Fallout 76 reviews are in(Yes, it's awful)

@R4gn4r0k: Civilization as well, but yeah, it's not a super represented group in current gaming

I think time will prove bethesda right. FO76 is an endless cash cow. Fallout 4 cash ends after the initial purchase.

Doubt it, doubt they'll be many people playing this in a month or two.

If people stick around to play destiny 2 and the division and rainbow six siege and no man's sky, then fallout will have no problem keeping players around.

Gamers always say one thing online, then do something else entirely different in the privacy of their own homes.

COD? Who plays that trash!!!

50 million copies sold later.

@commander: Ryse MP is 2 player co-op arena fighting. Fight waves of enemies and also some scenarios thrown in like saving civilians from cages, protecting objectives.

Its not deep but has some depth with earning clothing, shields, n weapons. The combat is fun and you can pull dual kills with partner. My fav. Is taunting the crowd , which helps build up a rage meter for special(which you choose from one of the gods you fight under before going in).

and ESO should have been more like Elder Scrolls. something more like Darkfall was...but nope

Those games actually have something to do apart from NMS no idea how many still play that rubbish doubt it's that many, what does this trash have to keep people playing?

Well, survival, base building, leveling up, looting, exploring the huge map, the quests, the nukes, it seems pretty endless. As endless as skyrim and fallout usually are. I spent hours walking around in skyrim, never needing to interact with npcs to feel fulfilled, looting caves, etc etc.

Ok, they are pretty present in strategy games :D

I remember there was a mod for Age of Mythology that was adding the Romans, but it never got finished.

The developers also worked on including the Romans in Age of Empires: Online; But Microsoft halted development on that game.

@R4gn4r0k: I feel like there should be an immersive, mature 1st person RPG in Rome. Like, something with a lot of the good qualities from Vampire the Masquerade Bloodlines

Bethesda has gotten so lazy and greedy.

Fallout 76 is a straight-up half-assed cash-grab where they didn't give two f**ks. They had already gotten real lazy with Fallout 4 but it wasn't nearly this bad.

Kingdom Come Deliverance showed that a historical RPG can totally work, without going overboard with fantasy or action.

I think something like that could totally work in ancient Roman times.

What's the bets on the next Assassin's Creed setting?

They've done polls on Japan and some other locations.

AC has already been in Rome, haha :D

Rome was involved in with Origins and AC 2 is set in the renaissance, so that's not exactly the same thing as setting a game around the Roman Empire. It would also fit with a progression on from Odyssey. I'm not going to drop in any spoilers here but if you've played it through you'll have a good idea why Japan would need to be further down the line, if they are going the way I think they are with the series (don't delete your last saved game).

Anyway on topic, Fallout 76 looks and sounds really bad! :)

I was originally planning on skipping this but got asked to review it + review code, and after playing to level 20, I feel like i'm not playing the same game everyone else is.

I keep hearing about all these "technical issues" but i've had less bugs in 76 than in Fallout 4 or Skyrim, and it runs fine for me. One crash and a couple infinite loading screens on the first day and thats it.

I don't miss NPCs at all. the NPCs were terrible in Fallout 4. badly written, badly animated, just super buggy and immersion breaking and not interesting to talk to.

I can comfortably say, i'm enjoying this about as much as FO4 which I liked but didn't love. I like 76 as well, imo its a decent game but not a great one. It has its issues for sure but i'd say those issues aren't any more severe than past Bethesda games which people loved for some reason. The map is big and varied and really fun to explore and that is always the main thing I look for in Bethesda studios games. I think their mistake was branding this as a full Fallout game instead of like a stand-alone multiplayer expansion to FO4, because that is what it feels like.

this is definitely a case of another runaway internet hatred bandwagon that isn't entirely based in reality

trash game is trash users say its a friggin 2.5 you know you suck

True, AC: Origins did have a part set in Rome. Same with AC2

And AC: Brotherhood was set entirely in Rome.

How can you release a game like this with zero NPCs and so many bugs lmao. Also it looks last gen.

Straight up like some alpha leak not a real game.

AC 2: Brotherhood was set in renaissance Rome, separated by more than a thousand years from the Roman Empire. That's a very, very different place and time.

Knowing what Ubisoft are like though they'll likely completely disregard the seeds they have sown in Odyssey though and go somewhere completely different altogether. I'm was surprised they managed to keep Desmond's story going through three core games and two expansions.

I am ok with the zero NPC story.

What got me from hearing things is that any base you build disappears after you log out, that is stupid

Gamers hated npcs in fallout 4, now they miss them. Gamers hated cod single player, now they miss it and claim that's all they played.

Either the internet is full of liars or....maybe it is full of liars.

Game is a lot of fun. Better than I expected it to be.

Well, I love it.

it makes a lot of sense for technical reasons

since the game loads you into a random server when you join, it wouldn't be possible to have your base present on every server.

even if you were able to keep joining the same server, different players joining/leaving would result in a ever-increasing amount of bases on any given server that would causer performance problems over time. players would get attached to individual servers for their base, and then you would be in a situation where you couldn't play the game because the server your base on is full.

your base reappears as soon as you log back into a server so there is no real impact from a user perspective

their solution is kinda brilliant honestly. though i'm not sure what happens if two players have bases in the same place and load into the same server.

your base does NOT reappear after login

I play building games all the time, nearly all of them have a multiplayer feature.

this is the first time I have ever heard of a building feature in which the building disappears when you logout. that is stupid, there is not any point in building a base at that point.

literally

the ONLY game I have EVER heard of that does that

so how does it 'technically make sense' for the ONLY game I have EVER seen to do that 'make sense' again?

EDIT: no I take it back I have heard of one other, its called Out of Reach, all others (even the multiplayers and yes even MMOs) allow you to keep your buildings after logout

I think most of the hate is coming from people who either haven't played it and have just watched the various youtube videos making it out to be the worst game ever, or only briefly tried the beta (and the game doesn't make the best first impression).

I went in expecting to not like the game at all, but honestly its fine. IMO it has mostly the same strengths as Fallout 4, but different weaknesses.

I feel like according to the internet, there is no possibility of a game just being average - decent. it either has to be the OMGZ BEST GAME EVER or TOTAL TRASH COMPLETE GARBAGE 0/10

yes it does. it disappears when you log out, then it reappears when you log back in.

its a good system

not what I heard from a source I trust.

he logged back in and his base was GONE!

but if you are right then yeah that is fine but I dont think you are correct

https://www.gamerevolution.com/guides/457651-fallout-76-camp-disappeared-gone-how-get-back-find

Players who reported that their Fallout 76 camp disappeared quickly realized that the disappearance tended to occur after logging out of Fallout 76. Apparently, when you log out your camp can disappear due to the fact that so many other players are setting up camps in the exact same area

that sounds like a bug he must have run into. I've heard about this happening to other people but I haven't experienced it. when I log in, my base is still there.

you can also move your base and unpack it at a new location pretty easily.

i read its happening when you log out and someone places a base in your same location.

The movable base feature you mentioned is going to make persistence a problem. How Wurm solves the 'many people making bases problem' is golden but to be fair that system the base is not movable.

ok well fair enough, I understand why they had to do it that way for the moveable feature, and it sounds like your base is not really 'gone' in a building traditional sense of the word but rather 'packaged'

@i_p_daily: that jist mean you lile bad games.

I'd believe that. I put put my bases up in the mountains so there is a pretty low chance of someone building in exactly the same spot.

you have this sort of central base piece where everything you previously built gets 'stored' and you can move this central piece and unpack the base at any time. you can even save blueprints for structures made up of multiple pieces and put them back up easily.

'packaged' is the right word for it

fair enough, consider my remarks retracted :)

@with_teeth26: So true. An average youtube review won’t get as many clicks. It’s metal gear survive all over again.

Game could've been a Mod for Fallout 4, but, hey, it's a company wanting money.

That jist means I have my own opinion, it also means you lile bad spelling lol.

No its arena MP, 2 (human players) vs AI, and the levels have traps throughout, most of the levels were ok, and a couple were really good. Sorry can't remember the names of the really good maps as its been 2yrs+ since I played it.

The only fact here is that you made that judgement from watching videos. Maybe live by your username and tryit.

It is BY FAR the worst game I have played in years. I honestly do not know what they were thinking.

I was hoping it might be the other way round. Now that plenty of reputable sources have given it a low score - what's stopping more from doing the same?

Sounds to me like you are playing the same game as everyone else.

It's a Bethesda game so of course it's awful

It probably wouldn't have been panned so bad if they didn't charge 60 dollars for a 30 dollar experience with microtransactions.

And yet Lemmings watch video's of Sony games and pass judgement on them....... pot calling the kettle black,

Pretty much every Bethesda game released all the way back to Arena/Dagger have been a buggy mess, they should all have been cheaper/panned.

All of a sudden people are outraged? Welcome to earth.

Ah, spoken with tears and jealousy...... So there's that.

30 dollar experience? Given the poor quality and the microtransactions, this should be F2P. And even then I probably wouldn't waste my time with it with so many better games to play.

@i_p_daily: dude. You like a game meant to be play with motion controls that could not get animation right for the simplest body parts. You just like bad games.