[Hirato]

They prioritize world-building over RPG elements.

Fallout 3's existence proves that they are incompetent at even this.

 

[Dreaad]

They prioritize world-building over RPG elements.

Fallout 3's existence proves that they are incompetent at even this.

Which is all the more pathetic because they already had most of the engine from oblivion. Further improving my opinion of Obsidian.

 

[Broseph]

LOL BROS DON'T YOU KNOW BETHESDA ONLY PRIORITIZES THE ROOL OF COOL

 

[Dreaad]

^ I would play that game.

 

[Tommy Wiseau]

They prioritize world-building over RPG elements.

Fallout 3's existence proves that they are incompetent at even this.

I don't really agree. If you'd look at some comparison pictures you can find on the web, you'd see that many Washington locations are actually a rather faithful and accurate rendition (though the scale and distance between those areas are obviously reduced by necessity) of the real thing.

Of course that's not everything the term 'world-building' should entail, but the attention to detail is noticeable.

 

[Azrael the cat]

They prioritize world-building over RPG elements.

Fallout 3's existence proves that they are incompetent at even this.

I don't really agree. If you'd look at some comparison pictures you can find on the web, you'd see that many Washington locations are actually a rather faithful and accurate rendition (though the scale and distance between those areas are obviously reduced by necessity) of the real thing.

Of course that's not everything the term 'world-building' should entail, but the attention to detail is noticeable.

Lol at Bethesda changing the gender of the statues in that last pic: 'what are you DOING? We can't have pseudo-classical statues of naked guys in our game? Replace them with scantily dressed women pronto!'

Says a lot about how they see their market.

 

[Hirato]

I don't really agree. If you'd look at some comparison pictures you can find on the web, you'd see that many Washington locations are actually a rather faithful and accurate rendition (though the scale and distance between those areas are obviously reduced by necessity) of the real thing.

I know nothing of the actual locations, so I'm just going to nitpick based on the photographs provided.
*NITPICK MODE ENGAGE*

First of all, we can see a very obvious architectural difference in the stairs leading up to the memorial. The F3 version terminates the stairs at the wall, which is also far more pronounced than the one visible in the RL version.
In addition, the F3 screenshot uses a uniform density for the pillars, the RL version appears to use a larger diameter at the base and shrink slightly as it reaches the top.
Lastly, the appearance of the walls are very different, F3 is a dull gray (with the green tint) and the RL version has many varieties of greys and other patterns which are completely absent, implying they're made from completely different materials.

The stairs have horrible shading, but the only thing I have to nitpick here is the fact that the apocalypse and 200 years of exposure to the elements only served to dirty the banners and render them incapable of reflecting light. As opposed to completely and utterly ruining them.

The RL version features wider top and bottom basins, and also much smaller ducts.
The F3 version also appears to consist of several different materials, which is the only explanation I can fathom for the parts discolouring differently over the course of 200 years.

On the subject of 200 years of rot, the fountain is completely unmaintained and should have fallen into a state of disrepair in that time. Also considering that it never rains in this shit-hole, the fountain should be completely and utterly dried up.

Then there's the stuff Azreal The Cat mentioned about the statues being the entirely wrong gender, among other things.

*NITPICK MODE DISENGAGED*

Of course that's not everything the term 'world-building' should entail

Agreed, when I cite world building, I explicitly refer to those other things, not being an American I really couldn't give a fuck about how well their monuments were recreated in a video game.

They're okay at the superficial stuff, but when it comes to any detail work, the only thing that comes out of them is sheer ineptitude.
They abuse the same small collection of tile sets (Ruined Interior, Utility Tunnels, Metro Tunnels, Factory, Caverns) for nearly all the areas, meaning that everything looks the same.
They are not good at area/level design, so areas not only look and feel the same, they are often practically navigated in the same way too.
There's almost no variety, and far too few exceptions to the above points.
They can't even manage something as simple as making the interior of a town hall look like an actual town hall,

And that's before we even jump on the myriad of issues with the setting their incompetent "world building" introduces.
Like the fact that there's no agriculture after 200 years, that nothing is growing, that no one produces anything, etc.
Basically everything sea and VD have stated on numerous occasions.

 

[Tommy Wiseau]

 

[Havoc]

Attention to detail? Gooby pls. The second comparision, the heads of the columns. Those aren't the same. If they had any attention to detail, this should be it.

 

[Tommy Wiseau]

I think you're holding replica models made in the GameBryo engine to an exaggeratedly high standard. Are you an architect by any chance? I can't think of many faithful renditions of real life cities in video games as it is, aside from Liberty City in GTA IV I suppose. New Vegas doesn't attempt to recreate Las Vegas either, after all. The only location modeled after a real thing as far as I know is the Prospector's Saloon (which is a real bar, but has a slightly different name in real life).

Not that Bethesda's execution is flawless, far from it, but we are talking re-used tile sets about a developer that decidedly takes the 'more is better' approach. Fallout 3 is still a significant improvement over Oblivion in this regard, where every Oblivion portal you had to enter lead to nearly the exact same encounters. As for lore (or logic) inconsistencies, I won't dispute that, but Bethesda's approach to world-building is pretty good when it comes to releasing the player into an open world and giving him incentives to actually not follow the main quest.

 

[Tommy Wiseau]

Attention to detail? Gooby pls. The second comparision, the heads of the columns. Those aren't the same. If they had any attention to detail, this should be it.

Eh, it is an alternate reality after all, so some differences are not inexcusable.

 

[Hirato]

It may be because Oblivion was my first and only venture into the world of The Elder Scrolls, but between it and Fallout 3, I'd defend the former as the better game.

New Vegas doesn't attempt to recreate Las Vegas either, after all

It would be silly if they did.
I believe it was quite explicitly stated that Las Vegas was destroyed, and that Mr House built New Vegas on the ruins of the old as he saw the NCR approach.

 

[Turisas]

It may be because Oblivion was my first and only venture into the world of The Elder Scrolls

Go play Daggerfall and Morrowind then, instead of wasting time in a silly Fallout 4 thread.

 

[Hirato]

I think I'll pass, between Oblivion, Fallout 3, and New Vegas, I'm completely burnt out on the genre.
Besides, I'm already juggling several games (with many more on the backburner) alongside my hobby project.

 

[Luzur]

It may be because Oblivion was my first and only venture into the world of The Elder Scrolls, but between it and Fallout 3, I'd defend the former as the better game.

New Vegas doesn't attempt to recreate Las Vegas either, after all

It would be silly if they did.
I believe it was quite explicitly stated that Las Vegas was destroyed, and that Mr House built New Vegas on the ruins of the old as he saw the NCR approach.

no, Las Vegas was spared because Mr. House got the local defenses up and running (though missing that chip he couldnt activate the total defense) so just a few bombs hit, but the city fell due to widespread riots and looting instead.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Of course that's not everything the term 'world-building' should entail

Wow, really?

Even if they were realistic renditions of the real life monuments, how is copying something and doing it in 3D "wold-building" in any way? Or how does it show that they're good at it? Oh wow, they can follow some photos when modeling!

Not to mention that except for the entrance to New Reno (aka the biggest easter egg ever) there are no real-world locations in Fallout, which shows that they SUCK at world building. HURRR liek let's do real buildings thats sooooo coool

 

[Tommy Wiseau]

How was I unclear with this? I put it right there in clear wording that I don't think you have to model real life items into your game to be good at constructing virtual worlds, but with the game being set in Washington DC, I believe doing so demonstrates a good attention to detail. Liberty City in GTA IV, modeled after New York, is also incidentally the product of excellent world-building, and the 'attention to detail' is vast, though I'm not exactly sure how much of it was modeled after authentic New York and isn't just inspiration.

I find it enticing to watch people nitpick details about how the architecture isn't 100% authentic because they didn't do this or that after a vaguely positive remark about Bethesda, instead of, you know, telling me why their world-building sucks because their AI is always shit or something like that.

there are no real-world locations in Fallout

The first one is set in California.

 

[Carrion]

I find it enticing to watch people nitpick details about how the architecture isn't 100% authentic because they didn't do this or that after a vaguely positive remark about Bethesda, instead of, you know, telling me why their world-building sucks because their AI is always shit or something like that.

Modeling isn't world-building. Those two things don't really have anything to do with each other. You can create a map with a perfectly modelled Empire State Building on one side and, I don't know, the Hanging Gardens of Babylon on the other, but it doesn't mean that it'd be much of a game world even if it looked totally awesome and realistic.

Does FO3 have anything resembling an economy? Where do the people get their food? Why does everything look like it was nuked to hell yesterday even though it's been two hundred years since the war, and why do people still live in those shitty houses instead of repairing them? Why does Megaton exist and does it make even a tiny bit of sense? How can completely retarded people like Moira Brown survive in a world that is supposedly harsh and deadly? What is the purpose of Tenpenny Tower? How do people have so much time for all that inane shit they're doing if they're struggling to even get clean water? How does the community of invincible children sustain itself and why is it right next to a vault full of super mutants? Is there anything that proves that they didn't just put in a bunch of random stuff and call it a game world?

Then again, my experience of FO3 is limited to a couple of Let's Plays, so maybe there is a logical explanation to all this and I just haven't seen it yet.

 

[baturinsky]

Yes, Fallout 3 is about as far from "world building" as you can get. In my fanon it's set at around year 2100, which makes it slightly less absurd, and lets me play it for DC landscapes.

 

[undecaf]

In my fanon it's set in a galaxy far, far away, which makes it slightly less absurd

Fixed.

 

[Tommy Wiseau]

Modeling isn't world-building. Those two things don't really have anything to do with each other. You can create a map with a perfectly modelled Empire State Building on one side and, I don't know, the Hanging Gardens of Babylon on the other, but it doesn't mean that it'd be much of a game world even if it looked totally awesome and realistic.

You're chiefly putting emphasis on continuity errors and lore inconsistencies (but I agree that a lack of proper agriculture is an oversight), which aren't exactly the same as world-building either, though I do think they play a role. That said, I didn't say modeling landscapes 'is' world-building, but that they play a part in it, along with Bethesda's method of 'distributing' content and incentivizing the player through non-linearity. As an example, after you're released from the vault in Fallout 3, you're met with a view of the first city in the game, Megaton, and the ruined town of Springfield. When you go to Megaton, there are NPCs that will give you quests that let the player explore a variety of different areas on the map not related to the main quest at all (Tenpenny Tower, Arefu, etc.). This is different from New Vegas, where you start at the edge of the map (rather than in the middle) and if you want to get the big picture, you more or less have to follow a set path eventually while doing some side quests along the way.

That said, there are benefits in New Vegas' way of doing things too, and the game still is very much open-world.

inb4bethshill

Is there anything that proves that they didn't just put in a bunch of random stuff and call it a game world?

It's not a setting they seemed to have taken as seriously as the first game did. Anyway, I've said all I wanted to and can't be bothered to discuss Fallout 3 further for now.

 

[Sunsetspawn]

All this world building talk is skewed by game play opinions seeping into the other areas of your brains. Although a mediocre game, Fallout 3 depicted the post-apocalyptic remains of a patriotic, retro-futuristic society that was deep within a cold war mirroring our own society circa 1960, and it did that shit VERY well. This atmosphere alone made me glad I played through it. I would never replay it because the game play itself just isn't strong enough to warrant it. New Vegas, on the other hand, had a pretty good world, but really didn't achieve the same effect. It ultimately just felt like a western with some future tech and warring nations, not that there's anything wrong with that. As opposed to F3, NV would be worth playing through again because of its superior gameplay.

I think I'll pass, between Oblivion, Fallout 3, and New Vegas, I'm completely burnt out on the genre..

To be fair, Morrowind and Daggerfall aren't in the same genre as the Fallouts, and some would argue that they're not even in the same genre as Oblivion considering Oblivion's shit is all retarded.
And if you liked Oblivion I would assume you'd like Morrowind way more, and if not then you're the reason we can't have nice things

And as for Fallout 4, well, without Obsidian being involved it will probably just be Fallout 3 all over again with better grafix or somesuchshit.

Maybe Wasteland 2's huge pending success teaches these fuckos a lesson.