Building Hurts and Helps Fallout 4 [William Strife]
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2024
- Being able to build structures and settlements in Fallout 4 is a double edged sword.
Join my streams! / @willstrifelive
Support me on Patreon:
www.strife.solu...
Twitch - / williamstrife
Stream VODs - / @willstrifelive
Twitter - / wstrife
BlueSky - bsky.app/profi...
Does anyone else put William’s very first Minecraft tutorial series playlist on when trying to fall asleep? Or during a rainy day inside to get more cozy? Same
The only use settlement building has for me, is setting up my base. The CAMP feature in 76 is the ideal format. I set up shop and make it my lil home. Other than that, I want to experience an actual RPG.
Agreed. Let us have a base where we can have all our stuff and maybe have our followers hang out when they aren't traveling with us.
Sim Settlement 2 Made Settlements What They Should Be.
I would say they should refine it then get rid of it. Streamline powering settlements and clearing out junk in settlements
Also welcome back Strife. Love your works.
settlement building leaves so much to be desired that it could be its own game entirely. if it has to be fallout, let it be a spin-off: build your own post-apocalyptic civilization and such. but for a main game, it really isn't needed. new vegas provided the template for an excellent 3d-fps Fallout Game. make it bigger and better, but keep the scope reigned in to making an RPG
There's two specific aspects of settlements that genuinely have gotten me to uninstall the game twice: The first one is that, in simple terms, it sucks me right out of the experience to be forced to plant crops, build beds and huts, and even assign people to specific jobs when I am also left to assume the people I'm doing all this for are able to do all this themselves.
The second one is even more rage-inducing, and it is that settlements are not actually safehouses. It's not just that they can get attacked, which I understand and even welcome; one of the most engaging aspects of settlement-building is clearing out Vault 88 by building a bunch of turrets and creating kill-zones for the different monsters you encounter to throw themselves into. No, the issue is that there is no actual safe _storage_ in the settlements; container or workshop, if you leave a weapon, bullet, or piece of armor around, both NPCs and enemies can walk up, take it, and use it.
It just feels extremely unsatisfying that, in a setting where I am constantly told everyone is starving, unsafe, cold, and looking for safe haven, people might show up to a settlement _I've_ made safe and inhabitable on my own, force _me_ to build them beds and pick a job for them, then grab _my_ specialized or unique weapons and use up all my ammo. Alien power cells, mini-nukes, fusion cores, power armor parts, the newly added piggybank grenades, all finite resources those greedy freaks gobble up. If a supply runner happens to be the one to take the weapon, you may straight up not be able to find it. It feels less like a power fantasy and more like I'm the whipping boy for a commune of spoiled man-children.
As for the other point, about completion of design... Not to be the guy who always brings New Vegas into things, but New Vegas is an unfinished game, we all know this. However, it definitely does feel like the folks at Obsidian, knowing they would only have time to do like 70% of the game, made 70% of their _game,_ while Bethesda made 70% of _each part_ of their game. Every part of 4 feels like it got started, good ideas were put in, and then they cut their losses. The world map, incredibly well-populated with both interesting little spaces and just _stuff_ to find at first, becomes more and more sparse the further you stray from the main quest's path; the weapon crafting system seems incredibly in-depth at first, until 20 hours in you realize you now have Best Guns and you don't really need to use a workbench again beyond tinkering with interesting legendaries; the dialogue system; the main quest; the enemy population is really well made, seemingly both varied in number and specific in tactics, but there's surprisingly little variation later on.
god that was long. TLDR building system bad, would be better if there was an automated option and a way to stop the goblins from snorting my bullets
The only part of building system that they need to keep is being able to decorate your player home.
The camp system in fallout 76 is excellent alternative in my opinion, it doesn't bother with helping NPC settlements and their endless fetch quests and you can move it freely anywhere on the map...
YEP camp is better than settlement one iv made a camp i dont nead to touch it any more
I love FO4's settlement building system...With mods that expand the build limit/settlement boundaries, let you place things anywhere you want, and let you scrap everything. I think it just needs to be fleshed out more and it could be great.
All I need is a few plots to make a personal home for myself. Keep that and have the usual unlockable homes in settlements that you can also plop stuff down for and I'm golden. The ability to take a building and make it into a base has been ingrained in me since I killed Fast Eddie and took his house in Morrowind and realizing I could do that anywhere, so I do have a pull for a nice player home.
I like the general idea of settlements, though in a future game has them they should be drastically scaled back from the 30 vanilla to at most maybe 10. But with tangle world effects. For example Oberland station is right next to Beantown brewery. Why not instead let is take over and decorate the brewery, with the raiders (or more apropriatly Triggermen) using the nearby people as slave labor to grow corn for moonshine. We take over and can decide wheter to keep it as a distillery, maybe chaning products based on crops bought/planted. Or turn into a sort of water purifing station, with either impacting what we see vendors carrying and at what price. Settlement fans such as myself can decor the building as we see fit, and add more settlers as workers, keeping happy to maximize production. Those who don't like can either have a smaller stream of caps, or just buy the parts needed to get the efficency bonus. And keep this sort of train of thought with other settlements while allowing 1 such as Sanctuary or Spectacle island to basically just serve as a sandbox for the mega builders
Fallout 4's survival mode and Sim's Settlements make settlement building "fun" and meaningful, in Fallout 76 camp builders make up a dedicated portion of players and reason to play
My feeling on this, is that now that things are set up, what would make it noticably better is if building was only used for both player homes (decorating) and 1 single settlement per playthrough. Say in Fo4 you and the other Vault dwellers survived and you had to pick a place to settle, and then build around that. So now the settlement is an RPG character alongside your actual RPG character. Give the different locations different benefits, maybe one is an old factory that can be used to make ammo and bullets, one is a farm or has good water access, maybe one is a military sciene place. Then you balance around just the one, alongside the rest of the game being focused on the things we all want in Fallout. I do think it is possible to have both, especially now that the systems are developed.
Or you know do what Sim Settlements did. (I haven't gotten to play that yet so I don't know all the details on it but I am looking forward to a SS2 playthrough soon)
Settlement building is worth keeping (lukewarm take at best) but what the system needs is more impact on the crappy civ we are improving. It aught be a whole way to play; you can be the new Tandy, Brygo, or Ceaser? Right now it's just silly and just showing off to npcs who don't notice.
I mean, I just want it to be automated and more logical.
Basebuilding works in Fallout 4 because of the minutemen. But for future games, yeah, they should scrap basebuilding.
I built a ton during my first playthrough, but I probably never will again. The system is just too restrictive to be truly satisfying. They should just drop like 90% of the system for the next game. Skyrim's hearthfire houses with more options would be perfect.
I just want them to make Fallout, because 4 isn't Fallout, it's a looter shooter with basebuilding and should have been advertised as such.
I just want them to make Fallout, because NV isn't Fallout it's a first person action shooter and should have been advertised as such
@@victhefoxygamer_6180 New Vegas probably one of the last full fledged RPG's before genre became a joke and was butchered by devs, today we now get action adventure games masquerading as RPG's by gaming companies.
@@Ulliam1That's a very close minded view of role playing games that you have there. Especially with the comeback of CRPGs.
I remember old Fallout fans were complaining about Fallout 3 being ruined because it was in 1st person but after New Vegas hit, they soon shut up about first person style.
However, you are wrong to say that there are no RPG's. I can tell that you don't play many RPGs if you're saying New Vegas was the last one lol.
Wasteland franchise was revived after Brian Fargo acquired the rights. Did you know Fallout was made because they were originally unable to make a sequel to Wasteland 1?
Wasteland 2 released in 2014 but they would release Directors Cut in 2015. It came out after New Vegas, already proving you wrong that RPGs in the old style haven't ended. It's more closer to Fallout 1 and 2 in terms of gameplay than Fallout 3 or New Vegas.
Wasteland 3 came out in 2020. So there is another post-nuclear RPG out there for you if you are serious about wanting RPGs. I have Wasteland 1 was also remastered. These games are fun for those who love RPGs.
New Vegas is more of n action RPG and those have become the more popular type. I think that's more of your gripe.
If you want more of the old school types which are more complex in RPG mechanics then you're looking for CRPGs which have been making a comeback. Balder's Gate 3 won Game of the Year. There are other games like Pillars of Eternity, I & II, Divinity: Original Sin I & II, Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous, Pathfinder: Kingmaker, Sovereign Syndicate, Torment: Tides of Numenera, Tyranny, Disco Elysium, Path of Exile.
So these games do exist but many who talk of RPGs just mean action RPGs. Yes, action RPGs have become more streamlined but if you don't like them then don't play them. Go play CRPGs but if you don't like those then I doubt you want real RPGs as those are as RPG you can get.
In the past RPGs were not as popular and we're more of a nerd genre. JRPGs not included. Things changed as ARPGs paved the way and now the genre is more popular than ever. So it's just different styles of RPGs. The direction of Action RPGs is because most people want that type of real time combat that they're known for as the combat is on par with action games.
The Witcher 3 is a highly acclaimed ARPG. Very easy for non RPG players to get into.
While others struggle with a game like Divinity Original Sin. But if you claim to care about RPGs the. You should be supporting the people who make the more old school style RPGs.
If you're not buying their games then don't be surprised why more aren't being made because they need the funds. Otherwise they sell to a big company who restricts their creative freedom and can shut them down any time.
So you saying the genre became a joke just tells me that you aren't looking or supporting what you deem full fledged RPGs. Especially when you claimed NV as the last one. I have named many RPGs that released after NV to prove you wrong. If you claim to be some true RPG player then you should play them. You're not looking for RPGs when you complain like that. You just seem angry about the rise of ARPGs, which NV is one of them too. Obsidian did release Outer Worlds which is an ARPG. They're making a sequel to that.
So if you want "real" rpgs then look outside the mainstream. You have no excuse.
@@SorceressWitch I said one of the last few Rpg's, of course I know about Wasteland, Divinity etc the point I was making is that gaming is now watered down, where titles like Assassins Creed Odyssey /Vahalla , Fallout 4 etc are being called Rpg's when they are clearly not.
Interplay meat rider spotted
Is it bad if I feel proud that Sarge and I poisoned Will with TheGamer articles prior? Also, obligatory Kenshi comment. Great video Will!
yeah, my opinion on TheGamer would not be in this vid if not for you introducing me to the site and what you use it for.
there’s room for these different systems, it’s just a matter of having more people on these disparate teams. beth is famously known for not having nearly as much people on their staff as they should, which leads (in part) to these deficits.
aside, have you tried the mod Sim Settlements 2? fantastic implementation of the settlement system that i could see thriving in a new fallout.
seeing strife actually release a fallout 4 video? its a miracle
It’s a narrative driven, survival and exploration rpg with deep fleshed out moral choices that have an impact in the way the world is shaped and understood. Settlement building is not fallout.
when i have to deal with the settlement stuff i just install Sim Settlement 2 and let it do that part, hell one of the mods i generally install is a mobile base, in FO4 being an APC
i care not for the building aspect so ill just let effectively other people make nice buildings that also gives me resources sometimes
all of my tinkering with mods is to make the settlement building make sense because for me having the option to build a character who is building power in the wasteland is what i want and settlements check that box. having looked into things though, its so broken in vanilla that if you don't mod it its pointless. the limits and restrictions really wreck the experience especially when your playing towards goals that ultimately wont work for arbitrary reasons.
I have yet to bother with building stuff with the feature. Only scrapping for parts or unlocking any safes within the zone
Ive thought this for a while. Fallout4s settlement system in and of itself isnt poorly designed. Its just used in the wrong type of game (singleplayer narrative driven rpg). Drop it into a modern survival game like Valheim or enshrouded and i bet itd work pretty well. The issue is that f4 doesnt have the auxillary systems to make building as good as it could be. In valheim the world uses a voxel system so if you want to edit terrain to prevent structures clipping, its easy as 123. Another system is quests, instead of relying on tedious boring radiant quests that no one likes, they shouldve made some handcrafted quests tied to specific settlements even if it meant reduced scope. It just kinda stands on its own as a system unless you literally make fallout a survival game.
Lol i posted this comment before watching the entire video. Funny to see we pretty much totally agree 😅
I honestly like building in fallout 4 and 76. It just needs to be refined and bug fixed.
@@ValTek_Armory For sure, i wonder what fallout 4 would look like if instead of having 30 settlement locations, most of which people dont touch, they had 5-10 with handmade quests something like a quest in sanctuary or the castle to fix the houses and walls, or elect a town leader or something
I loved fallout 3 as a child then i was 15 and fallout 4 was released it was good ( I remember saying i dont wanna fucking build) but not fully scratching my fallout itch… but one day i got ill and had an idea to play it not the way i normally would and turn sanctuary into a fort, and i had a lot of fun, my verdict was it sacrificed more of what the latter games had so it was fun and worked for me after i adjusted and years later i kind of get a feeling
That it having settlement building gives those fans who love a character playthrough that extended life (eg when fallout 3 is done there is literally nothing to do ( i know thats an rpg ending etc ) but it does allow for that to happen and i can appreciate that…
I also would like to see them just leave the sandbox game to Starfield and bring fallout to a space of lets make an amazing rpg with no other niche
But something also tells me es6 is gonna have to have some kinda of niche cos its franchise has never had one
As someone who doesn't particularly like the integration of the settlement and building system and the material attachment it gives to each save file, I feel that with some tweaks and additions it could easily be made just as core to the experience of the next Fallout game as Bethesda intended.
As it is the system sort of juts out of the rest of the game awkwardly and it feels like a different game whenever I go into the building mode. I'm not saying it's bad, it's just poorly integrated to where it feels like jumping a gorge when going between the activities of settlement building and exploring. Simple things like the automation that mods such as 'Sim Settlements' bring, being able to save templates of specific object sets/entire locations, and UI optimization could make it so that the required level of interaction is essentially 'none-and-done' if you wish it that way.
I just hate that it's forced into your lap with Fallout 4's equivalent of the first Skyrim dragon quest and has the depth of a pothole. Enough to splash around or get caught in for a moment, but nowhere near enough to immerse yourself.
Rebuilding and maintaining the entirety of Boston because the player is the only person in the game world with any agency... it just doesn't feel like Fallout to me so I'm in the "get rid of it" camp. It was unnecessary and done very poorly when they could have used that time to make the game better through gameplay/writing or just more stable.
Tbh you said what I thought of since the game released, I fully agree and tbh, this feature should be scrapped.
I like the idea of making a home but not so many I would prefer to get scrap to repair weapons and armour
Thought I never see the day fallout upload
I kinda like the idea of settlement building, but the way it was implemented in 4 is quite annoying.
But I do like the idea of being able to build up a base. I haven't tried 76 yet, but the idea of CAMPS feels like a more appealing compromise.
I am not interested in managing and balancing a ton of settlements, but managing a single base where I can have all my followers hang out? That feels like more fun to me.
I love the settlement system, but I fully accept that there were too many settlements in FO4. This is what makes Sim Settlements great. I'm happy automating the settlements I don't want to deal with and only building up the ones I want to.
I think it's great for the player home, but all the settlement stuff is a bit much. Of course, it's there as an option. It's so easy to go through the game without even touching the rebuilding.
The series to me has always been about rebuilding and dealing with the apocalypse thematically. If they continue the settlement system I'd like to see a more toned down system that has less player input, maybe just a resource Dropbox and the game just does the rest.
I like the system, I just want it to be meaningful. It doesnt' really affect the world in any way. It should. Would be cool if there were actual turf wars and you built up settlements to build up forces, so one side could gain more ground. Build equipment facilities to boost equpment level of your side's troops, so on, would be so awesome to be involved in worldbuilding.
Maybe you could help with settment building passively, just dropping off materials, and NPCs would bulild on their own. Or maybe avoid settlements altogether, let civilization crumble and overrun by raiders and perservere through being a one man army badass, but, in the end, even the wasteland becomes so inhospitable, because you were avoiding it's problems, so you are completely unable to survive at all. Damn, so many possibilities.
'Space Rangers 2' has excellent faction system tied it with difficulty scaling - On Easy, good guys will win in a few years, even if you don't get involved; on normal, it is a stalemate, so you have to get involved to tip the scales; on hard and very hard, good guys are getting destroyed fast, so you have to get involved to save the day and use every trick in the book to survive. I would love to see something like that, where world acts without you and your have to get involved to affect it's development. Great game, maybe you should check it out.
I know a lot of folks who absolutely love the basebuilding, and good for them. But for me personally I just didn't care for it, if it were regulated to as a completely optional thing then I'd be happy. Also color me surprised to see you talk about Fallout 4 Strife, figured you'd wouldn't touch this game with a 20 foot pole!
I don’t want them to remove the SBS as it would take away from the longevity of the game. but make it less of an feature and areas.
Another problem is even if you have a lot of defense for your settlements if you don't help personally defend them from any attacks the game punishes you by taking a certain percentage of your resources out of your workshop. What's the point of all the defenses if I still have to babysit every settlement or I will lose resources and have to gather more? I both like/dislike it but don't want to see it in a future game.
I dont like the settlement system myself and never explored it. I do like building my own home however.
Why do I hate the settlement building system ?
1-The terrain is bad and you cant delete some stuff except by using mods
2- its lazy way for Bethesda to make you do all the work diamond city and good neighbors are not enough.
Designing an entire base building system is *not* "lazy" lmao
I understand that fallout 4 especially can feel half baked in many parts cause it is to be fair. I understand that it is very lackluster compared to the other games in terms of being an RPG.
It is fair that the other systems of the game and the RPG elements shouldn't suffer from something that wasn't completely asked for.
However the building system; as confusing, frustrating and at times f'ing rediculous it can be; It is a system I think should remain but be redesigned and refined to suit with the other elements better.
The building system can be a great boon to the game, I refer to RangerDave, Robbaz, SkooledZone, Oxhorn and Cordless VII.
The system for building needs improvement and better thought out connections to the other game elements but with a good building system, even a flawed one; One can through effort and time make their own lore or story feel better and more immersive like RangerDave and his minutemen.
Of course the actions and beliefs of how the system can be improved varies between each individual; like how some preferred how Sim Settlements handled it, or some prefer the freedom of control. Either way it is in the hands of Bethesda but as someone who has over 1k hours in the game and first played on ps4, if it wasn't for the building system; I would not be an avid fan of fallout as I am today, the removal of the building system I say would make the next release suffer greatly.
I truly beleive, wholeheartedly that the building system in whichever way Bethesda wants to take it; is worthwhile to keep.
Fallout 5 or whatever the next fallout game is should be a single player, rpg, silent protagonist, and minimal base building. Focus the most on making the game world change based on the player character's choices. FO4 was such a letdown following FNV. And IMO FO76's biggest mistake was being an MMO
He returns.
So, first of all let me tell you I found your channel by watching some Subnautica tutorials you made previously. I know, I'm late to the party, but backlog of the games is big :) Having said that, it would imply that i love base building games, and i truly do... i have like 5 digits of hours in Cities Skylines 1, love the games like Factorio, and i think it all started in early 2000's with Caesar 3, a granddaddy of all city builder games.
But... I don't like the base building in Fallout 4, and I think majority of people who are in that boat "should" tell you the most obvious reason why, but that isn't always a case, and particularly not in this video, so let me offer you a perspective.
In Fallout 4, you can totally ignore this aspect of the game, but you lose the piece of the story from one faction helping you reach or destroy the proposed antagonist. And even if you decide to use that faction for above mentioned goal, all you need to do is to help couple of settlements, you don't even have to build anything besides few necessities like maybe 1 gun turret and a bed or two.
However, I play Fallout 4 exclusively in survival mode, which means sooner rather than later, I will have to engage with the settlements. Frankly, I usually do the bare minimum for them, making just enough defense, and never actually call any new settlers. I use it as my outpost to have a place to sleep or drop less useful junk that weights me down.
The few times I decided to engage with the settlement mechanics, rebuilding the Commonwealth, it quickly became apparent to me how unfinished this feature is. I don't refer to clunky mechanics of actual base building, this can be fixed with mods, no, I don't have problem with that. What happens in the background is what I hate about FO4 settlements to begin with.
For example, no matter how many walls you build, and no matter how many missile turrets you build, enemies will always find the way to spawn in smack center of your settlement or there will always be one idiot that got themselves kidnapped.
If you develop your network of settlements it soon becomes a cat and mouse game when you're asked to go help this settlement, now go help this settlement, go help that settlement.... It's very hard to break out and say, I wanna do something else now.
If we had the tools where we could make settlements sustain themselves, where at certain point you've done enough for the settlement so attackers can not breach the 285 defense value you have or can not spawn on the other side of the wall, or there are minutemen who will investigate kidnapped people instead of the god damn GENERAL..... then that would be the different experience which would make base building more appealing to more people.
Nowadays, when i play FO4, base building is the last thing on my mind. A turret, a sink and a bed is all i need from it.
Do i think it needs to be removed. Absolutely not. It's a great addition to FO4, albeit with some major flaws that will hopefully be addressed in the next iteration of the game, no matter when it is released.
yeah, didnt really wanna build the whole entire map for 1 faction that wasn't as good NCR rangers.
The other major problem is it ties very little to the main theme of the game. War never changes and all that, but all we have are scrap towns. No brick and mortar, no proper roads, no meaningful NPC and political building. Even Shady Sands has Adobe brick homes.
Given fallout 4 only had a team of like 100 people, unlike other massive open world games, it came out pretty good
FALLOUT 4 was half @$$ baked @ best. Fallout 76 was worse... simple answer, Bethesda makes crap Fallout games. ..
re populating the wasteland with settlements isnt a bad idea, if thats what you want to do. the main quest damn near forces it upon you, and ties it to a major faction on top of that.
i hate how half baked it feels, how much random trash is in each settlement, how long it takes to clean it all up. how much i have to baby the settlers. its tedious in the extreme, and makes it drag on if youre trying it. bethesda needs to stop relying on mod makers to fix their damn games. i see the appeal of the system, but much like a lot of 4, the implementation leaves me wanting a better game. being able to attract unique settlers with dialogue and quests to each settlement would make it a fuckton more worth it. being able to help set up what you want them equipped with, training materials, ammo crafting, and being able to set up REAL defenses not just a shit load of turrets everywhere would do a lot to make it better. being able to set up caravans, and have the restoration be an ending to the game too would be pretty sweet.
if youre gonna make it a core mechanic, then every faction should be able to engage with it, or ignore it. it should add value, questing, and rewards. all it adds is tedium. beyond my own base or outside mods that make the system better, i dont touch much the settlement system. kind of annoying having rando settlers hop in my very expensive power armor for a joyride and then never get back out. would be different if i set some extra suits as defense/guard gear, but would also require an in built system for making more cores, those things while not rare are certainly too precious to have every tom dick and harriette in a settlement run around for funsies in powered armor.
the forced faction thing also is super lackluster, i dont spend any time or real effort knowing any of em, they lack personality and depth that even three did better. at least 3 i felt the stakes of dads dream, of how much itd change the area. here its like, which overlord do i want to install? without the charm or good wrting of three. they pulled the everyone is an asshole in their own way thing poorly in 4.
the power armor system has potential, but much like everything else feels half assed. the cores last so so short at first, how in fuck does the brotherhood function?
it takes perks to make them last longer, several perks. which requires high intelligence. so any run you want powered armor has to have high int. basic model is weak and easy to destroy, forcing you if youre gonna use it, to go full into it every time.
in short fallout 4 has a ton of potential, and wastes most of it.
Personally? Never had a problem. I just ignored settlement building all together and enjoyed the game. I will say this however. Being owned by Microsoft has its benefits money wise. They have the funds to both refine settlement building, combat and story.
Fax
Disagree, i like the settlement building. Had a lot of fun as i played more. I began with not making much on first playthrough and now i take more advantage of building stuff. I just wish some locations were better because some small ones like Jamaica Plain i didn't like.
I still feel able to roleplay well enough in this game. I think voiced protagonist needs to go though.
Only good thing about fallout 4 is far harbor.
If you don't prioritise adventuring and questing in a Fallout game I've no idea why you're playing a Fallout game.
The building system is boring & need more focus on the adventure dlcs
I've tried 3 times to get into fallout 4....never played any of the others. First experience.
Loved the opening story arc, escaping the bunker....figuring out the mechanics, seeing the dangers....then came to crafting....absolutely hated it. And it was so early on in the game. I put it down and have no interest in trying again.
Make it a DLC for fallout 5
The building system is a great addition. But you do not need to use it at all for 99.99% of the game. I love building in the game, and that mechanic has been embraced by thousands of players. It's there if you want it, and you don't need it at all except to get into the Institute in the main game. Mods made the building system even better. If you don't like building, DON'T. It's an extra thing that you can do. Is it perfect. Nope. What game is? 4's building system was certainly better than 76's camp with its limited space and need for a 1st subscription to get more space. Leave the building mechanic as a core part of the series. I want to build stuff in the Fallout world, not just play dress up my house in VERY specific spots, like in Skyrim.
You can't just ignore the building system without unbalancing the gameplay loop and what constitutes a reward. A significant portion of the video is immediately about that problem.
@@willstrife I honestly cannot disagree more to your video. Not everything is about your supposed "gameplay loop/reward system". I have several friends who just play the game without building anything except the minimum for the main story, and I have several friends who absolutely adore the building system. Everyone gets something different out of the game. Fallout games have always been about their fun rpg/world settings. Not necessarily about making them a bleeding edge shooter. They never will be that. You don't like the build system, don't use it unless you have to. In every Fallout game, they add more to the game mechanics, like crafting or building things. Just because YOU find little meaning in the build system doesn't mean that many, many others don't find joy in carving out a bit of the wasteland in their style. Play it how you want, it's a game. I love the Fallout series, and yes, it has it's flaws. What game doesn't? Every game has aspects that one person might not like, and one does, with either side saying that the dev's put more time into X, instead of Y, that it would be a better game. I've heard so many of those arguments at the gaming table, and it really comes down to personal choice. What do YOU like? Fallout 4 caters to a wide audience by being more diverse, and giving options for people to embrace. FO4 isn't perfect, but it has a lot of ways to provide joy from the experience, in whatever path you choose to take.
@@stormcry8202Yeah and I have seen people who streamed the game without building anything and they enjoyed the game. People were able to get enough reward from the game without settlements. I think this guy just doesn't like the game.
Many people do like the building stuff so it would be bad to take it away and only cater to one group. Bethesda makes games that allow players to do what they want. So there are things you can ignore in their games.
I don't want to be forced to settlement build
I haven't played fallout 4 but weren't you looking for your son or something?
Why not make the vault dweller a craftsman of lost architecture of they want the game to be base buildings? Do the bases trade with each other and create thier own little economy?
The plot of the game is that the protagonist, who is locked into being either a soldier or a lawyer (but neither option influences much, being a soldier comes up in like two sidequests and being a lawyer comes up _never),_ gets _son-napped_ and goes on a bind to find his son before getting distracted looking for desk fans. Effectively, they didn't make them builders because Bethesda wanted the protagonist to have been like. In Anchorage fighting? This never comes up in the game btw. Oh also the male protag is a war criminal. No, the lawyer thing still never comes up.
As for the trade, kinda yes and no. There is an option to make your settlements trade with each other, which makes them able to tap into each other's pools of food, water, and junk materials. This is a genuinely useful feature, as some settlements have, for different reasons, a very diminished ability to engage in mass-scale farming; Hangman's Alley, one of the most useful settlements in the game due to its centralized location and immediate proximity to both the CIT and Diamond City, has like two patches of dirt to plant crops on, for example.
... But, to do this, you need Local Leader. A _perk_ that unlocks if you have like, I think Charisma 6? You can also build new workshops and even stores to buy and sell and produce resources passively, but you need other perks to do these too. It makes sense to hide some of these things behind a specific perk, don't get me wrong, I actually think it's great that Local Leader and Cap Collector wall you like that for stores and workshops. But supply lines are so incredibly useful and immediately obvious that it feels weird that they are locked to a specific build.
Nah, keep it. It was basically the only good part of 4.
That's because they focused on it to the detriment of anything else. Didn't you watch the video?