[Megathread] Fallout 76

[imabanana]

You do realize you sound super entitled with these comments, right? You're fine playing a free to play -game when other people are using a form of monetization to pay for it - in other words, they pay, you play, they're paying for your fun - but if you have to pay a single cent up front for it, then having that form of monetization is suddenly somehow, completely inexplicably, completely illogically, an "awful practice."

You do realize that's not at all what I said? I see this place (and its usual posters) hasn't changed, I'm out of here o.o

[Triptych]

Looks pretty cool!

I'm not a multiplayer enthusiast, and I've never tried one of these modern survival games (although I have half a dozen on my Steam wishlist...), but even so, I'm a big fan of the Fallout setting and am always impressed by Bethesda and Todd Howard, so I'll keep a close eye on the development of this one.

[Deleted]

You do realize that's not at all what I said?

I know it isn't what you said, which is why I wasn't claiming I was quoting you. I was simply pointing out that that's how it sounds to me. If I read something into what you said that wasn't there, my apologies. I just don't see any justification for cosmetic mtx being bad in a pay-to-play and fine in a free-to-play game other than the feeling of entitlement to all future updates and content being free simply because you paid for the base game. At this point I would ask if you wouldn't mind explaining why the upfront payment somehow makes it bad and it's fine if the game is free, but I suppose we can leave it there.

EDIT: Noticed this Variety interview, not sure if it was mentioned anywhere yet:

https://variety.com/2018/gaming/feat...ew-1202844504/

I think some people get it and and some absolutely do not

They think it’s straight up PVP. They think it’s running around and shooting folk or that you can’t play by yourself, or that nukes are going off every minute or that you can grief people.

They are judging it based on other things that say ‘online’ or ‘post apocalyptic.’

[Endus]

And did they magically appear from walking into radiation or take decades or centuries to develop?

They magically appeared. Fallout 1 and 2 literally had a perk named "Mutate!" that let you change one trait for another, mid-game. No cause, just BAM, you mutate for some reason. If you wandered around in toxic waste long enough in Fallout 2, you could grow an extra toe.

There was similar stuff in Fallout 3 and New Vegas (Barkskin, for instance), and some of the perks make no sense if they aren't mutations, like "Solar Powered.

Have you played Fallout games?

Also, scorched are not raiders, not sure why everyone say they are, and the new monsters don't seem to make any sense so far to me (nukes suddenly made random west virginia folklore creatures appear, because magic?)

The Scorched are ghoulish humans with guns who attack on sight.
Raiders are humans with guns who attack on sight.

The only functional difference is that the former are ghouls. They serve the exact same role in the game, because raiders couldn't possibly exist in 2102, outside of what you and your fellow Vault evacuees get up to.

As for why folklore is "real", again, have you played Fallout games, before? You've got vampires and aliens and magical Elder Being cults and a setting that's fundamentally rooted in a twisted portrayal of Americana. This is how the setting's always been. Cuckoo bananas turned to 11.

[Deleted]

Edited the OP quite a bit. Added some new links and made it a bit more streamlined.

Someone has made a world map for Fallout 76, pretty cool: https://i.imgur.com/djjnEJu.jpg



Here Todd talks about how the six regions act differently when you nuke them; different creatures (flora and fauna) will spawn in the nuked area and so on. That alone acts as an incentive for players to nuke a spot in a specific region, rather than someone's hut somewhere completely different.

[DarkAmbient]

- Hines plays it solo exclusively, himself, and loves it.

Blimey, I'm shocked to hear Bethesda's Senior Vice President of PR and Marketing say such a thing.

[Deleted]

Blimey, I'm shocked to hear Bethesda's Senior Vice President of PR and Marketing say such a thing.

Not as shocked as I am to realize people automatically distrust anything they hear coming from people, or relating to things that they don't absolutely love.

[Deleted]

Meh, not interested. It's basically Fallout Exiles. As a solo player with no friends that play games, multiplayer-centric games where you're at a severe disadvantage if you don't join groups, present no interest to me.

Also, what happens to your stuff when you go offline? Can it be stolen or destroyed like in Conan Exiles? Yeah, thought so.

[DarkAmbient]

Not as shocked as I am to realize people automatically distrust anything they hear coming from people, or relating to things that they don't absolutely love.

Do you think Bethesda's Senior Vice President of PR and Marketing would say "I've played Fallout 76 and tbh it's a bit shit" if that's what he honestly thought?

[Kathandira]

- One hope is to add uncertainty to the game; the existing games you really know how NPCs will interact before they do, for the most part, it's set by Bethesda and isn't up in the air. Interactions with players aren't certain.

This is one of the things that appeals to me most about single player games. It's like playing music. At first, you may not know how to approach the piece you are learning. Then you play it a few times, and get more familiar and comfortable with it, then after many times, you have it perfected. This is only amplified for me when it is co-op, because now it is like playing with a band, which is even more beautiful.

Not knocking, just giving an example of why some people may enjoy the scripted NPC actions.

[derpkitteh]

the more of these interviews i've watched, the more my concerns have been allayed.

the only thing giving me pause now is the lack of a way to avoid pvp entirely. they have it so there's a pve and pvp toggle, i think i will buy it.

- - - Updated - - -

oh, and i'm still concerned that i haven't seen any of the pc's use iron sight aiming in any of the gameplay.

i've still got hope though, that it's just because maybe it's not in yet at this stage of the alpha. it would make no sense to go back to fallout 3 style no-iron sights.

[dope_danny]

I'm just surprised how many people are high tier butthurt its not the same thing bethesda always makes. They've put out morrowind, oblivion, fallout 3, skyrim, fallout 4 and people are upset they aren't doing 'same shit different name on the box' again?

i mean this game could be trash for all i know when its out there in the wild full of randos but i can't remember the last time people were this mad a company thats been making the same game for multiple decades in a row wanted to make a multiplayer game thats not chasing a meme like mobashit or battle royale.

[GennGreymane]

I'm just surprised how many people are high tier butthurt its not the same thing bethesda always makes. They've put out morrowind, oblivion, fallout 3, skyrim, fallout 4 and people are upset they aren't doing 'same shit different name on the box' again?

i mean this game could be trash for all i know when its out there in the wild full of randos but i can't remember the last time people were this mad a company thats been making the same game for multiple decades in a row wanted to make a multiplayer game thats not chasing a meme like mobashit or battle royale.

Its chasing the destiny meme. Even used a lot of the same language for it.

[hulkgor]

They've put out morrowind, oblivion, fallout 3, skyrim, fallout 4 and people are upset they aren't doing 'same shit different name on the box' again?

If the formula\genre works, and sells millions, keep at it?

It would be like PES or FIFA suddenly releasing their new title not as a football simulator, but as a battle royale with 22 players in a football field and player housing in both goals, oh, and player-usable nukes.

Don't be daft.

[derpkitteh]

I'm just surprised how many people are high tier butthurt its not the same thing bethesda always makes. They've put out morrowind, oblivion, fallout 3, skyrim, fallout 4 and people are upset they aren't doing 'same shit different name on the box' again?

i mean this game could be trash for all i know when its out there in the wild full of randos but i can't remember the last time people were this mad a company thats been making the same game for multiple decades in a row wanted to make a multiplayer game thats not chasing a meme like mobashit or battle royale.

"same shit different box" is a gross misrepresentation of what fallout and elder scrolls is.

the core elements are the roleplaying aspect with a world rife with lore and stories to explore. those elements are essential to these games. what's different each time are the stories and worlds, and that's much more of an impactful difference than many other games have.

now, that isn't to say they can never do something different with elder scrolls and fallout. it's just that they need to make it abundantly clear that this has no effect on the timeline of the release of the next fallout game. if it does have an impact on it, that's not good.

[Endus]

I'm just surprised how many people are high tier butthurt its not the same thing bethesda always makes. They've put out morrowind, oblivion, fallout 3, skyrim, fallout 4 and people are upset they aren't doing 'same shit different name on the box' again?

i mean this game could be trash for all i know when its out there in the wild full of randos but i can't remember the last time people were this mad a company thats been making the same game for multiple decades in a row wanted to make a multiplayer game thats not chasing a meme like mobashit or battle royale.

One of the last times I remember this kind of anger was when Fallout 3 was announced, and was first-person and real-time rather than isometric and turn-based.

And frankly, that change was good, in retrospect. Almost unequivocally. What criticisms can be directed at Fallout 3 and beyond don't really derive from the first-person shooter mechanics they're based upon, nor would they be fixed with an isometric and turn-based system.

[Deleted]

I'm just surprised how many people are high tier butthurt its not the same thing bethesda always makes. They've put out morrowind, oblivion, fallout 3, skyrim, fallout 4 and people are upset they aren't doing 'same shit different name on the box' again?

i mean this game could be trash for all i know when its out there in the wild full of randos but i can't remember the last time people were this mad a company thats been making the same game for multiple decades in a row wanted to make a multiplayer game thats not chasing a meme like mobashit or battle royale.

I also dont understand the backlash.
I LOVE the idea.
I've been saying for years i wanted a Elders Scrolls game with Online features (not ESO, an actual Elder Scrolls game)

I had zero intentions on buying a offline Fallout game. This are great news for me.

[Endus]

I also dont understand the backlash.
I LOVE the idea.
I've been saying for years i wanted a Elders Scrolls game with Online features (not ESO, an actual Elder Scrolls game)

I had zero intentions on buying a offline Fallout game. This are great news for me.

One of the things I've been saying for a long time, myself, is that I wanted a decent online shooter with a focus on exploration and which was solo-friendly. I was hoping Destiny 2 would hit that mark. It didn't. The Division came close, in the leveling process, but then it was done and the rest of the game was super grindy. Both those had maybe 30 hours before you tapped out the non-repetitive grind content.

Fallout 76 may be exactly what scratches that itch, for me. That it's also part of possibly my favorite gaming IP is a massive bonus.

In WoW, I always played on PvP servers, even though I never really went around ganking people, because I liked that tension of "oh god, what's that guy gonna do". Griefing sucked, but they're actively going to be preventing that in Fallout 76, so that's fine.

I totally get why people might not like that stuff, and I'm not arguing that people SHOULD like it, but nobody was expecting Fallout 76 three weeks ago. TES VI, yes. Not this game. Certainly not with a release date in 6 months. If this isn't your cup o' tea, fine; go play other games. We're practically spoiled for choice, these days. Nobody's making you buy Fallout 76, nobody's making you play it. And it's not an assault on your enjoyment that the game doesn't fit what you want it to be. Shitting on other people's potential enjoyment because it's not what you wanted is a shitty, selfish thing to do.

[GennGreymane]

ah yes, great company to be in, comparable to Destiny 2 and the Division, one of which is garbage and treats its community pretty bad and the other broken until a year or 2 into its release.

- - - Updated - - -

lets add in anthem to that comparison, the game that got less cheers at E3 than battle toads, which showed like nothing, and is likley the reason why EA will soon destroy Bioware.

[Endus]

Interesting spatial analysis I saw on reddit about player density; https://www.reddit.com/r/Fallout/com...er_density_in/

Basically, assuming the "four times the size of FO4" refers to navigable space, at worst you'll be spread so thin there'll be two of you in a section the size of the Far Harbor map. And that's before you consider that people will be teamed up, which further reduces density.

ah yes, great company to be in, comparable to Destiny 2 and the Division, one of which is garbage and treats its community pretty bad and the other broken until a year or 2 into its release.

I don't think it is comparable. I think the major ways it's different are exactly the reasons those games never "clicked' with me.