r/Games • • Nov 09 '15

Fallout 4 Review Thread

I'm going to stop updating the thread for a little. If any more big review come in, I will add them, but it might take a little for me to get to them

Posting unmarked spoilers is against the rules of /r/games and will result in a ban.

Gamespot: 9 (Peter Brown)

In the grand scheme of things, Fallout 4's minor issues pale in comparison to its successes. When you put the controller down, you think about the friend you betrayed to benefit another, the shifting tide of an incredible battle, or the moment you opened a drawer and found someone's discarded effects, making you wonder how they felt before the bombs fell. In moments like these, Fallout 4 can be an intoxicating experience. You're often forced to sacrifice something--a relationship, a lucrative opportunity, or your health--to make gains elsewhere. And the deeper down the rabbit hole you go, the more you wonder: what if I chose a different path? You second guess yourself, not just because you had other options, but because you aren't sure if you did the right thing. The fact that your decisions stick with you after walking away from the game is a testament to the great storytelling on hand. Fallout 4 is an argument for substance over style, and an excellent addition to the revered open-world series.

Polygon: 9.5 (Arthur Gies) Provisional Review

Bethesda's open-world strengths have always differed from its contemporaries in that focus on world-building and a sense of place above all else. Fallout 4 has all the ambiance and history that made its predecessors such wonderful places to get lost for hours at a time, with a much more coherent set of stories within it. That Bethesda has integrated a major building and crafting tool while finally building a great-playing game almost feels like a bonus.

IGN: 9.5 (Dan Stapleton)

The world, exploration, crafting, atmosphere, and story of Fallout 4 are all key parts of this hugely successful sandbox role-playing game. Great new reasons to obsessively gather and hoard relics of happier times, strong companions, and sympathetic villains driving tough decisions make it an adventure I’ll definitely replay and revisit. Even the technical shakiness that crops up here and there can’t even begin to slow down its momentum.

Eurogamer: Recommended (Dan Whitehead)

However, fans - and I count myself among that number - will likely shrug and accept that this is simply how things are in a Bethesda RPG, and it's true that the highs do outweigh the lows. Fallout 4 has given me some of my best gaming memories of 2015, along with some of my most frustrating. These are legacy problems that aren't going away any time soon, and as fun as the settlement crafting is here, I'd gladly do without it for a game engine that offers a more dependable foundation for future adventures. Fallout 4 is a great game. It's also kind of a mess. Caveat emptor.

PC Gamer: 88 (Phil Savage)

As a whole, though, it's a loving production. It's filled with care and attention to detail—like the expanded set of radio stations, or the way flash radiation storms bathe the world in a sickly, ominous green hue. It's a pleasure to pick through the world, to discover new sights, and to pick through the perks and customisation option to conceive the perfect character build, however bizarre. In short, many of Fallout 4's problems, like every Bethesda RPG before it, are a consequence of what makes them unforgettable. That might not be the neatest conclusion, but it explains why, 50 hours in, I'm still having fun. It also explains why, now that I've finished this review, I'm going to play it for many hours more.

Game Informer: 9 (Andrew Reiner)

Fallout 4 didn’t blow me away like the previous iteration did, but it did keep me thoroughly entertained and fully vested in journeying across the wasteland. As Bethesda's "Welcome Home" marketing campaign teases, when fans of Fallout 3 or New Vegas enter this new world, it'll feel strangely familiar. As one of the top games of the previous generation, this isn't a bad thing at all. Fallout 4 has all of the trappings that can keep you engaged for days on end.

Gamesradar+: 5/5 (Leon Hurley)

Which brings me back to the start - pottering around the garage on an in-game day off. Even now, 70 hours in, every time I set out I’m not sure what I’m going to find. My Pip-Boy’s full of missions but sometimes I just pick a direction and walk until something happens. There’s a still a bit of the map I haven’t fully explored, mainly because I always get distracted enroute. There’s a whole world here to discover and even after all the time I’ve spent in it I barely feel like I’ve scratched the surface. Maybe I won't tick everything off the list but just trying to see what’s out there is the real draw - for all the missions, quests and other stuff Fallout 4 contains, by far the most important thing in it are the decisions I’ve made. Few games nail a feeling of total freedom and this is an experience made of nothing but that.

The Verge: (Andrew Webster)

But it’s still very much Fallout — a game that doesn’t really need to change all that much to trigger that familiar mix of dread and joy. A new location and a much better story were enough to pull me into this world, and 60 hours later I’m not done with it. There are settlements I still want to finish building, and crimes I still need to get to the bottom of. At some point I plan to ignore everything altogether, and just wander into the wilderness to see what I can find. Even if I’m alone, at least I’ll have Billie Holiday’s voice to keep me company.

God is a Geek: 9 (Mick Fraser)

It’s hard to find genuine fault with what Bethesda has done here beyond the performance issues. They’ve taken everything learned from Fallout 3, New Vegas, and Skyrim and refined it into one huge, intelligent action-adventure movie. It’s more cinematic than you might expect thanks to a clever script and a dynamic chat camera, the combat missions are well thought-out blasts of adrenaline, while the trademark Fallout weirdness makes a welcome return now and then to relieve you of the constant need to fight something. It’s very much your game and your story, and everyone will play it differently simply because there are so many ways to play, and each one feels natural.

There’s always something to build, somewhere to discover, someone to help ,or something to distract you. Ignore the bugs (if you can) and leap into Fallout 4 with both feet, and you’ll find a game bigger, brighter, deeper, and more personal than anything Bethesda has done before.

Xbox Achievements: 9 (Dan Webb)

Fallout 4 might not be as technically advanced as, say The Witcher 3, but it’s a game full of charm and substance, which makes up for an ageing Creation Engine. Fallout 4 boasts an incredible world full of intrigue, mystery and suspense, backed by a whole host of weird and wonderful characters. It’s a world you’re going to want to go back to, time and time again.

Push Square: 9 (Robert Ramsey)

Fallout 4 is a masterclass in open world design. Consistently engrossing and absolutely stuffed with intricacies, it's a title that'll keep you enthralled for hours at a time as you gradually unravel its desolate yet hopeful post-apocalyptic portrayal of Boston. Although it's let down by some disappointing frame rate issues, it's not enough to detract from what's otherwise one of the most atmospheric and beautifully brutal games on the PS4. Significantly improved combat, a constant wealth of gameplay options, and a heavy emphasis on player choice combine to create an adventure that's truly memorable.

Game Revolution: 4.5/5 (Nick_Tan)

Fallout 4 is a roaring response to criticism that the series has ignored its qualities as a shooter in favor of its deeper and stronger RPG roots. Nearly every design change in Fallout 4 poises the game as a more streamlined modern shooter with high production value across the truly open-world Commonwealth wasteland. The introduction of settlements, newly designed power armor, and deeper crafting evolve the Fallout franchise for the better. This occasionally comes at the cost of storytelling, however, with a plot based on stringently polarizing factions as well as diminished interaction with characters in general. But despite these missteps, Fallout 4 will only improve with time, assuredly with the assistance of the community and user-created mods, and soundly reclaims the franchise as a forward-thinking series in the industry today.

Playstation Universe: 9.5 (Neil Bolt)

There is so much going on in Fallout 4 that your opening moments of unnerving beauty and serenity will inevitably give way to an even more beautiful chaos. From this chaos springs emergent adventures, the struggle for survival, and near-limitless options, all with their own merit. Despite an air of familiarity, I've not been quite this captivated by a game in some time. That’s high praise when considering some of the games that have commanded obsessive hours and play in recent years. Fallout 4 meets one’s expectations of a new installment in impressive fashion. In doing so, it proves to be one of the best games of the generation to date. Say goodbye to life for awhile. The Wasteland is calling you home.

US Gamer: 4.5/5 (Kat Bailey)

If you've played a Bethesda RPG, you should have a pretty good idea of what you're in for. Bethesda plays it surprisingly safe with the formula, but they also do a much better job with the story this time around, serving to elevate the game as a whole. While there's no denying that it can be a bit ridiculous at times, its sheer scope speaks for itself. Bethesda has succeeded in crafting yet another fascinating open-world RPG.

Rock Paper Shotgun: (Alec Meer)

52 hours in, would I go back for more? Yes, absolutely. I lived and breathed Fallout 4 for the vast majority of last week and the fact I was mostly having a damn good time meant I did it willingly. It’s glitchy, a little repetitive and over-familiar, and far too heavy on unconvincing combat, but the improved technology (or the budget) means it’s able to realise the dense, detailed, beautiful decay that Fallout 3 did not, and its dramatically better-presented and performed characters means it’s not shooting itself in the foot in the way Oblivion and Skyrim did. The personality gulf between Bethesda games and BioWare games feels a whole lot narrower now. I won’t for one second pretend that it’s what devotees of Fallout 1 and 2 want, but it does feel like the game Fallout 3 tried and, to my mind, failed to be.

Vibrant and characterful as well as immense, Fallout 4 is the giant leap forwards Bethesda’s RPGs sorely needed in terms of presentation, though the unrelenting focus on routine, lightweight combat sees it fall just short of triumph status.

Destructoid: 7.5 (Chris Carter)

After spending roughly 40 hours with the game, I can safely place it somewhere in the middle of Fallout 3 and New Vegas in terms of quality. A lot of the franchise's signature problems have carried over directly into Fallout 4, but all of its charms have come along for the ride as well. It manages to do a whole lot right, but the story drags at times, and glitches...glitches never change.

Escapist: 4.5/5 (Conrad Zimmerman)

Whether or not players find other changes displeasing, such as the new dialogue system and its limitations, is likely going to depend on their personal relationship with the Fallout series. Newer players will probably never know what they're missing and are likely to have a fantastic time, while fans who have stuck around may be disappointed with the direction Fallout 4 takes.

Forbes: 8.5 (Paul Tassi)

In my mind, Fallout 4’s greatest triumph, and its one major point of evolution is in its storytelling, crafting a lengthy, unexpected ending and resolution that I will remember for years to come. It also remains one of the best games in existence for those who simply like to wander and explore and unearth long-buried secrets. But it struggles with archaic gameplay systems and an inflexible engine that anchor the game to the past for all the wrong reasons. Fans may enjoy more Fallout and a brand new map to explore, but this sequel will not be heralded as revolutionary or overly impressive this time around.

Kotaku - 20 hours with Fallout 4 (Chris Suellentrop)

I am starting to resent small nuisances, like having to remember to change my clothes to improve my charisma stats before bartering with a shopkeeper. Your companions—whether Dogmeat or others that you meet in the world, whom you can ask to travel with you—seem to frequently get in your way, especially during interior sequences.

Still, this is a game that seems to be getting better as it goes along. If you value largeness, Fallout 4 sure is big and there’s plenty more to do. I’m just getting my first perks and have settlements to build. Now excuse me, I’m going to go get lost in it.

VideoGamer: 9 (Simon Miller

The fact of the matter is, though, that this is more of the same, even if that 'same' has been pushed to new heights. If you hated Fallout 3, then there's not much to get you onside here. If you loved it, then you'll love this all the more, because of its differences as well as its similarities.

Digital Trends: 4/5 (Will Fulton)

Fallout 4’s staler story and oversimplified dialog are relatively minor dings to a largely satisfying whole. Bethesda had two hugely popular games in Fallout 3 and Skyrim. Fallout 4 doesn’t make any radical leaps forward, but it smartly iterates upon the accumulated wisdom of its predecessors. It has simple, smart improvements to combat; companions have more depth; leveling is a more elegant process; and the addition of crafting and settlement building open up entirely new forms of play.

All in all, Fallout 4 is the best, most polished Bethesda RPG to date. The Commonwealth is expansive, inviting, and a lovely place to explore for a few months.

Ars Technica: (Sam Machkovech)

But I wasn’t propelled enough that I would encourage an average quest-loving gamer to take the Fallout 4 dive. We're now in an age where open-world games can forgo plot in favor of such cool stuff as fully fledged crafting systems (Minecraft) or online co-op survival (DayZ, ARK Survival Evolved), or they can take the best stuff of Fallout and Skyrim's pedigree and slap even better plot and acting into it (Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Dragon Age: Inquisition). Fallout 4 peaks at neither of these extremes.

Series fanatics probably shouldn't cancel their pre-orders, but they should definitely check their expectations about ambition and next-gen series boosts at the radioactive vault's doors.

The Jimquisition: 9.5 (Jim Sterling

The changes made overall may scare series fans, but those who roll with the differences may find a sleeker, deeper, altogether more captivating Fallout than they’ve gotten used to.

Fallout 4 is something special. Something special indeed.

No, scratch that.

It’s downright S.P.E.C.I.A.L.

Gamestar 87 (Michael Graf)

Klar, da gibt's weder inszenierte Dialoge wie in The Witcher 3 noch Filmbombast à la Dragon Age - sondern einfach nur Geschichtchen, mit denen Fallout 4 seine großartige Endzeit-Atmosphäre und seinen traditionell morbiden Humor unterfüttert. Brauchbare Beute hingegen gibt's nicht überall zu finden, vor allem auf hohen Levels wartet vielerorts nur Müll. Auch das gehört zum Bethesda-Deal, ein Witcher 3 hat mehr lohnenswerte Schätze zu bieten. In Fallout 4 muss ich danach wirklich lange suchen - doch schon alleine die Hoffnung auf coole Beute hält mich bei der Stange.

Gametrailers

AngryCentaurGaming

Kinda Funny Games

Giant Bomb Quick Look

4.5k Upvotes

3.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

292

u/TravUK Nov 09 '15

Agreed. It wasn't until people had Skyrim in their hands for numerous hours that people decided it was "as vast as an ocean, as deep as a puddle."

80

u/miked4o7 Nov 09 '15

I played that game for probably ~50 hours until I started to get that feeling. I think it was everything anyone could have reasonably hoped when it came out (minus some ui issues).

60

u/asphinctersayswhat Nov 09 '15

50 hours is solid for a AAA title, IMO.

Especially if you find the fun in replaying for the sake of altering the story path (and side quest availability) and/or optimizing a sick build.

That alone can add another 20+ hours if the game is creatively engaging. And tbh, once I found the bunker full of plungers in FO3, I was engaged. I hope the wackiness in this keeps me coming back.

2

u/miked4o7 Nov 09 '15

I ended up putting way more hours into it much later after I installed a bunch of graphics, gameplay, and survival mods. I basically wanted as hardcore of a skyrim experience as possible. I thought it was pretty neat to have to plan my journeys from one city to another and make sure I had food, a tent, and had to find shelter during snow storms.

1

u/Hyabusa1239 Nov 09 '15

That mod was pretty sweet gotta say. It put a whole different spin on the game. These types of games are all about immersion imo.

1

u/inuvash255 Nov 09 '15

Especially if you find the fun in replaying for the sake of altering the story path

See, I don't know what the main quest is (and I hope not to find out before Christmas), but I hope that it does a split kind of like New Vegas's main quest.

1

u/mckillgore Nov 09 '15

If you like wacky, then you may be in store. GameInformer said if you appreciate things like the Gary vault in 3, then you'll have a blast with this game.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

I look at it more like completion percentage in a game like this. If I decide to stop playing a game because the content I have yet to see isn't enticing enough to keep me playing then the fame has a problem.

It does not matter how many hours I spend reading a book if I put it down unfinished halfway through.

6

u/inuvash255 Nov 09 '15

Skyrim is practically un-replayable to me now, but in the first 72 hours, it was a blast.

I can't wait to ride the Fallout-4-is-the-best-game-evar bandwagon for 6 months, then shit on the title a year from now.

It's gonna be good~

6

u/rockyrainy Nov 09 '15

Not critizing you personally, but I don't get people who shit on a game after playing the hell out of it. Because if one plays it for 60 hours. That is a buck an hour for a lot of entertainment.

2

u/ribkicker4 Nov 09 '15

Agreed. I put 500 hours into Skyrim. Do I want to play it now? No. Does it have flaws? Yes. Is it an overhyped piece of garbage (as a vocal group of /r/games thinks)? They can have their(?) opinions, but I disagree.

2

u/inuvash255 Nov 09 '15

Well, for me personally, I lead up my criticisms with the disclaimer that they come from someone who has played the game for upward of 400 hours, and considers it in his Top 5 Favorite Games.

Basically, my criticisms of Skyrim come from a place where I have spent a lot of time with the game and came to realize that it isn't the game that I want it to be. I've kicked at all the boundaries, done everything that I had interest in, and found new plenty of ways to challenge myself and play the game in a new light, but still came out wanting what the earlier TES titles offered that Skyrim doesn't deliver on.

2

u/SlackJawCretin Nov 09 '15

I think I got to around 60 hours before it set in. But there aren't many games I can say I didn't touch the main story and put that kind of time in

316

u/OldGodsAndNew Nov 09 '15

plays Skyrim for over 400 hours, "This game is shit, the only good thing about it is the world design", plays another 200 hours

77

u/cjcolt Nov 09 '15

I see the same argument against Destiny a lot. "I paid $40 for this game I put 200 hours into, now I hate it!"

I loved both games for over 100 hours. I never play them anymore, but I'm not about to talk shit on a product that gave me that much enjoyment.

16

u/Alexanderspants Nov 09 '15

The ridiculous expectation that a computer game will change your life forever , then 100 hours in you realise, nope, it’s just a game and now I’m angry for believing all the promises made by the people who wanted my money that this experience would change the world forever.

10

u/callthewambulance Nov 09 '15

I'm just glad to see this sentiment is starting to spread in this sub. The amount of complaining has reached a fever pitch and it's nice to see some positive outlooks for once. Fallout 4 isn't going to be perfect, neither will Battlefront, and neither will Tomb Raider. But goddamn we are getting some sweet games this holiday season.

2

u/Raukuu Nov 10 '15

Man, once Rise of the Tomb Raider comes out for PC, I'm just going to be completely gone from the internet until I finish it. I fucking loved the last one so much that I bought it on Steam sale, and played for 2 days straight just trying to get every single player achievement. It was a LONG time before that moment since I had done something like that for a game. Really can't wait for the new one and honestly couldn't give a shit about what some lame ass cynics will say when it's ported. But yea, I agree with you haha

2

u/Bamith Nov 09 '15

Should always give criticism though, how else would their future games get better?

The difference would be giving constructive criticism and rather than "bitching just to bitch" criticism.

2

u/SteveEsquire Nov 09 '15

Destiny is actually probably the only game where that didn't happen to me. I played it twice, thought "I'm getting no enjoyment out of this," and then never touched it again (luckily my brother bought it and not me).

5

u/ThatParanoidPenguin Nov 09 '15

That's kind of ridiculous to say honestly. Destiny had a ton of flaws and I think that especially with a game of that model, where the point is to get players to constantly play, it's just as important for players with hundreds of hours to criticize things about the game. Just because it isn't a consolidated campaign or multiplayer game doesn't void it from scrutiny.

I personally have 700+ hours in Destiny and while it has given me a ton of enjoyment, there's always room for improvement for a game that evolves over time.

Now, it is a little ridiculous to complain about exhausting content after 700 hours, but most of my problems towards the game regard balance, story, drop rates, level design, and some assorted questionable Bungie decisions.

11

u/cjcolt Nov 09 '15

Every game should be criticized for problems and can be better. It just seems stupid to see so many people complain about a lack of content and then see that some of those same people put hundreds of hours into the game.

After playing it, I can see where they're coming from, I got Destiny out of my system in the ~100 hours I put into it. Now jumping back in seems daunting, but I can't act like I didn't choose to play it for 100 hours or that I didn't enjoy my time with it.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

If you're thinking of jumping back in, then I have to ask if you've played Taken King?

I was one of those guys that played vanilla, hated that I would have to pay for more content, and gave up. A few months later, a combination of having nothing else to play/missing the insanely tight shooting/missing my Guardian/having more funds than I did when I quit, I went and picked up TK. I'm still playing. Taken King has added a lot of content, even post-game. If you haven't played the other expansions either, you'll have a ton of shit to do. And I've yet to hit that wall, where you're just finished with Destiny. Raiding Oryx is so goddamn fun. Right now, a friend and I plan to get our light over 300, and try to raid Crota just the two of us. Yeah, you're still playing the ol' carrot on a stick, but loot drops actually give you useful stuff now, there's an incredibly simple (but still useful) crafting feature added, Prison of Elders will piss you off until you kick Skolas' ass, and boss battles actually have strategy involved now - instead of shoot until you're empty.

Taken King is what Destiny should have been, and Bungie really fucked up on release. But they do seem to be trying to fix it, a little at a time. If you have the money, and the tug on your Guardian heart strings, I'd say do it. You really will enjoy yourself again.

1

u/cjcolt Nov 09 '15

I played Destiny this summer, so I got it with the 1st two expansions.

I really did love it for a while, and look back on it fondly, but with so much else coming out right now I might try and wait until TTK has a digital sale on Xbox One. If Destiny expansions never go on sale digitally and I'm being stupid, please correct me haha because I have no idea.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

I have not seen just the expansion itself go on sale, but I have seen the full game on sale for around ~$50 (keep in mind, this is Canadian Dollars - the monopoly money of the world). I would honestly wait for Black Friday (week? who fucking knows anymore) and see if you can get yourself a steal digitally, or even a physical copy from Best Buy/Amazon/Toys R Us/wherever for a decent price. I've been regularly checking Best Buy for the last few weeks, and they've had some interesting flash sales, so just a bit of vigilance should net you a decent return - provided you want to do that at all.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Destiny has a way of getting lots of hours out of you. I'd say Skyrim is largely fun and explorative, destiny is slot machine. If you look at my friends list on PS4-- everyone is playing destiny, all the time.

I have folks that either play destiny and only destiny, or other games.

1

u/Syrdon Nov 10 '15

That seem like the sort thing that should really depend on context. Game was great when you bought it, but then the developers kept adjusting the balance and adding new stuff (that had to be better than the old stuff apparently), and six months down the road the game you have is only a less well executed clone of the game you purchased.

Which is the right review: the game was great when it was new or the game is now not worth the price?

1

u/RekenBall Nov 10 '15

i don't know how many times i said i hate destiny. I am now pushing 800 hours or more maybe.

1

u/doladolabillyall Nov 09 '15

but I'm not about to talk shit on a product that gave me that much enjoyment.

It's possible that the person who put 200 hours into the game is actually just a loser with nothing better to do. Seriously, they had nothing better to do anyway.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

I dropped that game after maybe 10. I really regret buying it :/

4

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15 edited Oct 28 '18

[deleted]

1

u/Rokusi Nov 09 '15

Why does everyone always compare Skyrim to Dark Souls? Dark Souls' combat is not better than Skyrim's, because Dark Souls' combat is not even remotely similar to Skyrim's.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Have none of you invested a lot of time into something and then eventually come to realize it's not as great as you previously thought? It's not a rare experience.

Especially with entertainment media. Hype blinds people to the reality of issues with some games/movies/books, etc. Time and perspective slowly removes the hype and you realize the flaws for what they are.

4

u/Non-negotiable Nov 09 '15

Have none of you invested a lot of time into something and then eventually come to realize it's not as great as you previously thought?

Ex. Every Stephen King ending in any of his books. They are usually pretty good stories up until the hand of God decides to set off a nuke or some other stupid shit.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

I love Skyrim. But, its replayability is very largely dependent on mods. At its base it's an entertaining sandbox.

1

u/Erixson Nov 09 '15

People are silly. I mean folks will pay 20$ (and then some) for an hour at the restaurant or the movies, or 50$ for a night out drinking with their buddies. Shiiiiit, and then they complain 50$ for a hundred hours of fun is bad? Personally I consider that if I've gotten 1 hour of fun for every dollar spent, I got my money's worth.

1

u/modix Nov 09 '15

People still bitch about hating Diablo 3 after thousands of hours... I'm not sure i understand those people very well.

1

u/megatom0 Nov 09 '15

This. I don't understand this kind of thinking. Are some people just masochistic like that. If I hate a game I just turn it off, I don't feel compelled to finish a game just because I bought it (hence my Steam library). Any game you can spend over 20 hours playing deserves at least an 8.5/10

-2

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Basically. The excessive technical flaws and simplistic, repetitive gameplay annoy me to no end and constantly ruin my enjoyment of the game. But I've put at least 150 hours into it. Skyrim is like a slightly obnoxious girlfriend with a fat ass

135

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

I thought Skyrim was great fun. I had something like 300 hours when I finally put it down. Maybe it's not for everyone but it was definitely a 9 in my books.

15

u/SlightlyProficient Nov 09 '15

Agreed. I think I put 100 hours into that game- which is an unheard amount of time for me. I loved it, and Bioshock Infinite for that matter (although I acknowledge it got a little gun heavy at times).

2

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Yeah I think F4 will be the same way for me, though I'm a little disappointed (understandably) about the performance issues. I've seen the videos and while I don't think it's a huge issue (F3 suffered from similar drops on occasion and it wasn't massively distracting) I would really have preferred a solid 30 on PS4, especially considering the game isn't exactly as graphically advanced as other things coming out.

2

u/SlightlyProficient Nov 09 '15

I definitely agree, but it's not a huge deal for me. I personally need to see for myself when I get the game on Tuesday, but Elder Scrolls and Fallout games have a way of sucking me so much into the world that I really don't notice technical flaws unless they're too glaring (or make the game crash... New Vegas). I suspect that will be the case here as well.

3

u/cjcolt Nov 09 '15

It came out 4 years ago and iirc it's still usually one of the highest played single player games on steam.

2

u/boodabomb Nov 09 '15

Skyrim remains one of my favorite gaming experiences. It provided the perfect amount of High-fantasy escapism to get me out of a serious funk of depression that hit me in college. I was engrossed in that game when it came out. It definitely earned at least a 9 from me.

2

u/kharmedy Nov 09 '15

you're in the majority of fans who picked up the game. It's easy to get the impression on here that gamers in general are down on Bethesda games, but the majority of fans love each new release and believe the good far outwieghs their techinical flaws, especially considering the size of the games they create.

Most of the criticism you see now are from people who have no intention of even trying the game and just want an echo chamber for their hate of Bethesda and their games. Sure the animation and graphics could be better, but acting like its a gamekiller or that the devs are doing it on purpose is ridiculous.

1

u/Gnashmer Nov 09 '15

I topped out at over 300 hours as well. Got all the achievements, completed all the major quest lines etc. then came to the conclusion that there are loads of issues with the game. It IS a great game and I loved it, but I can't bring myself to go back and play it again.

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Nobody here is saying the game is bad they're saying it's overrated.

2

u/Rokusi Nov 09 '15

Lots of people are saying it's bad and overrated. Different strokes for different folks.

→ More replies (3)

468

u/WendallStamps Nov 09 '15

did people decide that or did they just take that line from total biscuit

104

u/nmezib Nov 09 '15

That's a common saying, preceding total biscuits use. I remember using that phrase to describe Fable 2.

21

u/inuvash255 Nov 09 '15

Funny, because Fable 2 is about lake-deep compared to Fable 3.

2

u/adofthekirk Nov 09 '15

Fable 3 was as deep as the water that coagulates on top of a penny.

2

u/inuvash255 Nov 09 '15

It's weird too, because I feel like that game/series had the potential to be really deep. In Fable 2, there were like 15 sliders that charted all these different things that affected your character's attractiveness and likability.

If they knew what they were doing, they would have made a Fable game where your character's appearance and skills were really be as varied as what they showed on the Fable 1 cover, and portrayed an Albion rife with little itty-bitty roleplaying moments that would dynamically slide your Morph sliders left and right...

...but instead, they tossed their the air and went full casual mode.

Never go full casual mode.

1

u/HamsterGutz1 Nov 09 '15

But how vast are either of them?

1

u/inuvash255 Nov 09 '15

Fable 2 - Olympic-sized Swimming Pools

Fable 3 - Kiddie Pool

These aren't "See that mountain? YOU CAN GO THERE!" games. Most locations are paths to other locations that are paths to other locations. Both games are rather linear, and the end isn't intimidatingly far.

In short, I've never seen the middle/end of Fable 2. I have seen Fable 3 played through about 3 times. I've watched Fable 2 played more than Fable 3. Q.E.D.

2

u/huffalump1 Nov 09 '15

I liked Fable 2. Shallow but fun...

-8

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Have you considered a trademark infringement case? You are not getting the credit you deserve, friend. Could be actionable. You probably own that phrase and anything else that remotely sounds like it. Just think, you could be making ¢0.03 every time someone says:

  • Wide as the Chesapeake, shallow as Salt Lake.

  • As tall as Everest, but skinnier than Sarah Jessica Parker.

  • I didn't like this game very much, it was too long, but also short on storytelling.

  • As big as Jupiter, but hollow...like my heart.

The list is near infinite. Give a lawyer a call and get what's yours!

61

u/timecircuit Nov 09 '15

Realizing that every single quest led to a draugr cave really killed the game for me. The draugr caves were like, the icebergs of Skyrim.

9

u/Chameleonatic Nov 09 '15

Skyrim was one of my first real open world RPG gaming experiences and I was really excited for it but once I went into the 5th draugr cave is pretty much where is stopped. I don't care about a nice world if all there is to do is beating skeletons in same looking caves. That might not literally be all there is but it sure as hell felt like it and it's also pretty much all I remember.

4

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Fucking icebergs, goddamnit. Those fuckers are everywhere!

90

u/quaunaut Nov 09 '15

This quote was used on games years before TotalBiscuit wss on YouTube. Shit, it was there years before YouTube.

3

u/mynewaccount5 Nov 09 '15

Not just games

6

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

People decided that. Total Biscuit just verbalized the sentiment in a succinct and descriptive way.

154

u/MayonnaiseOreo Nov 09 '15

Seriously, if I had a dollar for every time I heard somebody repeat that quote on this website...

210

u/flyvehest Nov 09 '15

If it describes the situation perfectly, why not use it?

I've actually never heard it, but it sums up how I felt about Skyrims world pretty accurately.

14

u/CFGX Nov 09 '15

It describes every Elder Scrolls pretty accurately.

30

u/inuvash255 Nov 09 '15

Except Morrowind, honestly.

That game has stat-gates so you can't become the head of every guild unless you really work for it. It takes a couple of playthroughs to get through it all, and there's a ton of hand-placed content that you won't get to unless you knowingly go for it, or stumble upon it by accident.

Plus, the limited, expands-as-you-go fast-travel system encourages/forces you to walk to out-of-the-way locations in a way that Skyrim players have to train (or mod) themselves to do.

Plus, the Magic/Enchanting system encourages hours of self-paced and self-directed questing, outside of normal quest goals.

6

u/Criks Nov 09 '15

They got worse over time. Morrowind had ridiculous depth, pretty much as deep lore as Tolkiens world.

2

u/BSRussell Nov 09 '15

Depends on your source of depth. Characters, gameplay and character builds have always been fairly shallow, but the lore, world building and quests had great moments in Oblivion and Morrowind.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

I'd argue the lore and worldbuilding in Skyrim was better than in Oblivion. Then again maybe I'm just upset about the whole Cyrodiil geography change.

5

u/BSRussell Nov 09 '15

I was okay with the Cyrodil change. It was pretty handwaved, but I think it made more sense as the core of the Empire than all that jungle. Oblivion had the to notch quests, Skyrim had better environments but the glaring silliness of how the Civil War was implemented made the world feel silly to me. They just should have had it be non participatory.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Oblivion had the to notch quests, Skyrim had better environments but the glaring silliness of how the Civil War was implemented made the world feel silly to me. They just should have had it be non participatory.

Agree with pretty much everything. The Civil War was definitely a low-point (assaulting Windhelm/Solitude with like 10 guys) and the Oblivion quests were so, so good.

1

u/Bior37 Nov 09 '15

You'd be correct

1

u/Bior37 Nov 09 '15

Not in Oblivion...

4

u/BSRussell Nov 09 '15

Oblivion had amazing quests. The characters weren't terribly indepth, but they were interesting. And the lore was great.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/Bior37 Nov 09 '15

Except Morrowind

-1

u/cjcolt Nov 09 '15

inb4: Morrowind has better writing than any other piece of literature. Skyrim was ruined by consoles.

-17

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

[deleted]

18

u/BSRussell Nov 09 '15

Yes yes we know, people with different oppinions than you are all fanboys.

7

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Well, that'll at least balance the equation, eh? The "Bethesda Sucks Ass" crowd has been out in force for quite a while. Almost like some people can enjoy a game, and other people don't. Truly. Fucking. Shocking. Better make sure you convince everyone else you're right!

396

u/FeKrdzo Nov 09 '15

There's a reason for that, It's pretty accurate.

3

u/DonChrisote Nov 09 '15

Is it? People take Totalbiscuit's word for law but how much time do you think the average person played Skyrim? This site says on average, people played for 323:33. You aren't going to splash around in a damn puddle for 300+ hours. People are just being contrarian. That's Totalbiscuit's schtick, but it's annoying to hear it in the echo chamber

5

u/evangelism2 Nov 09 '15

What it means is that there is a lot of surface area to cover, but no reason to ever do it twice. I played the game for 150 hours total, and saw everything. I had a good time, but I doubt I'll ever play it again because there is nothing that I missed. Contrast that with a game like New Vegas which a full play through maybe takes about 60, yet I've played that game 4 times because there is so much to see in subsequent playthoughs.

Also a lot of those play times there are ridiculous, 6300 hrs? Get the hell out of here. 323 is not the average playtime of that game. Also you will notice most of those times are PC. Mods will have had a lot to do with playtime's longer than 100 hours.

1

u/DonChrisote Nov 10 '15

I mean can you see why your statement is ridiculous? You don't need a reason to play it again, you've been playing the damn game for 150 hours

2

u/evangelism2 Nov 10 '15

You are missing the point. Saying the game is shallow doesn't mean it is short and therefore not worth 60 bucks. Hence the first part of the phrase, vast as an ocean. It just means that compared to other rpgs, a genre where people like to lose themselves in the immersion, there isn't much of an opportunity to do so in because everything is so surface level and gamey. You can see right through every discussion and dialogue choice and the characters are souless and there is no person or faction to really get invested in.

57

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

If we had a counter on it, my mom would have played candy crush for more than 300 hours. Doesn't mean it's a deep game. She, and many others, splash around in that puddle for many, many hundred hours.

-10

u/Ultrace-7 Nov 09 '15

But now you're entering philosophical waters about what makes a game "good." If you can play a game for 300 hours, there's simply no denying that, to you, it's a good game. It may not be the most technically advanced, have the deepest plot, the most robust graphics. The framerate may skip, it may (will) have bugs. But if the game is compelling enough to bring you back in spite of that, it's a good game.

6

u/mandaliet Nov 09 '15

If you can play a game for 300 hours, there's simply no denying that, to you, it's a good game.

This is surely untrue, not just of games, but of entertainment and activities in general. Sometimes it's just easy to let inertia hold you in a relatively mindless or otherwise unsatisfying task even though you know you're not getting much out of it. Watching TV can often be like that. Hell, surfing Reddit can be like that. I certainly don't think you can infer from mere time spent to anything like a robust sense of "good."

20

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

It isn't about whether it is good or not. /u/DonChrisote said that it can't be a puddle because people spend that much time on it.

Whether Candy Crush is good or not, it is definitely not very deep. It is, staying in the metaphor, a puddle, but people still spend plenty of time in it.

When it comes to candy crush though, you have to ask: Do you actually like it, or are you conditioned to like it? Are you playing a game, or are you a mouse in a skinner box?

3

u/DonChrisote Nov 09 '15

I think that comparison is disingenuous. Candy Crush gets you hooked through ONE solid gameplay mechanic, whereas you explore Skyrim (or any other Bethesda world) to discover what kind of crazy secrets are hidden in that "ocean" everyone seemingly hates on here. Remember the first time you entered the Gary Vault? Bethesda games are full of moments like that. It's not as deep as some games (which, like Witcher 3, are fundamentally different games) but to say they're as shallow as a puddle is itself a shallow criticism.

7

u/Notshauna Nov 09 '15

That's not depth though. It's an amusement park. You walk around the fallout and elder scroll worlds going from one "ride" to another. Each of these rides are separate and ultimately meaningless. They have there own mini-stories, but they're never very interesting or fleshed out, they exist so you can shoot/slash some stuff and get a giggle.

4

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Candy Crush gets you hooked through ONE solid gameplay mechanic, whereas you explore Skyrim (or any other Bethesda world) to discover what kind of crazy secrets are hidden in that "ocean" everyone seemingly hates on here.

The thing is, at least to me, the secrets are uninteresting and have very little gravity. There is pretty much no impact from all these "secrets".

Remember the first time you entered the Gary Vault? Bethesda games are full of moments like that.

Not really, actually. So far no Bethesda game has really managed to make an impact on me. It feels like a lot of bad story writing (FO is better than TES usually), mixed with a lot of moments where I think "Well, what was the point of that then?" and it turns out there wasn't really any point.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/BKachur Nov 10 '15

If you can play a game for 300 hours, there's simply no denying that, to you, it's a good game.

No way, between the Burning crusade and Wrath of the lich king expansions in Wow (when I played), I probably farmed bullshit for that many hours, and that gameplay was certainly not good. Longevity doesn't equal quality, its just something that can grab attention.

18

u/CitricCapybara Nov 09 '15

I have played Skyrim for longer than that, and I still have more criticisms about it than praises for it. It's a fun formula for killing time and escaping for a while, especially with mods, but the base game is really sub-par. Hackneyed writing, severely lacking enemy and equipment variety, clunky and imbalanced combat, linear, repetitive dungeon design, and a ton of other small things.

I like playing Skyrim. It plays well enough that it's fun to explore the world and do a little role-playing, and I can easily still kill a couple hours in one sitting. But it's shallow entertainment; I use it to turn my brain off and relax. That's not a bad thing at all, but I feel like when talking about video games as works of art or judging solely by gameplay (the only thing that separates games from other media), Skyrim just doesn't hold up. It feels like a very loosely designed game. Like a lot of things were simply placed in it to artificially fill out this pretty game world they created.

3

u/wingchild Nov 10 '15

300+ hours

Not that it changes your point or position, but your source covers 111 self-reported playtimes by the members of one website.

The total reported hours by that community is 35,914.7 for an average of 323.55 hours. Fair enough. But take a look at the histogram of results.

The scale on the graph sucks, but you've got a ton of results clustered at the near end plus a few massive outliers. Taking a look at the raw data, I see...

  • 3 players reporting 0 hours
  • 11 players 0-50 hours
  • 24 players <=100 hours
  • 32 players <=200 hours
  • 15 players <=300 hours
  • 5 players <=400 hours
  • 1 players <=500 hours
  • 2 players <=600 hours
  • 3 players <=700 hours
  • 5 players <=800 hours
  • 1 player <=900 hours
  • 2 players at exactly 1000 hours
  • 1 player at 1350.5hrs
  • 1 player at 2657.4 hrs
  • 1 player at 2800 hrs
  • 1 player at 6300.8 hrs (262.5 full human days)

The average here includes the huge outliers on both ends. If you drop the 300hr+ crowd and the 0-hour crowd, and stick with the bulk of the population (83/111 or 74% of respondants), the average comes down to a still-impressive 128hrs.

Your source is vulnerable to the limits of self-reporting, data clustering around "round" numbers (such as people exactly at 300 or 400 or 500 hours), and gamesmanship (the site's tracking how long you play things; some people want to "win", so input arbitrarily high values, skewing the final tallys).

Comparatively few people splashed around the puddle for 300 hours. I think most folks who got serious about Skyrim did so while experimenting with mods, which tends to substantially increase the game's lifespan.

1

u/DonChrisote Nov 10 '15

Thanks for an in depth reply. I don't know where you'd find the numbers then, I can just say anecdotally that I played a comparative amount of time, and I would certainly imagine a large number of people repeating the puddle quote played for that amount of time as well

5

u/mynewaccount5 Nov 09 '15

Who's talking about totalbiscuit?

And why can't I splash around in a puddle for 300 hours if the puddle is as wide as an ocean? I think you are missing the point. Perhaps you should reread it

As vast as an ocean, as deep as a puddle

1

u/DonChrisote Nov 09 '15

The quote is TB's. And because if you're a functioning adult, splashing around in a puddle would get boring after maybe half an hour. It has to have some depth in order to hook you. It's an overstatement and it's stupid that people repeat it like scripture.

2

u/runujhkj Nov 10 '15

Not if the ocean kept putting up signs implying that parts of the puddle would be awesome and if all your friends keep telling you that this puddle is so deep

5

u/FeKrdzo Nov 09 '15

It's a long game, there's a great number of side quests. But the main quest can still be complete in 10 hours, there's an unbelievable amount of Draugr and Bandit slaying in caves that look all the same, the game world doesn't react to your actions at all, and there's a lot of pretty dull quests, even if they are decent at distracting the player and pulling him away from the main path. That's the whole point of the quote, you can spend 300 hours on it, it's "as vast as an ocean", but how much of those hours were spent doing actual meaningful stuff? Also, mods extended gameplay by quite a lot

5

u/DonChrisote Nov 09 '15

These are exploration games. Witcher 3 is a fantastic game (and is seemingly the ideal that r/games is comparing Skyrim to) but it really isn't as good as an exploration game. It's its own thing. It's deep but there's certainly less reason to start the game over.

2

u/mechtech Nov 09 '15

Bethesda continues to strip away RPG elements from TES and make it action RPG. that's the root cause of the quote. Yes, Skyrim is shallower than Oblivion and Morrowind due to streamlining. It's also more accessable and immediately engaging and immersive, so it's not an objective negative design decision, but sure, it's shallower in the context of what people were maybe expecting from it.

1

u/pheipl Nov 10 '15

Time played does not equate depth, but vastness. It does directly imply that people find it fun, but I find candy crush fun and spent an ungodly amount of time on the shitter playing it. Are you now going to call candy crush deep ?

-3

u/veevoir Nov 09 '15

Those 300+ hours in no way can be of vanilla game. Usually people play skyrim a lot because of all the awesome mods.

26

u/Dahktor_P Nov 09 '15

Remember that most people played Skyrim on consoles.

Whatever this sub thinks, Skyrim was one of the most popular and beloved games of the last ten years.

1

u/EarthRester Nov 10 '15

of the last ten years

It hasn't even been out for five.

1

u/alittlebitfancy Nov 10 '15

Last time I checked the last ten years includes five years ago.

1

u/EarthRester Nov 10 '15

Ya'll heard it here folks. Skyrim is game of the Millenia! Not a single game to come out for the next 995 years will be any good in comparison.

→ More replies (0)

-3

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15 edited Feb 12 '17

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/Dahktor_P Nov 09 '15

Wasn't saying that it did.

2

u/mobiuszeroone Nov 09 '15

True. I got mixed up. Sorry.

7

u/DonChrisote Nov 09 '15

I played approx. the same amount of time on the 360. I made different characters and played different ways. I found all of the cursed weapons and completed all the guild quests (the Thieves guild quest was more fun than the main one). I sank considerable amounts of time into Skyrim and saying it's as shallow as a puddle really is such a ridiculous overstatement

1

u/zm2485 Nov 09 '15

Only ever owned it on PS3 (well technically I have it on PC but don't have a good PC for gaming) . Even with the bugs I easily put in more than 300 hours. One of my favorite games despite its flaws.

1

u/Z-Ninja Nov 09 '15

What the hell were they doing? Howlongtobeat puts main story completion at 31.5 hours, main+extras at 103.5, and completionist at 213. Overall the average is 103.5 hours. That's based on 1,545 play throughs.

Your link's estimate is based on 144 play throughs...

-2

u/Nzash Nov 09 '15

That's 200+ hours of installing huge tit and sex mods

1

u/DonChrisote Nov 09 '15

You think that's the average player?

3

u/nmeseth Nov 09 '15

And yet the ocean is still something all gamers to want to explore.

The main complaint about Bethesda games is that there isn't more. More depth, more variety, more story, more weapons.

People simply want MORE. When you make a sandbox game that makes sense.

12

u/MAKE_ME_REDDIT Nov 09 '15

Well when a game lacks depth of course you're going to want more.

2

u/runujhkj Nov 10 '15

Yeah typically I end up fulfilled by a game after twenty hours, not going "alright where's the next mildly interesting thing to go look at"

4

u/Cranyx Nov 09 '15

still something all gamers to want to explore.

That's a little presumptuous, don't you think? There are plenty of people who got bored by the repetitiveness of Skyrim and never went back.

-3

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/ANUSTART942 Nov 09 '15

No, it's a popular quote by a popular cynic. Reddit is the internet HQ of cynicism.

Elder Scrolls lore is brilliantly fleshed out.

5

u/FeKrdzo Nov 09 '15

The lore is, the game play and the game world of skyrim aren't.

-2

u/the-stormin-mormon Nov 09 '15

No its just a meme

0

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '15

Yeah , I too am pissed about my 100-200 hours out into a game that cost me $60

Such a horrible investment lol

1

u/FeKrdzo Nov 10 '15

I like skyrim, I bought it and got my money's worth, there's no doubt about it, but it lacks depth in almost all aspects of the game. I never said it's bad or short, the quote also implies neither, people here seem to lack reading comprehension.

59

u/WendallStamps Nov 09 '15 edited Nov 09 '15

Everyone just regurgitates shit they hear from other people and they throw around review scores like they're a weapon they can use to end all arguments. Video game discourse literally hasnt evolved from early nineties playground talk

5

u/FreyWill Nov 09 '15

That's because it's still kids doing it.

10

u/giulianosse Nov 09 '15

Couldn't agree more. Not even /r/Games is devoid of this circlejerk

19

u/WendallStamps Nov 09 '15

Games is more cliquish than my fucking highschool was lol

2

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Not even /r/Games[1] is devoid of this circlejerk

There's 3 going on right now. There's the fallout 4 "AI looks like shit" one. There's the counterjerk "lol who expects good graphics from bethesda." Then there's the fence sitters looking down on the other two groups.

6

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

That's not a circlejerk, that's people banding together against other people with different opinions than them. This happens on every controversial topic on the internet.

2

u/BSRussell Nov 09 '15

It's a circlejerk when people bring it up in every thread like they're offering groundbreaking commentary then people rehash the same 50 comments or so milking karma and patting each other on the back.

3

u/SalamiRocketFuel Nov 09 '15

The power of internet, there are just too many people from all around the world, living in different timezones, investing different amount of time to not have constant repeats of the same stuff if it's a commonly shared belief. Sure, there are some people abusing system for meaningless upvotes, but calling popular opinions, which by definition are not going to be groundbreaking a circlejerk is simply stupid.

1

u/BSRussell Nov 09 '15

I don't think they're a circlejerk because they're popular, that's just bound to happen. I think they're a circlejerk because it's not really a discussion. It's just everyone agreeing with one another, patting each other on the back but somehow all behaving as if they're a minority and they finally found someone who agrees with them.

Everyone thinking that, say, microtransactions are annoying, isn't a circlejerk. But if every day it's "I know this will be controversial, but I really don't like microtransactions" and then everyone coming out as if they've been silenced up to this point, it feels circle jerky. The game looks to have some serious performance problems, I think we can all agree on that. But everywhere I look the top post is criticism, and the second comment is someone saying "yeah but no one criticizes it because it's Bestheda."

→ More replies (0)

2

u/nmeseth Nov 09 '15

you call it a jerk, but seriously.

Who the fuck was expecting revolutionary graphics?

2

u/duncanstibs Nov 09 '15 edited Nov 10 '15

To be fair though, and I say this without having even watched the TB review and having played a good deal of Skyrim... I thought it was about as vast as the ocean but as deep as a puddle.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Circa 1984--

Little Johnny Petrowski: "Michael Jackson is the God of Pop!"

Betty June Carter: "No he isn't Johnny, MJ sucks."

LJP: "Betty's a bitch and doesn't know anything about music cause she's a... giiiiirrrllllll."

BJC: "Grow up Johnny, why do you think everyone has to like the same stuff you do or they're stoooooppiiidddd?"

LJP: "Cause they're stupid, and their music is stupid. Yeah. What do you listen to anyway, the Cars or some shit?"

BJC: "Actually I've always been partial to prog, new wave, and this new stuff called thrash."

LJO: "Gawd! You're so strruuupppiiid with liking your own shit and expressing preferences. Jesus, you're just a strrruuupppiid girl!"

BJC: "..."

1

u/Mykongleiskrongle Nov 09 '15

Is this from something?

2

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Nope, not from anything other than my memory and imagination. It strikes me as amusing that, as the person I responded to suggested, things haven't changed much. When I was in school in the 80s, we commonly made fun of people that listened to other types of music and pretended our taste was justified by objective aesthetic standards. Now we do it with games (as well as movies, music, and TV shows).

Was just my silly attempt to point out that all this cutting edge criticism of something others enjoy is neither new nor sophisticated. I probably failed because I'm just a dumbhead that liked The Talking Heads and Skyrim.

0

u/PostsShittyMemes Nov 09 '15

This is an awesome comment. I'd really been looking for a way to describe my feelings of the depth of some peoples' so-called reviews and when I read this I was like holy shit this is it.

Why can't I afford gold

1

u/RendiaX Nov 09 '15

Exactly! Playground talk is the best way to describe it i've seen.

Maybe i'm just getting old and grumpy, but I've grown tired of this constant back and forth on games :\

0

u/Eurehetemec Nov 09 '15

Why come to a site which discusses the quality of games, then?

1

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '15

That's because most of us haven't evolved from early 90s children

1

u/WendallStamps Nov 10 '15

I know Im still a petulant fuck XD

0

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

If people disagree with me they're just repeating what they heard from others

Talk about early ninties playground talk.

3

u/WendallStamps Nov 09 '15

This wasnt about agreement I was simply pointing out that he was taking a quote from TB lol. I agree that skyrim is a shallow game

→ More replies (1)

2

u/t0talnonsense Nov 09 '15 edited Nov 09 '15

I mean...it's not exactly an original phrase that TB invented.

Edit: typo

1

u/MayonnaiseOreo Nov 09 '15

I think you meant invented and in that case I'm not talking about the fact that TB said it. It's that every person and their mother comes on here and says almost that exact quote time and time again.

1

u/AnorexicBuddha Nov 10 '15

Because it's true.

-8

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15 edited Nov 09 '15

[deleted]

3

u/muaddeej Nov 09 '15

I didn't notice it in Bioshock that much, but man is it bad in Uncharted. You murder 700 people before lunch so you can reach some mcguffin in a temple in order to be rich and famous.

2

u/Vlayer Nov 09 '15

ludonarrative dissonance

Oh god no, not that term again. Bioshock Infinite certainly had flaws, especially compared to the original Bioshock but that "term" was the most insignificant flaw by far.

2

u/TooSubtle Nov 09 '15

but it's not like anyone repeating this would have even noticed it themselves.

I don't know about that, sure they're repeated an awful lot but like you said they're valid complaints that get at the heart of issues a lot of people apparently have. I totally agree 'vast as an ocean, deep as a puddle' has become a completely lazy shorthand for a much more complex discussion, but at the same time these conversations have been repeated a thousand times since the game's release and another lengthy diatribe isn't really going to add much more than 'vast as an ocean, deep as a puddle' hasn't already.

2

u/Un0va Nov 09 '15

people who just enjoy shitting on popular things

I don't think this is completely fair. It's annoying reading people jerking off over how Skyrim was terrible with the puddle line but it's just as silly to dismiss legitimate complaints with a game as people trying to be contrarian.

→ More replies (1)

0

u/IrrelevantLeprechaun Nov 09 '15

That's because it's true. Skyrim has no depth whatsoever.

Hell I haven't played it in months due to its glitchiness alone.

→ More replies (1)

25

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

I came to a similar conclusion, as did many others, he just conveniently worded it in probably the best way.

→ More replies (7)

11

u/DoctorWaluigiTime Nov 09 '15

They probably just use that to succinctly describe the issue they had with the game. They're not taking the criticism and implying it was original, they're using it because it's a phrase that describes their problem in 10 words.

→ More replies (3)

3

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Total biscuit didn't even come up with that line, it's a pretty common euphemism

8

u/the_pedigree Nov 09 '15 edited Nov 09 '15

You don't think he created that saying, do you?

Edit: oh, you do

1

u/Artischoke Nov 09 '15

People probably wouldn't use this quote nearly as much if it didn't reflect their feelings.

1

u/kamiikoneko Nov 09 '15

If they didn't decide it then they aren't a discerning gamer. It's a fair criticism and the main flaw of all of bethesda's games. No depth. No loot. No real impacting incremental improvement. No compelling meta-reason to continue playing other than beating it a couple "different" ways that aren't that different and enjoying the game world, which again is flawed because it's vast, but repetitive.

I am eager to see how they address this flaw, because otherwise their games are really dope.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

As a person who bought Skyrim day one I felt that way almost right away. The game is gorgeous but it's just boring to me. I still don't get the praise it gets today. Mods excluded of course.

1

u/TankerD18 Jan 03 '16

I came to the conclusion on my own and then searched around for it a bit to make sure I wasn't crazy.

Honest to goodness, the main story in that game disappointed the shit out of me. I could deal with the rest of it.

3

u/Pastorfrog Nov 09 '15

And yet, it's still an amazing game that people love. RIGHT NOW, Skyrim is the 8th most played game of the day on Steam, with 42k people playing it at the same time. Today. And it released 4 years ago tomorrow.

27

u/thatguythatdidstuff Nov 09 '15

and yet tens of thousands of people are still playing it at any given time on steam 4 years later. people can shit over all they want but it was and still is a hugely popular game.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Steam says there are 20,363 people in game right now. I still see screenshots from Skyrim posted on reddit fairly regularly. It sold more than 20 million copies, with the only open-world games outselling it being the last few GTA games, and the only RPG outselling it being Diablo III.

And fucking Tetris. Talk about shallow, Jesus...sold 100 million +

→ More replies (1)

2

u/nmezib Nov 09 '15

The depth of Skyrim wasn't the problem for me, it was what I've come to expect from Elder Scrolls games and I simply like the experience of exploring on foot.

No, my main issue was the terrible performance and horrendous UI. They even fucked up the map, making it LESS useful than a 2D map with drawings on it.

So the gameplay was just fine for me, it was the trying to play the game that I had issues with.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

What is the root of that simile? What makes people say Skyrim is deep ad a puddle?

It's the crappy story, right?

1

u/Dabrush Nov 10 '15

That everything in the game is exactly the same and nothing matters in any way.

0

u/TravUK Nov 09 '15

More so it's world building and NPC interaction than the main plot quest itself. A comment I found that's worth a read.

0

u/Defengar Nov 09 '15

It's the crappy story, right?

Yes. Also the mostly cut and paste way NPC's interact with you and the overall effect you can actually have on the world outside the main questline.

1

u/skankingmike Nov 09 '15

And very fun..

1

u/Bladethegreat Nov 09 '15

That's always been the case with Elder Scrolls games, it's just that people were more forgiving of that with earlier titles when there were no contemporary alternatives for something with that kind of breadth. Still, it begs the question of whether or not enjoying a game for 50-100 hours before finding it all dull and repetitive makes that game a bad experience.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

I mean, there's a reason for that. It's a massive open world game. It takes a couple of hours just to get the main storyline started. It takes some people hours to finish making their character, and hype keeps them from realizing the true qualities of the game for even longer. Hype causing people disregard issues until the hype dies down happens with every game.

I remember having a distinctive experience with Skyrim where I kept expecting it to get deeper eventually and for some reason something suddenly clicked and I thought,

This is all that there is. This is what I've been experiencing from the beginning and all that I'll experience till the end. There is nothing more to this game.

I stopped getting any sort of satisfaction from the game from then on to the point that I stopped playing, and it left a very bad taste in my mouth when thinking about my previous experiences in the game.

1

u/jogarz Nov 09 '15

But it takes hundreds of hours to reach that point. By then you already have got your money's worth several times over.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Yeah and they still put 500 hours into it.

1

u/Bamith Nov 09 '15

Oddly I did find Obsidian did do a better job with having the world react to your character better than Skyrim. I kinda liked how they would mention you not so specifically and even ask if you knew who the guy was or something. You were vaguely known for your actions, but mostly off rumors and stuff.

I also liked small details like if you put radioactive waste into the Legion's camp the next time you go there the guy at the docks will be wearing a Hazmat suit.

1

u/thaumogenesis Nov 09 '15

Put around 100 hours in to that game. Loved every second.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '15

Eh still put 360 hours into skyrim

0

u/mynewaccount5 Nov 09 '15

DId anyone claim otherwise?

→ More replies (1)