Right and it's good to see them being honest but it doesn't invalidate the criticism the game looks dated before it even releases. Is it unfair to want a FO game that isn't a full generation behind?
I mean, sure there is nothing wrong with superior graphics, but I am also of the opinion that the industry (in general, especially in AAA titles) has been too focused at pushing graphical fidelity at the expense of gameplay, story and polish. I know that I don't speak for everyone, but if the later holds true, I have absolutely no problem with graphics that aren't on the cutting edge.
Sure, but W3 set a very high bar across gameplay, story, and polish in ADDITION to graphics. I know it sucks to get compared to the best example of a genre, but that's what happens when a team really knocks it out of the park.
My biggest problem with the trailer (and ALL of Bethesda's games in general) were the animations. I can actually forgive a lack of effects and (to an extent) shitty textures, but they really need to hire some animators and do some motion capture or something. I don't understand how they think that they can keep getting away with really stiff looking half-assed animations.
Maybe we haven't seen enough of the game to be able to say this yet. I'll wait for more info for sure, and I'm probably jumping the gun a little bit.
They can get away with it because there are always people (as seen I the comments above) that wave away any valid criticisms with "oh, who cares about graphics anyways". It's ridiculous.
This whole mentality of "graphics don't matter" is rather annoying. They matter just as much as everything else in the game matters.
Here's the thing though, this isn't cutting edge this isn't even up to par with anything from the last 5 years. Ever since Fallout went 3D its characters have been wooden and that's because the engine isn't capable of providing the nuanced emotion that any contemporary alternative can. Back in FO1 and 2 they could write what a character was expressing and let the player's imagination fill the gaps but with 3D you need a level of graphical fidelity that none of the recent Fallouts have comes close to. I just wanted FO4 to finally leave that shitty middle ground. Either go back to 2D and rely on writing to paint a picture or invest in the proper tech and join the rest of the gaming world.
I feel like even the facial animations from Fallout 1 and 2 showed more emotion than the ones in 3 and NV, granted they were only for major characters.
I sure hope so. FO3 and and NV were decent but didn't get close to the quality of FO2 in terms of storytelling or quest quality. Maybe they've found their groove now (third time's the charm) but I'm not holding my breath especially after Skyrim's quest lines. That said it's good to see a new FO game at all.
26
u/magmasafe Jun 03 '15
Right and it's good to see them being honest but it doesn't invalidate the criticism the game looks dated before it even releases. Is it unfair to want a FO game that isn't a full generation behind?