You must log in or register to comment.
Me:.I love fallout.
Them: oh yeah, which one?
Me: the black Ash containing radioactive milleau that will bring sweet death to us all.
Them: …
Me: Also new vegas
I’m more a fan of instant vaporization
Fallout Equestria obviously
What would they think of someone who likes Tale of Two Wastelands? Their favorite plus Fallout 3!
Man that scene was fuckin harsh. The movie is Civil War and does a great job of showing why you don’t actually want a civil war to break out.
I’m struggling to enjoy the humor of the image because all I can think of is how fucked up that scene is 😅 (not that the rest of the movie is sunshine and rainbows).
Amen dude. Super fucked. That whole movie was depressing because of how stupidly accurate it is.
I remember the discussions during the release of that movie basically people are saying even if Trump got re-elected he won’t be as crazy as the president in the movie. Now, it’s almost prophetic.
As a fallout 1 and 2 fan, can confirm my answer is wrong
Fallout 1 and 2 are more righterer than any other answerer, dag nabit
I think anything besides 4 or 76 would be considered acceptable. Both fallout 2 and new Vegas were absolute gems
Fuck that! FO4 was tons of fun. There’s nothing wrong with people who enjoyed it.
It can be fun (especially with mods), but it’s a bad Fallout game, and a bad RPG in general. There’s nothing wrong with enjoying it, but if you say it’s your favorite Fallout then something went wrong. I can’t ever even be bothered to finish the main quest (as in, I’ve never finished it) every time I play it because it’s so uninteresting, which shouldn’t happen in Fallout.
I mean, FO4 is great if your idea of a good RPG doesn’t involve meaningful player choices…
Someone the other day was telling me the game would have been better if your spouse could be saved and be your companion. Like fuck no dude that sounds terrible for an RPG. It was super upvoted too, I’m guessing these are the fans that came from playing FO4/FO76
I mean… I can see that theoretically working… but not with the way Bethesda handles companions.
If your companion is functionally invulnerable, and the ‘points’ systems that govern their disposition toward you are very simplistic and easily gamed… yeah this would be very, very cheesy and janky, and because there’s no real agency on the part of your spouse, along with no real risk of them ever being seriously, permanently hurt or killed, it would all feel fake and stupid.
…
But!
You could make a very compelling game with a while bunch of branching plot paths based on key, pivotal decision/priority moments relating to how you and your spouse agree or disagree on things.
Something like this, done well, could be a very compelling New Game +, for FO4, or just a whole different game.
If you made a game where… you know, your spouse can fucking die, and the game can move on after that?
No invulnerability, no ‘severed thread of prophecy’ shit…
If you could actually take the concept seriously, I can see a game working around the core concept of ‘you and your spouse try to survive the apocalypse’.
Maybe theres certain ‘good’ endings where you two fight a bit, but ultimately reconcile and defeat some greater foe, achieve some good goal.
‘Bad’ endings where you piss off your spouse so much that they actually leave you, form a faction against you, force you into a moral bind where you have to kill them to do what you think is right.
Maybe theres middling endings where you do achieve big goal, but at the cost of your relationship, or your spouses life.
…
There are ways something like this could work, but I have 0 confidence that Bethesda is competent to either write compelling plot and dialogue for this, nor do I think they could actually code, actually structure a game that allows for all this.
They can handle basically side quests that modify the totality of an end state in fairly superficial ways, but I don’t think they can even concept design a game where the actual core plot is quite variable.
It was a first-person looter/shooter with a story, crafting, and base building. What’s an “RPG”? 😄
RPG means ‘role playing game’.
Where you get to decide what role you want your character to play.
Where player choice and creativity, problem solving approach… are as, if not more important than the underlying ruleset and world.
Where your decisions in the world meaningfully change how the story progresses, how the world evolves.
Where you can fail in your mission, even if you don’t literally die.
You… do know that the original Fallout was literally built as a DnD like, TTRPG, first, and the devs played multiple rounds of this, with a game/dungeon master and whatnot, to prototype the mechanics and balance that would go into the computer game… right?
That the game itself could beat you, and you would just fail, if you fucked about and didn’t discover a solution in time?
I was making a joke. I know what an RPG is. I completed Fallout 1 years ago and really enjoyed it, but never finished 2.
I just don’t care that 4 doesn’t live up to some RPG standard. It’s a game. It’s a fun game. If everyone would stop judging it for what it’s not, that’d be great. That goes for all games. Hell, all media!
Who cares what it could have been? Who cares what it’s history is? Is the game fun? That’s all that matters. Instead, we have a bunch of gatekeepers in the fandom who dump on FO4 every chance they get, and it’s exhausting.
I agree with the sentiment but not the premise. If you played the older fallouts then it shouldn’t be surprising that fallout fans are upset that the game diluted itself to appeal to a wider audience. Nothing wrong with a looter shooter with base building mechanics, just don’t slap fallouts name on it when it lost everything that makes a fallout game…fallout.
I was making a joke.
adjusts pink glasses
Mhm, yep, very funny joke.
EDIT:
You don’t care if the game lives up to other people’s different standards of a what a fun game is, but your represent your own standards of what a fun game is as objective, and then say that because FO4 meets those standards, its fine actually, and also all the other people with other standards should just shut up about them.
…
We could just ditch the entire framing of discussing FO4 as an RPG, and just say sure, it isn’t an RPG, its an open world looter shooter with crafting and base building and a story.
Problem there is, for me at least… I don’t find the story, the characters, the dialogue, etc, very good, at all.
I don’t find the shooting very good, what with the nonsense auto scaling, and unsophisticated combat AI.
Crafting, on its own, is a good subsystem of a game, but when combined with how the rest of the game works, it becomes a very tedious, mandatory chore.
Base building, on its own, is a decent subsystem of a game… but when combined with the rest of how the game works, … well, its either a chore to get through the bare minimum to advance the plot, the story… or, it isn’t comprehensive and well integrated enough into the main design of the game, such that the entire game itself could reach its full potential of meaningfully being a core mechanic of the whole game world and story, as I outlined in my other post.
The uh, I think its called ‘Expanded Settlements’ mod, or some such? It gets a lot closer to doing that latter thing, though I may be using the wrong name, its been a while since I last played FO4… due to the, you know, lack of fun I was having.
…
In summary… I am happy you find FO4 fun, and I hope you can respect that I don’t find it to be fun, and that different people have different standards for fun, and just as its ok for you to like something I don’t, its ok for me to not like something you do.
If you don’t wanna talk about this topic… maybe don’t talk about this topic?
But its kinda bs to just try to say ‘actually no one is allowed to criticize this or have a different opinion than me,’… and then also call anyone who disagrees with you a gatekeeper… when that is what you are doing, you are gatekeeping the entire discussion itself.
…
As a final point, FO4 ain’t got Caravan.
I should have just led with that, really.
I think this is a bit of a fallacy. While i agree on the premise that if it’s a fun game it’s fun, where is the line? The fallout series was primarily very story driven for over 20 years. If it doesn’t matter, then make it something completely off the wall - fallout 5 - the basketball drama. Life in a post apocalyptic Indiana isn’t easy, but what’s even more difficult is getting to the championship. Changes to stat scaling include sharpshooting, which improves your 3 point shot. There’s potential here.
At some point, you build a reputation and a fan base. I’m glad some people enjoy the game for what it is, but what i want is a new story that made me feel like fallout 2 did. New Vegas was the closest one. Fo4 wasn’t it.
It’s a standard that the series built for itself.
Sorry i meant that as a theoretical response to the character in the meme.
I personally thought fo4 was ok, but they intentionally dumbed down the dialogue and roleplaying, which ruined my immersion. Once i said “no i will not attack the railroad,” and the brotherhood laughed at me and said yeah anyway (the railroad is now hostile), that kinda ruined my fun.
Ehh, 4 was fun till the inevitable point that the Bethesda effect kicks in; the difficulty scaling is janky so you’re overpowered and/or something in your save broke so you can’t technically finish the game.
I rushed adhesive and water economy from the start and bought/crafted my way to being OP.
Unironically, they should have entirely thrown out most of their plot, and actually built up the settlement mechanics to the point that the game had dynamic factions and settlements with a simulated pseudo economy…
A dynamic, immersive, emergent FO experience, kinda like how Stalker has its dynamic, ambient faction wars, how they were trying to pull this off with the Goblins in Oblivion.
Make a series of fundamental plot points and main missions that anchor a main plot, which either happen on some world timer, or you conduct them, or even other factions/characters can do them or heavily influence them…
Now you have a game world with many more different paths to the same ending, as well as many different just possible paths for your character and the whole world… and isn’t so much ‘you are the unstoppable hero’ as ‘you are a badass, but there are lots of other badasses, and sometimes insane shit just happens for complex reasons and you gotta figure it out.’
3 is an odd one because I think it’s a good game, but it sure as hell does not feel like Fallout. It feels like someone killed Fallout and is walking around wearing its skin.
Fallout 4 feels like Fallout more, but is also a terrible RPG. Good shooter, tho. If you treat it like Borderlands instead of the RPG it used to be, it’s awesome.
New Vegas is the best of the 3D ones because it sure as hell has the right vibes (which it should, since it had at least 2 of the OG writers) and it has more RPGness than 3 and 4 combined.
A weird summary but a somewhat fair one. Yeah 4 does feel more like borderlands, that’s a good point.
But 4 is the best one
While I disagree with 4 being the best one, my previous comment was regarding the character in the meme.
Fallout Shelter of course!
found one
… Get Graham on the horn, this one needs a man of God…
Van Buren!
No, BoS Tactics!
New Vegas guy sighs, lowers his weapon
‘… You’re an oddball, but… probably a good kind of oddball.’
… I was gonna say DUST next, but uh… technichally thats not a “game”, its a-
‘It’s fine dude, you’re good.’
“Ad victorium!”
“Oh. The fascist kind.”
None of that 3d nonsense! Now get off my lawn!
Fallout Tactics obviously.
