Fall of Duty 4 - Why Fallout 4 sucks
10 years ago
General
In the very first mission, you enter the power armor, which is more like a mech now, rip a minigun from a chopper and kill a deathclaw - thats all you need to know.
FA+

A lot of the functionality of story telling gets much better the further into the game you get in the main story. At least as far as the game goes there are a lot of features to be desired. (I honestly hate not having repair function's for weapons and armor)
If you're a fan of Battlestar Galatica theres a soft nod towards that story near the end of the game. And the fact that you get to see factions play out the way they should have more so in the franchise is one reason why I enjoy it from a story standpoint (IE brotherhood of steel)
All in all, as far as games go its definitely not as buggy as Fallout:NV, haven't had the esteemed and famed first day crashes that Bethesda games are so well known for. Definitely the most stable of games they've released on a day one release to date. And like all Bethesda games there are memorable glitches and issues in the game that makes it a Bethesda game.
I enjoy the game for as far as it throws but at the moment I think a lot of the reason I enjoy it is the fact that it doesn't have all the day one issues and glitches and crashes and compatibility issues that Fallout 3 had for Windows XP (Hate HATE the Microsoft games UI) users and the lost saved files after every patch that New Vegas had on consoles and PC. There was nothing I hated more than spending hours in New Vegas only to have the game hard crash and lose 2 hours of quick saving.
This is in no way bashing your opinion, I respect anything and everything you say regarding it! I just like striking a conversation =)
I havent played much of the game due to stop and go attitude, but i always stick to the "first 30 minutes" rule - if the game manages to grab my interest in those 30 minutes, i will stick to it. The Warhammer vermintide strikes me as a good example, since I dissed the game in first 10 minutes and never touched it since. It might seem like a strange attitude, seeing that games are much bigger than what they show in such a small time period, but most of the UI and simple mechanics that will stick throughout the whole experience will show themselves during that time. But back to topic - yes, F4 is amazingly stable, considering other games from bethesda and runs smooth as baby buttock down the slide, but the inherent problem im having with it is, as said, the consoley UI. Everything seems to take a few seconds longer than it should and switching between buttons on keyboard is as cumbersome as trying to navigate with mouse (PCs and Convos are a good example here). All in all, the game is too much streamlined for my taste - gone are the skills and actual options when it comes to conversation, the world seems both crowded and empty at the same time. At danger to sound like a conservative, its too different comparred to earlier games and character centered storyline isnt helping it either. In older fallouts, the protagonist was both a bringer of change and looking glass into the world of Fallout, while in all bethesda games (starting with morrowind), the world revolves around the character (oblivion being a sole exemption here). But, under the line, is F4 a bad game? No. Is it a game that every RPG should look and get inspired with? No. And that kinda bugs me, since im so used to binge play every single bethesda game, but with this one, i just cant - if it wasnt called fallout, then yes, it would be great, but with all the betrayals to the standards of the series, it just leaves me with sour aftertaste
But the bit that really made me roll my eyes was the beginning, just before you regain control inside the Vault. You can tell, they really wanted to get an emotional reaction out of the player, but it is so heavy handed and transparent, it just made me go, again, "Really?" No emotional reaction here. And it set a precedent that the game is going to continue to try and be more serious than humorous, and it's the humor that puts Fallout above other post-apocalyptic settings.
Though, for me personally, Undertale spoiled Fallout 4, as it did everything emotion-wise that Fallout 4 is trying to do, RIGHT. The first hour of that game had me on physically tense and on the verge of tears, and it's a silly, Earthbound-inspired 8-bit-ish RPG. I spend my days playing Fallout 4, but I'm still dreaming of Undertale. (RECOMENDRECOMENDRECOMEND)
So far its what I suspected since E3, this is Bethesdas Fallout and ironically, that's made it a far better game then 3, heck better then NV in some regards.
So in the end I guess we have to agree to disagree, to me this is definitely a Fallout game and a Damn fun one to boot.
And "Agree do disagree" is kinda of a lost argument on this topic, since we dont stand on the oposite end of the spectrum, like me saying its the worst shit that plagued earth since E.T. for atari and you on the other hand saying its the best thing since baby jesus. Its because I love Fallout games im criticizing the whole thing, not because i hate em - i would hardly buy something that i know i will hate ;3 But, the whole idea of the exercise is to explore if the changes they did are "right or wrong"
As for empowerment, I dont see any different empowerment then what we saw in the old games, or any other protagonist, especially since ya not forced to neither accept the invite nor is it mandatory you run into it within a hour, I triggered that quest after 3-4 hours doing other things and even then I denied there offer.
But yeah, with empowerment, i meant that in older games ya needed to bust your ass and find things - in fallout 4, the game simply throws them in your lap constantly
Only complaints is the companions AI can be a pain in the ass at times, and there's no person pips on the compass.
Collecting all the power armor.