Trails in the Sky SC is shit. Guns of Icarus Online is much better.

**itskennyandjosh used "*roll picture*"**
**itskennyandjosh rolled image**No, fallout is a decent game, its the die hard fanboys who ruin it

Maybe you should just die.

yeah, swag on

>>#11, just kidding, didn't watch it ;)

"we"?

speak for yourself

well, he's not wrong... he is top tier shitposter.

You again?

spooked

Ayayayaiiiii

**victorytoaster used "*roll picture*"**
**victorytoaster rolled image** your alive?

Well, you're not wrong. Have a thumb. And a hug.

Not sure how I feel about this.

Oh god he is back

Biebergotswag! You're alive!

shut up, meg

when biebergotswag comes back and gets green thumbs

he allways did

Simple and effective and i do admit you got me several times with that shit.

**osmosisjones used "*roll picture*"**
**osmosisjones rolled image**Never thought I'd see a Bieber pic with green thumbs on this site.

Huh, partially forgot about you. How are things, man?

The RPG/story related elements of the game are the weakest (or just nonexistent) :l

you fucking what nigger

fj is the absolute WORST place to get your news.

fucking listen to BBC World Radio or something, ffs

that's like saying you wouldn't pick up a penny so why would you pick up a hundred dollar bill.

you're exaggerating the situation quite a bit here.

Although that being said I don't see anything wrong with saving a sheep from a terrifying and painful death so that it can live a little longer and be put to good use later after a humane and controlled death.

They are not positive/negative ffs, they are 'recommended' or 'not recommended'
The majority of 'positive' reviews are the 'xd meme' ones, I haven't seen any 'negative' review that was like you said, they are all pleasantly detailed about the negatives of the game.
If you bothered to read them, you will see that most of them are not 100% 'negative', they comment on the good things too. It's just that they don't recommend the game.
Don't get blinded by Little Todd's humongous cock
pic related

Jesus, you've really dedicated your life to hating on Fallout, haven't you? There hasn't been a single Fallout post on FJ that you haven't shitposted on so far.

90% of the negative reviews are just bullshit.

"They removed skillpoints!"
- Incorporated into the perk tree.

"No RPG elements!"
- More than in the last games. You can play the asshole, the jokester, the inquisitve or the paragon of justice, or something in-between these. In Fallout 3 and New Vegas you could mostly be bland, or get some of the options you have in Fallout 4, occasionally. People complaining about the "only 4 options" dialogue wheel tend to forget you didn't even get 4 options in the earlier games, and that they hardly mattered.

"The graphics are bad!"
- Replay Fallout 3 or New Vegas without gushing ENB and retextures up your ass, and you'll see what bad means. The game wasn't about graphics, and you have superhuman vision if you can call them bad.

"The intro is short and bad!"
- Subjective, nothing more. I'm happy I don't have to play a long sequence of doing nothing.

"No reputation system!"
- New Vegas was about warring factions trying to compete for power. Fallout 4 is not. The setting is vastly different, thus it wasn't an option. You can still join multiple factions and receive perks and bonuses as a result. Joining the NCR got you some jobs, joining the Minutemen makes you able to establish bases and building an army you can call in for support.

And that's your negative Steam reviews for you. Most of the reviews will complain about these things, completely omitting that the earlier games were in no way better. Maybe for their time, but the nostalgia idiots from /v/ aren't contributing in any positive way. It's also funny to see how half of these negative reviewers have played the game for 30 hours+, and a large amount of them for far more, even though the game came out a few days ago. Sure has to be a piss poor game if you play it day in and day out, right?

But why do I even bother replying to your shitposting, you're just gonna respond with a picture or video of Fallout bashing and declare yourself the winner because you're too autistic to see the game for what it is.

New Vegas is pretty much the only contrast there. In Fallout 3, you play as the son of a lost father. Here you are the father of a lost son.

But taking New Vegas into account, yes, it did make more options. But none of these options were really immersive. Sure, you could walk around and rip people apart, or you could actually try doing something meaningful. In any event, the story in New Vegas was pretty much shit. Not because Obsidian can't make a good story, but because leaving options open means going for width instead of depth. It's a designer choice, and if you prefer that, it's fine. I liked that part of New Vegas too, being able to make a character and almost immediately start playing the game, with being a courier seeming more like background noise.

I may not have stated it clearly, but I don't have any issues with subjective opinions. What I do have a problem with, is when people go berserk on forums, review sites and the like and virtually scream that the game "has no RPG elements", "your actions have no meaning", or "it's not a Fallout game". It's a little different from the earlier games, same transition type as was made from earlier Fallout games to Fallout 3.

i saw one that was really nice. the guy pretty much went through a really good run down of why he didn't recommend it, saying it wasnt a bad game but to wait till the christmas sale or till the price generally drops. personally, the only thing that really caught my eye and makes me really wish i could get the game was the weapon customization and the base building. everything else was kinda lack luster minus the shooting mechanics. not saying i wouldnt play the shit out of it or its a bad game but its just another game. nothing special. i think taking skills out was a silly move though. they could have had that awesome perk tree but still have skills. would have made sense, just a personal thought though

There are certainly things that could be better, yet the game still has way over 100 hours of content, not taking replayability and mods into account. The fact that people sweat the small stuff and outright tell people it's a bad game is a saddening one. Few games can reach the level this game has, and when baiters like oxidoferroso just try to stir up bullshit, it just means the game is glorious when they have to touch small factors, or outright not understanding the game. The skill tree could've been kept, yes, but once you start assigning perks you generally don't want to go for other playstyles. Hence it becomes specialized and varied by every playthrough, yet still pertains some usefulness. I'd say it makes more sense, seeing as an energy weapon still operates the same way a ballistic gun does in terms of recoil, so that one would be proficient in one and useless with another seems odd.

Then again, those are just subjective meanings. Negative reviewers like to think that their opinion is the ultimate truth, and that if they wail enough about it, it will be the truth for you as well.

criticism=/=bait

very true, there are tons of folks ive seen ranting and raving over silly shit. i really dont understand it. but when you list out why a person might not lke the game youve made a proper negative review, but when you just spout nonsense with 1 hour of gameplay and call it a total shit game cause of this that and the other without really letting the uninformed reader know why, your just being stupid.

The RPG/story related elements of the game are the weakest (or just nonexistent) :l