Upload
Login or register
x

Can someone explain this to me?

 
(Enlarge)
Can someone explain this to me?. How come every time a huge technical like Batman: Arkham Knight or AC: Unity comes around everybody (both gamers and "pres

How come every time a huge technical ******** like Batman: Arkham Knight or AC: Unity comes around everybody (both gamers and "press") throws a **** fit but when Bethesda does it, it's not only expected but excused. Why? Why does Bethesda gets a free pass on (often) game breaking technical issues without rarely any mention in reviews and virtually no impact on the score of the game while virtually every other game gets dragged through all 9 circles of hell?

W DARE THEY RELEASE SO MANY
ll) lailii' ii_.. -.t. ii, tiired by britis and fans for being technical issues.
ttn
...
+431
Views: 21486
Favorited: 20
Submitted: 11/15/2015
Share On Facebook
submit to reddit +Favorite Subscribe to thefallenlord

Comments(243):

Leave a comment Refresh Comments Show GIFs
12345>
[ 243 comments ]
Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest
Anonymous comments allowed.
152 comments displayed.
Reply
+337
#3 - lulusaurus (11/15/2015) [-]
One game is made in a matter of a year just to be a cash cow. Overall a small game.
Other is made over a course of 4+ years. Overall a huge game.

That's my view on the subject but you do have a point.
Reply
-123
User avatar #122 to #3 - doctorcamden (11/15/2015) [-]
>fallout 4
>skyrim
>huge

Pick one.
Reply
+98
#126 to #122 - lulusaurus (11/15/2015) [-]
I'll pick huge.
Reply
-5
#128 to #126 - doctorcamden (11/15/2015) [-]
Aaaae gurl
Reply
+13
#181 to #122 - cjfj (11/16/2015) [-]
YFW commenting.
Reply
+6
User avatar #183 to #122 - thepandaking (11/16/2015) [-]
He didn't mean in actual map size. Map size doesn't determine how much content there is in a game. He meant huge in the amount of content.
Reply
+1
#171 to #122 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
name a game that isn't proceduraly generated that is equal to or larger than skyrim.
Reply
+8
User avatar #179 to #171 - artlu (11/16/2015) [-]
GTA 5 :l
Reply
+1
#235 to #179 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
Years after Skyrim
Reply
+7
#212 to #171 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
The Witcher 3
Reply
+1
#236 to #212 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
Years after Skyrim. Hands down a great game.
Reply
+7
User avatar #174 to #171 - SuttBex (11/16/2015) [-]
Just Cause 2
Reply
-1
#237 to #174 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
Just Cause 2.
Not buggy.
Reply
0
#228 to #3 - mrhandss (11/16/2015) [-]
one game is rushed to release, so bugs are understandable.
other game has YEARS to get it right and still releases as a broken mess.


I'm not excusing Assassin's Creed, but I take more of an issue with a game shipping full of bugs if the developer had ample time to test the game before release.
Reply
0
#233 to #228 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
"one game is rushed to release, so bugs are understandable. "

Yea sure. Whatever.
Reply
+2
#27 to #3 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
I don't think time is much of any excuse in this case. Whether it took 1 year or 4, both games still released with significant amounts of glitches and bugs. One game was crucified as a blight against gaming, the other is heralded as a feat in the industry. If Assassin's Creed Unity is so bad because the series releases yearly with glitches, doesn't that make fallout 4 egregious since it releases in a similar state and they had more in a sense of time and resources to work with?
Reply
+3
#226 to #27 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
The difference here is the amount of content the games offer, as well as the fact that most of these bugs are hugely overplayed.
I have played both bethesda and ass cred games, but there are very few bugs that I run into.
People who run into bugs in games have that second response from the content, people who don't play the games and see the list of all bugs that millions of people have reported experiencing are more likely to criticize the game's bugginess.

That said, I have played Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3 I hope to get a system capable of running 4 soon and only once in skyrim did I run into a bug that was annoying: the old dude from the dragon slaying faction who you have to traverse the temple to get to the Alduin mural, I told him we would walk together, then fast traveled and he still walked the whole way there, no matter how much I waited/rested.

Played through Ass Cred 1 II III IV Brotherhood and have seen parts of Unity, all of them have noticeable bugs. Imagine getting a CoD with lots of bugs or similar issues presented. People would flip **** .

Also, we have to take into account that bethesda games bugs are usually Because I know that at least one person is gonna say "there are game breaking bugs too, hurr durr", note the use of "USUALLY", there are some game breaking bugs, but never on the scale of these other bugs. related to physics, with ragdolled bodies flipping out, clipping issues, and every now and again some texture issues. These things are relatively not important to the core game play. Break physics in a parkour based game? What kinda reaction do you think that will create.
Reply
+2
#213 to #3 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
I have over 50 hours fallout 4 gameplay so far and only saw one bug. The underside of an elevator wasn't loaded, I reloaded and it was back. Have had 0 frame drops and 0 crashes. Either I got lucky or the bugginess is being overstated
Reply
+2
User avatar #216 to #213 - lulusaurus (11/16/2015) [-]
I'm sure the people raging about the bugs are the one's not playing it. "Oh no look at this guy riding this junk into the sky, FO4 is the buggest **** ever. Why do people protect Bethesda?" In my experience I haven't seen any bugs, the main thing I can't stand in these games are the npcs.
Reply
+1
#238 to #216 - ndepicninja ONLINE (11/16/2015) [-]
I've seen a few bugs, such as a Brahmin somehow got onto a roof, and Dogmeat was jumping up and down extremely fast in an elevator, but they aren't game breaking, to me they just add a wild factor and hilarity.
Reply
+16
User avatar #33 to #3 - bombadealar (11/15/2015) [-]
They are both buggy ***** . And everytime you mention Fo4 isnt perfect you get beat down.
Reply
+14
#43 to #33 - thematthew ONLINE (11/15/2015) [-]
where the **** have you been, there was hate for the game before it even came out, now all i see is the same picture showing how the brick wall texture looks compared to other games with lines like "blunder of the century" and "it's ok when bethesda does it".
Reply
0
User avatar #44 to #43 - bombadealar (11/15/2015) [-]
Well I got shut down when I said its going to be a buggy mess as always when it got announced
Reply
-1
User avatar #46 to #44 - thematthew ONLINE (11/15/2015) [-]
they were probably idiots still high on the hype train, go to vgb and they will practically suck your dick for bad mouthing FO4.
Reply
-1
User avatar #124 to #43 - doctorcamden (11/15/2015) [-]
I've been continuously slandered and berated with "insults" and even one death threat over the last 4 months by FJ for not liking fallout, so, nah G.
Reply
0
#148 to #124 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
"death threats" you sound like a tumbrite who takes things people say on the internet seriously. Are you worried some faggot is gonna trace your ip and violently murder you over a video game? Are you really sure, are you worried about it?
Reply
-1
User avatar #150 to #148 - doctorcamden (11/16/2015) [-]
Did i say i took it seriously? Did I say i was worried? Does your comment have anything to do with my original point?

No, No, No.
Reply
-1
#170 to #150 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
Kill self.
Reply
+1
User avatar #40 to #33 - OtisMcWonderful (11/15/2015) [-]
It isn't perfect, but it's still better than FO3 at release, at least from a stability standpoint. I haven't had any major issues with FO4 yet, and FO3 was constantly crashing for a while after release.

As for the game quality itself, it's alright. They've changed too much regarding stats and skills for my taste, but the gameplay is still fun. It's not a bad game, but it's not a great game either. I'm glad I didn't get myself overly hyped for it like everyone else here.
Reply
+18
#49 to #3 - theruse (11/15/2015) [-]
Shouldn't that make it worse since they had more time to work on it to fix the bugs?
Reply
+12
#57 to #49 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
No, because they spent that time making a game that's fun instead of a regurgitated mess of the previous titles.
Reply
-7
#60 to #57 - theruse (11/15/2015) [-]
They would have more time to fix the bugs though, so it's more inexcusable that the games would have bugs.

It doesn't matter if the game is good or not, what matters is the fact that it still has bugs and glitches.
Reply
+11
#71 to #60 - howaboutnsfw (11/15/2015) [-]
"It doesn't matter if the game is good or not"

k
Reply
-11
#72 to #71 - theruse (11/15/2015) [-]
Not when it comes to the glitches you ******* idiot. If it has glitches, it has glitches, and you can't excuse that because "Oh well I liked the game."

******* fanboys are so God damn thick.
Reply
+12
#75 to #72 - howaboutnsfw (11/15/2015) [-]
I usually buy games to have fun. Not to admire lack of glitches. I can go ahead an make you a game where you beat your head into the wall, it won't have glitches and will work perfectly. "It doesn't matter if the game is good or not"
Reply
+2
#79 to #72 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
If you think a game with an engine as complex (inb4 'DYURR DAT ISNT CUMPLERX') as Fallout is going to be entirely bug-free across all platforms then you're not just delusional, you're clinically retarded and have no right to be using the marvel that is a computer.
Reply
+1
#108 to #79 - rnorton (11/15/2015) [-]
It being a complex engine doesn't exonerate them form the fact that they've had years to fix the universal glitches in their game that come as a result of the engine's deficiencies. The same bugs that keep popping up every time they release something.
Reply
+12
User avatar #143 to #108 - yudodat ONLINE (11/16/2015) [-]
Engines are very tricky. For companies like Bethesda, they have 1 engine that all of their developers use to make the game. Problems can occur when you have to switch 40+ people to a new engine and have them relearn their work environment. Engines also have a base layout that (very common in many engines) has some interactivity between code that doesn't allow for certain changes.

Example: World of Warcraft started with a main backpack for your character that had 16 slots. As the game got bigger, people needed more slots to carry things. Blizzard looked at the backpack, attempted to change it, and it broke the game. Why? The entire engine intertwines with the backpack system. Drops, Setting, Level, Achievements, all of it, were intertwined with the backpack system. This did not excuse the fact that players needed more bag space, so they decided to forego changing the backpack and just add in extra bags that you could get bigger forms of. This means that instead of adding a few lines of code to an already simply backpack system, they had to write a whole new system for these extra bags. This causes there to be more bugs, which have to be fixed, which, as the system is now more complex, give way to even more bugs.

Now, back to Fallout, imagine that little hiccup with the bag system, and apply it to a large multitude of interconnected systems that have systems of their own. Change something with the menu and you have bugs in the skill system. Change pathfinding and you have ai's spawning 30 feet in the air on invisible ground. It's a very difficult system.

The easiest way to fix this would be to carefully rewrite the engine from scratch, but this could take years. The 4 years betwen New Vegas and 4? Could have taken 7 or more. It could have come out with more bugs even.

Them having years to fix it doesn't mean they can take every bug that comes through and remove the possibility of it to happen. They have to find a way to reproduce the bug, figure out why it's happening, and fix it. You fix it, and then your QA are reporting 4 more bugs in the same spot. Repeat until dead.

When it comes to game development, writing a complex engine for use in 3D Open World is one of the most insane things to even think about doing. We don't know the engine as well as they do, and the "repeating bugs" may be ones that can not be fixed because of their connection to other systems.

Hordes of bugs aren't fine, but make sure you understand the problems they're facing.

Source: Game Programmer for 9 years, had to rebuild a local companies engine once. Was hell on earth.
Reply
+2
#180 to #143 - rnorton (11/16/2015) [-]
This was actually really interesting and informative. So i have another question. From what I'm able to put together, Fallout 4 still runs on Gamebryo at its base with additions on top of the basic engine itself to try and keep it current with the times, leading to what is now the Creation Engine. Gamebryo itself dates back to games like Morrowind released in 2002. Is continuing to add stuff on top of the engine (and re-branding the name) sustainable in an even longer term, or will Bethesda eventually have to make a new engine at some point in the future?
Reply
0
User avatar #199 to #180 - yudodat ONLINE (11/16/2015) [-]
I don't put much hold into graphical complaints, but if Bethesda don't do something soon, those graphical complaints will have some ground. Let me explain why there are problems when it comes to the Creation Engine.

In Layman's' terms:

Imagine you had a pretty house with nice paint, a full green yard of grass, and a beautiful family living in. You decide you want a garden. So you dig up a small patch of grass to start your garden in. As you dig, you start to find trash underneath the dirt. Then you notice that there is no dirt, only garbage. GARBAGE makes up foundation of your land, with only a small patch of grass covering it. You take the garbage out, and pack in dirt, but your house starts looking worse and worse. Your deck is falling apart, your children are sick, and no matter how much garbage you replace with dirt, it keeps getting worse. Eventually you have removed so much garbage that your house has rotten, and your family has died. Your beautiful home is no more.

Technical terms:

When Bethesda changed the GameBryo engine to accommodate their needs for better graphics and capabilities, they locked themselves into a development path where they were forced into a constant battle to keep the old GameBryo engine covered. They managed to hide it all away with the patch of grass and build a nice little framework the house for their games to be made. Thus was born the Creation Engine. Now, what do you do when you have a leak in your pipes? You patch it up, or you replace the entire pipe if you want it to last longer . When Bethesda tries to patch up their bugs or replace the older systems, all the systems they've built upon it start to fail. System connections don't route properly, functions lose their call stacks, variables get erased, bad stuff like that.

If Bethesda don't move to a new engine, eventually their house will rot, and their family will die. They can patch it up as they go, but they'd be better off just replacing the whole thing before they have to.

Problems with creating a new engine:
Could lose the "Bethesda" feel
Time Consuming
Sales predictions would be iffy
Definite moneymaker for atleast 2 more games if they stay on this

Code is tricky, and no matter how much you add onto it you still have that same base. Everything still relies on the garbage.
Reply
0
#210 to #199 - rnorton (11/16/2015) [-]
Bu tin the end, that switch to a new engine may be what allows that homeowner to have a new house and have his family survive long enough for grandkids to be born.

I'm not one to hold much value in outright graphical fidelity either. I think overall art direction is much more important and, when done properly, is the reason a lot of games that aren't necessarily the most intensive to be successful. I haven't really seen all that much in terms of excellent art direction from Bethesda, that have some cool spots, but the game environments blend together and nothing really feels memorable or unique after a while. The only spot from Fallout 3 I can really remember is that VR vault where everyone was plugged into the perfect neighborhood and one guy was a psychopath.

Granted, a lot of that had to do with games like Skyrim and Fallout falling into grayish greenish color pallets, making it harder visual distinctions to discern themselves to me. So, to me, unless they step up their direction, the only thing they can rely on in the visual department is graphical fidelity/animation quality, which looks like it might rapidly stagnate. (Granted, having sunlight in Fallout 4 seems to have made everything pop a little bit more, but i haven't seen enough gameplay all at once in order to notice if the environments blend.
Reply
0
User avatar #218 to #210 - yudodat ONLINE (11/16/2015) [-]
Exactly, all of it. Eventually they have to switch to a new engine, it's just a matter of when they decide to.

The graphics comment was mainly just because it is a AAA game, and if it comes out looking the same as the last 2 did, people are going to get angry. It's just how people work now.
Reply
0
#219 to #218 - rnorton (11/16/2015) [-]
Understood
Reply
0
User avatar #221 to #219 - yudodat ONLINE (11/16/2015) [-]
I hope this let you understand why recurring bugs are a thing. Trust me, I hate seeing bug reports about the same bug over and over that I just can't reproduce. It hurts my confidence when I can't fix my game. I don't have any insider insight, so they could just be neglecting those bugs, but I believe it's just an inability to fix them without making it worse.
Reply
0
#222 to #221 - rnorton (11/16/2015) [-]
For me it just seems more than it is because I see other companies get slammed for the exact same thing.
Reply
0
User avatar #232 to #222 - yudodat ONLINE (11/16/2015) [-]
Okay, let me take a shot at this too. Let's use Ubisoft as our example of another company.

The brunt of Ubisoft's bug hate comes from Assassin's creed. Assassin's creed Syndicate(Newest release) runs on the AnvilNext 2.0 created in 2014, which is an update of the AnvilNext game engine created around late 2011-early 2012. AnvilNext is a recreation of the Anvil engine created in 2008. Anvil is an update to the Scimitar engine made in 2006~. Let's move through time, starting with Scimitar.

Scimitar(original Anvil) is a brand new engine written by Ubisoft to handle third-person stealth games, mixed with some action and a unique physics engine. Very complex.

Anvil is an UPDATE of the Scimitar(original Anvil) engine. They added code into the Scimitar engine and renamed it to Anvil. Very simple.

AnvilNext is a RECREATION of the Anvil engine. The difference is that They REWROTE all of the Anvil engine. They did this by taking the (fairly new/simple) Anvil engine and pulling out what worked, rewriting the (basic) framework, and adding the rest in. Fairly simple.

AnvilNext 2.0 is a RECREATION of the of the AnvilNext engine. The difference is that They REWROTE MOST of the AnvilNext engine. They did this by taking the (Newer but complex) AnvilNext engine and pulling out what worked, rewriting the (intermediate) framework, and adding the rest in. Little more complicated, but doable.

In all, this is a good way to do the engine. you can change it as you need it, and you can keep it up to date.

So, why can't Bethesda do this? Because Bethesda can't move any of the code, as their newest code connects to the oldest code. They would have to go back to step 1(Scimitar) and work they way forward.

So why does Ubisoft get so much flak when they've done a much better job developing their engine? Because they don't FIX it. With an engine as (relatively) simple as AnvilNext 2.0, they have no problems with their old code, because all of their code is new, with clear connections. One bug for them has much of a less chance of bringing down the house.

Neither company deserve to get off clean, but Ubisoft has made a much worse example of how to handle your bugs.
Reply
-6
User avatar #81 to #79 - theruse (11/15/2015) [-]
I don't have time to deal with you anymore.

**** off and log in next time. You can hide behind Anon all you want but the truth is you're a fanboy who can't handle the facts because they aren't positive towards Fallout 4.

Fallout 4 is a great ******* game, but we can't ignore the flaws in it.
Reply
-2
#85 to #81 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
" THEY DISAGREE WITH MY UNFALABLE OPPINION!!! WAAH WAAAH WAAH MOMMY! THEY WERE MEAN AND SAID I WAS PATHETIC! THEY MUST BE EVUL FANBOYYYYS!!! WAAAH ******* FANBOYS CANT TAKE MY INTELLIGENCE!!"
Reply
-1
#67 to #60 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
This is the epitome of someone who doesn't understand how games are made and work.
Reply
-2
#70 to #67 - Bobtheblob (11/15/2015) [-]
Implying that Fallout 4 isn't a regurgitated mess of the previous titles. All of the ******* bugs that plagued all of their previous games are still here, because Bethesda doesn't wanna change the ******* engine.
Reply
+1
#77 to #70 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
Tell me more about how ****** Skyrim was.

I bet Morrowind was THE best game ever though right? ;)
Reply
-1
User avatar #84 to #77 - Bobtheblob (11/15/2015) [-]
Please highlight where I said that Skyrim was ****** . I said it was full of bugs, and it still is full of bugs because Beth can't be bothered to even attempt to fix them. It was fun, even though you had to mod it for hours to get that fun.
Reply
0
#86 to #84 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
Or how about instead you go fist theruse and then lick your come off his chin?
Reply
-3
#88 to #86 - Bobtheblob (11/15/2015) [-]
Let me know when you're finished sucking off Todd Howard, then we can swap cum together.
Reply
0
#89 to #88 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
I'm already gargling it while i type.
Reply
0
User avatar #90 to #89 - Bobtheblob (11/15/2015) [-]
You big whore, we were supposed to share it.
Reply
0
#91 to #90 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
Come here and ill spit it in your mouth then. Or maybe your eyes. I havn't decided yet.
Reply
0
User avatar #187 to #84 - thepandaking (11/16/2015) [-]
I didn't have to mod it, let alone for hours to get the fun in Skyrim. I did indeed mod it for hours, but that was to get extra fun. What you said was subjective, not objective.
Reply
-1
User avatar #80 to #77 - theruse (11/15/2015) [-]
I know you're the same anon who keeps replying to me. Shut the **** up you pathetic cowardly fanboy, and log in if you're going to throw **** .
Reply
-1
#83 to #80 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
Oh dear, you just went full potato and decided to play the 'log in' card.

Shall i start a countdown before your rage reaches critical mass and i get an ip block?
Reply
-1
User avatar #69 to #67 - theruse (11/15/2015) [-]
This is the epitome of a fanboy who can't accept his favorite game has flaws.
Reply
+2
#76 to #69 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
lol

Fallout 4 has plenty of flaws. It's still a fun as **** game and those bugs don't detract nearly as much from the experience as whiney little man-babies like you imply.

"B-B-BUT MUH HYPE! IT TURNS OUT THEY DIDNT DELIVER THE JESUS-RESURECTION CANCER CURE GAME THAT I IMAGINED IT WAS GOING TO BE WAAAAAAAA"
Reply
0
User avatar #78 to #76 - theruse (11/15/2015) [-]
I'm not saying the game was bad. Never did I once say it was bad. I'm saying you can't just give Bethesda a pass on it's glitches like it's not a problem they release a $60 game so buggy.

You fanboys don't see that. All you see is "HURR DURR I FINK GAEM IS BADE LOL!"
Reply
0
#82 to #78 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
That just makes it more utterly pathetic.

I can at least understand and laugh at the thinking of someone who overhyped it and is now not enjoying it because of that. The example of AC given was this - the bugs actually made the game unplayable which is why they were lambasted for it/

On the other hand, someone who is so whiney as to enjoy the game and then bitch because of periferal bugs and gltiches that didn't stop them playing outright and barely registered on their play is just a cunt.
Reply
0
User avatar #98 to #60 - pokemonstheshiz (11/15/2015) [-]
It's bugs caused by the engine, not their system. These have been problems since Oblivion. The only solution would be to get a new engine, but that would take a **** ton of work just to get it even close to where they need it to be, and then start on making the game.
Reply
0
#109 to #98 - rnorton (11/15/2015) [-]
I sit possible for them to improve the existing engine where it falls short?
Reply
+1
User avatar #115 to #109 - pokemonstheshiz (11/15/2015) [-]
I'm sure there are probably still some things they could do, but it's mostly stuff integrated into the engine that causes it. They are making changes to and improving the system with each game, but the underlying code and physics used can't really be helped, for the most part.

Considering the immense size, open worldness, and compatibility with mods, it's pretty unlikely that these games will be bug free. Linear games without mods are a lot easier to test, but the possibility of bugs in something like Fallout is exponentially more. And they do consider mods when they make it. For instance, they took out the holstering animations because it might make it harder to mod in new weapons.

And honestly, besides some clipping, I've yet to encounter any bugs in FO4.
Reply
0
#117 to #115 - rnorton (11/15/2015) [-]
Then maybe its time to look into a new engine? I think we're right about at the point where plenty of companies are switching their engines over, whether it be Unreal 4 or making their own (I think Square Enix recently did one, too). From what I understand, it's been nearly a decade since they started using the basic gamebryo engine about a decade ago, maybe it's time to create a more solid foundation in this aspect?
Reply
0
User avatar #121 to #117 - pokemonstheshiz (11/15/2015) [-]
They are on a new engine, technically. It's called Creation Engine, which they made for Skyrim's release. It's just based on some of the underlying code from Gamebryo, so it carries over some of the inherent problems
Reply
+1
#167 to #49 - ciacheczko (11/16/2015) [-]
The reasoning behind the bugs is that in a game that's this big, this complex, and yet still has to be simple and open enough for people to make ******* of mods for it - they just had to let go of some things and let these bugs slip by.

In order to fix them, the game would have had much more complicated code and, as such, would be less buggy, but wouldn't have that enormous modbase that makes it so popular and keeps it safe from boredom.

They made the choice, and I believe they made the right one.
Reply
0
User avatar #208 to #49 - sirrawrsalot ONLINE (11/16/2015) [-]
You're really underestimating bugs here and many people are having bugs that are either hilarious or hard to notice, or just plain tolerable, it's hard to care about bugs that dont break immersion versus ones that make the game unplayable. For example, Dead Island, I generally mediocre/bad game and it was absolutely full of bugs, but most of them had no impact on gameplay and were straight up hilarious.
Reply
+17
#20 to #3 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
I agree but we aren't talking things like "WELL IF YOU EQUIP THE RETARDGUN AND SPIN IN A CIRCLE WALK BACKWARDS EXACTLY 10 PACES AND RELOAD THE GAME 3 TIMES YOU WILL GET TELEPORTED TO NUKETOWN", the bugs and issues people are experiencing are things that can be attributed to just downright poor optimization, which, for a game that had the budget FO4 did, isn't so easily excusable.

Whenever I enter that factory near Sanctuary Hills my framerate tanks to about 15. It legitimately gives me a headache. Same goes for most of Boston. Why can I run Witcher 3 with not so much as a hiccup but then this game which isn't exaclty cutting edge graphics puts up a fight?

While we're on the topic, why are there only two shotguns? Where is my pump-action? Yeah yeah, "a gazzilion combinations if you count all the crafting!", but you can't even get anything CLOSE to resembling a pump shotgun. Even with the combinations, two shotgun types is sad.
Reply
+6
User avatar #56 to #3 - duskie (11/15/2015) [-]
dont forget one cant be modded while the other can
Reply
+8
#125 to #3 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]

From a programmers perspective the bigger the game the more bugs right? But patching the game breaking ones are difficult and tedious because usually it involves substituting lines of code that creates other bugs with different effects and to completely cancel them out requires massive reworking of the code. Bethesda picked the most tolerable bugs to have. With Ubisoft its more like "Just throw it together" if it works it works and if it doesn't it'll still sell
Reply
+28
User avatar #21 - leifbunny (11/15/2015) [-]
Ubisoft milks the living **** out of their series. I personally expect bugs because I know debugging takes a ******** of time and most companies these days have opted for a "make the users debug for us" structure that's just awful. Ubisoft's games are nowhere near as large and intricate as bethesda's. They are made to be pretty, so they sell more. But they are also made fast, so optimization takes a hit. Then you suddenly get these uncalled for ridiculous "bugs" that can be replicated with little effort.

On the other hand... Bethesda still has people trying to complete skyrim. It's an overly large game with a LOT of data to keep track of all at once. Optimization is taken into account, but cannot be perfected all the time. These games also have multiple years between their releases. They have extensive testing for as much as humanly possible, and the only bugs we see these days only come up by a player's unfortunate stumbling into them which, thanks to the gamebryo engine, can be fixed, cut, or simply ignored by the console, allowing players to proceed as normal. It is unfortunate that the bugs exist, but at least they are minimal in comparison to how much they keep you busy trying to escape them.


Ubisoft prides themselves on visual beauty, then speed through development, ******* up in the process. Bethesda takes their time on their much larger games, whose beauty comes from their worldbuilding, not their modeling. Their bugs are also coincidental to a player's unusual actions, not expected play.

This is coming from someone who hates skyrim enough to write a ******* list, isn't the biggest fan of fallout, and, well, I suppose if there's any bias in my opinion, I hate ubi for a number of reasons, some of which I have laid out above.
Reply
0
User avatar #243 to #21 - schmuxy (11/16/2015) [-]
>states possible biases in his opinion

There should be more people like you
Reply
+37
User avatar #2 - anygoodnames (11/15/2015) [-]
Varies on the game series. Way back in Morrowind, the bugs were practically the feature, letting you do some crazy, hilarious stuff. Since Bethesda couldn't get rid of all the bugs, they literally became features of the game, as seen in Oblivion and Skyrim.

Some can get away with it, some can't.
Reply
0
User avatar #87 to #2 - needsauceadmisblan (11/15/2015) [-]
that endless cash grab from the count in skingrad (oblivion) good times.
or filling you r house in bravil with all the bones you can get.
anyone know invisibility spell for skyrim i cant seem to find one
Reply
+2
User avatar #123 to #2 - nanako (11/15/2015) [-]
Hey does anyone remember building a ladder out of paintbrushes to skip to the final boss in oblivion?
Reply
+6
User avatar #6 to #2 - thefallenlord [OP](11/15/2015) [-]
Oooookay, but what about current technical issues with Fallout 4 on consoles? And plethora of crashes on PC? Those can't be considered features by any means. Why aren't those mentioned in almost any review? Why aren't those problems reflected in the final scoring?
Reply
+4
#14 to #6 - jettom ONLINE (11/15/2015) [-]
Because reviewers and scorers haven't run into those issues.

The BIGGEST issue I've ran into with Fallout 4 is that once, a random settler NPC had her head replaced with a huge cow. It was a general hilarious experience, I reloaded the place with fast travel and boom, issue gone. Completely.

I know that totalbiscuit's review of Fallout 4 will touch heavily upon those issues as he's running into them himself.
Reply
+1
#25 to #14 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
Multiple reviewers have said that plethoras of bugs/glitches still exist, but that it runs par for the course for the series and you shouldn't expect anything else. They rarely had any effect on the final review score.
Reply
+2
User avatar #19 to #6 - redninjaa (11/15/2015) [-]
Im playing on ps4, and its perfectly fine, no bugs, looks great. My only gripe is that im using a console and not a pc.
I exclusively play pc, im not trying to be an elitist btw.
Reply
0
#225 to #6 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
I've only had one crash to desktop in about 50 hours of playtime. Probably some specific hardware issue. You can only test for so much
Reply
0
User avatar #152 to #6 - timmmmmmmmmmmay (11/16/2015) [-]
idk about you but ive only crashed fallout 4 on my pc once and that was because I spawned 1000000 melons.
Reply
0
User avatar #104 to #6 - pokemonstheshiz (11/15/2015) [-]
There's a couple of places with poor optimization, but I've not had any crashes so far
Reply
0
#9 to #6 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
They might be expecting a "fix" for them?
Hardcore / difficult games relies on a solid foundation any little glitch is a problem. Casual games can just be reload from a save and like meh so it crashed.
Pulse people really like cheating.
I do see your point. I think its just the audience that is attracted by the games themselves.
Reply
0
User avatar #7 to #6 - anygoodnames (11/15/2015) [-]
No pattern to it. No reasoning I can find. Just... Is? I don't know how to speak on it further.
Reply
0
User avatar #8 to #7 - thefallenlord [OP](11/15/2015) [-]
To me it's hypocrisy stemming from fanboysm and hype Bethesda games seem to generate.
I might be wrong tho...
Reply
0
User avatar #17 to #8 - alarubra (11/15/2015) [-]
I've never run into glitches in an unmodded Bethesda game. Ever. And I've beaten Fallout 3, Oblivion and Skyrim multiple times.
Reply
+1
#18 to #17 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
"But I haven't had any problems" good for you, go back to playing, those that have can have the discussion. Consider yourself lucky.

-John "TotalBiscuit" Bain
Reply
0
#58 to #18 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
Yes, good for the majority. Because people who don't have problems ARE the majority.
Reply
0
#229 to #58 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
Enough people had issues with Skyrim on PS3 to delay for 3 ******* months, so I'll call ******** .
Reply
+61
User avatar #30 - willshire ONLINE (11/15/2015) [-]
One is a small game with big, sometimes gamebreaking bugs.

the other is a big game with small, mostly innocuous bugs.

you do the math
Reply
0
#224 to #30 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
"Mostly innocuous"

So is that why I can't actually finish Fallout 3 on my xbox 360? With all the **** Ubisoft gets, I can at least say I've never had to buy their games AGAIN on another platform just to ******* finish them.

PS, if it's unstable, then it won't matter how "big" the world is. I'd rather have a smaller game that's focused and works properly than one made with almost no practicality that fails on a technical level.
Reply
+7
#135 to #30 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
Skyrim locked me out from finishing the story 3 times.
Fallout 4 crashed 3 times on me so far, and a texture issue that still has not been resolved for some reason, no matter how times I restarted.
They both havebig game breaking bugs. But some differences, Assassins creed comes out yearly now, while fallout doesn't. Also people just like Bethesda more as a company than Ubisoft, so people tend to like their games more.
Also Fallout 4 is a fun game, so the bugs seem minimal. Just like AC4, which is my favorite AC game, because it was so fun no one really cared about bugs. It tends to happen with many games.
Reply
-1
User avatar #190 to #135 - thepandaking (11/16/2015) [-]
I've never had a game-breaking problem with a Bethesda game that wasn't fixed by verifying the game cache (a steam function that basically makes sure you have all of the files downloaded correctly) or googling it and finding out I did something wrong. I've had many many bugs, but those bugs have all been small like a raider glitched halfway into a wall or bad pathing for NPCs due to the hell that is nav-mesh.
Also a big difference is the debug menu. Assassin's creed doesn't allow you to manually solve bugs that you encounter, and that's a big deal I feel.
Reply
+9
#95 - saintcole (11/15/2015) [-]
Bethesda does not have micro-transactions or day 1 dlc, so **** Ubisoft and **** Uplay.
Reply
+7
#74 - garymuthafuknoak (11/15/2015) [-]
after years of being a Bethesda fanboy I had to doubt my loyalty after having 20 hours of gameplay on fallout 4 already and encountering a glitch that makes me drop everything when I walk. I've already lost all of my rare weapons and armor, and I only make by by picking up weapons dropped by the enemies. Which I end up dropping anyways in about 30 seconds. I cant go into a cave to fight ghouls or mirelurks because I will only have my fists and I cant pick up any of their stuff. I'm forced to play on easy and it is still incredibly hard.

Not to mention I've spent hours on quests that end up being impossible to play because of AI that dont respond sometimes. I dont know how I lucked out this bad, but I play on Xbone and I already tried uninstalling the game and reinstalling

GG Fallout 4, guess I'll go back to New Vegas
Reply
+1
#129 to #74 - anotherponyaccount (11/15/2015) [-]
Hopefully there'll be a patch soon
Reply
0
User avatar #240 to #129 - garymuthafuknoak (11/16/2015) [-]
you have fallout 4?
Reply
0
User avatar #241 to #240 - anotherponyaccount (11/16/2015) [-]
Yeah, no major bugs so far
Reply
+3
#93 to #74 - undeaddog ONLINE (11/15/2015) [-]
Comment Picture
Reply
0
User avatar #102 to #99 - undeaddog ONLINE (11/15/2015) [-]
I just wanted to use the gif...
Reply
+1
#141 to #102 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
Don't lie, you don't want to touch him for fear that the bugs will spread
Reply
+7
User avatar #22 - sigmasenpai (11/15/2015) [-]
Ubisoft is like that one chick you know who pops out a baby every year the first one was a miracle and everyone supported her. The second one they were happy for her. The ones after that started to make her look stupid. Bethesda is the cool dad you had who was always working and making ends meet but would have vacation time and take you camping and teaching you how to enjoy life.
Reply
+15
User avatar #24 - Data (11/15/2015) [-]
You put in about 30 hours into a Batman Game/Assassin's Creed Game. People will play Fallout 4 and Skyrim for years.
Why?
Batman/AC is standalone, with optional DLC later on that you pay for. Sometimes, it's even at release. You don't play through the story more than a few times before you stop playing. It has little customization, with no real branching paths. I haven't personally heard of any mods for either of these games.
Fallout 4/Skyrim is expansive; it can be modded and DLC adds more to the game overall. You may still pay for it, but it's usually worth your money. The game can be replayed multiple times without tanking because of the wide variety of builds and situations that you'll come across, and the dynamic of the game.
Bethesda games are loved because they put love into their games. There's something for everyone in Skyrim and Fallout 4. But it isn't the same for Batman or Assassin's Creed. It's great for a quick thrill, one shot adventure. So people want it to work the first time they play through it; it's probably the only time they will. Fallout and Elderscrolls is something you're going to come back to, again and again, because of the massive amount of adjustments you can make and things you can do It's more like a Sandbox than anything.
Other people may find Batman worth playing over and over, or enjoy stabbing people in the face from a rooftop, too, so they'll keep playing for that. There's always an odd one out of the bunch. But a lot of people tend to gravitate to the freedom of Elderscrolls games and Fallout.
Reply
+5
User avatar #53 - battletechmech (11/15/2015) [-]
It's because Bethesda doesn't advertise themselves as pioneering the future of gaming, they advertise fun experiences.
Reply
+4
#54 to #53 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
and fail to deliver on on both ends
Reply
+1
User avatar #55 to #54 - battletechmech (11/15/2015) [-]
I managed to have fun in the elder scrolls and their fallout games, obviously there is a separation of opinion on the matter, you can like Mass Effect, but I still think it's **** .
Reply
+5
#59 to #53 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
Except they did precisely both of those at E3.
Reply
+23
#32 - pocketstooheavy (11/15/2015) [-]
The fanboys.
Reply
+5
#156 to #32 - vohcaz (11/16/2015) [-]
While the fanboys are a big factor, I think the game does make a difference too.

Try replacing FO4/Skyrim with AC black flag.

The Black Flag bugs were considered funny and quirky in the same way back then, because the game itself made them excusable. Remember the video of the ship slowly flying out of a hole in the sea? That was some funny **** , and i only saw that once.

Unity however, ran absolutely terribly on a GTX 770, even on LOW/720p settings. It had a story that seemed much less relevant, and a lot of the bugs were not the type that could be laughed off.
Pedestrians spawning in view, a few feet above ground and then falling down when you got closer - with no animation, was a bit silly for the first few seconds, but it KEPT happening continuously every hour i played. Falling into the white void was not a "haha wtf" moment, it was a "not AGAIN!" moment.
Reply
+4
User avatar #52 - Einsty (11/15/2015) [-]
You can't mod ubisoft games. You buy it and it's all you're gonna get out of it, ever. Add paranoid DRM to the mix and I'm really not surprised that they are held to a higher standard in this regard.

Late elder scrolls and fallout games are riddled with technical imperfections, but they are about the open world filled with hand crafted content. They have large replay value. There are ******* of mods, there are script extensions. You pay for a game and get so much more, that's why it is often excused.

It's not a double standard, there are simply more parameters to it.
Reply
+3
#140 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
>hello, exterminator? I've got a cockroach infestation.
>"OK sir please give us your address we'll be there tomorrow"

>next day
>van pulls up by my house
>man steps out with exterminator backpack on.
>"could you please show me where?"
>shows him massive nest of cockroaches
>looking at his face, it's familiar
>blue eyes
>curly brown hair
>mfw its Todd
>mfw he tells me those are features not bugs
>mfw he charges me £60 for getting him out here.
Reply
+7
User avatar #116 - yoloswaggins (11/15/2015) [-]
ITT people still making excuses for Bethesda
Reply
+5
#36 - beroty (11/15/2015) [-]
them there's STALKER
wich was made by mud, vodka and slav technomancy and on Medium it looks better than Fallout 4 on Ultra
******* Bethesda, can't improve their ****
Reply
0
User avatar #39 to #36 - thefallenlord [OP](11/15/2015) [-]
While I love that game to death, it too had it fair share of bugs, crashes and glitches
Reply
0
User avatar #220 to #36 - ztron (11/16/2015) [-]
Stalker with mods*
Lost Alpha's a step up from Fallout 4 but the other Stalker's are old as balls.
Stalker Call of Pripyat - Nvidia GTX 770 - Ultra Settings at 1080p S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Lost Alpha Gameplay 1080 Maxed Settings
Reply
0
User avatar #242 to #220 - beroty (11/16/2015) [-]
***** , Vanilla SoC looks better than FO4
Reply
0
#66 to #36 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
>Playing Fallout for the graphics

kek
Reply
+5
#68 to #66 - beroty (11/15/2015) [-]
yeah, what the **** i was thinking anyway?
was i really wrong for expecting bethesda to improve after 7 years since fallout 3?
even modded oblivion looks better
Reply
0
#100 to #68 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
Honestly I think the game looks fine. I wasn't expecting a pure masterpiece of art and beauty if I wanted that I would be an artist. Besides you can't compare what a mod did to a game that has been out for like what 10 years or something (Don't quote me). It's the gameplay and story that draws everyone to the game. Not the graphics. Enough said.
Reply
+2
#103 to #100 - beroty (11/15/2015) [-]
This gif explains what i think about FO4 better than any word could say
Reply
+2
User avatar #110 to #36 - thegrimgenius (11/15/2015) [-]
>Stalker
>Not buggy
>Graphically better
I love Stalker to death, but that's just wrong.
Reply
0
User avatar #118 to #110 - beroty (11/15/2015) [-]
it's literally graphically better
Reply
+6
#1 - swbite (11/15/2015) [-]
all of Bethesda's games have been like that going back decades, Ubisoft released solid games in the past I do see where you are coming from
all of Bethesda's games have been like that going back decades,
Ubisoft released solid games in the past
I do see where you are coming from
Reply
+4
#4 to #1 - thefallenlord [OP](11/15/2015) [-]
I get that, but why do we still allow this? Why don't we as consumers don't voice our displeasure with the technical state this games are coming out? Why for the love of God-Emperor we still tolerate this **** again and again and again?

It just DOESN'T work... on launch... and sometimes even after that
Reply
+6
#12 to #4 - jettom ONLINE (11/15/2015) [-]
Because they're different games.
Bethesda games are open world. You have inconceivable freedom, while Ubisoft games are more linear. If you're playing an Ubisoft game, and a place makes you crash, you can't play most of the game until a patch. In Fallout 4, my game crashes whenever I'm trying to enter Prydwen. I just decided to do another part of the game instead.

Furthermore, far less people run into issues with Bethesda games, and they're generally not game-breaking.
With Ubisoft, more encounter the bugs than those who do not, with Bethesda, while each and everyone might run into one or two bugs, the fewest run into 10+ game breaking ones. I think the only universal bug is the "Children in power armor" which is hilarious.

And the parts besides the bugs themself are generally better overall in Bethesda games. The Assassin's Creed games are somewhat rushed and the story has been generally awful since the second one. The only "good" new Assassin's Creed game as of late was Black Flag.

I mean sure, I'm playing Fallout 4 and I run into this. Does it make me furious? No. There's 3 heads inside a fridge. If I wasn't paying attention I wouldn't even notice them.

But in Ubisoft's situation, those 3 faces would maybe be the faces of Key NPC's. And they wouldn't be fixed. If I went back to this location, these heads would work as intended. They wouldn't in Ubisoft's case.
Reply
+2
#28 to #4 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
The worst part is that Bethesda isn't going to make a lot of significant efforts to fix these issues, since their last game, Skyrim, still has insane amounts of bug and glitches, progression stoppers, sequence breaking, etc. years after the release. Fans just say "Well, mods fix it" as a defense. That's doesn't make it ok! That's the company literally not caring anymore about the game and letting other people fix the mistakes they couldn't be bothered to for free.

If they implement a paid mod system like they tried to do in Skyrim (since the only reason they said they took it out was because Skyrim's modding community was too well established), you're essentially going to pay for the equivalent of patches and bug fixes.
Reply
0
User avatar #196 to #28 - nyangiraffe (11/16/2015) [-]
The Fallout 4 EULA says mods must be released for free, so no paid mods.
Reply
0
User avatar #10 to #4 - swbite (11/15/2015) [-]
I think its ******** , you can't keep the sheep from following the stupid shepherds.
This is the best were going to get because the average user is dumber than the buggy A.I. in these games
Reply
0
#11 to #4 - cookiegooroo (11/15/2015) [-]
Except it does work otherwise people wouldn't be playing it? I understand the frustration you face when a game doesn't even load and/or isn't playable but clearly it's working for a lot of people. The reason the other games were torn down was because they were unplayable buggy messes for almost everyone at launch. People with even the most high end computers had trouble running Unity and even then every time they turned a corner everyone's hair color would change, their faces would disappear and the floor would stop existing. As for Fallout 4 maybe I haven't looked hard enough but I haven't seen too many things that actually render the game unplayable or inexcusably laggy and most of them are fixed with a restart?
Maybe I'm just uninformed?
Reply
0
#13 to #11 - thefallenlord [OP](11/15/2015) [-]
Look up issues console verions have... simple example: game runs on sub 30 fps and even that gets cut in half the second you look down the sights.

Me personaly, my framerate would tank HARD in any town and in some cluttered outdoor areas.

I have friends on steam who refunded the game because they were unable to even start the thing in 4 day time window.

Preformance for this kind of game is just bad (we're talking about game that can't run past 60 without breaking it's physics engine)

Steam forums are full of people having all sorts of technical issues that prevent them from playing, so I'll let you with somewhat rude but imho very valid quote by TotalBiscuit:
"But I haven't had any problems" good for you, go back to playing, those that have can have the discussion. Consider yourself lucky.
Reply
0
User avatar #206 to #13 - nyangiraffe (11/16/2015) [-]
TB's issues he had were caused by editing the ini file to unlock the frame rate to go over 60. Even after bethesda said it causes issues.
Reply
0
#145 to #13 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
"Look up issues console verions have... simple example: game runs on sub 30 fps and even that gets cut in half the second you look down the sights." limitation of the consoles...

"Me personaly, my framerate would tank HARD in any town and in some cluttered outdoor areas. " your horrible computer

"Preformance for this kind of game is just bad (we're talking about game that can't run past 60 without breaking it's physics engine) " 7 year old card runs game maxed with no issues
Reply
0
User avatar #149 to #145 - thefallenlord [OP](11/16/2015) [-]
Witcher 3 ran on solid 60 with V-sync
Fallout 4 drops below 30 in places and it does it for prolonged periods of time on numerous ocasions.
Reply
0
#144 to #13 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
The question was why consumers tolerate the technical state at launch.
The answer was that a majority of the consumer base doesn't have these serious problems.
I'd say consider yourself unlucky
Reply
0
User avatar #146 to #144 - thefallenlord [OP](11/16/2015) [-]
Majority of the people in Europe didn't die during the second World War, so why should we care? They were just unlucky.

...yea great line of logic you have there. I would swear there was something in the definition of the word 'review' that was supposed to cover all facets of reviewed product and take it into consideration in overall evaluation.
Reply
0
#29 to #11 - anon (11/15/2015) [-]
There are people in every game that releases horrendously buggy that say "I never had any problems", they are generally ignored.
Reply
+2
User avatar #112 - gilliam (11/15/2015) [-]
I have gotten only one bug so far in 60 hours of playing.
I might be that statistical minority, i dunno.
Reply
+3
#132 - fiskars (11/15/2015) [-]
>there are people defending FO4 bugs right now in comments
>Muh open world
>it took 4 years!
>but the bugs are small!

holy **** you guys have no standards.
Reply
+3
User avatar #133 to #132 - thefallenlord [OP](11/15/2015) [-]
IT TOOK 4 YEARS... yet the game is still chock full of bugs!

I HAVE NO BUGS!... yet the Steam forums are full of people with them

BUT IT'S OPEN WORLD... how the **** is that an excuse? Can't do it properly? Don't do it at all.
Reply
+1
User avatar #207 to #133 - shaddyz (11/16/2015) [-]
have you seen the bugs in unity? they werent hahaha funny they were obnoxius, stoped the game flow and made you fail(biggest no no for me)

for me seeing danse doing the moonwalk is just funny, it didnt crash my game, it didnt **** up my files i didnt fail a mission because of it...

i think the biggest issue people had with unity was that their bugs was crushingly killing the games flow
Reply
+1
#230 to #207 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
Except FO3's bugs weren't funny either. I didn't laugh at the crashes, my autosave for any area inside The Pitt corrupting so I'd have to restart the DLC, or any of the massive frame rate drops.

Funny how people bitched at Arkham Knight for the PC port, but as it stood Bethesda was just as greedy when releasing FO3 on consoles when it clearly needed mods.
Reply
0
User avatar #231 to #230 - shaddyz (11/16/2015) [-]
Didnt play 3, cant argue for it
Reply
+1
#161 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
I swear to God, the Third Crusade was more peaceful than differing internet opinions
Reply
+1
User avatar #169 to #161 - Blackmane (11/16/2015) [-]
Dear diary, today anon was both historically educated and topical!
Reply
0
#194 to #169 - anon (11/16/2015) [-]
I dare say if we gathered all the differing opinions on this into one physical location for a peaceful discussion, we'd easily end over 3 million lives.
Reply
+1
#101 - darcabyss (11/15/2015) [-]
I haven't encountered any game breaking glitches in Fallout 4. Just the occasional Brahmin on a roof or characters stop talking to stare passionately at each other. Oh, and some dick head stealing my first suit of power armor and walking around looking distended.
Reply
+1
#31 - sinery (11/15/2015) [-]
>TFW
12345>
[ 243 comments ]
Leave a comment
<
>
 Friends (0)