Fallout 76

[DarksunDaFirst]

On 6/13/2018 at 5:02 PM, Nutduster said:

I mean... you can quibble all you like, but the fact is that this game looks very little like previous Fallouts, and you know that.  If there's a hidden Fallout-iness about it, it's not exactly stellar marketing to keep their cards so close to the vest. It was fine for the initial teaser trailer, but once they started explaining exactly what it was, they had to have known that the existing fanbase would be, mostly, outraged.  So what I take from that is either A) this initial half-explanation is basically right, and this is a multiplayer, PvP-dominant shooter game with a Fallout setting that otherwise isn't much like Fallout as we know it, and any Fallout-ishness will be patched in later; or B) they just are terrible at marketing their own games and terrible at predicting how people will react to announcements.  Either way... not a good look, is it? 

 

I'm not here just to complain though, I'd LOVE for this to be good.  I play lots of multiplayer games and I have a good friend who put as many hours into Fallout 4 as I did, who I would like to build settlements and stuff with.  But I also want something more or less like a multiplayer Fallout game, and not just like a vaguely Fallout-flavored copy of other popular online games.  I already choose not to play most of those (except GTA Online, which I have very mixed feelings about), why would I want that from Fallout?

 

As far as RDR2 and its announcement go, we didn't know much, true.  But they also didn't come and tell us it was an online-only game with no NPCs.  If they had, people would be losing their f*cking minds just like Fallout fans are.

I just have to disagree with you with what we’ve seen and heard about through post E3 interviews.  They look to doing their own flavor to try and fit it into the Fallout world. 

 

As for RDR2 - of course it wouldn’t be that.  I cant imagine them deviating so wildly from what has worked for them in the past when doing a game of the same style in the same series.  This FO game is not the same style - it’s something new to BGS.

[Misumi]

Have they cleared up the PVP system yet? There's a thread/video where Pete Hines supposedly further addresses it.

[Nutduster]

2 hours ago, Noale said:

Have they cleared up the PVP system yet? There's a thread/video where Pete Hines supposedly further addresses it.

 

Not that I know of, but I need to go look at the Fallout sub-reddit to see the new news.  Still hoping this game is gonna be good.  So far the info they've given out has been very confusing and vague to me.

[Static]

On 6/13/2018 at 7:33 PM, Noale said:

This is being thrown around way too much these days to the point where it has somehow become synonymous with giving criticism. Huh, TIL.

 

Hope you aren't aiming that first sentence at me either. Half my posts here are just memes/jokes because frankly I couldn't care less if I get Fallout 76 or not. I am against the current online concept of it, but I also fail to see how that would make me sound entitled.

 

The fallout (pun intended) of this announcement is just fun to be watch in my opinion.

TBH, the self-entitled comment was pretty much solely directed at this line 

 

On 6/13/2018 at 7:32 AM, OurJud said:

 is the complete and utter disregard of the SP offline players. He doesn't apologise, he doesn't explain their reasoning (not that their reasoning isn't obvious, but the gesture would have been nice), he doesn't do anything to try and appease us. Blatant and complete disregard - almost as though we never existed.

 

But it definitely applies to anyone who thinks their own personal needs/wants are somehow more important than anyone else's who'll play the game.

 

On 6/13/2018 at 8:03 PM, Nutduster said:

 

Not true.  I actually never preorder games myself but at least for people who do, they usually have certain expectations of what the game will be like, based on the promotion and/or previous games in the series.  Neither applies here because the promotion is super-vague and what little they are telling us makes it sound like it's not really a Fallout game.  So what are people ordering?  Mainly a title and an aesthetic, and a nebulous promise of some kind of multiplayer experience - that's it.  It's only up for preorder now because Bethesda is clearly rushing this thing to market.  Mark my words, it's going to be unfinished as hell at launch - along the lines of GTA Online in 2013, but without a polished single player mode attached.

Regarding the use of promotion, maybe if you give it more than 3 days, you'll see more promotion for the game? As far as basing your expectations off previous games, that still applies in this situation. Tbh, the games sounds just like like 4 but with MP and the ability to build anywhere. In fact, that literally what it is and you would probably know that if you had viewed (assuming you haven't of course) the Noclip video about 76's development. Todd says almost verbatim "76 is the multiplayer to 4. Oh, you didn't know that? *todd smile*". On the subject of it being rushed to market, normally I would agree with you but seeing how 76's development had started before 4's had even finished, that's means it'll have had 3 years almost exactly to be developed. Though I don't doubt that you're right about it being unfinished at release, even though that's kinda the point with "games as services". And if it does't have any SP, you won't be "forced" to buy it, so problem solved.

 

Quote

At least in those cases, they are up front about the game being a work in process, and they don't usually sell them for full AAA retail price.  Fallout 76 is preordering for $60. 

 

In those cases they've also have had more than 3 days to detail/promo the game.

 

 

Quote

Again, no, because when the newest Assassin's Creed or GTA or Halo or Madden game comes out, you DO know basically what it's going to be, at least the core gameplay of it.  There is still massive confusion about what Fallout 76 will be (even at Bethesda, seemingly), and what we do know points to a very different experience than the previous games.

Newest AC (Odyssey) is quite a departure from norm for AC games, with it having a choice in protags. romance options, ability to choose dialogue, and whatever other RPG elements they ass to it. So that's not the best analogy. 

As for GTA, V is, for better or worse, quite different that IV and any of the other games as well. So again, not the best analogy. Personally I don't see whats so confusing about it, it's Fallout with emphasis on MP, building/crafting, and survival, and out of all of that, the only thing very different is the MP.

 

 

Sorry for the long post.  

 

 

 

Edited June 15, 2018 by Static

[Shadowfennekin]

So much for Save Player One

They stabbed player one in the back and threw out his corpse for Super Mutant Hounds

[Mokrie Dela]

It's a shame there isn't a single player mode but what I've realised is this is a fallout 4 expansion for online. It's to fallout 4 what gta o is to gta v, just a different game so those like me who an online game isn't suitable for, aren't buying a product that's 50% online. I bought fallout 4 and enjoyed it on my own. No multiplayer distraction. Imagine if rockstar split gta v and gta o into 2 different releases. That's how I'm looking at it.

 

 

I know I may buy this one day. One day being 2 years time when it's on 2nd hand sale for a tenner. 

[Nutduster]

9 hours ago, Static said:

Regarding the use of promotion, maybe if you give it more than 3 days, you'll see more promotion for the game? As far as basing your expectations off previous games, that still applies in this situation. Tbh, the games sounds just like like 4 but with MP and the ability to build anywhere. In fact, that literally what it is and you would probably know that if you had viewed (assuming you haven't of course) the Noclip video about 76's development. Todd says almost verbatim "76 is the multiplayer to 4. Oh, you didn't know that? *todd smile*". On the subject of it being rushed to market, normally I would agree with you but seeing how 76's development had started before 4's had even finished, that's means it'll have had 3 years almost exactly to be developed. Though I don't doubt that you're right about it being unfinished at release, even though that's kinda the point with "games as services". And if it does't have any SP, you won't be "forced" to buy it, so problem solved.

 

 

Epic excuse-making and rampant misinformation.  How is a game that 1) can't be played offline and 2) doesn't have NPCs the same as 4?  Show your work.  You're honestly just talking out of your ass there.  It's still unclear if this game is going to have any kind of story mode at all, anything other than just basic Radiant-style quests or something like GTA Online's contact missions, where there are things to do but no real story and no character choices to make.  The eventual private-server play they intend to patch in (but when..?) may also not resemble a real single player experience, even though they are trying to make it sound that way; I would guess it's more likely to be like playing GTA Online invite-only, but with mods.

 

And if 76 is LITERALLY the multiplayer to 4 - the GTA Online to 4's GTA V - then why is it being sold separately and at full price? 

 

As far as giving it more than 3 days goes, I am happy to do that.  I personally have no intent of preordering, just like I never preorder anything - but even if I was prone to preorders, I wouldn't preorder this until they explained it a lot more clearly.  Therefore you can stop giving me personal advice - I don't require it.  My beef is only that they are offering preorders AT ALL on a game that doesn't look to be fully designed and certainly hasn't been fully explained.  Nitwit kids and Fallout addicts are going to buy this thing and then hate it, at least some of them.  I don't find that to be a good or honest business practice.  Open up preorders after you've clearly defined all the ways that this game both is, and is not, like previous Fallouts.

Edited June 15, 2018 by Nutduster

[Mokrie Dela]

It's sold separately and at full price for good reason 

 

It's a different world. So while it's clearly using 4's assets, it's not just a new mode. It is a new world with new creatures and the plethora of new coding and man hours that went into that. I like the fact that it's sold separately - those like me who don't want to be forced to play multiplayer and sit it out and wait the 5 years for fallout 5 - we aren't paying for a mp game; even some games with multiplayer as part of the entire package sometimes feel like single player has suffered for it - gta v for example. 

 

So full price is for the dev time and thus wages of the staff (remember it's their job and they have bills just as you or I), because it's not a half hour job adding multiplayer; this is an entirely new game, a spin off if you like.

 

In terms of quests:

They said the overseer gives you the main quest. It's expanded and more are given through discoveries on your travels - not settlements of Npcs. It's multiplayer. Like a huge death match. Side quests will be there but I reckon mostly ambient in nature. Don't expect high charisma speech checks. It's you against randomgamer001. 

 

Sure there a not been a huge info drop on the game but I think it's becsuse the game is quite simple. No deep character or story needed so no need to give lots of details and there is a lot of info out there already. 

 

Still as a fallout fan I'm still watching it. May watch a few live streams when it's out but other than that I know exactly what this game/spin off is or rather how relevant it is for me

[OurJud]

7 hours ago, Shadowfennekin said:

So much for Save Player One

They stabbed player one in the back and threw out his corpse for Super Mutant Hounds

I'm truly over this now, and that's not just sour grapes.

 

I discovered yesterday that there is now a good deal of gameplay footage out there, and but for the slightly different landscape the game doesn't appear to have moved on from 4 in any way shape or form. Same engine, same graphics, most of the items are unchanged.

 

In truth I think the only 'new' thing the online fraternity will be getting is a slightly different, probably much bigger landscape, and the ability to play against other people. It looks so much like 4 in every other way I'm beginning to wonder what they've been doing all this time.

 

Like @Mokrie Dela says, it's pretty much Fallout 4 Online.

Edited June 15, 2018 by OurJud

[Ruin]

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

Epic excuse-making and rampant misinformation. 

TIL differing opinions are now misinformation.

 

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

How is a game that 1) can't be played offline and 2) doesn't have NPCs the same as 4? 

Did you not see the game displayed? It's utilizing plenty, if not all, of 4's assets to create a new map.

It literally looks like 4 but with a focus on Multi-Player.

 

But hey, I guess you know more about what is or isn't like 4 than Todd Howard or the people who are, ya know, developing the game.

Hell, you don't even need to be a developer to see this.

 

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

Show your work. 

Agreed. They should show more of their work.
But every company these days from R* to Bethesda to EA and everything in between have made it a habit to not show, just tell. 

And for some of them, like R*, it works out wonderfully.

I still don't like the fact you have to essentially buy the beta, but that's what youtube is for I guess.

 

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

 It's still unclear if this game is going to have any kind of story mode at all, anything other than just basic Radiant-style quests or something like GTA Online's contact missions, where there are things to do but no real story and no character choices to make.

Again, did you not watch the noclip documentary or Beth's interviews? There is a story, but it is extremely minimal and the focus seems to be more on exploration and crafting.

It is very clear this is some MMO a la Destiny mixed with some of Bethesda's ideas. Whether or not you agree or like that they used the fallout franchise for this is subjective.

 

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

The eventual private-server play they intend to patch in (but when..?)

This is why they don't talk much. Anything they say is suddenly taken as a blood oath by people even if something comes up or if they have a change of plans.

Common sense would assume that if the game is a success and feedback seems to be very supportive of multi-player play and interaction, then the private server may get delayed or even scrapped. Likewise, if griefing and ill experiences are too rampant and publicized, or if sales or low, they may shift focus on speeding up private play or even offline play so as to avoid backlash when they decide to quit support.

 

This game is still in development; things can change and that's why they don't talk much.

 

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

...may also not resemble a real single player experience, even though they are trying to make it sound that way

It's blatantly obvious this is not going to be a single player experience like previous BGS games. When Todd did the Gamespot interview the day after their conference he was directly asked this and he answered that it was a multiplayer focused entry.

He did try to sound vague during their conference, but that vagueness was cleared up later on.

 

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

And if 76 is LITERALLY the multiplayer to 4 - the GTA Online to 4's GTA V - then why is it being sold separately and at full price? 

 

So now you're switching sides? Do you think it is or isn't 4's MP?

 

As to why it's being sold separately; why wouldn't it?

- Games like Overwatch prove you can sell a multiplayer-only game so long as you add value to it, and it's success proves that people are fine with paying it.

- Making the Creation engine multiplayer-compatible was a feat that took a lot of time to do (with it being an engine focused on single-player. Again, did you not watch the documentary at all?), so either they delayed Fallout 4 for another 3 years or they shipped the game then. 

 

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

I personally have no intent of preordering, just like I never preorder anything 

Good for you; what does this have to do with the subject other than trying to act holier-than-thou?

 

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

I wouldn't preorder this until they explained it a lot more clearly.

That's perfectly fine. You're acting like people are telling you to spend your money on something you don't want.

 

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

My beef is only that they are offering preorders AT ALL on a game that doesn't look to be fully designed and certainly hasn't been fully explained.

Why would they hate on free money? Clearly people still preorder en masse even when preordering is by definition obsolete since digital copies will never run out. 

You're essentially hating on the idea that they can and will take people's money, which is no one's problem except the people ponying up the cash. 

 

I agree, the game seems to be half-assed from what they showed, but you're acting like they owe you something.

It's quite simple; like what you saw? Buy it.

Didn't? Ignore it. It's obviously not for you.

But your stance seems to be that you're mad they didn't cater to you this time, and want them to do so even though they have no obligation to.

 

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

Nitwit kids and Fallout addicts are going to buy this thing and then hate it, at least some of them.

That's their problem, not yours.

Again, you seem distraught over how others spend their money, oddly so.

You even go as far as to berate them for not complying to your ideology, even though I'm willing to bet there's some impulse/"senseless" buys you've made as well yet you wouldn't like to be called a "nitwit kid" for it.

Chill.

 

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

I don't find that to be a good or honest business practice. 

So?

I don't find selling people toxins to be good or honest, yet I'm not going to get mad at McDonald's or Marlboro for it.

Business isn't about ethics. Like, at all.

Especially subjective ones.

 

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

Open up preorders after you've clearly defined all the ways that this game both is, and is not, like previous Fallouts.

Yet you have no qualms with R* doing the same with RDR2. Lol.

 

Edited June 15, 2018 by Ruin
spelling

[Nutduster]

LOL if you think I'm responding to that giant wall of quotes and text.  Come on, man.  Should I quit my job to continue this annoying conversation with you, in which I'm trying to make one simple point and you're dancing around it as best you can?  Nah.

 

Here's my final piece of advice for you: walking around with a big company's cock in your mouth is not a good look.  They don't need you to defend them against even mild criticism like mine.  One wonders why you feel so invested this as to even bother.

Edited June 15, 2018 by Nutduster

[Tracksuit Hitman]

Massive fan of the series, not so much a fan of this instalment. The nicest way I can put it: it looks like a load of sh*t.

 

You'd expect better from Bethesda, but in the end all of our beloved developers succumb to this type of crap. I was super hyped when I first saw the teaser - when I thought it was going to be a real Fallout game, but nope, it's just another sh*tty online game that'll be as cancerous as my hometown. 

 

This will become a habit for the devs. Why? Micro transactions. Once they see the dollar signs they won't stop. Say goodbye to solid games and say hello to messes like ESO.

[DarksunDaFirst]

2 minutes ago, Tracksuit Hitman said:

This will become a habit for the devs. Why? Micro transactions. Once they see the dollar signs they won't stop. Say goodbye to solid games and say hello to messes like ESO.

Microtransactions only pay so much - and that's if they get a dedicated base that wants to pay for them.  Fallout Shelter, a free game with 100+ million players...still hasn't made as much as Fallout 4 has made.  Not even close.  And besides that, so long as the microtransactions are purely cosmetic in an online game, I couldn't care less.  

Now if they do a microtransaction model for in-game currency...that would be a bit different.

Edited June 15, 2018 by DarksunDaFirst

[Tracksuit Hitman]

I'm not comparing the profits of a mobile game to one of their major releases, though. We're not talking about Fallout Shelter, we're talking about Fallout 76. Fallout Shelter is a free to play game with in-app purchases, whereas Fallout 76 will be a shelved game that'll sell at the usual £60-70 RRP on release + the inclusion of P2W microtransactions. You know it, I know it, Bethesda know it.

[Nick1020]

I’m not too upset about 76 being online only but rather worried about the bugs and glitches. Bethesda studio games are notorious for their bugs. If it wasn’t for mods, I’d never beat fallout 4 on survival mode. 

[DarksunDaFirst]

8 minutes ago, Tracksuit Hitman said:

You know it, I know it, Bethesda know it.

Actually, I don't and you don't (Bethesda might?).  We have no precedent that this would be the case.  In fact, we have the opposite in a single player and multiplayer game - 1 from the developer, and 1 from the same publisher.

Fallout 4 has microtransactions now with Creation Club - which all of that stuff is cosmetic (and mods do a better job at most of that stuff anyways)
Elder Scrolls Online has microtransactions but it's ALL cosmestic and includes access to DLC (conversely to just purchasing them....either way, you're paying for the expansions).

Edited June 15, 2018 by DarksunDaFirst

[Mokrie Dela]

1 hour ago, Ruin said:

TIL differing opinions are now misinformation.

 

Did you not see the game displayed? It's utilizing plenty, if not all, of 4's assets to create a new map.

It literally looks like 4 but with a focus on Multi-Player.

 

But hey, I guess you know more about what is or isn't like 4 than Todd Howard or the people who are, ya know, developing the game.

Hell, you don't even need to be a developer to see this.

 

Agreed. They should show more of their work.
But every company these days from R* to Bethesda to EA and everything in between have made it a habit to not show, just tell. 

And for some of them, like R*, it works out wonderfully.

I still don't like the fact you have to essentially buy the beta, but that's what youtube is for I guess.

 

Again, did you not watch the noclip documentary or Beth's interviews? There is a story, but it is extremely minimal and the focus seems to be more on exploration and crafting.

It is very clear this is some MMO a la Destiny mixed with some of Bethesda's ideas. Whether or not you agree or like that they used the fallout franchise for this is subjective.

 

This is why they don't talk much. Anything they say is suddenly taken as a blood oath by people even if something comes up or if they have a change of plans.

Common sense would assume that if the game is a success and feedback seems to be very supportive of multi-player play and interaction, then the private server may get delayed or even scrapped. Likewise, if griefing and ill experiences are too rampant and publicized, or if sales or low, they may shift focus on speeding up private play or even offline play so as to avoid backlash when they decide to quit support.

 

This game is still in development; things can change and that's why they don't talk much.

 

It's blatantly obvious this is not going to be a single player experience like previous BGS games. When Todd did the Gamespot interview the day after their conference he was directly asked this and he answered that it was a multiplayer focused entry.

He did try to sound vague during their conference, but that vagueness was cleared up later on.

 

 

So now you're switching sides? Do you think it is or isn't 4's MP?

 

As to why it's being sold separately; why wouldn't it?

- Games like Overwatch prove you can sell a multiplayer-only game so long as you add value to it, and it's success proves that people are fine with paying it.

- Making the Creation engine multiplayer-compatible was a feat that took a lot of time to do (with it being an engine focused on single-player. Again, did you not watch the documentary at all?), so either they delayed Fallout 4 for another 3 years or they shipped the game then. 

 

Good for you; what does this have to do with the subject other than trying to act holier-than-thou?

 

That's perfectly fine. You're acting like people are telling you to spend your money on something you don't want.

 

Why would they hate on free money? Clearly people still preorder en masse even when preordering is by definition obsolete since digital copies will never run out. 

You're essentially hating on the idea that they can and will take people's money, which is no one's problem except the people ponying up the cash. 

 

I agree, the game seems to be half-assed from what they showed, but you're acting like they owe you something.

It's quite simple; like what you saw? Buy it.

Didn't? Ignore it. It's obviously not for you.

But your stance seems to be that you're mad they didn't cater to you this time, and want them to do so even though they have no obligation to.

 

That's their problem, not yours.

Again, you seem distraught over how others spend their money, oddly so.

You even go as far as to berate them for not complying to your ideology, even though I'm willing to bet there's some impulse/"senseless" buys you've made as well yet you wouldn't like to be called a "nitwit kid" for it.

Chill.

 

So?

I don't find selling people toxins to be good or honest, yet I'm not going to get mad at McDonald's or Marlboro for it.

Business isn't about ethics. Like, at all.

Especially subjective ones.

 

Yet you have no qualms with R* doing the same with RDR2. Lol.

 

 

47 minutes ago, Nutduster said:

LOL if you think I'm responding to that giant wall of quotes and text.  Come on, man.  Should I quit my job to continue this annoying conversation with you, in which I'm trying to make one simple point and you're dancing around it as best you can?  Nah.

 

Here's my final piece of advice for you: walking around with a big company's cock in your mouth is not a good look.  They don't need you to defend them against even mild criticism like mine.  One wonders why you feel so invested this as to even bother.

Enough now guys. Chill out and keep it civil or don't reply at all. 

[Tracksuit Hitman]

 

7 minutes ago, DarksunDaFirst said:

Actually, I don't and you don't (Bethesda might?).  We have no precedent that this would be the case.  In fact, we have the opposite in a single player and multiplayer game - 1 from the developer, and 1 from the same publisher.

Fallout 4 has microtransactions now with Creation Club - which all of that stuff is cosmetic (and mods do a better job at most of that stuff anyways)
Elder Scrolls Online has microtransactions but it's ALL cosmestic and includes access to DLC (conversely to just purchasing them....either way, you're paying for the expansions).

I'll give you that - I don't know for sure, and I am being majorly presumptuous. I've seen some of my favourite series' go downhill because of the online P2W crap and after a while it gets tiring. I worry that Bethesda are going down that route - on one hand, you can't blame them (if they do) and on the other, as a fan, you can.

 

However, it's not just microtransactions that peeve me off about 76. I don't like anything about it - I don't like that it's solely online, I don't like the plot, I don't like anything that I'm hearing about it. Wasn't Elder Scrolls: Online enough? I hated that game, too, for the same reasons. I know I'm not the only Fallout fan that feels this way, either.

 

The concept sounds cool to begin with, but it won't work out as well as people think in practice, regardless of whether Bethesda have solid developers or not. I wouldn't have minded if they had given us the choice of both offline and online play, but to base a Fallout game solely online is just moronic in my eyes. Someone mentioned bugs and whatnot above, too. I agree with that.

[DarksunDaFirst]

2 hours ago, Tracksuit Hitman said:

 

I'll give you that - I don't know for sure, and I am being majorly presumptuous. I've seen some of my favourite series' go downhill because of the online P2W crap and after a while it gets tiring. I worry that Bethesda are going down that route - on one hand, you can't blame them (if they do) and on the other, as a fan, you can.

 

However, it's not just microtransactions that peeve me off about 76. I don't like anything about it - I don't like that it's solely online, I don't like the plot, I don't like anything that I'm hearing about it. Wasn't Elder Scrolls: Online enough? I hated that game, too, for the same reasons. I know I'm not the only Fallout fan that feels this way, either.

 

The concept sounds cool to begin with, but it won't work out as well as people think in practice, regardless of whether Bethesda have solid developers or not. I wouldn't have minded if they had given us the choice of both offline and online play, but to base a Fallout game solely online is just moronic in my eyes. Someone mentioned bugs and whatnot above, too. I agree with that.

I understand your presentiment for the game and I don't think you're not without merit either, just to be clear.  I think there definite legitimate concerns with the game, I just really dislike people throwing stuff out there that really either doesn't make much sense at all or is only relatable on a personal level.

You don't like that it's online only - well, that's what an MMORPG is supposed to be about really.  Though even this is limited because you're not going to have hundreds and thousands in the same gameworld (sounds like they'll be doing multiple game worlds on the same mega serveror the same few, which is good because it allows for easy transfer of data from one world to another).  You're going to have "dozens".  To me that sounds like a 30-60 person gameworld.  Plenty of opportunity to be alone (that and it sounds more of a limited and instanced PvP, rather than full all out open PvP)

I would agree with you that "ESO was enough", but look at it this way: the actual developer has never done anything like this, and they really wanted to do it.  Have to remember, ESO was only published by Bethsoft.  Zenimax Online has it's own development studio, it's own staff, it's own writers...the only thing they leaned on BGS for was lore (to make sure it fit).  

And yes, you're not the only one.  I've been on the Beth boards too, and many people are disappointed.  As someone mentioned on there though - not every game is going to cater to you personally, and I think that is what most of the people who are upset are truly upset about.  You see this ad a few weeks ago, it's being teased that something is coming...it's part of the Fallout franchise and you're thinking you're getting a new SP game to romp through...only to find out it's multiplayer.  The rumor mill from the year or so before though would have led though to serious doubts of a single player game, and the fact that the intro "Off-Air" screen was in color instead of monochrome should have been a hint.  If it's not for you, it's not for you.  

Personally, I don't think this game will run like ESO.  ESO had a very specific setting (a great war) and purpose to it's setup (the factions).  Fallout 76 looks to be different.  It's still multiplayer, but for once the ability to interact with others is not going to be scripted.  I mean, I love the TES and FO series as much as the next guy, but interacting with NPC's over and over again...it does get old because you know EXACTLY how to get the outcome you want.  I still play FO4, but I skip almost every conversation because I know all the outcomes already (except when I have to try to persuade or threaten or etc.).  

Lastly, don't think of this as a betrayal of any sorts.  They still have other games in the pipeline (I honestly believe Starfield is going to be slated for 2019 considering how far it is in production already) and they will be geared to you.  

How does the saying go?....Keep Calm and Carry A Bunch Of Stuff Back To Your Base So You Go Slay More Things...or something like that

Edited June 15, 2018 by DarksunDaFirst

[Ruin]

8 hours ago, Nutduster said:

LOL if you think I'm responding to that giant wall of quotes and text.  Come on, man.  Should I quit my job to continue this annoying conversation with you, in which I'm trying to make one simple point and you're dancing around it as best you can?  Nah.

 

Here's my final piece of advice for you: walking around with a big company's cock in your mouth is not a good look.  They don't need you to defend them against even mild criticism like mine.  One wonders why you feel so invested this as to even bother.

 

Translation: I have nothing to say, so I resort to insults; the last refuge of the outargued. Not surprised.

 

Ontopic: Still bummed they can't let people try the beta freely. Surely the more people that can playtest the better; since more data can be collected and more people can be convinced to purchase the game.

[Jason]

4 minutes ago, Ruin said:

Ontopic: Still bummed they can't let people try the beta freely. Surely the more people that can playtest the better; since more data can be collected and more people can be convinced to purchase the game.

I mean, if that's what it actually was sure. We all know it's gonna be nothing more than a weekend or two where they hand keys to every Twitch and YouTube streamer with a half decent amount of viewers and use them to promote the game ahead of release.

[Nutduster]

39 minutes ago, Ruin said:

 

Translation: I have nothing to say, so I resort to insults; the last refuge of the outargued. Not surprised.

 

 

Actual translation: can't be arsed to reply to a post where you broke down a simple argument to literally 13 individual sentences and phrases just so you can swing your e-penis around.  If you want to talk like grown-ups, bring it down about 5,000 notches; otherwise I really don't care.  I don't feel strongly enough about this to bother trying to convince you, and you're clearly not here to debate in good faith anyway.  You misunderstood more than half of my post completely even as you were breaking it down into tiny granules of language - amazingly, context matters.  Stay in school, kids.

Edited June 15, 2018 by Nutduster

[Ruin]

27 minutes ago, Jason said:

I mean, if that's what it actually was sure. We all know it's gonna be nothing more than a weekend or two where they hand keys to every Twitch and YouTube streamer with a half decent amount of viewers and use them to promote the game ahead of release.

 

Yup.

A damn shame.

 

Hopefully they're not as blatant as Bungie with it. I really wanna like this game.

Edited June 15, 2018 by Ruin

[Static]

13 hours ago, Nutduster said:

 

Epic excuse-making and rampant misinformation.  How is a game that 1) can't be played offline and 2) doesn't have NPCs the same as 4?  Show your work.  You're honestly just talking out of your ass there.  It's still unclear if this game is going to have any kind of story mode at all, anything other than just basic Radiant-style quests or something like GTA Online's contact missions, where there are things to do but no real story and no character choices to make.  The eventual private-server play they intend to patch in (but when..?) may also not resemble a real single player experience, even though they are trying to make it sound that way; I would guess it's more likely to be like playing GTA Online invite-only, but with mods.

Not sure how any of what I said are excuses or misinformation when 90% of what I said about the game was from Todd. To answer your question, it's similar to 4 because the "core gameplay" as you put it previously, is almost identical based off the footage they've shown. Majority of the assets used were recycled from 4. Really the only major changes they shown so far are the tweaks they did on their engine to allow MP. And also the addition of real-time VATS, which they havent shown yet so I cant really say how different that'll be.  And are you implying 4 didn't have a sh*t ton of radiant quest?

 

13 hours ago, Nutduster said:

And if 76 is LITERALLY the multiplayer to 4 - the GTA Online to 4's GTA V - then why is it being sold separately and at full price? 

Why was GTAO launched 2 weeks after SP? And why wouldn't it be sold desperately and at full price if people are willing to buy it? That's like asking why was V release 3 separate times within 2 years? $$$$$$$$$ is the answer, like it always is in regards to business. And you're acting like GTAO's model is a good one to follow. I'll take whatever 76 has to offer over being drip fed content that still basically requires mtx just to afford it. 

 

13 hours ago, Nutduster said:

As far as giving it more than 3 days goes, I am happy to do that.  I personally have no intent of preordering, just like I never preorder anything - but even if I was prone to preorders, I wouldn't preorder this until they explained it a lot more clearly.  Therefore you can stop giving me personal advice - I don't require it.  My beef is only that they are offering preorders AT ALL on a game that doesn't look to be fully designed and certainly hasn't been fully explained.  Nitwit kids and Fallout addicts are going to buy this thing and then hate it, at least some of them.  I don't find that to be a good or honest business practice.  Open up preorders after you've clearly defined all the ways that this game both is, and is not, like previous Fallouts.

It really doesn't seem like you are since you've nonstop complained about everything for 3 days now. And maybe you don't need advice on pre-ordering but you certainly need some on a multitude of other things. I don't see why every other pub/dev are allowed to offer pre-orders, but not Beth all because YOU aren't conviced it's a "true" fallout game. Even though there hasn't been one since 2. lol at "fallout addicts" though coming from the guy denouncing Beth all because "THEY GOT THEIR MP IN MY SP".

 

Also it's kinda funny that everyone is so worried about the lack of story when, A) 4/3 story sucked and were basically the same and B) I've never met a person IRL who considered the story(any of them) as the selling point of the franchise.

Edited June 16, 2018 by Static

[Nutduster]

Get out of town.  You've never met a single person who considered the story (including the NPC interactions and multiple dialogue options/character building) as the best part of a Bethesda RPG?  Where have you been?  Go read the Fallout or Elder Scrolls-related Reddits to have your mind blown.

 

Anyway, whatever.  I'm bowing out of this thread because I have no interest in getting cast as the "hater" in your demented little play.  I played a lot of Fallout 4 despite people complaining about it left and right, and if Fallout 76 ends up looking good *to me* I'll buy it too.  On the other hand I never played a complete Fallout PRIOR TO 4 and don't even know in much detail how they compare to it; I'm not particularly attached to the series at all, just speaking on my own preferences and why I think a lot of older fans than me are disappointed and nervous right now.  In essence, you're putting words in my mouth because it's easier for you to argue against who you think I am than against the actual substance of my posts, which I think have been at least somewhat neutral.  Sorry I spoke my piece about questionable business tactics in the gaming industry and kind of shoddy marketing efforts by Bethesda; obviously that was just too darn much criticism for the more fragile among us to deal with.  It's clear to me now that reactions to this game are so polarized that anyone trying to have an opinion anywhere in the middle will get run out of the discussion on a rail, so I'm just going to escort myself out instead.

Edited June 16, 2018 by Nutduster

[OysterBarron]

Alot of people have some very good points on either side of the field and worrys. I think at the moment we need to all hold our breath and wait for some more details instead of attempting to tear each other a new anus through misdirected anger. This is either going to turn out like fallout borderlands or fallout fortnight.

[Misumi]

My reaction to seeing the direction of this thread, is the same reaction I had when they first announced Fallout 76.

 

 

I really just want Starfield tbh.

[trip]

I just watched the documentary of the Making of FO76.  Enjoyable and informative.  Worth a watch for those who haven't.

[Mexicola9302]

This is also informative. I watched The Making of too.

 

Edited June 16, 2018 by Mexicola9302

[Doctor Holliday]

Yeah the more I see, the more I don't like it.

Basically the only brand new feature is the concept of Permanent Mutations and the ability to drop nuclear bombs across the map, both of which I could totally live without. Everything else is World of Warcraft Lite. And all they can promise fans of classic Fallout is that "private maps and private servers are coming... in the future." Gotta love some good ole fashioned ambiguity and misdirection.