Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Fallout 76 Review - Our Verdict on Bethesda's Wasteland Extravaganza - Fallout 76 Review
SBFord
Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
Fallout 76 Review - Our Verdict on Bethesda's Wasteland Extravaganza - Fallout 76 Review
After several hours of exploring the rolling hills of West Virginia, our scored review for Fallout 76 is here. In this article, we will build on previous observations and experiences to draw our conclusion.
Comments
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
This is far below a 7. It deserves a 3 or 4, if we're being generous.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Fallout 76 game is about 5 years behind the curve of popular genres, and waaaay behind the curve of what I expect from a $60, AAA title. A survival shooter that offers nothing new to that genre with practically none of the Fallout series soul? And also doesn't support basic features like FoV, ultrawide support, and push-to-talk?
This looks and acts more like a $20-30 indie early access title -- and at that price, I'd probably give it a 5/10 at best. But at $60? This doesn't even deserve a 5/10 -- much less a 7/10 -- but closer to a 3 or 4.
Honestly, I think their biggest mistake was calling this a launch when they released a survival game in the normal buggy state that early access games survival games normally are in. Follow that with a $60 price tag for a product worth no more than $30 and that's where most of the criticism I hear is coming from. The icing on the cake was the refusal to give out refunds, altering of collectors edition items, and no communication until 13 days after "launch" about fixes. They dug out what could have been a knee deep hole into a 6 ft under level hole to bury their game's future and respectability in.
21 year MMO veteran
PvP Raid Leader
Lover of The Witcher & CD Projekt Red
That was the case with FO76. In my 5-6 hours I ran into only ONE other living person, who was WAY higher level than I and was occupied with doing his own thing. That means for hours at a time, I interacted with no one, just ran from place to place and uncovered the fairly generic mystery of the Overseer. I was BORED.
Then I got jumped by a SWARM of scorched, all armed with shotguns and pistols. There had to be 10 or more of them ranging from a couple of level ones to several who were level sixish, they killed me, somewhat easily.
Then I logged out, popped in FO4 (I have close to 800 hours invested in that one) and spent the next couple of days playing that.
Thus endeth my experience with FO76.
T
Angryjoe is not one of my friends. My friends enjoy their time together in Fallout76. Not sure how long it will last, as they have played many of these games, DAYZ, Rust, Minecraft, Space Engineers, Conan, ARK, Farming Simulator 19, etc.
Guess any game that can be played together offers a different experience when you play it alone. Based on what my friends say, I would play it when I had the time.
5/10 is an "average".
And this crap deserves 3/10.
Giving this game 7/10 it's like slapping in the face of all gaming community.
Shame.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
Do you think it was a FO4 asset flip?
Either of those ought to be serious concerns.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
People REALLY need to remember that reviewers are people with tastes and preferences that differ just like anyone else. Given that there are plenty of people who like the game, just as there are plenty who don't, it would behoove us all to look through the lens of "different strokes for different folks".
A reviewer's job isn't to tell you what you WANT to hear, but to tell you their honest opinion drawn from their own outlook and experiences.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
Why bother QA testing your games anymore? Why bother optimizing them? Why bother improving your engine technology or making new engines? Why bother making new assets? Why bother including NPCs or hiring writers? Why bother having stable servers? Why bother correctly advertising your product? Why bother with refund policies or basic customer support?
Apparently, none of that matters, because you can neglect all of these things and still be considered average. If you're Bethesda, that is. If EA released this, we'd be looking at an uncontroversial, 2/10 review, because we actually hold EA to the same basic standards as everyone else.
How is this review NOT informative? It doesn't conform to people who dislike the game's opinion, and that's not the same thing. What you're looking for is for reviewers to be echo chambers of your own personal thoughts. That's NOT what the idea should be. A critic's role isn't to meet your expectations, but to share with you whether a product met their own.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
I think this is a wierd one BM. It is a (fairly) fun game but isnt a well made game. I understand some people are angry because they feel ripped off. And they are rightly entitled to that. But how much should bad business practice factor into a game score???
Are we basing the score from fun?
From being polished?
From good will?
Most of the time these things go together but for fo76 its just weird.
NMS and Sea of Thieves had such a good foundation but lacking content. I feel something similar in fo76. Fo76 do have contents but lacking in polish and is full of bugs. Will it get better? Im sure of it. But will it get better quick enough is really the question right now.
Sure, the reviewer may have lucked out and not hit the majority of bugs others have hit, but that doesn't mean they're not there. That should be taken into consideration in the final score.
Yes, it's the reviewer's opinion, but I'm of the opinion a reviewer should construct the opinion with the audience in mind, and that means judging it based on bugs widely reported, even if you haven't personally experienced them. And by the widely reported issues alone, I can't say this game should rate as average.
The review barely makes mention of the bugs. The review also makes a big deal out of the mere fact that we got Fallout something, as if that fact should buy Bethesda points on it's own. I don't think that's a good thing to look at as a positive for this release, because it smacks of giving them a pass because you like Fallout.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
Aloha Mr Hand !
That doesn't mean reviewers are right.
7 for a game like that is an insult for all the games who got the same score.
Also, reviewers are seen as a reference as if the game is good or not. People are often waiting for reviews before buying, saying it's only honest opinion drawn from their own outlook and experiences is..meh.
That aside, I think you are fighting a losing battle. No one is giving the members here the free pass even when they like games like RDR2 or W3. God forbid if anyone likes something about FO76 which is the new hate flavor of the month--well deserved to some extent--but liking it nonetheless means you'll be shunned and gunned.