[Megathread] Fallout 76

[Deleted]

about the nature of either Fallout 5, Elder Scrolls 6, or Starfield

Todd talked about Starfield several times. It's a huge single player RPG franchise. TES 6 has been said to be nothing different from the previous ones so why assume anything different.

[MakeMeLaugh]

Hey, the more people start singing Fallout 4s praises, the happier it makes me.

I'm not praising it, at this point you are just trolling, making shit up just to bait. FO4 was not a bad game but definitely not a good fallout game, it deserved the backlash it got from the fans.

Wait...what? Was this really a thing? I mean, don't get me wrong, some of the voiced lines were cringe-worthy, but it wasn't THAT bad all things considered.

And besides, all it would have taken to fix was a checkbox option: "Text only dialogue" vs "Voice Acted dialogue".

The complaints were that adding a voiced protagonist kinda kills some of the immersion. For example, his voice does not suit a raider, or just someone evil if you were building your character to be like that. Also when we play these kind of games we tend to imagine how our character would say things, so actually having a voiced protagonist ruins it. I mean it's not the end of the world, but I say it's a legit complaint.

[Deleted]

FO4 was not a bad game

I'm happy that you think so! It definitely isn't a bad game, indeed.

[Darkrulerxxx]

Does anyone actually pay attention to the latest news stating that there will be npcs, there will be quests, there will be a story, there will be end-game content, there will be DLCs..etc.

I swear its like the same 3 posters shitting up the thread with old information

[Deleted]

Does anyone actually pay attention to the latest news stating that there will be npcs, there will be quests, there will be a story, there will be end-game content, there will be DLCs..etc.

I swear its like the same 3 posters shitting up the thread with old information

yep, the IGN interview clears up a lot of stuff. it will we relatively easy to avoid pvp (although probably not in 100% of situations, but repeatedly getting ganked is unlikely at this point with our information), not too much players on any given map/server. homes cant be destroyed while offline, and they cant be destroyed completely at all.

[Deleted]

From what I gathered, there's actually very little incentive to try and break someone's base, and even nuking it might just be a waste of a nuke, seeing as though it'd probably take a bit of doing to get the nuke in the first place, and you'd want to plop it in some opportune spot for good loots.

Which is nice. It lacks the bully incentive of kicking other people's sand castles just to screw with them. Definitely not the kind of survival brawler sadists would be happy with, and that in turn makes me a happy camper. Or, C.A.M.P.er!

[Selastan]

From what I gathered, there's actually very little incentive to try and break someone's base, and even nuking it might just be a waste of a nuke, seeing as though it'd probably take a bit of doing to get the nuke in the first place, and you'd want to plop it in some opportune spot for good loots.

Which is nice. It lacks the bully incentive of kicking other people's sand castles just to screw with them. Definitely not the kind of survival brawler sadists would be happy with, and that in turn makes me a happy camper. Or, C.A.M.P.er!

I'm pretty sure Nukes exist for the sole purpose of counter-ganking. A group of IRL friends or something build a massive impenetrable fortress city and raid the world from it, the rest of the server can decide to hunt down Nuke codes and fix the problem.

[Deleted]

I'm pretty sure Nukes exist for the sole purpose of counter-ganking. A group of IRL friends or something build a massive impenetrable fortress city and raid the world from it, the rest of the server can decide to hunt down Nuke codes and fix the problem.

i wouldnt be to sure that it is even possible to loot other players corpse or chests. i dont think they want a griefy rust or ark experiences.

[Deleted]

I'm pretty sure Nukes exist for the sole purpose of counter-ganking.

Well, that's not at all what Todd and the other Beth people said, in the few different interviews and so on (showcase, Coliseum, Making of, IGN interview.) The nukes were meant as a bit of an extra help in killing the big monsters that appear in certain locations, the public workshops if I'm not mistaken, and they also create a radiated zone which raises the level of everything in it, giving higher level loot and resources.

Nuking a base might break it, sure, but bases can never be completely destroyed, and according to Todd, a broken base is "easy to repair", and as we know, you simply respawn when you die, so from these pieces of information it would seem clear to me at least that the nukes are meant for a PvE purpose primarily, and as a "fun" PvP addition if you want to waste them to cause 5 minutes of frustration to some random person you've never met.

Also, I'm not sure a group of friends can even build a shared base. I'm pretty sure your base is your base, and that's it. Plus, the bases log out when you log out; they're not persistent in the world, and you can never choose which server to play on as the servers aren't visible on any kind of a list (except until they perhaps add the ability for us to host our own servers), so the next day you get back in the game, that massive impenetrable fortress city wouldn't even be there. Plus, it can't be massive, since the base size is capped. And, as said, repairing the base is, according to Todd, easy, whilst getting the codes for the nukes, then entering the silo and launching, isn't.

[Endus]

but its one leveled at live services, especially one boasting of no NPCs to get quests from other than an overseer....

They didn't "boast" that. Todd Howard specifically clarified that there were myriad sources of quests in the world; robots, locations, terminals, etc. There are NPCs, just not human NPCs.

Seriously, I don't know where you folks get this stuff.

It's not just a fear of being camped. It's having to deal with other people ruining what you wanted to do in the game. There are PLENTY of ways to do that without every interacting with another player. For instance, you spend a lot of time roaming around, and discover a cool cave that you'd never seen before. It's clearly meant to be something, but it's already been cleared by someone else.

Progression and such is personal, not global. That at least strongly suggests that a location isn't "cleared" for you unless you or your team were the ones that cleared it. They may even instance locations so you can't run into other players at all, inside.

Another situation is where another player follows you around and either ruins your stealth attempt, blows everything up, aggroes everything, or otherwise just makes a nuisance of themselves. Shit you just wouldn't have to deal with in a singleplayer version.

Yes, that can happen. In a single player game, it could happen, too. I've had settlers alert entire super mutant camps and run away right past me, forcing me to get involved, in Fallout 4. And if a player's doing it on purpose, you can kill them. That's totally an option. Or just go somewhere they aren't; they've said you can see where other players are on the map.

Non-hostile actions which none-the-less cause you to miss out: You see a bigass deathclaw or something and want to go fight it. But by the time you get there a group of 5 power-armored friends in a team have already smashed it. The opposite case is where you want to go do something, but have to wait for a group of people to get their asses in gear to reach the location before you begin, because you want to include them.

None of that's a given. And it can happen in single player games, because yet again, the factions are often hostile. I've picked over battlegrounds where the fight was over before I got there plenty, in Fallout 4. It's often a convenient source of early-game loot, in fact.

Off-topic, but Metacritic is cancer. ;D It's just not a good measuring stick.

It ain't perfect, but the metascore's better than any particular site's scoring methodology, IME. And certainly better than user scores.

Wait...what? Was this really a thing? I mean, don't get me wrong, some of the voiced lines were cringe-worthy, but it wasn't THAT bad all things considered.

The 4 choices oversimplified the conversation and made them basically default to "yes, no, sarcastic yes, query" kind of patterns. I presume it was done to make the dialogue more accessible for console users.

The voiced protagonist was seen as a negative for two reasons; the first is supplementary to the above; they had to limit how many responses there were because the voice actor had to deliver every single line written. So why have 5 flavors of "sure" when two will get the job done. It's dirt cheap, by comparison, to write the lines, compared to getting them voiced. Plus, storage size for the game, and so forth. The second reason is that content mods had to either force a voiceless protagonist, which seemed odd by comparison to the rest of the game, or re-use existing lines, which can seem stilted (but some use it okay).

- - - Updated - - -

I'm pretty sure Nukes exist for the sole purpose of counter-ganking. A group of IRL friends or something build a massive impenetrable fortress city and raid the world from it, the rest of the server can decide to hunt down Nuke codes and fix the problem.

They've specifically said, actually, that it's the endgame. It's not about nuking other player's bases, since those players can just plop their C.A.M.P. down anywhere else and restore their base. The nuclear launch system is basically how you irradiate a zone and turn it into "heroic mode" in that region, with harder enemies and better drops and some changes to architecture/landscape/weather/etc.

I really think people are thinking this is going to be heavy PvP, when I suspect it's going to turn more into co-op and cautious friendliness. With the occasional asstard ganker being handed his ass on a pretty china plate by the server for being a problem.

[SirCowdog]

Todd talked about Starfield several times. It's a huge single player RPG franchise. TES 6 has been said to be nothing different from the previous ones so why assume anything different.

Was that in the recently linked video? Or was there another source?

[Deleted]

Was that in the recently linked video? Or was there another source?

https://www.reddit.com/r/Starfield/

I'm afraid I'm not a walking, talking video-timestamp machine, and as such can't remember which of the three, four or five times he was interviewed he mentioned these things, and at which point, and quite frankly I don't feel like doing the work for you. That subreddit seems to have threads with information in them, though.

I would've compiled all that crap in the megathread on these forums, but Mr. Mass Effect made the thread, so it's up to him now.

[SirCowdog]

I'm not praising it, at this point you are just trolling, making shit up just to bait. FO4 was not a bad game but definitely not a good fallout game, it deserved the backlash it got from the fans.



The complaints were that adding a voiced protagonist kinda kills some of the immersion. For example, his voice does not suit a raider, or just someone evil if you were building your character to be like that. Also when we play these kind of games we tend to imagine how our character would say things, so actually having a voiced protagonist ruins it. I mean it's not the end of the world, but I say it's a legit complaint.

Have you ever tried playing FO4 with something like the Horizon survival mod? It makes the game MUCH different. You actually have to be smart in order to play well and progress. Can't just roll into a house full of raiders and shot like crazy while healing to full with magic clean water. It doesn't solve any of the RP issues about being forced to be a good guy, but the gameplay is taken up several notches.

As for the complaints about the voiced main character: I guess I can understand the complaint. But what I thought was even more of an issue was how you were basically forced to be a good guy. There weren't many options to be evil. Although I did do a playthrough as a human-supremacist member of the BOS. Killed any ghoul, synth, or mutant I could get away with, including several major quest characters, and regardless of morality. Not human? Dead.

That was about as close to being "evil" as I could manage. Made me feel like I was a Warhammer 40k Space Marine or inquisitor or something. I was surprised at how far the game let me take it.

Damn...all this talk about Fallout makes me want to fire it up again. Must....RESIST! Willpower....fading...quickly....!

- - - Updated - - -

Progression and such is personal, not global. That at least strongly suggests that a location isn't "cleared" for you unless you or your team were the ones that cleared it. They may even instance locations so you can't run into other players at all, inside.

I was under the impression that when he was talking about "progression" he meant personal character level ups and skills and such. It WOULD be nice if world state was instanced, and specific to each character. Although how they'll pull that off with 32 or so players per "server" will be interesting to see.

I admit I can't really counter-argue most of your points. I'm just saying that multiplayer has a very different flavor and theme to it than when you're doing the single-player thing. Going into an Elder Scrolls or Fallout game solo is just not the same as knowing that there are other players out there you might have to deal with. For many people that's just not welcome.

Personally I'm willing to re-assess my POV if new info arises. But many people can't, or won't, do that. They'll just remain pissed off and not buy it.

It ain't perfect, but the metascore's better than any particular site's scoring methodology, IME. And certainly better than user scores.

That's because scores are inherently a bad way to assess a game. It's a TL: DR version without any context or explanation. If you want an actual assessment of a game, you're going to have to read reviews and fully understand WHY someone is liking or disliking the various aspects of it.

That's why Metacritic is cancer. It just lumps all the scores together and pukes up an aggregate. It's worse than a scoring system because it doesn't consider anything of worth, and doesn't explain anything useful. Great! Metacritic scored a game 72.245 stars out of a possible 12 melons.

It's meaningless info.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.reddit.com/r/Starfield/

I'm afraid I'm not a walking, talking video-timestamp machine, and as such can't remember which of the three, four or five times he was interviewed he mentioned these things, and at which point, and quite frankly I don't feel like doing the work for you. That subreddit seems to have threads with information in them, though.

I would've compiled all that crap in the megathread on these forums, but Mr. Mass Effect made the thread, so it's up to him now.

Don't aggro! I was just asking to be pointed in the right direction.

[Mumba]

NoClip just released his Fallout 76 documentary. A bit more information about the game, but it doesn't really make me much more interested in the game.

[XDurionX]

Just watched the documentary (which is excellent, they really deserve to be supported on Patreon), but it really didn't mitigate my concerns. Guess i'll really have to skip this one and wait for Starfield. SadFace.

[Ton00]

Any one know how big you can build tho as heard its pretty small aka pitch a tent mode if so Doa this game tbh

[I Push Buttons]

Any one know how big you can build tho as heard its pretty small aka pitch a tent mode if so Doa this game tbh

Sounds like everyone gets their own small camp they can plop down almost anywhere, but there are a limited number of larger "public workshops" players compete for control of.

[XangXu]

Survival games are just as deep as RPGs just in a different way.

You need to plan, you need to know your limits, you have to be clever, you have to

gasp

USE YOUR BRAIN. Dumping points into stats isn’t going to save you from making dumb decisions. Playing smart will.

[Omians]

So Private Servers and mods Post Launch

[Kathandira]

Just watched the Documentary. Knowing more definitely helps me understand the game better. I can see myself playing this game with friends and having a good time. Not too crazy about the survival stuff such as needing to eat to stay alive, but it's ok.

A new concern I have, is they said that you start the game and are put in a server with up to 24-30 people. If I want to play with my friends, but I was the 30th person to join that server, how will my friends join if it is full? Does that mean we have to discuss with each other to see which of us have enough room on our server for 3 more players?

Which is exactly why they should have private servers at launch. Not afterward.

But, eh! we'll see how it truly fleshes out.