Share your most favorite quotes from the interviews with Bethesda on FO4

[0wing]

Or the funniest ones in your opinion. I'll start with

"look, we can't apologise for being a role-playing game. We have to build a first-person shooter, and it needs to be a really, really good one." taken from gamespot interview after E3 2015. Understand however you want, so to speak.

"Well, in our games, we want to give you complete freedom." same source. Well, it's not particulary funny but it's plus one to 'tell me lies' points since Fallout 4's story is well known for being on rails.

 

[Ediros]

"It just works" by Todd Sweet Lies Howard.

Enough said.

 

[Altairp]

"Settlements are optional"

 

[whirlingdervish]

"not interested in discussing how realistic things are in an alternate universe post-apoc game w/ talking mutants and ghouls" - Pete Hines 2016

This can't be repeated enough.

From one angle, it's the worst possible PR a PR person could do. You might as well say "I don't care about your valid criticism, because I don't care about this game world or it's canon, nor do I understand them"

It really highlights the blatant misunderstanding in the heads of Bethesda's higher-ups regarding consistent entries in the series like Ghouls and Mutants.

Ghouls that don't talk.. would have no fucking place in Fallout. They aren't zombies, no matter how much guys like ol Petey insist on misunderstanding this point. They don't rise up from graves to drag at your ankles, they are not the undead, and they are not soulless yet human shaped cannon fodder for the player character to mow down and not feel bad about because they are ugly.

They are people. Flesh and blood, LIVING people, most of whom lived for a long time and would have lots of useful things to say. Even the ghoul crazies said things and they were.. crazy!

Ghouls in the world of fallout were a dark thematic element that allowed them to work with elements like racism in a post apoc environment and even themes like posthumanism to some degree. They used to be a DEEP element of the setting before Pete's company turned them into stupid zombies to cash in on the stupid zombies in open world games trend in modern gaming. They were also a way to show how the world of fallout differs from our own in the handling of concepts like radiation and what it does to living things (unlike in FO4 which goes full on with cancer as a plot element.. the antithesis of what the Fallout universe's radiation did to people)

The very fact that he thinks GHOULS THAT TALK are an unrealistic thing, in the setting of Fallout, just shows how very badly they miss the mark at understanding the setting at all. Much the same for Mutants. They are all people, much more so than the bunch of dumb robots in FO4 who retarded NPCs in the game treat like they are people.

Nobody seems willing to ask them the simple response to this inane BS, that directly cuts to the core of his supposed argument for ignoring the stupidity of kid in the fridge:

"Why would mutants and ghouls NOT talk?"

 

[Irwin John Finster]

I don't have the exact quote but there was some marketing thing Todd Howard was doing for Fallout 4 and he said something along the lines of (and I'm paraphrasing here) "We didn't focus on the graphics so much, we wanted to focus on making a good Fallout game" or it was something like "we wanted to focus more on making a good game rather than graphics."

As it turns out, they focused on neither the graphics nor making a good Fallout game, just some lazy crafting-based MMO with the Fallout title.

Also pretty much everything their marketing says, such as "not interested in discussing how realistic things are in an alternate universe post-apoc game w/ talking mutants and ghouls" and (paraphrasing) "we made a GOTY quality game" and "why are people made about more content" (referring to the complaints over the Workshop DLC scam).

 

[0wing]

I don't have the exact quote but there was some marketing thing Todd Howard was doing for Fallout 4 and he said something along the lines of (and I'm paraphrasing here) "We didn't focus on the graphics so much, we wanted to focus on making a good Fallout game" or it was something like "we wanted to focus more on making a good game rather than graphics."

You talking about this?
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/fallout-4-may-not-have-the-best-graphics-but-here-/1100-6428328/

Well, the graphics are fairly good actually. Lighting sets the tone to the whole picture and weather effects are real treasure. The rigged LOD or non-destructed windows are different questions.

 

[Irwin John Finster]

You talking about this?
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/fallout-4-may-not-have-the-best-graphics-but-here-/1100-6428328/

Well, the graphics are fairly good actually. Lighting sets the tone to the whole picture and weather effects are real treasure. The rigged LOD or non-destructed windows are different questions.

I agree the graphics are fine but have you seen the characters and their animations? Or what happens to them when it rains? It's like dumping oil on a plastic mannequin/robot. This only adds to the immersion breaking when you couple it with their terrible dialog and voice acting.

 

[0wing]

I agree the graphics are fine but have you seen the characters and their animations? Or what happens to them when it rains? It's like dumping oil on a plastic mannequin/robot. This only adds to the immersion breaking when you couple it with their terrible dialog and voice acting.

Yeah, characters hardly a strong point especially with face animations and unnecessary char lighting but overall it's still good. Immersion breaking starts with the first plot hole you'll encounter in the game which opens before you'll ever see a face animation, BTW.

 

[MercenarySnake]

Well, the graphics are fairly good actually

Low quality textures at max settings.
Majority of things tend to look like plastic.
Looks dated on arrival.

Worst part is despite the above the game still runs like dogshit on high end hardware.

 

[0wing]

Low quality textures at max settings.
Majority of things tend to look like plastic.
Looks dated on arrival.

As I said and was overlooked - lighting sets the tone and weather effects are nice enough. Put on top of that great work with landscape.
Actually textures are high quality but not rendered properly. And not archived properly. Memory management issues or shit.
Moronic technical decisions tends to be moronic but still.

Worst part is despite the above the game still runs like dogshit on high end hardware.

It runs like dogshit on every rig. Everyone sitting in the same den, high end pc gamers, low end laptop users and especially console gamers. Wel-fuckin-come to the club of dogshit performance.
Egalitarianism as it's finest, every other developer only dreams of this stability.

 

[Izak]

'[Fallout 3 has] over 200 endings, since last week. The 12 endings was surpassed sometime ago.' - Todd Howard
Fallout has 26 ending slides, Fallout 2 has 55 ending slides, Fallout New Vegas has 186 ending slides, Fallout 3 has 18 ending slides; the only game it beats in terms of endings is Fallout 4 which had a poultry 2 ending slides.

Sources:
https://www.destructoid.com/fallout...-you-will-never-have-a-life-again-77392.phtml
http://fallout.gamepedia.com/Fallout_endings
http://fallout.gamepedia.com/Fallout_2_endings
http://fallout.gamepedia.com/Fallout:_New_Vegas_endings
http://fallout.gamepedia.com/Fallout_3_endings
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_4_endings

 

[Deeves]

*nebbish whine* "Weeeelll coming out of Skyrim, it was how do we tell a good story while maintaining a big open world where you can do what you want? Like, at the end of the day you are sacrificing some control over ... good flow of a story to let the players do whatever they want. Uhm, having a voice on a character lets you hit those emotional beats, just, a lot better you know? If - If you were to take away what we've done before and you were to do a game like this, you'd have the character voiced. But it wasn't a 'debate', you know, like what were we going to sacrifice if we have a voice?"

and

". . . if install base really mattered, we'd all make board games, because there are a lot of tables."

~ Todd Howard, recipient of 'Best Game Director' award by the Academy of Arts and Sciences, and a Laurel of Honor, apparently Germany's lifetime achievement award for gaming.

source:


http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=22418

B-B-B-Bonus round, try to last 0:48 seconds into this video without cringing to death;

 

[mithrap]

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/fallout-4-interview-we-re-probably-doing-too-much/1100-6428336 :

"we want the player to be in sync with the character. You're new to this world, and you would rather things be the way they were." the very definition of a ROLE playing game, right ?

"We're lucky, in that nowadays we're not a very big studio--we're just over 100 people." Er...

"Yeah, we're probably doing too much. If the game sucks, the answer may have been we tried to do too much." That. Just that.

"I think GTA V had succeeded the most at the same type of thing we try to do. I look at that game and think, "Wow, I just don't know how they did this.""

 

[Deeves]

"I think GTA V had succeeded the most at the same type of thing we try to do. I look at that game and think, "Wow, I just don't know how they did this.""

Uh, that would be because they never betrayed their roots. They knew exactly what game they were since the player was a little top down pixelized Tony Montana in GTA. They only added what would enchance to the open world mobster experience and ruthlessly cut away the chaff.

They didn't add Minecraft clone element because it doesn't belong in a crime sandbox, and they knew anyone who would want that experience already has Minecraft, Terraria, and Space Engineers on their taskbars.

 

[Irwin John Finster]

"We made a Game of the Year quality game"

 

[whirlingdervish]

"We made a Game of the Year quality game"

Except, for the life of me, I can't think of a single year in which that statement would have been true.

FO4 is just such lazy bland trash, that does exactly nothing new, that I can't think of any game it is objectively superior to, that was released any time in the past 10 years.

There's literally no innovation in it, and nothing award worthy in the things that someone else has done before.

At almost every point, I could probably answer with "TW3 did it better" with the exception of fuckable robots.

crafting? see above.
combat? see above.
voiced protagonist? see above.
epic story? see above.
world building? see above.
visuals? see above.
companions you can bone? see above.
minigames? see above.
replayability? see above.
ladders? see above.

the list goes on and on.

 

[0wing]

with the exception of fuckable robots.

PLEASE ASSUME THE POSITION.

 

[olestra]

"Money was never a big motivation for me, except as a way to keep score. The real excitement is playing the game." --Todd Howard

 

[Omar]

From E3
And its all starts with an obsession to detail, our artist's concept every button every blinky light. Not just on one terminal on all of them. Because it's our belief for that its all of these small details coming together that form a much much larger whole.