Ever since Bethesda announced Fallout 76 and the lack of human NPCs I've been seeing people writing it off as "not a Fallout game" and it's made me curious. I want to know what makes a game a "Fallout Game" for each of us. For me the biggest part of any Fallout game is exploring the quasi-50's America and piecing together what happened before and after the bombs through the use of the notes and hollowtapes that you can find scattered around. I'd be lying if I said the NPCs didn't factor into my enjoyment of the game, but for me they just aren't the biggest part.
Since this is the case it should come as no surprise that I've enjoyed what I've played of the Fallout 76 Beta as those aspects of the game are still there, I've also encountered some Robot NPCs that I quite like, such as one Protectron who has been forced to watch over its master's corpse for years and spends its time making fun of him.
So what makes a "Fallout Game" for you?
Ever since Bethesda announced Fallout 76 and the lack of human NPCs I've been seeing people writing it off as "not a Fallout game" and it's made me curious. I want to know what makes a game a "Fallout Game" for each of us. For me the biggest part of any Fallout game is exploring the quasi-50's America and piecing together what happened before and after the bombs through the use of the notes and hollowtapes that you can find scattered around. I'd be lying if I said the NPCs didn't factor into my enjoyment of the game, but for me they just aren't the biggest part.
Since this is the case it should come as no surprise that I've enjoyed what I've played of the Fallout 76 Beta as those aspects of the game are still there, I've also encountered some Robot NPCs that I quite like, such as one Protectron who has been forced to watch over its master's corpse for years and spends its time making fun of him.
So what makes a "Fallout Game" for you?
Shiit. So I guess there are two answers for me because I do think that it's fair to point out that Bethesda Fallout is incredibly different from previous Fallout games (or New Vegas).
Personally I originally saw a Fallout Game as primarily being focused on creating a world that every build style or approach to a quest could theoretically work with the right characters. A game that allowed a weak Scientist to be just as succesful as a Tank or a Gunslinger or any combat focused class and one. Basically a game where every option was theoretically possible even if most of them were harder to pull off. It was something fascinating in today's world of RPG's, but only really lasted for Fallout 1, 2 and maybe New Vegas (to an extent).
Fallout 3 was a game that I think was built around the choice of creating a better world, but still had the range of options available to make it feel like player choice mattered. You could consider the current world the best possible future, and enjoy the carnage and chaos that the new-world brings, or you can be someone who just wants to find his dad and live in the Vault, or any number of ideas. I think it's probably the best blend between that ideal and the gameplay focus of today's Fallout, though obviously a bit flawed when it comes to writing.
Today...Fallout is...nothing. I really do think that Bethesda has no real idea for what they want Fallout to be, and it's created this weird blend between Fallout 4 and Fallout 76 where, you can't really point to much that defines the game. Fallout 4 is just confused, and while I think Nuka World is possibly the definition of what it could have been (and possibly the perfect place to define the tone of Fallout) the rest of the game is a confused, depressing mix of nothing and boring stuff. It's fun, the combat and gameplay are obviously enjoyable and the levelling system is defined, but it just doesn't have the cohesive nature of the early games.
So I suppose a Fallout game is...something. I have no idea what it is to be honest, I think the tone of the Fallout World is more or less that weird blend between Humor and Horror, of a world that's wacky and depressing and fun and confusing, but they just don't fully go for that because it's a hard sell. There are plenty of games that go too far in either direction and make the other element feel underdeveloped but lately Bethesda's somehow fucked up both and landed squarely in the middle of each (rather than the middle of both). I don't know man, it's tough to say because my opinions have changed so dramatically over the years you know.
Shiit. So I guess there are two answers for me because I do think that it's fair to point out that Bethesda Fallout is incredibly different from previous Fallout games (or New Vegas).
Personally I originally saw a Fallout Game as primarily being focused on creating a world that every build style or approach to a quest could theoretically work with the right characters. A game that allowed a weak Scientist to be just as succesful as a Tank or a Gunslinger or any combat focused class and one. Basically a game where every option was theoretically possible even if most of them were harder to pull off. It was something fascinating in today's world of RPG's, but only really lasted for Fallout 1, 2 and maybe New Vegas (to an extent).
Fallout 3 was a game that I think was built around the choice of creating a better world, but still had the range of options available to make it feel like player choice mattered. You could consider the current world the best possible future, and enjoy the carnage and chaos that the new-world brings, or you can be someone who just wants to find his dad and live in the Vault, or any number of ideas. I think it's probably the best blend between that ideal and the gameplay focus of today's Fallout, though obviously a bit flawed when it comes to writing.
Today...Fallout is...nothing. I really do think that Bethesda has no real idea for what they want Fallout to be, and it's created this weird blend between Fallout 4 and Fallout 76 where, you can't really point to much that defines the game. Fallout 4 is just confused, and while I think Nuka World is possibly the definition of what it could have been (and possibly the perfect place to define the tone of Fallout) the rest of the game is a confused, depressing mix of nothing and boring stuff. It's fun, the combat and gameplay are obviously enjoyable and the levelling system is defined, but it just doesn't have the cohesive nature of the early games.
So I suppose a Fallout game is...something. I have no idea what it is to be honest, I think the tone of the Fallout World is more or less that weird blend between Humor and Horror, of a world that's wacky and depressing and fun and confusing, but they just don't fully go for that because it's a hard sell. There are plenty of games that go too far in either direction and make the other element feel underdeveloped but lately Bethesda's somehow fucked up both and landed squarely in the middle of each (rather than the middle of both). I don't know man, it's tough to say because my opinions have changed so dramatically over the years you know.
Dragonborn2021 said:So I suppose a Fallout game is...something. I have no idea what it is to be honest, I think the tone of the Fallout World is more or less that weird blend between Humor and Horror, of a world that's wacky and depressing and fun and confusing...
Speaking of depressing, early on in 76 you can find a holotape recorded by a 13 year old boy who was a bully in school, his father kept telling him that bad things happen because he misbehaves so he was under the belief that the bombs were his fault and he promises to be good now so his dad will come back.
I definitely agree that Bethesda Fallouts are different to the original 2 (plus the spin-offs from that time period), and will say no more because I'm likely to have a go at the people who still for some reason expect each new Bethesda Fallout to somehow be like the original 2 games.
[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Dragonborn1721]Dragonborn2021[/url] said:[/b]
So I suppose a Fallout game is...something. I have no idea what it is to be honest, I think the tone of the Fallout World is more or less that weird blend between Humor and Horror, of a world that's wacky and depressing and fun and confusing...
[/blockquote]
Speaking of depressing, early on in 76 you can find a holotape recorded by a 13 year old boy who was a bully in school, his father kept telling him that bad things happen because he misbehaves so he was under the belief that the bombs were his fault and he promises to be good now so his dad will come back.
I definitely agree that Bethesda Fallouts are different to the original 2 (plus the spin-offs from that time period), and will say no more because I'm likely to have a go at the people who still for some reason expect each new Bethesda Fallout to somehow be like the original 2 games.
Speaking of depressing, early on in 76 you can find a holotape recorded by a 13 year old boy who was a bully in school, his father kept telling him that bad things happen because he misbehaves so he was under the belief that the bombs were his fault and he promises to be good now so his dad will come back.
I definitely agree that Bethesda Fallouts are different to the original 2 (plus the spin-offs from that time period), and will say no more because I'm likely to have a go at the people who still for some reason expect each new Bethesda Fallout to somehow be like the original 2 games.
Heh fair enough, I mean...I can understand wanting them to be more like the original two but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to expect Bethesda to make them like that. I don't think their changes are all bad or anything, I just think they're a bit confused at what sort of direction they want to go you know...
Speaking of depressing, early on in 76 you can find a holotape recorded by a 13 year old boy who was a bully in school, his father kept telling him that bad things happen because he misbehaves so he was under the belief that the bombs were his fault and he promises to be good now so his dad will come back.
I definitely agree that Bethesda Fallouts are different to the original 2 (plus the spin-offs from that time period), and will say no more because I'm likely to have a go at the people who still for some reason expect each new Bethesda Fallout to somehow be like the original 2 games.
Heh fair enough, I mean...I can understand wanting them to be more like the original two but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to expect Bethesda to make them like that. I don't think their changes are all bad or anything, I just think they're a bit confused at what sort of direction they want to go you know...