EPTFallout 4! - Page 57
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
daemir
Finland8662 Posts
| ||
|
KaiserJohan
Sweden1808 Posts
On November 17 2015 02:28 daemir wrote: I sort of semi hate the aesthetic of the fallout world. It's been a long while since the bombs fell, yet all people seem to live in shitty, extremely dirty little hovels. Come on. Humans are an industrious race and it does not take decades to build a new timbered house or reinvent the use of concrete to make concrete elements and assemble a house from those. Like an actual house, not 2.75 walls and a roof. Would love to see any of these fallout games located to areas where there's actual winter and see how well these "houses" keep the heat in...they'd be felling trees for a new timbered cabin after the first frost, guaranteed. Good point! And the wasteland does get old after awhile... but maybe the nuclear fallout fucked up the eco system. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On November 17 2015 02:28 daemir wrote: I sort of semi hate the aesthetic of the fallout world. It's been a long while since the bombs fell, yet all people seem to live in shitty, extremely dirty little hovels. Come on. Humans are an industrious race and it does not take decades to build a new timbered house or reinvent the use of concrete to make concrete elements and assemble a house from those. Like an actual house, not 2.75 walls and a roof. Would love to see any of these fallout games located to areas where there's actual winter and see how well these "houses" keep the heat in...they'd be felling trees for a new timbered cabin after the first frost, guaranteed. I think, that's not a valid claim. It's a design choice. Yes, you can obviously dislike it, but to act "logical" on it is kinda weird. I'm sticking a needle in my arm to get millions of sv out of my system. There's ospreys landing on airships, ion/rocket propelled sailships, robots that are indistinguishable from humans. You have radio in heavily radiated areas etc. I really don't think that "logic" has a place in Fallout games. Like, none. In fact, pretty much all post-nuclear games have the same problem. It doesn't show the reality of what would come (neither Stalker nor Metro). | ||
|
hfglgg
Germany5372 Posts
On November 17 2015 02:28 daemir wrote: I sort of semi hate the aesthetic of the fallout world. It's been a long while since the bombs fell, yet all people seem to live in shitty, extremely dirty little hovels. Come on. Humans are an industrious race and it does not take decades to build a new timbered house or reinvent the use of concrete to make concrete elements and assemble a house from those. Like an actual house, not 2.75 walls and a roof. Would love to see any of these fallout games located to areas where there's actual winter and see how well these "houses" keep the heat in...they'd be felling trees for a new timbered cabin after the first frost, guaranteed. i always ignored the offical lore and just assumed for myself the bombs have fallen only a few decades ago. i think there are a lot more things than just the artstyle that doesnt fit with a 100+ years old new world. | ||
|
daemir
Finland8662 Posts
On November 17 2015 02:47 m4ini wrote: I think, that's not a valid claim. It's a design choice. Yes, you can obviously dislike it, but to act "logical" on it is kinda weird. I'm sticking a needle in my arm to get millions of sv out of my system. There's ospreys landing on airships, ion/rocket propelled sailships, robots that are indistinguishable from humans. You have radio in heavily radiated areas etc. I really don't think that "logic" has a place in Fallout games. Like, none. In fact, pretty much all post-nuclear games have the same problem. It doesn't show the reality of what would come (neither Stalker nor Metro). I disagree. You have people in the world obviously care about the base needs, you have to secure pure water, food and some shelter (bed) and defense. All of it makes sense, but it doesn't explain why everything needs to be so damn worn down or ragged. You even have concrete foundations in the build menu, so having to rely on these houses that are a few bits of sheet metal nailed together seems silly. Diamond City, apparently having been there for century(ies?) looks like shit. At least in fallout 2 you could find some nicer places the more civilized territory you walked into. Klamath/Den was a craphole like FO3/4 buildings, but Vault City was not and I recall NCR being better built as well. San Fran too. You can have the world look like it's been through hell, but places where people have settled for longer than 2 weeks should look like it. I mean people don't even bother to clean out old skeletons out of the houses they lay their bloody sleeping bags in? Seriously? I hope modding will fix issues like this at least with settlements you can build. Being able to erase all the useless crap out of the way and maybe even terraform to level out earth for buildings...building elements that look well made, no silly limit to how much you can build (which can be circumvented anyway)...mods can do so much to a game like this. Can't wait for SkyUI equivalent to come and save the PC users from the torture that is shitty PC control port. FoUI gief! | ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
Also at The Prydwen you can escort scribes around the map, turn in research papers and finally get blood samples for the scientist woman. I'm pretty you can also go around farms bullying people for the BoS quatermaster. It all pays quite well. | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
Unless there was another nuclear war in the meantime, it is completely nonsensical. But I guess sense is too much to expect from a FP Diablo like. | ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
Their poison/venom takes me down from 100% to 40%. If I get infected twice I'm dead. In X-01 power armor no less. | ||
|
ZasZ.
United States2911 Posts
On November 17 2015 04:11 -Archangel- wrote: Actually proper Lore has been shit on since Fo3. Fo1 and Fo2 made some sense and towns there were rebuilt more than in Fo3 and Fo4 which happen 200 years after the war while Fo1 happens 84 years after it. Unless there was another nuclear war in the meantime, it is completely nonsensical. But I guess sense is too much to expect from a FP Diablo like. Yeah dawg, we get it, you don't like the games after Fallout 1 and 2. Since none of us are devs at Bethesda, I'm not sure what you hope to gain by trying to convert random strangers on the internet to your "I hate modern video games" religion. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On November 17 2015 04:27 ZasZ. wrote: Yeah dawg, we get it, you don't like the games after Fallout 1 and 2. Since none of us are devs at Bethesda, I'm not sure what you hope to gain by trying to convert random strangers on the internet to your "I hate modern video games" religion. Not sure how you can defend FO4 release... the PC version is godawful. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On November 17 2015 04:32 wei2coolman wrote: Not sure how you can defend FO4 release... the PC version is godawful. Easy. People I know have it and enjoy it despite it's issues. Defense over. | ||
|
Disregard
China10252 Posts
| ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
If this was a physical object, Ralph Nader would be all up on Bethesda. On November 17 2015 04:59 Disregard wrote: If you have over 105fps after hacking or using a terminal, you're basically 100% going to be stuck and bugged. Physics/gamespeed tied to FPS. lmao. how has this not been fixed yet? | ||
|
Disregard
China10252 Posts
And not much Bethesda can do about it now, that's a core engine issue. Anything below 100FPS is fine though. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Disregard
China10252 Posts
On November 17 2015 05:07 Plansix wrote: It’s too bad that some people are having issues, but others are enjoying the game without problem. The only time anyone has to defend the game is when people ask questions like “I don’t see how anyone can defend the launch of this game?” like everyone need to take strong stand on the issue. Those issues I mention are universal, it happens for everyone that can run the game above 100fps. Totally fine for people that are comfortable with the 60frame cap. Beside's some UI and some minor issues I don't mind the game at this state since Bethesda always relies on third-party mods to address those issues. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
Physics/gamespeed tied to FPS. lmao. how has this not been fixed yet? Who said it's actually an issue? I play partially on >100fps (depends on region obviously - but in bunkers etc easy) - not once i got stuck. Wanna explain that? | ||
|
Disregard
China10252 Posts
edit: It's a engine issue so no updates can fix the issue, just limiting FPS to 100 is the best solution. | ||
|
DoubleB
Germany870 Posts
On November 17 2015 03:29 Latham wrote: Do people still have trouble making caps? At the Cambridge police station BoS scribe&knight give a huge load of missions, you get XP and they pay you caps.[...] So I did alot of those quests too, do they ever end or do they both give you an infinite amount of quests untill you finished the game? | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On November 17 2015 05:10 m4ini wrote: Who said it's actually an issue? I play partially on >100fps (depends on region obviously - but in bunkers etc easy) - not once i got stuck. Wanna explain that? On November 17 2015 05:07 Plansix wrote: It’s too bad that some people are having issues, but others are enjoying the game without problem. The only time anyone has to defend the game is when people ask questions like “I don’t see how anyone can defend the launch of this game?” like everyone need to take strong stand on the issue. Like I said, if this was a physical object, like a camera, gpu, etc, anything above a .1% failure rate is considered a comical failure of a product release. Somehow, when known problems for a video game comes out from Bethesda, it's okay? wut. | ||
| ||
