• Grellan@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      It also wasn’t universally hated. It came out to a pretty decent reception. Mixed with the normal response to Bethesda bugs.

      76 was universally panned. Super buggy, to pvp oriented, none of the story that people wanted from fall out, over filled with bad micro transactions. It was a hollow shell, and the shell wasn’t all that good looking.

      • FlagonOfMe@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        On the contrary, I think it was by far the most beautiful Fallout game. It wasn’t just green and brown and had gorgeous scenery instead.

      • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        It wasn’t hated, but faint praise for a main release of one of your biggest IPs is pretty far from infallible. Alarms should have been going off, but they were ignored.

      • ryven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        There was a good bit of story in 76, though? I quite liked the storyline where you take up the mantle of a radio drama heroine after finding out what happened to the previous holders of the title and breaking into their secret lair.

        Or, I dunno, does it not count as story because most of the important events have already happened? Maybe it’s “lore.” I had a good time with it, anyway.

    • raptir@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      It wasn’t “universally praised” but it had generally positive reviews when it was released. Fallout 76 was panned.

    • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      FO4 got a little flack, but overall it was very well received. You can see the reviews for yourself. Most of them are pretty high.

      • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        It was on the lower end of favorable, lots of 8s about 10% of professionals being mixed. That’s not well received. Steam was about 75% positive, that’s not glowing reviews. It’s a good, but not great game. That’s great for a random indie title or a yearly release, but for once a decade franchise title, it’s not good.

        • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago
          • IGN: 9.5
          • PC Gamer: 88
          • Metacritic: 87 critical, 6.8 User (game was very divisive for the old fans in particular so that’s not unusual IMO. You can see reviews swing wildly there with sub-5’s and 9-10 both all over the place)
          • Steam: is not 75%. I am not sure where you’re going that. It’s 83% all time, 89% recent, which I find very interesting actually.

          You’re welcome to throw out all of the above if you don’t like the sites for whatever reason, but if you could show 3-4 other examples from sites you’d consider valid if you take with issue the above I’d appreciate it. They were the top hits and all are major-known sites, that’s about it. I just don’t want to get bogged down in a source argument.

          • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            There’s a lot of attempts in this thread to make it seem like Fallout 4 wasn’t a massive commercial and critical hit.

  • dan1101@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    They don’t do multiplayer well for one. They need to be as innovative in multiplayer as they are in single player.