I posted this elsewhere, but considering it didn't completely follow the thread at hand, and I fear it will just be svcked into the void. I figured out why I had a love hate relationship with F4 much in the way I did with Skyrim. Let's get some thoughts on the matter so I don't spam a thread where the context of this post doesn't make quite as much sense as it does here because I made it the topic, ha.

Hundreds of millions of dollars disagrees with you.

I wanted to reply there, but then changed my mind as to not pollute the thread with not-so-on-topic posts, so nice thing you made your own thread

I think Bethesda does know its audience, and it wants to make it bigger while sacrificing the more demanding minority (however large it is, it's still a minority). They focus on "quantity over quality", "breadth of an ocean, depth of a puddle", or whatever you want to call it, because that's what seems to attract the biggest audience. Fling BGS's open world exploration expertise and a great well known universe into it, and you have a very successful title.

That's great for it. But individuals also can disagree with money. It's a bit like saying,

"Well I don't eat donuts and I don't like donuts" and someone goes

"Well other people buy donuts and the economy says donuts are good"

That's great for those other people and that's great for the economy. But not every individual in that million is going to like donuts. I did not hate F4, actually I am torn between liking it and then being pulled out of it because of a few elements that pull me out of the game.

The fact that Fallout 4 is going to be Bethesda's best-selling game ever is proof enough for me that they know exactly who their audience is.

You can always "dig the hole a bit deeper" so to speak. They can always put in more content. Plus you know the community is going to mod things into the game that the devs have overlooked either due to time or money constraints. FO:4 will be a different animal in 6 months then it is now, and it'll be even more so years down the line. What they have done right is lay a good foundation. This is a great game. I am doing something with a Bethesda game that honesty I havent done in years with a game. Finished it and started over with a new character to do different things. I havent done that with Fallout 2, or 3, or New Vegas....I have gone back and replayed those games, but usually I'll wait for a dry spell in gaming and then go back to my old favorites. Kinda like reading a book that you love over again.

Fallout 4 did enough things right that I'm going for a second play through right off the bat.

But that's not where I am coming from. I am not speaking from the aspect of profit. But the aspect of Good Storytelling. That's exactly what my post was about.

As in I can understand from some people's perspectives of why they cannot bond with the main protagonist in this case. And that from a storytelling perspective Bethseda doesn't know their audience, it's a giant cluster[censored] storytelling wise.

That may be, but the design choices they made show which direction it's heading quite clearly. I mean, I replayed Mad Max as well, it's a fun game for what it is, but I know you need a microscope to find any depth in that

Here's the thing you've got three different players all playing F4.

You have the young ones, I am talking adolescents, young advlts [12-24]. This may be, considering their generation of games, one of the best told stories because of their generation of gaming.

You have the mid twenties, [25-29], different motivations in life, who are passing this generation of gaming or grew in a different one

Than you have the older generation anywhere between 35+

I finally get it.

For the young ones this small little quip is easy for them to bond through the family because to them this is storytelling, this is the way they are growing up when it comes to video games and the way stories ar etold

For the older generation as I said are probably already married, they can take the first five minutes of this game and easily place their own children into the game or their own spouse into the game and get a connection

For us that our life goals and changes in our lives, of the few they are and I am not saying everyone around here don't get me wrong, cannot connect to this story because they aren't our life motivations right now, or we were exposed to other types of storytelling because you have two different 20 something generations.

The ones that grew up with this kind of storytelling in games, and the ones that grew up with a different storytelling style in video games.

I am not saying that this is wrong. I am just saying Bethseda is failing to hit all the markets. I now understood why I couldn't connect to the main storyline. Because I don't have any of the motivations of the main character. Most people who play games, want to find something identifiable in themselves in the character.

Sales doesn't need to be a reflection of a good game tho. Good marketing, building the hype, very much so helps in that manner. Diablo3 also sold good, because of its predecessor, but in the end, turned out to be not so good, all subjective of course, and then again, Diablo3 only have a small percentage playing it nowadays, compared to the number who bought it.

On-topic;

While I'm married, I do not have any children. And even then, I forced myself to let go of the forced background. Every quest that involves me as the concerning father, primarily the main quest, I just quickly skips through because I'm simply not interested in it. Same goes with all the settler thing. I've build exactly only what is needed in one quest for a faction, which is not the minutemen

I am not interested in the settler thing for the same reasons, because I really don't care for providing for those people, I have zero incentive to do so. They did well enough when I wasn't around, they will do well enough with me around doing nothing for them.

Also, it seems very far stretched that I would go looking for my son after 200 years have passed, and without any prior knowledge to the Institute. For all I know, reason dictates that my son is dead, and from that moment, the story should be free. They should let us discover, that there would be a reason to go look.

Do Bethesda know their audience. Hmm, I think so. I also think, they know they could get more sales, catering to a wider demographic. Us "old" ones who have played all the previous titles, are well into our late 20's and beyond (myself am 43) So it makes sense, trying to hook into a younger audience. Is it worth it? Well, from a financial perspective, yes it is. From a game perspective, I feel the price is high regarding integrity to the series as a whole. I think, we just have to accept, that the Fallout universe is entering a new time-period and evolving. For some, it is for the worse, for others, for the better. So *shrug* learn to live with it, or let go.

All of the above, doesn't mean we shouldn't "fight" for a better game experience, or try keep it true to the series, but ultimately, it is not up to us, but Bethesda. I can speak for myself tho, and say, that if there will ever be a Fallout 5, I won't be pre-ordering, and I will likely not buy the DLC's for FO4 if it follows the same lines as the main-game. For that, is to shallow for me, when talking RPG's.

I ultimately agree with this sentiment. I am not going to buy the next Elder Scrolls games after the butcher that was Skyrim.

And after being spoiled by Obsidian with FNV, I am not going to buy any other Fallout game that has Bethseda stickered on it. Don't get me wrong, I like F4 a lot more than Skyrim, at least it still has interesting bits. But this doesn't make me excited for the new generation of gaming.

I want in depth, interesting storytelling. I want a main story that is compelling and full of richness.

As I keep advocating earlier, was I think the main quest would have been cooler if they took that idea from F3 about the Vault that created stimulated life for their Vault members and implemented fake ideas while they slept and everything you knew was actually a stimulated lie, would have been way more interesting.

And I am sure you could tie the Institute to it somehow. i don't know, but I just don't see the need for the baby and the wife. Take them out of the story.

Beside the fact that it's F3, but reverse. Instead of a son looking for a father. A father looking for a son, but the main difference is that the Lone Survivor didn't have a bajillion dialogues about his dad.

Is it only that? Are you sure?

Is the main storyline as compelling and rich as Witcher's or Mass Effects'? These are purely story-driven games. Bethesda tried to immitate them in my eyes and ended up falling short in both the story driven aspect and the sandbox freedom rp aspect it was so good at.

It is as simple as that, really.

What's more disappointing is that I know Bethseda has it in them. Personally I like both Morrowind and Oblivion and even F3 showed me they can write quality driven games. I am more disappointed in the fact that Bethseda is opting for Money over Quality.

I mean Half Life and Witcher are still going to get money and they settled over Quality over Money. So, why won't Bethseda follow in Valve's footsteps or Obsidian.

And instead following down the same dank hole as Dragon Age Inquisition, and Mass Effect. [sorry I like ME1 and ME3, but not so much 2, but it never had been my favorite RPG series. Mark Meer sounds so stiff and flatline]

They have a broad audience.

I wish that theyd make the game focus more on dialogue and choices and consequences and take things a little slower and less actiony, but then they'd probably alienate the other elements of their market. At the moment they are probably keeping everyone just happy enough. But its a delicate balance. If you try and please everyone, you may end up pleasing no-one.

Incidentally, I'd actually argue that FO4 is better written and better voiced than Morrowind, Oblivion and Fallout 3. It just doesn't do many meaningful options.

The direction Bethesda took ended up scrapping most of the things I liked about Fallout 3 and NV and instead focused more on combat, crafting, etc...which to me are things that are nice to have, extras but not the reason I play a game. Though I do like that they took a page from Obsidian's book and made more interesting companions. If they'd instead moved more towards a greater number of interesting side quests, factions with interesting storylines (which I missed from Skyrim), skills and perks that enable you to solve quests in varying ways as well as adding extra dialogue, roleplaying and dialogue options in general, the ability to create a more varied character rather than the semi-set one that we got, etc...then I wouldn't have a complaint. Even if things like graphics or combat got worse, I could overlook it in favor of the improvement (or even continuation) of the things I like. I think we're all like that. We have a certain threshold of like or dislike and if a game crosses it in one direction or another then we will ignore its' flaws if we like it or good attributes if we don't.

I think most of us with criticisms are either venting their disappointment or are hoping their critiques will be heard and the next game will be more to their liking. Personally I've been thinking the last few years that the gaming industry isn't really creating anything that appeals to my tastes anymore. The only game I've really loved in the past several years was The Witcher 3, the next most recent one was Star Wars: The Old Republic which was released in 2011. While I don't hate Fallout 4, and see that it has many good points, it's not a game I can be passionate about or one that I can play over and over to try different things as far as choices and roleplaying (because nearly everything is the same). I realize I have very specific and very niche tastes that aren't profitable to cater to but it's still depressing.

Ha, yeah Nefla I know what you mean. My conflict is that I love the first person and exploration of Bethesda games, but increasingly I'm having to look for my choice and consequences kicks elsewhere. Those games do exist, now more than ever, but you need to look outside of AAA games for it at the moment at least.

Can I recommend Shadowrun: Dragonfall, Pillars of Eternity (though I didn't like it myself), Divinity Original Sin & Wasteland 2 (not played either of these ...yet).

Aww, really? What about Wasteland 2, Pillars of Eternity, Age of Decadence, Divinity: Original Sin - to name just the big small ones - none of those are interesting for you?

Edit: ah! Ninja'd. Then I'll add Sunless Sea, Undertale, Her Story, Grim Fandango remaster, This War of Mine

I shall not lose!

Let me tell you this - did you buy it? Most people that share our views HAVE bought the game. Trust me on this, if people like us boycotted it, it would become profitable to them to cater to our tastes.

On another note, it's until an indie company caters to our "niche tastes" (again) and succeeds and these niche tastes start becoming mainstream (again).

IMO it's not even not catering to niche tastes. It is a simple good ol' drop in quality.

There is choice and consequence in the game. My character now has a condition that permanently affects his health because of a choice he made. I could give out other examples regarding main factions and companions but they'd be huge spoilers.

You mean the crushing consequence of permanent -10 HP for not making the dumb choice?

Yep likewise. I certainly never said there was no choice and consequence - but its relatively limited, even compared to something like Fallout 3.

You are a little confused. The stated premise of your thread is that Bethesda does not know their audience. When a massive amount of people buy a product then, by definition, that company does know their audience.

If you wanted to start a thread that discussed good storytelling then you should have said so in your title and opening post and left any spurious claim that Bethesda does not "know their audience" out of it completely.

I see. Many have been screaming that it doesn't exist in the game which is why I responded. How exactly is it limited? Could you give an example?

I think they've done a very good job of large scale choices in the game. That side is much better than I expected from them.

Personally I wouldn't have minded more smaller choices and ways of playing individual quests. There are some that you can do differently of course.

I'm generally happy with it. But maybe my expectations weren't as high as some.

Its hard to give an example of something existing less than it has before.

I guess other than occasional Charisma checks (generally people are recommending this as a dump stat, which is telling), I have not run into any skillchecks in the game - have you?.

When I think of how many quests I have completed that I have been able to affect the outcome, they seem pretty limited. In can think of only a handful so far. Obviously the radiant quests wont have any options, and thats fine.