Fallout 4, or the most GPU-intensive webpage of all time

[BPzeBanshee]

https://fallout.bethsoft.com/

Seriously that fucking countdown is sending my GPU up by at least 20 degrees and sending the fan crazy for no apparent reason. This game better be worth the hype and GPU-killing.

[Blinge]

I'll paste what I just typed to a friend:

Looks like it's just Bethesda this time instead of Obsidian; who did New Vegas. I found New Vegas far superior to 3.

I've rarely had as much of a reason to give a shit about the world's people, stories, lore as New Vegas gave me. While I can see through the illusion, I felt like my actions in game were actually affecting the world. I hope they take New Vegas stuff like the factions and player character's reputation into 4.

Also the bit with the dog at the end is such a throwback to the posterboy for 3. The lone wanderer from vault 101 was usually pictured in the middle of a long road, with a dog. It's clearly a different character from vault 111 so why frame him in exactly the same way other than a cheap throwback. Lol.. analysis over, I'm sure it'll be worth playing even if it doesn't set the world on fire.

[broken harbour]

The longest I ever spent on a single game was Fallout 3... 128 hours. Despite all its flaws I loved the world. New Vegas was in many ways superior, but I found the setting more believable in F3.

While I'm happy to have just more of the same in F4, what I really want is a game that takes place during the war that annihilates everything. That would be a great twist on the formula. But being another vault dweller that gets sent out into a world they've never known... again, happy to do it again, but F5 will have to change it up to keep people interested.

[guigui]

While I'm happy to have just more of the same in F4, what I really want is a game that takes place during the war that annihilates everything.

And drop the Post-Apocalyctic RPG stuff ? No way. All we really need is to be sent out seeking a water chip, you know, to help people in the vault survive...

[Ed Oscuro]

Will it be worth it? Bleheheh. I've been going through Skyrim recently. Bethesda really had better step up their game - since at least Oblivion, all these AAA releases have been basically the same thing, with different graphics and different sitcom characters and situations. Each one of the two horns on the Bethesda battle helmet, the pearls of ZeniMax Media, represents a world that's scared to change - in fact, a dead world that cannot change meaningfully. I think it would be fun to have a cyberpunk Elder Scrolls game. I don't think it would be fun to do the computer hacking minigame or spend 50 hours watching slo-mo deathcams again. Nor am I really all that excited to see whatever they'd choose to replace these with, because it'll become mind-numbingly boring due to being used over and over and over through an estimated 20000 hours of following quest markers into more clutter warehouses, on the say-so of featureless characters who only exist to make you do random/awful things and get clutter.

It's kinda funny that Capcom got so much flak for making choices with its franchises based on the realization that something had to change with its recent releases, yet Bethesda just whips up a new graphical tileset for Not Sports Game '1X and everything's cool. FO4 has even less to work with; FO under Bethesda is brown and empty, with goofy characters.

Do I care about the 2077 war? Do I still care about The Disappearance of the Dwarves? Haha. Bethesda isn't going to really make any brave decisions about these ongoing sources of Tantalizing Mystery! other than to bodge in little side stories of no consequence that purport to "shed light" on the story. Meanwhile, we'll all be stuck in Never-Changing And Terrible Combat World Hell. The fact that a lot of first-rate work goes into all aspects of the games makes the deadness and stagnation only more painful.

I would like to be surprised, but I really doubt it.

BTW, Steam's got a up-to-half-off Fallout franchise sale right now.

While I'm happy to have just more of the same in F4,

I'll give it a few more years. I used to feel the same about Morrowind. Bethesda can't milk you forever. Or can they?

[MOSQUITO FIGHTER]

My initial reaction is that it looks extremely similar to 3. I'll probably enjoy it anyway. I never finished New Vegas. I need to get back to that one. I haven't even tried Skyrim yet. So many RPGs, not enough time. I hope they don't expect you to open the same drawer, file cabinet, etc over and over again. It would be nice if they somehow made lock picking interesting too.

[Khan]

I spent around 150hrs in fallout 3 and can say i enjoyed it however it felt abit too barren for my liking the towns just didnt have enough inhabitants and I managed to get ahold of decent gear very early so deathclaws didnt even seem like much of a threat as a friend of mine made them out to be, since f4 was announced ive decided to finally try new vegas out even though ive had the game in my steam library since july 2012

[drauch]

I mean, I don't really see what one would expect to make it feel like such a wildly different game than its predecessors. Still, I kind of understand the sentiment, because Fallout 3/Oblivion/Skyrim all feel sort of "samey" to me in certain regards.

The biggest thing I just want to see is a difficulty spike. I miss having areas you just couldn't traverse from the get-go, like caves and camps and ruins you couldn't set foot in until later in the game. The latest iterations just feel like such handholders with no risks involved. I enjoyed Skyrim, but it really left me in the cold with all the bullshit it tried to integrate, leaving me feeling like I was playing more of a homebody sim game than a nomadic RPG adventure. A small house to store loot in is fine, but once you have a maid, garden, children, smithing, chandelier upgrades and all that bullshit, it sort of no longer feels like an adventure.

[Blinge]

The biggest thing I just want to see is a difficulty spike. I miss having areas you just couldn't traverse from the get-go, like caves and camps and ruins you couldn't set foot in until later in the game. The latest iterations just feel like such handholders with no risks involved.

Try going North in New Vegas from the start. You'll be torn a new asshole, or poisoned to death.. it's great.. haha. Many times in the game I felt like I had no choice but to use all resources available to me in order to survive. There's also hardcore mode which adds dehydration, food and sleep requirements to your character, and makes ammunition have weight.

I did find myself burning out on NV a lot, though. Maybe I was just tired of the formula, but it was worth forcing myself back into that world when I finally got round to it.

[drauch]

Yeah, that's what I heard from a few friends. New Vegas is still the only one of the lot I haven't played. Hardcore mode does sound very appealing, as I'm a big fan of STALKER.

[Blinge]

Ahh, Stalker is definitely on my list. I would describe NV's Hardcore mode as baby stalker.

[ratikal]

I never really paid attention to Fallout, but I'm picking it up just to see how demolished Boston can be. It'll be cool to go to locations that I've been to in real life.

[Ed Oscuro]

I mean, I don't really see what one would expect to make it feel like such a wildly different game than its predecessors. [...]

The biggest thing I just want to see is a difficulty spike.

You basically understand where I'm coming from. The additional stuff doesn't serve any useful gameplay purpose, and the basic gameplay in these games is pretty sad to begin with. They've been getting better since Morrowind, but it's still not good gameplay. The basic stumbling block for Bethesda is that their gameplay ideas are based around unlocking things, instead of giving you an interesting and fully fleshed-out set of mechanics to start with. Adding firearms in the FO world just made it worse, at least in FO3, since you can play the game like a real FPS player and sidestep the fake level difficulty - except that tends to expose the shortcomings in the game not being developed as a FPS (for example, exploiting cover to mow down Mutants easily).

I also can't say that they stand up well to the original 2D games at all. FO2 had a huge amount of variety even before you consider all the stuff that got cut; NV (which I still haven't played) sounds like trying to make a full game out of what was just one area in FO2 (New Reno).

No doubt there's plenty of good stuff in the games, otherwise I wouldn't bother complaining.

[BrianC]

The site is so CPU intensive, I can't even connect to it.

[Leandro]

I'm already at 209 hours on Skyrim and didn't even finish the main questline. After I'm done with this game I won't play a RPG again for years