Bethesda Names Fallout 4 “Our Most Robust & Solid Release Ever”; First Patch Next Week

An argument that will not ever die: are the many, many bugs and glitches which pepper Bethesda’s RPGs an unavoidable consequence of how much they cram in, or a sign of a studio so complacent about success that it believes it can get away with so many rough edges? Whatever the reality, at least Bethesda are getting on with patching Fallout 4 [official site]. Nonetheless, they claim that any issues are a side-effect of “the scale and complexity of the systems at work” and argue that the post-apocalyptic sequel is “our most robust and solid release ever.”

Well, yeah, but I could say that about the cake I tried to make for my partner’s last birthday. Sure, it wasn’t as disastrous as previous years’ efforts, but Mary Berry would still pass out in horror if she saw it.

In fairness, Fallout 4 is nowhere near as messy as Skyrim was at launch, despite having no shortage of bugs. And, interface headaches aside, it seemed built for modern PCs from the off this time. So a patch doesn’t feel urgent as such, but it’s nice to think that we might see a few less Escherian NPCs and perhaps a Dogmeat who knows how to avoid furniture before too long.

Besthesda try to justify the bugs and whatnot in this post here, arguing that “a hundred testers will never replicate the many millions playing the game now, and we’re hard at work addressing the top issues.” OK, but maybe hire more testers too?

Beyond “top issues”, Bethesda aren’t giving out any details on what the patch will entail, other than to say next week’s update will be a ‘beta’ release. You’ll have to opt-in, in other words. They’ve done it before – it basically enables them to live-trial the fixes before committing to them, which I imagine is most helpful to Bethesda in terms of the later console update, and all the long-winded certification that involves.

A full PC release will follow the beta version, with consoles after that. Say Bethesda, “This process has worked well for us in the past and allows us to get more fixes out faster. Expect to see more updates, that are smaller and more frequent, than a few big ones. This allows us to make sure each fix is working right, as any change can have unintentional side effects in a game this huge. We expect the first beta patch to be up next week.”

They also claim that confusions over exactly how some of the game’s mechanics and interface work is deliberate. “There are many moments of “How does this work? What do I do to survive?” and that’s how your character should be feeling as well. Those that push through should be able to look back at who they were when they stepped out of the Vault and say, “I made it. I understand this world now and it’s mine.” I’m not sure I’m buying that to be honest – a lot of things simply feel like UI obfuscation, and on top of that any claim that it’s all about discovery is negated by the fact that there are blow-by-blow in-game help screens if you can bothered to trawl through them. But big game companies never, ever make mistakes. Don’t forget that.

Anyway, I look forwards to the patch, though I secretly hope it doesn’t nuke the bug which enables me to infinitely pickpocket Fusion Cores from unsuspecting Brotherhood of Steel soldiers. Anything in particular you’d like to see fixed right away?


  1. gbrading says:

    I’ve had my first bug that is genuinely irritating, and that’s that on the Workshops view in the Pip-Boy, it’s stating incorrect settlement information about Sanctuary. It’s saying there’s zero beds, defence or water, but when I return to Sanctuary it changes to say there are beds and water and defence (and there are, I put them there). It’s really irritating as it’s lowering the happiness of the settlement and people are complaining about lacking things which they’re not actually lacking.

    What I will say about Fallout 4 is that I haven’t had it genuinely crash yet, but they could definitely do with sorting out some of the performance issues around certain areas, like the Corvega Factory and downtown Boston near Goodneighbour.

    • GraemeL says:

      I know it sounds ridiculous, but if you have a powered television in the settlement try deleting it. I had the same problem at the drive-in and a thread on reddit recommended this as a fix. It worked for me.

      • vargata says:

        i will try this, thanks a lot

      • gbrading says:

        Hmm, that’s a good tip! There is indeed a TV there, I’ll give that a go when I get home. :)

        • Cronstintein says:

          Whoah, I know for a fact that I have one in there. Will definitely try that, thanks!

    • LexW1 says:

      I’ve had genuine crashes, sadly.

      So far what I’ve had is:

      1) Bug that white-outs the entire screen when rains, with only vague shadows/ghosts visible – workaround is to turn off “wetness” (not rain occlusion). Happened repeatedly until I found the fix.

      2) Crash to desktop when going into VATS (instant game close, like it had never been running). Pretty rare – less than 1 in 100 VATS startups, but pretty bloody irritating. No fix, no cause I can see, not repeatable. Happened at least 10 times so far.

      3) Hard lock-up when going into settlement-building mode. Only happened once so far.

      4) Crash of launcher (!!!). Never happens twice in a row – pretty odd.

      That’s ignoring all the stuff didn’t trigger right, people stuck in objects, etc. etc.

      I’d say they’re right re: most stable ever release but it’s like boasting that your D+ essay is your best ever grade or something.

      • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

        Well now, that’s quite hardcore and i especially like point 4.

        Not really sure how you happened to experienced all that crap though.

        You shouldn’t listen to me on crashes because i always clean up drivers in safe mode and do a lot of other shit the next guy never does, so i rarely crash, but this time around pretty much everyone and their cat is reporting almost none at all so your case is incredibly weird.

        • JarinArenos says:

          Yeah, I’ve had exactly one crash in 80+ hours of play so far, and I’m typically inundated with them. Sorry to see it hitting you so badly.

      • Joriath says:

        I’ve had a few crashes, usually caused by my graphics card unexpectedly failing then recovering itself. This only seems to happen in some areas, mostly just S/SW of Sanctuary. I also had one instance of such a crash the other day when I tried to exit power armour. Other than that though, only one crash in the middle of an urban area which froze the game and wouldn’t allow me to use my mouse in the task manager to close it. Bit annoying that one but only happened the once.

    • nimbulan says:

      Turn shadow distance down to medium. You’ll hardly notice a difference but it REALLY smooths out the performance in those bad spots.

    • Nerdy Hermit says:

      *Contains spoiler*

      So far I’ve been lucky. I’ve not encountered many bugs at all. There has been, perhaps, once or twice where the game did CTD but I have not seen it in the capacity that people have noted. The only other bug I have encountered was not being able to get “Hole in the Wall” quest to trigger despite doing the cat quest. High Luck stats in my S.P.E.C.I.A.L? Who knows.

      I will say that I am enjoying the game though there have been moments when I felt parts of FO4 were re-skinned scenes from FO3. Like where you follow Prime to the institute with the BOS. It felt a lot like you were taking the same path with Prime as you did in FO3. Except the water part. Maybe just my imagination.
      Anywho, I can see myself playing this game for years to come because of the vast world and neat crafting options. I can’t wait for mods to start rolling out. They always spice things up!

  2. Jakkar says:

    The argument never lived; It is not acceptable to release utterly broken shit and let modders fix the vast, vast majority of the problems you cannot for four games in a row, not with the budget they command and the amount of money they wasted on advertising their broken, ugly, clunky product.

    Any basic moral analysis of the factors involved will derive the same answer.

    It is obviously not okay D:

    • mukuste says:

      Well… people keep buying their stuff, so it seems consumers find it acceptable, and Bethesda sees no need to change anything.

    • Dale Winton says:

      It’s not broken either. I just completed it last night , 80 great hours

      • JiminyJickers says:

        Indeed, I have yet to finish the game but I have been playing it non-stop and have had zero crashes. Only some minor visual bugs.

    • Yachmenev says:

      Well, I think that for most people, it isn’t utterly broken. It certainly ain’t for me, and I think the reviewer here on RPS played the game for 52h without a crash.

    • Geebs says:

      I’ve completed every Bethesda game after Morrowind without mods, multiple times.

      The things modders do to the Elder Scrolls games are highly impressive/disturbing, but the trope that Bethesda’s business model relies on modders to “fix” their games is hugely overplayed. They sell like gangbusters on the consoles, for a start.

    • Press X to Gary Busey says:

      They finally fixed the engine. All that’s left now are some errors in scripts that will hopefully be fixed in a few patches.
      I’d say it’s a pretty good release state for a AAA 2015 Sandbox.

    • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

      “It is not acceptable to release utterly broken shit”

      You’re right, thank god they’re not doing that anymore.

      • Shakes999 says:

        No kidding. People just love to regurgitate what other people on the internet tell them to say.

        That being said, at midnight when F4 came out, the game WAS completely broken for me. 7 crashes, audio bugs, would crash on startup 3 times in a row once or twice. Then I went to sleep, booted it up the next morning and it’s ran flawlessly ever since. No crashes, minimal bugs and none game braking.

    • MisterFurious says:

      Yeah, but it’s Bethesda. It’s cute when they do it.

      • Hedgeclipper says:

        I don’t think that article makes much sense, he’s comparing staff numbers with developers who churn out games on a yearly basis – and the Assassin’s Creeds – they’re releaseing 2 or 3 a year now? Compared to that Beth has a pretty slow release schedule which is understandable given the smaller team size but I don’t think it automatically follows that they’re throwing fewer man-hours at it.

    • machineageproductions says:

      Fewer than 20% of players play on PC. Fewer than 10% of those ever touch a mod.

      I don’t think mods are necessary to make the game playable if fewer than 2% of players actually use them.

      • JohnHue says:

        Are those stats current ? With the Workshop in Steam for Skyrim, I’m not sure. Every single person I’ve talked with regarding FO4, and most of them are very casual gamers on console, knew about mods for Skyrim and Fallout 4 and knew it was a bit part of the games.

      • Kelsyer says:

        Fewer than 1% of people believe those stats without a source. Come on kids think of it like Uni, source your bullsh..

    • Nerdy Hermit says:

      I don’t consider the game to be broken at all. I’ve put in a good 100hrs or so and am on my second play through with minimal bugs. Only once or twice did it CTD but that was at the beginning of the first play through and has yet to happen to me since. Perhaps its my PC, stronger than most out there and perhaps able to handle more info from the game. Or maybe I’ve been lucky. Who knows. Though I do agree that they should hire more testers to work out bugs before final release. That or go the rout of early assess on Steam like ARK and others are doing.

    • Chmilz says:

      Playing through Witcher 3, I can safely say I’m done with games that require me to mod them to make them playable. I love the Fallout world, but I’ll only buy into Bethesda’s hackjob games on a $5 Gold Box Steam sale from now on.

  3. Cinek says:

    “most robust and solid release ever”? Wow, they are full of themselves, aren’t they? One would think they’d strive to raise these low standards Bethesda has, not praise themselves for what they did. Pretty much the only good thing about this release is that it doesn’t crash, but other than that it’s full of bugs, including these stopping you from progressing through the main quest.

    • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

      Then they should change their wording with “less wonky”, but they’re right, the other games before launched in a worse shape.

      As i said below i still maintain that some crap is bound to happen, the comparison with TW3’s “perfect shape at release” doesn’t work because most stuff is triggered near you and it’s a tightly controlled environment that doesn’t invite chaos, and there are less dynamic system to contend with.

      Meanwhile Beth games have stuff happening inside and outside your u-Grids, and playing with their number can be amusing but rather dangerous aswell, but that is expected.

      • Cinek says:

        If I were them I would STFU and go back to work on a patch. Cause that’s what they should be doing. And hopefully this time release one that won’t make certain flying creatures fly backwards.

        And don’t get me started on “stuff happening near you” – Bugs in FO4 are not only related to some variables and events that happen away – you have tons of issues right around you. From not being able to progress through quests, companions not recruiting, spawn bugs, AI bugs, down to physics bugs. Witcher 3 wasn’t nearly as buggy when you take the events happening in a close proximity of the player, stop pretending that it was otherwise.

        • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

          Oh i’m not pretending anything, it’s still true that it was a genuinely solid release although with some similar bugs, but way less.

          Ultimately i’d say it’s a balance of things, the way Beth games are structured along with how their engine works ( and it’s a bit more evolved this time ) tend to invite extra crap. I’m not giving them an easy pass, mind, they could still make a better work, i’m just recognizing that there are pros and cons with their core structure, with the most obvious pro being the easy of modding and modifying everything which is a big part.

          Again, i’m just saying they got better, not that they’re in any way perfect. I’m positive because with what they’ve done with the new dynamic systems and the better engine features they potentially created an even stronger platform for modding than before, and i honestly can’t wait for that.

        • Dayfather says:

          I’m 55 hours in and haven’t encountered a singel game breaking bug, just a few graphical and UI glitches but nothing that really bothers me. First on my fix list though would be that when holding the middle mouse button to rotate the camera when I’m in a settlement it dumps me into the workshop view as soon as I’ve rotated 180 degrees.

          Witcher 3 was a way worse experience for me, I couldn’t even get it to run for more then 5 minutes before crashing, after a day of trying to figure out the problem I finally figured out that it was having issues with the factory overclock on my graphics card (which no other game before or after has had an issue with) and had to bring down it down. When I finally got the game running I thought the game felt rather boring. I really don’t get all the praise it’s received, FO4 is in my opinion the superior game.

          • RPSNaN says:

            196 Hours, All 50 Achievements.

            I have to say, I’ve seen quite a few game breaking bugs since the time I’ve been playing this game; but the release was definitely better than their previous titles, by far.

          • Cinek says:

            Yes, it is. Doesn’t mean it’s some gold standard or something they should be proud of when the game requires tons of fixes, and knowing their history – some major bugs will never be fixed by the corpo, instead modders will step in fixing for free what Bethesda earned money from.

      • ohminus says:

        On the other hand, Witcher 3 was the first game in a new engine, whereas they’ve been unable to get the kinks out of theirs for several games in a row now.

        The problem is that their attitude is fundamentally wrong – they add new features like settlement-building before ensuring what’s there actually works. All for the glory of “Hey, you can do even more stuff now!” It’s a pile of features roughly cobbled together without much rhyme or reason. And given that, it’s not too surprising it has bugs.

      • CrankyKong says:

        The idea that the Witcher 3 didn’t have serious bugs on release also is bullshit. There were bugs that wouldn’t allow people to finish main story quests. A bug that actually stopped people from getting XP from main story quests. Hell, you couldn’t even cross a bridge on Roach at a trot for some goofy reason.

        • Buggery says:

          The bug for not getting XP from main quests was actually a feature – you received an amount of XP necessary to pull you up to level with the next main quest. If you did a heap of sidequests, then you leveled above the minimum expected for the next quest. Sort of like the scaling level enemies in Oblivion except not as broken.

    • hungrycookpot says:

      The game has crashed my entire system a number of times now. As in, power off, cold reboot crash. Never seen anything like it.

    • Sgt_Big_Bubbaloola says:

      “most robust and solid release ever”

      Ya know, bizarrely, EA are actually able to make that claim at the mo with the release of Battlefront. I know it’s a lot of peoples whipping boy at the moment but there are no game breaking bugs that i’ve found yet. And the server connections are as solid as a rock.

      But that tends to get in the way of people hating on EA (yes they deserve more often than not, just not this time).

      • nottorp says:

        Of course, you’re talking about a game with no single player – just a few bots. 90% less complexity.

        • Buggery says:

          But also, multiplayer online – adding a further 90% complexity, requiring a d20 dice roll based on their respective LUCK tables (be sure to check for any inventory based modifiers) to see who will win.

  4. pasports31 says:

    I know that different people have different experiences, but I’m fifty hours in and have had nary a bug encountered. Only one bug was bad enough where I had to load a previous save (got stuck behind a counter), besides that the worst I’ve really seen is some random framerate drops that occur fairly rarely. The game is more stable for me now than New Vegas is, which was released like 5 years ago.

    • All is Well says:

      I haven’t really encountered any game- or plot-breaking bugs either. What I do have however is an incredibly annoying issue where my character sometimes takes ages to equip a weapon after I’ve pressed the selected shortcut button. They’ll remove the previously equipped weapon though, which means I’m often left defenseless in the middle of a fight if I try to switch guns. I hope they fix that.

      • davethejuggler says:

        Yeah thats the only real one I’ve encountered as well. It’s so frustrating. Had to unfavourite, unequip and refavourite and reequip a weapon yesterday to get the damn thing to work. Fortunately nothing was happening at the time.

    • ohminus says:

      released like five years ago on the same engine. If it wasn’t more stable than that, they should all go home and start doing something else.

    • Fonzcorp says:

      My play through has been pretty close to solid as well. Close to 40hrs and the only 2 bugs that had me reloading a save was the same ‘getting stuck behind the counter’ and ‘weapon model not showing in first person mode’.

  5. klo3 says:

    Alec is the guy hanging some kind of a weird metaphor for Bethesda robust and solid? I mean hes contracting his muscles although he seems quite dead…

  6. Babymech says:

    “a hundred testers will never replicate the many millions playing the game now”… a hundred testers never went to Monsignor Plaza?

    I would have been happy to take the bugs in exchange for an engine that was more precise about clipping – the ubiquitous Z-fighting in the Wasteland is worse over time than the occasional crash.

    • Detocroix says:

      A hundred testers probably went to the Monsignor plaza, but the conditions when they went there are vastly different. Game testers don’t usually get to test hundreds of hours on the same build, but instead test several hours in each of the hundreds of builds they get access to… meaning players went to Monsignor plaza 20-60 hours in, with a lot of locations cleared, items looted, bases build, a case that is really hard to test because the game has a hundred locations you need to reach at 20-60 hours in for the first time to know what actually happens.

      • EhexT says:

        100 testers and none of them played with a mouse and keyboard before and figured out that their UI is utter garbage with those?

        Did Gearbox (look at our PC QA Team! they’re all using gamepads!) start doing QA for Bethesda?

        • jrodman says:

          Well, there’s QA, and then there’s Priorities, and then there’s a Release Date.

    • machineageproductions says:

      I’ve been to Monsignor Plaza multiple times under different conditions, both early game and late. No problems. I imagine that if testers had a similar experience to mine, they wouldn’t report it as an issue.

  7. TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

    Vault 81 apparently has two recruitable NPCs according to the official guide, but at least one is bugged and is unable to leave. I also got special characters in Sanctuary like the old lady transforming by all means and purposes in simple settlers, losing their dialogue options.

    There are other little things, like population count, caravan routes sometimes disappearing and so on, but as of now i quite concur with Bethesda with their claim. I still mantain that FO4 is in a better shape at release than any of their previous games. It’s not much, but it’s something i guess.

    When it comes to complexity and the “inevitability of bugs” i am a little torn, although it’s probably unfair to mention other “big” open world games because they work way different when it comes to dynamic stuff. Even TW3 is more orchestrated and tailored to what should happen moment to moment near you, meanwhile with Bethesda games you can play with u-Grids count and notice how much is independently happening anywhere, which is extremely complicated and can break the game if you go too far with it. Any other game with “true” open world dynamic mechanics has some troubles, like the easy example that is Stalker Clear Sky.

    One example is minutemen quests, if your questgiver is one operating the caravans his/her position will be constantly calculated to be somewhere ( when you return ) and that’s the same for other things that happen, so not only what is active in your u-Grids is counted but to a lesser extent even a lot of other stuff, and to their credit the whole thing about allowing settlements in the first place created even more trouble so i can’t complain that much.

  8. maicus says:

    I’d rather have janky, weird systemic nonsense than a polished, bug free Far Cry: Wasteland.

    • Marblecake says:


    • klo3 says:

      Even though you probably are not, it almost sounds like you’re implying that Ubi makes bug free, polished games ;)

      • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

        I think he mostly meant that Far Cry is a very formulaic open world experience in which you have some precisely tailored set of activities, an underlying set of mechanics that sort of work to make that happen, but ultimately you’re stuck there with little variety between activities of the same type.

        Your only way out would be the main campaign, but then you might not like it.

    • PineMaple says:

      I was thinking recently how similar the trends in the Fallout and Far Cry franchises seemed to me. Both Far Cry 2 and Fallout 1/2 would be in my top 5 favourite games of all time, and while I thought both FC3 and F3 were decent games, they removed what had made the previous games great and not just good. I’d seriously consider giving a kidney for a return to Far Cry 2’s style (a little like Obsidian’s work on FNV), particularly if it meant funding to be able to realize Hocking’s original vision.

    • rb2610 says:

      I read this article this morning: link to

      When I read the title I thought “come on, this guy is just fanboyishly sympathising or something”, but on actually reading the article he does bring a pretty valid argument.

      The exact things that make things like Far Cry, Assassin’s Creed (except Unity), GTA, MGSV seem so polished in comparison are in contention with the things that make Bethesda games great.

      Those games manage to be polished by carefully limiting what you can do in their open world. You’d never see something so obviously prone to breaking the game as for example Morrowind’s Scroll of Icarian Flight, Boots of Blinding Speed or Levitate spells in any of those games. All those things are so prone to causing broken behaviour that they wouldn’t make it past the drawing board in most other games, but they’re all part of what made Morrowind so memorable.

      They’ve toned down on the quite so obviously broken stuff since Morrowind, but you can still see what I’m getting at.

    • EhexT says:

      No. That’s not your options. Bethesda can claim that all they want, but it’s simply not true. You can make giant open world games without the horrible UI, awful hardware requirements-per-graphics and (still the same bugs from Oblivion) AI and scripting issues. It’s been done. “It’s impossible” doesn’t fly when the opposite has been proven.

  9. Zaphweazle says:

    “a hundred testers will never replicate the many millions playing the game now, and we’re hard at work addressing the top issues.”

    well, finding bugs is good, but you also have to fix them. In the projects I worked in it was not so much a lack of testers, but a lack of developers that can fix all the stuff that’s discovered during development.

    • kozzy68 says:

      many bugs are so ovious and discovered so fast that sometimes I doubt that that there was more than 2 testers involved. They rather invest in having 3 prerlease articles weekly in every major magazine instead of bug fixing. They know it works for todays awerage kid. Sale abowe qality.
      Only exeption is Blizzard I think. Dont buy EA UBI or Berseda.

      • davethejuggler says:

        Yeah, except Blizzard has yet to manage releasing a WoW expansion without their servers just going to complete hell for about a week. Their motives are clearly “It’ll be hell for a week then settle down. Better to take the media hit than spend loads on more servers that won’t be needed in a weeks time”. No company is above this.

      • Premium User Badge

        DuncUK says:

        As a software engineer in a different industry, when you have bugs so glaring and ubiquitous that literally every customer experiences them eventually, it is often down to change that’s made in the code base very late.

        Take the “lockup on exiting an in-game computer console” in FO4 as a fictional example. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if for the vast majority of the development the transition animation to / from terminals was jittery and jarring, but basically functional and stable. Ugly, but not broken. As it wasn’t breaking anything, it’s not prioritised for fixing. As the launch day approaches, it rises up the priority list as something that needs work as it will be seen alot but doesn’t look good. An engineer is assigned, reworks the animation and produces something that looks much better and that works just often enough that the game breaking bug he introduced is not spotted in the limited test time remaining. The game releases and the majority of gamers experience the bug with enough play time.

        I’ve lost count of the number of times this sort of late change has caused issues in my experience and there’s not much you can do to mitigate it without insisting that every release candidate goes through extensive, costly and time consuming final testing. Frequently the first release candidate will do, but as it uncovers bugs that require fixing and additional testing, as the days pass by and the pressure to just ‘release something’ mounts. I’ll bet that in alot of industries, the very final release version has had the most minimal testing of all.

  10. FriendlyNeighbourhoodMurderer says:

    For me (50+ hours) it’s been very very stable. I’ve had minor bugs like being stuck in a terminal, but a F9 solved that, and a bug where the resolution was a bit weird (had to exit and start again to solve that) but nothing really that made me think the game is broken in any way.

  11. kozzy68 says:

    my dog has vanished when sending him to baase … I mean he is totaly gone. Game has memory leaks as it needs reboots once in a hour or 2. People will put up with any crap quality this days when game wont crash totaly after 5 minutes they call it quality release by todays stadarts.
    My suggestion dont buy crap or we see games like batman become stadart. Dont put up with that.

    • Furius says:

      Your comment is a buggy mess. (though I do agree with you)

    • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

      “People will put up with any crap quality this days when game wont crash totaly after 5 minutes”

      What if it doesn’t happen after over 150 hours?

    • SaintAn says:

      130 hours in and I have been able to play for many hours without ever needing to restart. And the only times I have lost my companions were when Dogmeat and Nick were part of a couple of quests and were waiting at the quests, and when I sent Nick to Greygarden and he was sitting up on the freeway above that settlement.

    • nrvsNRG says:

      crashing or otherwise, it’s true that people’s standards are lower when commenting on Bethesda games. They will play 100hrs and say “no bugs here”, but really all those hiccups they see while playing just fail to register in their brains.

    • Holderist says:

      Check the doghouses, he likes to hide in those. Or put up a town bell, it’ll summon everyone in the settlement.

  12. Godwhacker says:

    Discovering how things work is one thing, shipping the game without a sodding manual is quite another. Is there a good reason for not including a list of key bindings for base binding, crafting, and so on? Perhaps there’s a late game space combat simulation piece that they don’t want to give away by listing all the controls.

    • Premium User Badge

      basilisk says:

      There is an in-game manual. The “Help” section in the game menu actually contains a lot of detailed and specific information. Few people will ever open it, certainly, but it’s there.

      • Zenicetus says:

        It’s better than nothing, but it’s still a surprisingly thin text-only “manual” for a game this big and this complicated. It also gives wrong information, like listing the wrong keyboard key for power armor repair.

        Not a big deal since you can see the prompt at the bottom of the screen when you get there, but it’s an indication of how little they cared about some aspects of the PC version like mouse & keyboard support, or monitor resolutions and aspect ratios that weren’t the same as consoles.

    • Premium User Badge

      DelrueOfDetroit says:

      You mean like the giant notification that comes up saying “HOLD ALT FOR WORKSHOP” and then the list of key controls along the bottom of the screen?

  13. plavski says:

    Software developer here: It’s not testers they need, it’s time. I’d easily wager that 90%+ of all bugs discovered in the wild are already in Bethesda’s bug tracker. Testers log everything and discover everything. But that doesn’t really matter – there will always be bugs found.

    The issue is getting the time and resources to fix them. Launch day is a fixed date for a lot of companies and you have to prioritise and fix whatever you can. Project managers need to fix the killer bugs and let “dogmeat occasionally clips into the ground” slide because it’s not a showstopper. Developers only have so many hours in the day and these are not simple systems. Make one fix and you better hope that the unit tests are in order and that it hasn’t completely nuked the scripting in another quest 100 hours into the game, cos good luck discovering and fixing that in time! A robust engine has robust testing automation designed from the get-go. But an identified bug still needs to be fixed. I’d wager that every developer on their staff knew about all these bugs before launch, but weren’t allowed to fix them – because they were fixing even bigger bugs that never ended up in the release code. There are probably many of them now checking the internet, hoping that people haven’t found the other issue they fixed last week that could mess up saves because working 70 hour weeks isn’t fun and mistakes happen.

    You can’t fix this sort of issue by throwing money at it, as hiring more developers just means more time spent training them up to work with the engine and the processes. The best coders spend more of their time helping the weaker ones and then the quality dips across the board. Such is part of any team growth, and growing in crunch is not a good idea.

    In a game as huge and mind-bogglingly complex as Fallout 4, it’s still remarkable we got as solid a release as we have. And as the article notes, it’s nothing compared to Skyrim’s launch. Small mercies, etc.

    • kozzy68 says:

      customer should not care if its crapy testing lack of coding skill in the team or short dedline that results in bugs. Simply product is crap if its bugged and I dont care whos foult is that. There will be always bugs, true but minor small things afficting 1%. There was enough time to ivest in PR and art work for sure. What is sad is every one is doing this and people are getting used to it as normal to have beta versions released.

    • ohminus says:

      “In a game as huge and mind-bogglingly complex as Fallout 4, it’s still remarkable we got as solid a release as we have. And as the article notes, it’s nothing compared to Skyrim’s launch. Small mercies, etc.”

      Sorry, but that’s BS. “It’s nothing compared to Skyrim’s launch” is a non-issue because
      a)it’s the same engine, so it’s entirely unremarkable that they ironed out SOME of the bugs they left for the community to fix in Skyrim
      b)They caused plenty of the issues in Skyrim with an idiotic, long-term fixed release date of 11/11/11, which was purely a sales promotion ploy which had nothing to do with the game itself – any change of launch date would have shot their precious hype campaign. That’s entirely their own doing.

      Compare to CDPR, which followed the motto “We rather delay than hand you something we don’t consider great ourselves”.

      • plavski says:

        link to

        Witcher 3, patch 1.10 – over 600 changes, 13 pages of fixes. Yeah, they release super stable, flawless, bug-free code.

        • ohminus says:

          Did you actually read what I wrote?
          Witcher 3 is the first game in a new engine. Fallout 4 is one of several games Bethesda has released in the same engine.

        • Cinek says:

          And yet – still better than Fallout 4 at the release. Deal with it.

          • popej says:

            I disagree.


          • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

            I played the shit out of TW3 and loved every second of it, it was one of my most awaited games, and that is the only reason i managed to put up with all that instability.

            And it’s not like that’s a mistery that now everyone is conveniently trying to ignore.

      • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

        “a)it’s the same engine, so it’s entirely unremarkable that they ironed out SOME of the bugs they left for the community to fix in Skyrim”

        Skyrim’s engine was a minor evolution from the one used in FO3 and FO:NV, the one in FO4 is a major evolution.

        Still, the point is that even if the comparison was made with Skyrim, FO3 and NV were a mess aswell, and it’s quite good that their least buggy game as of yet is made with the biggest and least time-proven engine iteration that for the first time drops support to old consoles.

        Still, i expect open world games to be a crashfest and GTA and TW3 proved that, yet this one disproves it, so how is that possible? Does this game really suck as you all try to claim?

        • ohminus says:

          Once more: Witcher 3 was a new engine. Fallout 4 wasn’t. If they couldn’t manage to sort of the most devastating bugs over years and years of using the same engine, they shouldn’t be in that line of business.

          • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

            REDengine 3 vs REDengine 2, that’s an iteration aswell just as much as it happened with the Creation engine, maybe they changed more, maybe they changed less, but they did so with their in-house solutions none the less.

            There is a thin line there, some engine upgrades are more dramatic than others, but this is besides the point.

            The real point is that there is a perceived need for some people to bash Bethesda’s most succesfull release as of yet with any means necessary, even bringing external examples while actively ignoring any single logical fallacy.

          • ohminus says:

            Not quite. REDengine 2 made extensive use of middleware and was dramatically less complex. It should be evident it’s not as simple as an interation given that Witcher 2 was not really open world.

          • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

            They’re still two very different engines doing very different things, the whole open world alone is not the biggest problem, it depends on how you use this newfound scope.

            But it still doesn’t matter for shit other than to set up a pissing contest. Both games did something that i felt was wonderful, both companies have their strong and weak points, i didn’t feel cheated as a customer with either game because i got what i wanted with each and neither reached a critical mass of bugs that would anger me, despite both having their fair share.

      • Premium User Badge

        DelrueOfDetroit says:

        CD Projekt Red has the luxury of saying “we will release it when it’s done” because they have a near bottomless budget. People need to remember that not every development company out there has a hugely successful online marketplace.

        • ohminus says:

          Aside from the fact that these are two companies under one parent, but even chartered in different countries, I think you forget that CDP as an international games developer is way, way younger than Bethesda.

          • Premium User Badge

            DelrueOfDetroit says:

            I am referring to and the fact that any profits made from that company are rolled back into CDPR giving them a near limitless budget when it comes to their own game products.

    • teije says:

      Good points from my perspective as a manger of both software devs & QA folks. Definitely agree that the limiting factor is usually delivery timelines, and that their internal bug tracking system has the majority of items being reported.

      I’ll disagree that testers find everything – no matter how many/good they are, and even with quality unit/regression testing scripts (I have no idea if this is the case of FO4, obviously), they will not replicate the sheer variety of scenarios that a large group of active users “untrained” in testing methodologies will encounter. That’s why throwing a program out for a beta can be so useful.

      Is FO4 is more buggy than most, acceptable or not? Not having played it myself and not knowing how Bethesda handles their dev/testing sprints, I can’t say. But from their somewhat defensive tone, it sounds to me like they know it shipped with more issues than they are happy with.

      • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

        It’s not a polished Jewel but it’s still Bethesda’s best effort, so if you still somewhat enjoyed the previous ones it’s a rather safe bet.

    • adamaj74 says:

      “The issue is getting the time and resources to fix them.”
      “You can’t fix this sort of issue by throwing money at it…”

      Yet, release after release, a handful of random modders fix Bethesda’s games within weeks of release.

      “…it’s still remarkable we got as solid a release as we have.”

      No, it’s not. Many of these bugs are the same carry-overs from every Bethesda release going back a decade. They need a fresh start.

    • BirdsUseStars says:

      Yeah, and people also need to realize that their is a diminishing return here. Do you want it 89% polished today, or do you want it 99% polished, but you can’t have it for 6-8 months?

      • ohminus says:

        The latter. Setting up an immobile deadline like 11-11-11 with Skyrim is pure idiocy.

    • suibhne says:

      Some of your points are spot on, but I think you’re missing a basic fact that FO4 (and Bethesda’s games more generally) has content bugs and engine bugs. The content bugs are fixable, by Bethesda as well as modders, and it really is an issue of time. The engine bugs are a different matter entirely, and Bethesda has arguably been making poor engine choices for 15 years. Their world size and content scale have led them to settle for a incremental patching on a terrible underlying engine for over a decade.

      Bethesda clearly doesn’t need more content developers. If there’s a problem there, it’s bad management practices and/or bad design priorities – not a lack of resources. But the studio desperately needs an industry-leading team to build or adapt a kickass engine. Right now, we’ve seen years of compromise. It’s now coincidence that, every single time a new FO/TES game is announced, everyone looks around nervously and asks, “Will this be the time they finally use a new engine?”

  14. GallonOfAlan says:

    This is not the rails and scripted events of a COD. This is complexity on another order of magnitude. The software developers on these comments will agree. If you think it’s unplayably broken, take a look at the recent Batman game. That’s *actually* unplayably broken for a lot of people. The real issue here is the resources and willingness to fix serious issues quickly and not break saves. So if you’re really worried dry your eyes and give it six months before buying it.

  15. Jason Moyer says:

    I’m not particularly thrilled with some of the nastier bugs that always seem to get through Bethsoft’s QA process, but I do feel like people should read this article on the tradeoffs they make when it comes to preserving a positive studio culture and trying to balance the massive amount of content their games provide with the polish people expect from AAA games:

    link to

    • Guvornator says:

      I was about to link to that self same article so thanks for saving me the bother. a few lines stand out:

      “Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, the company’s first Xbox 360 game, saw a big leap to about 70. But then, after its biggest mainstream success, Bethesda added only about 10 more heads for Fallout 3. Skyrim was another “big” jump, to just 100 people. For the leap to Xbox One and PlayStation 4, Bethesda told GameSpot that it only added 8 more people.

      Compare this to the 450 people who worked on Assassin’s Creed 2, and the 900 who worked on Assassin’s Creed IV a few years later. Or perhaps the 1,000 people who worked on Grand Theft Auto V.

      There’s no secret to how other AAA developers working on large, open-world games achieve that fine sheen: With veritable armies to keep their technology at the cutting edge, generate massive worlds of content, and polish increasingly complex game systems. Were Bethesda to pursue the same path, such explosive growth could not help but have an impact on its sustainability as an institution, as a culture, and as a creative entity.”

      • Buttless Boy says:

        This is a great argument until you remember that a lot of the biggest problems people have with Bethesda’s games appear to be because the people in charge of those things suck at their jobs: their writing has always been sloppy and dull, they’ve had consistently lousy UIs since Oblivion, their art direction has been varying degrees of uninspired for a decade, their AI has always been awful, and their animations have never been anything approaching good. They desperately need new blood. I’d suggest hiring the modders that fix these things over and over in all of their games.

        Bethesda games are some of my favorite games, but it blows my mind how much worse they are than unpaid modders at almost everything they do. I still prefer a vanilla Bethesda game to most other AAA games, but they could be so much better than they are and it’s always disappointing to see how little they’ve learned with each new release.

      • Baines says:

        Maybe Bethesda should team up with one of those other AAA publishers that are willing to foot 500 man teams for some super-game, with a deal that both can continue to use the resulting engine (so Bethesda can use it for its next several games.)

        Grand Theft Scrolls: Morrowind, anyone?

  16. ignare brute says:

    The interface is a mess, it is not as magnificient as the Witcher 3 despite require similar hardware… Still, I’m playing everyday. So I guess that is good.

    The most obvious issue to me right now is that weapons does not show damage per second (DPS) like I think it did in previous versions. So it is often very random to decide out of two weapons which is best.

    • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

      That’s because of textures and their extremely low impact on GPU processing power.

      FO4 has a lot of modern processing techniques, similar to TW3 in fact, but the textures are not on the same level and they tend to be the most “in your face” feature.

      They are the easier thing to mod though, which makes FO4 a stronger modding platform than the previous games which relied on archaic shading.

  17. mao_dze_dun says:

    Not a single word about SLI/Crossfire…

    • Zanchito says:

      Nor any aspect ratio / resolution outside what a TV can do. I’ve spent almost as much time fiddling with obscure settings trying to decrapify the UI, screen and huds as playing.

      • Zenicetus says:

        I was finally able to use power armor last night, because I finally found a setting someone discovered that scales the HUD so you can see it at 1600×1200. Up to level 20, I had no power armor options, because they couldn’t be bothered to support a 4:3 screen. Good going, Bethesda!

        I know I’m “supposed” to be using a widescreen monitor as a gamer, but somehow every other game I’ve played in the last year — Witcher 3, AOW III, Pillars of Eternity, Endless Legend, Rebel Galaxy — managed to support my 1600×1200 screen with no problems.

        If even a little indie studio like the guys behind Rebel Galaxy can support it directly as an Options setting, then why the hell can’t Bethesda? Especially since the game engine can handle it, and it works just fine with a tiny .ini file hack.

    • Trimdeezy says:

      I don’t know about crossfire

      But SLI IS functional if you get into NVIDIA inspector and tweak a few settings.

      If you have NVIDIA, google it – should be able to get it to work. Without it, I wouldn’t be playing it.

      Trying to fix it for widescreen is another story – but I was able to work that out too.

      The point is? Our job is to play the game. Not fix it for you, Bethesda.

      In fact, if it was trivial enough that we could fix it for you? Even more SHAME on you.

      • ZippyDSMlee says:

        I kinda wish they would just give up and all PC games come with the SDK…. it would make fixing it go so much faster and smoothly and you do not have to work around hard code…

  18. Holysheep says:

    Blatant fucking lie. Even skyrim was more stable at start.

  19. SideWays408 says:

    Im about 20 hours in and i have not expirienced a single real bug. Iv seen some graphical glitches here and there but nothing that affected my gameplay in any way.

  20. Sui42 says:

    To all the arguments which say “but oh, it’s such a complex system / game…”

    Well, maybe the game doesn’t actually need to be such a complex mess of shit?

    I mean, from a critical perspective, I find the more recent Bethesda games to be horribly overstuffed with terrible content. I’ve played Fallout 4 for about 15 hours and I’ve yet to come across a single story, quest or even *line of dialogue* which is interesting or thought provoking. The best I can say about the game’s story content is that it’s “not ALWAYS terrible”. There is nothing in Fallout 4 which isn’t a poor imitation of something from a previous Fallout game, or some film or fiction. Much like the actual stuff which litters the game world; it’s all junk.

    So, solution: put in less stuff? Make sure the stuff you put in is actually quality content? I’d rather play a 40 hour game with interesting stories and fewer bugs, than the huge swamped mess of shit which Fallout 4 is right now.

    • ohminus says:

      Here’s to fixing what’s there before cramming in tons of new features just to be able to say “Now you can also do X,Y and Z!”

    • Cinek says:

      I detect Witcher 3 effect – expecting good content from the newly released games with some quests that make you weight your decisions. I’d love to see more games strive to that standards, but honestly: I never expected even 1/10th as much from Bethesda. Look at their track record. I can’t think of a single game they made in last 10 years where an entire main plot and almost all of the side-quests wouldn’t be a complete shit.

    • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

      That’s your opinionin and your priorities list, which are probably not in line with what Bethesda has always trying to do with their games.

      This begs the question: Are their games for you? Probably not.

      I personally enjoy the dynamic response i get from the game mechanics themselves, the constant random shit happening around, the increased connection with the wasteland and reshaping parts of it to my liking, playing mayor and so on.

      I actually wouldn’t want to go back to a game that lives primarily by main and sidequests i already know like the back of my hand, but that’s just me. There are a couple notable exceptions ( like KOTOR2 ) but that’s more or less it.

      You have to make some tradeoffs with each game to meet the desired goals, and for my personal preference it’s quite alright considering the cons are greatly overplayed by some.

      There are people here who didn’t comment on previous articles because they resurfaced just now from their session, and they are here to report dozens of relatively smooth hours of gaming. I concur, i had minor bugs and never a crash.

      • ohminus says:

        “I personally enjoy the dynamic response i get from the game mechanics themselves, the constant random shit happening around, the increased connection with the wasteland and reshaping parts of it to my liking, playing mayor and so on. ”

        And I am constantly baffled how people feel a “connection” with a world that is rather arbitrarily cobbled together with a whole bunch of features which neither make sense by themselves nor in combination.

        Bethesda games have for quite some while now been a sandbox on which someone poured out a sack of features. That’s not what a world looks like. A world is a complex system of interdependencies from which arise a significant number of limitations as to what your options are. You say you like to play mayor – how credible is it that in a dangerous wasteland, random dude #1 who excels chiefly in shooting things (because the game doesn’t let you do anything else really well) is trusted to become the mayor of a community of people who may even know each other longer than they know random dude #1? Trust should be a very scarce resource. And how come random dude #1 magically develops engineering skills whenever they are necessary, only to forget them immediately thereafter?

        • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

          First thing first, you never become a real mayor.

          Life in the wasteland is dangerous and primitive and people enjoy the fact that you helped them with their problems, created a better environment for them and built defenses, it’s a tenfold upgrade from their previous shithole and that’s all that matters. You’re already Jesus for them.

          Eitherway, i feel connected because i find the game immersive, i like to see stuff happening when i stroll around and i feel connected when i scavenge shit that would otherwise be just there for flavor.

          Many open world games simply treat the environment as something that might be nice and cool looking to explore, and what happens is i don’t end up doing so that much because it’s often pointless, just like i was always bored with building in various games in which you only do that to be cool, because that’s pointless aswell.

          What happens here is that i’m given a wasteland that i feel i can sort of own, and that this is the game for me. I’m really sorry it’s not the game for you.

          • ohminus says:

            I’ll give you an example from Skyrim: There’s a whole bunch of sawmills. Every hold has one. Some people even order logs from them, but what is being done with all that wood? Even when you build your own house, the planks look like they’ve been in place 50 years. At the day, the sawmills are, especially in the number they exist in the game, fluff. Hey, you can even use them to cut logs, but to what end? It doesn’t serve any true purpose.

            Is it immersive that you can go to the smith and hammer away on his anvil? Certainly, if he gave permission. Is it immersive that you can make weapons that put the smith to shame from scratch? Not really.

            Compare Witcher 3: Geralt can make potions and bombs, because that crude alchemy is part of Witcher training. But to make actual weapons and armor, he needs to see a pro – and they are not all equal either. Would you seriously order weapons or armor from someone who has been practicing smithing only for a few weeks? Not really. Your life depends on these things.

            The Civil War in Skyrim is symptomatic for their problem – no one forced them to have a civil war. But they had this great idea, dropped it into the game and then struggled to implement it in a credible fashion. And where in terms of games mechanics, Bethesda has unfortunately practiced “If there’s a problem with it, cut it out” when it comes to games mechanics instead of fixing them, they left the Civil War in there as a fragment, even though it is a side show compared to Alduin’s return.

            So the procedure over several games has been to mechanistically rob you of more and more character decision options, even though you should have them in a credible world, all the while adding new things to do, even when you shouldn’t be able to do them in a credible world.

            I’d much prefer that they fix things instead of cutting one thing out and adding something new that’s just as flawed for it.

          • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

            There surely are gamey elements, afterall i can turn scraps into a scavenged airplane engine that i didn’t really get from anywhere, but every game has them somewhere.

            We’re not going anywhere if all you can do is trying to desperately prove the game sucks, carefully picking what you feel is wrong without really doing the same with your other comparison sources, that are supposedly otherwise perfect and completely devoid of their own silly gamey thingies.

            Besides the Skyrim example is plain “wrong” because there’s actually a point in FO4 in have a lot of resources. All my camps are linked and spare food and water feeds those less fortunate. If i still has other stuff left i can use it for crafting a whole bunch of things, including “vegetable starch” that provides one of the rarest and most useful commodities around, adesive.

            Look, building and crafting there is gamey and a little too overpowering, but if you like this sort of stuff it’s awesome to have huge farms or absurd water treatment facilities that you carefully build piece by piece, electrical wire, poles and all, patiently trading and scavenging all that’s required.

            But the real point is that we’re comparing different games, and that’s the biggest stinger there. Either you’re like me and love both, or you’ll probably hate one of them as you do.

            Technically it would be even possible to hate TW3 because you’re Geralt. It’s not my case but there sure are those people out there.

            Can’t wait for Cyberpunk though.

          • ohminus says:

            Sorry, you clearly don’t understand the concept of an example. I used Skryim examples because the problem is most obvious there, but it’s really applicable to every Bethesda game out there.

            “Look, building and crafting there is gamey and a little too overpowering, but if you like this sort of stuff it’s awesome to have huge farms or absurd water treatment facilities that you carefully build piece by piece, electrical wire, poles and all, patiently trading and scavenging all that’s required.”

            And if you like a credible, immersive world, then it’s complete anathema to that concept.

          • Premium User Badge

            Qazinsky says:


            So you want to compare Geralt, a defined character that is NOT and has no interest in being a blacksmith, with a player defined character that can be built to be a grandmaster blacksmith and have the exact motivation and background (apart from being taken prisoner) the player decides for them?

            You sure learn the trade fast, but that is due to gameplay issues, noone would like to spend 10000 hours to master a game skill in real time. We learn things fast in Skyrim to get to where we should be with the character we want to play, just because we just created this character doesn’t mean we were born yesterday.

          • ohminus says:

            “So you want to compare Geralt, a defined character that is NOT and has no interest in being a blacksmith, with a player defined character that can be built to be a grandmaster blacksmith and have the exact motivation and background (apart from being taken prisoner) the player decides for them?”

            No, I am saying that there are justifications why someone cannot do something. You cannot do everything, you have to focus on some things if you really want to be good at them.

            “You sure learn the trade fast, but that is due to gameplay issues, noone would like to spend 10000 hours to master a game skill in real time. We learn things fast in Skyrim to get to where we should be with the character we want to play, just because we just created this character doesn’t mean we were born yesterday.”

            That’s a bullshit argument because Skyrim precisely removed the notion of not being born yesterday from the game. Instead, you start with a blank slate. Your argument would hold water if you indeed started with someone who was already an accomplished smith. But you don’t. Learning quickly during the game is not an adequate substitute.

            The problem only exists because Skyrim introduced smithing to begin with – previous games only had repairing. Which makes sense, because that’s about what someone who lives on the road will master – repairing the stuff he uses if it’s not completely broken.

          • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

            I like many non credible things, i might need to change my hobby if that wasn’t the case.

          • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

            Plus, previous Witcher games had the excuse of amnesia, but the third doesn’t and you still start like a poor sod with little skills, how is that credible?

            There are a TON of stupid gamey elements in each game, you can’t try to have me believe you can’t stomach this sort of stuff because you wouldn’t be playing almost any game at all at this stage.

          • Premium User Badge

            Qazinsky says:

            Every Skyrim character starts with enough knowledge in smithing to make full iron right off the bat, wether you like it or not, wether it “makes sense” or not, every character has that base knowledge. The character might very well be “accomplished” wherever they come from, but we can’t know that because that isn’t Skyrim.

            You do not start as a blank slate, you start as a Jack of all trades, with some skill in everything.

          • ohminus says:

            You don’t realize that’s the same thing? You start as a blank slate because you start the same as everyone else, without specific strengths or weaknesses defined by your past as you did in previous games.

          • Premium User Badge

            Qazinsky says:

            Granted, they removed classes and I’d prefer to have them back but race still give you different skill bonuses. The way you used blank slate as a reason to why the character wasn’t a capable blacksmith is what I am arguing with here, the character clearly possess blacksmithing knowledge, amongst other things.

    • monsieurZb says:

      OK, honest question from a developer who don’t do games : what are these “mindbogglingly complex” behind-the-scene features I constantly hear about in Fallout 4?

      I sometimes saw the remnants of battles that took place without me (got a few legendary weapons that way) but that’s about all.

      There is nearly no interaction between settlements, the locations reset so completely every few days that there is no need for the game to keep track of them, the dialog shrubs are very simple and don’t give the impression of a complex network of connections. There is no procedurally generated terrain, buildings or creatures.

      I’d really be interested because, while it’s entirely possible I’m missing something big, I’m wondering what this complexity is supposed to achieve that scripted events couldn’t do.

      • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

        There was a settlement quest i had to complete but my questgiver was one of the caravaneers, so i had to chase him mid course to report in and it’s position was always updated anywhere on the map.

        I even tried waiting before entering the relevant “grid”s and it still worked, and i didn’t tweak them in any way beforehand, which might break the game anyway.

        This is just a random example and yes, you could make more stuff scripted, but maybe you shouldn’t, especially since the biggest problems seem to be broken scripts.

      • ohminus says:

        This! The supposed complexity is just a bunch of fluff features added independently of each other, with no real consequences and impact on the larger world.

      • suibhne says:

        There’s actually very little systems complexity in the game. There’s a remarkable amount of content, and that seems to continually get mistaken for systems complexity by reviewers as well as players. But there’s very little horizontal interaction between vertical slices of content – almost everything is self-contained (or periodically reset, as you note), with no global or regional effects and no long-term consequences in the gameworld.

        It’s not just that scripting could accomplish the same stuff – it could actually accomplish much more, because it could accommodate actual consequences for player actions. Those are exceedingly rare in FO4.

      • Zenicetus says:

        Well, here’s an example of something I saw recently that’s either “emergent” gameplay due to the design, or a hell of a good scripted event that covered all possible scenarios (spoilers, obv):

        After finishing some of the early quests in Goodneighbor, I found the guy in the back of the bar who’s a potential Companion. I didn’t mean to hire him, but the dialog wasn’t clear enough about why he wanted some caps. Anyway, he got hired and my current companion Nick was sent back to his detective agency in Diamond City. I figured I’d try the new guy and see what he was like (incredibly annoying, as it turned out).

        We walked out of Goodneighbor and headed northeast to an area I was supposed to check out. We started to hear some gunfire a block or two away, and I go over to check it out. It turns out that Nick, in the process of leaving Goodneighbor, has stumbled into the Raider guards in front of the Mass Fusion building and they attacked him. So we help out, kill the guards, and Nick goes on his way.

        Would that have still happened if I headed South after leaving Goodneighbor? Was it emergent or scripted? I dunno. It was still cool to see.

        For all of my complaints about the horrible UI, wooden faces (except for main characters like Nick) and uninspired dialog, I do enjoy the way the setting works, and I enjoy seeing little scenes like this. Witcher 3 did a better job of being a complete game where everything worked amazingly well. Fallout 4 does only one thing well, and that’s environment design. It’s enough to keep me playing.

        • suibhne says:

          I’m pretty sure that was emergent. My point is simply that it’s not an indication of complex systems; it’s actually very simple, algorithmically. In this specific case, it worked out well. But it can just as easily work out really, really badly – as when I’ve seen traveling caravans, several times, engage totally Super Mutant groups that represent an obvious, overwhelming threat, and apparently survive only because I deign to bail them out. Or…I walk away and leave them to be slaughtered, and I still encounter the same merchant an hour later in a different part of the map. It’s the exact same algorithms at work, and you quickly realize that they’re 1) incredibly simplistic, and 2) incredibly artificial and “gamey”, not at all representative of reasonable NPC behavior. Bethesda doesn’t design living worlds. Rather, it designs ant colonies full of very simple AI actors in a context with lots and lots of stuff. Sometimes the result is compelling, but it’s often laughable.

          • Zenicetus says:

            As a critique, I agree with all of that.

            So it’s a choice between not enjoying the game at all, or putting on rose-colored glasses where you enjoy it when something cool happens (like my example above), along with just ignoring it when it doesn’t work out. That’s the choice I’ve made. If there were better games like this out there, I’d just ignore Fallout 4 and play those better games. But as it is… and since I’ve already finished Witcher 3…

            And yeah, I know that makes me a stooge and an enabler for poor quality games from Bethesda. :) I see it as demonstrating that there is a market for games like this by spending money on it. And maybe someone else will come along besides just CDPR and give them some real competition so they’ll tighten up their act.

  21. MikoSquiz says:

    I’m used to seeing other people making implausible excuses for Bethesda releases being janky and dysfunctional, but that claim that the ballsed-up interface work is intentional is the first time I’ve seen Bethesda themselves making implausible excuses for their releases being janky and dysfunctional.

    • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

      As much as i’m in the “loving FO4” camp, yes, i have to admit that line in particular was majestically stupid.

  22. tonicer says:

    I would love to be able to play FO4 with 144FPS on my 144Hz monitor without breaking the game.

  23. raegenhere says:

    I can’t even say if there are bugs or not, I’ve put it aside after an hour, since the keyboard & mouse controls are just horribly unintuitive and confusing.

    For building stuff you’d need 3 hands to do it effectively, mousewheel does not nothing in many areas where you would expect it (changing weapons like in any other game since the invention of mouse wheels…) or where it would be helpful (VATS). If you need to confirm something, it’s is “e” sometimes and “enter” at other times…

    I didn’t give it much time, so I might be wrong on some. Also, I’ve read about potentially helpful alternate keys or “tricks”, which just aren’t documented…
    In any case, I’ll be waiting for modders to fix controls and UI.

    • Premium User Badge

      Qazinsky says:

      AFAIK e always works even when the ui says you need to hit enter. Most games that switched weapons with mouse wheels has a set weapon order, they could have done mousewheel scrolling through quickbar or the favourite list though.

      • suibhne says:

        “E” almost always subs for Enter, but not always. There’s such a lack of attention to detail.

    • Zenicetus says:

      Quick tips for mouse & keyboard if you don’t already know it:

      Hold shift and use WASD to scroll sideways for the Settlement menu, and E for enter. Also, you can use the top row number keys for dialog choices instead of the arrow keys.

      It’s maddening that you actually *can* do things like that, or hack the game files to get correct monitor resolution and desired FOV, but you have to stumble across the information online instead of having any of this directly indicated in-game and supported by Bethesda.

      • suibhne says:

        Almost every time I use the Shift-keyboard trick to navigate the Workshop menu, the interface becomes non-responsive even to the number keys. When I use the number keys only, this does not happen. It’s unlikely this is due to a keyboard issue on my end, since I’m using the bog-standard Windows device drivers. So…as convenient as that trick is, it’s significantly buggy for some players, at least.

  24. GallonOfAlan says:

    Jesus. I used to wait half an hour for Manic Miner to load from tape, and it didn’t work half the time. Gamers today are whiny nances.

    • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:


      Games in the past were bug free.


      • Guvornator says:

        Surely buggy Fallout games are just part of it’s heritage? Remmember the Ghoul town in 2 that turned on you after saying thank you for fixing their power station? Your reputation would be in the sink by the time you left, because the game thought you were killing innocent civvies rather than bloodthirsty killers. Or the fact that Armour piercing rounds were useless thanks to some messed up maths? bethesda are just keeping that tradition alive…

      • Titler says:

        I started gaming with the Dragon 32, and the Commodore C16, and it’s true, games back then could be broken, or just plain shoddy. But do you know what they didn’t have? Multi-million advertising budgets to tell you they were fantastic, and online obsessives who’d be there wherever you tried to talk about what you’d played, and wouldn’t let you have your own perspective on the experience you’d just had. Once you owned a game, it was yours in those days, for good or ill. But now…

        Seriously TacticalNuclearPenguin, I’ve been reading articles on F4 here, trying to get a sense if I want to invest in it as the first new game for my brand new system; And you’ve been posting on every single one for hours at a time, responding to almost everyone’s posts in considerable depth. But what good does it do? All it actually does is make people more resistant to wanting to play the game, because its fans have no interest at all in letting others speak and say what they honestly saw; You want to always say either they’re wrong, or it “just isn’t the game for you”.

        Now my experience with Skyrim was that it was a beautiful world, with cardboard characters and lifeless quests mostly, but which only became tolerable in an engine sense with years of Unofficial Patches and judicious use of console commands still, to find where my NPCompanions with half my loot had wandered off too. I still put in 344 hours because I could set my own goals and I liked standing on windswept mountains. It was just fun to explore the world, even if not talk to the mannequins that populated it. In many ways, probably close towards how you play Fallout 4.

        But you’re so, so determined to defend the game beyond reason that I’m now really not sure it’s likely to be in any state I want to play right now. I don’t trust your judgement on what the game would actually be like for me.

        I know you love the game, but it’s possible to suffocate the things you love by being too clingy, you know? Why not take a break and let more people talk so actual issues can be raised and addressed, and maybe they’ll come to love the game in time too. Right now though… I think I’ll pass.

        • Premium User Badge

          Qazinsky says:

          Yet you did not mention how other people, like ohnimus does the exact same thing in every thread on any comment that is vaguely positive? Funny how it’s discussing the game when they think like you yet turns into baseless complains when they belong to the other side, eh?

        • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

          Meh, i guess i’m bored, but you probably shouldn’t focus too much on me but rather the actual trends going on.

          Don’t trust me, trust those who are surfacing just now to report their 100+ enjoyable hours.

          Trust them, because they were playing and not commenting before when the first articles popped in all that was present in the comment section ( other than me and a couple other dudes ) were people on a fucking crusade.

          I would hope that if you noticed me, you would have noticed that trend too, but hey, when i’m bored i’m on the internet shooting bandwagons on sight.

          I seldom told people they were wrong, i mostly told them they should stop spewing bile because that’s what happened most of the times, and i’m not sure why would anyone do that. I’m also confused as to why everyone is bringing TW3 to the table while desperately trying to force it down everyone’s throat as the better game and prove FO4 is horrible, while they are two very different things.

          I think i know the internet by know, i’ve seen many people panic over scores ( thankfully there are none here ) and awards, and for some reason people are scared that this game might steal some incredibly precious medal from some other game. I’m not sure why but i feel it’s the only logic conclusion by now.

    • All is Well says:

      I agree. Fuck people complaining about Fallout 4. I sure didn’t complain that it was “immersion-breaking” and “shallow” when I had to use sticks instead of real swords when I was a kid, or when they had literal bugs on them. And fuck people complaining about low framerates in Arkham Knight. My first computer couldn’t even load that game, much less play it. Really, fuck everyone complaining about anything that was worse at some point in the past, the entitled fuckers.

      • ohminus says:

        Awww, cute. Calling people “entitled little fuckers” when they expect adequate value for their money suggests you never ever acquired a mature relationship with money. Most likely, dad is still paying for you. When you used sticks for swords, you didn’t pay a single dime for them. Guess what, spoiled little brat, when people spend money on something, they expect value.

      • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

        I’m not entirely sure about the tone and what you’re trying to convey, but putting FO4 and Arkham Knight even remotely near is rather stupid.

        • All is Well says:

          I know, Poe’s Law and all that, but I would have thought that it would be pretty obvious that I was parodying the logic of GallonOfAlan’s post from the line “fuck everyone complaining about anything that was worse at some point in the past”. And the tone was (intended to be) jovial. Oh well.

          • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

            Yeah, point taken, i just wasn’t exactly sure because the tone seemed to change mid post and i see others have fallen in the same trap.

            Still, i give the guy some credit because it’s also true that this particular game’s “brokenness” is incredibly overplayed.

          • All is Well says:

            Yeah, I actually agree (though perhaps mainly because I think there are other problems that are more interesting and important to discuss). My point wasn’t really that all the complaining about bugs is entirely justified, only that it’s silly to think they’re unjustified because games in the 80’s had worse problems. Heh, guess I should have just written that to begin with!

          • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

            Pfft. You both had a point, plus you can’t blame yourself for my prototype sarcasm detector.

  25. Solidstate89 says:

    It definitely is the most stable Fallout Bethesda game I’ve ever played. On top of that, the only really infuriating bug I’ve come across is the fact that certain conversations I was supposed to be able to have were completely cut off from me because I was wearing wearing power armor – so I was just attacked instantly.

    Heads up for anybody on the mission to find Kellogg, don’t take your Power Armor with you. He’ll just attack on you sight instead of having the chance to converse with him. The same goes for the mission to rescue Detective Valentine. And at least 2-3 other quests I’ve done before I read about that bug and was wondering why the game was acting the way it was by having clearly defined moments where conversations were supposed to happen, but where instead I had no choice but to kill my attacker.

    • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

      It might be depending on some bug with a certain paintjob, upgrade or even armor model?

      I approached Kellog with the shark paint X-01 ( yeah, main campaign starts at level 40, didn’t you know? )and all went well.

      Fun fact: The plasma rifle even if modded to be a green flamethrower still counts as semiauto rifle when perks are concerned and retains it’s kinetic/energy damage mix, with damage and armor penetration boost from the perk plus it’s random rare enhancement of 30% penetration on top, Kellog lasted 0.8 seconds of mindless frontal assault!

      • Premium User Badge

        Qazinsky says:

        Strange, I could have sworn I was looking at a plasma rifle just yesterday and saw a significant drop in damage due to the flamer mod counting as automatic and thus negating the rifleman perk…

        • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

          I reloaded on a level up and tried every perk except for pistols, and that’s what i came up with.

          Are you sure you’re not just seeing the modding screen and noticing the huge damage differencial between that and, say, the sniper barrel?

          Damage seems poor but:

          1) in that screen you only see either the kinetic or energetic component
          2) It’s like that because the rate of fire is absurdly high, plus it doesn’t seem to care if an enemy is covered by another and i’d wager it also hits various parts simultaneously, but don’t quote me on that. It’s just that on actual live testing it was so overpowered it looked like a glitch.

          You’re supposed to buy a lot of plasma rounds after that though.

          • Premium User Badge

            Qazinsky says:

            The modding interface shows both types of damage AFAIK, could be that I compared to other +dmg mods, but as I don’t have the game in front of me right now, it’s hard to tell, but as far as I remember, switching between the standard damage and the the flamer component lowered the damage, granted, maybe it gets such high fire rate increase that the DPS is the same/higher.

          • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

            Yep, something like that, i’m slightly misremembering some things about which interface shows which, but still all i know is that i tried to verify if the perk worked and it does.

            The thing chews through ammo like a minigun, that’s the thing with the very “low” damage values, although mine is showing this right now with only 3/5 perk points. Ignore the language, mods are maxed.

      • Solidstate89 says:

        I had the starting T-45d with no specific faction paint. I’ve also had it happen with the T-60 using the Vault-Tec paint.

        Same results.

        • Premium User Badge

          Qazinsky says:

          It can be hard to say if it’s a Power Armor bug or something much more narrow though, some bugs are so weirdly specific, for example, the one real bug I get, is that if I have one specific companion following me, I will turn to face him instead of any NPC that tries to initiate dialogue with me. The same is not true for other companions though, and it mgiht not even be true for this companion all the time either, I noticed it after a while, might just be some really weirdly specific problem.

          • Solidstate89 says:

            It’s a well known reported bug on the Fallout 4 Wiki site, and I was able to perfectly reproduce it as well.

            The owner of the bar in Diamond City (his name escapes at the moment) who is having an affair with the married woman. During the mission you can accept to go and speak to him, I quicksaved right outside the bar. I loaded it, and with the Power Armor on, he instantly began attacking me. It even broke the pre-scripted conversation he was supposed to be having with the last “customer” who was leaving the bar. The customer was just standing there, having his one half of the conversation.

            I loaded up the quick save because I had no interest in killing him and wanted to see what would happen if I talked to him. Out of no other reason other than the fact I wanted to talk to him without the “radio voice” I stepped out of my power armor and changed literally nothing else. I stepped into the bar, and the pre-scripted conversation finished perfectly. I was then able to have the normal conversation with him that I was supposed to have in the first place.

  26. Suits says:

    Comparing weapons and armor is the most archaic shit ever

  27. Tinotoin says:

    The most broken thing in the game, for me, is that this is not Diamond City’s theme music:

  28. Stevostin says:

    “But big game companies never, ever make mistakes. Don’t forget that.”

    Yeah, like video game websites ever do ?

  29. Buttless Boy says:

    The whole argument that Bethesda can’t possibly fix all of the engine bugs that’ve been around since Skyrim, Fallout 3, or sometimes even Morrowind is such shit. It’s literally in the terms of service for their mod tools that they can use any content the modders make however they want. Many of the unofficial patch team members have repeatedly said they’d welcome Bethesda adding their fixes to the official patches. They could have incorporated every single fix from every single sprawling unofficial patch in the last decade of Bethesda games, which would have fixed most of the lasting engine bugs, and given them a much stabler system to build this game on top of. Why they’ve never done this is a mystery to me.

    It’d be cool if some enterprising journalist would reach out to Bethesda employees to try to find out whether it’s the publisher forcing early releases, mismanagement, or just general incompetence that’s causing these issues. There must be something unique going on here when other games of this scale just don’t have these kinds of problems.

  30. trjp says:

    You have to remember that Fallout 3 was a disaster at launch, CTDing for most people, performance problems for nearly everyone and either years on, it’s still pretty much that!!

    I’d argue that FO3 shouldn’t still be on-sale, it’s fundamentally broken without fan patches and hacks – that Bethesda continue to sell it having NEVER fixed it tells you everything they need to know about Bethesda.

  31. Marcurios says:

    No matter what they say, fact is that the game doesn’t ever utilize more more then 55% of my CPU, because the executable is programmed that way, framerates drop down to 25 with high end hardware and the CPU isn’t used, that is a case of bad programming.

    Also, drawcallcounts are console based amounts on PC, since PC doesnt have a low level API it can’t handle these drawcalls, another case of bad programming.

    They make money by the millions, and have mediocre programmers at best, this is unacceptable imo.

    I always loved the games, but this is actually the last time i bought one of their games for the full price, next time i’ll wait a year before i buy it, that way i pay a price that is more consistent with it’s quality.

    • mlgxdoritos says:

      Totally agree, been having fps drops like crazy on a 970 and an i7. That shit is unacceptable.

  32. suibhne says:

    It arguably is their most stable release, at least since Morrowind…and that’s really damning with faint praise. But the worst part isn’t the stability – it’s that Bethesda’s UX design continues to be among the worst in the business, at least on PC.

    Bethesda’s continued logic – which they’ve now made explicit in their PR – is that scale excuses poor craft. It’s disappointing to see so little ambition/vision.

    • Baines says:

      Bethesda is only able to continue to use that excuse because so many people buy and praise their games.

      The moment a Bethesda game tanked, Bethesda would reevaluate what they find acceptable.

  33. nimbulan says:

    Even though I’ve had very few problems, based on my experience and everything I’ve read I would say that Skyrim had far fewer significant problems at launch than Fallout 4 does. Hell they even had the microstuttering bug fixed at the Skyrim launch before they proceeded to break it again in a patch.

  34. Nokturnal says:

    “Designed for PC from the start.”

    They didn’t even include a working FoV slider with the game. That means, no, no it wasn’t designed for PC. Also you have to mod out the stupid controller dialogue menu to a PC friendly dialogue selection.

    They also did a terrible job at optimization. The ground textures are stuck on 4k res even if you set graphics to low. Making areas like the area around Goodneighbor a framerate nightmare. Thankfully mods fixed this as well.

    Raise your standards Rock, Paper, Shotgun. It might be less of a mess than their previous titles, but designed for PC means having a working FoV slider and PC centric control schemes. (Why have bash and throw grenade the same key on PC?)

    • suibhne says:

      Yeah, it’s hard to take seriously any claim of “developed with loving care for the PC” when you’re saddled with an FOV that’s designed for couch-and-television play. I think it’s reasonable for games to require PC players to use a gamepad (which is as legit for PCs as a joystick, e.g.) as long as this requirement is totally up front, but it’s a pretty fundamental disconnect with the platform to require PC gamers to use the same view as couch-and-television console gamers.

    • Sulpher says:

      And to add to the “designed for PC” incredulity:
      -the game has locked-in mouse acceleration
      -the vertical axis mouse sensitivity is set to half the horizontal (whyyyy?)
      -it doesn’t support multi-GPU setups
      -no support for frame rates higher than 60, else you get stuck in place after using in-game terminals and will effectively double your melee speed.

      After a decade with this creaking engine the community routinely quashes more bugs than Bethesda in the first week after release, yet the same frame pacing stutter issue is present from Oblivion all the way to FO4.

  35. DimentoGraven says:

    It’s hard to take an article complaining about inadequate bug checking seriously when the editor was so appallingly bad at fixing the various errors in the article.

    Still, yeah it’d be nicer to have a more bug free version of the game available when launched, but that would require more bodies, and bodies cost money, and money spent on bug testing is money taken away from the profit margin, and god-for-f’ing-bid the suits get LESS obscene profits just for the sake of “esoteric intangibles” such as ‘quality’…

  36. Merlin the tuna says:

    I love this headline. “Bethesda announces that latest Bethesda game is pretty great!”

  37. garsidetogo says:

    Don’t understand how it’s so appalling to people that the enormous, living and breathing worlds of Bethesda games have bugs. Try to wrap your head around how many methods and processes are running simultaneously in a game of this size, with all of its different systems, facets, and activities. There are going to be cases where things occur that were never planned for… simply because the scale of the game is too large… of course this doesn’t excuse devs from obvious or common bugs… but what do you expect from an experience you cannot recreate in nearly any other game?

    • ohminus says:

      “Don’t understand how it’s so appalling to people that the enormous, living and breathing worlds of Bethesda games have bugs.”

      It isn’t living and breathing. It merely simulates it, and pretty badly so. It has tons of features none of which are interconnected -as they would be in a living, breathing world.

      ” Try to wrap your head around how many methods and processes are running simultaneously in a game of this size, with all of its different systems, facets, and activities.”

      This argument was already debunked by others here. Try to keep up. The system is not nearly as complex as it pretends to be.

    • Sulpher says:

      Their games have never lived or breathed for me. I’ve enjoyed them all (save Oblivion) but to these eyes Beth games have always been rather shallow in terms of towns and townsfolk, of kings and the quests they give. The writing falls short every time. What routinely delights is the scale of the environments and your quest to craft increasingly absurd swords/guns to tip the odds in your favor. New Vegas however remains a high point, and Bethesda can’t claim a win on that one.

      • Turkey says:

        It’s funny how much more the Gothic 2 devs made their world seem alive just with a few canned work animations and having the characters be suspicious of you if they caught you doing something shady.

  38. Premium User Badge

    syllopsium says:

    It might be true that a lot of the bugs are due to complexity of systems – after all there’ve been issues with RPGs such as Ultima since the 90s.

    However, issues such as the lack of support for screens not in 16:9 format are surely calculated decisions to ship the game on a certain date, and sod the minority of people running different hardware.

  39. Premium User Badge

    gritz says:

    It’s pretty amazing to see the long knives come out on both sides of any mention of this excellent game’s obvious flaws.

  40. Kregoth says:

    Hire more testers? that still wouldn’t have improved the amount of bugs on release. As someone who has worked in the testing environment. No amount of testers will ever find all the bugs produced across millions of hardware combinations.

    For all this bitching about bugs, I agree with Bethesda, this is their best “Released” game. I have encountered fewer bugs and shortcoming in its mechanics than previous games. The game is amazing, not perfect, but still far better than previous releases.

    The new Perk leveling system is great. They got away from letting you become a jack of all trades, at least not from the start. Each Perk path helps change how you play the game. From the Charismatic Settlement builder, to the lucky retard who finds everything in random drawers.

    Compared to previous releases this game feels more complete than any other title they’ve released. Definitely not perfect, but the system and mechanics feed into each other far better than Skyrim or Fallout 3/NV ever did.

    I also Agree with Bethesda when it comes to not hand holding the player throughout the entire game. The game is all about a sense of discovering a new world, so discovering them on your own is far better than being told!

    So whats the point I am trying to make? NO ones perfect, no company can make the perfect game. No matter how many testers, or developers make a game, you will always find faults! It’s reporting on what makes the game enjoyable, what makes the system and mechanic work. Report about THE GAME, not the company track record. I’ll read a stupid Kotaku report for that crap, I come here to read articles about what makes a game Special! Write about how mechanics and systems can be improved, not how horrible they are. Otherwise it looks like your just complaining because you can!

    TLDR? Stop pointing out the faults, and instead write about how they could improve those faults. Developers look to your articles to learn how to improve their games, so write more about that so they can!

    SIDE NOTE: Anyone notice that lots of the Brotherhood of Steel Knights all have pitched varied George Clooney’s in their ranks?

    • ohminus says:

      “The new Perk leveling system is great. They got away from letting you become a jack of all trades, at least not from the start. Each Perk path helps change how you play the game. From the Charismatic Settlement builder, to the lucky retard who finds everything in random drawers.”

      Yeah, if what you want to play is a cartoon, that may work, but it has nothing to do with not letting you become a jack of all trades.

      “Compared to previous releases this game feels more complete than any other title they’ve released. Definitely not perfect, but the system and mechanics feed into each other far better than Skyrim or Fallout 3/NV ever did.”

      You seriously want to suggest something becomes “more complete” by throwing out most of the things that characterized it?

      • Kregoth says:

        I am not referencing the game as amazing, I am referencing it’s “amazingness” to what this article is complaining about! I enjoy the game for what it is, and has done! But it’s not as good as I’d hoped either, it’s still Bethesda best release in terms of feeling like a more finished product.

        All the Bethesda games I have ever played always had a crap ton of features that half the time weren’t really implemented well. Fallout 4 has FAR less of those problems. A lot of whats in the game feels more complete, more focused. It’s not an amazing game, as it’s an amazing release for Bethesda.

        I think the games is too easy, and could really do some improvements on how Difficulty is handled. Like making loot more scarce, and traders more greedy. Less bullet sponges, more survival! The difficulty options are piss poor and lazily implemented.

        I do agree some of what made Fallout great is not present at all in Fallout 4. Than again the game is it’s own thing. I enjoy the game regardless of what I don’t like. So Props to Bethesda!

        Complaining about bugs in such negative manners as Alec has. Cast criticism, not negativism. I just don’t see the need to write an article that cast negativity, rather than good honest Criticism.

  41. ohminus says:

    Because both are in fact quite different games than Fallout 4 and came about in quite a different fashion.

  42. Y2Kafka says:

    Seriously guys… if I have you read one more comment that says:

    “I haven’t encountered a bug in my game even though I’ve been playing for X hours. Except for one thing but it wasn’t a big deal so whatever.”

    I’m… well I’m not going to do anything. I’m just going to go back to not buying the game until modders can get the game stable for everyone and not just “most” people.

    • Sulpher says:

      Yeah, this is a game I’m going to buy… when it’s patched, modded, and on sale. To wit, replaying New Vegas I realized that there is no ‘sprint’ feature. So I added a mod that allows running at a cost to AP and OH LOOK AT THIS it’s in Fallout 4 now. An extra 6 months of community optimization will turn this good game into a great one.

  43. RegisteredUser says:

    Complexity excuse or not, they have bound animation timings to framerate, thus breaking the game for people with too high fps and/or not using VSYNC. Something that has cropped up a good bit with other “Sod the PC, this is a console game and 60fps is all that we are going to ever consider” games as well(Dark Souls, Resident Evil, various) and something that from what other coders have said is basically taught to people in game dev coding 101 not to do.
    There is a rather lengthy discussion with some other game devs weighing in on reddit and I expect other places as well.

  44. nottorp says:

    Isn’t the accepted practice with Bethesda games to wait for the first 15 patches anyway? They announced one, 14 more to go.
    That is, to have a stable-ish experience. Since the horse armor, to have a stable-ish experience without breaking the bank you have to wait for the game of the year edition that includes all addons at half the price of the initial game :)

  45. ZippyDSMlee says:

    Lets see 3 crashes, and 1 missing quest NPC, lost about 5 hours of game time going back to a privous save in the hopes the NPC pops up correctly.They really need to make it so a quest NPC respawns in the correct location every few game days depending on how far along in the quest you are. My main compalints tho is how heavily watered down the game is and the “lore” or style changes to the weapons…. super sledge is rocket powered now? 0-o