You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
92

[–] PrivateJoker 0 points 92 points (+92|-0) ago 

Meh, FO3 and NV weren't that great to look at on last gen consoles yet i still put in 100s of hours with each of them. I'm sure this one will be just as good, if not better.

0
36

[–] Bkow 0 points 36 points (+36|-0) ago 

Me too. I don't play Fallout for the latest and greatest graphics. I play for the story and the side stories and the incredible locations and characters.

0
28

[–] munk_e_man 0 points 28 points (+28|-0) ago 

Not to mention the freedom. Anytime a game offers this huge amount of customization and sandboxing, it comes at the expense of a bit of graphics. Modders will always be there for power PC gamers who have rigs able to handle intense graphics, but as someone with a pretty mediocre laptop I'm more excited that the game will actually be able to run on my computer.

0
20

[–] austenite12 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago 

My only beef with Bethesda is their character animations. Ever since Morrowind they've stuck out to me.

0
1

[–] escape 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Plus if you really want those graphics, use mods! Get the best of all worlds!

0
0

[–] BRockShooter 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Same here. I usually don't play games for their graphics. I play games for thier gameplay, openness, replayablity and both the development and mod community behind them.

Look at Minecraft. The game has TERRIBLE graphics, but yet remains the most downloaded game on the planet and has one of the largest player bases and mod communities around.

That proves it, right there, that graphics don't mean squat if the game doesn't have the gameplay that people are looking for.

0
11

[–] ARCHA1C 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

But they were more graphically-competent relative to other titles of the time, whereas FO4 is clearly lagging behind in visuals.

The visuals in FO3 certainly aided to the appeal. I enjoyed the great draw distances and details. The discovery of new areas and visually-interesting sights added to the playability of the game.

I wouldn't simply dismiss the dated graphics of FO4. Having sub-par visuals in a AAA title could hinder it's long-term appeal.

1
23

[–] Womb_Raider 1 points 23 points (+24|-1) ago 

Yes, but on PC, mods will come with time and textures will be replaced. I'm not worried.

0
16

[–] Madi 0 points 16 points (+16|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Ehh, maybe it's just because I play a lot of older games, but I think FO4 looks pretty good visually

0
1

[–] YourDumbWhat 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

They're not THAT bad. It certainly won't ruin it's appeal long-term: at worst, it looks like something that could have potentially came out a few years earlier in the fantasy land of unlimited game budgets.

As for FO3, I don't think it was any less behind graphically than FO4 will be. You know what else came out in October 2008? Dead Space. Anyhow, let's look at this from a Bethesda release stand-point. They make a new engine for Oblivion, then use the same engine (with some polish) for Fallout 3. They make a new engine for Skyrim, then use the same engine (with some polish) for Fallout 4.

0
1

[–] BRockShooter 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

If all you care about is graphics, why even bother playing games? Go watch a AAA movie instead where you can gawk at all the overly saturated pretty visuals until your eyes fall out.

0
1

[–] the-code-always-wins 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I just hope they maintain the interesting plot of FNV. Storywise, Skyrim was a big downgrade.

0
1

[–] Rellik88 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Maybe because I remember NES. I thought the graphics were quite good.