StarDestroyer.Net BBS

To busy trying to pre order to talk
Spoiler No date listed, my only issue is no date listed...

At some point, someone will point out how many things were wrong with most of Bethesda's open-world games, but I won't be paying much attention due to the fact that I give a statistically irrelevant number of fucks. I will gladly play a game titled Glitchfest: The Corporate Cash Grab if someone told me that I can explode mutants in slow-mo using retro-themed laser cannons.

Well, damn. No atomic car.

The Fallout 4 website
Needless to say it's getting HAMMERED by millions of people. But there's a pre-order button, where does it go?
Found it, Street date is....
Release Date: 12/31/2015

So the last day of 2015.... the very last day.
Can a mod edit the title with Dec 31st 2015 date?

Lagmonster: Why, yes I can, you dapper fellow!

Hmm, so it takes place in Boston, so hopefully we should see the android plotline and the Underground Railroad for them from Fallout 3.

Also, I'm curious as to the vault. Is it a sealed vault just now opening up, the descendants of a vault meshing with society, or an open desolate vault that has been taken over by people from the wasteland.

im looking forward to this one. Good timing for the launch date, lots of punters with spare Christmas cash or vouchers.

So...that trailer. I know I'm not the only one who was disappointed in the stiff animations on display in the dog model, nor the fact that it looked like one big sculpted dog-brick, rather than something covered in fur. It doesn't look horrible, but neither does it look like anything like as good as it should. Blah, blah, not release product, etcetera etcetera -- the game's coming out in seven months, it might as well be from a graphical standpoint. Don't get me wrong, I'm interested in the game, but...uh...if it's going to look like that, why isn't it coming out in 2011?

Ultimately, I would really like to know where the huge, modern-AAA-development budget is going. It's not to graphics, those are treading water. It's not to exhaustive QA testing, this is a Bethesda game. If it's to content creation, why are the budgets ballooning rather than staying static?

EDIT: And if you know damned well that your dog model and animations are kinda janky, why in the name of sweet merciful fuck would you put it front-and-center for your announcement trailer?

FaxModem1 wrote:Hmm, so it takes place in Boston, so hopefully we should see the android plotline and the Underground Railroad for them from Fallout 3.

Also, I'm curious as to the vault. Is it a sealed vault just now opening up, the descendants of a vault meshing with society, or an open desolate vault that has been taken over by people from the wasteland.

I think that the leaked script a year or so back implied that the Vaultdwellers were in cryostasis the entire time. I've seen some people speculate that the "introduction" is you running to the vault with your family and waking up later.

White Haven wrote:So...that trailer. I know I'm not the only one who was disappointed in the stiff animations on display in the dog model, nor the fact that it looked like one big sculpted dog-brick, rather than something covered in fur.

The most simple and direct answer is that they could save a crate of money by simply painting over the previous game. They don't have to improve the graphics or gameplay at all to sell a success; they simply have to create a huge, complicated, sidequest-filled world stacked with things to discover and blow up.

Frankly, I'd rather have them take a classic car and tune and shine it to perfection, over spending time engineering the sports car of Tomorrow.

Doesn't BethSoft always reserve the big engine upgrades for TES games? FO3 and NV were basically the Oblivion engine so why should we be surprised that this one hasn't changed much from Skyrim?

White Haven wrote:So...that trailer. I know I'm not the only one who was disappointed in the stiff animations on display in the dog model, nor the fact that it looked like one big sculpted dog-brick, rather than something covered in fur. It doesn't look horrible, but neither does it look like anything like as good as it should. Blah, blah, not release product, etcetera etcetera -- the game's coming out in seven months, it might as well be from a graphical standpoint. Don't get me wrong, I'm interested in the game, but...uh...if it's going to look like that, why isn't it coming out in 2011?

Creation Engine games don't break the graphics barrier. Same with animations. It's just not what they do. That Skyrim looked as good as it did while still having atrocious animations is pretty amazing actually. But a lot of that probably has to do with everyone remembering potato heads from Oblivion. The game really didn't look that bad for the times.

Beth just can't into graphics and animating. Look at the static mesh improvement and UV map correction mods for Skyrim. They look 1000 times better and are less resource intensive. Made by modders in their free time. Beth has always been about "good enough" and whereas this attitude makes companies like SEGA and Ubisoft pump out garbage that assaults the player constantly, Beth's garbage somehow manages to be enjoyable.

Ultimately, I would really like to know where the huge, modern-AAA-development budget is going. It's not to graphics, those are treading water. It's not to exhaustive QA testing, this is a Bethesda game. If it's to content creation, why are the budgets ballooning rather than staying static?

Marketing and likely (lack of) personnel retention and getting the new guys up to speed. Even though Beth makes cut-down Action-Adventure games now, they are still big games. There's a lot to make work as a singular game and the more people doing so, the more cost intensive it is to make sure everyone is on the same page. When you have a smaller team of people who've been working together for years, they can crank out a lot more with a lot less money.

Also likely that there are teams already working on the 3-5 DLCs they will be releasing.

EDIT: And if you know damned well that your dog model and animations are kinda janky, why in the name of sweet merciful fuck would you put it front-and-center for your announcement trailer?

Because people don't care. Honestly, I don't really care if the gameplay and story will be engaging. Since I only see Beth logos front and center, they probably won't be. So this is going to be a Steam sale pickup for me.

It's kind of sad that Skylanders is getting player-controlled vehicles before Fallout.

God though, can you imagine how clunky and horrible a player controlled vehicle would be in a Bethesda game?

Vendetta wrote:God though, can you imagine how clunky and horrible a player controlled vehicle would be in a Bethesda game?

Eh, modders would fix it.

Vendetta wrote:God though, can you imagine how clunky and horrible a player controlled vehicle would be in a Bethesda game?

What did you say about my horse?!

I am reluctant to touch any Bethseda game after the stunt they pulled with paid mods. They backed out of doing it for Skyrim because of the whiplash reactions but the statement implied they would try to come up with another way of pushing the concept.
Oh look, new Bethseda game which many will buy because of the rampant mod communities that exist.

Vendetta wrote:God though, can you imagine how clunky and horrible a player controlled vehicle would be in a Bethesda game?

There are some vehicle mods for Fallout 3 and New Vegas that honestly are pretty cool. Plus they got horses and rideable dragons in Elders Scrolls that work pretty good. It probably would take too much of a tweak to make the scripts used for the horses for motorcycles and the dragons for vertibirds.

The problem with vehicles in future games, and with the modded ones already existing, is the lack of passable roads in the Fallout universe. Its been over 200 years since last someone laid down asphalt, the roads are broken and destroyed if they even exist anymore. A place with civilization like the NCR would have probably repaired the roads, they mention in NV they are atleast repairing tracks and are quarrying limestone for concrete, but everywhere else would be pretty bad. Be a pretty bumpy ride.

I just really really hope Bethesda took what was great from Fallout 3 and New Vegas and made an truly awesome game. Fallout 3 had a kickass environment, beautiful and interesting with plenty of little nooks and crannies, Unfortunately much of downtown DC was boarded up by I guess Super Mutants trying to keep out squatters so the property value of their shacks don't go down.

New Vegas had great writing for companions and better crafting and weapons. The companions for Fallout 3 were pretty bland and usually had no backstory or missions related to them, New Vegas every companion had alot of backstory and quests to do. New Vegas had a pretty bland environment. Barely felt post-apocalyptic at times. More of a western with laser guns. None of the crawling through ruins and ducking into sewers that made Fallout 3 so much fun.

Things I definitely want in Fallout 4 is more Three Dog because 1 dog ain't enough and two is too low. More Liberty Prime and East Coast Bros of Steal. Iron sights and more ammo types, some really weird ones too that a world like Fallout would create. More exploration, none of that boarded up house crap. If I see a building I should be able to loot it. Smarter enemies, a drugged out raider might not use cover but a soldier should. More songs on the radio, having the same 20 songs repeating over and over gets boring despite the fact the songs are actually pretty good.

Most importantly more wackiness. Fallout is one of the darkest yet most hilarious game series ever and that ones of the reasons it so good. You're walking down the road and find a drainage chamber filled with a family who died in the aftermath of the the Great War after finding their SOS and walk a little farther to find a battle between robots, super mutants, and ......cows.

Joun_Lord wrote:...a battle between robots, super mutants, and ......cows.

And the worst best part?

The cows are winning.

Joun_Lord wrote:

Vendetta wrote:God though, can you imagine how clunky and horrible a player controlled vehicle would be in a Bethesda game?

There are some vehicle mods for Fallout 3 and New Vegas that honestly are pretty cool.

Honestly, the main reason I want vehicles in the game proper is because that way it's more likely to be stable. I had to stop using the Fallout: NV CARS mod before I saved up enough money to buy one because it wasn't recognising one of its dependencies, but that's less likely to be a problem if it's an official part of the game and not a Frankenstein's monster of mod assets kludged together.

I just really really hope Bethesda took what was great from Fallout 3 and New Vegas and made an truly awesome game. Fallout 3 had a kickass environment, beautiful and interesting with plenty of little nooks and crannies, Unfortunately much of downtown DC was boarded up by I guess Super Mutants trying to keep out squatters so the property value of their shacks don't go down.

New Vegas had great writing for companions and better crafting and weapons. The companions for Fallout 3 were pretty bland and usually had no backstory or missions related to them, New Vegas every companion had alot of backstory and quests to do. New Vegas had a pretty bland environment. Barely felt post-apocalyptic at times. More of a western with laser guns. None of the crawling through ruins and ducking into sewers that made Fallout 3 so much fun.

Yeah, both games have their good points, but it would be really nice to have the good points of both at the same time.

They are making more of these shitty games where it's been centuries and centuries since an apocalyptic war where people can build and maintain fucking hovering robots but haven't figured out how to build a wooden hut, roads, and just general medieval civilization? Not to mention the horrible gameplay, insanely irritatingly moronic "retro-future-1950s" pre-war style which is just the fucking 1950s, and glaring bugs that were never ever even attempted to be repaired.

And you monkey's are looking forward to a sequel with no gameplay video or even screenshots that might come out at the end of next year? Sad.

At least I know the awesome looking XCOM 2 will at least most likely come out in November of this year, given that dates like 12/31/ANY YEAR are just placeholders.

Flagg? I know you're in pain, I know you're feeling miserable, but take your negativity and stuff it.

Fallout is a classic for a reason, and frankly, it's all because of the reasons you just badmouthed. Now, get out of the thread, unless you have something useful to say about the topic.

I'm looking forward towards Fallout 4 but I hope they'll get rid of some of the stupidity that has been present in previous games. I mean, unless a particular rundown building has been previously occupied, I'd rather not find in every second desk\filing cabinet\etc... bottle caps, ammo or other such loot. Bad enough there's computers that still function AND have power after 200 years. Where are they getting the power from? If that shattered building is still getting electricity why don't we see constant sparks from ruptured wiring? These are just a bunch of little pet peeves but it does break the SoD.

Nevertheless, yay Fallout 4!

And Flagg's got a point about the whole post-apocalyptic Scavenged Punk aesthetic not making a lot of narrative sense. The third game's supposedly set what, two hundred years after the war? Someone should've thought to start quarrying some stone by now, or finding a pre-war clay pit and making bricks.

I enjoyed Fallout 1-3. When I tried t play New Vegas, it was plagued with so many bugs, that I barely made it 1/3 of the way through, before giving up. Apart from bug fixes, I'd like to see quest tracking handled a little better than past games - don't get me wrong - I like the open world environment, but I also need some unambiguous direction for the main plot points.

FO3 was pretty impressive, especially the first emergence into the wastes and the nuke blast, but it never quite stuck with me the way that FO 1 and 2 did. That could be the well-known effect of people remembering experiences from their teen years more vividly than later ones, of course, but I still feel that the Interplay Fallouts had a certain edge and grit that the Bethesda games lacked. NV with plenty of mods was fun enough to put another 10-15 hours into, but once I picked up Skyrim it was hard to go back. I'll probably buy FO4 shortly after release and put in about 10 hours before getting frustrated with bland combat (unmodded Beth games always have extremely bland combat), then return 6-12 months later when the realism mods have matured and put in 50+ awesome hours.