Good, bad, totally rad? Tell me about it.
It's a serviceable ARPG/ open world game and nothing more.
Not the mega hype game places like GameSpot claimed it to be. However the shooting is better than FO3 and artistically it's not just muddy brown textures. Quest system/ structure is very copy_paste from 2011's Skyrim which has some replayability. Also expands on the Hearthfire DLC's clunky building management. Now for a whole base.
Major downside is the conversation-wheel and most the buildings are locked. So the 'open-world' is heavily smoke and mirrors compared to Bethesda's past offerings.
As such depending who you ask it's either Bethesda's first failing pre- FO76/ TES: Blades, or a moderate follow-up to FO3.
Personally consider FO4 a 6.5/10, a fun game, but it's nothing special.
I'd recommend The Outer Wilds or Valheim over it, for that open world/ exploration fix.
Fell somewhere between Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas; had the potential to be better than New Vegas but ultimately was not.
It was ok I guess but really forgettable.
Yeah, this is how I felt. It came and went.
I enjoyed it. It's not the greatest Fallout but it's not like there's any real competition in the genre.
Shooting was improved but that did little for me as I really enjoy the VATS system and I'm generally of the opinion that as games become more about action they tend to become lesser and shallower experiences.
Didn't live up to the hype. Just average, or perhaps slightly better than average.
They pretty much handed everything to the player in the first 30 minutes of the game - spoiling the progressive feel that rpgs generally have.
Far too much emphasis on collecting stuff and they took away weapon/armor degradation which only served to make inventory management more tedious.
The speech from npcs seemed kind of distant/muffled which lowered interest/immersion. And then there was the story which was not only absurd but rather tedious and unfun.
And generally it was just a shooting simulator with much less choice and player agency than what Fallout 3 had.
Even the dialogue options where limited compared to its predecessor.
It was OK but I still prefer New Vegas over Fallout 4 when it comes to RPG elements. Building and crafting system were cool and I enjoyed everything to the fullest and sunk 300 hours into it. But never came back to play it once more. One playthrough was more than enough for me.
It's absolutely awesome. Really, really enjoyed it. It was my introduction to the Fallout series, glad it came along. It has some issues, sure, but it's just enjoyable on a whole.
I had a fun time grinding and building up my base for I would say 24 hours of play time. Then I did more main missions and I hated the fact you needed to use the mech suit to complete the missions, right? I assumed you needed to use the suit for the rest of the game so I quit the game.
I haven’t played all the Fallouts but I thought New Vegas was awesome and it is my favourite one. Pretty much everything about New Vegas was great in my opinion.
I had a fun time grinding and building up my base for I would say 24 hours of play time. Then I did more main missions and I hated the fact you needed to use the mech suit to complete the missions, right? I assumed you needed to use the suit for the rest of the game so I quit the game.
I haven’t played all the Fallouts but I thought New Vegas was awesome and it is my favourite one. Pretty much everything about New Vegas was great in my opinion.
No. I only used the suit for one or two missions, I recall. But I would say 90% of my playthrough was w/o the suit.
I had a great time with it even though I think it's one of Bethesda's weaker RPGs. Gunplay was fun and an improvement over previous Fallout games, didn't really care for or use the base building feature. Also not a huge fan of the voiced protagonist and dialogue wheel, as well as the randomly generated settlement quests.
What I love about Bethesda games though is the exploration and discovering details and little stories all over the world. And Fallout 4 offers that aplenty.
What I enjoyed about FO4:
What I did not like about FO4:
Bethesda pretty much failed with every single part of this game outside of the game play. I put 400 hours into a few play throughs of FO4 and explored the whole map, but I never actually finished the main story. So, with all that said, I'd still recommend it if you just want a fun game loop of explore, kill, loot, craft, repeat.
I couldn't get into it and I've tried it like 3 times. I always quit at like the 2-3 hour mark. It was my first Fallout game so I went into it with really high expectations but it didn't meet them. My main complaint is the radiation system. It makes me do dumb shit like having to find a way around this giant lake because I'll die if I swim in it. I'm not used to having those types of restrictions in my open world games.
My main complaint is the radiation system. It makes me do dumb shit like having to find a way around this giant lake because I'll die if I swim in it. I'm not used to having those types of restrictions in my open world games.
You get a set of power armor early-on in a story quest that can walk through the radiation lakes, and other areas with heavy radiation, it requires charge items to use after extensive use. However makes those trips more manageable.
I couldn't get into it and I've tried it like 3 times. I always quit at like the 2-3 hour mark. It was my first Fallout game so I went into it with really high expectations but it didn't meet them. My main complaint is the radiation system. It makes me do dumb shit like having to find a way around this giant lake because I'll die if I swim in it. I'm not used to having those types of restrictions in my open world games.
I had the opposite experience. It was my first Fallout game, but were some reason my expectations were relatively low. Maybe this allowed me to enjoy the game more, I dunno, but I really had a blast w/ it.
@RSM-HQ: That's good to know. I will return eventually to try to play it again. After all of the fun I had with Skyrim I know that Bethesda are good developers and the game clearly has potential.
@RSM-HQ: That's good to know. I will return eventually to try to play it again. After all of the fun I had with Skyrim I know that Bethesda are good developers and the game clearly has potential.
I understand that but Bethesda's Fall Out was always in the shadow of TES.
Hmm, I'd personally recommend Morrowind. I've read some people use the Rebirth Mod, but personally Overhaul 3.0 is smoother and provides more options. I think very highly of the Overhaul mod bringing the game up to modern standards, expected from Oblivion and Skyrim.
I made a thread about a spiritual successor to The Elder Scrolls series call The Wayward Realms, that I'm keeping a close eye on, I'm hoping that's a great game because I personally don't have faith in Bethesda Studios anymore.
It was ok I guess but really forgettable.
yep forgettable is the word.
didn't feel like a true sequel to me, more fallout 3.5. oblivion to skyrim felt like a significant enough evolution to be deemed sequel worthy. f4 felt more like a shivering isles type expansion. cynic in me suspects it may have been a large expansion planned for the end of the 360/ps3 gen, missed the cut through maybe development issues or something, so they tacked on a base building feature, called it f4 and launched it early last gen. i still rebought it for the goty edition though, so wasn't terrible, just forgettable. that and fallout 76 is why im not getting too hyped for starfield, bethesda have a lot to prove
My favorite parts of Fallout are exploring the vaults and discovering their stories. I think 4's are pretty boring.
I do really like the first half of the story until it splits into pick-a-faction and play it out. Most of the options and what happened I thought was pretty interesting. But as above said the dialogue is boring.
Shooting is much better.
I really wasn't into the crafting of base building, but luckily you don't really have to do much of it.
Good but ultimately forgettable. I'm not a big fan of the combat improvements, would rather have them pushing the player towards the VATS system.
It's a serviceable ARPG/ open world game and nothing more.
Not the mega hype game places like GameSpot claimed it to be. However the shooting is better than FO3 and artistically it's not just muddy brown textures. Quest system/ structure is very copy_paste from 2011's Skyrim which has some replayability. Also expands on the Hearthfire DLC's clunky building management. Now for a whole base.
Major downside is the conversation-wheel and most the buildings are locked. So the 'open-world' is heavily smoke and mirrors compared to Bethesda's past offerings.
As such depending who you ask it's either Bethesda's first failing pre- FO76/ TES: Blades, or a moderate follow-up to FO3.
Personally consider FO4 a 6.5/10, a fun game, but it's nothing special.
I'd recommend The Outer Wilds or Valheim over it, for that open world/ exploration fix.
Well explained. The game just didn't live up to the hype and expectations. I enjoyed my time with it nevertheless. Kept me busy for a couple hundred hours. But I have never had a urge to replay it again.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment