Fallout 4: The best one in the series

Hi all...I need an opinion. currently, I am playing Fallout 4. I think it's the best one in the series. What do you think? The only problem with the game is to find the bobblehead locations. I can help you to find the fallout 4 bobblehead locations. Hope, it will help you. http://gamenapp.com/fallout-4-bobblehead-locations/

In my opinion Fallout 3 is better than Fallout 4. When I finished Fallout 3 I went buy Fallout 4 and when I played it somehow I didn't liked much.

But it's just my opinion

In order of greatness:

Fallout 3

Fallout 4

Fallout: New Vegas

This except New Vegas is 2nd and 4 is 3rd.

I have not played the older games, but I think both F3 and NW are better than F4. Theyre more challenging and genuinely feel like post apocalypse.

Never played New Vegas, and that's over how much of a mess I found FO3. Oblivion clone in many ways/ and not in good reason, straight-up clunky mechanics, and ugly world couldn't show its colors; that's apparently a good karma system and questline-up.

Never finished the main questline, killed all the Behemoths while exploring the gameplay. Ran into some tunnels that all looked the same, and that's my experience with FO3. If someone found it great? I would like to know how long it took to find that magic. For me it was one of the worse games I've seen Bethesda shove out.

Fallout 4 made some really bad choices as an RPG, but from both a world and mechanical perspective, is much better than FO3. Again, can't speak for NV.

You know, they have some pretty good pmt meds available these days, RMS.

As for F3's magic, I felt it the moment I stepped onto the wasteland. The opening vault was a chore, the childhood stuff, but once you stepped out of that vault and into the post apocalyptic landscape, it was pure magic all the way.

The feeling of freedom: you could go anywhere you liked, and choose to be the bad guy or the good guy. Excellent xp and level up stuff. Loot everywhere. Great locations and characters.

To call the game oblivion clone is the most stupid thing you've ever said on these boards. And that's saying a lot! I mean the game could not be further from Oblivion. Totally different skill and perk sets, to start with.

Only people I know who hate F3 are those graphics who*es. People who only play games with candly looks. Well, they can go (censored) for all I care! F3 is a masterpiece, and its on the top ten list of every hardcore gamer I know. Along with such greats as AC2.

And the best thing about F3 is that it has not aged a bit. I still love it to death, and play it all the time. It rocks.

But hey, theres no accounting for taste. Some have it, you dont. Go figure.

if these boards are anything to go by, that's far from true (hardcore gamers in general).

it got ridiculed for years after release with people complaining it contained very little of the fallout lore from previous games, it was a dumbed down rpg, there was a real lack of consequence for in game decisions etc. new vegas is very much the darling of the hardcore brigade.

i loved f3 so i used to argue otherwise. i preferred it to new vegas, although the mountain of bugs i encountered on nv launch didn't help

@henrythefifth:

You know, they have some pretty good pmt meds available these days, RMS.

Class act as always Henry.

Only people I know who hate F3 are those graphics who*es. People who only play games with candly looks

Yes, yes I'm clearly all about them graphics Ser. From my love of Chrono Trigger, Tetris, Devil May Cry 3, Pac-Man: Championship Edition, and all the way to Disgaea lol.

Considering the list of games you usually praise (Mass Effect: Andromeda, joke of 2017), and stupid comments you make on games you're ignorant on

"At least today sequels are different to the original game. In the old days sequels were always identical. Look at Mario 1-3. Identical."

https://www.gamespot.com/forums/games-discussion-1000000/old-games-beat-modern-games-33404293/

Perhaps take a step back and realise how much a hypocrite you are!

Unlike you, with a number of games, I've tried a few of the Fallout games. Just don't think highly on my experience with FO3. At least I asked if a certain magic helps the experience that I'm missing_

Barely care for graphics (as my list should have hinted) but FO3 is down right ugly to look at, even artistically. Creators intent probably, it's a dead world, but everything being a generic brown and so many reused assets is sore on the eyes. Give me Oblivion and Morrowind any day over Fallout3. Yes, I think Morrowind looks better than FO3, at least artistically.

Well, they can go (censored) for all I care! F3 is a masterpiece, and its on the top ten list of every hardcore gamer I know.

Hit a nerve or something. Didn't realise you developed FO3_

Just so many people listed for that "every" remark, I cannot process the volume. . do these "hardcore gamer"s really exist, or are you trying to stroke your own ego?

I've never stated people can't like FO3, my post was personal experience, but now it's a privilege for the "hardcore" crowd? . . lol, you really are something Henry. Guess I'll go back to my filthy casual games like Monster Hunter. You sure showed me

Along with such greats as AC2

Assuming "AC2" means Assassins Creed 2? I played that game in full, weird start but overall good follow up after a terrible first game, which was shallow and held your hand like an idiot. Now I liked Assassins Creed 2 for what it was, so if you want to call it great that's fine with me. Personally disagree, would call it good. Nothing more.

Regardless as already established it's cool you only like Sandbox games. Don't share your limited taste. And if you realised variety is the spice of life, different people can like different things, and this is fine. However, quality is a factor here regardless on what one enjoys. And I didn't see a lot of it in Fallout 3. Wouldn't be surprised if Bethesda rushed the game to work more on Skyrim.

But hey, theres no accounting for taste. Some have it, you dont. Go figure.

Yes, yes I like bad games. Boo hoo.

Fallout 3 is still ugly and you explained nothing magical that I could consider from my previous post.. A good quest mention or hidden ability may have at least helped what ever case your rant was going for.

Considering how decent ES: Oblivion looked, Bethesda could have done more with Fallout 3's appearance.

@jun_aka_pekto: This is why I'm convinced it was a side project as they worked on The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim.

Sort of like Platinum Games example- TMNT: Mutants in Manhattan over something like Nier: Automata.

Nothing to determine this, all speculation on my end.

see i didn't think f3 looked all that bad. i kinda expected the wasteland to be a desolate place. there were a handful of places that i really liked - megaton, rivet city and little lamplight for example. there was beauty in the ugly, if you looked close enough ;)

it was f4 that i thought looked god awful. my hypothesis was that f4 was a last gen game (similar to what shivering isles was to oblivion - a full game expansion) that didn't quite make it out in time (which is why it came out so early this gen and there was such a short time between its announcement and release), so bethesda bolted on an ultimately pointless base building feature and hoped no-one would notice the last gen graphics / performance.

again all speculation on my part but it just felt off as a game and f3 to f4 wasn't anything like the difference we saw between oblivion and skyrim

@Macutchi:

see i didn't think f3 looked all that bad. i kinda expected the wasteland to be a desolate place. there were a handful of places that i really liked - megaton, rivet city and little lamplight for example. there was beauty in the ugly, if you looked close enough ;)

Hmm, you make a far more convincing argument Mac. Don't think I visited every city. Are they that drastically different? Maybe it was just too much brown for me to notice. I dunno, yet if I only looked at Bethesda games FO3 was about a year after The Shivering Isles. Which was environmentally stunning by comparison.

it was f4 that i thought looked god awful. my hypothesis was that f4 was a last gen game

Don't entirely disagree with this statement. It didn't seem designed for current platforms. I remember going to give Fallout 4 a chance when it turned out id Software had a hand in the shooting mechanics, which drew me in as I waited for D00M IV.

FO4s look wasn't much of a consideration before I dived-in, was just happy to read it handled guns better, for me was a reason to give Fallout another chance.

Fans seemed annoyed it wasn't taking advantage of more powerful hardware, commonly using The Witcher 3 as a graphical level FO4 should be if I remember. And while I will agree FO4 wasn't a very good looking game, if we look at the advance graphical engines games have been showing off during its timeframe, it still had this artistic variety I don't recall seeing in FO3.

But again, didn't really see all FO3 had to offer. Maybe I'd have liked it more if I stuck with it a few hours longer? Yet it got very same'y to me very quickly, didn't look very good, and overall encountered too many reasons not to continue my playthrough.

Only so many times I could enjoy blowing someone's head off into a pile of goo :)

ultimately pointless base building feature and hoped no-one would notice the last gen graphics / performance

That was a pretty pointless, and poorly designed feature wasn't it. To think that was the main selling point of Fallout 4 during e3 >_>

@RSM-HQ: there was a lot of brown tbf ha. and there was definitely a lot of repetition in scenery. but i think perversely that repetition helped accentuate the more unique locations when you did discover them.

for me i was suckered in with the atmosphere from the start, so maybe that helped mask some of the game's shortcomings. having your eyes adjust to the brightness when you first stepped out of the vault and the wasteland suddenly open up before you was a real iconic moment for me. and the realisation that your father was out there somewhere and you were at the start of a long adventure... i really lapped that up. the game gripped me from the off.

it wasn't until i'd finished the game and i began to reflect upon the experience that i started to pick holes in it, but by that point i'd had my fun and the holes couldn't really detract from all the fun i'd had. then all the dlcs began to arrive and with them some great new locations, premises and characters too.

but for me it's a game that i'm glad i played at the time. i've tried to return to it but without much success (on 360). i've still got the pc version knocking about somewhere so if i can find it and mod the hell out of it maybe i'll have another go. probably not though

oh and i didn't know that id software helped with the shooting mechanics of f4. that's interesting. combat was far better in f4 tbf

4 was a much better shooter than 3 or New Vegas, but I liked basically everything else about them significantly better than 4.

From best to worst.

Fallout 2
Fallout 1
Fallout New Vegas
Fallout 3
Fallout 4

I don't see how anyone wouldn't agree with this list if you've played them all.

@Macutchi: Very nice screenshots. I think the first two areas did appear in my playthrough though not from that overview perspective, not sure how you got such a nice view honestly, and was draw distance that good on the 360? or is this a later P.C. update/ mod. The top one surprisingly looks better than I ever remember FO3 looking.

Anyway that last one looks surprisingly colorful. Though based on your description, it's good I never encountered it :P

Fallout 4's story engaged me much more than New Vegas, although 3's story was almost as good. I also found the companions to be better than NV or 3. The side quests in 4 were also really good.

The only thing I truly hated about 4 was the settlements. Didn't find it exciting or fun to build and maintain them.

But, I've only played these three, and Fallout 4 is at the top of my list.

Uh Uh Fallout 3 was the best in the series.

Unlike f4 it was a proper role playing experience. You could choose to be a real scumbag or a great person.

Fallout 3 took a chance with some risky elements - and it was those very things that made it great. Whereas f4 and new vegas were just boring morally grey affairs - it was hard to give a damn about any of the factions or quests because there was no clear cut right/wrong.

I didn't expect FO4 to have cutting edge graphics. But, it did some basic things okay such as more correct colors. I expect a German Shepherd to be brown and black, not green and black. I also expect bare metal to look like bare metal and very distinct from other materials such as concrete. As seen on my FO3 screenshot, pooch, gun, and concrete all have a similar color palette....which to me is ridiculous.

As for the gameplay itself, it was fine enough for me to finish the storyline campaign. I just wished it looked better.

Even though I have sunk about 130 hours in to Fallout 4, I do not think it is better than Fallout 3. Sure the game mechanics are much better, but the story is much weaker. The other problem that I have with Fallout 4 is that it is just too similar to Fallout 3: virtually the exact same enemies and landscapes despite it taking place in a different part of the U.S. For some reason, Fallout 4 never felt like a true sequel, but more of a Fallout 3.5 situation or a spin-off title akin to New Vegas because so much is exactly the same- same weapons, enemies, landscapes, menus, perks, items, etc. Unlike the Elder Scrolls games which reinvent themselves from the ground up with every version, this just feels like Fallout 3 with a few tweaks. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I just wish it was more different than it's predecessor. Still a top notch game though, but if Fallout 3 was a 90+, then Fallout 4 would be an 85+.

Fallout NV is the best by far

I would rank them:

Fallout 2

Fallout 1

Fallout New Vegas

Fallout 4

Fallout 3

The first two games are obviously the best, by a huge margin. New Vegas is great for trying to recapture the feeling of the series, although it was weighed down by Fallout 3's bad engine and gameplay.

Fallout 4...is arguably better than Fallout 3. Bethesda didn't understand the Fallout setting at all when then made Fallout 3 - Washington DC felt a nonsensical post-apocalyptic theme park rather than a society that was rebuilding centuries after the war. Fallout 3 easily had the worst gameplay of the series as well.

With Fallout 4, Bethesda showed a bit of restraint (I was shocked!). They actually included things like farms, small settlements, and warring factions. They put a lot of effort into making the game feel like part of the Fallout world, rather than just a whimsical sandbox.

Still, Fallout 4 was dead boring, and every quest involved "go to this bandit/mutant location and shoot everything". It is a competent but incredibly bland game, so it can't be any higher than 4th on the list.

Fallout 2

Fallout: New Vegas

Fallout

Fallout 3

Fallout 4

Fallout: Tactics (why does everyone forget Tactics? It wasn't that bad...)

That's my ranking. New Vegas beats out Fallout 1 by a little because I loathed the time limit to get the water chip... And because New Vegas with mods is godly. Although playing Fallout 1 is when I experienced my most memorable "choice and consequence" moment in a game to date.

Remember all those awards Fallout 3 got? There were hundreds of GOTY awards from all around the globe, and on top of that, they got Bafta and all sorts of other awards too for their groundbreaking game.

Fallout 3 became the most decorated game from Bethesda. No other Bethesda game has gained so much fame and awards. Fact.

yep, people were really passionate about that game at the time. The main reason why it didn't receive even higher user reviews was due to the technical issues that it had.

With its graphics, the newest Fallout is for sure the best.

New Vegas was my favourite, followed by 4 and then 3

I didnt like Fallout 4, Fallout 1-3 are better.