Video Game News and Miscellany
- Thread starter figmentPez
- Start date
Some developers have earned that amount of trust?
We know exactly what we'll get. Huge sandbox world with a glitchy "improved" game engine. Weak AI. Great lore... hopefully an awesome FREE mod community.
I have no issues pre-ordering this one myself but I don't even WTF the release date is.[DOUBLEPOST=1433380754,1433380699][/DOUBLEPOST]Also, main character is male... bet the first mod is "better main character" with DDs... the way all women were meant to be.
I have no issues pre-ordering this one myself but I don't even WTF the release date is.[DOUBLEPOST=1433380754,1433380699][/DOUBLEPOST]Also, main character is male... bet the first mod is "better main character" with DDs... the way all women were meant to be.
Even after the paid mod fiasco?
I'm the biggest Fallout fan ever, but I'm going to wait and see. If there's going to be paid mods, then I'm going to wait until the GotY edition is on sale on Steam for 75% off before I buy the game. After all, the budget for the mods has to come from somewhere, right?
All I need to know is release date and whether it conflicts with anything else I was planning to get ... so I can delay getting that other game.
That's the only risk, I hope people keep bringing that up and we get a formal answer. That shit don't jive.
I must be the only person on the planet who isn't a big fan of the series and thus, mostly unaffected by the announcement.
Right now there's a bit of a furor on Reddit (and it's shown up on gaming news sites as well) regarding an alleged leak from nearly a year ago that claims to have a bunch of details on Fallout 4. A few of the details have been proven correct, while other might be correct, but a lot of people are taking the entirety of that "leak" as gospel now.
The correct information includes:
1. The game takes place in Boston.
2. The announcement came in June 2015.
3. Super mutants and feral ghouls make a return.
4. Initial release on PC, PS4, and XBone.
The possibly correct information includes:
1. Voiced protagonist. The guy in the Vault suit at the end of the trailer talks to the dog.
2. Male-only player character.
However, I'm pretty sure this "leak" is still bullshit, due to the following reasons:
1. None of the correct information is all that surprising. Boston has been predicted since the Commonwealth and the Institute were dropped as sequel hooks in Fallout 3. Predicting a June announcement, when E3 takes place, is also no big surprise. Super Mutants and Feral Ghouls are such a big part of Fallout lore that it's a no-brainer they'll reappear. And predicting it'll release on PC and the currently most advanced consoles is obvious.
2. Vault 111 plays a major role in the trailer, but is not mentioned in the leak. The leak mentions a Vault 79, which doesn't appear in the trailer.
3. The leak claims there's going to be a XBox360 and PS3 version released later. This is very counter-intuitive, as it basically means creating the same game twice, once with modern graphics and gameplay, once with last-gen's graphics and gameplay.
4. Importing saves from FO3. FO3 does not have this capability, although admittedly giving FO4 the ability to read data from a Fallout 3 save doesn't sound entirely implausible.
5. A male-only protagonist goes against the freedom that's been offered in every Fallout game and every Bethesda game thus far.
So, basically, this leak is going to come up a lot. But I'm pretty sure it's bullshit.
The correct information includes:
1. The game takes place in Boston.
2. The announcement came in June 2015.
3. Super mutants and feral ghouls make a return.
4. Initial release on PC, PS4, and XBone.
The possibly correct information includes:
1. Voiced protagonist. The guy in the Vault suit at the end of the trailer talks to the dog.
2. Male-only player character.
However, I'm pretty sure this "leak" is still bullshit, due to the following reasons:
1. None of the correct information is all that surprising. Boston has been predicted since the Commonwealth and the Institute were dropped as sequel hooks in Fallout 3. Predicting a June announcement, when E3 takes place, is also no big surprise. Super Mutants and Feral Ghouls are such a big part of Fallout lore that it's a no-brainer they'll reappear. And predicting it'll release on PC and the currently most advanced consoles is obvious.
2. Vault 111 plays a major role in the trailer, but is not mentioned in the leak. The leak mentions a Vault 79, which doesn't appear in the trailer.
3. The leak claims there's going to be a XBox360 and PS3 version released later. This is very counter-intuitive, as it basically means creating the same game twice, once with modern graphics and gameplay, once with last-gen's graphics and gameplay.
4. Importing saves from FO3. FO3 does not have this capability, although admittedly giving FO4 the ability to read data from a Fallout 3 save doesn't sound entirely implausible.
5. A male-only protagonist goes against the freedom that's been offered in every Fallout game and every Bethesda game thus far.
So, basically, this leak is going to come up a lot. But I'm pretty sure it's bullshit.
It might be second, but the top game right now is an early access dinosaur game. Do you know how many games on steam let you shoot dinosaurs? A lot.
My point is, pickings might be slim this close to a steam sale.
With a game like this, I think the only reason to preorder is so you can pre-load. Which is a pretty good reason.
I...pre-ordered Arkham Knight.
BUT JUST THE CORE GAME. Not the season pass bullshit.
I am super tempted to pre-order FO4, but then I looked at my games-to-play list on both my PC and consoles, and I changed my mind. Unless something has drastically changed in their mindset and there will be a tangible benefit of some kind for playing at launch (and I mean more than "free commemorative gun" kind of benefit), I will wait until I get at least a few games down my games list.
GasBandit
Staff member
Heck, I barely got a couple hours into Fallout 3 before I got distracted by something else. It just really didn't hold my interest for some reason. I've heard New Vegas is better than 3, but... just never got around to trying it.
New Vegas is MUCH better than FO3, being written by folks at Obsidian Entertainment. The factions are more important and interesting, the stakes are more definite and long lasting, and your actions feel more important to the overall scenario. Toss in 4 wonderful content DLCs and a bunch of fun extras (Gunrunner's Arsenal makes weapon choices more interesting) and you have a killer game.
Then download the Tale of Two Wastelands and play FO3 with New Vegas Rules.
I've always had issues getting into Bethesda's open-world stuff. Fallout 3, Oblivion, Skyrim, etc. I should love them based on the way you can grow your character/build and use equipment and such, but for some reason I always get bored about 10 hours or so into the game.
Of these types of games Skyrim probably held me hostage the longest, but even then it wasn't more than a few days of playing.
Fallout: New Vegas Play Time - 41 hours (pc) + 200 some on Console. I have all the achievements on 360.
Skyrim - 205 on PC + another 200 on console. Have all of the basic achievements on Console.
Probably another 200+ for Oblivion and 300+ for Morrowind.
Yes, I have a problem.
Skyrim - 205 on PC + another 200 on console. Have all of the basic achievements on Console.
Probably another 200+ for Oblivion and 300+ for Morrowind.
Yes, I have a problem.
I've got about 100 hours on Steam FFVII somehow, and have yet to finish it. I know I left it running once, but it wasn't that long.
I guess I just like grinding more than I let on.
I guess I just like grinding more than I let on.
I couldn't get into New Vegas for some reason. Loved the hell out of Fallout 3, and I probably put 400 hours into Skyrim over the course of many characters, maybe more. Don't know why New Vegas didn't grab me. It just felt like work each time I sat down to play it, whereas Fallout 3 had me every time. I loved creeping through the DC Metro, discovering new areas, new stuff. Maybe because New Vegas was so much open terrain that I felt the quests were more the meat of it. I played Fallout 3 and Skyrim more to be immersed and mess around. I'll pop in Skyrim just to wander the wilderness, don't even care if I find a new quest.
Don't look at my Skyrim gaming hours...
I take shit for these opinions everywhere but I'm pretty much in the NMA crowd. Hated what Bethesda did with Fallout 3 (not the world, the lore basically). Harold walking across the country to become a tree, super mutants on the east coast and not manufactured by the Master (Oh, we're DIFFERENT super mutants), the knights in shining armor protector Brotherhood of Steel (that New Vegas straight up had to explain away in the archive), the Enclave existing at all (Oh, we're a DIFFERENT Enclave), abandoning the Mark Morgan atmospheric music for more generic epic music. It was like fan fiction.
THAT NO ONE HAD FUCKING CLEANED THEIR HOUSES IN THE 200 YEARS SINCE THE NUCLEAR WAR. FUCK. We get it, it's a wasteland, but people would still clear the God damn rubble off the floor of their domiciles.
THAT NO ONE HAD FUCKING CLEANED THEIR HOUSES IN THE 200 YEARS SINCE THE NUCLEAR WAR. FUCK. We get it, it's a wasteland, but people would still clear the God damn rubble off the floor of their domiciles.
Steam Machines set to release in October and November
And honestly, they don't sound too hot. The OS is Linux-based, so at launch will only support games that can run with that. Other games can stream from a Windows or Mac based computer, but if that's the case, wouldn't you just use the computer?
Other factors of not-great include it being a partnership with Alienware and GameStop, and the pricing increases get crazier with the more power you want in it, which implies these aren't going to be the magic box that makes PC gaming as easy as consoles, but will have just as much parts and such needed, so again, PC would seem to be better if you're just going to have to do that anyway. If you buy one version, it might run worse than another version, and still need upgrades.
I don't see this as the solution to console gamers wanting the PC experience, and I don't see this suiting PC gamers who want games to stop being affected by console releases. I'm kind of disappointed.
And honestly, they don't sound too hot. The OS is Linux-based, so at launch will only support games that can run with that. Other games can stream from a Windows or Mac based computer, but if that's the case, wouldn't you just use the computer?
Other factors of not-great include it being a partnership with Alienware and GameStop, and the pricing increases get crazier with the more power you want in it, which implies these aren't going to be the magic box that makes PC gaming as easy as consoles, but will have just as much parts and such needed, so again, PC would seem to be better if you're just going to have to do that anyway. If you buy one version, it might run worse than another version, and still need upgrades.
I don't see this as the solution to console gamers wanting the PC experience, and I don't see this suiting PC gamers who want games to stop being affected by console releases. I'm kind of disappointed.
I've often wondered just what purpose steam machines might serve. The only real purpose I see them serving is as a secondary system, sort of like a home media pc but for gaming.
And really, anyone that's likely to want one of those can make one for far cheaper, and install SteamOS on it if they really want to.
Not at those prices.