Fallout 76. Worried? Excited? Both?

[Winthur]

Not really. Diablo had around 5% 'vestigial campaign to act as a tutorial and get you up to level 70 so you could get around to playing the real game', and 95% 'grinding for gear'. And it's not even PvP focused.

Diablo 2 is perfectly competent at being a regular h'n's that you play at your own pace and can be completed without any grinding whatsoever. You can set your own goal, whether it is making fun but expensive builds on b.net, gearing up for PvP, gearing up for Pandemonium/Uber Tristram, or just getting an untwinked character to Hell Baal, especially with Hardcore ticked as a flag. Only a few of those encourage you to do the old Tristrun->Tombrun->Ancients->Baalrun ad infinitum -> run a85 / meph hell / CS / WSK routine.

Especially at the start of the ladder you can't count on anyone to rush you through the bosses and you actually can form a team with a few dudes and have fun speeding through the quests together. Or you can play solo and just do the zones you enjoy.

[Calemyr]

It's worth noting that he pointed out at least one quest-giver: the overseer. And that she'd be sending you on missions to all 6 regions of the game.

So we have a central command structure, with the Overseer directing those that want direction while others go off on their own pursuits. You can go structured or you can go free-form, just like Fallout usually runs. I mean, I don't know about you, but I spend about three quarters of each game just wandering and checking into buildings whose doors haven't been boarded over. I imagine I'll still be doing that in this case, although we won't be exploring the corpses of opened vaults this time around. Well, not many of them, anyway. It could be that there are other first-release vaults in the area and we go all tribal on their rumps or vice versa.

Of course, with humanity largely caged underground at this point in time, we're probably not going to see the infinite raider problem (I swear, I must've killed enough raiders in Boston to populate China). Also, we probably won't see as many feral ghouls at this point, either. As a result, we're going to see a much more diverse population of mutant creatures. We saw a number of them, and they were pretty cool. Gotta wonder if there's going to be a reason why most of the new creatures don't show up in later games. Possibly they'll just say that FEV functions like ordinary evolution, with most mutations not being viable on a long term scale. The ones that survive two centuries are the mutational archetypes that are robust enough to thrive without consuming themselves to extinction. I also saw the super mutants in the trailer, so they're still a thing, and they're probably the dumdum variety the east coast has been plagued with already. Maybe not, though. FO4's Strong suggested that even dumdums have a culture, even if it's really weird by human standards. That could be extended if there are super mutants willing to cooperate with humans. Granted, that "reasonable" group would probably have to die out in short order.

All in all, I'm unsure. Like most things, this is an exciting concept that could become incredible if in creative and competent hands. Or it could be a poorly thought out waste of time if left in lazy and greedy hands. I could easily see a lot of really cool things coming from this, or a whole lot of nothing. Bethesda is one of the few companies left that I'm willing to give better than 50/50 odds on it being worthwhile. Maybe 55/45.

Now for my fears:

The online cooperative focus will probably kill companions, one of my favorite parts of the game. They add so much to the game for me and I'd hate to lose them. We may be able to have a dog or a robot or something - actually, I could see an Automatron-like element in building your own sidekick. If they're given the filled out nature of Codsworth, Curie, or Ada, it could even be a fulfilling companion to have, while being personalized enough that you don't see too many duplicates and regulated enough that it wouldn't be too hard to transmit their designs to other players. After all, the Automatron stuff was Rob-Co and predated the Great War.

Mods are going to be a big factor here. We won't have the vast, anarchic gene pool of creative geniuses and derivative hacks supplying us an endless supply of little tweaks and additions to the game, so that every instance of the story is just a little bit different. That's going to really hurt my enjoyment of the game. On the other hand, we have the Creation Club, which would be perfectly suited to this style of game. As a result, the Creation Club now makes a lot more sense: they wanted it out, tested, and as accepted as possible before it became the primary mode of modification. If Fallout 76 were a free-to-play game like Fortnite, Creation Club would be at least a passable implementation of a monetization scheme. And by already bridging the gap between modders and Bethesda, they'll be able to go all out on helping them make curated mods. I mean, I've been horribly disappointed with 95% of the Creation Club so far (Captain Cosmos and Slocum's Joe being the only ones I felt I got my money's worth out of), but it could come into its own in 76. Delusional, perhaps, but it's pleasant to be optimistic on occasion.

Call me cautiously optimistic, I guess. It could be fun, and at worst it'll probably turn out like ESO - which is still a decent MMO though certainly not an excellent one. I certainly trust them to pull this off better than I trust Bioware to pull off Anthem.

[Brookshw]

It basically has to be radiant quests since it's multiplayer. What are they going to do? Have a story that one team gets to finish and the other 3 teams miss out on? Have people quit the server when they're done with the story leaving ghost towns?

The multiplayer aspect basically forces the fact that there won't be any real story or writing. Games like this are repetitive by necessity.

Not necessarily, SW: Kotor's mmo allowed for a pretty good story in multiplayer, people w/ different objectives in a zone, instanced areas, people standing still watching cutscened while everone else ran around. I'm completely unclear how they're going to handle it which it a huge make/break issue for me.

Good question raised about companions, since they weren't mentioned I assume they're out, but.....there has to be a dog. That's such a staple. Still, so much player focus. Be nice if they did something like the henchman from Guild Wars one.....but I doubt it.

What happens w/ the creation club definitely is an issue, pay to win gear? Pay for content previously in the base games? DLC new areas? Companions?

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Not necessarily, SW: Kotor's mmo allowed for a pretty good story in multiplayer, people w/ different objectives in a zone, instanced areas, people standing still watching cutscened while everone else ran around. I'm completely unclear how they're going to handle it which it a huge make/break issue for me.

Different genre entirely. This is to be player v player focus. Think Overwatch with more players per game. There isn't a whole lot of narrative capability within what they are doing.

Good question raised about companions, since they weren't mentioned I assume they're out, but.....there has to be a dog. That's such a staple. Still, so much player focus. Be nice if they did something like the henchman from Guild Wars one.....but I doubt it.

Companions are antithetical to the entire concept.

What happens w/ the creation club definitely is an issue, pay to win gear? Pay for content previously in the base games? DLC new areas? Companions?

At this point? It wouldn't surprise me.

[Calemyr]

Different genre entirely. This is to be player v player focus. Think Overwatch with more players per game. There isn't a whole lot of narrative capability within what they are doing.

Good grief, I hope not. A PvP focus will shut this game off from me immediately. I mean, nothing would kill my interest faster. I'll accept lootboxes in my game before I accept that crap. My impression is that you can PvP if you like, but that's not the focus and player killing results in bounties that will make you a target for everyone looking to make a quick cap. Hopefully the game will quietly shuffle the psycopaths to different servers so they can get on with killing each other I play in my sandbox in peace.

Ah, crap. Thanks a lot, Shneekey. You just downgraded me from "cautiously optimistic" to "probably not interested". I'll take the wasteland. I'll take super mutants. I'll take mega-mosquitos, bipedal nightmare crabs, zig-zagging radiation zombies, and ten foot tall killer chameleons. I'll take it all on with a manic grin on my face. But I don't want the griefers.

Crap.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Good grief, I hope not. A PvP focus will shut this game off from me immediately. I mean, nothing would kill my interest faster. I'll accept lootboxes in my game before I accept that crap. My impression is that you can PvP if you like, but that's not the focus and player killing results in bounties that will make you a target for everyone looking to make a quick cap. Hopefully the game will quietly shuffle the psycopaths to different servers so they can get on with killing each other I play in my sandbox in peace.

Uhh... did you not see the trailer? The whole shtick is 'there are other players, and they want stuff, and the best way for them to get stuff is to take your stuff'. That's the very fundamental concept that the game is based on.

Ah, crap. Thanks a lot, Shneekey. You just downgraded me from "cautiously optimistic" to "probably not interested". I'll take the wasteland. I'll take super mutants. I'll take mega-mosquitos, bipedal nightmare crabs, zig-zagging radiation zombies, and ten foot tall killer chameleons. I'll take it all on with a manic grin on my face. But I don't want the griefers.

Crap.

Best to at least be aware of what it is rather than pre-order and be this disappointed after spending that cash. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, man.

[VoxRationis]

A comparatively minor gripe compared to the general consensus of pessimistic groans (mine among them), but it irritates me that they seem driven to include a basic voiceless emote system, complete with exaggerated, WoW-esque character animations. That style of motion is cute when it's on a 50s-esque cartoon Vault Dweller. It's ridiculous and off-putting when you put it on a gritty in-game character model.

[Antonok]

So little bit more news to share:

There will be mod support, just not as launch. Todd mentions 'your own private worlds'.

They don't want the pvp to be 'griefy' so they're still tweaking that. They still want PvP in it though.

Interview is here

[Triaxx]

I say wait for the beta and see. Or just go back to being disappointed now. I'm going with the former.

Bethesda is '100 percent committed' to Fallout 76 mod support This talks about private worlds and mod support once they have the online working properly.

[Erloas]

Watching videos on Twitch is painful...

I'm trying to figure out how they're going to do this. Nothing they've said is impossible, but some combinations they've said seem like they might be.

I really enjoyed Borderlands, and a few other games with a similar style of multiplayer and I could see that being good, really good, if done well.
I can't see more persistent world MMO styles working with what they've laid out. I love EVE's design but they are missing many of the things that made EVE work, what makes it amazing.(even as I openly acknowledge that EVE was not the game for me, it is still brilliant)
The various other MMOs and not-MMO multiplayer designs I know all say this really has no way of working. It just seems like a really cool idea that has no chance of surviving contact with the real world. I would say expect the multiplayer to be redesigned almost completely once it hits beta.

I would also say it is going more and more into the direction of action/shooter with RPG elements rather than an RPG. In fact they seem to have made little indication of keeping even the most vestigial RPG elements that the other games had.

[gooddragon1]

I don't think we'll ever get anything better than Skyrim. I like morrowind, but the graphics, feel, and dragons of skyrim just blow it away. I know VI is coming, but I dunno anymore. Little biased towards Skyrim because I have a 32 bit pc. If VI is always online then no. I like modding my games. I feel like we're reaching a point where graphical returns aren't giving as much as is being invested.

Already made a post on this thread, but felt like another one. Might make a "most toxic game thought experiment thread" too.

[Triaxx]

I doubt VI will be always on line. It's a mainline game in the series, and I doubt highly they'd do it multi-player. Me? I'm expecting Elsewyr, which is supposed to be comprised of multiple regions, deserts and jungles, so a grassland coast could be reasonable. That or Valenwood, using the tech developed in 76 for showing all the trees and stuff.

[Balmas]

So, the good news is that Todd Howard gave an interview that clarified most of the things he left out in the little E3 presentation yesterday. The bad news is I was right. I hate being right.

You can play solo! Which means that you'll be alone on a server full of several dozen other people.
You can't turn PvP off! Hooray for the several dozen people probably having a shoot-on-sight mentality!
There's literally zero human NPCs! Which means that any quests are probably going to come from robots!
VATS still exists; it just loses the slow-time aspect. Presumably this is to give players who aren't good at PvP a way to fight back.

More good news! Mods are a thing! So are private servers!
More bad news! Neither of the above are happening on launch!
More bad news! Fallout: 76 is going to subscribe to the "Live services" model, which translates to being charged full price for the game and then being charged for additional fees.

Color me impressed. I didn't think it was possible to disappoint me in literally every single way, but Bethesda, as always, brings their F game.

[Spore]

More bad news! Fallout: 76 is going to subscribe to the "Live services" model, which translates to being charged full price for the game and then being charged for additional fees.

Yeah, that'll be a no from me.

[Balmas]

Oh, and also no Fallout 3 remaster. So there's that not to look forward to.

[Cheesegear]

but Bethesda, as always, brings their F game.

Press 'F' for Fallout.

[NeoVid]

At least this Fallout will have an answer to why there's so many pointlessly destructive psychos raiding the wasteland.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

So basically all the east-coast Raiders came from Vault 76 and its descendants? Yea, I can see that.

[Triaxx]

Okay, going back to New Vegas.

That said, a slightly edited tweet from Many a True Nerd:


"On the plus side, Fallout 76 sorts out a gripe some people had about Fallout 3.

Why is the Capital Wasteland in ruins 200 years after the war?

Because these jerks next door in West Virginia WOULDN'T STOP FlippING NUKING EVERYTHING."

[Brookshw]

Now I want to know when Atom RPG will be finished.

On the plus, I think the F3/NV/4 debate is over and everyone can get on with hating 76.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Now I want to know when Atom RPG will be finished.

On the plus, I think the F3/NV/4 debate is over and everyone can get on with hating 76.

I think the phrase 'Yea, but at least it's not 76' will be the ultimate in damnation with faint praise sort of backhanded compliment by virtue of some minimum-designation low-bar to step over.

[DigoDragon]

The bad news is I was right. I hate being right.

Despite knowing what your voice sounds like, I kept reading this part in Weird Al's voice.

More good news! Mods are a thing! So are private servers!
More bad news! Neither of the above are happening on launch!

Huh, so private servers will be a thing, but later. If I could control who I'm with on a server that would make the game better, but if it's not even gonna be a thing at launch... wonder what the prices are for 'em when they do come out.

but Bethesda, as always, brings their F game.

F stands for Fallout, right?

At least this Fallout will have an answer to why there's so many pointlessly destructive psychos raiding the wasteland.

So basically all the east-coast Raiders came from Vault 76 and its descendants? Yea, I can see that.

Heh, this is unintentional lore-building I can headcanon.

[gooddragon1]

I think the phrase 'Yea, but at least it's not 76' will be the ultimate in damnation with faint praise sort of backhanded compliment by virtue of some minimum-designation low-bar to step over.

Still a better love story than twilight.

Edit: What is Atom?

[Brookshw]

Edit: What is Atom?

https://store.steampowered.com/app/5...ic_indie_game/

Isometric post-apoc rpg with branching quest paths for varied resolutions. Still in Beta but shows promise, early release let's play seem okay.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Because these jerks next door in West Virginia WOULDN'T STOP FlippING NUKING EVERYTHING."

Origin story for the Children of ATOM?

[Xenopax]

My problem with the nukes is that it's going to kill the immersion. Forget the tech involved. Repeatedly nuking the map ends either with the whole map being the glowing sea or it healing itself which shouldn't happen. If you absolutely had to get something to kill high level players, you could set up some sort of transmission beacon or something that calls up a really powerful creature or a swarm of them. That would give them a chance to defend themselves and is much more fair than "Lol I nuked you and all your stuff that you worked for".

[Rodin]

I'm about as disappointed in this as it's possible to be. It's just another cash grab for leaping on the flavor of the week, that being Battle Royale and Multiplayer Competitive Survival.

Pass.

I do want to address this though:

We then get a few shots of gameplay with 4-man parties running around, shooting West Virginia baddies like mutated frogs, some kinda skeletal swamp being, and hold the ****ing phone, why the hell are there super mutants here? I guess at this point we can just forget anything about FEV being a top-secret development for the war effort, is that about right? At this point, we've gone from "Mariposa is the only place that has this top-secret chemical for the war effort" to "Actually, this civilian facility had some, and actually so did a facility completely unlinked to Vault-Tec/the Great Project." I can't wait to figure out how Bethesda's gonna arsepull the existence of super mutants in this Fallout.

This complaint needs to just go away. Super Mutants were brought into Fallout 3 because they're iconic, a representation of the Fallout Series. They will be in every game going forward. You could have Fallout: Beijing and Super Mutants would still have made their way there.

Lore is subservient to game design. The cat was out of the bag on this one 10 years ago.

Now, a more valid complaint is "Oh dear God not Super Mutants again." Because they do tend to get overused, especially in the main franchise. New Vegas was a bit more restrained with the Super Mutants but still had a fair few running around, but Fallout 3 and 4 were just flooded with them.

Of course, from everything I've heard this game is going to be about as canon-friendly as DBZ made-for-TV movie, so I don't think I'm going to be stressed out about it.

Especially since I have no intention of playing it.

[Calemyr]

I don't think the nukes will be that common. You need to combine a number of code pieces for a single launch and I would bet that the spawn rate for code pieces is a readily available variable for them to tweak to keep it a rare thing. And the codes collected won't be used to just attack: rare materials will be available at ground zero, so you can rest assured a good chunk of 'em will be sent to the middle of nowhere to for low-guilt farming. Besides which, the Fatman can already be fired (en masse, in fact, with the MIRV version) repeatedly with no long-term consequences. Kinda suggests to me that the bombs the Chinese used were dirty bombs to maximize the long-term damage. Dirty bombs contaminated with FEV, in particular, would go to great lengths to explain the Fallout setting, though exactly how a virus could survive the explosion is a little questionable...

According to Howard, the PvP element is important to "maintain the drama", but they're constantly tweaking it to minimize the grief. So PvP is not the focus, just a freedom that drives home the desperate stakes. Which is fair, since post-apocalyptic settings aren't the place for happy families. He also said that quests were largely going to be derived from robots and computers, and "found" rather than "given". So, rather than Settler A asking you to delve into Dungeon B to get MacGuffin C, you'll find Dungeon B and inside learn that MacGuffin C exists. Or Robot D will tell you where crashed Vertibird E fell, where you can get a not-quite shiny set of power armor.

I guess I'm currently putting the odds at 2 to 3 against the game being much fun, given my hatred for PvP. My only hope is that there will be "safe zones", regions where PvP isn't allowed, but the lack of space makes it unpleasantly crowded - you want to branch out on your own, but doing so would leave you vulnerable to 76ers that just decided "screw it, raiding is the smarter way to do things". That said, say 50 people spread out over a space 4x the size of Fallout 4's map? If cost/reward is balanced so that raiders are a rarity, say 10% of a population on the high side, you can probably go a long time between problems. They could even add a penalty mechanic where if you die with a bounty on your head you will respawn bountyless on a different server so that you can't continually harass the same group of people. This would also create a different culture among settlers and raiders: settlers are allowed to form community bonds because the players can band together and stay together, while raiders become an inherrently self-centered group because working together is riskier - you might have a better chance for survival in a gang but you can't take it with you when you die.

Eh, it's a thought.

[Xenopax]

I guess I'm currently putting the odds at 2 to 3 against the game being much fun, given my hatred for PvP. My only hope is that there will be "safe zones", regions where PvP isn't allowed, but the lack of space makes it unpleasantly crowded - you want to branch out on your own, but doing so would leave you vulnerable to 76ers that just decided "screw it, raiding is the smarter way to do things". That said, say 50 people spread out over a space 4x the size of Fallout 4's map? If cost/reward is balanced so that raiders are a rarity, say 10% of a population on the high side, you can probably go a long time between problems. They could even add a penalty mechanic where if you die with a bounty on your head you will respawn bountyless on a different server so that you can't continually harass the same group of people. This would also create a different culture among settlers and raiders: settlers are allowed to form community bonds because the players can band together and stay together, while raiders become an inherrently self-centered group because working together is riskier - you might have a better chance for survival in a gang but you can't take it with you when you die.

Eh, it's a thought.

I like this idea. Normal cities could be those safe zones. You could technically kill someone but you'll receive hell for doing so

[Winthur]

The more I think about it, the more I actually like it.
Fallout became a vehicle for generally enjoyable exploration and light combat in a post-apocalyptic world. Of course we're not ever going to get Fallout 1/2 again, but there's plenty of indie RPG developers who make games in that similar vein.
Any pretenses of Fallout ever coming back to its roots have been unfounded since 3, and it's good that they're trying something new with the franchise, given that the Fallout world is a good chassis for multiple gamestyles.
I probably still won't buy it, but it's nice they're trying to do something new.