Current Events > Fallout 4 and MGSV are great games.

(+) Yeah! (+)

People are way too harsh on them.

Yeah they have flaws, in both cases there is a lot of bad writing.

But they are great games and great worlds to explore. Way better than New Vegas or MGS4
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

People are way too harsh on them.

Yes.

UnfairRepresent posted...

Yeah they have flaws, in both cases there is a lot of bad writing.

Yes.

UnfairRepresent posted...

But they are great games and great worlds to explore. Way better than New Vegas or MGS4

No.
---

Go back to the Fallout 4 board
---

The problem with MGSV is that it barely does anything better than Peace Walker (the real MGSV IMO)
---

MGSV is a tech demo
---

I'm sure that you think you are coming up with something that seems honest and straightforward but you're trying too hard TC. Maybe take a break and rub one out, or have lunch, or look at YouTube.

babyeatermax posted...

Go back to the Fallout 4 board

Ok

AvantgardeAClue posted...

The problem with MGSV is that it barely does anything better than Peace Walker (the real MGSV IMO)

You wot

IT's waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than Peace Walker.

And I say that as a fan of Peace Walker

For starters the latter chunk of Peace Walker is a boring slog one player and putting that aside it's super easy.

It was fun (for a handheld game) but it's got nothing on 5 or 2 or 1 or MG1
---

Fallout 4 is better than people credit for, but it's still way behind New Vegas. MGSV though... just, no.
---

KiwiTerraRizing posted...

MGSV is a tech demo

No, that piece of crap Ground Zeroes is a fucking tech demo.

I swear this is true, not counting cutscenes, no walkthroughs, no nothing. First time I played I got from the first moment I controlled Snake to the start of the end credits in about 15 minutes and that was WITH slow stealthy gameplay/no kills.

THAT was a fucking insult to gamers and the fact gamers rolled over and accepted that without complaints but then bitched about 5 (which was great) is a mystery to me.

"I don't mind the kick in the balls but I'm furious that this excellent lunch has slighty less salt on it than I would ideally prefer!"
---

I liked FO4 a lot and FO3 has a special place in my heart but FONV has the highest replay value in the entire series. I blame that entirely on the fact your character is whoever you want them to be past and present.
---

Orthopox12 posted...

I liked FO4 a lot and FO3 has a special place in my heart but FONV has the highest replay value in the entire series.

For starters it's about a third of the size of all the other Fallouts so not saying much

for 2, I disagree.

First thing I did when I beat Fallout 3 and 4 was make a new character and be a bastard (I'm always a goody-too-shoes first)

New Vegas? There's so little personality to go around that there are no other choices to make. "Just do the same thing again but this time do it with the bastards not the army."
---

Fallout 4 is just Skyrim with guns. I gave my copy to a friend because it sucked.
---

sobergermanguy posted...

Fallout 4 is just Skyrim with guns. I gave my copy to a friend because it sucked.

Well this is true but Fallout 3 is just Oblivion with guns... so >_>
---

Gameplaywise MGS5 is at the top in the series.
Storywise it is at the bottom.
---

IT's waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than Peace Walker.

Yeah okay.

Hey Jin-san, please give me a million ways to sneak around a base even though the tranquilizer gun trivalizes any sort of challenge!

Hey Jin-san, encourage me to scout the map all the time even though D-Dog can do it for you automatically!

Hey Jin-san, get down! That enemy helicopter that you've encountered 584845733 times is back!

Hey Jin-san! Hope you have fun traversing the map for no real reason other than to pad out the length of the game!

Disgusting.jpg
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Orthopox12 posted...

I liked FO4 a lot and FO3 has a special place in my heart but FONV has the highest replay value in the entire series.

For starters it's about a third of the size of all the other Fallouts so not saying much

for 2, I disagree.

First thing I did when I beat Fallout 3 and 4 was make a new character and be a bastard (I'm always a goody-too-shoes first)

New Vegas? There's so little personality to go around that there are no other choices to make. "Just do the same thing again but this time do it with the bastards not the army."

FO4 and 3 are higher on my favorites list for sure but all these years later I found going back and replaying NV the easiest. Thats what I basing my origional comment on.
---

I played both and got sick of both pretty quickly.

Nobody likes building bases. MGSV was cool except for that part.
---

The same people who don't like those games rebought shitrim 15 times.
---

mgsv was shit

fallout 4 was mediocre
---

AvantgardeAClue posted...

Hey Jin-san, please give me a million ways to sneak around a base even though the tranquilizer gun trivalizes any sort of challenge!

Bro dis is peacewalker doe

Uncle Choad posted...

Nobody likes building bases. MGSV was cool except for that part.

I never even built bases. That was dull
---

i love MGS5, but im not blind to its issues that others might have with it.

F4 has barely any redeeming qualities. its a thoroughly mediocre game.

Yup, but Fallout 4 had far better writing than the skirt wearing Roman classic new Vegas.
---

Orthopox12 posted...

I liked FO4 a lot and FO3 has a special place in my heart but FONV has the highest replay value in the entire series. I blame that entirely on the fact your character is whoever you want them to be past and present.

You are aware you're born as the Fallout 3 protagonist? Right? There is no past before you, you're there from the protagonists conception.

New Vegas on the other hand does elude to some of the couriers past, with Ulysses chiming in.
---

OEIO999 posted...

Orthopox12 posted...

I liked FO4 a lot and FO3 has a special place in my heart but FONV has the highest replay value in the entire series. I blame that entirely on the fact your character is whoever you want them to be past and present.

You are aware you're born as the Fallout 3 protagonist? Right? There is no past before you, you're there from the protagonists conception.

Yeah but you're still "The son/daughter of this guy who was raised in a vault and now is after him!"

Where as in New Vegas you're just "Some Courier who got shot" and the rest is up to you.

I mean the courier could be a serial rapist for all we know. Where as the Lone Wanderer's past is pres-set

I see his point but to me it's not saying much/
---

Both MGS4 and MGS5 were disappointing so that doesn't say much.

Fallout 4 was meant to be the next gen debut for Bethesda. I don't think anyone liked their focus on Settlements. That annoyed both people who liked Bethesda games and Fallout games. It just doesn't show the strengths on what Fallout is supposed to be about at all. It's a better Borderlands sequel than a Fallout 4 one. I much prefer the character focus of New Vegas. Even if you disagree it felt dated to stuff like Witcher 3 which had already released.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

People are way too harsh on them.

I disagree, I think people are way too generous, at least with MGSV. It got so many 10/10s. Personally, I think the game is garbage, not just as a Metal Gear game, but as game in general. I can understand that people like it but I just can't understand giving it a 10/10 score, there's just so much wrong with the game. It doesn't really do anything all that groundbreaking either. Sure it feels nice and smooth to control, but it doesn't really do anything new.

Ground Zeroes was fantastic though iirc. The level was the perfect size and it was as dense and thought out as it needed to be. It showed a lot of potential for the full game. Wasn't really worth $30 though lol

As for Fallout 4, people always point out so many flaws with it and I can't really deny any of them, but I still liked the game

UnfairRepresent posted...

OEIO999 posted...

Orthopox12 posted...

I liked FO4 a lot and FO3 has a special place in my heart but FONV has the highest replay value in the entire series. I blame that entirely on the fact your character is whoever you want them to be past and present.

You are aware you're born as the Fallout 3 protagonist? Right? There is no past before you, you're there from the protagonists conception.

Yeah but you're still "The son/daughter of this guy who was raised in a vault and now is after him!"

Where as in New Vegas you're just "Some Courier who got shot" and the rest is up to you.

I mean the courier could be a serial rapist for all we know. Where as the Lone Wanderer's past is pres-set

I see his point but to me it's not saying much/

As opposed to being from the East and all the exposition Ulysses drops about, a courier who got shot and got buried alive and instead of fleeing a town that you know little to nothing about and are INSANELY ill-equipped (since you start out as an adult? with bare minimum skill qualified for a wastelander) to tackle the task in any realistic sense? The fact that someone who has a job as a fucking courier, would be bold enough to traverse a location he/she knows next to nothing about, says a lot more about the character than it should.

The Lone Wander's past is set, by, you. You're not getting anyones point.
---

For all the shit Fallout 3 gets for its cinematic and fictional elements, NV literally starts out with you getting shot in the head, buried alive and then dug up, to have a shrapnel of that bullet still lodged inside your head.

How does it more cinematic/fictional than that?
---

DarthAragorn posted...

The Lone Wanderer's past isn't set at all, lmfao

get off bethesda's dong

I know, thats what i said

????

Are you role playing the couriers with a shrapnel in your head and 0 int or something? Cause time and place. I'd say stop sucking Obsidian's balls, but I am pretty sure they don't have any, oh well bully for you
---

sorry let me refine that

the lone wanderer's past isn't set by the player at all, it's set by bethesda
---

Ground Zeroes was better than MGS5 (which was trash).
---

Dragon239 posted...

Ground Zeroes was better than MGS5 (which was trash).

I agree with this

Ground Zeroes had actual effort put into its level design

MGSV (which is trash) was just a bland boring empty open world
---

OEIO999 posted...

The Lone Wander's past is set, by, you. The fact that the LW is someone's child is as about relevant that the courier is well...a courier.

Not really. The father is a main character in the story and the primary goal for the first half of the main plot. He's voiced by Liam Neeson! The past of the courier and why he does what he does is up to you. There's a lot more left to the imagination. There's more blanks that you can fill yourself.

A lot of the appeal of custom RPG characters is that players can fill in the blanks themselves. It depends what you're looking for really.
---

The Lone Wanderer's past was completely dictated by the game. I'm not sure I understand this argument.
---

Let's see, you control the baby and somehow name this child, you live out its past, including choosing its future career e.t.c

None of the decisions for the Lone Wanderer is made by the game, other than its conception.
---

Darmik posted...

OEIO999 posted...

The Lone Wander's past is set, by, you. The fact that the LW is someone's child is as about relevant that the courier is well...a courier.

Not really. The father is a main character in the story and the primary goal for the first half of the main plot. He's voiced by Liam Neeson! The past of the courier and why he does what he does is up to you. There's a lot more left to the imagination. There's more blanks that you can fill yourself.

A lot of the appeal of custom RPG characters is that players can fill in the blanks themselves. It depends what you're looking for really.

The father is a main character in the story and the primary goal for the first half of the main plot.

What does that have to do with the game controlling the LW's past?

He's voiced by Liam Neeson!

What does that have to do with anything??!?

And NV's equivalent is Benny and Matthew Perry.
---

Except you know its entire childhood of growing up in the vault and being friends with whats her name and interacting with the bully and having to leave the vault to find dad

all dictated by the game
---

OEIO999 posted...

What does that have to do with the game controlling the LW's past?

Everything. It's your characters motivation in the game. He/she wants to find Liam Neeson because they ran away from the Vault.

OEIO999 posted...

What does that have to do with anything??!?

Because the preset family angle is important.

OEIO999 posted...

And NV's equivalent is Benny and Matthew Perry.

Benny doesn't have anything to do with the PC outside of the events in New Vegas. Your interactions with him are decided by the player.

I'm not sure if you're really understanding the argument here.

Because of the way Fallout 3 is laid out you have to play as a young guy/girl who is looking for their Dad. This is more personal and defined than most RPG's that let you create a character. That's all people are saying. Compare this game to an Elder Scrolls game for example
---

Fallout 4 is pretty good. Not as good as NV obviously, but still fun.

A lot of the criticisms are valid, but gamers take things too farand action like it's complete garbage. . This kind of exaggeration gamers do is really stupid. I wonder if people forgot about games that really are terrible.
---

DarthAragorn posted...

Except you know its entire childhood of growing up in the vault and being friends with whats her name and interacting with the bully and having to leave the vault to find dad

all dictated by the game

I'll give you childhood friend, but that doesn't say anything about you other than hypotheticals. Also you can control how that relationship turns by turning on her with Butch. Interacting with the bully is dictated by you.

Leaving the vault is dictated by you, events take place that is not caused by the protagonists choices (Jame's choices caused events). Like the vault water chip in Fallout 1 e.tc You can just stay in the quarters. But since it's a game and time is static, it won't go anywhere.
---

Yes in Fallout 1 you have to get the water chip and you lived in the vault.

But a lot more is still left open. You can play as a different variety of potential characters. You can be a young guy or an old lady. IIRC how you ended up in that vault and who you were raised with there with isn't relevant. A lot more is left blank.

Finding a water chip for your home isn't as static and predefined as finding your scientist father who ran away from the vault mysteriously. Everyone in Fallout 1 is a stranger. This isn't the case in Fallout 3.
---

Courier: Hey you're awake. Here's some stuff now fuck off.
Lone Wanderer: Entire history made up in the intro.

There really is no comparison.
---

fallout 4's campaign was a mess but it was overall a decent game

mgsv has 10/10 gameplay but it was such bad design
---

Darmik posted...

OEIO999 posted...

What does that have to do with the game controlling the LW's past?

Everything. It's your characters motivation in the game. He/she wants to find Liam Neeson because they ran away from the Vault.

OEIO999 posted...

What does that have to do with anything??!?

Because the preset family angle is important.

OEIO999 posted...

And NV's equivalent is Benny and Matthew Perry.

Benny doesn't have anything to do with the PC outside of the events in New Vegas. Your interactions with him are decided by the player.

I'm not sure if you're really understanding the argument here.

Because of the way Fallout 3 is laid out you have to play as a young guy/girl who is looking for their Dad. This is more personal and defined than most RPG's that let you create a character. That's all people are saying. Compare this game to an Elder Scrolls game for example

Similar to you wanting to finding Benny, although I'll admit its not linear as F3.

Because the preset family angle is important.

No, its not. You were talking about the Voice actor, that has nothing to do with anything.

Benny doesn't have anything to do with the PC outside of the events in New Vegas.

Ditto for James. I don't think a guy who brings in an NPC's voice actor has any ground for stating what the argument is.

Because of the way Fallout 3 is laid out you have to play as a young guy/girl who is looking for their Dad.

Because of the way Fallout NV is laid out you have to play as a Courier girl/boy who has to stay in NV to take care of its problem, a place you know barely anything about and have no reasons to stay in, because just got shot and buried alive. Other than personal reasons (Benny shot you) or because you don't have a choice as a courier, to leave.
---

Saying MGSV is better than 4 isn't really saying a lot. They're both shit in their own ways.

4 had way too much control taken away from the player to watch cutscenes. 5 had too much empty space outside of missions, and just straight up wasn't finished

I totally disagree about FO4 and New Vegas though. FO4 wasn't anywhere near as bad as MGSV, but it definitely felt like it built more off of FO 3 than New Vegas, so I'm not too keen on it
---

Romulox28 posted...

fallout 4's campaign was a mess but it was overall a decent game

I'd say the game was fine.

The factions were weak and the twist was so blatant I don't think you can even call it a twist

Beyond that, the story was solid and the gameplay was stellar.

I love all the side-stories in the game and the sheer amount of dialogue is insane
---

MGSV is shit, it deserves all the hate it gets.
---

OEIO999 posted...

Ditto for James. I don't think a guy who brings in an NPC's voice actor has any ground for stating what the argument is.

What? James is the father of the Fallout 3 NPC. Of course he's more important.

The voice actor argument is to counter-point your argument that the family angle isn't important in Fallout 3. Of course it is.

Can't you kill Benny as soon as you find him anyway?

OEIO999 posted...

Because of the way Fallout NV is laid out you have to play as a Courier girl/boy who has to stay in NV to take care of its problem, a place you know barely anything about. Even though you just got shot and buried alive.

Take care of what problem? How?

You're already putting out a significantly more vague pitch.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Romulox28 posted...

fallout 4's campaign was a mess but it was overall a decent game

I'd say the game was fine.

The factions were weak and the twist was so blatant I don't think you can even call it a twist

Beyond that, the story was solid and the gameplay was stellar.

I love all the side-stories in the game and the sheer amount of dialogue is insane

eh i had a lot more complaints with the story

fo4 spoilers

first of all it's all over way too fast, so the pacing is way off. goes from a detective noir thing, where you're trying to find your son, to some all out faction war in the blink of an eye. didn't feel natural.

having to choose a side was really clumsy and i never felt like i had any motivation in the game to do so, except that at an arbitrary point the game made me choose.

the whole faction thing felt clumsy, like bethesda was obligated to shoehorn it in, and the campaign suffered as a result. i also disliked how the minutemen were there as the cop-out option.

beyond that the game is just ok. shooting felt good and it is fun to explore but the little mini-stories around the map felt a lot less compelling this time around, RPG elements were neutered even more (to the point where Bethesda should have just made it a straight up shooter) & base building was pointless.

that being said FO4 is not a bad game, just kind of sloppy and poorly put together in a bunch of parts.
---

Yeah it sucks that you have to wait until faction quests to open up before betraying certain factions at times.

I sided with the Railroad and I remember thinking that if it was up to me I would handle stuff differently. But that option isn't available. I never felt like that with New Vegas. It felt like I had more agency.
---