Slashdot Mirror


Fallout 4 Wins Best Game At Bafta Awards (bbc.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from BBC: Fallout 4 has won the best game of the year at 2016's British Academy Games Awards. It marks the first time its US-based developer Bethesda has won the prize. It did not win in any other category. Fallout 4 is an action-focused role-playing game set in Boston following a nuclear war. It contains hundreds of hours of storyline to explore. Like last year's winner -- Destiny -- it had not won a prize in any of the other categories before taking the top award. The studio's European managing director said he had not expected the result, and recalled that although Fallout is now one of gaming's biggest franchises, it too started out small. "You don't have to have the multi-million dollar budgets to make great games -- I've seen a huge amount of evidence for that tonight," said Sean Brennan.

120 comments

  1. Bafta? by axlash · · Score: 1

    What do films have to do with games?

    --
    Deal with reality - the world as it is - rather than ideality - the world as you would like it to be.
    1. Re:Bafta? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      About as much as giving Fallout 4 and Destiny a "Game of the Year" Award. Which is to say the voters go "Yeah, I think I've heard of that, so sure why not?"

    2. Re:Bafta? by Gussington · · Score: 1

      Absolutely nothing.
      And unlike a film or TV show which you can watch in a couple of hours and decide if it's good or not, a good game can take months to appreciate. And there's no way any human can devote many man-months to many games in one calendar year, and also have a job, so as usual with any game review results are completely unreliable.
      It all sounds like an act of desperation for a tired old industry to try and stay relevant, but failing miserably.

    3. Re:Bafta? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's more disconcerting is this "news" was public knowledge several weeks ago. No one believed it because Fallout 4 is a bit of a turd when it's compared to the competition.

    4. Re:Bafta? by mjwx · · Score: 4, Informative

      What do films have to do with games?

      /sips cup of proper tea, not that Lipton nonsense.

      Well you see the British are a progressive lot, except when it comes to naming. The BAFTA is the academy for modern art forms such as film and television and so it was natural to extend this to video games. The problem is BAFTA is a recognised name and therefore, cannot be easily changed as their role evolves. This is why the MOT is still called the Ministry of Transport instead of the Department of Vehicle Bastardry.

      The introduction of video games into the BAFTAs has been a big thing in recent years and I think, better off for it.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    5. Re:Bafta? by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      What do films have to do with games?

      Ron Perlman.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    6. Re:Bafta? by mikeabbott420 · · Score: 1

      Ron, Ron never changes.

      --
      This program was made possible by a grant from the Ultra-Humanite, and viewers like you.
  2. Re:Overated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should give it a Undertale Bafta Is going to have a Bad time Toriel Despise's Bafta's

  3. This is a pretty blatant ad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is kind of low.

  4. Not anymore :( by Mitreya · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "You don't have to have the multi-million dollar budgets to make great games -- I've seen a huge amount of evidence for that tonight," said Sean Brennan.

    I think that used to be true. In the 80s and 90s perhaps, you could start small.

    The "evidence" we have here is if you started in the 90s and were popular, then you can have the necessary multi-million budget to make successful games now.

    A quick google search places Fallout 1 estimated budget as $3M ($4.5M in current money) and Fallout 4 at anywhere between $150M and $250M (or possibly even more, this is not the highest estimate I saw).

    1. Re:Not anymore :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You are so dead wrong...

      Especially in the last few years (since Kickstarter took off) the entire Indie-thing really has taken off. Faster Than Light, Pillars of Eternity, Divinity: Original Sin, ARK Survivial evolved and all the countless, countless, countless other cool titles on Kickstarter and Steam Early Access are speaking a very loud voice.

      And how can say "You need a big budget" in the era of Minecraft is totally beyond me, how again did Minecraft start out?

      Further, a lot of those 100 and 200 million AAA titles is not for the game, but marketing, a budget of 100 or 150 million for big titles is not uncommon these days. So if you hear "the game cost 200 million to make" you are usually seeing at least 100 million for marketing here.

      You see a grim situation - but in fact it is a future that has never been brighter since the late 80s where a bunch of dudes in a garage could make some nice game.

    2. Re:Not anymore :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As evidenced by Final Fantasy XV needing to sell something like 10 million copies to break even. Which is something like the entire install base of people who even own the consoles they're targeting.

    3. Re:Not anymore :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Pillars of Eternity

      ... which really should have been awarded any "best game of 2015" kind of thing. Best thing I played in 2015 for sure. Beat Fallout 4, IMHO.

      But to be fair games like Pillars were not exactly made on a shoe string budget. You're talking millions of dollars to make something like that, with a staff of several dozens of top-talent experienced game devs, who worked night and day on it for several years. It's not something that a 1-3 developer garage studio is going to crank out, no matter how much money they get on kickstarter. Just on sheer quantity of artwork alone, it's way beyond most small studios.

      Btw, I would add the Grimrock series to your list of great indie games.

    4. Re:Not anymore :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are so dead wrong...

      Especially in the last few years (since Kickstarter took off) the entire Indie-thing really has taken off. Faster Than Light, Pillars of Eternity, Divinity: Original Sin, ARK Survivial evolved and all the countless, countless, countless other cool titles on Kickstarter and Steam Early Access are speaking a very loud voice.

      And how can say "You need a big budget" in the era of Minecraft is totally beyond me, how again did Minecraft start out?

      Further, a lot of those 100 and 200 million AAA titles is not for the game, but marketing, a budget of 100 or 150 million for big titles is not uncommon these days. So if you hear "the game cost 200 million to make" you are usually seeing at least 100 million for marketing here.

      You see a grim situation - but in fact it is a future that has never been brighter since the late 80s where a bunch of dudes in a garage could make some nice game.

      You don't need to have multi-million dollar budgets to make good movies either, but statistically...

    5. Re:Not anymore :( by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Fallout 4 at anywhere between $150M and $250M

      Considering that gamers are entirely unimpressed with it, thats really sad.

      I've yet to meet a single person that cares at all about Fallout 4. Its just another New Vegas ... which is to say: Its a let down for all of us still hoping to get that feeling we got from Fallout 3 back.

      I'd love to know where the money went.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    6. Re:Not anymore :( by Eunuchswear · · Score: 2

      Fallout 4 at anywhere between $150M and $250M

      Considering that gamers are entirely unimpressed with it, thats really sad.

      I've yet to meet a single person that cares at all about Fallout 4. Its just another New Vegas ... which is to say: Its a let down for all of us still hoping to get that feeling we got from Fallout 3 back.

      Hi, Fallout 4 fan here. Now you've "met" one.

      It's strange to claim that Fallout 4 is "just another New Vegas" -- the complaint from all the Black Isle/Obsidian fans is that Fallout 4 isn't like NV, Fallout 2 and Fallout 1.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    7. Re:Not anymore :( by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      I just say two words: "candy crush".

    8. Re:Not anymore :( by Harlequin80 · · Score: 2

      Different strokes for different folks. Fallout 3 left me bored, I never could get into it. I just didn't care. NV was worth playing. Fallout 4 kinda falls between the two. I enjoy it while I am playing it but I don't seem to ever feel an incentive to start it up.

    9. Re:Not anymore :( by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      I'd love to know where the money went.

      Coke, blackjack and whores are the usual suspects in these cases.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    10. Re:Not anymore :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps the gamers would have been more impressed by it if Witcher 3 wasn't released just before.
      The big news here is really that someone though Fallout 4 was better.

    11. Re:Not anymore :( by loufoque · · Score: 1

      I think he meant to say that it's just as mediocre as New Vegas.
      This Bethesda title was clearly a miss, they made a game as bad as Obsidian.

      Why it would get a game of the year award makes no sense whatsoever.

    12. Re:Not anymore :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He wasn't talking about Fallout, but the myriad of indie games that took honours at the award.

    13. Re:Not anymore :( by tsotha · · Score: 1

      I loved both Fallout 3 and Fallout NV. Fallout 4? Eh... meh. I'm not really sure why, but it's just not as entertaining to me.

    14. Re:Not anymore :( by Kellamity · · Score: 1

      I'm very confused as the popular opinion is that NV is awesome, and much better than 3. I like them all, personally!

    15. Re: Not anymore :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah Witcher 3 is the best game I've ever played no competition.

    16. Re:Not anymore :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How dare you! That is Social Justice money. Every project need to dedicate part of it's budget to feminists initiatives. You don't want to anger the twitter mob? Do you?

    17. Re:Not anymore :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he actually meant to say that he loves raping children with the sexus mod.

    18. Re:Not anymore :( by mjwx · · Score: 1

      "You don't have to have the multi-million dollar budgets to make great games -- I've seen a huge amount of evidence for that tonight," said Sean Brennan.

      I think that used to be true. In the 80s and 90s perhaps, you could start small.

      You still can.

      Whilst I feel Fallout 4 deserved its award despite not being as good as New Vegas, personally I would have awarded it to Rebel Galaxy as it managed to do far more with the money it had.

      Games like Rebel Galaxy and Planetbase are good examples that you dont need multi-million dollar budgets and huge names to make a great game. Even competing head to head, Cities: Skylines outperformed Sim City 4 with far less of a budget by simply being a better city sim.

      For the most part I ignore the huge, $200 million crapfests that come out of major publishing houses these days. I couldn't care less about the latest Snooze of Duty or whatever crud has Tom Clancy's name on it. Fallout seems to be the exception rather than the rule when it comes to AAA budget games these days.

      I'm by no means a gaming hipster who only places games no-one has ever heard of, I liked FO4 (as well as SCII LOTV) but I find the problem to be the state of the industry. I'd like big budget games to be a little more adventurous, right now they're too dumbed down, too cliched and too bland because Activision et al. are too scared of alienating any part of western society (erm, insulting Russians and Arabs is fine though). However the thing is, if you want to make an interesting story, you need to take risks with it.

      I have the same problem with gameplay, a lot of AAA FPS's have boiled down to "press X to do everything". Again this is due to the publishers not wanting to offend those who have no skill. Having the player actually do something, or shock horror, use their brain seems to be the antithesis of AAA game design. Its one thing to have a smooth, fluid dnyamic when it comes to interfaces and controls, but you cant achieve this by removing just about everything you can do. The last COD I played had pretty much boiled itself down to two options, move and shoot. so you pretty much only needed two buttons. I dont believe that has improved since 2005.

      Finally what stood out with FO:4 for me was no regenerating health. Yes, the other crutch the COD series relies on. You actually had to manage resources, going in guns blazing on 20 hp was a sure fire way to die, sometimes you needed to eat irradiated food to survive or go the long way around and hope you didn't encounter any ghouls. Hell, going in guns blazing as a LV 4 character at the Corvega factory was asking to die. You had to be a little tactical, a little thoughtful in your actions. Hey, but as I said, FO:4 was the exception, not the rule when it comes to AAA games.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    19. Re:Not anymore :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >10 million copies to break even
      >Which is something like the entire install base of people who even own the consoles they're targeting.
      36M PS4s sold
      20M XBONEs sold
      There's hyperbole and there's being completely wrong because of ignorance since it takes few seconds to google the numbers.

    20. Re:Not anymore :( by SharpFang · · Score: 2

      Of course if the management is retarded, the game can't be made popular on a reasonable budget.

      This was always true. Just think of the budget behind Atari 2600's E.T.

      Take Minecraft as a counter-example.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    21. Re:Not anymore :( by SharpFang · · Score: 1

      Or someone paid more.

      These game awards shows exist for the sole purpose of marketing, and huge $$$ change hands under the table.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    22. Re:Not anymore :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt they provide better marketing than having a semi-large youtuber play/endorse the game.
      OTOH those youtubers might not be for sale.

    23. Re:Not anymore :( by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 1

      Methinks both Fallout 3 and NV are great. I like the setting of the capital wasteland better, and I think it has more memorable locations. But there is no question that the plot in F3 is badly written and borderline ludicrous, whereas NV has a good narrative and is way more interesting and gives the player more options in that regard.

      I haven't played F4 yet, as I always wait for bugs to be squashed and all DLC to be released first. The ideal "new" Fallout would be with world design by Bethesda, and plot and writing by Obsidian.

    24. Re:Not anymore :( by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      No it isn't.

      Find anything online on any gaming site that agrees with you.

      Popular opinion is that New Vegas as a shitty sequel that added nothing to Fallout 3 except more brown and green.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    25. Re:Not anymore :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Minecraft was a one man team. Probably sub $1,000,000 development budget up to 2012. Probably a sub $100,000 budget for the first two years. To this day it is packaged as a java jar file.

      The game sold over 70 million copies and was finally bought by Microsoft for over $2 billion.

      You do not need multi-million dollar budgets in this industry. You have never needed them.

    26. Re:Not anymore :( by SharpFang · · Score: 1

      Having a semi-large youtuber play/endorse the game AND winning a game show award gives them better marketing than just having a semi-large youtuber play/endorse the game.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    27. Re:Not anymore :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just say two words: Paid Marketing

    28. Re:Not anymore :( by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      I think that used to be true. In the 80s and 90s perhaps, you could start small.

      The "evidence" we have here is if you started in the 90s and were popular, then you can have the necessary multi-million budget to make successful games now.

      Still true today, actually - a small one or two person shop can make a great game. We call them "indie games" and there are millions of them. Most of them are crap, and really do reflect the fact that it was done by a one or two person shop, but there are a few gems the pop up now and again.

      And heck, mobile development brought back indies, big time

    29. Re:Not anymore :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The indy market is a terrible place. It is plagued with back door deals and cronyism - most award groups are designed to benefit friends rather than people putting real effort into it. Kickstarter itself is the place where money and hope goes to die.

    30. Re:Not anymore :( by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      personally I would have awarded it to Rebel Galaxy as it managed to do far more with the money it had.

      Really? Rebel Galaxy is good, but not THAT good. I'd personally rate it somewhere between a 6.5 and 7.5. It has it's own issues and slightly annoying ways....it's evil ways. You set out....cross that way...doing repetitive missions...to make your pay....and shoot neutron rays...at others evil ways. Though I must admit, I'm hoping they do a sequel with a somewhat bigger budget.

      You actually had to manage resources, going in guns blazing on 20 hp was a sure fire way to die, sometimes you needed to eat irradiated food to survive or go the long way around and hope you didn't encounter any ghouls. Hell, going in guns blazing as a LV 4 character at the Corvega factory was asking to die. You had to be a little tactical, a little thoughtful in your actions.

      Well yes, at least early on. The game IS better balanced than Fallout 3. You know how it was, you reach level 20 in 3 and you're pretty much quick death to anything NOT a Feral Ghoul Reaver or Enclave Hellfire team. But in F4, leveling and equipment is more granular. You're not going to be doing the F4 equivalent of picking up a set of Combat Armor (the best non-powered non-unique armor in the game) from the Talon Company on practically your first Moira mission to that grocery store, and then relying on that armor (and eventually the Reillys Ranger unique version) the rest of the entire game.

    31. Re:Not anymore :( by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Really? Rebel Galaxy is good, but not THAT good.

      I'd say it is THAT good considering it was made over a few months by 2 guys on a budget of a fiver.

      You're right about it's flaws, but the game was still better than most AAA dreck with a hundred times it's budget. COD has been using repetition since 2004, the same game gets released every year.

      Well yes, at least early on. The game IS better balanced than Fallout 3. You know how it was

      I'd have to disagree. If you didn't use VATS and played FO:3 like a normal FPS, you were pretty much sniping everything. Taking out super mutants at level 4-5 was not difficult. FO:NV and 4 were easier because you didn't have your non-VATS accuracy tied to the guns skill.

      Also with FO you didn't stay at the low levels for very long, you got to L2 just by leaving the Vault. I'm usually at L4 before leaving the vicinity of Megaton. However the concept of turning into a one man killing machine armed to the teeth is a concept that dates back to the original FO games (the top down ones). Klamath in FO:2 was hard until you came back an few levels later and wiped out Metzger's gang without breaking a sweat.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  5. Of course it did by axewolf · · Score: 1

    It is the best art for preparing the general population for the step down they are about to take in the new world economy

  6. good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the awarded one wasn't gta v. (awarded? meh)

  7. Wait a second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It wasn't really all that good.

    What did it win against?

    1. Re:Wait a second by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Other, lesser politically-backed up games.
      The BAFTA awards are now much like Eurovision: politically-heavy bullshit. It's no longer about the games themselves but who backs them up and what's in it for various lobby groups.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    2. Re:Wait a second by Kreplock · · Score: 1

      Good thing it wasn't up against FO3.

  8. Should win for special effects by lucm · · Score: 5, Funny

    Stuff disappears from companions inventory, guns become transparent when you crouch, scorpions walk in the sky, raiders taunt you as they patrol from the bottom of the sea, severed limbs spin forever... Special effects are amazing in Fallout 4!

    And to make sure you enjoy them, especially the rotating items on display during loading, the engineers brilliantly injected a random delay of up to 1 minute each time you enter a building or fast travel.

    --
    lucm, indeed.
    1. Re:Should win for special effects by Eunuchswear · · Score: 2

      And to make sure you enjoy them, especially the rotating items on display during loading, the engineers brilliantly injected a random delay of up to 1 minute each time you enter a building or fast travel.

      Well the new hardcore/survival mode partly fixes that -- you can't fast travel.

      But, seriously, get a SSD, makes load times much more bearable.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    2. Re:Should win for special effects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow, sounds a lot like my day/night/morning with my usual hooker i mean call girl i mean BFF!

    3. Re:Should win for special effects by zenlessyank · · Score: 1

      Well, it is Fallout 4 Beta. Just like Windows 10 beta. It's the new way. See, you buy a piece (no pun intended, well, ok unintended pun) of software thinking it is ready to go since it was on a shelf in a box or it was on a web store with a giant BUY ME button next to it, and you thought, cool, I will grab that. Then you go home and find out it is broken.... I hear a fat New York Italian guy from a 'B' movie laughing out loud "Zero's and ones, baby. Zero's and ones"!

    4. Re:Should win for special effects by loufoque · · Score: 1

      Why the hell are you playing on a console?
      You're part of the problem.

    5. Re:Should win for special effects by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 1

      And to make sure you enjoy them, especially the rotating items on display during loading

      You can move and rotate the items on the screen, so that's something to do while you wait for the next section to load :)

    6. Re:Should win for special effects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop pretending it doesn't happen on PC. If anything the sloppy attitude of shipping crap and maybe fixing some of it later was mostly PC domain not so long ago.
      Till PS2 generation console coders had to actually test their shit thoroughly and ship non broken games or else there would be expensive consequences.
      Now compare that to Bethesda, a company which probably didn't ship a single RPG you could actually finish (or play for more than half an hour without crashes) without large pack of patches.

    7. Re:Should win for special effects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Add to that, a lighting solution that looks like it's straight from the 90's.

    8. Re:Should win for special effects by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      scorpions walk in the sky

      You're expecting life to be normal after a nuclear war??

    9. Re:Should win for special effects by chihowa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The same issues happen on a PC.

      Even with an SSD, there is way too much waiting at load screens. My PC has 32 GB of RAM sitting unused by the game as it reloads the areas from disk over and over again. If I enter, exit, then reenter the same building, the areas are reloaded from disk every time. When I'm approaching a building, there's no disk activity at all when the game should be preloading adjacent areas.

      Consoles are to blame, but not in the way you're suggesting.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    10. Re:Should win for special effects by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My PC has 32 GB of RAM sitting unused by the game as it reloads the areas from disk over and over again.

      Absoutely this. I have 32 gigs of RAM. I currently have 22.5 gb available. I could nock that down to 26 easy by closing all of my browser windows and a few other programs.

      My Fallout 4 directory is 25.9 gb. There's zero reason any asset should ever be loaded more than once, and pretty much no reason to ever release anything once it's been loaded.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    11. Re:Should win for special effects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Create a RAM disc, copy the game to it before playing (yes, increases initial load, but now everything else is super-fast).

    12. Re:Should win for special effects by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      My PC has 32 GB of RAM sitting unused by the game as it reloads the areas from disk over and over again. If I enter, exit, then reenter the same building, the areas are reloaded from disk every time.

      Sounds like your OS has a major bug. Free memory should be used as disk cache. There's no reason a user program should be trying to keep stuff in memory, that's the OS's job.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    13. Re:Should win for special effects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google "ENB for Fallout"

      Helps.

    14. Re:Should win for special effects by JohnStock · · Score: 1

      The OS's file system should be caching some of that in RAM automatically. I wonder if Fallout 4's code explicitly forces reads from disk for some strange reason. It could also be because they use huge monolithic asset files that can't be cached .. but even then they are rarely bigger than 4gb each in most games.

    15. Re:Should win for special effects by lucm · · Score: 1

      But, seriously, get a SSD, makes load times much more bearable.

      Can't do that in my Playstation 4 I think.

      Nonetheless, it's a new bug. I played the game for a while, loading was ok. Then there was a patch, and now it's taking forever to load sometimes. I did zero investigation but my immediate suspicion is that they're "calling home" during load and their web server is slow to answer, I see no other obvious reason. Disk isn't spinning, nothing.

      I'm sure someone with a better network setup will eventually catch them if they're doing that.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    16. Re:Should win for special effects by lucm · · Score: 1

      Well, it is Fallout 4 Beta. Just like Windows 10 beta. It's the new way.

      Always been like that with Fallout. New Vegas was particularly buggy on Xbox. But those games are awesome so you put up with it. I'd say that's the biggest difference with Windows 10...

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    17. Re:Should win for special effects by lucm · · Score: 1

      And to make sure you enjoy them, especially the rotating items on display during loading

      You can move and rotate the items on the screen, so that's something to do while you wait for the next section to load :)

      I don't know if it does that all the time, but twice I've moved that thing like crazy out of boredom and the whole game froze. I had to re-kill a friggin deathclaw.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    18. Re:Should win for special effects by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      But, seriously, get a SSD, makes load times much more bearable.

      Can't do that in my Playstation 4 I think.

      You certainly can. First upgrade I made to my PS4 was installing a 500Gb SSD. Instructions are all over the web.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    19. Re:Should win for special effects by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Create a RAM disc, copy the game to it before playing (yes, increases initial load, but now everything else is super-fast).

      I was going to make a comment to this effect, actually; I've seen it suggested for a lot of games.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  9. What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Absolutely nothing. Fallout 4 was a rip-off of its predecessors. It offered less content in parts that were liked in previous releases and offered more content in areas that nobody was interested in. They tried to make Fallout 4 the new Sims. Hell, even the soundtrack was the same as in the previous one!

    1. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Darinbob · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I love Fallout 4, and I've played all the Fallout games. People are still bitter that Bethesda got the license and are holding a grudge.

    2. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What I don't like about the reboot Fallout games is that they took a good RPG and turned it into a twitchfest FPS.

      Fallout 2 is still the best in the entire series.

    3. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Gaygirlie · · Score: 4, Informative

      I have all the previous Fallout-games, including Fallout Tactics, and.. well, I was bored with Fallout 4 already before I was half-way through with the mainline story. The game is surprisingly dumb, things just keep repeating over and over and over and nothing you do really seems to have any effect on the gameworld, like e.g. you go and help a settlement, then 30 minutes later the same settlement has the exact same trouble again, and again, and again, and again... Similarly, you go and kill enemies off one area, go barely 500 meters in some direction and come back and POOF -- new ones have spawned. Also, the enemies were either god damn enormous bulletsponges that could take several nukes in the face or they were made of paper and sugar and died as soon as you looked in their general direction, never being balanced in any way or form. That dogmeat? Oh, geesh, that fucking piece of shit is in your way all the god damn time, not letting you go through doorways or getting out from behind a desk or running on top of a corpse you're trying to loot and so on.

      The game is a boring mess and instead of progressing and improving from previous ones it took several steps back.

    4. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by tsotha · · Score: 1

      Isn't every sequel a rip-off of its predecessors? What an odd thing to say.

    5. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Informative

      Compare to Fallout 3. More to explore (the major point of the game). More songs, and yes a few repeat from Fallout 3). More interesting combat options. Things respawn fast at times, but that happened in FO3 also. And dogmeat is actually useful unlike the one in FO3. Can't think of any way it's not improving on FO3, though the different level/stats/perks is more of a side move than improvement. The things that don't feel so great feel that way in FO3 also. Not finished with the main quest and I'm an embarrassing number of hours into it.

    6. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Urban Dictionary sums it up pretty well:

      Stealing ideas and/or products to create something of lesser value. To take credit for something that is not their own. To slightly alter an existing idea and product for personal benefit. Disregard the origin of the true creation in attempt to make a quick buck and turn a few heads.

      Matches what Fallout 4 is and in contrast to the series' history, rip-off is the exact word I would use, too.

    7. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      No people are just pissed off that it was a shitty game with all of the things that made previous Fallout games great. That includes: Removal of the karma system, streamlined leveling, non-shit writing, did I mention non-shit writing? Mediocre plot, and shit writing. On the otherside the whole base-building thing was pretty great, and so was the weapon mod system that they pulled from FO:NV. But overall it was a mediocre game, and would easily rate a 6/10 game on my scale. FO3 would be a 7/10, where at FO:NV would be a 9/10.

      If one wanted to compare FO3 to FO4, FO3 is the superior game, and even at that the story writing was pretty damned bad.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    8. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Removal of the karma system

      The karma system was shit. "Stealing" from the people who just tried to kill you is bad, mmkay?

      streamlined leveling

      Oh no, they removed the asinine weapon sway that required you to sink all your skill points into guns.

      non-shit writing

      A fair point if you're bringing up FO/FO2 and/or NV, but Bethesda has always had shit writing. FO3 was atrocious.

      Mediocre plot

      Compared to finding yet another GECK and your father?

      FO3 is the superior game

      Fallout 3 was shit. A dumbed-down, completely rehashed plot with shitty game mechanics.

      Points for throwing a 9/10 to NV though; it's the only modern Fallout that truly lives up to the name.

    9. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just to be clear - different != bad. (The internet just doesn't seem to get that for some reason.)

      If you want a game that aligns more with RPG elements play FO2 or FNV. If you want a game with more gunplay and survival elements (in the sense of crafting and building) play FO4. FO3 is in that middle ground where it's a worse combat/survival game than FO4 and a worse RPG than FNV.

    10. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Points for throwing a 9/10 to NV though; it's the only modern Fallout that truly lives up to the name.

      Play it again, Johnny.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    11. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not necessarily. In the 90's it wasn't unheard of that a sequel came with an entirely new engine and were in a different genre.
      What is sold as new games now used to be what one expected form an expansion to a game back then.

      Compare Dune and Dune II, completely different games.
      Or Duke Nukem and Duke Nukem 3D.

      Not that there weren't many sequels that were just more of the same, but it is by no means the case that every sequel is a rep-off of its predecessors.

    12. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      I love Fallout 4, and I've played all the Fallout games. People are still bitter that Bethesda got the license and are holding a grudge.

      I'm only bitter about that because Bethesda can't code their way out of a nutsack. Even their Amiga games had graphics glitches and crash bugs. Now that they are making dramatically more complex games, they are creating dramatically more complex bugs. I'd love to play F4, but I'm not dumb enough to pay Bethesda for an unfinished game any more. Now I will wait for the rest of you to jump on that grenade, and I will wait until I can get the game cheap, reasonably bugfixed... they never fixed all the bugs in New Vegas, why would I assume they would fix all the bugs in F4? shit they couldn't even make fallout shelter without an absolute shitload of bugs and that game is about as simple as it gets any more. Oh yeah, and with all the overpriced DLCs included.

      I would thank the Bethesda fanboys for giving them that money early on so I don't have to, but what you dipshits are actually doing is encouraging them to produce bugfests. STOP PREORDERING FROM BETHESDA. Then MAYBE they will start to do some QA.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not finished with the main quest and I'm an embarrassing number of hours into it.

      Finishing the main quest line might change your opinion. The ending was about the only thing I really didn't like. Essentially you're forced to make a shitty decision when an obvious compromise the game won't let you actually do practically lands at your feet. (It's so bleedingly obvious, too. Dunno if you know spoilers or not, but especially given that the game is all about liberty with the American Revolution being a major theme, somebody should have put in a three fifths compromise!)

    14. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Talderas · · Score: 1

      they never fixed all the bugs in New Vegas, why would I assume they would fix all the bugs in F4?

      I don't know why you would use New Vegas bugfixes as an indicator for FO4. New Vegas was developed by Obsidian Entertainment which was founded by people from the studio responsible for Fallout 2 which was created from people who were part of Fallout. FO3 and FO4 were developed by Bethesda Game Studios which were also responsible for Morrowind, Oblivion, and Skyrim. The only linking factors between New Vegas and Fallout 4 is that they share the same Fallout IP and were both published under Bethesda Softworks.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    15. Re: What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, Bethesda fails at story telling... Oh no, we need someone to go into a room full of radiation and die to prevent a disaster, and its either you or me. Uh, hey guys, remember me the friendly super mutant who is immune to radiation and used this earlier to your benefit, I could go instead of either of you and wouldn't die and we could all be happy. No, no good, that would remove the telling ethical choice that we are going through ... someone must die.

    16. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fallout 4 is a sequel not a ripoff.

      Judged on it's on merits it's a very excellent game. It's a new gameplay experience in the Fallout setting. The settlement mechanics tie in interestingly with the scavenging and crafting mechanics, and the Minutemen radient quests rather imersively capture what taking respnsiblitlyt for rebuilding civilization in a post apocalyptic wasteland would be like (an all consuming grind to keep it from falling apart as the same problems crop up again and again).

      Content wise they also managed to put a pretty good amount of random set piece locations with their own stuff going on. That helps make it feel like a living world instead of a theme park.

      Where it is weak is the writing of the "main plot" which frankly appears to be a vestigial organ included more out of an expectation that one would exist (ignoring it seems to have minimal negative impact on gameplay IMO), and the underdeveloped faction system. Implementing raiders as a number of separate minor factions similar to settlements or the Atom Cats would have allowed more of a roleplaying experience.

      They probably could have done some interesting things with the dialog system as well if they'd copped a more mature version of the Mass Effect wheel than the one they used. In particular I'm thinking of the "interrupt" actions for Paragon and Runigade. Tie that mechanic into the SPECIAL system and you've got something with a lot of potential.

    17. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by chihowa · · Score: 1

      The karma system was shit. "Stealing" from the people who just tried to kill you is bad, mmkay?

      That part is still broken in FO4, too. Wiping out an entire settlement is ok and the companion will even help out, but "Codsworth didn't like that" when you "steal" the stuff they left behind.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    18. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The only linking factors between New Vegas and Fallout 4 is that they share the same Fallout IP and were both published under Bethesda Softworks.

      The publisher matters because they decide whether/when to ship.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    19. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I think it's ironic because some of the most bitter haters of Bethesda love Obsidian to death, proclaiming Fallout 3 the worst game of all time and Fallout New Vegas as the best.

      As for bugginess, Fallout 4 seems pretty good overall. People with some high end graphics setups seem to have troubles but for my system which doesn't even meet the minimum specs is getting good performance and have never had a lockup or hang or a broken quest. Fallout 1 on the other hand, which I love, is one of the buggiest games I have (not as bad as Daggerfall, from Bethesda).

      Basically if you don't want a really stupid shooter on rails and want a open world sandbox RPG with lots of exploration and no wall that says "don't go here", no cut scenes that force you down a certain path, then the only company doing this sort of thing is Bethesda. Maybe it's not the popular style but Skyrim and Fallout 3 made huge amounts of money so there's still interest in that sort of play style.

    20. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Bethesda is not stereotyped by shipping too soon. They're sort of the opposite in many ways.

    21. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Karma system was silly. The entire world instantly knowing that you stole a sweet roll (suweeeet rooolll!). Never made any sense. Max out karma very quickly, shoot up an entire village and karma is only at neutral.

      The plot is very good, better than Fallout 3, better than Fallout New Vegas (which had zero surprises). But remember, this is an open world sandbox, it is NOT a stupid plot on rails like 99% of the games out there. The main plot is a very minor part of the game. You can go one hundred hours between one main plot quest and the next if you want to. People that focus on the main quest end up saying "that was dumb, the whole game was only 2 hours long!"

      Base building seems mediocre to me. It's ok, but doesn't grab my interest.

      The weapon mod system is not borrowed from FO:NV, and I hated the mod system there (5/10). Too many guns is boring, this is not a shooter game.

      Better world landscape. Better treatment of city areas (DC had big open streets, Boston feels smaller and cramped with more unexpected things to discover). More interesting companions (granted no long and easily breakable companion quests like FO:NV had, but light years ahead of Skyrim or Fallout 3). Not a big fan of the perk system but I'm also not creating overpowered characters easily which was a flaw in earlier Fallouts.

    22. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      Maybe I was just lucky, but I played through the entire story without any major bugs. A few things could have been polished to be easier to work with (looking at you settlement building), but it wasn't anything that prevented me from playing.

    23. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Fallout 4 is much less buggy than Fallout 3 or NV, which was an Obsidian game, not Bethesda. Easily the most "non-troublesome experience" from Bethesda game I've played other than Oblivion.

      I've only pre-ordered ONE Bethesda game, that being ESO, which is Zenimax Online studios and not Bethesda Softworks. And THAT was for the PS4, when it had been out on the PC for a while and thusly was more likely to have issues worked out.

      .

    24. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Tuidjy · · Score: 3, Informative

      I have played every PC Fallout game when it came out. I have finished and enjoyed every single one of them until Fallout 4. Fallout was a wonderful surprise, Fallout 2 was more of a great thing, Fallout Tactics was a interesting diversion that scratched my Jagged Alliance itch reasonably well, Fallout 3 was a mediocre transition to a new engine which grew, with the DLCs to a enjoyable game, and New Vegas was once again, pretty damn great.

      I have not finished Fallout 4, I have no interest in doing so, and about every single thing about it annoyed me. By the way, I'm an MIT student, and I loved Boston (It helped that I went there from a colder climate)

      That Fallout 4 can receive a game of the year award in a year that saw The Witcher 3 and Life is Strange come out? To me this simply underlines the utter irrelevance of the reviewers who awarded it.

      --
      No good deed goes unpunished...
    25. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, no. It's a watered-down disappointing snoozefest just like Skyrim. It was a huge bummer and it's shit.

    26. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Bethesda is not stereotyped by shipping too soon. They're sort of the opposite in many ways.

      Whether the games are bugfests because they include everything or because they don't take their time, either way that's the publisher's call.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    27. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I have not seen Bethesda's more recent games as bugfests. The games are playable all the way through before even the first (mandatory) patch.

    28. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I have not seen Bethesda's more recent games as bugfests. The games are playable all the way through before even the first (mandatory) patch.

      I haven't even played F4 yet I know there are a shit-ton of major bugs yet unpatched. That it is possible to complete the story is not really the bar, for me.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    29. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The lack of a conversation tree was a big step backwards! Surely you noticed that?

    30. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by lucm · · Score: 1

      I love Fallout 4, and I've played all the Fallout games.

      Same here.

      I was a big fan of Oblivion and hated Skyrim, found it tedious, ruined the Elders Scrolls franchise for me. When I heard there would be a Fallout 4 I was afraid they would do the same kind of "reengineering" but I was immensely relieved to see that they kept the thing very close to the Fallout spirit.

      There are a few annoying things (like those redundant settlement missions) but the improvements like point-and-loot or the possibility to setup a gun turret to protect my stash are terrific.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    31. Re:What does Fallout 4 have to do with GotY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Odd, i cannot get into NV. I have tried like 4 times, and each time I just get a little bit in and drop it. THe game bores me. FO3 I have beaten multiple playthroughs, and FO4 I have played a fair bit but havent really advanced the plot all that much.

      I keep hearing NV is so good. I just cant figure out why

  10. Fuck You, Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's PAC MAN all the way baby! HAHAHahahha

    dorito in my bunghole
    another satisfied customer
    nuclear testing area
    watch out for the scorpions
    buried treasure
    1 of my kidneys
    star whackers
    star wackers
    the damn tour
    sgt slaughter
    dead cobra commander
    destro loved to give head

    1. Re: Fuck You, Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want to laugh when I see posts like this, but then it occurs to me that the poster more than likely has schizophrenia. :(

  11. Fallout 5: Dinosaur Hunter + Lizard Breath by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't fuckin wait! My dream will come true! I love yooooooooouuu!

    Welcome to Fallout5, where your weapons are sticks and stones, the monsters ranging from Dinosaurs to hissing lizard creatures living in caves and traveling through portals. This game is rated XXX due to sexual POV with dinosaurs, insects, holes in the ground, and other cave women!

    Included in the VIP Box Set is a real tube of lizard lube, a TRex Fleshlight, a pamphlet on how to shave your balls and a plastic celeb of your choice plastic head with Fleshlight technology mouth, ears, and even eyes!

    1. Re:Fallout 5: Dinosaur Hunter + Lizard Breath by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      There's a mod for that.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
  12. Witcher 3 is a far better game by millertym · · Score: 0

    At least if it's story and characters that matter. Fallout 4 is great as an open world game, and may indeed hold more playable hours in it than Witcher 3... but the depth of the RPG experience in Witcher 3 is hands down superior.

    1. Re:Witcher 3 is a far better game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1+
      Agreed. After playing the witcher, fallout really seems to be a bit lacking.

  13. Seriously? by RogueyWon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm guessing not too many people on their judging panel actually play all that many games. I could have imagined Fallout 4 being Game of the Year material... if it had been released in 2010 or so. As it is, I found it distinctly underwhelming, and I don't seem to be even close to alone in that.

    Leave aside for a moment the bugs and technical issues (serious though they are). The game itself just feels dated and not particularly interesting. After a reasonably effective opening sequence (possibly all the judges played?) the writing is generally quite stiff and sterile. There are few NPCs who display any signs of actual character. Ironically, one of the very rare exceptions is a robot.

    The main plot is a by the numbers affair whose "big twist" is easily predicted within an hour or two of starting out. With one or two exceptions, the sidequests and environmental storytelling are flat. The combat is poor (immersion-breaking movements speeds and bullet-sponge enemies), the stats system is nothing to write home about and all of the best bits of the game were basically present in Fallout 3 and New Vegas.

    By almost any measure, there have been better games released in the last 12 months. The Witcher 3, while not without occasional technical issues (albeit much less severe than Fallout 4's) was jaw-dropping. The writing, which I would expect BAFTA to have a particular focus on, was superb. Everybody talks (quite justifiably) about the Bloody Baron questline, which remains a superb example of moral nuance in games, but that was just one of many plot-threads written with both intelligence and humanity. The world they created also did a great job of looking and feeling like a low-tech fantasy world, right down to a prevailing moral compass that is a long way from the early 21st century.

    I'm not sure what their eligibility window was (so its release may have been slightly too early), but Bloodborne would also have been a strong contender. It does the "environmental storytelling" techniques developed in the Souls series and takes them close to perfection, building an incredibly rich seem of lore with only the broadest of brush-strokes (and doing the most successful evocation of the spirit of H. P. Lovecraft in a game that I've ever seen). It's also much, much better than Fallout 4 in gameplay terms, being deeper, more fluid and more satisfying.

    Hell, even Metal Gear Solid 5, glorious trainwreck that it was, must surely rank above Bethesda's clunking bug-fest. Sure, the ending is clearly unfinished and it occasionally dips into the depths of Kojima-stupidity, but it's a hell of journey along the way (and, unlike the other games I've mentioned, pretty much perfect from a quality assurance and technical performance point of view).

    God almighty... Fallout 4? Seriously?

    1. Re:Seriously? by Nemyst · · Score: 1

      Just look at last year's GOTY to understand where they're coming from. Destiny wasn't a bad game, but it was distinctly underwhelming, falling well short of its promises, with a poor storyline and many lacking elements. There were plenty of much better games released that year that far outshone it. Their criteria seem to be more about "Who's spent the most money" (or perhaps "Who gave us the most money"?) rather than whether the game is good or not.

    2. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      by every measure people actually care about. ie... money.

      fallout 4 beat the shit out of every game you mentioned.

    3. Re:Seriously? by nine-times · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd like to suggest that it's more a matter of taste than you're implying. For example:

      The Witcher 3, while not without occasional technical issues (albeit much less severe than Fallout 4's) was jaw-dropping.

      I played a bit of it. Found it boring. Didn't want to continue. "Oh, look at me, I'm Mr. Toughguy-ponytail-douchebag. I have a gruff voice and a bad attitude, and I show sex scenes, so that 13 year-old boys think I'm the coolest guy ever!" Combat was boring hack-and-slash. I don't want to make potions. I don't want to worry about repairing weapons or whatever. I don't want to play card games in my RPGs.

      I didn't play Bloodborne, but I didn't care for Dark Souls. Maybe it's just because I don't have the time or interest to "get good" at games, but it just felt like a repetitive grindy game where I had no idea who I was, where I was, what I was trying to do, or why I should care about any of it. I bought it, played for several hours, and promptly forgot about it.

      I guess my point is, there's a consensus among a lot of people talking on websites that Fallout sucks, and Witcher 3 and Dark Souls are the best games ever. I'll probably get modded down for suggesting otherwise. When share the opinion that's popular on the Internet, it's easy to think that you're just unquestionably correct. However, it's possible that not everyone agrees with you.

    4. Re:Seriously? by AndIWonderIfIWonder · · Score: 1
      You can see the jury for all the awards on page 34 of the awards brochure. https://issuu.com/bafta/docs/b...

      Bloodbourne won the game design award but wasn't nominated for best game.

    5. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Filthy casual spotted.

    6. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      git gud casul

    7. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course Bloodborne has a different issue: it's very hardcore, and accessibility for this game is almost nonexistent. It's hard for a gamer to appreciate all the Lovecraftian elements (I take people's words for it) if you can't make it past the first combat encounter with that damned werewolf. Yeah, call me a carebear hand-holder but what I am is a guy who's interested in something allegedly with Lovecraftian elements, supposedly, but not a game which thrives on a sense of rigorous punishment, repetition and insane loading screens all on the pretense that there's anything actually rewarding or fulfilling about the process. But I grant that it is a good game, is repetition and rigorous punishment for failure somehow do feel rewarding to you.

    8. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the problem is that CD Project Red is Polish studio, and anti-Polish rhetoric is recently fashionable in England

  14. Fallout in name only by Stormwatch · · Score: 1, Insightful

    How can it be Fallout when it's not top-down and turn-based? Everyone knows Wasteland 2 is the true modern Fallout.

  15. MOD PARENT UP by Katatsumuri · · Score: 1

    Where are the mod points when you need them?