Fallout 4 - Why it Divides Fans
Vložit
- čas přidán 31. 05. 2024
- In the Fallout universe there are many historical debates with one of the major topics being about which of the games are the best between Fallout 3, 4 or New Vegas. Often when new players come looking for advice on where to start, this erupts into a dispute about which one to go for. With Fallout 4 being the most recent single-player edition, it would normally make sense to pick this as the best in the series and the one to suggest. With that being said though, many people still hold Fallout 3 and New Vegas in higher regards. In this video I will explain why Fallout 4 does not seem to get as much love as the other two and the reasoning behind it from that perspective.
Please note; I love every single Fallout game. I am not here to convince viewers on which game is better! This video is to help people understand why someone may prefer a game that is 14 years old opposed to the newest edition.
00:00 - Introduction
02:06 - Fallout History
03:05 - World Ambience
10:49 - Roleplaying and Character Customization
19:02 - Writing and Quests
23:04 - Settlement Building
25:29 - Nostalgia
27:45 - Outro - Hry
With every Bethesda Fallout game, we get less and less role playing game, and more looter shooter.
I think we have to just hope they bring your RPG elements back into the game. I think the fans would appreciate it and could handle it. I don’t think them taking them out makes the
Game better or more well received. I think they can please both sets of fans and still put RPG elements in. Not sure why they took them out.
@@AVVGaming1yeah that's honestly my belief for it imagine a fallout with the gameplay of fallout 4 the exploration of fallout 3 and the story quality of fallout New Vegas
That is the perfect fallout game
Fallout 3 had the most interesting things tucked away in the world and so many random encounters I still haven't seen them all despite the fact I've played the game since it came out
Fallout New Vegas has to be my favorite story in a video game
And fallout 4 improves on every bit of the looting the gameplay and the quality of life even it's vats system is the best in the series requiring more thought in planning than any of the previous
@@themanicman8458 I just booted up NV again this morning. Left it at level 38 and now just exploring the map. Unreal game. Gonna have to do a video on it lol I can’t resist!
@@AVVGaming1 that's new vegas' quality. Even talking about it now gives me an immediate itch to play it again after so many years because it's addictive in the fun way and not anti-fun like fallout 4 where you feel cheated when u play it
@@AVVGaming1 after the amazon show i wanted to revisit the games, booted up FO4 for about 20 minutes and got bored. Booted up NV, 43 lvl right now, nearly 140hours and im just discovering the someguy2000 series of questmods - INSANE
Fallout 3 has the best adventure, Fallout 4 has the best gameplay, Fallout 76 has the best community, but Fallout New Vegas has the best depth. That's just my opinion though
New Vegas' depth, for a game that took 1.5 years to make, is unbelievable even until this day!
I disagree about the gameplay. Fallout 76's gameplay was an improvement to Fallout 4's.
I never liked New Vegas. I really really tried, too. The only part I really enjoyed was Old World Blues. The rest is long, drawn out, and generally boring.
I love how F4 power armor feels like POWER ARMOR and not a metal spandex suit with exposed pipboy wrist😂 The Fusion Core part needs some fine tuning in next games but keep in mind. A supposed 200+ year lasting FC would get its lifetime shortened by not only time but conditions aswell by F4 time. Spiters ignore that part. Hope for more immersion like option to opaque, even remove the p.a HUD, also have different helmet HUD frames depending on what p.a helmet and visor you use too, in future games. Also HUD color wheel option
@@hermos3602I agree and disagree, the mechanics of playing 76 are a straight upgrade in my opinion in almost all aspects BUT it's just not nearly as fluid as 4 due to the online play and that kills the gunplay but the systems are still engaging enough but the action is not as fluid so I prefer 4's responsiveness and 76's legendaries and character building
In beyond the beef you missed another outcome. You can even put fake blood on a bed and say that the dad was the one who murdered his own son and the dad gets gunned down by a securitron. This shows that the writing is so phenomenal in new Vegas.
It's a shame that Beyond the Beef is so complex it tends to bug a lot on an unmodded copy of the game. It's truly a fantastic quest with the amount of options you have.
This is my I love Fallout New Vegas! It just keeps delivering surprises and secrets! How the heck did they make that game in the last 1.5 years! I am gonna have to do a video just for that game soon!
@@AVVGaming1it took so little time because they didn’t have to make any of the gameplay systems. All they had to worry about were the quests and story
Yes that’s correct, but still the level of depth on these quests, it’s just above and beyond level of work. It really is a gem of a game.
@@AVVGaming1 it is, but obsidian’s best work has always comes off the backs of other’s hard work. new Vegas wouldn’t have been nearly what it was without Bethesda’s gameplay systems. We saw what they did with their own IP (Spacer’s choice or whatever it’s called) and it was pretty forgettable.
I just know lots of fans of new Vegas talk about how shitty Bethesda is when they talk about new Vegas, and I just want to reiterate that New Vegas is also good because of Bethesda’s hard work in making the engine, tools, assets, animations, gameplay systems, etc.
My wife has just gotten into the series. I started her on 4 specifically for the simplistic story. Great way to dip your toes without too much stress. After playing all of them, her favorites are 2 and 3, but she admits that she never would have touched them if they were her firsts. Especially NV; it's a Mastercraft for gamers/genre fans, but way too heavy for newcomers.
Yes 100% and you know what’s crazy? My wife just got into the series and fallout 4 was her first too. I feel like its enough to show the potential of the series which gives them the encouragement to push through the older graphics and gameplay of the previous entries and appreciate them. If you ask someone who is used to modern graphics to jump into an older version they may give up altogether and that would be a shame.
I agree, bcus you have to know how to mod them too to really enjoy them these days.
I agree
New Vegas was my first, it was a huge learning curve to me cuz im a stupid kid whos never played fallout. But I love the game.
@@thetweeshrew4187 that’s awesome! I’ve just done a new vegas video if you want to check that out. New vegas is my favourite but all of them are great in my opinion it’s one of the only series that has so many top games
For all of FO4's flaws, it's still way better than Starfield lmao
Haha you can say that again! It had flaws, but it's still a good game you will play in the future. Starfield was so disappointing its not even funny.
Starfield is just fallout 4 in space and lacking any vision or direction for what they were making.
@@GalileoGuy175 the lack of creativity in the writing or world building is ridiculous. It’s literally a universe you can write anything. Mass effect a great example.
That’s a VERY low bar but I hear ya.
A very low bar, but true.
Nate/Nora is a weird halfway house between a blank slate and being their own character. They have too much predetermined background for you to truly make them your own, but at the same time their predetermined character traits are used so little that they don't actually serve as truly independent characters with their own stories. It's the worst of both worlds.
lol that’s true! It’s a weird combination for sure. I think I prefer blank slate over background story.
It's kind of funny to me, there is more shown progress in the ten years between Fallout 3 and Fallout 4 than in the 173 years between Fallout 76 and Fallout 3. That is the biggest issue I have with how Bethesda designs their version of the Fallout world. So much time has passed, and humanity just can't seem to drag itself out of the detritus of the old war.
I have always wondered that as well, at what point does humanity start to rebuild things normally instead of that mad max style. Maybe it's just for aesthetics? If they were to rebuild maybe it wouldn't have that post-apocalyptic vibe?
The whole Fallout story doesn't make sense. 200 years after the bombs drop but everyone and everything looks and act as if it's only a few days after. For comparison the whole U.S.A was only founded like 2 centuries ago and it's a complete world now from back then.
@@xsizzlexster6495the west coast actually was developing and advancing......until the TV show. It feels like Bethesda is using the show to bring civilization back to their standard living in tin shacks post apocalypse.
Agreed. If fallout 3 was set around the same time as fallout 1, it would make total sense, and fallout 4 could be set later. It'd be cool to get two parallel societies on the opposite coasts and see how they interact with each other, but that's too much creative world building for Bethesda to handle
The west coast had a fairly developed civilization until the TV show. I think Bethesda used the show to bring the level of civilization close to that on the east coast.
4 is wide but shallow. The dialogue system and voiced protag limited the story and removed the ability get good conversations with NPCs about factions, life, and story details. While the gameplay is 'better' than 3, it really isn't on par with shooters of 2005... then you have the reduction in towns in favor of settlements. A neat feature for sure, but not good enough to sacrifice the entire point of fallout.
Eh I think it’s a nostalgic bias
My friend who isnt a fallout fan started playing it and enjoyed it but he came to me and said "whats up with the dialogue system, its so bad they might aswell just have removed it altogether". Pretty sad.
@@Concerned_Citizen Except the video quite clearly shows it's not nostalgic bias.
I think they were trying to advance their game quality by adding the voiced dialogue almost thinking of it as an improvement but it just didn't work. At least we should know exactly what we're about to say lol. Some people will love the settlements instead of the towns, but unfortunately I myself prefer the towns. I think there was too much of the settlement building and it just seemed out of place.
@@Concerned_Citizen I love fallout 4 NV is my favorite but i love them all and the voiced dialogue and such shallow limited options in how to handle the conversation you have in game is the worst part of fo4 and almost ruins it as a RPG
I don't mean to be that edge lord, but the thing that gets to me the most about Fallout 4 is the tone.
It's just not dark enough, often enough.
Compared to Fallout 3 and New Vegas, Fallout 4 feels "Pg-13"
Compared to Fallout 1 & 2, Fallout 4 feels PG.
Edit, I clearly like to comment right away. Well said AVV
Yeah it was the first thing that came to mind. When I replayed 3 I was so surprised by how much more dark it was, not just in the visual but in dialogue. I much prefer writing like this is any game, I don't like the other writing which is almost silly. Like in Starfield, they had like country farmers working on the moon saying things like "we are just country moon folk, we don't know nothing about no fancy spaceship" and it's like who writes this stuff? Lol
@@AVVGaming1 Completely agreed.
true, fallout 4 felt like a shallow kids game at times where nothing mattered and every option you chose would never matter anyhow
you will always be the hero and never like a survivor in a blown up world
@@SimonRobeyns Agreed. I hate to boil it down as childish, but it really was just a bit too whimsical for me. The older fallouts have whimsical moments too, but the juxtaposition works better because the older games also take the darker parts far more seriously and you feel the threat of living in the wasteland. That's what makes the absurdist humor of Fallout work so well. Or I'm high, I dunno
Disney af
Voiced protag works fine in a non-rpg. If you are on train tracks, and the writer has a great story and you are there to shoot stuff in between scenes, it's fine.
But when they moved to voice, they just collapsed the rpg elements. You are given one character to play, the soldier, and the female lawyer one is technically there, but only cosmetically. The character has soldier skills and no lawyer skills. They never set up a provisional government, for example, because they do not know anything about laws and never went to law school.
If anything, they could have committed to the bit and only given you nate, or gone for dual protagonists who might even end up fighting, or who might work together to build a new government. Nate could do combat, Nora could do diplomacy/settlement management.
Or they could have scrapped both and gone back to the ttrpg roots, and let the player make up their own story.
Great post. I would side with the going back to the basics and just leave the slate clean. I think letting a player make up their own stories is the best way and when I think of Betehsda open world games, that's what I think of, roleplaying. Like you said, in Uncharted games they have voiced characters with set stories. But they are really good stories and voice actors and linear. Bethesda are building open worlds to explore and it doesn't need to be done there. Also, the story in Fallout 4 is just not good enough as a trade off for a lack of freedom in Roleplaying. At least in my personal opinion. You summarized that element perfectly.
@@AVVGaming1 I'm not against the voiced Protagonist if they went the Mass Effect route. I do like BrettCaton's idea of dual protag's but dunno how'd it work.
They only had Nora so you could switch to playing A girl instead of A guy. The whole point of Bethesda games these days is how much of A broader audience they can reach... Sellouts, if you ask me.
Insert Mass Effect and The Witcher
The dialogue system in 4 was just a ridiculous change of it ain’t broke don’t fix it
I watched a video on why they did change it. They tried to copy mass effect but primarily the walking dead by tell tale games. It really wasn’t broken and was the best in FNV. The Starfield one is just too many questions that no one is really bothered about
@@AVVGaming1 why would they do this, both of them were crap .. especially the telltale extended cutscenes. ( I refuse to call those games )
One thing you have missed is that the only faction you cannot violently remove in Fallout 4 is the Minutemen. Everyone else are at your mercy, meaning if you choose to you can absolutely make yourself their enemy the moment you encounter them, including killing otherwise essential characters you'd need to interact with to do that faction's storyline. I still remember that the moment I encountered Father in my very first playthrough I immediately started shooting. I encountered a new faction and through my actions and choices locked my access to them and any friendship away. So if you consider having the option to blow up Megaton or murking Bruke as part of roleplaying and character customization, then you need to also see the option to become an enemy of the big factions via immediate hostility as a similar expression of the same approach.
That's awesome! I actually never considered shooting Father immediately and it's really cool that you can. Now on my most recent playthrough of Fallout 4 I am going to have to test all of these things you have suggested. Very fair points! I still think Fallout 4 is an incredible game, and you learn something new about it every day! Thanks for the information!
yeah but that's something you could do in every game (except fallout 3). Aside from becoming enemies with a faction and choosing different ways to resolve a conflict in 8 (?) sidequests there's no way to impact the world.
@@maestrofeli4259 You're both correct there but also maybe missing the point a little. The fact that you can have a relatively broad stroke across all factions before ultimately siding with one (including just focusing on a single one barring the Institute) makes the general faction design quite similar to New Vegas. Both games have a single faction (Yes Man/Minutemen) that will always be there to enable you to finish the game while allowing you to treat the other factions in any way you want, may it be cooperation, tolerating them, or making them your enemy. While New Vegas has the reputation system which puts more limits on your interaction with each faction before things go down south, two of the three big factions (NCR and Legion) offer you a full pardon if you have wronged them this entire time but may want to side with them after all. So to some extend you also can dip into every faction just like you can in F4. And in both games you reach a point where you ultimately have to choose one. But also in both you have the power to outright reject options. Ultimately it's easy to say that New Vegas designed their factions and your interactions with them more elegantly, but at the same time F4 does offer you a quite similar option of experiences.
Yoo i thought i was the only one that started blasting
@@maestrofeli4259 You can't kill Yes Man in fallout new Vegas they are all like that people are jaded.
One thing I think 3 and NV both got wrong is the lack of plant life, you can look at Bikini Atoll or Chernobyl and see that 40 to 70 years after a bomb or major radiation release they are green so why would the world 200 years after the war be so barren.
I'm sure this was due to engine limitations but I don't consider it amazing world building.
Plenty of trees in new vegas, just not in the desert..
I understand your point. It may actually be down to engine limitations though as you said. Thank you for the examples, I have just been looking at them online now!
I think FO3's lack of flora was a conscious decision to make it closer to 1 and 2. But the classics take place in the desert of California, while 3 takes place in the green region around DC. It would make sense if the game took place close to the war since nuclear bombs are mini stars that incinerate everything, but after 200 years the plant life would be as it was before human settlement, a wild forest. New Vegas had the engine limitation of 3, but also it makes sense that the Mojave Desert would have sparse vegetation. There is plenty of vegetation around Jacobstown in mount Charleston tho.
New Vegas is based on Las Vegas which is pretty deserted anyway. So, I get why it didn’t recover
The desert dont get any veg dessert
lol I was doing a brotherhood mission and one of the knights said, “if you think the commonwealth is bad you should see the capital wasteland”
Haha and they’re spot on! lol it’s definitely the less pretty of the two areas lol one aged better than the other lol
This is why I feel that in order to enjoy fallout 4 as a fallout game you have to play on survival.
A lot of people have also been saying that! It's a great point! Just to clarify, I still love Fallout 4, it's still a great game!
@@AVVGaming1 I have like 2,000 hours in it and I fuggin hate it 😂
Yeah, survival is the only way I have ever played it.
Haha 2000 hours!? That is awesome! I’m gonna have to get that mode on tonight I reckon.
i just try to survive the gamebreaking bugs for a start
Gotta be honest, i just started fallout new vegas after having it for years in my backlog, and while having playing fallout 3 and then 4 at launch i must say that 4 is the weakest of them all by far, maybe there are some parts of 3 that are done better in 4 but not the ones that matter in my opinion, the settlement building was fine, but not good enough to carry through most of the game, you're probably going to play with it in 3-4 settlements, maybe 5 at most, and then you're going to get tired of it bc of how bad the placement system can be with some items and between foundations, walls, etc. It's even worse when you get a huge space to make your vault but there's no way to make it not look like shit and since then i really think i dont want to touch that mechanic ever again if the settlers are as shallow as they were in there tbh
Is not even good for people who like base building and resource management, it would be more comparable to a more shallow house flipper with worse building mechanics bc the settlers barely do anything to make them unique (besides some key npcs that dont really add that much) and are just kinda there, while the building might be a worse fornite in terms of weirdly hard to make anything that isnt limited to foundations, but maybe with a bit more detail in interiors i must say
Glad to hear you're enjoying New Vegas! Fallout 4 was a very different game in terms of what they were offering. Like you said, it's fine, but it's so overused in Fallout 4 that it gets pretty mundane. We all gave Sanctuary a go, we may have tried to do up 4-5 nice locations but no-one is going to build the whole wasteland. If you love building then Fallout 4 would be the best game, but if you prefer role playing or story, the others will probably be a better fit. Different games for different tastes.
fallout 4 is somehow letting down more on story, and focused more on gameplay and graphic
I think the writing in Bethesda games recently has been far too "safe". Like almost so obvious and no risks taken, that it kind of insults the intelligence a little bit. I saw a video on their writing and how they aim to keep it simple, but it's too simple now I think.
I feel you somewhat glossed over it because FO4's engine has notably less stutter in combat, but FO4's gunplay was abysmal. An incredibly small pool of weapons artificially inflated with weapon mods mostly tweaked small stat changes. They lumped energy and ballistic weapons into the same perk categories and took away derived SPECIAL stats (reload speed, accuracy, strength requirements, crit chance). They ditched NV's damage threshold system and different ammo types (pulse, fletchette, hollowpoints, etc.) and got rid of unique weapon variants for their stupid 'legendary' weapon system that makes zero sense lore-wise (and have sadly continued into FO76 and Starfield).
Seems to be this guy really loves to gloss over details, he also didn’t articulate properly that Fallout 3’s worldbuilding doesn’t make any sense and that Tenpenny tower quest outcome where u get the ghouls in peacefully has zero impact on the story
Yes I agree with all your points. I definitely personally preferred Fallout NV as its my favourite. Sorry I wasn't able to cover all this in the video but I agree with everything you said. Thanks for your feedback.
@@AVVGaming1 No worries I think you did a great job overall with this video especially explaining the differences in ambiance and quests. It's just... FO4 irritates me in a lot of so many little ways.
Like, that first suit of T-45A power armor you get for free in Concord? It has higher damage protection values than any other base game non-power armor. Even if you broke EVERY PIECE except one, you'd still be getting better protection than a FULL SUIT of Combat Armor. Who thought this was a good idea?
@@danpaz9485To be fair siding with the ghouls changes the vendors in the tower and affects a couple of related sidequests.
@@MichaelJennings-ro9zq As someone who likes replaying Fallout 4 more than any other Fallout game (I love the survival mode), I do agree on the early power armor being stupid. I just ignore it completely for this reason.
But I actually prefer the way armor reduces damage in Fallout 4 to the DT system in New Vegas.
Also, the weapon mods do not give 'small stat changes'. In many cases, a weapon's damage will nearly double when comparing the weakest mod to the strongest mod.
Then you have mods that change the gameplay in other ways; ie, adding a scope vs reflex sight, or a mod that changes a projectile weapon into more of a flamethrower. How are these 'small stat changes'?
I agree on some of the derived special stats; but accuracy IS derived from perception in VATS. And Luck does affect criticals by affecting how fast your critical meter builds up. Also, the Luck perks are often crit focused.
'stupid' legendary system... man, the legendary system is one of my favorite aspects of Fallout 4; especially in survival mode. If I haven't slept in a bed for more than an hour, yet see a legendary raider or gunner... I suddenly get torn as to whether I should chance it and potentially lose a lot of progress on my game. It's a great tension I can't get in any other Fallout game, or in a lot of other videogames in general. And sure, many of the legendary items aren't very good.. but maybe, just maybe, I find that Instigating Gauss or Twin Shot Combat Rifle. (I ignore all legendaries that can be bought from vendors because I enjoy the loot hunt).
Anyway, sorry if this came off as argumentative. I just think there is a good reason why people mostly say the writing in Fallout 4 sucks (it does) but the gameplay is the best.
Videos like this make it so obvious that most of the new players weren’t even born when fallout 3 & new Vegas came out. There’s a simple reason it divides the player base, expectations. After all the years of delay and drip fed info, after Bethesda had their golden age, it seemed natural that the next installment would be leagues better than the previous. Well upon release of the very first trailer all of us knew, Bethesda has completely dropped the ball. The new art style works, but the story elements and treatment from 2009 leaks ACTUALLY being the game was such a huge let down.
Kids today will literally never know what it’s like to hope and wonder, all the teasing they did about “The Commonwealth” being so dark and scary was DASHED when we played Fallout 4 Bubblegum Sunshine. Really spent time thinking about this, New Vegas/3 are the old gaurd, the OG Bethesda that really cared about meaningful story and player interaction rather than microtransactions and DLC. The new games are HOLLOW shadows of their previous iterations and Todd Howard did it to spite me personally.
Yes I feel like especially when you look at 4, 76 and Starfield, the writing is getting worse drastically. So much more basic and doesn’t leave any emotional memories. Very mundane and safe.
Begin again the tale of two wastelands is hands down the best fallout experience anyone can have. Fallout 4 Magnum Opus with a few additional mods comes close.
Thanks for the advice! I’m going to try that and add it to my growing list of things to try and play lol.
With regards to essential NPCs, I heard you can kill the Main Faction leaders in Fallout 4 when you first meet them, with the only exception being Preston and the Minute Men. Is that not true?
I will give it a try tonight and see! You are probably right but I remember I few invincible characters. Of course Preston is invincible lol the one person who would have been killed the most lol
You can kill Shaun, Maxson, and Desdamona as soon as you meet them.
I feel like there's a lot of hate towards FO3, but that game did a lot right. Those sidequests, though a lot of them were still go here and kill this, were some of the best Bethesda's ever done (The Superhuman Gambit, Reilly's Rangers, Stealing Independence, You Gotta Shoot 'Em in the Head), the best sound design and DJ, and it got 5 story DLCs most of which were awesome (-Anchorage...).
To me it feels like Bethesda was at least TRYING with Fallout 3, whereas I don't feel that at all with Fallout 4 and later.
I think it’s the case in writing. They put a lot of effort in whilst writing fallout 3 and then in 4 they simplified it a lot. They mainly focused on quantity instead of quality which more present in 3. I don’t hate fallout 4 but 3 definitely did a lot right and deserves praise for sure!
It is flatly not true that you can experience everything in one playthrough in Fallout 4. You can pretend to be friendly with all factions up to a point, as could any double agent IRL. But there will be a point of no return where you must choose a side. What happens after that completely changes depending on whom you choose to support.
That is true! There is a point where you can't experience everything so you're right!
There is really no point in experiencing all factions because they're all the same. Once you've done all their quests up to the point of no return, there's no point in joining them in other playthroughs because their ending is all kinda similar. Just watch their endings on CZcams so you don't have to waste hundreds of hours.
@@TomCruz54321 yes and this is a little bit disappointed. I’m going to discuss the writing in Bethesdas recent games soon. I feel like the audience would appreciate a bit more challenging content (story wise)
@@TomCruz54321Yep lmao. The only faction with some kind of rational/ideology is the BoS. Under Maxon it makes some sense that they'd try to eradicate the Institute.
The Institute is a nonsensical, impossible, self contradictory faction. The Minutemen are half baked and have absolutely no good reason to seek and destroy any of the other 3 factions (players can attempt to inject their leadership as a reason, but this is hardly reflected in the Minutemen as a faction who are essentially a farmer militia/mutual defense coalition). Why the Minutemen would not want to OCCUPY the airship and/or Institute I have no idea, nor do I have any idea where they got the ordinance to destroy the Institute in the first place.
The Railroad has similar issues. All of this talk of espionage but at the end of their story they seek the same annihilationist solution to the Institute as the BoS which makes absolutely no sense. If they are trying to help synths, maybe they should OCCUPY the facility that produced and serviced synths? Bethesda could have written the Railroad differently, specifically making them more philosophically robust regarding the creation of synths and synth personhood, but instead they're a bland, uncomplicated, incoherent mess whose favored outcome is apparently the same as the explicitly colonialist, xenophobic BoS.
I would have loved to see factionalism in the Railroad/Minutemen but apparent stability and unity on the part of the Institute and BoS. The Institute, being isolated and insular, is primed for propaganda and group think. Similarly, the BoS is highly ideologically motivated and actively hostile to new ideas and differences in speciation among the mutant life of the wasteland. Players could feel conflicted about choosing the "strong" but morally questionable factions over the "weak", fractured factions with less abhorrent morals/ethics.
@@TomCruz54321 Waste? I'm absolutely certain hat I won't "waste" hundreds of hours on anything.
What's the point?
And how much money do you want to bet that I haven't found and beaten unmapped locations in the Commonwealth that aren't on CZcams?
It’s really as simple as roleplay, it’s hard to really make a be a certain character in fallout 4 they all end up feeling them same because they are, no matter who you make it’s always going to be either Nate or Nora, that’s not the case with 3 and NV
Yes I’m going to do a specific video about this and how fallout maybe should give us a different starting point on the maps by choice. As opposed to being locked in to a specific character starting story. I know why they do it but it’d be nice to Roleplay a bit more! Thanks for your comment!
U completely fail to grasp de point. Fallout 4 kills the RPG, 70% of the quests are radiant quests with the quest item on a neatly placed chest on the end of a dungeon with no story and a convenient backdoor for u to leave, it's just a shooter looter no more a rpg, Fallout 4 was no history and its shallow. About the setting u fail to understand it Bethesda like the post apocalyptic ppl living in trash thing that's why Fallout 3 and 4 look like they are frozen in time 200+ years after the bombs dropped. Fallout 2 and NV are post post apocalyptic they are about rebuilding, and the politics and conflicts of the new world, they are rich in lore, world building. In fallout NV every location is well thought out makes sense. In fallout 4 the locations are like they are just frozen waiting for u to pass there a raider camp beside a gohul place and a super mutants camp leaving 5 ft from each other for no reason just there to be shot at, there's no world building, is just randomly placed.
Those are all great points! I think I’m going to have to do another video explaining more on the points you said. There’s a lot to cover but the lack of RPG elements should have been first point I think, on reflection
Came in the fallout verse with FO4….according to steam I’ve got close to a thousand hours in it at this point (mostly due to mods). I poked at NV a bit quite some time back and wasn’t impressed, recently gave it another attempt at an honest play thru….and it’s stellar. I’ve also tried 1 and 2 but just can’t get into them, compared to modern games they just feel clunky.
Evactly the same for me with the same outcome.
I reckon it's once you get to New Vegas and the town outside Freeside. At that moment you start to see how good it is. But up to that point, you've got to be committed to it. A lot of games are the same, where they start slow and you have to reach a certain moment in order to really see its potential. That moment is pivotal. Some games have lost me in that moment.
@@AVVGaming1 actually on my first play thru got about 75% of the way thru the game using yes man....but blew thru the main quest line and didn't bother exploring or doing any of the side stuff.....just lost interest in it.
@@jasongalloway4645 have you done Vault 22 yet?
One other issue with the faction system is that the Minutemen are the "Yes Man route" of this game. The faction that will stick to you no matter what. This doesn't make sense. Yes Man works because they are an amoral character that will go with whatever you do. The Minutemen are a faction with their own ideology and objectives, they shouldn't condone when you take actions that hurt the development of the Commonwealth, specially when you hurt innocent people. Also you become their general but have no sort of power at all, Preston makes all the decisions.
I think they would work better as a small faction that you can convince to work with any of the other three if you have good karma.
They have no real reason to oppose the Railroad or the Brotherhood, and they are too small and weak to pose a believable threat to the Institute.
I think the neutral ending should have been with a more neutral faction that answers directly to you, or maybe you just get all the other factions to destroy each other and you become king of the ashes.
I agree 100% with everything you have stated in this comment. I didn’t feel like I earned the title of general either; New Vegas had the best decision system in the main quest. Great comment!
I've been playing since Fallout 3, played them all. Yes EVEN 76. I can't really say which ONE is the best.( New Vegas) I mean they ALL have their FUN. MANY an hour and NO regrets playing them. I LOVE 4, the...MAP. It's a fun...playground but the...story and the CHOICES on handling situations doesn't come CLOSE to New Vegas, baaabbyy. Thank ya, Thankyaverymuch.
Have you played Brotherhood of Steel??
I was going to make that exact joke in the video! "I'm not here to tell you which one is the best (NEW VEGAS)" lol. They're all good games in their own right, the best thing would be if they took all of them and took the best part from each. Probably a dream, but that would be awesome!
One of the things I hated in fallout 3 is the necessity to use metro tunnels to move around the wasteland. If I'm gonna spend a good portion of a game in a dark train tunnel filled with creatures and people who want to kill me, I'd play metro instead. And that was the first reason I fell in love with new vegas, it's a real open-world experience.
Of course, I love NV for other reasons too mainly how interactive the world is and how interconnected everything in the game are, even the DLC's have arcs.
Moving to the topic of Fallout 4, I hate the skyrim style questlines. I literally did so many radiant quests for the brotherhood in my first playthrough just to feel like I actually am a part of the brotherhood not just a mere messenger. Ironic isn't it? My impact to the world is better explained, and made more sense as a literal Courier than as a brotherhood "knight" where I felt like a glorified mailman.
Yes fallout 3 used a lot of metro tunnels and new vegas really was a brilliant game. I personally don’t like radiant quests but I understand they can be there if wanted. In Skyrim they’re in there but subtle. In Fallout 4 they became a bigger portion, then starfield they pretty much became the game. The pattern isn’t great but I just feel like hand crafted content is so much better!
The problem with starting with Fallout 4 is it can make playing new Vegas and especially fallout 3 very unfun as far as fight in game goes. I personally suggest you play in order 3,new Vegas, then fallout 4 assuming you want to get the most fun out of each game.
I think this would be the ideal path and order to take. My only concern is that new fans may try 3/NV, not commit to it because how dated it looks and then give up entirely. I reckon the right order is what you've suggested, it's just whether people would commit to it.
one could also say that having played New Vegas, one would have the experience of a much better written game to compare FO4 to and in so doing making the game feel shallower when you get to it
Still sad how far the series went away from the core experience from Fallout 1+2 still by far the best two Games of the series.
@@henriklarssen1331I actually recommend people start here. If you haven't played 1 and 2, you have no idea what the bar is.
@@Thagomizerthen again, some people don’t want to play 25+ year old games that take hours just to learn the mechanics of
"Let's say my character is also evil and he wants to get to know Kellog..."
Sometimes, in a roleplaying game, you are assigned a role. No matter how evil you are, you are playing a character who canonically loved their spouse and watched Kellog murder them and steal their son. You not being able to be best mates with Kellog is no more limiting than saying "I'm trying to play a veteran wracked with PTSD but Bethesda never gives me the option to shoot myself in the head."
You're not a blank slate in Fallout 4, you're an unrevealed slate. Nate and Nora are already characters and you are playing some version of them, with a very few things (basically the prologue and cutscene stuff) being fixed character traits.
Yes and I’m not saying it’s wrong. Witcher 3 is my favourite game of all time and Geralts a pre set character with a back story. I was just saying how some people want that in a fallout story is all. I guess I just want a DLC where I can go get a beer with Kelogg lol jk
Yes, more long form content to listen to while working, working out, falling asleep...
I am definitely committed to doing long form content! Thank your feedback and hope to bring more videos soon.
I see your point about player freedom but Fallout 3 isn’t the best counter example to Fallout 4. There are still a huge amount of „essential“ NPCs in that game you can’t kill. Even the major exceptions like Three-Dog (which you mention) and Moriarty don’t really change the trajectory of the main story if you kill them. Nuking Megaton is the only way to be truly lost in the main story if you didn’t get information beforehand, but it’s not like it destroys or even significantly diverts away from the main plot if you can pick the trail back up again somewhere else. This is why I like New Vegas the best out of the three; it feels like my choices matter so much more and I get to take part in crafting the plot I would want for my character.
Yes you're 100% right. I feel like maybe a honed it too much on Fallout 3 in this video. But I really wanted to do a Fallout New Vegas video separately and give it the love it deserves. Sort of explain why it's so special. Thank you for the feedback though :)
why is the video only viewable in 480p? is this an issue on my end?
No I think it’s my end. I’m new to CZcams and a few people have said the same thing. I’m going to get it fixed. Thank you for letting me know and sorry about the quality.
I've said this before and i'll say it again. Fallout 4 made the apocalpyse look appealing to live in. You have friends, allies, lovers, a child? robot servants, power, settlements to make your own home and all the protection and weaponry you need so you're never in danger. If I HAD to live in a nuclear destroyed world, i'd be glad it's Fo4...if you're the main protagonist. Other people kinda got it bad but hey, that's not me
The blue sky and pretty colours kind of made it too cheerful in my opinion. It’s like you get to sanctuary and it’s destroyed, but you can in 10 minutes change it into a thriving safe place lol. Totally different from other entries.
@@AVVGaming1I mean the desert climate of Fallout 1 and 2 did a good job on their own of creating an environment that was dark. It isn’t exactly a desert on the East Coast, especially the area around Washington D.C. with a lot of marshes. I feel as if maybe Orange tones could work for making the game dark, partially because Mad Max Fury Road did that.
@@KaosNova2 I know I loved the fallout NV aesthetics even though that had a blue sky too. Just looked bleak. I guess I like it to look bleak lol barren even
The growing Sea is the bleakest I've seen in Fallout.
Isn’t it hilariously ironic that in a game where the theme is “what makes a human being?” everyone, literally EVERYONE, is completely unchanging and robotic. I can’t think of a single character who goes through a meaningful character arc with noticeable change in character and personality. A game ABOUT humanity is notable for its lack of believable human characters.
Yes, there really isn't any character Arcs throughout. I was going to do a video on this actually, and how writing a morally grey character is the most interesting. A lot of characters written in Bethesda's games are like "cool hip sassy person" and that's it. It's like overly simplified with no room for that person to change or have another side. They are what they are.
The only meaningful arc is hidden unless you do a Brotherhood playthrough. Danse is revealed to be a synth, you can have a pretty solid conversation with him and he's so steadfast in his beliefs he still thinks you should kill him, at least initially...
@@uberboomer8670 wow that’s actually a real surprise! I did not know that! Thank you for sharing, that’s actually pretty clever writing in that one. Of course it’s hidden behind specific choices lol
@AVVGaming1 yeah I was pleasantly surprised but also a little annoyed that it took until the end of my 3rd different playthrough to find a modicum of depth. And yet I still genuinely love the game
Nothing wrong with loving the game. It’s still a great game, it’s just that starfield wasn’t a shock after fallout 4. It’s just about wanting to tell Bethesda, look we love RPG elements, we love the customised character options, we really don’t like radiant quests or procedural generated worlds. Basically just to guide them to making world class titles like they have done before.
one thing i think fallout 4 really dropped the ball on was factions like pretty much whichever you join the others have to die. i think one of my most disappointing moments was when i did my first playthrough. so i had been working closely with the brotherhood and railroad so i grew to like the railroad but the brotherhood only option i had was to kill the railroad i was really hoping for something like being able to warn the railroad and give them the option to run or make a peace treaty between the 2 i reloaded saves trying different speech options hoping there was one another option nope only one option.
Yes, it sorted of pushed you into a corner you didn’t want to go into. A lot of people I think end up just stopping at a certain part in the story so that way they don’t lose factions etc. there should have definitely been more options you’re correct!
You can play fo4 without any settlements.
If you want do do dumb, mean things, play the game a few times and throw it away, fo3 and nv are probably best for you.
Fair comment
People don't argue as much about 1/2 being the best because the people old enough to think of those as the best games don't waste as much time debating the topic.
Yes those that tend to love the first original games seem to be a lot more calm individuals in the comments sections and sort of like the scholars of the group lol. They have seen it all and don’t debate because they know
Its not like most of the fans started with the first two games, so no one really knows what it means to be a "real fan" anyway.
Also, dont become one of those channels that say "i dont think youtube will let me say that, so ill just play nice and let the algorithm do its job" crap. Dont be a tool. Just say whatever you want, because im going to use ad-block and shadow view anyway.
Thank you! I am brand new to CZcams having only put out my first video 6 weeks ago so I generally don't know the rules lol. Just regarding swearing. I'm not bothered about the algorithm, I just don't want to make a video and it get taken down for one word lol Thank you for your feedback, I promise I won't become one of those channels!
Yeah but the thing is FO4 kinda shits on the lore of older games and even contradicts itself multiple times it's just terrible
yea.. I started with FNV and im playing Fallouts 1 , 2, and Tactics.. SO whats your point Carkeys????
fallout 1 and 2. because i played it back in the day
0:38 Am I missing something here? What side quests? I remember actively running around the entire map looking for side quests. It was literally just go to random place, shoot the enemies, loot and repeat.
Yes I know what you mean! They were more about quantity rather than quality in the game, and I think that’s another big reason some may prefer the quests in the older games. Another settlement needs your help…
Well, people who love Fallout 4 also love Skyrim and those people ALSO love Oblivion. And, Oblivion was practically made with the same engine as FO3/FONV, so if someone liked Oblivion then they will most likely like the last two Fallout games as well...
That’s 100% right! They were pretty much the first studio to master the giant open world and were way ahead of the competition. Now they’re starting to fall behind.
Fallout 4 is the Super Paper Mario of the franchise
Haha that's a good comparison!
Fallout 4 was "dumbed down" to appeal to a larger audience because there are far more "casual" game players than there are "hard core" gamers. And it worked. It's still working. Personally I prefer 4 because of the massively superior graphics, combat, and gunplay. And the mods. Can't get those for 3 and NV on console, which is what the majority of people play on.
Yes, having access to the mods gives the game a longer (if not infinite) lifespan. Without those options a game will only age over time. 4 is still a great game, they all are. I would love for them to remaster Fallout 3 and NV, those games really deserve it, specifically Fallout NV. If not, we will get a new Fallout 5 one day and if they can keep the same attributes that made Fallout 4 so successful, then sprinkle in a little bit more of the RPG elements from previous entries...looking at a perfect game.
@@AVVGaming1 I would buy and play remasters of both of those games.
@@TheJudgementofDog I reckon they should do it. People would buy them and new fans deserve to experience those games
Without having to struggle with the graphical limitations
Just wanted to point out for any new fans to the series, @23:39 it's mentioned that Fallout 4 leans into settlement building heavily and that it's a huge part of the game. This is straight up untrue. I can only think of three little times where that mode even comes into play. In the beginning, the player is encouraged to do some little tasks to help a group of characters (whole process takes about the time of an average pop song), and even then, not forced. If the player joins the Minutemen, you will have to use the mode to point at one pile of rubble and push one button. Then near the end, the player will have to use the mode to build a story-related device (takes about 30 seconds maybe). The whole concept of settlement building is optional at the very least and was tossed in by Bethesda via one guy's idea late into development. Those that are into it get to see their creativity pay off. Those that aren't don't have to waste their time with it.
Yes you’re spot on! Thanks for mentioning it and it’s correct, it’s there but not mandatory for the most part. Thanks for taking the time to explain that to fans new to the series. My video may have been a bit harsh at points and didn’t go into enough detail at points. Settlement building is optional.
@@AVVGaming1 For sure man! Looking forward to more of your vids
Kellogg is so cool and rational, its always bothered me that all options end with a fight to the death.
Yes and they tell you his whole back story as well so you can sympathise with him. He wasn’t original evil, he was turned that way through pain. So to end having to kill him and yell at him regardless of your choice is a big let down. What’s the point in knowing the backstory then?
“The quests are so different” *chooses the radiant quests as the example for Fallout 4*
Yes maybe not the best example! I’ll take note of that feedback and make sure to consider it in future videos. I honestly like fallout 4 a lot and was just explaining why someone may prefer the older games. I think, upon reflection, maybe the video comes across about harsh on fallout 4. Thanks for your comment.
@@AVVGaming1 It is not the best example, but one new players are most likely to encounter first, as FO4 sets you naturally to head to Concord and meet the Minutemen in the first hour of gameplay. While it's not a bad idea to talk about what effectively pads out the quests of FO4, I could see why you chose to pick them as most other quests from the top of my head are usually very linear in some capacity compared to FO3 or NV.
So in retrospect; Maybe looked at picking something that's equally as deep into FO4 as your listed example, probably the one quest with the ghoul child in a fridge as an example, but overall I see why the meme-man himself would have been an obvious choice.
Bethesda doesn't understand fallout, they only understand the surface level stuff like power armor and super mutants.
They go for the open world and they do okay with that. They really struggle with the RPG aspects and the writing. It’s so basic level.
I’ve not played Fallout 4…it seems like an ‘beginner’ game for the Fallout franchise for people who aren’t ready for the bleak insanity of the wasteland of Fallout 3 and New Vegas. Fallout 3 is still my favourite.
Fallout 4's Survival Mode is as dangerous and difficult as it gets in the franchise. And places like the Glowing are unseen in Fallout 3 or New Vegas...
the “bleak insanity” of the 2 easiest games in the series lol, base fallout 4 is quite a but harder than base 3 n NV and the survival mode is much harder than anything from other modern fallout
@@thewinger337what are you smoking? Fallout 4 is baby easy mode
@@funki4896 I was mainly referring to the fact you can’t off anyone important 😅
@@thewinger337 ‘bleak insanity’ is more of an aesthetic term. Fallout 3 looks like a barren wasteland and everyone and everything is out to get you. Cities decimated. It’s got that bleak vibe. And if none of your decisions make a difference to how you play the game it’s not as fun 🤷🏻♀️
Around 15:00...you can get to 100 in every stat in new vegas...but the overall point of the specialization in skills mattering in dialogue more, and the options being more clear still stands.
nearly all fallout fans will say "start with fallout 3" going backwards with these games is not a great idea in terms of gameplay, QoL stuff and all of that. its how most of us started.
I would personally say to play 3, then NV and then 4. But in reality I have had to say 4 first just because people new to the series tend to play a couple of mins of three and NV and give up because of the graphics from those times. It’s too big a drop. At least if they play and like 4 it gives them a drive to push through with the older titles.
@AVVGaming1 not only the graphic, but stability issues as well. I know when I started NV on pc recently (ive played it before on console), it just crashed all the time. had to learn how to mod just soo I can play.
@@christopherson93 was it really that bad? Such a shame because it really is an amazing game. It really needs a remaster so people can appreciate it.
The quality was good enough right off the bat that I was surprised when you said you were a new channel. Subbed tho!
Thank you so much for the kind words! I am new but practicing daily and really enjoying it. Thank you for subbing too! I hope with each video to make them a little better each time, thank you for the support!
It is a looter shooter theme park. And it turned Fallout completly into the goofy cartoon area.
No real RPGs elements, the shooting is mediocre at best and the looting is bad.
It fails in all 3 Elements.
Fallout 3 is bad, but it is still an RPG, a light one.
Yes its strange because the shooting was obviously worse in Fallout 3 and NV, but it wasn't compared to other shooters as they had other elements that they could specialize in. When they took out those RPG elements, they then got compared to other shooters, which it would end up losing too.
I get why FO3 is criticised (I have criticisms of my own) but this attitude of if something isn't 10/10 across the board, it's bad is not really useful or accurate. FO3 is a good game with some flaws (as well as some things it does excellently).
I feel like its positives far out weigh any negatives. It just set a great tone.
If you remember the faces that were placed on the sides of buildings in fallout 1 and 2, you know how different the world of fallout was in the first 2 games compared to four. Glad these are back in the new expeditions in 76 though.
I waited until Fallout 4 to play Fallout because I wasn't too interested in playing in a world that was strictly a barren wasteland. With Fallout 4 though I'm able to use mods to overhaul the wasteland to look more like what it really would look like after a hundred or so years after the bombs fall, a world where nature has reclaimed everything with forests and meadows popping up where neighborhoods and cities once were.
Lore wise that is exactly what should happen since we see exactly that in Chernobyl.
Yes mods definitely make the experience even better! I think on my playthrough I added a lot of nature elements too just to make the world feel alive. The concept of having so many mods is vital to the games longevity
I never understood why In fallout, four, the first thing you counter is a death claw It's supposed to be the big bad of the game. I remember playing fallout three and Encountering a supermulan for the first time.
I got killed. At a very best spot because it auto saved and it will only load up the last save. I had to restart a whole new game
That’s sad about the saving thing, but yes that was one of my main points. Death claws are supposed to be an20% of survival lol. You had to hide from them in 3 and NV a lot of times because they were so tough. But then, in fallout 4, they give you power armour, mini gun and you kill it so easily. Sort of ruined that a bit.
Finished the game 8 years ago, and started again on survival with mods… what a time!! Also started new Vegas for the first time it’s also really fun
That's awesome! Just the other day I had 3, NV and 4 all on the go flicking back and forth through them lol. What a time indeed!
I would recommend fallout 3. Not because it’s a “better game” than fallout 4, but narrative reasons and because it’s the best introduction. It has most of the core elements of a fallout game that serves as a nice intro to the world (vault life, brotherhood, enclave, mercenaries, raiders, super mutants, slavers, etc.) and has an enjoyably simple story to help with that intro. New Vegas would be next as the better and more complicated story now that one knows the basics and introduces people to the elements exclusive to fallout 1 and 2, games they aren’t likely to play.
The introduction for fallout 3 was really good. Absolutely gave you so much backstory and concept in such a short amount of time. It really is the best introduction for someone who knows nothing about fallout. It’s just whether someone new can go back to those old graphics, or whether they need to play a bit of 4, learn to love the series and then that gives them the push to stick with the games before it.
Finished New Vegas like 4 times but...
I've replayed recently Fallout 4 (second time) and Fallout 3 (second time, but first time in over 10 years) - and I gotta say that I've forgotten how many original quests and locations were in Fallout 3, how much variety in small local societies - stuff like Megaton, Ghoul City, small village on a bridge, the subway filled with bandits, vampires wannabe, ghouls, then a random hotel in the middle of nowhere, a small house inhabited by some paranoid person, Brotherhood outcasts, Rivet City, slaves running away etc. Walking around always finished in discovering something fresh. And it's so much darker in its nature.
I've found Fallout 4 just so boring the second time, I can't remember really any interesting quest from it - just chores, building bases, cleaning locations over and over. I do enjoy Fallout 76 tho, and I prefer it to F4.
While we praise New Vegas rightfully so, I really encourage people to relive Fallout 3, it's so much better than I've remembered!
And yeah F4 gameplay/shooting feels better but tbh not that much better for me to prefer it over 3 overall. I probably won't revisit F4 again (but can't wait for Fallout: London!)
I Agree with both of your comments! Fallout 3's side quests were unbelievable. Like, the stories they told were very deep and a little twisted. Like psychologically it impacted you. Fallout 4, one of the things I notice is that I have so many places to go/can enter, but I get overwhelmed by it all. A lot of it is just something to do. Fallout 3 I felt like every location gave those type of rewards you're referring to. Great comment! 3 is underrated for sure.
Fallout 3 is my favorite. I lost count how many times I played it.
@@blockmasterscott it keeps you hooked! It was a really good blend at the time and very replayable
The funnest thing in fallout 4 that had consequences was building up settlements then actively burning them down as a raider in nuka-world.
Haha I’m assuming you had fun with that! Lol
@@AVVGaming1 yeah the 1st time or 2 doing it. I felt like I couldn't play an evil character with all the "bad" options and consider nuka-world as one of my favorite DLCs because of that reason
@@Tyranitardad maybe that should be my next video
@AVVGaming1 that'd be awesome! Starfield felt so empty as well because of that reason. I wanted to play a morally gray smuggler and then the smuggler fella who you meet first In constellation shot me for getting caught smuggling! It really turned my playthrough a rushthrough after that.
It's a great game, but a terrible Fallout, simple as.
Completely different for sure!
Nope. You could as well argue that Fallout 2 and New Vegas are not real Fallout games on the basis that they are "different" from Fallout 1. Fallout is not what you want it to be. Fallout is Fallout. Fallout 4 captures the feel and aesthetic of og Fallout and respects the lore. Tim Cain - the literal creator of Fallout sees ot as Fallout. But appearantly random FNV fanbois better know what Fallout truely is than the its literal creator...
this comment doesn’t make a lot of sense
@funki4896 I didn't say they weren't "real" Fallouts, using the older games as a metric, which is indeed viable, Fallout 4 doesn't hold up. It would've done much better as a spinoff, or better yet, a totally different game. Titles carry a lot of weight, throwing a title on something means that it's now carrying that weight, and it will inevitably always be compared to it's priors, one way or another. It wasn't a hard sentence to understand, or comprehend in the slightest.
@@Eight-BitesBro is summoning this dialogue from deep within his ass 💀
"Fallout 4 is shallow"
3 words... Nate the Rake.
The debate is over!
Skyrim was my first elder scrolls game I guarantee no matter how good elder scrolls 6 is, I will find it hard to like. Just like new vegas fans with fallout 4
We all have our first love and nothing can replicate that feeling. I think maybe your comment summarises this whole point the best. We all love our first the most and will always defend it :)
@@AVVGaming1 exactly, it’s why nostalgia is so strong
The reason reason that none of these video essays ever cover: People get fixated on the fallout they liked, and don't ever consider the negatives brought on by prior fallouts that brought in the current versions.
Example. fo1 and 2 have different understandings for how super mutants work, as well as how ghouls work. People sit there and claim the franchise gave them immense freedom, and had morally gray villains, while completely ignoring how the enclave are portrayed as a completely unsympathetic evil organization who are essentially the wig party on steroids, and the master isn't insane, he's cognizant of what he does, but he's incompetent enough to literally do NO research into what he's doing. He creates super mutants without even so much as examining whether or not they can pro-create when his literal intent is to replace humanity with super mutants. He at no point thought it out. His actions show someone who doesn't care, but not the example of someone crazy like people use to justify his actions.
In tactics, which is canon, it's shown that the brotherhood of steel are starting to lessen from their goals, and instead choosing to help people survive.
In fo3 the two biggest complaints are how the good guys and bad guys are... black and white... with the brotherhood of steel and the enclave... Literally two factions that have in the lore point been made into good guys vs. bad guys BEFORE fo3. The next being the concept that they retconned. Something fo2 and foT did as well.
Fo4's biggest problem was that it tried to appeal to everyone who's been complaining. They have an objectively good faction in the minute men, they then have three morally gray factions, they undid some of their retcons with groups such as the brotherhood of steel, which in the end just looked like backpedaling.
The biggest reason so many 'fans' of fallout hate fallout now, the entire meme of "we're fallout fans, we hate fallout", is because 90% of the 'fanbase' don't bother to actually LEARN the franchise.
Nothing made me appreciate fo4 more, than when i played fo1 and 2. I've grown to enjoy them, but when i first tried them, i went in as someone who was 'told off' by people because i liked fo3, they kept harping on how amazing fo1 and 2 were, the choices, the fact you could side the the bad guys if you wanted, etc. etc. and in the end... half the shit they said was lies. The games are actually very barebones in many cases. Not to mention "siding with the bad guys" is actually EXPANDED on in fo3 compared to 1 and 2. example? you can work with the slavers and enslave the entire wasteland. In fo1 you can... shoot a guy for a raider grop, and then they say you're okay with them, and then you do nothing else for them...
In fo3 you can poison project purity, killing everyone for the enclave. In fo1 you can! side with the master right at the end...
Fo2 had even LESS opportunity to side with bad guys than 1 did. I've yet to see evidence you can even side with the enclave, and my experience shows them to be hostile by default, and their entire ideology says that you, a wastelander, should be killed on sight. There's no 'side with the evil person' in fo2. Yet. People still sit there and claim that fo1 and 2 are the pinnacle of the franchises, with more choices than any of them. Hell i've heard them say this even against foNV which is LUDACRIS.
Once i tempered my expectations, and just assumed those people were lying to hate on fo3 and beyond, i did start to appreciate fo1 and 2 more. But by learning it, and noticing all the retcons, the re-writes, the complete lack of choice beyond 'shoot this guy' and 'or plant a bomb to blow him up instead' i did very much start to realize that 4 actually okay. I'd say mid, not amazing, not awful.
But i appreciate them because i LEARNED about the others. i had to learn how much people lie about the older ones to realize how the newer ones are actually pretty in-line.
tl;dr: people hate on fo4 because they're ignorant of the lies being pushed about fo1 and 2's quality.
First of all, thank you for the awesome comment! I really loved it because you literally gave examples for every game and you’re absolutely right about 4 trying to appease to many people. Morally grey character writing is definitely the best but it may not be as apparent as we think in some previous games as it’s actually very hard to write. I think what you’re mainly saying is that every game appeals to different people and we have to give each a fair chance without bashing them as well as not view them through rose tinted glasses due to nostalgia or an allegiance. Really good comment and probably 100% the most neutral and logical response you could give.
@@AVVGaming1 You kinda said it alot easier than i did. Each one appeals to different groups.
Fallout 4 is pretty but shallow. It's reminds me of The Outer Worlds which has all the same issues. So weird that Obsidian didn't make it more like New Vegas which is amazing. And the Fallout game I enjoy most. I do a solid Fallout 3 and New Vegas back to back playthrough every 4 months but only do Fallout 4 every couple of years.
New Vegas really was just special. Just one of those moments where everything came together. In reality, it shouldn’t have been possible with the time frames, but it happened and thank goodness for that!
In full disclosure, I'm very biased towards New Vegas. But in my opinion Fallout 4 and Skyrim too for that matter just feel so soulless to me. Mindless combat along a path that is extremely linear even though it masquerades as being so open. I love the entire series; both Fallout and ES, I just wish Bethesda would stop trying to appeal to everyone and try to appeal to their core fanbase.
The core fanbase is now the mindless people with no interest in a true RPG. The dialogue options are designed to not matter. It's for the people who just want to fudge around and shoot stuff before turning off the game so they can rapid skip all the meaningless dialogue options and continue on their day. Sad.
I think it’s the money that’s the problem. I prefer new vegas and always will but fallout 4 sold more. It happens all games now; they go for the money which tends to be what you’re saying. Easier to understand stuff. Doesn’t mean they have to throw it away completely though. What happened to innovation and trying something different? Not sure why games are becoming more basic.
@@AVVGaming1 It's like you say: It's about the money. From a publisher's perspective, the risk-reward ratio is just not there for new ideas. I think that's just where we are right now. I have hope that things will get better, but for now we endure. Having gaming be so accepted in the mainstream now is a double-edged blade. And it's also not only a problem for the games industry to be fair; it's a problem in nearly all media.
A lot of the good quests in Skyrim compete with the worst quests in Oblivion. The writing has gone downhill in both Skyrim and Fallout 4. The graphics and gameplay were clearly more important than the story the games used to tell. It felt like most of Fallout 4 was just settlement building. It should have been a DLC. Not so heavily focused as the whole purpose of the minutemen. Wasted potential on said faction. Who am I kidding, all of the factions were wasted potential. To the point where the three main factions are irredeemable in the eyes of each other. No compromise. Just kill everything. In New Vegas, you actions affected the faction you picked in the end. It made the whole game feel like your efforts mattered.
Fallout 4 doesn't even present a good future for any of the factions. What happens to the commonwealth after you beat the game? At least Fallout 3 and NV gave you vision of what future you helped create.
It divides fans because its an even more impressive regression from 3 if you enjoy the classic games and a worse game entirely if you enjoyed New Vegas. But if you're a casual fan of the series you'll enjoy it fine.
But damn it could have been so much more.
I think the game is fine, it’s just the writing I think is lacking a lot. Im a new vegas fan so it’s lacking a lot in those ways. But man, if they could like the best from every fallout game and put it altogether, that’d be the dream. Not gonna happen but I’m allowed to dream lol
@@AVVGaming1I remember a comment somewhere that every Bethesda game post Morrowind needs 3 mods.
Stability patches, intro removal, and difficulty increase.
And damn if that isn't how I enjoyed Fallout 3/4 .
I think Fallout 3 should have had 3 options for the prologue
The longest option, where you see the wanderer at 1, 10, 12, 16, 17 and 18 years old
The default one we got with 1 10 16 and 18
And then a quick start version with just the birth and the 18 yr prologue ending.
That’s an awesome idea! This would fit all types of players. Those that really enjoy the long back story and want to take their time, those that want to enjoy it for a bit and those that are on playthrough 278 and want to get out there really quick! lol
I disagree on the part that Fallout 4 looks objectively better. That's entirely subjective other than the obvious higher polygon count and fleshed out human models compared to older gambreyo fallouts. The art style in Fallout 4 has been rebooted in to this wacky 1950s cartoony look with bright colors. It almost makes me feel like I'm walking through a theme park and not a desolate wasteland, It completely kills the vibe. This problem is even more exagerated in Fallout 76 with Apalachia's terrain. I hate this art direction and it strays away from the more mature and dark vibe I get from F3/NV. And no I'm not blinded by nostalgia since I played fallout 1 after every latest entry and it perfectly captures the desolate aesthetics that I love about post apocalyptic America in this franchise so
Exactly what I mean about the ambience. It was very colourful and positive environment with wacky characters. It seemed extremely different to what other Fallout games were like. The quests didn't feel deep or dark, like I don't really remember them. Even the quest where you have to track down a serial killer, when you meet him he's acting crazy and has these silly goggles on. It takes away the seriousness of it and breaks immersion.
This video is laughably ignorant and it's very obvious fall out new vegas wasn't understood.
Sorry new at CZcams! I didn’t cover as much as I may have wanted to but it’s just my 10th video. Sorry if it didn’t meet expectations but thank you for taking the time to give feedback.
@@AVVGaming1don't sweat it, this guy can't even formulate an argument as to what he has a problem with. He's a troll
@@conradpabis9032 thank you mate! That’s means a lot :)
@@AVVGaming1 of course! Keep up the good work
@@conradpabis9032 thank you!
I love Fallout 4. I have been steadily cultivating all the settlements, not just the usual 4 or five. I don't mind Preston, as my settlements are so well defended, nothing is missing when I go back to visit. I miss the drama of New Vegas, and hope that Fallout 5 will take place there and feature a similar RPG element.
That’s awesome! Takes a lot of dedication to commit to all the settlements! I bet if feels really rewarding though. I think fallout 5 would be awesome if they took the best from every game and put everything altogether. Probably asking too much but I can dream!
Great Video! But why only 480p ?
Thank you so much! It was my mistake, I’m new and when I produced the video I selected it to export as 480p. I’ve since released a new video in HQ. This was a lesson for me and videos from now on will be better quality.
Initially I was looking at each main game. I remember I was having a hard time deciding which ones to play. I went with fallout 4 because:
1. Fallout 3 and New Vegas graphics looks dated.
2. Fallout 4's gameplay and world designed look hella fun.
3. Fallout 4 seemed to be the game with the most mainstream popularity.
4. I found the gameplay footage far more interesting then the other games and love the building system I was seeing.
5. I was aware people believed the dialogue system was limited, but for a new player like me it seemed more open ended then what I am familiar with. And I don't mind there being a voiced protagonist.
6. The game looked pretty expansive with so much to love.
Its still hard for me to consider playing New vegas and Fallout 3 cause of stuff like this.
And that is absolutely perfectly fine! Fallout 3 and NV are amazing games but at this point they are a little bit dated now at this point. For people who are new to the series, it may be too much to ask them to play 3 and NV because of their age and dated graphics/gameplay. For example, my partner had never played a Fallout game before. Tried NV and 3 and didn't like them (couldn't get over the bad graphics). Finally, I suggested to try 4 and now they love it! As a result, now they're open to playing other games like New Vegas and Fallout 3 because they know the potential of how good they can be because of what they experienced in Fallout 4! They're all great games and if someone is going to commit to NV or 3, they have to know it's going to be worth their time. Once you've enjoyed Fallout 4 it may open the doors to try the others.
@@AVVGaming1 Yea. I definitely understand that. Its very possible I would have tried them if he graphics were updated. However I do intend on playing Fallout 3 and New Vegas someday. If not just to learn about the lore. There is a lot of good points in this video.
Thank you! Take your time and wait for the right moment when you are in the mood for it. Don’t force yourself through the motions. A day will come when you’re just in the mood to commit to one of them and it’ll be a good time!
Imagine limiting to yourself purely based on what's popular at the time.
Lmao. Bethesda's target audience at work.
@@samithonjames370 I think your forgetting the fact that Fallout 3 and New Vegas are also popular. I picked Fallout 4 due to a combination of factors that can be summed up as 1. Better graphics. 2. More interesting looking gameplay and systems 3. A lot of content to explore. 4. Interesting themes and alot of stuff that caught my attention as exciting when looking at gameplay footage. The popularity of the game was just a sign that I was making the right choice.
Fallout 4 being more colorful and the vibe more hopeful as you help rebuild with the Minutemen is probably why I like it so much. I just like helping people.
And that’s an awesome quality to have! The video is trying to say one is better than the other. They’re all great in their own ways and meet different peoples wants.
My main issues are the writing/quest design, the mediocre to straight up bad voice acting, voiced mc(limiting dialogue options) the art style, the perk system, and the fudging of the lore that happens with every bethesda made fallout. The synth debate is so poorly handled that I don't care about it at all, and the railroad is all, "you're either taking a bullet for a synth or you're scum". Almost everyone's an idiot(it's been 200 years why is there trash still everywhere and skeletons in every other building). Quests are either kill or find something. Most of the guns are just bad looking, and oversized, some couldn't possibly function(and why are they all left handed). Art Style is gonna be up to personal taste, but the post fallout 4 artstyle feels like a parody of fallout rather then the actual art style. The perk chart removes the rpg elements of the previous games and makes leveling feel almost worthless and locks quality of life stuff to SPECIAL levels like mod crafting or crafting crafting stations.
Rapid fire of other problems I have: The brotherhood airship makes no sense, how did they build that in the post apocalypse. Having to max friendship points for follower quests is just plain inferior to completing simple checks in previous games. Being limited to one companion is ridiculous, dogmeat, Ada, and cogsworth should be able to follow you with a humanoid companion like in New Vegas with Ed-E and Rex. Durability being removed messed with power armor and makes stuff less valuable, the traders also suck for the most part. Legendary gear meant there was barely any truly unique weapons or variants compared to NV which had a great variety of variants that weren't just different enchantments(that's what the effects are called in the files). Also no different ammo types, so no 50 cal goodness of blowing up an entire group of raiders with a sniper rifle. One final thing, your companion will be annoying about you picking up "junk" to make weapon mods, like who thought that was a good idea?
Awesome awesome comment! Totally agree with everything you’ve said. I’m working on my next video, about how Bethesda doesn’t respect its fans with intelligent writing and stuff like that. That is probably the biggest thing for me. But you summarised everything in even more detail than me. I know Bethesda are trying to make the game more casual but I feel like there is a limit.
I subbed at 300 subscribers, since then you’re at 400+, damn good work man🤣
Haha! It’s definitely been a day. 6 weeks ago I had 12 subscribers and they were all family who didn’t really like video games lol definitely gets me motivated to get onto the next video!
It doesn't divide fans. You just have too many weirdo NV toxic fans in your circle that are really loud.
The majority of Fallout fans play Fallout 4. That's why Fallout 4 has more current players, made more money, and has more sales.
Just to be clear, I love all Fallout games as I explain in the video; I just wanted to explain where some fans would argue against fallout 4. I love them all though and have played the life out of 4
The karma system was pretty dumb. It was contradictory and caused entire settlements to turn hostile out of nowhere.
I can see why it would be annoying in that way. I’m sure if introduced in a new game it would be tweaked to stop things like that happening
Exactly. It also would go against one of the game's main themes of questioning whether or not Synths are human by clearly delineating morality to certain actions related to it. By not giving us Good Karma if we helped save a Synth, for instance, we can come to our own conclusions on whether or not we actually did the right thing instead of just letting the game tell us we're good/evil.
What's the mod for the heavy weapon you've got in the thumbnail?
I’m sorry but I’m not sure :(
@@AVVGaming1 That's a shame. Did you get the thumbnail from somewhere else? Or if you screeenshotted it, can you give me a mod list?
@@bajscast yeah I’ll figure out where I took the guy from and get a link to you
@@AVVGaming1 Thank you!
@@AVVGaming1 Yo! Did you figure this out?
I think Fallout NV has the best story but Fallout 4 settlements and crafting just should be a standard. I wish we could get the best of all fallout worlds, the complex and wide array of decisions from NV, crafting and settlement building of 4, leveling and perks and traits of fallout 2, timed events from fallout 1, and wasteland filled with stuff like Fallout 3 AND then give us bosses from 76 and boom we have the best fallout game ever.
Haha it’s exactly that simple! Yes! All the best parts from every game. Can you imagine!? We wouldn’t sleep for a week lol
It's not fun.
Fallout 4? Any particular reason you didn’t enjoy it?
@@AVVGaming1 It's really hard to put my finger on it. I have tried maybe 6 times to get into it over the years and I sputter out after a few hours. It feels like its better polished than 3 & NV but it doesn't feel like it's deep. Maybe the way interacting with NPCs works and maybe the Commonwealth just doesn't grab me as much. I don't bother with the settlements so I don't really care about that aspect.
@@h347h I made this video after my recent experience. I go flying into this game but suddenly lose interest after certain amount time goes by and that doesn’t happen with NV for example.
Realistically the sky would always remain "Blue" after a nuclear war that won't change just because people nuked the world.
You really hit the nail on the head with this. 3 and New Vegas are bleak as hell, they actually feel post apocalyptic, depressing, and quite eerie. 4 is just so colorful and has this slightly cartoony, Pixar esque art style, as welll as a more upbeat soundtrack. I prefer my Fallout to have that dirty and grim almost horror vibe.
Yes, they’re different games in that respect, I love the horror element as well. The vaults in 3 and NV were particularly dark lol
The thing about New Vegas is that, depending on your choices, you can help to rebuild the Wasteland by your choices. Do you go with a corrupt government whose people are well intentioned? The pre-war businessman? Anarchy? Or do you go with Roman LARPers?
Counterpoint: As I've gotten older, I've found myself preferring the more hopeful and optimistic undertones of Fallout 4 in comparison to its predecessors. Ultimately, it depends on the current mood I'm in, but considering how the real world has been getting aggressively worse year after year after year, I've found myself looking more for media that doesn't make me feel miserable the majority of the time. Sorry, there's a better way of putting this than I am, and to each their own.
Yup. You’ve nailed it. Fallout 4 isn’t an objectively bad game, but it’s very shallow and does not have the wonderful despairing tone of 3 or NV. Starfield is the logical endpoint of this: everyone’s essential. No real choice. Sign of the times. Great video.
Thank you so much for the kind words! I feel like the best games including the ability to make decisions and impact the world e.g. Witcher 3, the walking dead both won game of the year. Decision making is essential in video games as that’s why we play them. A movie or tv show is linear, I like to impact a game.
Fallout 4 doesn't "divide" any fans, it simply smokes out all the New Vegas gatekpeers.
It does have a strong fanbase
It smokes out anyone with good taste, that's for sure.
"In new vegas I killed all the npcs!"
"what did you do then?"
"Um... restarted the game".
"Fun".
I think it’s more the freedom aspect. Not necessarily to do that, but the fact you can if that makes sense?
It's the fact that every character can be killed which made the game feel more realistic. I can go up to Benny and kill him without it affecting the rest of the game, and there were different ways to kill him too. I can kill Caesar, President Kimball, and/or Mr. House, and still continue the game. You can work with the boomers to ally with them or kill them all to finish the game. You had more choices to roleplay the story that you wanted.
Where as in Fallout you had less choices to make, and everything was pretty much a different version of kill everything. You spend hours building good repour with every faction, only to have to destroy most of them. None of the endings are shaped based on the decisions you made to get there. Fallout 4 focuses more on settlement building than actually having a decent story.
@@toxicmale2264 Being able to make choices that just ruin gameplay, like killing quest givers, doesn't seem like a feature to me, it seems like a bug. I don't like that the traveling vendors can eventually die in FO4. It's one of the things I really disliked in FO3, at some point the whole world is dead. Not fun.
@@belmiris1371 The wasteland is not supposed to feel "safe". It is supposed to feel dangerous. Which is captured perfectly when everybody can be killed. While I am not advocating for killing everyone, it is the fact that you can that add to the dangerous feel.
@@toxicmale2264 Dead NPCs = boring.
In defense of Fallout 4 (not the lack of depth in quests and dialogues) I am a player that doesn’t want to experience every decision or choice, I don’t like evil or morally wrong or idiotic choices and I will never engage in them; add the fact that I prefer to do just one or a few long runs instead of restarting the game and making new characters and there you go, the Skyrim/Fallout 4 formula will have me hooked. I don’t engage with the Imperial Legion, I will always choose the Stormcloaks so I have zero reason to start again the game to make an imperial sided character in that department, but it will royally piss me off if I had to choose between the Dark Brotherhood and the Thieves Guild. I appreciate the freedom, the multiple endings, but I despise that forced replayability.
This also happens to me with the Dark Souls games, I don’t want to grind levels over and over again for new characters, I rather have my preferred quality melee build perfected and leveled at max level and start NG+, but in no way go back to level 1 and grind again with a feeble fresh new character, making my efforts on that first character mean nothing. This translates to Skyrim and Fallout 4 to have a character that, as long as the effort in training and leveling up is there, have no problem having unlocked every skill without having to compromise damage dealing with speech skills and such. Plus, as a PC player, I can customize the game to my liking and, more specifically, add more quests to partake and lands to explore, to keep enjoying the character I put so much effort into making an unstoppable force of nature, with no forbidden path.
Yes then in your case fallout 4 would probably be the best. See for me I love replaying a game and making different choices each time. But it just means we have different things we love about the game, but neither of us is wrong. We’re both right and I think the best game will be the one that gives both, and both optional so that way it pleases all players. Chances are very low thst game will ever exist but it’s a nice thought lol. But I do agree a lot with you, as with Elden Ring I best that once and didn’t really have a desire to redo it at all. Especially as I get older replaying a 100 hour game is just unrealistic. Great comment!
My problem with Fallout 4 (NV die hard) is the number of non radiant side quests and them having no real effect on the factions in the game. If you take out the radiants it’s only 40 sides and NV’s got 75 and most have implications on the world and factions. Still I agree with a lot of comments, 4 seems like a great entry level, and if you really love the universe NV will get you obsessed 😂
You’re spot on! I love fallout new vegas though I’m playing it now. 4 can’t keep me held in its world. Nv I can’t get out of lol I’m playing it today! Lll
I’m gonna throw my old man views on this.
As somebody who played Fallout 1 back in 2003 on my mum’s crappy old pc when I was like 13 or something, I was immediately drawn into the game and was hooked.
I personally think you ALL should go and play it.
I then rushed to my mates hose so he could burn me a copy of Fallout 2 yes I just admitted that. And I loved that too.
Fallout 3 released and I was very skeptical of how it would play and feel but when i came out that vault I was pleasantly surprised.
It was bloody horrible and everything wanted to kill me, good job.
I still have nightmares about those metro trains tunnels.
I feel that 3 gave the best atmosphere (of the 3d games). Yet it was missing a certain sprinkle of pure Fallout magic. But it’s a very commendable entry by Bethesda.
Then Vegas came out….
The magic was back and as all know many of original staff worked on it.
Yes it’s brown and quite empty really but it’s the interactions and fine crafted stories and humour that F3 didn’t have.
Fallout 4…I hate to love this game.
It’s beautiful…too beautiful.
The story is pretty shit by Fallout standards but I admire what it does do right.
There’s a lot of bloaty “No real consequence” to it.
Yes the shooting etc is better but it made me feel like I was the king of the wasteland when that’s not the essence of Fallout.
I’m not touching 76 with a stick…sorry.
Shame because it’s a beautiful looking game.
Conclusion: Play Fallout one followed by F3 and then Vegas. IF those games could somehow be merged THAT would be the best Fallout game. Fact
I
Yes I’m replying to my own comment.
Hopefully, no matter which one you play I’m happy people are still playing and discovering this horrible brutal franchise masterpiece and that it allows you to perhaps explore the other games you have not played.
That’s all children 😊
Hahaha what an awesome comment! Loved reading that! You’re clearly passionate and experienced after playing them all. I’ve just done a video on new vegas and uploaded a few hours ago discussing what you said. All the games are awesome but in completely different ways. I agree with your assessment on every game btw. I have played 76 and it’s probably exactly what you think it is. It’s not really a fallout game in my opinion.
I have to agree - there was more depth and character in FA3 and Vegas (and Fallout 1 and 2 too).
I still like FA4's colors better. I reloaded a save in FA3 after I played FA4, and realized that my eyes can't take that rubbish any more.
A desolate wasteland doesn't have to be all dark and grey. The sky will be blue after 200 years, so will be the water. Darkness and greyness is not the only way to describe desolation.
The night sky will still be immensely beautiful even after the world has ended.
I think it was probably also due to the graphical capabilities at the time. Fallout 4 is the definitely the best looking game of the series and they’re all good games in their own ways for different reasons. I think we’re lucky to have them all, but I think FO3 and NV could use a remake now just to make it more playable since the graphics now are very old. Even when they came out they were not up to par with good looking games of their times. Beautiful RPG elements though
Because Fallout 4 is more action game than RPG. I’m
Playing through it right now and I can’t shake the feeling that Bethesda wanted a pure action game in the Fallout world, while trying to retain elements that make it “Fallout”, but they didn’t succeed in that regard. Still a decent game, but clearly not the best Fallout game.
Clearly this was a deliberate choice to appeal to the mainstream. It’s not ideal, it it is what it is. They did the same thing with the Elder Scrolls series, with Morrowind being the last RPG, and Oblivion and Skyrim being more action games that appeal to wider audiences.
Yes and I would argue it’s dropping each game. From Morrowind, to Oblivion, to Fallout 3, then Skyrim and Fallout 4 it dropped so much in terms of RPG elements. Now 76 and Starfield. It’s a shame for players who love that part, like myself.
I see 4 as a bitter future with hope. I play games for entertainment or for fun. 3 seems depressing and an anguish to play. So I enjoy 4 my favorite
Yes it’s much more optimistic than 3. I love every Fallout game and I love that each brings something different to the table, that’s what keeps it interesting. Every fallout game is someone’s favourite and they’re all top games. It’s tough for a series to make 3 great games, let alone 6!
Between 3 and NV you have the primary target for nukes and half a desert…yes, 4 is a city… but I can’t imagine it being hit half as hard as dc.
I def agree with your role playing points. I’d have loved the survival mode in 4 to be implemented in a game with the tone of 3
Thanks! Yes I agree with what you’ve said and a lot of people love the survival mode and suggested for me to try it!
The dialog system and the settlement building really killed the game for me. Played it for a few hours, years ago, and never went back.
It's an acquired taste the settlement building. It was not for me personally but I know some people will like it. The dialogue system was a bad idea. They tried to copy the Walking Dead video game (of all games) and Mass Effect. Did not execute correctly.
FO 1,2 and NV are by far the three best games of the franchise. The writting and rpg elements are superior to FO 3 and 4, but I still enjoy them.
Each game has its own qualities and its nice that we are debating about games that are all so great. I absolutely love them all but New Vegas specifically. Nice to receive a message from El Phenomenon btw!
Wait... you can PLAY "Beyond the Beef"? You must have the magic bug free edition of NV.
Haha on my last playthrough on
Xbox series, I had zero bugs. Zero! The chances of that are so rare. Now I’ve typed this it’ll crash tonight lol
It's a lot of fun to roam around fallout 4 and just kinda loot and shoot shit, but the story is so goddamn dull. It was a lot of fun getting to be a raider in nuka world though. New Vegas will always be my favorite
The writing and quest design and role playing mechanics are better in NV. The open world design is better in fallout 4. It’s all about each person having different preferences. I have the same taste as you.
This one is actually pretty easy. 1, 2, 3 & NV are niche games with specific appeal. 4 has broad appeal so it is safer and more accessible. So new players should determine if they want a quirky niche experience unlike anything else, or a fun looters shooter with hoards of content and a oddball setting. They are aimed at different audiences and audience sizes. I LOVED 4 so I want back and played the earlier games and loved them as well. I think if I played them in the other order I likely would not have liked 4 as much.
So most should start with 4
Well that’s the best summary! That is exactly what I think as well. Plus with the older graphics a lot of people just can’t get thru the older games but if they played 4 first and enjoy it, it can help give them motivation to stick with the older titles
@@AVVGaming1This was a well done vid. Quality work. Looking forward to what else you produce. Maybe a look at 1&2?
@@c_bass1971 thank you so much for the compliment! I’m new at CZcams and learning every day about video creation. Thanks. 100% I think that’s the next ones to do! Stay tuned and it’ll happen I promise!
24:24 all valid points. I think fallout 4 would have had a better settlement experience if they trimmed it down to 15-20 prominent settlements with their own stories kinda like bunker hill. Back when i played fallout 3 i remember wishing the game had a way to reflect my deeds physically in the world by making settlements like megaton actually look better and function better because i helped them. In a future game if they keep the system they should have some preset progressions to developing the settlements with whatever faction you want to run the territory with the option for you to totally personalize it the way you can in 4. This way you have something meaningful for people who dont care for building as well as people who do and the system is a bit more thoughtfully integrated. I really did not like the settlements in 4 until i played the game on survival mode and realized how vital the system could be when resource management and local safety became more of a consideration. And there were hints of this novelty with the brotherhood taxing settlements for resources or nuka world allowing you to convert them to raider settlements but ultimately these ideas were not baked in or elaborated on enough to make them feel substantial because as you said, your impact on the world is kept mostly on the surface and the response to your deeds and reputation are inconsistent at best. The game offers less narrative choice but in the long run it hasnt been too great a detriment personally since it’s easier to accept limitations than it is to accept many choices that never quite give you the outcome you want no matter how much you try because of moral ambiguity.
I 100% agree with everything you have said there. I haven’t played survival mode and so many people have recommended that I try it so I’ll definitely be seeing how it impacts the play through. I think when they dropped in settlement building it was a last minute edition so they didn’t really add much to it and just were sort of there. The Nuka
cola one was better but again not perfect. Basically if they implemented everything you have said in this message then I would enjoy it a lot more! Awesome comment!
@@AVVGaming1 yeah survival mode is the only way i care to play f4. Its pretty hard at first but it highlights a need for strategic engagement with niche character builds and planning your expeditions in to the world by choosing what to cary, what to stash, what to buy, where to rest, ect. You can infuse your own head cannon in to it but i find the game much more enjoyable this way that makes it an entry with strengths uniquely worthy of praise. But i still want the best of all the worlds so i really want to see player choice in the narrative to come back in a more intelligent way for the future and thats were the remake/ remasters have a golden opportunity to refine these systems and get more fan feedback before the next main entry.
You know… I find it odd that people seem to be divisive and worked up over games like this. Like, I understand why games like Fallout 3 and NV are beloved and hold a special place in their hearts but to me they’re just games that people play, so excuse me for not understanding the high-praise it has garnered and I truly believe it does deserve the praise. But hearing the praise all over and over again while disregarding the other becomes annoying that it actually doesn’t want me to play their game of their choice.
It’s just a game. They’re no different from Fallout 4 or any games in that regards. To me a game is just a game, and I want to have fun playing it without people telling what is right and wrong. And my time spent on the Fallout community is just endless debates about Bethesda or Obsidian, Fallout vs Fallout, the list goes on. I think being part of a gaming community or fandom can ruin your experience with having fun of what game you chose since people think they know better when it’s better for the beginner to decide what they wants and how they will experience it.
To me at least, I played Fallout 4 because I like the look and aesthetic of the game. I like how it’s played and it’s gameplay but the story is where it falls flat especially its RPG element. Yet I still have fun in spite of its shortcomings. To me at least, Fallout 4 is the “modern” and user-friendly game in the franchise for all beginners of the franchise, and appeals to a larger audience than a minority. As you said in your conclusion, Fallout 3 and NV are great games but are outdated by the engine, and it would not appeal to most modern players and it sometimes could not run without crashing in the new PCs and you need to rely on mods in order to run it properly.
I’m saying this as someone who was recently new the franchise since the Fallout TV Show, I just find it tiring how games could divide people to the point people gatekeep and slander other games or titles just because it didn’t live up to their expectations and think they’re ‘right’ when their opinions are just as subjective as everyone else. I know it’s their opinions and they have every right to express, but sometimes they should keep it to themselves. I have my own grievances on all Fallout games as mentioned and seen in the video but I never expressed it because it was already parroted for the same reasons that has been said to death multiple times since I’ve been in the Fallout Community.
A game is a game. It’s a temporary escape from reality. It’s meant to be played for fun not choose which is better. I’m just glad this video at least remained non-bias to some degree constructive on why people prefer older Fallout over New Fallout without sounding like a Fanboy Zealot. I can understand why older fans or rpg fans prefer Fallout 3/NV but me and other “modern” fallout fans are so casual with our pick in regards with gaming so we have no problem on choosing what Fallout game we like and we play it with our heart’s content, but as I said before.
A game is just a game. Don’t take it too seriously since it’s just a temporary escape from reality. Just let people have fun with their own preferences and let them play it on how they see fit. All Fallout games are good (even Fallout 76), they’re just different Fallout games that appeal to a differnet audience.
Thank you for this awesome comment! My intention was to explain why there is the debate and experiences you have had in the Fallout community. I feel I came across maybe a little against fallout 4 and maybe that was a mistake whilst writing. But for me they’re all great and they all appeal for different reasons. I don’t think some people can actually play the older games as they’re far too dated compared to recent additions. The concept of having a debate is like you said, everybody is correct as it’s opinion based. I totally disagree with saying “fallout 4 sucks you have to play NV” as that person may not like that game and now they’re put off the entire series. Games are just games but they are art in that we all see them differently since it garnishes emotions. Thank you for your kind comment and I’m glad you’re enjoying Fallout 4. The show was awesome as well! Great comment!
Maybe because they’re being advertised as rpgs with choices and consequences, that u have to pay with you know? Money? And that when we criticise these games so the devs take feedback to approve upon these games. This isn’t just something generic, its something that had potential to be better that people found could be better than what we got from Bethesda, also, when people enjoy something and put time and effort in the community, they’re gonna obviously get mad when it changes like with football or their favourite tv show, if for whatever reason they changed and made bad changed people are gonna be mad, its not like thry’ll just say forgot it and move on onto something else, they will stay and continually criticise because they enjoy it. Its like telling a person to stop taking their favourite flavour of ice cream, u can tell them all they like how that flavour is gone, they will still continually criticise the company that sells ice cream for only serving bland vanilla.
If people can like they’re own thing and formulate their own community than its a pointless battle, u say to enjoy yourself whilst saying u dont understand why people are getting worked up by a product they’ve paid for and for what they’ve invested their time in or shown with previous ones that can be better than what people got.
@@danpaz9485hm… good point.
4 is Wide as an Ocean but Deep as a puddle, it lacks roleplaying options for the player, while you can do almost everything in a single playthrough, the impact on your choices feel bare bones and have little value. As for the Factions, Institute are just evil for the sake of it and have no justified reason for their actions (Shaun is also an idiot), The Brotherhood are basically Enclave Lite as they behave similarly to them (Fuck Maxson, i want Lyons back) also he wants to nuke the institute which would destroy all of the technology inside and risk infecting the wasteland years later with radiation leak, Railroad has good intentions, but they want to destroy the institute that are making synths that they could have helped, also same reason as above, radiation leak, Minutemen i feel is the best choice as the player has more control except for nuking the institute (unless you use a mod called Conquer the Institute where you take control of it).
The Dialogue Wheel limits what you can say and you are given vague ideas on what the choice is, the Perk chart limits you to 70 buyable perks and it is an FPS killer as you unlock more perks as they all play when unlocked. The Commonwealth also lacks any form of progression, it's just as stagnant as the Capital Wasteland despite being less destroyed by comparison.
And all those legacy bugs that modders have to keep fixing every game because Bethesda never fixes them.
Yes I agree with a lot of this. I think it’s mainly the simplify of the writing. I was going to do a video explaining how Bethesda have been using too basic writing in their games compared to other games. Basically they introduce a bad guy who’s bad, talks bad, dressed bad, all the people you know so he’s bad, so you kill him. It’s such basic writing. People have layers and shift constantly on the morality scale. I think that’s what I feel 4 lacked.