*** Official Fallout 4 - No Spoilers Allowed ***

1 week and counting...

I know Amazon aren't going to get my soundtrack copy to me before release, what are GAME's delivery times like? Much chance of an early delivery with them?
 
Overall though PC versions generally take at least one patch to bring the game up to the standard you'd expect on release, especially on cross platform games.
To PC gamer standards, maybe.

But requiring patches to fix or improve notable issues is something we see regularly on console multiplatform titles, too.

I've no doubt it will run fine on PC and no doubt my PC will handle it perfectly but not wanting to start a console/master race debate - if you buy a triple AAA title like this on console (think its £39.99 on the rainforest) it generally holds value longer than it does on PC and you often can't get a new copy for less than the initial price for a considerable period of time. When I come to buy it on PC to take advantage of mods I'll both know the game fairly well and the price come christmas time will undoubtedly be IRO £15-25.

(Even GTA which held its price very well on PC is going for £20-25 now.)
I just dont get the logic here. Why does it matter if the prices stay higher on console? Why is that a reason to get the console version first? You can get the PC version cheaper first, and then you'd never need to get the console version. It would be redundant when you've already got the best version.

I mean, do what you want, but I just dont get the rationale whatsoever.
 
Hope i didnt help start the pc/console debate, was just wondering for myself tbh

Only concern i have with going console is load times? Or is it different now? In vegas rvery door had the spinning load screen and they took ages for what it was, but on pc it was almost instant. Little things like that bug me more than overall visuals etc

But then it seems like a game i would rather play on the sofa anyway. Think i will go ps4 for now!
 
I disagree about it being "3.5". It looks much more like a true sequel in terms of graphical improvement and narrative direction than any other ass creed, cod, bf, uncharted, etc, etc, franchise game that gets released almost annually.

I just think its more of a progression rather than a revolution

as far as I can tell some aspects of the game have remained unchanged from both new vegas and fallout 3, so will be instantly familiar, whereas things like V.A.T.S. have changed slightly

you cannot just make sweeping changes to such a loved series otherwise you will lose your audience

those long term players will be more forgiving of the games quirks, new players brought in by the hype will stamp their feet if its not perfect in their eyes
 
I am definitely interested in this now, but I have AC Syndicate and Halo 1, 2, 3 and 4 to finish before I can justify buying it!

I'm still playing syndicate. It's a big game so set plenty of time aside. Fallout 4 will also consume time, fallout 3 was a massive time sink once you got into the whole wasteland and it just want on and on.

I do hope the ps3 stuttering has been fixed in 4, it was very annoying in 3 on ps3.
 
To PC gamer standards, maybe.

But requiring patches to fix or improve notable issues is something we see regularly on console multiplatform titles, too.


I just dont get the logic here. Why does it matter if the prices stay higher on console? Why is that a reason to get the console version first? You can get the PC version cheaper first, and then you'd never need to get the console version. It would be redundant when you've already got the best version.

I mean, do what you want, but I just dont get the rationale whatsoever.

It's purely based on the fact that in recent times console versions have had far less issues than PC versions. Batman, AC, Watchdogs, GTA IV just of the top of my head. Not saying they are without issue but generally much more polished than their PC counterparts.

The point I was making about the price is that if you buy the console version you know you're highly like to have a fully playable game on release date whereas if you buy a PC version on release you run the risk of not having that luxury, with the added fact the price on PC will be signiifcantly lower in a shorter space of time than the console version - which to me makes more sense to wait out on the PC rather than throwing £40/50 quid to possibly 'beta' test the port when come December you can play the polished PC version for sub £30 with hundreds of mods to play with.

I'll end up getting it on both, it's a really bad habit :( but if I can save money along the way I can justify it to myself :cool:
 
It's purely based on the fact that in recent times console versions have had far less issues than PC versions. Batman, AC, Watchdogs, GTA IV just of the top of my head. Not saying they are without issue but generally much more polished than their PC counterparts.
This just isn't true, though. That's my point. AC Unity was a massive headache on consoles, too. Watchdogs was a mess on consoles, too. GTAIV came out in what, like 2008(and ran like crap on consoles)? Arkham Knight is a legit example, but these are exceptions, not the norm. There's a ton of terrible console versions of games, too.

This myth that console games are more stable or more optimized is a total myth.

The point I was making about the price is that if you buy the console version you know you're highly like to have a fully playable game on release date whereas if you buy a PC version on release you run the risk of not having that luxury, with the added fact the price on PC will be signiifcantly lower in a shorter space of time than the console version - which to me makes more sense to wait out on the PC rather than throwing £40/50 quid to possibly 'beta' test the port when come December you can play the polished PC version for sub £30 with hundreds of mods to play with.

I'll end up getting it on both, it's a really bad habit :( but if I can save money along the way I can justify it to myself :cool:
You dont, though. You dont know you're 'highly likely' to have a fully playable version on Day 1 on consoles. That's just completely not true. There's a ton of games even just this generation that needed all kinds of patching before working correctly, first and third party.

Your pricing argument also makes NO sense at all. Buy console version first, which will be expensive, likely around £40, then buy PC cheaper later on, at an additional cost. That is an expensive way to go about it.

If you want to save money, then dont buy *any* versions at all for a while. Or just buy the PC version and dont play it for a month or two. You're still more likely to save money that way then buying the console version *and* the PC version later on.

Seriously, this weird idea that console games are all fantastically optimized and well built is totally ridiculous. They've been messes all throughout not only this generation, but also last generation as well. And in the meantime, devs are better supporting PC versions, making them better than ever. For a PC specific dev like Bethesda, this has never been more true. Their console efforts have been terrible.

I mean, again, do what you want, but your reasoning is awful. Truly awful.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom