I haven't seen any examples of AJ being a shill. His sponsored videos are disclosed, his opinions are fairly consistent, and I haven't seen much from him that is out of line with what I already thought.
If anything, he's a corporate hater, not a shill. The worst one can rightly accuse him of is being a fanboy.
I haven't seen any examples of AJ being a shill. His sponsored videos are disclosed, his opinions are fairly consistent, and I haven't seen much from him that is out of line with what I already thought.
If anything, he's a corporate hater, not a shill. The worst one can rightly accuse him of is being a fanboy.
The problem I have with AJ is that he's a bandwagon jumper. I have never seen him have an outlier opinion in any game - he just looks at which way things are going and goes with the flow. It's his lack of original thought that makes me not a fan.
I happen to agree with him in this case but If I'm going to watch an anti studio shenanigans critic with a clown act I'd rather watch Jim Sterling any day of the week. He at least does have original thoughts about the stuff he slams.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I haven't seen any examples of AJ being a shill. His sponsored videos are disclosed, his opinions are fairly consistent, and I haven't seen much from him that is out of line with what I already thought.
If anything, he's a corporate hater, not a shill. The worst one can rightly accuse him of is being a fanboy.
The problem I have with AJ is that he's a bandwagon jumper. I have never seen him have an outlier opinion in any game - he just looks at which way things are going and goes with the flow. It's his lack of original thought that makes me not a fan.
I happen to agree with him in this case but If I'm going to watch an anti studio shenanigans critic with a clown act I'd rather watch Jim Sterling any day of the week. He at least does have original thoughts about the stuff he slams.
I enjoy Jim as an entertainer and appreciate his thoughts on the industry. As a game critic, I find his tastes eye-rolling. Placing a walking simulator on your best games of the year may be original, but it's also silly.
I haven't seen any examples of AJ being a shill. His sponsored videos are disclosed, his opinions are fairly consistent, and I haven't seen much from him that is out of line with what I already thought.
If anything, he's a corporate hater, not a shill. The worst one can rightly accuse him of is being a fanboy.
The problem I have with AJ is that he's a bandwagon jumper. I have never seen him have an outlier opinion in any game - he just looks at which way things are going and goes with the flow. It's his lack of original thought that makes me not a fan.
I happen to agree with him in this case but If I'm going to watch an anti studio shenanigans critic with a clown act I'd rather watch Jim Sterling any day of the week. He at least does have original thoughts about the stuff he slams.
I enjoy Jim as an entertainer and appreciate his thoughts on the industry. As a game critic, I find his tastes eye-rolling. Placing a walking simulator on your best games of the year may be original, but it's also silly.
Silly is a good description of him lol.
But he has quite often been first off the mark with scathing criticism of industry practices when deserved. I respect him for that despite his silly schtick.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
7 feels about right. I'm enjoying the game solo as well. It plays much differently than FO4, and until I compared strategies with a friend, I would have given it a 4 or 5. Someone above mentioned being swarmed by a hoard of Scorched and ragequitting. I've been there and did the same until I learned that you gotta have a melee weapon ready to go. If you are expecting to be able to outgun everything with VATs, you are going to die. If you are expecting to be able to loot the entire world a la FO4, you will be quickly overencumbered with nowhere to store stuff. You gotta pick and choose what is most immediately important to your character build. I think a lot of hate is because this game isn't as easy as FO4 nor does it play like FO4...despite looking like FO4. There are certainly bugs, and the whole CAMP despawn thing really sucks when it occurs, but the game is new. Hopefully it gets the attention it needs to rise to 8-9.
Anyone who clearly states their reasons why they don't like a particular game, is not a bandwagon jumper.
'Fanboy' and 'hater' are too easily thrown around.
As for Fallout 76. If you have played FO4, then I can't see how you would think FO76 is ok.
- There is no improvement (graphics, less bugs) and just taken away (story, characters, gutted crafting). And to me the annoying part is that Todd Howard was exaggerating as if FO76 was all improvement.
- As a typical survival game, it lacks incentive. There is no reason to PVP, or even co op in PVE. The survival aspect is almost non existent.
The game is basically a go and fetch scrap bonanza with multiplayer. It makes no sense at all that the game is (originally) priced as high as FO4 GOTY.
The pattern I see when people like FO76. Many have not played FO4 and are mostly talking about the fun with other players. Not the game itself.
Anyone who clearly states their reasons why they don't like a particular game, is not a bandwagon jumper.
'Fanboy' and 'hater' are too easily thrown around.
As for Fallout 76. If you have played FO4, then I can't see how you would think FO76 is ok.
Yes, those words are thrown about a lot, even if they aren't appropriate.
And while a person to clearly states their reasons for not liking a game is not a "bandwagon jumper" neither is a person who states why they like a game a shill or sellout.
It's a person's experience and what they want in a game that will determine whether they will like Fallout 76.
Just because someone likes Fallout 4 doesn't mean they should like Fallout 76 or hate it.
I didn't really like the Conan MMORPG but I think Conan Exiles is wayyyyy! better.
Maybe someone played Fallout 4, thought "it's ok" but really likes certain things about Fallout 76?
The problem here, as always, is that some people just can't fathom why anyone would not be aligned with their own thoughts on a game.
Yes, there are things that are going to be pretty universal like bugs, or issues rendering but that is what it is. If for some people that's not a deal breaker then it isn't.
Some people say "there's no way someone would like this because x, y, and z. That's just making a statement based on their own personal preferences.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Anyone who clearly states their reasons why they don't like a particular game, is not a bandwagon jumper.
'Fanboy' and 'hater' are too easily thrown around.
As for Fallout 76. If you have played FO4, then I can't see how you would think FO76 is ok.
Yes, those words are thrown about a lot, even if they aren't appropriate.
And while a person to clearly states their reasons for not liking a game is not a "bandwagon jumper" neither is a person who states why they like a game a shill or sellout.
It's a person's experience and what they want in a game that will determine whether they will like Fallout 76.
Just because someone likes Fallout 4 doesn't mean they should like Fallout 76 or hate it.
I didn't really like the Conan MMORPG but I think Conan Exiles is wayyyyy! better.
Maybe someone played Fallout 4, thought "it's ok" but really likes certain things about Fallout 76?
The problem here, as always, is that some people just can't fathom why anyone would not be aligned with their own thoughts on a game.
Yes, there are things that are going to be pretty universal like bugs, or issues rendering but that is what it is. If for some people that's not a deal breaker then it isn't.
Some people say "there's no way someone would like this because x, y, and z. That's just making a statement based on their own personal preferences.
True enough but shills do exist and so do bandwagon jumpers. Some of them even state reasons but they can be borrowed reasons.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Anyone who clearly states their reasons why they don't like a particular game, is not a bandwagon jumper.
'Fanboy' and 'hater' are too easily thrown around.
As for Fallout 76. If you have played FO4, then I can't see how you would think FO76 is ok.
Yes, those words are thrown about a lot, even if they aren't appropriate.
And while a person to clearly states their reasons for not liking a game is not a "bandwagon jumper" neither is a person who states why they like a game a shill or sellout.
True enough but shills do exist and so do bandwagon jumpers. Some of them even state reasons but they can be borrowed reasons.
Oh, believe me I know.
That's why people need to think for themselves, take what reviewers say and compare it to their own tastes/thoughts.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Anyone who clearly states their reasons why they don't like a particular game, is not a bandwagon jumper.
'Fanboy' and 'hater' are too easily thrown around.
As for Fallout 76. If you have played FO4, then I can't see how you would think FO76 is ok.
- There is no improvement (graphics, less bugs) and just taken away (story, characters, gutted crafting). And to me the annoying part is that Todd Howard was exaggerating as if FO76 was all improvement.
- As a typical survival game, it lacks incentive. There is no reason to PVP, or even co op in PVE. The survival aspect is almost non existent.
The game is basically a go and fetch scrap bonanza with multiplayer. It makes no sense at all that the game is (originally) priced as high as FO4 GOTY.
The pattern I see when people like FO76. Many have not played FO4 and are mostly talking about the fun with other players. Not the game itself.
I've played fallout 4, and I like fallout 76. It's not without its problems, but there's still a lot of fun to be had. Enemies are much more varied and a lot tougher in 76. There are a lot of different weapons and mods for weapons. I completed fallout 4 in maybe 30 hours or so. I still have so much to do and haven't completed the main quest yet in 76 with nearly triple that time played.
Nuclear strikes and blast zones add difficulty, I spent 3 hours farming enemies for legendary items yesterday in a blast zone with 8 other people with me. Had some very interesting interactions I've never had in Fallout 4.
Fallout 4 was great for story. Largely the gameplay was similar though between the two games. The bugs I deal with on the daily is unforgivable in FO76... there are things I'd like to see changed as well within the way the game works... but the core game I feel is still pretty good. After more play time I've decreased my personal score from a 6 to a 5.5 because of some of the thoughtlessness on blast zones mixed with the instability of the game, it seems like they should have had some foresight as to some complications that left me with a distaste yesterday that took me several hours to remedy.
Anyone who clearly states their reasons why they don't like a particular game, is not a bandwagon jumper.
'Fanboy' and 'hater' are too easily thrown around.
As for Fallout 76. If you have played FO4, then I can't see how you would think FO76 is ok.
- There is no improvement (graphics, less bugs) and just taken away (story, characters, gutted crafting). And to me the annoying part is that Todd Howard was exaggerating as if FO76 was all improvement.
- As a typical survival game, it lacks incentive. There is no reason to PVP, or even co op in PVE. The survival aspect is almost non existent.
The game is basically a go and fetch scrap bonanza with multiplayer. It makes no sense at all that the game is (originally) priced as high as FO4 GOTY.
The pattern I see when people like FO76. Many have not played FO4 and are mostly talking about the fun with other players. Not the game itself.
Quite frankly, the fact you call people who are ok with the game (NOT GREAT), as people who haven't played FO4 or any previous game of the series is just very telling of internet mentality.
I have played over 700 hours of Fallout 4 and close to that for NV and FO3. FO76 is still ok in my book. It's not what I wanted from the next Fallout game, but I'll take it over NOT PLAYING a new FO game for years. I would call myself a much more established FO universe fan than you as you obviously have not played the game (easy to see from your two complaints that you read from the web).
- Bugs are there - it's a Beth game and FO. You live with it or don't. - There's plenty of incentive to group up, especially with your buddies. Such as sharing perk cards, one of you being the melee dude, other heavy gunning or sniping from the back. The fact you don't know this tells all I need.
You can think you're like, what, the pinnacle of FO player ever existed and look down on those who still do play this game for all it's faults if you want. All I'll answer is don't believe everything you read on the internet.
Game is frustrating at times and very enjoyable at others. It's still very much a FO game - whether you like it or not. I still easily spend 4-5 hours playing it every evening now.
Personally I disliked the lack of NPC's.
Not so much because they were missing in and of themselves but because it spoils every story in the game. You know before you even get started that every story in the game ends with "and they died".
There is no other ending in the game and this gives all the quests and stories a sort of nihilistic pointless feeling. Some may like the atmosphere from this but I do not.
For me that is a much bigger problem then the bugs.
Personally I disliked the lack of NPC's.
Not so much because they were missing in and of themselves but because it spoils every story in the game. You know before you even get started that every story in the game ends with "and they died".
There is no other ending in the game and this gives all the quests and stories a sort of nihilistic pointless feeling. Some may like the atmosphere from this but I do not.
For me that is a much bigger problem then the bugs.
I do have to agree about the "and they died" part, but I am still enjoying the journey. I would like to think that this is just a jumping off point though. One of the selling points of FO76 was the whole "and you get to rebuild it" narrative. Many people have already complained you don't get to do that in the game, but why would anyone think a multiplayer online game would get you to that point so quickly. I think of the current state of the story to be the introduction, with more to come later through updates and/or DLC.
As far as the lack of actual NPCs in the game, isn't that what MMO players have been yearning for? I know I have seen a million threads where people bitch about the big yellow question marks over the quest giver's head and begging to be left alone in their sandbox to do whatever they want. Now Bethesda has given us that and all anyone can do is scream about not having anything to do.
You gave this game a 7? A 7 would imply that it's mostly enjoyable with room to grow. The fact of the matter is that this game is severely hindered by bugs that make it unplayable at the worst times and frustrating at the best times.
The game deserves a 3 at best.
I would agree that the *potential* of the game is exhilirating and the company should continue to strive toward all the possibilities. But that is not a basis for scoring the current game that your readers are going to experience when they put down their money based on your recommendation.
Shame on you.
Men do not stop playing because they grow old. They grow old because they stop playing. -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
Anyone who clearly states their reasons why they don't like a particular game, is not a bandwagon jumper.
'Fanboy' and 'hater' are too easily thrown around.
As for Fallout 76. If you have played FO4, then I can't see how you would think FO76 is ok.
- There is no improvement (graphics, less bugs) and just taken away (story, characters, gutted crafting). And to me the annoying part is that Todd Howard was exaggerating as if FO76 was all improvement.
- As a typical survival game, it lacks incentive. There is no reason to PVP, or even co op in PVE. The survival aspect is almost non existent.
The game is basically a go and fetch scrap bonanza with multiplayer. It makes no sense at all that the game is (originally) priced as high as FO4 GOTY.
The pattern I see when people like FO76. Many have not played FO4 and are mostly talking about the fun with other players. Not the game itself.
Quite frankly, the fact you call people who are ok with the game (NOT GREAT), as people who haven't played FO4 or any previous game of the series is just very telling of internet mentality.
I have played over 700 hours of Fallout 4 and close to that for NV and FO3. FO76 is still ok in my book. It's not what I wanted from the next Fallout game, but I'll take it over NOT PLAYING a new FO game for years. I would call myself a much more established FO universe fan than you as you obviously have not played the game (easy to see from your two complaints that you read from the web).
- Bugs are there - it's a Beth game and FO. You live with it or don't. - There's plenty of incentive to group up, especially with your buddies. Such as sharing perk cards, one of you being the melee dude, other heavy gunning or sniping from the back. The fact you don't know this tells all I need.
You can think you're like, what, the pinnacle of FO player ever existed and look down on those who still do play this game for all it's faults if you want. All I'll answer is don't believe everything you read on the internet.
Game is frustrating at times and very enjoyable at others. It's still very much a FO game - whether you like it or not. I still easily spend 4-5 hours playing it every evening now.
For the record, I'm lvl 62 now.
The bugs are taken worse here because modders can't bail out Bethesda in such a game.
The entire "well, it's Bethesda, so it's okay!" Is what the GameSpace article was getting at about FO76: no, it isn't okay. We're paying full price for a product from a large corporation. Having more bugs than a bee's nest should've never been an accepted quality for consumers. But software magic: you can't hold companies accountable to normal quality standards, this is software development!
Yes, we can. And really, we should. These devs and pubs are no longer passionate, small groups of gamers who wanna just make something cool to share. They're in the business of maximizing profits while minimizing costs. Letting them minimize costs via shoddy code work is a terrible idea, quite frankly.
I believe people are becoming more critical of things written here due to the dropping quality. For instance, calling Torchlight Frontiers an MMO despite it not offering even a remote semblance of any MMO gameplay or numbers. I would not hesitate to believe this very site even called Fallout 76 an MMO at one point too.
So when a site has proven time and time again that it doesn't understand the content that it is supposed to be dedicated too, people want to tear it apart. It gets tiring when you see false articles, only to go to other sites and discover "Oh... its 4 players... not an MMO'.
With that being said... this site really needs to work on its credibility. There is no room for argument about what the initialism of MMO stands for. It is 3 defined words that offer no room for confusion except to those who lack english skills (perhaps due to it being their second language). So maybe master what the site is supposed to be about before branching out onto other topics.
Fallout 76 is a mess and deserves a lot less than the reviewer gave it. Perhaps not a 3 as some have called for. But a 5 would be much more in line.
I believe people are becoming more critical of things written here due to the dropping quality. For instance, calling Torchlight Frontiers an MMO despite it not offering even a remote semblance of any MMO gameplay or numbers. I would not hesitate to believe this very site even called Fallout 76 an MMO at one point too.
So when a site has proven time and time again that it doesn't understand the content that it is supposed to be dedicated too, people want to tear it apart. It gets tiring when you see false articles, only to go to other sites and discover "Oh... its 4 players... not an MMO'.
With that being said... this site really needs to work on its credibility. There is no room for argument about what the initialism of MMO stands for. It is 3 defined words that offer no room for confusion except to those who lack english skills (perhaps due to it being their second language). So maybe master what the site is supposed to be about before branching out onto other topics.
Fallout 76 is a mess and deserves a lot less than the reviewer gave it. Perhaps not a 3 as some have called for. But a 5 would be much more in line.
I agree about the score bit in their defense they are kind of stuck with an established name that reflects a dead genre... Most games are now online (the novelty is gone) and all the genres are merging. RPGs are becoming action games, cats are breeding with dogs- Its madness. madness I tell you.
They should cover online games because if they stuck to MMORPGs all they would be writing about are F2p Japanese, Korean grinder games- Those days of the genre peaking are long gone and as the mainstream embrace gaming more and more the industry moves and terms evolve- I hate it too, Alpha doesnt mean alpha anymore , an "MMO" is pretty much anything with co-op and 16 players on a server..and canvas means nylon.
For the fun of it I'm going to try to describe why I have the shortcuts for 9 games on my desktop:
Lotro - community, raids Legends of Aria - potential for community, UO feels, progression Warframe\Killling Floor 2\Diablo3 - sometimes I just want to shoot shit and progress Darkfall New Dawn - community, progression BDO - its pretty and sometimes immersive Witcher 3 - because one day I'll play a single player game again
Now Fallout 3 community - not so much but could happen with code changes looks pretty - its ok, just shoot shit factor - yeh it does have this, but differently than the others, you need a decent amount of time to prepare progression - slowly now but yeh it does immersion - when I hear footsteps and cant read a terminal until I clear them - yeh exploring - so far yes tells tales - via unusual means but yes
To me Fallout 76 does a bit of everything (except community) but its not yet the master of anything. I'm currently much more likely to log into KF2 or Aria.
How do you give a single number rating that makes sense amongst all these thoughts. I'm not sure.
EDIT- those reviews also include that the wasteland is largely empty as a result of the decision to forego true NPC populations. I didn't see much made of that in this review, and is something I would've been unpleasantly surprised with had I just taken this review as the assessment of the game I go by.
Realize that you just used the fact that, a game that's well over a decade old and has to scale to higher player counts, has poor AI... So Bethesda's new $60 AAA small-group multiplayer shooter title shouldn't have any better, and we shouldn't demerit their title for having even more boring NPC enemies (WoW mobs will patrol, ESO's will heal and flank, etc.) than older titles that must scale the AI up against larger player counts hogging system resources.
EDIT- the enemies in Fallout 4 are more interesting. Not because they're smarter on an individual basis, but because the NOC groups such as BoS and the Insititute patrolling or exploring can cause dynamic gunfights between the NPCs you happen upon. It's a step backwards from the previous Fallout title itself.
This happens ALL THE TIME in FO76. Whitesprings bots will attack hostiles. Super Mutants will attack Scorched, Scorched Attack Feral Ghouls, Everything is attacking everything at all times. Often times I'll be somewhere, hear a gunshot and check the map to see if it's a player, and most of the time it isn't.
Not to mention the enemies in FO76 are WAY more varied than in FO4. Even now after all my time played I sometimes see a new animal or enemy I haven't seen before.
That's a good thing to hear for FO76, but it isn't really the same as the two I mentioned. Both the BoS and Insitute be interacted with and cooperated with by the player.
That's a symptom of the lack of NPC factions that aren't just cannon fodder for players. Either way, this reviewer made it very clear he experimented with the AI and found they do nothing without being triggered by players:
"It doesn’t help West Virginia feel any more lived in that the AI enemies do such a poor job of appearing alive. They’re clearly just waiting around for you to turn up and kill them. When Scorched and ghouls aren’t spawning out of thin air, I’ve sat hidden watching them to see how they spend their time and, well, they just stand there, fixed to the same spot.
They only come alive when you walk into their vision, and even then they either run straight at you or hide behind the nearest bit of wall, leaning out periodically to shoot in your direction. And that’s when they work as they’re supposed to. Sometimes they won’t even do that due to some bug hidden away in the code. Often an enemy will stand stock still, inanimate, waiting for you to kill them.
After 30 hours of fighting countless Super Mutants, Scorched, and ghouls – who all behave exactly the same way, suffer from the same bugs, and offer no real challenge – I am completely bored of combat. Now, when I see an enemy, I’m just frustrated that they’re getting in the way. There’s no fun in the 500th headshot against these cretinous creatures."
Their final score is a mere 0.4 off from the average critical score, by the way.
Just so you know, I don't agree with his assessment on enemy AI, almost like he didn't even play the game.
Scorched move all around, (ghouls are more stationary), I've had ghouls, mirelurks and others hunt me while I'm in stealth inside a building, or sneak up om me while crafting or cooking.
Have had a party of super mutants split up, one running into melee, a 2nd throwing grenades, and a third backing off and shooting from range while in cover.
Sure, they might stand still but normally if they can see at all unstealthed most npcs will hunt you.
Damn level 22 wendigo caught me in toxic lake, I was level 11....backed into a kids cabin, heavily overloaded which was depleting my AP at a fierce rate. fighting for my life, using stim packs and a wendigo ward with little effect, when out of now where a rad scorp shows up, shit, I'm screwed, right?
Nope, rad scorp attacks wendigo and they go at it. I'm watching them fight, wondering which I should add on, pack of ghouls swarm from everywhere and swarm the rad scorp.
So wendigo has taken a beating, but he comes after me, so we go back at it, me ducking in and out behind cover, (I'm melee) blocking like a pro, and I prevail.
Hmm, wheres that rad scorp? Dead, not far from the cabin. Oh oh, where are the ghouls, jumping out from everywhere and charging me.
I furiously cut them down left and right, level 15 boss ghoul, goes right to the wire, burning several stimpacks.
Whew, I won....but I'm now 150 overweight, it's late, and I can't be sure I can survive another big fight.
So I log out, a brilliant strategy I discover as the next evening when entering the world I respawns at the safe edge of the lake instead of the middle.
I immediately stealth and make my way carefully across the lake bed to my camp where I safely scrap and stash everything.
Enemy AI static and unimaginative? Again, not sure what game he and others are playing.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Anyone who clearly states their reasons why they don't like a particular game, is not a bandwagon jumper.
'Fanboy' and 'hater' are too easily thrown around.
As for Fallout 76. If you have played FO4, then I can't see how you would think FO76 is ok.
- There is no improvement (graphics, less bugs) and just taken away (story, characters, gutted crafting). And to me the annoying part is that Todd Howard was exaggerating as if FO76 was all improvement.
- As a typical survival game, it lacks incentive. There is no reason to PVP, or even co op in PVE. The survival aspect is almost non existent.
The game is basically a go and fetch scrap bonanza with multiplayer. It makes no sense at all that the game is (originally) priced as high as FO4 GOTY.
The pattern I see when people like FO76. Many have not played FO4 and are mostly talking about the fun with other players. Not the game itself.
Quite frankly, the fact you call people who are ok with the game (NOT GREAT), as people who haven't played FO4 or any previous game of the series is just very telling of internet mentality.
I have played over 700 hours of Fallout 4 and close to that for NV and FO3. FO76 is still ok in my book. It's not what I wanted from the next Fallout game, but I'll take it over NOT PLAYING a new FO game for years. I would call myself a much more established FO universe fan than you as you obviously have not played the game (easy to see from your two complaints that you read from the web).
- Bugs are there - it's a Beth game and FO. You live with it or don't. - There's plenty of incentive to group up, especially with your buddies. Such as sharing perk cards, one of you being the melee dude, other heavy gunning or sniping from the back. The fact you don't know this tells all I need.
You can think you're like, what, the pinnacle of FO player ever existed and look down on those who still do play this game for all it's faults if you want. All I'll answer is don't believe everything you read on the internet.
Game is frustrating at times and very enjoyable at others. It's still very much a FO game - whether you like it or not. I still easily spend 4-5 hours playing it every evening now.
For the record, I'm lvl 62 now.
The bugs are taken worse here because modders can't bail out Bethesda in such a game.
The entire "well, it's Bethesda, so it's okay!" Is what the GameSpace article was getting at about FO76: no, it isn't okay. We're paying full price for a product from a large corporation. Having more bugs than a bee's nest should've never been an accepted quality for consumers. But software magic: you can't hold companies accountable to normal quality standards, this is software development!
Yes, we can. And really, we should. These devs and pubs are no longer passionate, small groups of gamers who wanna just make something cool to share. They're in the business of maximizing profits while minimizing costs. Letting them minimize costs via shoddy code work is a terrible idea, quite frankly.
Not even once would I say I think this is a good game nor Fallout went to direction I liked. I've also previously said modders saved Beth for their previous releases. It's very true and very apparent how bad they're at some basic things like UI. I discarded a "Power Armor Chassis" that had a full set of 2nd best/best Power Armor in it - full armor too. I saw a Power Armor Chassis to my inventory and immediately threw it away for weight purposes. I was salty for sure, but a day later I was sporting X-01. You live with what the game is or you don't.
The game, however, is still very Fallout when you just relax and explore places - not focusing on bad things. I don't like listening a holotape or reading a terminal for story, but that is what it is here - personally I prefer reading this stuff from a wiki instead. You live with what the game is or you don't.
These devs are very passionate about their game. You can see this from hand-crafted small details you find when actually playing and exploring. The main problem is these Beth devs do not have proper experience with a multiplayer game. Beth is also trying to patch the game - slowly and bug-heavily. I already suggested they should take the game offline for a month and fix it properly.
The fact is, I still enjoy exploring places in the game, just like any other Fallout game. Every day I get on and go exploring and 5 hours vanish. I'm at level 97 now for the record. I like playing the game - I don't think it's worth $60 or $40, maybe like $20-30. If you can buy the game for that - give it a shot.
If you love exploring in Fallout universe and have done that enough in previous titles - this is the only one you get to do it in a fresh setting in ~5 years. That's just a simple fact.
Comments
If anything, he's a corporate hater, not a shill. The worst one can rightly accuse him of is being a fanboy.
I happen to agree with him in this case but If I'm going to watch an anti studio shenanigans critic with a clown act I'd rather watch Jim Sterling any day of the week. He at least does have original thoughts about the stuff he slams.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
But he has quite often been first off the mark with scathing criticism of industry practices when deserved. I respect him for that despite his silly schtick.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
That's just, like, my opinion, man.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
I've played fallout 4, and I like fallout 76. It's not without its problems, but there's still a lot of fun to be had. Enemies are much more varied and a lot tougher in 76. There are a lot of different weapons and mods for weapons. I completed fallout 4 in maybe 30 hours or so. I still have so much to do and haven't completed the main quest yet in 76 with nearly triple that time played.
Nuclear strikes and blast zones add difficulty, I spent 3 hours farming enemies for legendary items yesterday in a blast zone with 8 other people with me. Had some very interesting interactions I've never had in Fallout 4.
Fallout 4 was great for story. Largely the gameplay was similar though between the two games. The bugs I deal with on the daily is unforgivable in FO76... there are things I'd like to see changed as well within the way the game works... but the core game I feel is still pretty good. After more play time I've decreased my personal score from a 6 to a 5.5 because of some of the thoughtlessness on blast zones mixed with the instability of the game, it seems like they should have had some foresight as to some complications that left me with a distaste yesterday that took me several hours to remedy.
But that being said, still enjoying it.
I have played over 700 hours of Fallout 4 and close to that for NV and FO3. FO76 is still ok in my book. It's not what I wanted from the next Fallout game, but I'll take it over NOT PLAYING a new FO game for years. I would call myself a much more established FO universe fan than you as you obviously have not played the game (easy to see from your two complaints that you read from the web).
- Bugs are there - it's a Beth game and FO. You live with it or don't.
- There's plenty of incentive to group up, especially with your buddies. Such as sharing perk cards, one of you being the melee dude, other heavy gunning or sniping from the back. The fact you don't know this tells all I need.
You can think you're like, what, the pinnacle of FO player ever existed and look down on those who still do play this game for all it's faults if you want. All I'll answer is don't believe everything you read on the internet.
Game is frustrating at times and very enjoyable at others. It's still very much a FO game - whether you like it or not. I still easily spend 4-5 hours playing it every evening now.
For the record, I'm lvl 62 now.
Not so much because they were missing in and of themselves but because it spoils every story in the game. You know before you even get started that every story in the game ends with "and they died".
There is no other ending in the game and this gives all the quests and stories a sort of nihilistic pointless feeling. Some may like the atmosphere from this but I do not.
For me that is a much bigger problem then the bugs.
As far as the lack of actual NPCs in the game, isn't that what MMO players have been yearning for? I know I have seen a million threads where people bitch about the big yellow question marks over the quest giver's head and begging to be left alone in their sandbox to do whatever they want. Now Bethesda has given us that and all anyone can do is scream about not having anything to do.
The game deserves a 3 at best.
I would agree that the *potential* of the game is exhilirating and the company should continue to strive toward all the possibilities. But that is not a basis for scoring the current game that your readers are going to experience when they put down their money based on your recommendation.
Shame on you.
Men do not stop playing because they grow old. They grow old because they stop playing. -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
The entire "well, it's Bethesda, so it's okay!" Is what the GameSpace article was getting at about FO76: no, it isn't okay. We're paying full price for a product from a large corporation. Having more bugs than a bee's nest should've never been an accepted quality for consumers. But software magic: you can't hold companies accountable to normal quality standards, this is software development!
Yes, we can. And really, we should. These devs and pubs are no longer passionate, small groups of gamers who wanna just make something cool to share. They're in the business of maximizing profits while minimizing costs. Letting them minimize costs via shoddy code work is a terrible idea, quite frankly.
So when a site has proven time and time again that it doesn't understand the content that it is supposed to be dedicated too, people want to tear it apart. It gets tiring when you see false articles, only to go to other sites and discover "Oh... its 4 players... not an MMO'.
With that being said... this site really needs to work on its credibility. There is no room for argument about what the initialism of MMO stands for. It is 3 defined words that offer no room for confusion except to those who lack english skills (perhaps due to it being their second language). So maybe master what the site is supposed to be about before branching out onto other topics.
Fallout 76 is a mess and deserves a lot less than the reviewer gave it. Perhaps not a 3 as some have called for. But a 5 would be much more in line.
They should cover online games because if they stuck to MMORPGs all they would be writing about are F2p Japanese, Korean grinder games- Those days of the genre peaking are long gone and as the mainstream embrace gaming more and more the industry moves and terms evolve- I hate it too, Alpha doesnt mean alpha anymore , an "MMO" is pretty much anything with co-op and 16 players on a server..and canvas means nylon.
I mean- They have to cover something , right?
Lotro - community, raids
Legends of Aria - potential for community, UO feels, progression
Warframe\Killling Floor 2\Diablo3 - sometimes I just want to shoot shit and progress
Darkfall New Dawn - community, progression
BDO - its pretty and sometimes immersive
Witcher 3 - because one day I'll play a single player game again
Now Fallout 3
community - not so much but could happen with code changes
looks pretty - its ok, just
shoot shit factor - yeh it does have this, but differently than the others, you need a decent amount of time to prepare
progression - slowly now but yeh it does
immersion - when I hear footsteps and cant read a terminal until I clear them - yeh
exploring - so far yes
tells tales - via unusual means but yes
To me Fallout 76 does a bit of everything (except community) but its not yet the master of anything. I'm currently much more likely to log into KF2 or Aria.
How do you give a single number rating that makes sense amongst all these thoughts.
I'm not sure.
Scorched move all around, (ghouls are more stationary), I've had ghouls, mirelurks and others hunt me while I'm in stealth inside a building, or sneak up om me while crafting or cooking.
Have had a party of super mutants split up, one running into melee, a 2nd throwing grenades, and a third backing off and shooting from range while in cover.
Sure, they might stand still but normally if they can see at all unstealthed most npcs will hunt you.
Damn level 22 wendigo caught me in toxic lake, I was level 11....backed into a kids cabin, heavily overloaded which was depleting my AP at a fierce rate. fighting for my life, using stim packs and a wendigo ward with little effect,
when out of now where a rad scorp shows up, shit, I'm screwed, right?
Nope, rad scorp attacks wendigo and they go at it. I'm watching them fight, wondering which I should add on, pack of ghouls swarm from everywhere and swarm the rad scorp.
So wendigo has taken a beating, but he comes after me, so we go back at it, me ducking in and out behind cover, (I'm melee) blocking like a pro, and I prevail.
Hmm, wheres that rad scorp? Dead, not far from the cabin. Oh oh, where are the ghouls, jumping out from everywhere and charging me.
I furiously cut them down left and right, level 15 boss ghoul, goes right to the wire, burning several stimpacks.
Whew, I won....but I'm now 150 overweight, it's late, and I can't be sure I can survive another big fight.
So I log out, a brilliant strategy I discover as the next evening when entering the world I respawns at the safe edge of the lake instead of the middle.
I immediately stealth and make my way carefully across the lake bed to my camp where I safely scrap and stash everything.
Enemy AI static and unimaginative? Again, not sure what game he and others are playing.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The game, however, is still very Fallout when you just relax and explore places - not focusing on bad things. I don't like listening a holotape or reading a terminal for story, but that is what it is here - personally I prefer reading this stuff from a wiki instead. You live with what the game is or you don't.
These devs are very passionate about their game. You can see this from hand-crafted small details you find when actually playing and exploring. The main problem is these Beth devs do not have proper experience with a multiplayer game. Beth is also trying to patch the game - slowly and bug-heavily. I already suggested they should take the game offline for a month and fix it properly.
The fact is, I still enjoy exploring places in the game, just like any other Fallout game. Every day I get on and go exploring and 5 hours vanish. I'm at level 97 now for the record. I like playing the game - I don't think it's worth $60 or $40, maybe like $20-30. If you can buy the game for that - give it a shot.
If you love exploring in Fallout universe and have done that enough in previous titles - this is the only one you get to do it in a fresh setting in ~5 years. That's just a simple fact.