Ridiculous moments in Fallout 4

Discussion in 'Fallout 4' started by The Dutch Ghost, Nov 15, 2015.

  1. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    I don't know, maybe you are right. But I love to also believe that Fallout New Vegas has shown that even the casual market, can take depth. At least as far as role playing goes. A tight and well done narrative doesn't have to be super complex though. Just well writen. But some depth here and there, can't hurt either. Complexity can come with player interaction, motivations. Like Benny or House, simply because they give you many ways to interact with them. You can kill Benny, you can help him escape, you can let Ceasar kill him. And there are many more nuances between that, Like if you chose the Black Widow perk as female.

    And you have many options with House, Ceasar, the Legion and the many other NPCs and factions. This gives the game really a lot of depth. But the best part is, it's all optional.

    I like to think that if Obsidian had the resources, time and marketing of Bethesda, they could have sold as many copies with Vegas like Fallout 3. And they would be now selling Fallout 4. As a true role playing game.
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2016
    • [Like] [Like] x 4
  2. ZigzagPX4

    ZigzagPX4 The Swiftness of the Ranger

    Nov 22, 2015
    New Vegas uses a different tactic entirely. For the people who don't want depth, the surface of the game is already good. For the people who do want depth in storytelling and roleplaying, that also exists. Fallout 3, in contrast, has a more appealing surface, but doesn't go much deeper than the surface.

    To try and do what New Vegas did, they would probably need more development time. Fallout 3 was already made, which demonstrated the capabilities of the engine. This allowed Obsidian to focus more on the gameplay and story than on the engine itself.

    And there's another point to consider - like I said, Bethesda is playing into being a mainstream game with all the rest. Can you think of anything in New Vegas that would seem excessively political or satirical? Anything that would alienate the new audience, whose primary games would likely be Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed?

    Considering how all previous Fallouts were designed to be satirical of Cold War politics somewhat, I think that there's plenty of bits and pieces that would push away Bethesda's target audience. And since Bethesda is playing "no risks allowed" with the series, I'm certain they'll restrict going into themes like that. If Obsidian does get their hands in a spin-off it will be more limited in themes than New Vegas was for sure, because Fallout went even more mainstream with 4 and Bethesda now has a large audience they don't want to push away.

    Simply put, is New Vegas going to offend people at all, whatsoever? People found a lot of intense political context in Fallout 4 alone, which barely had any setting depth to it. I think that's going to be a big factor for how Bethesda goes forward.
  3. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    Why would you have to offend people to be enjoyable? All I am saying is, a game can offer depth and a great story, and still be sold to the masses.
  4. ZigzagPX4

    ZigzagPX4 The Swiftness of the Ranger

    Nov 22, 2015

    Well, you don't have to offend people. But people will get offended all by themselves. You could have a depth and a solid plot, but you still aren't going to get the same experience as you did with New Vegas. Things in NV that would detract from a mainstream experience alone - slow pacing at the start of the story, freedom of paths leading to places you can't get past (Sloan's deathclaws alone would be detrimental already), the NCR as a whole (politics annoy the people who wants to relax with a game without politics), the entire reputation system (and consequences as whole).

    Simply put, the game cannot take the player out of their comfort zone. Anything that has even a slight chance of making players tell their friends it has something a little annoying, or making players not come back for DLC, is out of Bethesda's list. Let me put it this way. If Bethesda thinks the game has any risk of being hard or politically incorrect, it has to be completely redesigned. This is what corporations do when they have a popular yet risky intellectual property. Especially with the 2010s and all the close cultural criticism of media and entertainment, and also with modern gaming and the casual audience being the biggest.

    Fallout is currently the Star Wars of video games. One wrong move and they could end up with controversy, because all eyes are on it and now it has a massive following. I know that a game with good writing and depth can be sold to the masses, I'm just saying Bethesda is not going with that approach, and with Fallout this popular now they never will.

    "Do people get that easily offended by a video game?" YES! "Is that going to affect sales?" Of course!

    Literally every idea I've seen on NMA would be a risky pitch to company higher-ups, because it wouldn't appeal to everyone. If we're going to come up with a suggestion that Bethesda will take seriously, better start thinking like a business predictive analyst and not like a gamer.
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2016
  5. Mr Fish

    Mr Fish Snug Rubber

    Sep 11, 2010
    By gamers for gamers.
    Interplay's old motto.
    I like that.
    I guess Bethesda decided to streamline it into by business predictive analysts for the unwashed masses.
    • [Like] [Like] x 1
  6. Dr Fallout

    Dr Fallout Centurion

    Aug 17, 2015
    Oh I wouldn't say unwashed, more like for the FPS crowd, which gets bigger and bigger.
  7. Immortalkickass

    Immortalkickass First time out of the vault

    Dec 4, 2015
    Whats ridiculous is that Bethesda can regress from their own standards, like in the case of crime in FO4. I noticed many items that should be owned but are not, items that are stolen not marked as stolen (and can be sold to any vendor), personal terminals accessible by anyone and not a crime to use (most obv being Prydwen), and trespassing is met instantly by violence (by female scientists in my case, since i trespassed the Science! centre in Diamond city).

    Skyrim wasn't like this. How can they not learn from their own products? Its freaking ridiculous to be able to steal the Fatman near KLEO and sell it back to the robot.
  8. ZigzagPX4

    ZigzagPX4 The Swiftness of the Ranger

    Nov 22, 2015
    I think their entire development team is just disorganised and overworked, which is why they were so keen to get Fallout 4 out. They need the money to set up their new subsidiaries, Bethesda Montreal I mean seriously just look at that name. I guess they're going for expanding Bethesda Softworks.

    Anyways, it looks like they're probably heading the way of the Ubisoft - same thing again and again, with average quality control. But that's better than the way of the EA, I guess. I mean, Assassin's Creed Syndicate was pretty good IMO, so even if they decide to go with "mass expansion, time for one Fallout every year" and pump basically the same thing out every year, it will still have quality to it because now they have the resources, manpower and organisation to make sure it doesn't come out a mess.
  9. Dr Fallout

    Dr Fallout Centurion

    Aug 17, 2015
    Oh I kind of think it's going to be a mess. I mean, let's look at it this way, game made by around six people has less bugs then a game made by twenty or more.
  10. Yemsral

    Yemsral First time out of the vault

    Jan 19, 2016
    En, he seemed to understand his possess everything.
  11. ZigzagPX4

    ZigzagPX4 The Swiftness of the Ranger

    Nov 22, 2015
    Boosting back up a thread that's probably supposed to fade away, but I really enjoyed this little show:

    It makes me wonder. Was Fallout 4 originally supposed to have companions that could geniunely die in battle? It would add to my theory that Fallout 4 was a perfectly adequate sequel to Fallout 3 and somewhere along the way the big corporate decision told them to change everything, and they had to do it, which completely ruined the entire development.

    Though a perfectly adequate sequel to Fallout 3 would still be a poorly-written bad Fallout game, it would still be better than whatever congealed mess we got instead.