I think my first Bethesda game was Skyrim and I love Skyrim. I’ve played through Skyrim when it first came out I played through it again in the DLC came out. I played through it again on the switch I have since played through it again on PC. I love Skyrim. I played it so many times and I know it’s a meme to keep re-releasing the game but it is just genuinely very good game.

I’ve played fallout three I tried to get into new Vegas. I played fallout four up to like level 40 just today actually and I’ve tried fallout 76. I know the gameplay is almost the same as the Skyrim game but I just can’t get into fallout and I don’t know what it is about that series . Maybe you can help me figure it out because I just don’t think this game is captivating.

It seems like there’s just less to do in the world enemies are Raiders or mutants and maybe some creatures and I guess sky rooms really the same it’s just different factions of humans but it just seems less copy and pasted than fallout does and of course Skyrim has the same dungeons, but so does fallout.

Is it just the genre of playing in a wasteland instead of a fantasy world the only real difference between the elder scrolls games in the fallout games? 

  • Melllvar@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    2 months ago

    One is high fantasy, the other is satire. They may be technically very similar, but as far as tone and mood they are very different beasts. Like Star Wars and Spaceballs.

  • loobkoob@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    2 months ago

    The big difference between the two for me is how much feeling of gameplay expression there is. In Fallout, my options feel like melee, shooting enemies with shotguns, shooting enemies with automatic rifles, shooting enemies with long-range rifles, shooting enemies with lasers, shooting enemies with miniguns, and so on. And the shooting mechanics don’t feel strong enough to really differentiate those different weapons as different playstyles for the most part. If I play a game like Titanfall, Battlefield, etc, then changing weapons can feel drastically different - they handle differently, you navigate combat arenas differently, you prioritise targets differently, you use cover differently. But that doesn’t really feel like the case with Fallout for me without any of the moment-to-moment decision making that tends to allow for gameplay expression in shooters.

    Whereas Skyrim feels like there are a lot more playstyles available. Destruction magic feels very different to conjuration which feels very different to illusion which feels very different to being a stealth archer which feels very different to using a dagger which feels very different to using a huge, two-handed melee weapon. They’re not just visually different; how you approach and navigate combat encounters will be significantly different depending on what kind of build you have. It just feels like there’s so much more gameplay depth.

    • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 months ago

      Really good points here but also I just want to add that Skyrim is very unlike any other game I’ve ever played. Whereas Fallout is shooting, which I’ve played a million times in other games. When I look at the other factors, Fallout has them in spades. Great enemy designs, good locations, great story depth, and the world and themes are phenomenal.

      But at the end of the day you’re right, your interaction with the world is mostly just guns. That’s why people find such enjoyment with melee runs in Fallout I think. Guns just aren’t as engaging but also they kind of encourage you keep your distance from the enemies. Whereas in Skyrim, unless you’re playing with a bow, you’re directly interacting with the enemies up close and personal.

      My advice is basically just to go play fallout and try it with a melee build and maybe ditch the companions. Or maybe find mods that try to add things to the playstyles.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      One thing I found interesting about the Fallout TV show is how under-gunned the protagonist is. She’s not even armed at all most of the time (which, frankly, seems almost less realistic than toting around an entire arsenal the way you can in the game).

      Maybe OP would get into the game and its story more if he went for a gameplay style that emphasized hacking or diplomacy or other stuff other than combat.

    • M500@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s actually a great point and maybe that’s exactly what it is.

      I carry 4 guns but only because they use different kinds of ammo. I don’t even think about the kind of gun.

      But Skyrim is exciting because each time I play, I do a different build. Stealth, vampire, melee, etc…

    • Opafi@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Whereas Skyrim feels like there are a lot more playstyles available. Stealth archery feels very different to covert shooting, which feels very different to furtive bow handling, which feels very different to being a stealth archer which feels very different to using an arrow silently, which feels very different to using a huge, two-handed bow quietly. They’re not just visually different; how you approach and navigate combat encounters will be significantly different depending on what kind of build you have. It just feels like there’s so much more gameplay depth.

  • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    2 months ago

    I think my first Bethesda game was Skyrim

    Side note, fuck am I old. 🥲 My first Bethesda games were Where’s Waldo, Terminator and then a bit later Elder Scrolls: Arena. It was always sad to see how far the concept had actually fallen von the lofty heights of the Arena->Daggerfall jump and what it promised. Morrowind felt like a big reduction in scope but in return added a lot, so it felt okay. Then came Oblivion and that solidified the route that led to Skyrim and most post-Skyrim open world designs.

    I think what you’re feeling might just be… open-world realization? The fact that open games are naturally less engaging? The whole “Wide as an ocean, deep as a puddle”-thing?

  • jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    You might enjoy more classical CRPGs, the Bethesda version of games tends to be more environmental comma /action RPG.

    Fallout 1, fallout 2, even fallout New Vegas are closer to the CRPG format.

    The best modern example is baldur’s gate 3. That is definitely a CRPG where you can get invested in the story.

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEQ7KR9enYdQsB6kcMnw0NA This YouTuber reviews lots of CRPGs, they’re a good resource if you want to see if you’re interested in other options. There’s an excellent CRPGs out there that don’t cost a lot of money. That are easy to get lost in for days

    Mortisimal gaming

    • M500@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Thanks! I do like the crpg genre and played a decent amount of fallout 2. Not too competition, but I imagine I got pretty far or possibly near the end.

      I think there is a series called dragon fall. I have that from Epic games as a free game.

      Are there any specific crpgs you recommend?

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Boulder gate 3 of course.

        Space wreck is a good one

        Divinity original sin 1 and 2

        Depending on how patient you are atom RPG is really good

        Colony ship was excellent

        Wasteland 2, wasteland 3. More action RPG than CRPG but if you like the fallout 1 and 2 series, it kind of scratches the itch. But not as much narrative impact

        Disco Elysium is pleasant, but it’s less CRPG and more experimental exploration, but it’s nice

        I haven’t played it myself but I hear good things about rogue trader

        • M500@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          I really liked baldurs gate, but got burnt out by the time I made it to act 3 and just quit the game. Maybe I’ll go back to it at some point.

          I loved disco, it was the first game I played on the steam deck. After a couple hours, my wife asked me what I was watching😂 she thought Cuno was so annoying.

          I’ll check out these other ones, I’d love to find a new crpg.

  • paultimate14@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    2 months ago

    I feel the same and I think I’ve narrowed it down to a handful of things, in no particular order.

    1. The environment design. Fallout is mostly wastelands, with just a few settlements scattered around. Everyone is fighting each other, plus the monsters that are encroaching on civilization. Everything is a shabby remnant of the past shoddily cobbled together. Even the entire settlement system in Fallout 4 is based on gathering scrap and taping it together. In Skyrim, you can mine and process the minerals to make the nails to put your house together. Skyrim has ruins and remnants of past civilizations, but a lot of the buildings and infrastructure are still in good condition, and there’s fresh growth. The wilds of Skyrim are much more diverse than the wastes of Fallout. Fallout 3 in particular has the annoying green filter on everything unless you mod it out. It doesn’t feel like there’s really a world left to save- it seems like everything is doomed to chaos and anarchy.

    2. “Survival”. I would not put Fallout in a list of survival games, but it does borrow a lot of elements from the genre. I understand what they’re going for, but I don’t like the resulting gameplay. Constantly scrounging for weapons, ammo, and resources getd really boring really fast for me. Managing health and Rads too. Every combat effectively takes twice as long when you factor in the time you spend to recover the resources you used.

    3. Guns. I know there’s a schism in the Skyrim community between those who mod in guns and those who don’t. I see a few problems with guns in Skyrim, and most apply to the vanilla Fallout games too. BGS just isn’t great at gun play. The feel of the weapons, the environmental design, ammo distribution, enemy AI, physics engine, the sound design… BGS isn’t particularly great at any of it. When the ranged combat is a supplemental element of the gameplay that’s fine- Bioshock has 2 great games despite mediocre combat mechanics, and the Elder Scrolls games are similar with their bows and ranged magic. Fallout puts the ranged combat front and center, and it falls apart.

    4. Progression. I think this is why I love Skyrim, and the source of it’s commercial success. I was no stranger to RPG’s before Skyrim (both videogames and tabletop), but the ones I enjoyed were imusually in spite of the leveling systems. Usually a lot of grinding and overly complicated systems with points, skills, abilities, etc.

    Fallout uses one of my least favorite systems- general experience gained (mostly through combat) that leads to an overall character level increase, which then grants points that can be used to improve specific skills. You want to get better at lockpicking? Go kill something. Barter, speech, science, repair, medicine… The answer is to kill something. Improve the Energy Weapons skill? You can kill something with Small Guns or Melle and it’s just as effective. It completely disconnects the actions you take as a player from the development of the character.

    Skyrim is the opposite. To get better at lockpicking, you pick locks. To get better with a shield you use a shield. It’s both intuitive and satisfying. Other RPG’s boast more complexity, flexibility, or realism, but I think Skyrim really hits the sweet spot between accessibility, realism, and customization.

    This also ties back to the survival aspects I mentioned earlier, because I also felt like equipment was much more important in Fallout. Your damage there is often more about what gun you’re able and willing to use than anything to do with your character. In Skyrim, a character with a high one-handed skill and perks can have pretty good damage with just about any one-handed weapon. There’s variance of course- you can tell the difference between an iron sword and dragonbone. But the smithing and enchantments mitigate a lot of those differences. If you haven’t focused on enchanting yet you might choose a lower-pedigree weapon with a better enchantment.

    1. Lore. This is subjective of course, but I think Skyrim and the rest of the Elder Scrolls just has better lore. The alt-history of Fallout isn’t terrible, but it’s hard to compete with thousands of years of over a dozen races, various factions, and pantheons of gods interacting with each other. I love reading the books, listening to the dialogue, finding carvings and paintings in the textures or on the item models. Fallout’s lore is mostly either “where were you when the bombs fell?”, “that asshole leading a group of roughians is being a real jerk”, or "Wow Vault-Tex was really unethical ". My wife and I have spent dozens of hours watching YouTube videos breaking down ES lore- everything from speculation about the godhead and very nature of the universe to the one NPC who is vaguely connected to a faction thought extinct.
    • andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      This also ties back to the survival aspects I mentioned earlier, because I also felt like equipment was much more important in Fallout…

      Pretty much agreed with everything and this paragraph is probably why I am picking Fallout and (partially) TES3 for I like the opposite than you and OP, and both sides are valid. My journey is of sharp spikes of interests when I find a new shiny thing or mechanic, even if it’s not my speciality, rather than a smooth gradual progression that puts an accent on a character you nurture. On that distinction, it sound like playing the mechanical part of an RPG like an arcade\action game.

    • M500@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s a good point, I think the dreary landscape is really boring and is not a ln environment if want to immerse myself in.

      Fallout 76 has nice forests, but that game has its own problems.

    • M500@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I got pretty addicted to fallout 2 for about a week or 2. That was genuinely a really good game.

      I was surprised that you could sleep with someone to get an advantage 😂

  • Titou@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 months ago

    For me it’s the reverse, im a big fan of sci-fi, post-apocalyptic, retrofuturism style, but i don’t care about fantasy things.

  • Tyoda@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Fallout’s every mechanic keeps disappointing me, but I can always see a glimpse of how great they could be, so I keep playing. Maybe that’s just not good enough for you.

  • cmhe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Time and your personal experience might be a factor.

    Often the first book I read from an author, leaves a very positive and fresh impression, but after I read a couple more of the same author, I learn their structure and writing style, and it becomes just more of the same, and I have trouble getting into those books.

    It is similar in other mediums as well, maybe to a lesser degree. TV series and video games have multiple writers to keep things fresh, but at some point it becomes just more of the same.

    You can still try to replay/rewatch/reread the great ones, but then you know what to expect. This might not be the case with new media of the same authors.

    Also time directly might also effect it, I have trouble really getting into any game now, because I have other stuff to do, and getting back into it afterwards (especially with video games) is more difficult.

  • Shurimal@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    You’re not alone. I’m in the same spot. I love the humor of Fallout and I really liked the TV series; I have played Morrowind, Oblivion, more Skyrim playthroughs than I can remember but I bounced off FO3 pretty hard. For me it was the dreary environment and overall decay of the world.

    People in FO3 just didn’t seem to care much about their living conditions and this doesn’t seem like what would happen in actual post-collapse society. People in general love surrounding themselves with art and beauty, rusty scrap metal shacks wouldn’t be around two centuries after the bombs drop. Earthship, stucco and clay bricks are low tech but can be made very pretty and livable. Murals and paintings made using various pigments, colorful textiles, basreliefs, carvings and sculptures of ceramic, wood and stone would be everywhere, sprinkled with surviving pre-war artifacts that’s been restored, maintained and cherished with pride.

    Plant life would also recover quite fast and be lush in a post-atomic war world—Chornobyl is a prime example how nature claims back human-abandoned land just decades after a nuclear event. Deserts in FO should not be all dreary brown misery; there would be a thriving ecosystem of both flora and fauna. Two centuries is enough time for the most dangerous radioisotopes to decay away and you wouldn’t really find places where radiation would stop wildlife reclaiming the land. More mutations and birth defects, yes, but life will find a way.

    And this overall miserable representation of post-apocalyptic world is the reason FO games never really clicked for me even though the satire and tone hit the spot.

    • Estiar@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s the thing that breaks my immersion. I know that 200 years would make the area completely taken over by nature. It would look more like Horizon rather than Fallout. Not sure I’d dig trenches or anything, but radiation would be much more minimal. Nukes would also have a limited area, so the cities would die, but farmers, small towns, and everyone else out in the boonies would survive and rebuild. Hiroshima is a thriving city nowadays, with the building that survived still there

  • shani66@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    To be perfectly honest, fallout 4 is probably the peak of Bethesda game design. For the most part it’s incredibly shallow, like all of their games, but everything having some kind of actual use as scrap instead of a gold/weight ratio makes exploration far more rewarding.

    That said, Bethesda sucks and there could be a few reasons why it shines through. they didn’t have the actual TES creators’ work to capitalize on and ruin, they just seem to take fallout less seriously than they do TES, and the bad gameplay becomes more apparent when you focus on ranged weapons.

    • InfiniteStruggle@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Strange, I’ve not met many people that would rank FO4 over FO3 or new vegas. Atleast, not in terms of story or gameplay design. What are your opinions on 3 and new vegas?

      • shani66@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Oh don’t get it mixed up, new Vegas is better than anything Bethesda has ever put out, it’s just not a Bethesda game. 3, meanwhile, is just straight up bad. It’s as unrewarding as oblivion to explore, the gameplay sucked, and the setting was stupid.

  • Vincente@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    You are right, just trust your intuition and perception. The Fallout game series made by Bethesda is boring. On the other hand, the different gun genres aren’t as interesting as the different professions, skills, and features, not to mention the lores of vampires, werewolves, and cult rites.

    • M500@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I hardly know/care about the fallout lore. I guess it’s just not a series for me.

      I wonder how much more I’d like it if the mechanics where the same but had a different setting/story.

  • Ibaudia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’ve only really played New Vegas extensively, but I think the biggest thing to remember is that when you’re familiar with these western-style RPGs, they seem like they have a bottomless well of content because you know how and where to find quests and such. When these games are new, you have to find content for the first time, and if you’re not sure where to look then it becomes frustrating and boring.

    New Vegas is better at this than most fallout games because once you have a quest it often leads to a sequence of other quests. in FO3, half the game is just finding stuff to do. Never played 4 or 76. No one plays FO1 or FO2 anymore but they sometimes suffer from similar issues, especially FO1.

    Build variety in these games comes more from the perks, skill pts, and SPECIAL stats you choose. They’re not quite as visual as the different classes in Skyrim, but they certainly do much different things.

  • Quazatron@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Same here. I have a few games from the Fallout series, but it just doesn’t click for me. I keep going back to Skyrim. It is just fun to ride around the landscape, sometimes doing nothing, with a huge ass battleaxe on my back.

    • M500@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah? Skyrim has a really interesting landscape. Fallout is mostly empty land, a small hut/gas station or random buildings in the city.

      Around level 40 I’m either 1 shotting people or it’s a bullet sponge. And I basically take everything.

      Its difficulty curve is kinda weird. It starts pretty hard then takes a quick turn to a walk in the park.

      • Quazatron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m on level 50-ish in Skyrim, and I either have done all the quests I could find or can’t do some quests because of some bug.

        Then I can either pile mods on it to make it more interesting (and lose achievements in the process) or start again with a new character.

        Either way, it’s still a nice place to burn some hours.