It's not about Fallout 4 being a good game on its own merits, it's about it being a good Fallout game. Since it has a 4 on the end it should be a proper sequel, and it isn't. And the reasons why should be fairly obvious. (No skills, dialogue cross, voiced protagonist, no traits, a SPECIAL system who's only real purpose is to grant you access to perks, still first person and real time, still just a themepark dungeon sandbox world with scaled down everything.)

Fallout 4 can be a good game on its own merits. And there is nothing wrong with liking Fallout 4 for being 'just a good game' for you. But if we're going to talk about the merit of its as a Fallout game and a sequel at that then Fallout 4 is an abomination to me. It's merely a step above Fallout: Brotherhood Of Steel.

So my criticism is simple. Fallout 4 isn't a Fallout game. It has the name "Fallout", it has a 4 on the end and it has some iconicism inside of it but that's it. Fallout 4 is more like a hybrid mix of Skyrim, Bioware, Rust and Borderlands than it is Fallout.

And as a fan of Fallout since 1999 who loves the series it feels like, yknow the South Park episode where Indiana Jones is raped by whatshisface and whatshisface#2? Yeah, that, except way way worse. And all I can hope for is that Bethesda allows a third party to develop a game, like Obsidian did. But there's no guarantee that the third party they get (if they get any third party to do a game) would care about creating a Fallout game. They might just want to create a Fallout 4-clone or do their own spin on it and end up with something completely alien to Fallout 4 and FNV.

Anyway, as to a game on its own merits? It just looks boring to me. A bunch of running and gunning against bullet-sponge enemies in a scaled down sandbox world. I mean, that's Borderlands. Except Borderlands has better gunplay, more interesting locations and enemies, and I find the humour in it funny. As a game on its own merits, why would I want to settle for an inferior Borderlands?

Sure, FO4 has base-building too, but honestly if I wanted to build houses then I'd go to a game where that is the main feature, like The Sims.

Finally, Fallout 4 has a... Story? I guess. Yeah it has a story, but... It's Bethesda. They aren't good at story-telling. And from what I've seen you get to join the Brotherhood after like one mission and you become the leader of the Minutemen after 2 missions. Oh and Cabot's house. And the kid who's been stuck in a fridge for 200 years.

Nothing about Fallout 4 looks appealing to me even on its own merits. Bullet-sponge enemies, pointless gimmicks, poor writing, an inconsistent incoherent world, a poor story, annoying crafting system, bad gunplay, awful minimalistic UI, same ****** ass console-focused menu (I play on PC and the PC version should 'not' have the same menu system as a console does as what works for a controller does not work well with a mouse and keyboard).

Fallout 4 just doesn't seem appealing to me in any conceivable way.

TL : DR
My criticism is that Fallout 4 lacks the design philosophy that makes a Fallout game a Fallout game and that on its own merits Fallout 4 looks like a game that is trying to ape other triple-a titles out there but does a very very poor job of it.

It's not that it's a bad game, but it's a bad RPG

I've played all of the main series games. Fallout 2 was way better than 1 in my opinion. Everybody agrees that New Vegas was better than 3. I'm in love with Fallout 4 (and Cait), but I'm still trying to decide how it compares to New Vegas. I'm certainly dying as much as I did in 1, but we all know that the game was rigged from the start.

To me, Fallout 4 is great, but it will never stack up to New Vegas, doesn't come close.

New Vegas is the game that got me into Fallout, Frank Sinatra singing Blue Moon in the intro, then you wake up, hands tied, and Matthew Perry delivers that infamous opening speech, with that infamous tagline (they said his voice acting was flat, but I loved it), and then waking up in Goodsprings to Doc Martin.

Everything about that game was perfect, if they would use the new engine and port it over to PS4, my dick would be able to cut diamonds.

But, alas, that's a dream.

Anyhoo, Fallout: New Vegas will forever be the best Fallout to me, everything was great, it looked fairly decent, nothing about it was abysmal, every feature was good, the DJ was ******* stellar ( **** whoever says Three Dog is best DJ, Mister New Vegas is the best ******* DJ ever, also, **** Travis, seriously, **** that guy.), everything was perfect. That's all I can say.

Can I be in the opinion thread?

Played New Vegas first so that'll always be a personal favorite for me
I picked up 3, but my PC at the time couldn't run it because Windows 7
Got 1 2 and Tactics for dirt cheap off of a steam sale
Tried playing all three, but couldn't get into them because isometric + "It's 2012"
Eventually played through 1 and had fun, but never thought it was absolutely amazing until that ending
The next day I started playing 2 and don't hurt me still haven't finished
Never even tried Tactics past that first launch
A year or two later I finally get a new PC and am able to play Fallout 3 after a few fixes
Enjoyed it more because **** isometrics, but did miss the clever dialogue and varied interesting factions and groups of 1, 2, and NV
Obviously played 4 and while the world certainly felt more alive than that of 3 and played a lot better than any game in the series from a gameplay standpoint
Again though. I really miss that special touch that the characters from the original team have. In my opinion the closest Bethesda came to hitting that sweet spot for me was Travis
I loved how he was so unsure of himself and generally awkward and was really surprised when he actually changed after a certain sidequest involving him

what? I haven't, and I'm not planning to, what do you mean?

imaging call of duty, but co op only, and completely ****** with power armor

I agree

I wanted to come back to this, and I wanted to talk to you about your point, specifically, your Fifth paragraph.

You said, "Contrasting with Fallout 4, we are instead given a protagonist with a clearly defined story and character to it already."

I disagree, we have an objective, sure, and one aspect, but that's it.

When you start in Fallout 4, you know knowing about the base character other than he/she served in the military, which isn't a defined story, because a lot of people of that time period would've served in the military. You have an objective in Fallout 4, sure, find your son, but in Fallout 3 and, respectively, New Vegas, you have almost the same objective: find someone, could be your dad(3), the man who tried to kill you(NV), or your son(4), but they follow a similar path.

I don't see Fallout 4 as any different to say, 3, because it's not about the end goal, it's getting there is what makes Fallout so fun, in New Vegas, I didn't cherish taking the dam from NCR, Legion, or ******** on both to take it myself, I cherished all the dumb and funny **** I did to get there, like going to the Big Empty in Old World Blues, talking to robots about penishands, or going to Utah, to meet a man kept alive by anger, or following the Lonesome Road to meet the Courier calling me out, whom of I had some unknown history (which you can make up yourself).

Unfortunately, you're right, Fallout 4 does not have the staying power of New Vegas or 3 (never played 3, for the record), but I wouldn't say that you had a clear story and character, you just had an objective, and one aspect of your background defined, but it was that way in 3 and New Vegas, in New Vegas, you couldn't be a Caravan Guard, or anything else, your character had to be a Courier, and have history with Ulysses, from what I remember of 3, which is kinda obvious, you couldn't be a random wastelander, you had to be a Vault Dweller.

I don't mind my character having to be from a military background, and I don't mind the objective, hell, I'd get bored with Fallout if I just wandered around all the time.

That's all I wanted to say, have a fine day, my friend.

This is Mister New Vegas signing off, haha, just kidding, I'm not going anywhere, my love for you is too strong.

A very concise rebuttal, thanks for that!

You bring up another point.

"(Yeah, I kinda realize the first half of New Vegas was on rails.)".

Fallout 4 is the same way, you remember Captain Crunch taking your son, and you go after him first (like you go after Benny first), then you kill him, and from there, you're left to decide why you want to find your son.

And when you do , you're also completely free as to what to do, do you be caring, and gentle, or do you be a complete prick to him because he left you on ice for 60 years, allegedly. , or inbetween.

You can hate everything he stands for, or be the one that drives it to the top.

So, in conclusion, (apparently that wasn't all I wanted to say), I agree with you on the fact that Fallout 4 doesn't have the lasting effect that New Vegas or 3 did, but I do disagree that it's vastly different and your character is clear-cut, as opposed to New Vegas or 3.

I suppose that objectively everything you say is true, but there is a clear subjective argument towards it as well, but it almost entirely hinges upon the main character being voiced and the issues that brings up with dialogue.

Bearing in mind that this is indeed subjective, I felt as if having the main character be voice acted took away from some of the emotions I felt during the game. In your head you have a certain tone when reading the dialogue of your player character based upon how you are reacting to the events of the game. I felt that with the Sole Survivor being voice acted, my reactions were being overridden by the emotion portrayed by the voice actor, which in turn created a disconnect between the character and myself. Perhaps this is why I felt so strongly that the character had more of a developed personality and backstory in the game by default.

Another negative that I attributed to the PC being voiced is the simple fact that they had to have less dialogue for it, or else they would have to get the VA to say more lines. I know the opinions are very mixed on this, but I for one stand on the side that the game could have used a better dialogue system than the one it had implemented.

Glad to find another Fallout fan that is able to debate points without resorting to petty arguments.

*cont*

The Minutemen are basically a militia, the Railroad are just....weird, and the only one that's actually comfortable is the Brotherhood of Steel.

The Institute are pretty much just....evil period.

I wish the presentation of the factions weren't so biased, which brings me to my next point.

Piper.

I wish Piper didn't talk about the Institute so much. When you walk out of Vault 111, you're very impressionable, you don't know what to expect out of anyone, you get to Diamond City, you meet Piper at the gate, and then you go on it, after talking to Mayor McDoughnut, of course, and then she asks why you're here, and then she talks about the Institute, the "Commonwealth Boogeyman", which cripples anyone's stance on the Institute because you're taught to hate them, like you're taught to be in awe of the Brotherhood when they fly in on the Prydwen.

My only problem, specifically with Piper, is that the game sorta forces you, at least at first, to loathe one of the factions.

You're totally right about the bias towards the Institute that the game throws at you. I think that they did that because (actual spoiler ahead) it makes the shock of Shaun being the Institute's director that much more powerful .

I think your problem with Piper is the problem you have with all of the game's companions. As far as the ones I've encountered, they all have reason to dislike or hate the Institute. Bethedsa really wanted you to hate them too because quite frankly I don't believe their writers have the capacity or courage to offer each faction without bias.

New Vegas did it right by introducing you to them under a moderate, neutral scenario and letting you decide for yourself if you liked them or not. This was something that is pretty important for RPG's. It's good when you don't really know who the bad guy is in the game in my opinion.

I can kinda understand the hatred, but I hate the fact that I was taught that hatred, instead of gaining it, myself.

Basically, what Dougsdales my Dimmadomes is the fact that I basically had no choice but to hate the Institute, due to presentation, the Minutemen are presented as an upstanding militia, out to help the people, the Railroad is "presented", kinda, as basically the Underground Railroad, but instead of smuggling black slaves to the North, they're smuggling synths out of the Commonwealth, the Brotherhood of Steel is presented as an almighty good, flying in on it's massive airship with it's dozens of Vertiberds and it's Knights with power armor and tip-tap-choppin' up meat, and the Institute are basically Nazis on steroids who want to replace people, even though in real terms, the closest thing to Nazis in Fallout 4 are the Brotherhood because of their "kill anything that isn't human" attitude, basically, like an Aryan belief.

At the end of the day, and I'll say it again: New Vegas scratched every itch, you went into the game with a semi-blank slate, a wonderful world to explore, you're not given a biased view on any of the factions, you run into them respectively I don't remember how you meet the NCR, but I know you first meet Ceaser's Legion when Benny is kidnapped by them. , and from there, based on your personal morals, you choose who to follow, the Companions didn't rabble on about how "X sucks because they're EVILLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!"(even though, I have to admit, Nick Valentine and Curie are on my list of favorite companions of all time).

Now, imagine Fallout New Vegas with Fallout 4's engine.

And you just got a snapshot of Heaven.

Oh, of course. Maybe that's another reason for the feeling of disconnect I was talking about earlier between myself and the player character; in a way the bias I felt wasn't my own.

Nick Valentine and Curie deserve their own game about being partners in post-apocolyptic detective noir and I will throw money and give blood to make it happen.

You actually meet both the NCR and Caesar's Legion on the way to Novac from Primm, and oh golly gee wouldja look at that, you effectively meet them both right next to each other, each introducing the factions and their stance on each other because Obsidian's writing team is top-tier.

Yeah, but the difference between meeting both the NCR and Ceaser's Legion on the way to Novac, is that instead of hearing that one sucks(if you listen to Radio New Vegas like I do), you hear both sides of the story, how Ceaser's Legion captured Primm, and how the NCR is at Hoover Dam, it never says "X or X is bad, mmkay?", it's just like, "Here, pick one, or don't , I don't give a **** , we were good enough to give you an independent ending, too, son."

And I think that's where Fallout 4 kinda shot itself in the foot.

It didn't have an independent ending, it could've, quite easily, with someone like Piper, or a big player in Diamond City (maybe even Nick), you could've had an independent ending, where someone helped you infiltrate the Institute by yourself (because let's be honest, by the time you reach the ending, you're a one-man army wrapped in a tank.), and you could've killed them, and been greeted by the other two Faction leaders, and could've told them to go **** themselves and that you were way too cash money to join their nerd cliques, and even killed them if that was your choice.

Back to my original point: Fallout 4 is a solid game, but it's a lacking Fallout game.

Agreed and well said.

Also for anyone tuning in to the comments section who might be interested, the Fallout series from 1 to New Vegas Ultimate Edition is for sale on Steam for 66-75% off right ******* now, go pick them up and play them for $21 if you haven't done so already.

I already own Fallout: New Vegas, bruv.

I love it to death, it's what got me into the series, and to me, it does everything an ARPG should do, and more, to a T.

And there's two other things that come to mind, discussing Fallout, and I'll start with the biggest one.

Is it just me, or are the factions....weird in this game?

In New Vegas, you understood where everyone stood, you kinda got everyone's endgame.

But in 4, they're just....there.

Eh, I disagree there. I think that the factions just being there was good. you have to remember that there wasn't a central focus for the story to revolve around as far as the Commonwealth was concerned.

In 3, there was Project Purity. It was the thing that the two factions that mattered in the game cared about and its success or failure carried great weight. (or was supposed to anyway, it came up short on delivering on the significance of the project).

In New Vegas, it was all about Hoover Dam. Everything revolved around the second battle for this critically important structure. Factions were making decisions based around which side they were going to fight and where they stood to gain in the Mojave Wasteland afterward.

The factions in those games (and I'm just using them for example) all were focused around a significant thing that was happening. In Fallout 4, we didn't really have anything like that. The narrative was really all about the Sole Survivor, set in the backdrop of some events that were taking place in the Commonwealth at the time. I didn't feel as if the factions lacked for personality or purpose; they were just going about their business as usual. Sure, your influence in which factions you aided made the difference but other than that, considering there wasn't any one thing that everybody was focusing on, I felt that their portrayal was pretty good.

If I'm honest, I don't know how I feel about the voiced PC.

On one hand, I've always felt that'd be great for New Vegas or something, but you're right, on the other hand, I always make up an accent, tone, amount of sarcasm, etc, etc, so I think the voiced character is a double edged sword.

The dialogue system is also...meh. In New Vegas, there were Intelligence checks, too, instead of just Charisma checks, and Charisma checks were more clear cut instead of color-coded.

I think that it's good that there's a voiced PC, but on the same hand, I wish they would've taken the time and energy of voicing the PC to write more witty dialogue, which is something I give high praise to in regards of New Vegas, it had some of the funniest dialogue I've ever read, whereas only sometimes is the Sarcastic option kinda funny.

I think that, at the end of the day, Fallout 4 is a solid game, but it's a lacking Fallout game, it's not lacking by much, but a few...inconsistencies, drag it down in areas where it could've had improvement.

Thanks for having this good-ass debate with me, friendo.

You're right there.

Fallout 4 is fun, but it won't ever have the staying power.

**** , I must've beaten Fallout: New Vegas about 10 times, hated Fallout 3, though. just don't like it, might play it for the Enclave, tho.

What I would prefer, is for the next Fallout game to be Fallout: New Vegas 2, where Fallout 4 was just Fallout 3, part 2.

New Vegas just scratched every itch, man, it was perfect.