Skip to main content

Impressions of Fallout 4

Despite some obvious flaws, Fallout 3 remains my favorite video game of all time. Never before or since have I spent nearly so much time in one world, drawn to exploring every nook and cranny of post-apocalyptic Washington D.C. Never before did every random side-quest, minor skirmish, and unopened door feel so integral to the story I was involved with.



So to say that I’ve been eagerly anticipating Fallout 4 is to put my mood the past sixth months in the mildest possible terms.

Having played about 12 hours (which seems like the barest scratch of the surface of this game), I can say that Fallout 4 has met my expectations. It has not exceeded them quite yet, but I am certainly playing the game that I thought I would be playing.

To start off, the basic set-up of Fallout 4 is similar to most (though not all) of the previous post-apocalyptic sci fi epics. You start out exploring the wastelands after escaping from a Vaultec survival shelter. The twist here is that your protagonist is someone flash frozen from the era prior to the bombs falling.

(Minor spoilers ahead)

After some very quick exposition you discover yourself attempting to escape a crumbling cryogenic chamber after watching your spouse murdered and son kidnapped at some point in your long frigid slumber. As far as initial set-ups go, I think this falls somewhere in between hunting for your missing dad in FO3 and looking for the jag-off who shot you in New Vegas in terms of compelling character motivation.

From there you find yourself in the shattered, violent remains of the Greater Boston area. As in previous games, one of the pleasures of this game comes from tracking down real-world sites and seeing what’s happened to them in the After. For most part, nothing good. Lexington for example is complete hell-hole. Don’t bother visiting Malden Center either. You help out a guy named Sully. Fenway Park is the center of Commonwealth civilization. There’s a place called Wicked Shipping Company filled with blood-thirsty ghouls. The roads are crumbling and filled with potholes. So, with one or two exceptions, not all the different from now.

The biggest innovation here is the crafting system. Those who have played previous Fallout games might remember that it was possible to craft new weapons out of recycled trash or make bullets out of random scraps of metal. Also, if you’re reading this review there’s a good chance you’ve played Skyrim and the Hearthfire DLC. In Skyrim you could track down all sorts of resources and build a manor somewhere out in the wilderness. Occasionally you’d have to defend it from bandits. That basic idea is framework behind Fallout 4’s crafting system, but Bethesda has used the intervening years to craft something very similar in feel and effect to Minecraft’s sandbox system. It’s certainly nowhere near as versatile as Minecraft (think one of Lego’s specialty kits compared to a bucket of random blocks) but I’ve already been seeing some impressive examples of creativity in IMGUR galleries.

One major theme of the game appears to be the reestablishment of civilization and so I’ve found myself spending about half of my time in-game tracking down the resources necessary to craft my settlements and defenses. Then I have to attract more settlers. Also, it’s important to have these communities trade resources with each other. Plus you can recruit more settlers from around the Commonwealth. Oh, and you get attacked by random raiders, androids, and mutated creatures.

In a word, this is very time-consuming and Bethesda clearly wants players to invest early and often in the crafting system so a lot of the other features of Fallout games - bizarre encounters and dire discoveries were in short supply during most of my first forays into the game. I’m optimistic that this will change however. I’ve made it farther into the heart of what used to be Boston and uncovered more of that black humor that is a Bethesda trademark. Also more actual NPCs to talk to.

The dialogue system has been changed and I think mostly for the better. Instead of an unvoiced menu of dialogue responses, players now click on one of four buttons with the barest sketch of what your protagonist will say. The options might be ‘yes,’ ‘no,’ ‘sarcastic,’ and ‘wait, what did you say?’ That aspect feels sort of like Mass Effect’s dialogue options except there isn’t any obvious guidance on what significance your dialogue choices have. They appear significant but it’s tough to say. I can say I’m much more intent on listening to the conversations than before, if for no other reason than I want to know what I said.

As far as criticism go, I have two minor ones. First off, while the game engine has been upgraded, it feels very similar to Skyrim. So, while I was struck with how beautiful the wasteland looked in the first few minutes of play, I’ve encountered more and more dodgy animations and recycled textures as the game has gone on. Anyone who plays Bethesda has got to be ready for that sort of thing but it does represent a small distraction. The other issue is more ephemeral. While I’ve certainly enjoyed the crafting system and finding Woburn (sort of) was a welcome discovery, I haven’t actually been delighted by anything yet. I’ve been surprised, horrified, engaged, and amused, but I haven’t had a moment in the first game where I’ve just sat back astounded.

It’s early, though, and the wasteland is a big place filled with possibilities.
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Writing Horror

I'm wary offering advice to other writers. 

First of all I've got the whole imposter syndrome thing and whatever advice I give feels like a good way of revealing how little I know about anything. Second, what I've learned mostly relates to solving problems in my own writing. What advice does a dog have to offer to a duck on how to swim? 
However, for Arisia 2018, I'll be participating on a panel of doing just that - giving advice to aspiring horror writers about writing horror.

So, what truths can I impart?

Some advice feels absolutely true, if a bit self-evident.

You must read. If you're trying to write horror then you must read horror. Not just one novel. Not just one author. You should make a sincere effort to read everything by everyone. The more recent the better. The classics are always going to be there, but if you want a sense of where your stories could fit, you need to see what is being published out there.

You must write. I do not think you have to write …

Reading Response to "A Good Man is Hard to Find."

Reader Response to “A Good Man is Hard to Find” Morgan Crooks I once heard Flannery O’Connor’s work introduced as a project to describe a world denied God’s grace. This critic of O’Connor’s work meant the Christian idea that a person’s misdeeds, mistakes, and sins could be sponged away by the power of Jesus’ sacrifice at Crucifixion. The setting of her stories often seem to be monstrous distortions of the real world. These are stories where con men steal prosthetic limbs, hired labor abandons mute brides in rest stops, and bizarre, often disastrous advice is imparted.  O’Connor herself said of this reputation for writing ‘grotesque’ stories that ‘anything that comes out of the South is going to be called grotesque by the northern reader, unless it is grotesque, in which case it is going to be called realistic.’ This is both a witty observation and a piece of advice while reading O’Connor’s work. These are stories about pain and lies and ugliness. The brutality that happens to characters …

We Have Always Lived in Haunted Houses

As my final pre-Arisia post, I'd like to tackle ghosts. Metaphorically, of course, because ghosts are intangible and also don't exist. 


I don't believe in ghosts. Not the sort of ghosts, anyway, that float around decaying old mansions or scare impressionable media personalities. Physics, at least the way I've grown up understanding it, precludes the existence of energy that cannot be detected reliably. Put another way, physicist Brian Cox stated that if ghosts existed the Large Hadron Collider would have almost certainly found one by now.

So, when I say I'm a fan of ghost stories and tales of haunted houses, am I being hypocritical? Possibly, but I also think one can appreciate ghosts and haunted houses in a different way. Even though they might not exist in a 'peer-reviewed' and 'experimentally replicable' fashion, phantoms absolutely exist as a potent symbol of the past.

When we talk about ghosts what we're really talking about is that annoying…