Some people question the game's realism.
Some people question the game's realism.
I'm not sure if you actually played Skyrim when it launched. Your claim about EA and Ubisoft compared to Bethesda clearly shows a strong fan preference. Bethesda is often considered the worst gaming company left, especially when it comes to fixing bugs. It's surprising you enjoy their sandbox games—Morrowind was released in 2002, and by then sandboxing had become common for them. Fallout 3 followed, but even then it wasn't groundbreaking. In recent years, sandboxing has made a comeback, yet Bethesda still doesn't earn any credit.
My issues with the game don’t relate to visuals, glitches, or speed. The combat and weaponplay in FO4 are solid, and there are interesting areas to discover. However, the dialogue options feel limited compared to previous titles. I view the speech checks as a significant drawback, often just requesting more money. Compared to FO3 and NV, they fall short because they rarely test diverse skills and don’t clearly demonstrate how different abilities affect conversations. I believe FO3 and NV handled speech checks better, offering more variety and showing skill usage effectively. Before these checks appeared for special stats or abilities, I would have created multiple characters and tried different approaches to see how my choices impacted the story. Now, it seems the system mainly rewards charisma, leaving other talents untouched and reducing the sense of progression. My biggest frustration is being restricted from unlocking powerful features until reaching a certain level. In earlier games, I could boost specific skills early—like unlocking computers or sneaking—and get a head start on caps through bartering. While the new perk system has its drawbacks, I’m not convinced of its overall value.
I enjoy the game, though your arguments are strong. These were the main things that let me down. As you mentioned, I was hoping for something less cluttered and more stable. The implementation of dialogue, abilities, and rewards really fell short.
I face the same problems I do with Skyrim—it's a classic Bethesda engine issue. I only play at 100fps on high refresh monitors, and the physics engine fails above 60 frames per second, making the game essentially unplayable. Skyrim has never been fixed, and Fortnite won't either. These are typical releases nowadays, packed with console controls and plenty of technical glitches. All these points are objectively negative; we're not even sure if the game's design is sound. It's pretty average compared to other broken titles.
I'm just starting out with the Fallout series and I'm really loving FO4 now. I finally figured out why my frame rate was lagging and it's making me appreciate the game more. I've been thinking a lot lately, and I feel like games have become too much analyzed. Over the past few years, little changes haven't happened much. It's getting harder for developers to create something fresh and original. So we tend to break everything down and stop enjoying the experience for what it is.
Confirmed. Shadow distance adjusted to medium. Achieved smooth performance at 60fps with 1440p resolution. Added a new thread/topic regarding the update.
The game doesn’t look bad at all; I’m not sure it’ll earn any awards for graphics but I really enjoy its art style and love the vivid colors. FO4 stands out with its bright, lively palette—a nice contrast to the usual browns and grays in many AAA titles, especially considering it’s set in a post-apocalyptic world. Regarding bugs, the experience has been impressively stable for me, with no crashes after more than 40 hours and only minor issues. Even with official and fan updates, FO4 remains more reliable and bug-free compared to FO3 and NV. Bathesda has made some excellent contributions, though it sacrifices RPG features that I value most, making the game more engaging for those who enjoy deep storytelling and exploration.