Ashley from GamersFTW writes: With the much-anticipated Fallout 4 now out, we thought we’d take a look at the 5 franchises that were so good that that we found ourselves completely immersed. We neglected our loved ones and forgot to eat, but it was worth it!
The GTA 5 Agent Trevor DLC episode could have been a real treat for fans on PlayStation and Xbox, before it was scrubbed sometime before 2017.
With the amount of money they generated, I just don’t understand the scrubbing of this. It would’ve been fantastic for fans.
I really want to know who drove the decision to focus on multiplayer was it Rockstar or take two.
Because when online started taking off many of the studio leads began having falling outs and leading including a founder
The RPG has seen an explosion in popularity thanks to Amazon's TV show, but it was Bethesda's most controversial Fallout for a long time.
I loved it. And I platinum'd it. I guess it's like most "divisive" games. If you don't like it, so what? Let those that do, enjoy it.
The article is trying to create fud where there was none. It has an 87 meta (on PS4). There is nothing divisive about it. It was well received. Period. I don't remember any arguments except for some performance issues when it first came out. Thats it.
I really enjoyed Fallout 4.
I loved the halfway goal of what you are building towards. I had a good sense of what it was and then when you finally are almost there the music builds up - beautiful!
@Eonjay Forget the meta scores there are plenty of people who loved Fallout 3 but thought Fallout 4 was a bit of anticlimax and I do get it. Pete Hines the retired head of Bethesda's PR was even asked about it, and his answer was that it was because it simply didn't have the novelty of being brand new that Fallout 3 had.
No venture beyond that so many of the hardcore gatekeep the franchise hard as 4 was far more popular and simplified many of the rpg elements refined shooting to the point where vats was optional the game was far more accessible and sold the most out of every franchise entry to date.
It's my personal favourite I get why people love 3 or NV but I do hate seeing people crap on 4 and the people who like it.
It was a good shooter especially coming from FO3/NV game wise improvements wise but it was a below average RPG and that’s where many felt ROG elements should have been deeper
- Fallout 4's story, characters, dialogue, and quests. They even managed to make the Vaults boring.
- Fallout 76 is Fallout 4 online. Same crap.
- Starfield doubled down on the crappiness of all these aspects despite being a new IP.
People bought and liked all of these games, which sends the message that we want more of this. I don't know about you, but I don't like being treated as a child and my intelligence insulted by developers.
Fallout 4 wasn’t so much divisive as not very good. But there aren’t many first person RPGs so what else are fans of the genre supposed to play?
I think it was the lack of morality gameplay and lack of path to completion options compared to what fallout 3 and New Vegas offered. I think the issue mostly arose because of the voiced protagonist and how many lines of dialogue that needed to be recorded. Didn’t leave for many options beyond “good” “sarcastic douche” and the odd question or two for nearly every interaction. Personally I thought the game was fantastic as an adventure and exploration game, I liked the park system and base building, but the rpg aspects were fairly gutted. It made shooting much more tolerable too but it still wasn’t anything fantastic. The faction choices were ok and I felt like they all provided a more grey moral choice dilemma compared to older games which felt more good/evil but it wasn’t presented as such as prominently as I would’ve liked. You had to do some more internal and critical thinking of your own to come to decide why you’d support one faction over another unless you were in it just for some in game benefit or another.
I didn't like any of the factions, so when it got to the point that I had to choose, I chose to stop playing
I finished the game but you are correct. I was thinking I don’t really know which one to pick as I don’t really care for any of them. I was near the Institute so I just went with that quest line. A lame way to choose who will win but I didn’t really prefer one over the others
I don't think FNV was good/evil. You have evil with Caesar's Legion, then everything else is different shades of grey imo and quite relative to your own political views! 😅
1 Bad writing, the main quest is terrible. The sense of urgency of the story is at odds with the open world nature of the game
2 Boring, bland factions
3 too much personality for the main character. The game decides that you're married, that you love your son, your voice... a rpg like fallout should have a blank slate mc
4 dead open world. Fallout 3 and nv have a bunch of small cities and locations on their maps that give you interesting quests and dialogue. In Fallout 4 it feels like 80 per cent of the map is focused on combat and environmental storytelling, it feels more like a post apocalyptic action game rather than a dialogue heavy rpg
Fallout 4 is a very fun open world fps with really cool environmental storytelling but a very poor rpg
Bethesda's post-apocalyptic RPG remains an unabashed classic, more than a decade and a half on from its launch.
For me its the fact that I could put hundreds of hours into it and still find areas I missed in my earlier runs. It was also my first FO and despite what I had to put up with at times such as overall crashs and killing my orginal PS3 with the YLOD it's still my favorite entry to this day.
Tons of reasons
But my silly little one…hunting for unique weapons and armour
Something Fallout 4 just didn’t really have as much because they replaced most of it with randomly generated customised weapons. Even Elder Scrolla doesn't do it as well.
I remember during my first playthrough of Fallout 4 back in 2015 I somehow got an automatic combat rifle that shot explosive rounds by defeating a legendary creature. Unfortunately that was the only playthrough I ever got that weapon. It's a shame because it was absolutely epic!
Sense of exploration. That was why older Bethesda games were so good. They might have had glitches, broken mechanics, meh visuals, etc., but they were some of the best around when it came down to the sense of exploration. You could go wherever you wanted and you would find something cool; it might have been a faction, a weapon, an enemy and much more. And that is what they are lacking now. Skyrim still had a lot of that, but Fallout 4 dropped it by focusing on an interconnected world and more randomly generated rewards. Fallout 76 just kept that trend and added multiplayer, and Starfield went even further in killing it by creating a whole universe with parts completely isolated from each other.
I think the retrospective of Fallout: New Vegas' existence has somewhat diminished the view of Fallout 3 in the eyes of many, but it getting out of the vault in Fallout 3 was, for me, the most remarkable experience I've had in a videogame.
I was 12 when it came out, and I remember I just saw the score it got in Gamemaster magazine (remember those!? 😅), and I just went to the shop and bought it with my pocket money.
Not knowing anything about the game, I thought the whole thing was going to be about growing up in a vault, especially given that I'd spent about 2 hours in it....I literally could.not.believe it when you got out and it was just this wasteland on every direction. Amazing.
Probably because these Bethesda games were hand crafted so that exploration meant something. Unlike Starfield where this sense of exploration is replaced with the illusion of scope and procedurally generated worlds. A player can always appreciate when they wonder into an unforgettable new encounter by accident or stumble across a new questline that becomes their favourite. Just like a player can always tell when they're ploughing through filler on auto pilot, that they'll forget the moment some resource numbers go up and nothing worth remembering occurred.
I mean, in Fallout 3 you could nuke an entire town as a SIDE QUEST. In The Elder Scrolls Oblivion and Skyrim, the Dark Brotherhood questlines were my favourite in any RPGs and you could completely avoid them if you didn't care for them. In The Witcher 3 side quests take you on ridiculously dark and mysterious storylines that are some of the best I've played in RPG history. There's a reason why people still talk about KOTOR to this day. Difference between a developer creating something or just padding a game world with stuff.
There were some side quests that could yld have been developed into an entirely separate game. Some great writing there.
The Elder Scrolls is always a world I get lost in, although the online version was terrible.
Oooo that is a good list. I literally can't decide!!!
The thought of getting lost in Yharnham makes my skin crawl
I agree with Elder Scroll and Fallout, not so much with GTA V. GTA V had some interesting things to do, but it felt short. Considering I stopped playing after a month, San Andreas on the other hand had me playing for a year almost. GTA V needs more story, less online.