I want to cry over what Bethesda has turned this franchise into

[Blastwave Dave]

I think you mean perk tree since Fallout 4 doesn't have skills.

It's hilarious because they just made perks do what skills do rather than anything interesting.

 

[Mr Fish]

I think you mean perk tree since Fallout 4 doesn't have skills.

There is a mod to add in skills into Fallout 4: https://www.nexusmods.com/fallout4/mods/28222
I used it once but I can't remember how well it worked as I was messing around more with uh... 'other mods'...

 

[xaleromy]

I'm very upset that Fallout will forever be remembered by the general public as :MARKETABLE: :BRIGHT COLOURS: :NUKA COLA: OG: :RUN DOWN SHANTY TOWN:

This art is what Bethesda fans think when they hear Fallout (No shade to these artists, the art they make is great but I'm making a point):

Spoiler: Bethesda's Fallout

It seems like people only view the classic games as lore, New Vegas is just a spinoff only good for cool armour. And according to this video (again no shade intended), they think that the only people who like New Vegas (Classics were maybe implied) are hopping on a bandwagon or something. Tactics and PoS are one in the same and should be condemned to hell.

It's genuinely upsetting to me. In an Instagram comment section I said I disliked FO4 because it's not an RPG. I got ratio'd by someone saying "Go play an RPG then", as if they didn't realize Fallout is an RPG series. I feel like Fallout proper only lives in the heads of people on classic forums like this one.

I'm starting to think a proper Fallout game will never be made again. Bethesda doesn't care about Fallout. Look at how much effort they put into Skyrim, dual wielding, magic, mounts, transformations, etc. In Fallout 4 you can make a settlement and a robot but there isn't much else that's interesting. Starfield even looks promising, proper RPG elements for the first time under Todd Howard and Pete Hines' management.

Am I growing old and weary? Am I too pessimistic? How does anybody feel about this?

Actually I discovered the whole series thanks to Fallout 4. Since I bought it, it immediately became my favourite game and it is probably the game I have most hours on.

A month ago I decided to finally play the first games (fo1 and 2) and I have to admit that they are on a way different level. No hate on fo4 though, it has less RPG characteristics but surely more longevity being an open world and having many more places to explore (and settlements to build).

So yeah, I feel like you're not wrong being that pessimistic, but I have some hope. I believe they'll make a game like fallout 4 in terms of location and mechanics, but with more RPG characteristics on the player build and maybe a story with REAL different endings and not a linear main quest.

 

[Mr Fish]

Actually I discovered the whole series thanks to Fallout 4. Since I bought it, it immediately became my favourite game and it is probably the game I have most hours on.

A month ago I decided to finally play the first games (fo1 and 2) and I have to admit that they are on a way different level. No hate on fo4 though, it has less RPG characteristics but surely more longevity being an open world and having many more places to explore (and settlements to build).

So yeah, I feel like you're not wrong being that pessimistic, but I have some hope. I believe they'll make a game like fallout 4 in terms of location and mechanics, but with more RPG characteristics on the player build and maybe a story with REAL different endings and not a linear main quest.

To me it doesn't matter if they made Fallout 5 extremely RPG-esque as it would still be built on the lore that I refuse to consider canon from 3, 4, and 76. Fallout's main series is literally not salvageable to me. They'd have to omit all of their entries from the canon and basically reboot the series from Fallout 2 onwards and that's not ever going to happen. The other alternative is an "alternate timeline" handled by a smaller studio (for an isometric cRPG series) that deviates from Fallout 2 into its own lore that doesn't contradict previous lore. That could happen but I've been waiting for that to happen for 15 years and I'm not holding my breath.

Once you've ruined lore it can't be undone (through retcons for example) without causing even more lore issues. I can't get invested in a story or world that I know is wrong and that is lying to me. At that point the series is just dead to me.

However, as a game on its own merits Fallout 4 is pretty fun to just goof around in. Mods especially help wonders.
I might just buy Fallout 5 depending on its porn mods. >..>

 

[Norzan]

This is why i hate when some dumbasses come crying "lel who cares about lore?" because they fail to realize that some people can't enjoy something that doesn't have internal consistency. You can make up your own world completely divorced from real world rules, but all you have to do to make people take it seriously is to have consistent, established rules and respect them when you are writing for said rules.

Bethesda just doesn't give a shit and retcons everything whenever they feel like it. That's why we got dumb shit in 76 where they have a freaking satellite to communicate long distances where in Fallout 1 they didn't have it because it's not mentioned.

I'm also not interested in exploring worlds with mostly one-and-done bad locations like in most Bethesda worlds, locations you enter, do like a bad quest, shooting people up, loot and leave. Fallout 4 is littered with this crap.

 

[PaxVenire]

They'd have to omit all of their entries from the canon and basically reboot the series from Fallout 2 onwards and that's not ever going to happen.

From this I presume you don’t accept New Vegas either?

Actually I discovered the whole series thanks to Fallout 4. Since I bought it, it immediately became my favourite game and it is probably the game I have most hours on.

I discovered the series through Fallout 3 when it came out and it was my favorite game of all time for the longest time. I had no interest in playing the originals, and I didn’t like New Vegas for a long time until I snapped myself out of my stubbornness and played Fallout 1 when I got my first computer. Took me some time to adjust to the 90s style CRPG, but I fell in love with the original and then by proxy, F2 and FNV (and later on with CRPGs in general). After playing F3 again, I really started to see the flaws in the game, especially in the writing. The originals really changed my whole outlook, not just with Fallout 3, but with RPGs and to a degree video games as a whole. It woke me up essentially.

No hate on fo4 though, it has less RPG characteristics but surely more longevity being an open world and having many more places to explore (and settlements to build).

I’d have to heavily disagree with this. Fallout 4 has absolutely no longevity. Once you’ve explored the world once and finished the linear story, you’ve really seen it all, this goes for most Bethesda RPGs. And just because you can infinitely do Preston Garvey’s bidding or build the settlements Bethesda was too lazy to build themselves, doesn’t mean it makes up for the shallowness that is the rest of the world and game.

I believe they'll make a game like fallout 4 in terms of location and mechanics, but with more RPG characteristics on the player build and maybe a story with REAL different endings and not a linear main quest.

Fallout is nothing more to Bethesda than a means of income, as with all their IPs now. That’s why every game is so watered down. Their senior asshole of marketing Pete Hines has repeatedly said they don’t care about lore or making the world even make sense in a game about “shooting mutants”, Todd Howard cares more about building settlements and making funny guns to kill raiders with than choice and consequence in a world trying to rebuild itself after a nuclear holocaust, and their lead writer Emil Pagliarulo… well I’ll just leave this here:


I’m not even trying to be mean when I say this, but don’t expect Bethesda to make anything even similar to an RPG in the future. Even with all those people named above gone, we’ll still get shit. This is highly evidenced by the state of Fallout 76 right now which is an entirely different development studio than Bethesda’s Maryland studio which has all the main clowns working on Starflop.

 

[Norzan]

It's pretty funny hearing Todd in interviews saying Starfield has "hardcore rpg elements" when he's talking about stuff that existed in RPGs since the 80s. It just goes to show that they consider even the most rudimentary of RPG elements to be "hardcore" and thus can be dropped when they want to sell a game to the lowest common denominator.

 

[PaxVenire]

Precisely. The so-called "hardcore RPG elements" we know of so far consists of a non-voiced protagonist, a skills system, and more than 4 dialogue options. Mind you, we also have confirmation from that very same interview that the skills system in Starfield is essentially a copy/paste of how skills work in Skyrim so...

But hey, 1 bajillion planets to discover, right? Surely those are hand crafted hub worlds with purpose and depth and not procedurally generated wastelands that will somehow look more desolate and appropriate for a Fallout game than Boston did in Fallout 4.

 

[Mr Fish]

From this I presume you don’t accept New Vegas either?

I'm fine with considering the writing of FNV to be canon, ignoring some gameplay things like feral ghouls being able to sprint faster and hit harder than an adult fit normal human can. However, I like Van Buren more than I like FNV. So if a TC mod of Van Buren ever gets finished I'll probably ditch FNV. I'll have fun with FNV but if VB ever steps through the door I'm breaking up with FNV.

I can't expect a series to be 100% consistent all the time. There are compromises you have to make. FNV is the most of a compromise I could ever allow for a Fallout game.

Thing about FNV is that I can't stand playing the game. I like the writing, characters, factions, locations, lore and all but I find the gameplay to be such a drag that I can't enjoy the game anymore.

OWB on the other hand is completely non canon to me. I hate that DLC.

[edit]

Also a big reason for why I wanna go back to 2 rather than FNV is because of a lot more things. Such as the prewar artstyle, culture, architecture, the way the world was designed with map nodes and all. There's a lot of stuff that was completely lost with Fallout 3 and beyond and that includes FNV. All FNV got is its writing and RPG mechanics and quest design. It doesn't look or feel like Fallout to me.

It's pretty funny hearing Todd in interviews saying Starfield has "hardcore rpg elements" when he's talking about stuff that existed in RPGs since the 80s. It just goes to show that they consider even the most rudimentary of RPG elements to be "hardcore" and thus can be dropped when they want to sell a game to the lowest common denominator.

Pretty sad state of affairs when basic bitch shit is considered "hardcore" because of how watered down they've become over the years.

 

[PaxVenire]

I'm fine with considering the writing of FNV to be canon, ignoring some gameplay things like feral ghouls being able to sprint faster and hit harder than an adult fit normal human can.

I completely agree with this, I never liked ferals being able to charge at you, and its only gotten 10x worse with Fallout 4/76. I also wish ferals could still retain the ability to use weapons like knives like the ferals in Necropolis, and mumble words. Ferals in Fallout 1 to me felt more scary because rather than being just literal zombies, they were moreso like crazed meth-heads. Not enough brain function to use their motor skills to the best ability or comprehend speech, but enough to still stab and kill you with a shiv if you got close enough.

However, I like Van Buren more than I like FNV. So if a TC mod of Van Buren ever gets finished I'll probably ditch FNV. I'll have fun with FNV but if VB ever steps through the door I'm breaking up with FNV.

Interesting. I definitely love the concepts and ideas of Van Buren, and if I had the choice of keeping New Vegas or magically snapping not only Van Buren, but also the planned Fallout 4 that was essentially what New Vegas was supposed to be into existence, I'd give up New Vegas without a second thought. But I honestly don't think even a TC mod re-creation or the unity engine remake of it would satisfy me enough to "break up" with New Vegas, knowing that a majority of Van Buren itself and the future of Fallout after Van Buren is lost to time. New Vegas, especially through the DLCs, seems to be written specifically for fans of original Fallouts to let go and accept it'll never be the same, and I think it was written specifically as a sendoff to the series in the best way it possibly could be written. Nothing against those trying to do TC recreations however, I'll still gladly play the hell out of them if it ever comes to fruition. I have a huge respect for TC mods, still waiting patiently for the English translation of Sonora.

Thing about FNV is that I can't stand playing the game. I like the writing, characters, factions, locations, lore and all but I find the gameplay to be such a drag that I can't enjoy the game anymore.

I can't say I blame you, it was made in like 18 months and in Bethesda's jury-rigged abortion of an engine. Not even I can play vanilla New Vegas, admittedly my New Vegas is modded to high hell.

OWB on the other hand is completely non canon to me. I hate that DLC.

I think I remember you saying this in a different thread. I understand your reasons for not liking it, but I disagree that its bad enough to be non-canon. Subjective though, so I'll leave it at that.

Also a big reason for why I wanna go back to 2 rather than FNV is because of a lot more things. Such as the prewar artstyle, culture, architecture, the way the world was designed with map nodes and all. There's a lot of stuff that was completely lost with Fallout 3 and beyond and that includes FNV. All FNV got is its writing and RPG mechanics and quest design. It doesn't look or feel like Fallout to me.

Absolutely agree with this, the originals just had a completely unique style for the pre-war world that was never faithfully recreated since Fallout 2. Fallout 3 era Bethesda seemed to think pre-war Fallout was literally just the 1950s with robots, and while they did the best they could with what they had, New Vegas still had to abide by this when it came to items like pre-war clothing all just being straight from the 1950s. I do think however Fallout 3 did a good job with the architecture of the downtown D.C. ruins. The art deco/gothic look to the city specifically that future games slam dunked into the trash can. Fallout 4/76 era Bethesda seems to think pre-war Fallout was the Jetsons. I look at the Boston skyline and want to puke it's so ugly.

Spoiler: I'm sorry to make you see this again:

 

[Mr Fish]

Interesting. I definitely love the concepts and ideas of Van Buren, and if I had the choice of keeping New Vegas or magically snapping not only Van Buren, but also the planned Fallout 4 that was essentially what New Vegas was supposed to be into existence, I'd give up New Vegas without a second thought. But I honestly don't think even a TC mod re-creation or the unity engine remake of it would satisfy me enough to "break up" with New Vegas, knowing that a majority of Van Buren itself and the future of Fallout after Van Buren is lost to time. New Vegas, especially through the DLCs, seems to be written specifically for fans of original Fallouts to let go and accept it'll never be the same, and I think it was written specifically as a sendoff to the series in the best way it possibly could be written. Nothing against those trying to do TC recreations however, I'll still gladly play the hell out of them if it ever comes to fruition. I have a huge respect for TC mods, still waiting patiently for the English translation of Sonora.

You're might be right but there's no way I can determine it until I play it. It's a pipe dream but it's the only hope I have for the "future" of Fallout.
I haven't gotten around to playing other TC mods though. Been so busy with backlogs and being addicted to WoW that I just never found the time for them. Gotta remember to try them out when this final backlog is done.

I can't say I blame you, it was made in like 18 months and in Bethesda's jury-rigged abortion of an engine. Not even I can play vanilla New Vegas, admittedly my New Vegas is modded to high hell.

Like, I'm fine with wrestling with older games with clunky UI's and menu's and gameplay and stuff but older games tend to not be so damn long. FNV is a looooong game. And all of those little issues mount up until I just can't deal with it anymore. Such as the pipboy's layout and functions being designed for a controller in mind rather than a m+k. Guns are also wonky, sometimes i hit the button to shoot or hit with a melee weapon and it just doesn't do it. Same with jumping. Sometimes the game just does not register inputs.

Absolutely agree with this, the originals just had a completely unique style for the pre-war world that was never faithfully recreated since Fallout 2. Fallout 3 era Bethesda seemed to think pre-war Fallout was literally just the 1950s with robots, and while they did the best they could with what they had, New Vegas still had to abide by this when it came to items like pre-war clothing all just being straight from the 1950s. I do think however Fallout 3 did a good job with the architecture of the downtown D.C. ruins. The art deco/gothic look to the city specifically that future games slam dunked into the trash can. Fallout 4/76 era Bethesda seems to think pre-war Fallout was the Jetsons. I look at the Boston skyline and want to puke it's so ugly.

Spoiler: I'm sorry to make you see this again:

Yeah there are a few parts in DC that looks good. I suppose that different areas of the US would develop their own styles so I don't mind Boston's design in theory, execution however is not Bethesda's wheelhouse... In fact, what is?

However I see your skyline and I raise you... Dragonball Z ancient alien civilization vampires!

 

[Norzan]

This fucking video, i swear. Emil is clearly only employed because he's best buds with Pete and Todd, or else he would have no job.

By the way, he's the lead writer AND designer of Starfield. Honestly don't know why people have any hope for that game.

 

[PaxVenire]

This fucking video, i swear. Emil is clearly only employed because he's best buds with Pete and Todd, or else he would have no job.

By the way, he's the lead writer AND designer of Starfield. Honestly don't know why people have any hope for that game.

In a sort of cosmic way, we should be thankful to Emil for one thing: Had it not been for his incessant bitching to Todd to set Fallout 3 in D.C., the original plan was for Bethesda to do a direct sequel to Fallout 2 set in the West Coast.

Could you fucking imagine a Bethesda Fallout written by Emil as a direct sequel to Fallout 2? I'd much rather they go and fuck off to the other side of the country than ruin the West Coast with their bullshit.

 

[Norzan]

I'd much rather they go and fuck off to the other side of the country than ruin the West Coast with their bullshit.

West Coast wasn't exactly unscathed in Fallout 3, what with the BoS, Enclave, Super Mutants and other stuff related to the West Coast being fucked.

So yeah, he actually managed to ruin plenty from the West Coast and he didn't even have his game set on it. So, no, i'm not gonna be thankful to Emil for anything.

 

[PaxVenire]

Hah you’re not wrong. Still, if he managed to do such damage while writing for the East, imagine how much worse it would be if he wrote one on the West.

 

[TorontoReign]

West Coast wasn't exactly unscathed in Fallout 3, what with the BoS, Enclave, Super Mutants and other stuff related to the West Coast being fucked.

So yeah, he actually managed to ruin plenty from the West Coast and he didn't even have his game set on it. So, no, i'm not gonna be thankful to Emil for anything.

You should be tbh because you would not have FNV which is the only decent thing in the series in how long? Yah...it is also shit compared to the old games but it is something that would not exist without them fucking up the east.

Hah you’re not wrong. Still, if he managed to do such damage while writing for the East, imagine how much worse it would be if he wrote one on the West.

You are correct Norzan is just highly autistic about Fallout and thinks it would be better off dead than still having something around to maybe make people wanna buy the series one day and make a real RPG.

 

[Norzan]

You should be tbh

No.

Norzan is just highly autistic about Fallout

You're an idiot. Also, the pot calling the kettle.

and thinks it would be better off dead than still having something around to maybe make people wanna buy the series one day and make a real RPG.

The latter can happen because of the former since it has happened with plenty of franchises. So ye, i wish the franchise had died so that maybe down the line someone else would have bought the rights and made something actually worthwhile. Instead of three bad games and a tight grip on the franchise. The fact New Vegas happened is a miracle, and Bethesda most likely won't allow anyone else to work on Fallout ever again.

 

[Mr Fish]

The franchise had died so that maybe down the line someone else would have bought the rights and made something actually worthwhile.

From my days on the Bethesda forums back in 2008-2011; A lot of people think that's exactly what happened. cRPG Fallout died, which is a good thing because then Bethesda could buy it and make real games with it.

 

[xaleromy]

I’d have to heavily disagree with this. Fallout 4 has absolutely no longevity. Once you’ve explored the world once and finished the linear story, you’ve really seen it all, this goes for most Bethesda RPGs. And just because you can infinitely do Preston Garvey’s bidding or build the settlements Bethesda was too lazy to build themselves, doesn’t mean it makes up for the shallowness that is the rest of the world and game.

I don't know how many hours in fallout 4 I have, but I only started 2 saves. The first one was the first playthrough and I completed the main quest pretty fast.

Then, when I got bored, I started another game in survival mode. I actually enjoy it a lot, and despite having visited almost every place, sometimes I run into places I've never explored. And honestly, I enjoy building settlements, trying to make them seem as safer as possible. I know for some people it might be boring, but I believe that if you manage to give your gameplay a sense (as for me it is keeping settlements safe), it can surely have more longevity and be fun.

Finally, Bethesda might not be the best in RPGs, but I personally like the many side quests they provide (factions, companions, settlements, and all others).

 

[Mr Fish]

Depends on why you play a game too.