Fallout 3 came out in 2009, Fallout 4 came out in 2015. Of course it's gonna run worse.

It's the exact same engine though, maybe with some tweaks but not a brand new engine.

That would be like saying because Pool of Darkness came out 4-5 years after Pool of Radiance, of course it runs for shit (they are the same damn engine, I think the most recent update of the Goldbox engine (forget the name) supports 256 color VGA for portraits and cutscene images. Otherwise it is the same game engine.

So I'm really at a loss for why Fallout 4 is such a pig compared to 3 and New Vegas when seemingly the only thing different is God Rays, ambient occlusion and higher resolutions. It's maddening how badly it runs.

snorg wrote:

It's the exact same engine though, maybe with some tweaks but not a brand new engine.

That would be like saying because Pool of Darkness came out 4-5 years after Pool of Radiance, of course it runs for shit (they are the same damn engine, I think the most recent update of the Goldbox engine (forget the name) supports 256 color VGA for portraits and cutscene images. Otherwise it is the same game engine.

So I'm really at a loss for why Fallout 4 is such a pig compared to 3 and New Vegas when seemingly the only thing different is God Rays, ambient occlusion and higher resolutions. It's maddening how badly it runs.

Nvidia PhysX, godrays, the much increased shadow distance, better AI (more CPU based), and just more going on in the world in general (Settlements).

snorg wrote:

So I'm really at a loss for why Fallout 4 is such a pig compared to 3 and New Vegas when seemingly the only thing different is God Rays, ambient occlusion and higher resolutions. It's maddening how badly it runs.

"Seemingly" is the key word here. Higher resolution textures, higher polycount models, physics effects, more use of shaders, the stuff MrEWhite listed...

It's not "the exact same engine". It's gamebryo, yes, but it's a newer version of it.

I understand you're disappointed with the content, but you're deliberately glossing things over to convince yourself that "It's THEIR fault!!!" WRT performance.

I couldn't agree more with the OP. The only thing I liked about F4 is Nick Valentine.

SquallStrife wrote:

"Seemingly" is the key word here. Higher resolution textures, higher polycount models, physics effects, more use of shaders, the […]
Show full quote

snorg wrote:

So I'm really at a loss for why Fallout 4 is such a pig compared to 3 and New Vegas when seemingly the only thing different is God Rays, ambient occlusion and higher resolutions. It's maddening how badly it runs.

"Seemingly" is the key word here. Higher resolution textures, higher polycount models, physics effects, more use of shaders, the stuff MrEWhite listed...

It's not "the exact same engine". It's gamebryo, yes, but it's a newer version of it.

I understand you're disappointed with the content, but you're deliberately glossing things over to convince yourself that "It's THEIR fault!!!" WRT performance.

+1

Basically what Bethesda is doing is trying to sell a game that would appeal to the masses. I dare say the VAST majority of people haven't played FO1 or 2. I paid for my copy, and I don't regret it. And once all the DLC comes out I will buy it and have a grand time. I play on a 7970 at 2k resolutions, it ran just fine. Why on earth people play games on laptops is beyond me. Its like towing a trailer with a motorcycle. Laptops are not designed to play games of this caliber.

That said, I believe the problem lies with you (snorg). I get the feeling you are more angry at your laptop and transferring it to the game. I had a blast in the game. And most of it was because I was dicking around, making my own adventures. Could FO4 be better? Yes. Are your points valid? Mostly. Do I care? NOPE.

Luckybob, I'm not asking you to care about it. I just needed to vent my frustrations.

Personally, I think the only way I'm going to enjoy the game is as a sandbox type game on a much faster system.

But all the RP elements that made the original Fallout games great are no longer there. Fallout 3 and New Vegas were a definite departure with the switch to first person and the massive change that brought with the combat system, but all the other elements were still there.

Fallout 4 has its good points, and if you are coming to it without having played the others, its not a bad game, but only a 5-7 on a 10 scale. If you are coming at it with having played the others, it is more like a 3 or 4. And if you are trying to play it on system with a crummy GPU, it is a 2 🤣.

What frustrates me is the continued watering down of RPGs to the point that they aren't really RPGs any more. That's my main gripe here.
We are long removed from the days when a single person or team of 3 or 4 people could develop a AAA title on their own. From here on out we are looking at more of the same from giant companies. Maybe indie gaming will keep some of that original spirit alive.

Agreed. Loved Skyrim but had the same frustrations with its lack of story/world interactions and depth. So much detail but so little actual effect on your surroundings.

imho, if you want a great RPG experience, grab a pen and some paper, go buy the latest D&D manual, and go make some friends.

Hands down the most fun you will ever have. I've done it in the past, and will probably do it again in the future, but finding a GOOD GM is hard as fuck.

Not sure what your guys expectations were... I enjoyed Fallout 4. Though.. I don't go into many games with high expectations. Take Dishonored for instance.. LOVED it but, I didn't go in expecting much.

ODwilly wrote:

Agreed. Loved Skyrim but had the same frusterations with its lack of story/world interactions and depth. So much detail but so little actual effect on your surroundings.

I think Skyrim is more for the mods. The main story lines once you get in so far kinda turns to meh.

Private_Ops wrote:

ODwilly wrote:

Agreed. Loved Skyrim but had the same frusterations with its lack of story/world interactions and depth. So much detail but so little actual effect on your surroundings.

I think Skyrim is more for the mods. The main story lines once you get in so far kinda turns to meh.

agreed. I played it on console originaly so it was alot less fun. Overall fallout4 is enjoyable. Love the combat

luckybob wrote:

imho, if you want a great RPG experience, grab a pen and some paper, go buy the latest D&D manual, and go make some friends.

Hands down the most fun you will ever have. I've done it in the past, and will probably do it again in the future, but finding a GOOD GM is hard as fuck.

You've got that right. I haven't played pen and paper D&D (or any RPG, for that matter) in years just because it is so hard to find a group of people that can get together at the same time for a gaming session, when everyone has kids and jobs and everything. Even when I've volunteered to GM/DM I can't get enough friends rounded up to make it worthwhile. So I content myself with the 1 or 2 good CRPGs that come out each year and get my fix that way.

ODwilly wrote:

Private_Ops wrote:

ODwilly wrote:

Agreed. Loved Skyrim but had the same frusterations with its lack of story/world interactions and depth. So much detail but so little actual effect on your surroundings.

I think Skyrim is more for the mods. The main story lines once you get in so far kinda turns to meh.

agreed. I played it on console originaly so it was alot less fun. Overall fallout4 is enjoyable. Love the combat

The combat is arguably the best thing about it, although there are some things that break the game a bit balance wise if you level the right perks. But for the most part it is satisfying.

And it is a good looking game, too, mostly. It's just the lack of all the other stuff that makes a Fallout game that was such a big let-down.
I admit my expectations were really high for this one.

With respect to my original rant, I agree it was due partly (but not entirely) to my level of frustration trying to run this on a laptop. However, it has a fairly high-end (well for 2011 anyway) GPU in it, I thought I'd at least be able to manage a playable frame-rate at low detail.

I don't feel so strongly about but I don't bother with a lot of things like the settlements and just do my own thing ie just casual play. The gaming industry in general has been on a downward slide for many years and the only good games are usually those that end up forgotten by most.

Fallout 4 is a hog but expecting a 2011 model laptop to run it good is unrealistic, look for optimized textures (mod) and you should get some fps after that.

We wanted Fallout 4...

We got

Wasteland Landlord Simulator and Junk Collector.

nforce4max wrote:

I don't feel so strongly about but I don't bother with a lot of things like the settlements and just do my own thing ie just casual play. The gaming industry in general has been on a downward slide for many years and the only good games are usually those that end up forgotten by most.

Fallout 4 is a hog but expecting a 2011 model laptop to run it good is unrealistic, look for optimized textures (mod) and you should get some fps after that.

The reason it runs badly is mostly the way the engine renders shadows. It renders them behind walls in the way your looking, which is why in cities it runs bad.

On a related note to this thread I bought Far Harbor. Awesome addon! Any of you guys try it yet?

Nope, waiting till the season pass price drops.

MrEWhite wrote:

Nope, waiting till the season pass price drops.

I picked up on sale awhile back. Havent tried any of the other dlc out yet.