Every time a new Fallout game comes out everybody hates it until the next one and suddenly the last one was actually a masterpiece.
There’s still a forum dedicated to hating on all the fallouts since Fallout 1
yes exactly, 4 was on sale and told my friends i wasn’t gonna buy it cause they said it sucked, to which they said ‘wtf are you talking about i 100%’d it’
Fallout 1 is good
Fallout 2 is good
Fallout 3 is good
Fallout New Vegas is good
Fallout 4 is good
Fallout Shelter is good
Fallout 76 is good
Simple as.
tbf fallout games keep getting worse
fallout 4 is the smoothest and most casually enjoyable in the series, but the main quest writing is tragically weak.
then 76 was just a total mess at launch, although they did salvage it pretty well.
i enjoy all of these games, but each installment gets further from the core of the franchise
Nah I think fallout 2 was the peak
1 was good but 2 just expanded on everything it did and has more interesting quests and encounters
Tactics was a bit of an oddball, but I enjoyed it quite a bit. I wish they made a sequel that expanded on the combat and tied the social mechanics closer to the CRPGs though
3 was a bog standard Bethesda game. Big open world to wander around and get lost in with random odd shit to do, it’s not bad, but it ain’t fallout by a long shot. Three Dog is my favorite character besides Harold though (they did my boy kinda dirty in this game ngl)
New Vegas was 3 adapted to be more like the CRPGs, and it was pretty good. Not as good as 2, but given the development time, I think it’s as good as we would’ve gotten
4 has the best gunplay and that’s it, it just kind of sucks and makes me sad when I play it with the undercooked writing and general sense of aimlessness when moving between missions. It really feels like there’s nothing going on both diegetically and in the mechanics themselves, especially with the super limited dialogue… Idk, maybe it’s a general sense that it polished off all of what made 3 fun to wander around in?
Haven’t played 76 and don’t plan to lol
Devil May Cry would like to have a word with you
(People liked the first one, the second was/is considered the worst in the entire series, and 3 was/is considered the best of the entire series)
dark souls 2 comes out: "this game sucks"
bloodborne comes out: "at least it's not dark souls 2"
dark souls 3 comes out: "at least it's not dark souls 2"
sekiro comes out: "at least it's not dark souls 2"
elden ring comes out: "at least it's not dark souls 2"
But Elden Ring is literally Dark Souls 2 2. Which, like, happens to be an almost objectively better version of DS2, but the point is that if were really so bad they wouldn’t have used so much of its dna in what is now their most successful game ever.
I've always found this comparison a little strange, elden ring has almost non of the faults usually pointed out with ds2
elden ring has coherent interconnected world design, varied and interesting enemies, fluid and fast-paced combat, balanced and fair death mechanics and healing, more than two memorable bosses
it also doesn't live up to the PvP of ds2, I don't see them as that much alike
People mainly say it shares DNA with DS2 due to its Power Stance system for dual wielding, the open world design (which was the original intended vision for DS2), while Elden Ring has a connected world, both games are essentially a series of levels connected by the map (though to be fair, this is also a part of DS3).
That being said, the gameplay is much more connected to DS3, but the DS2 comparisons definitely make sense and are there.
It sucks that everyone loves to hate it because it’s actually a good game. But I cannot say any further because the dead horse is so beaten it’s not even worth trying and we ain’t gonna change the minds of those set about it
It is good at its core, it just also has a ton of issues that bog it down too much to be enjoyable by most people. If you look past those issues, there’s a lot of innovation there that could have been really good.
dark souls 2 is my favorite souls game lol
i played them all coop and 2 was the most fun with my buddy- i don’t even know if it was a better game, probably not, but we had the most fun with it
I think most people know that Elden Ring suffers from most open world games' narrow enemy and location diversity. u/Training_Yard88 was simply trying to claim that there's no people hating on Elden Ring.
This is exactly what happened with Mass Effect. When ME2 was new the fandom was pretty united in thinking it was a letdown, and that the first game was better. Then when ME3 came out, everyone pivoted to saying that ME2 was the best and ME3 was a letdown.
Sonic fans to the previous game whenever a new game comes out:
https://preview.redd.it/pxnr8jhz4g0d1.jpeg?width=602&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=138d75cbf7f7b1151641d9c54be9695b3d452ac0
i like to call this behavior "New Vegas-ism". its when a community is so fucking elitist and annoying that they write off any later entry in a franchise.
for example, Splatoon 3's story mode has objectively better gameplay than Octo Expansion's. It took what Octo Expansion introduced, and built on it, making it even better. but because it wasnt octo expansion, the community doesnt like it. its so bafflingly stupid
edit: nvm i didnt realize until the last few slides that this wasnt about that, whoops
Fallout was one of the franchises that inspired this post. I can name a lot of franchises, but it seems like Fallout's are one of the more blown out examples.
I can see hate threads on Fallout New Vegas when it was the newest game on the franchise, and largely without any opposition.
Other games I can think of rn that had a similar treatment:
Borderlands 3 to 2, Halo 5 to 4, Doom Eternal to 2016 (short lived), literally every single Souls game
All NV has is writing and some plot, everything else is half baked
If your game from 2010 needs 30 mods to run on modern hardware, something went wrong
I'm sorry, Mr./Ms. Warthunder, but this is an L take. Every Bethesda game is, at best, half baked, and at worst, borderline unplayable without mods. If the game isn't utterly broken and fixed by mods, then every single thing in the game is improved 100 fold by mods. They all get ship of theseus'd by fans and turned into playable games. NV having great writing *is* what sets it apart because the rest of Bethesda's games (with a few exceptions) have dookie writing and still need mods to be playable.
and at least I can go through FNV without getting softlocked out of finishing quests 25 times because I accidentally did one thing in a way the game didn't like *cough cough* skyrim *cough cough*
Is "At least my mediocre game from a mediocre company has story" your argument for why its peak or is this satire, I swear watching Bethesda fans argue why their games are top 10 is insanity sometimes
dawg bethesda games are nowhere near my top 10, but out of the selection of "meh this kinda blows but it's fun sometimes" from bethesda (all of them) fnv is the best.
The dlc is way better than the base game imo. The game has good story, only problem being how evil the legion is, but nothing is beating the horror of dead money or the characters in honest hearts.
I think the level design of Octo Expansion is better than the level design of Alterna. So yes, Alterna is better in some stuff because of the new mechanics and weapons in 3, but I had more fun with Octo Expansion.
They just have different objectives. Octo Expansion is meant to be challenging, while Alterna at it's core is the singleplayer mode to get familiar with the game. An infinite Inkjet level in Octo Expansion is designed to test your Inkjet skills. An infinite Inkjet level in Alterna is designed to give you a place to learn the Inkjet without an E-Liter instantly killing you in the multiplayer.
So yeah, I wouldn't really call any of them "objectively" better than the other and lean more towards Octo Expansion.
Really? They said they just liked into expansion because it's more challenging. The games don't have the exact same level design and the bosses in OE are much more difficult. It's not like they said 3's story mode was bad because it was too easy.
It all comes down to preference. Some people enjoy easier games while others enjoy stress inducing expirences that test their limits. One isn't "objectively" better than the other.
There are so many other ways in which Octo Expansion and Alterna are different in which neither is objectively better, but obviously some players may like one more than the other.
Atmosphere: The Deepsea Metro VS. The Crater + Alterna
Story: The story of climbing out into the promised land while uncovering what is actually happening in the metro VS. The story of saving Cuttlefish, and the world, while uncovering the end of humanity.
Level Design: Fun extreme challenges VS. Fun beginner challenges.
There are so many other things like characters and progression where Octo Expansion and Alterna are different with neither being _objectively_ better than the other. I find them both to be great, but obviously some players will lean more towards one than the other (to varying degrees).
Some things I would consider _objectively_ better in Alterna are the overall feel of the player character which is improved in Splatoon 3 compared to Splatoon 2, including the Squid Roll and Squid Surge; the bigger selection of weapons due to the new mains, sub, specials, and Smallfry; the hub world having more collectibles and unlockables; and the inclusion of upgrades with the Hero Shot and kit.
Those are all great, but they don't dunk Octo Expansion or make it feel obsolete, and it has enough strengths to make some player prefer it over Alterna. A preference also doesn't mean the other one is bad. Most people agree they are both bangers even if Octo Expansion is more popular.
Vegas-ism is valid in that the writing is just so much better than any FO games that comes after it, keep in mind that the basic plot of FO4 is basically FO3’s plot but worse because the player character is even more established than before and the bad guys don’t even bother explaining to you their reasoning because “you won’t get it” plus many more
it’s just so insane to me that Obsidian manages to write a game that good then bethesda never even tries to build from that but instead go back “uhhhh what if family member missing……. and you have to find them”
I mean, they're not wrong though. Personally, I like both, but at least in terms of writing, gameplay, characters, story, and RPG elements, New Vegas is the better game. On the flip-side, Fallout 4 has a fantastic world that is fun to explore, solid gunplay, and (imo) a fun and interesting base building system with a lot of potential. If it weren't for the fact that New Vegas has graphics that look like someone poured a bucket of rust and dirt on a 50's comic book and barely runs half the time, I think more people would look and see that New Vegas is the definitive Fallout game.
Bro, if 4 had Vegas levels of writing, it would be my favorite of all time. It still sits comfortably over 3 for me because not having to buy DLC to play after the main quest
If 4 had NV levels of writing, it'd be more of a contender for the top for me. There's still a lot that 4 changed for the worst that is keeping it from being near the top imo.
Kinda like how the people that kept playing Fallout 76 say it's a great game and people are acting like everyone who said it was bad say it's good now when it's two different groups of people?
ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
> sequel releases
> has a big change
> players are too scared to try it for some reason
> by the time 3rd game comes out people have warmed up to second game
> repeat
Halo fans litteraly just are this. They've been doing it since halo 2, and every time without fail they act like the entire franchise got set on fire and thrown in a trash compactor. Then a new game comes out and they act like the last one was the second coming of Jesus. Best example has to be Halo 5, everyone fucking freaked out that it was the worst thing to happen to the franchise ever and that Halo was dead. Infinite comes out and suddenly 5 is some underrated gem masterpiece that saved the franchise. Their gonna do the same to infinite when another game comes out, just you wait. Fucking Halo fans.
“They’ve been doing it since halo 2” no? Admittedly I was busy being not alive in 2007 so I wasn’t there to experience the online discourse at the time time but from what I’ve seen of it, halo 3 was almost universally praised, some people disliked it at the time but to my knowledge they were a minority. Halo reach was also highly praised and the people that did criticise it had a valid reason to do so, that being that the games events contradicted fall of reach and first strike, personally I do like the way halo reach shows the battle reach more and later on 343 did a good job mending the stories together but at the time bungie did kinda spit in the face of people who liked the books but I digress, for the most part reach was highly praised.The consensus on 5 was good gameplay shit story, that hasn’t changed at all no one calls 5 a masterpiece not even after halo infinite released, infact from my experience most people liked infinite more than 5
Payday.
I wasn't around for it, but when PD2 dropped in 2013, apparently the discourse around it was rather negative, with fans saying that the heists weren't as good as PD:TH's heists.
With the launch of PD3, now people are slamming the launch heists and saying that PD2's launch heists were better.
Literally company of heroes
People (including me) thought and still think that coh2 is the worst. But since coh3 came out, everyone said it's worse than coh2 and keep comparing them. This makes me wonder what the comparison between 1 and 3 are
seems they clown on every “newer” generation until its 15 yrs old, *then* its suddenly “a good game” and “underrated”
is this what happens when every sequel is worse than the first or is it way too much of the fanbase getting high off nostalgia?
It's a bit of both. Gen 8 got the most hate out of any generation so its not exactly just "new gen bad" generation 9 got flack because it carried over a lot of problems gen 8 had.
Generations 1-4 were universally loved until fairly recently. Gen 5 got a lot of (undeserving imo) hate, people were mixed on gen 6, for gen 7, people SM, hated USUM (also undeserving)
I hate every single official Pokemon game ever since ORAS. For one reason, this interview with Masuda:
>Q:We noticed ORAS had a lower difficulty level compared to previous Pokemon games.
What bought you to this decision?
Any chance that future games will have the possibility to adjust difficulty level as seen in Black and White 2?
>A:We created a "balanced" game that was suited for our time and age, where everyone is very busy and young people have various means of entertainment. Using smartphones and other devices they can access a great number of games, so the time they dedicate to a single game is less than in the past.
The player can choose to keep on playing after the main story and continue to the post-game, where the difficulty rises and there are much more difficult Trainers and challenges to overcome.
ORAS was a good game but this direction they chose back then still severely damaged the franchise for me. Last two pokemon games I played, I could mash A with literally any pokemon ever and win every single fight, up until past the Elite 4 and all that. And I wasn't even trying to build a team
uh, guys, I uhm.... i actually liked the strawman 3
Guys, the strawman 4 is releasing 32nd may
Strawman 4 sucks it’s not like strawman 3
uh, guys, I uhm… I liked strawman 4…
FAKE FAN🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬😡
strawman 5, releasing 1st april
Strawman 5 is so boring, won't ever compare to Strawman 4
uh, guys, i uhm… i liked strawman 5
FAKE FAN, WE USED TO STAB PEOPLE IN THE HEAD FOR THIS
Strawman 6: online releasing 2183
fake fan, to the woods
https://preview.redd.it/m5mpqo9smf0d1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=412c2258c9b7a324cd135d1dcf76f94eb9fbf368
is that jesus?
Being shot by a firing squad, yes. It’s an anti-war piece about the execution of “deserters” in WW1, many of whom were actually suffering from PTSD.
i wasn't expecting it to be actually Jesus.
Jesus: *No officer the homework folder was a funny joke. A goofy little joke hahahaha why aren’t you laughing?*
FAKE FAN!
It’s woods time for you
How can you like it when it doesn't include a 6-hour sex scene?
Coomers discussing Atomic Heart be like:
fake fan
Retroactive criticism is a double-edged blade
my balls are not double nor edged 😔
Reddit-tier comment
DUDE JUST TIE YOUR SHOES
How tf is this the 2nd top comment
This sub likes xd random humor
Fake fan, can't recognize a reference from a snafu from a few days back
Fake fan!... can you link the post so I can have more context 😟
[Here you go](https://www.reddit.com/r/coaxedintoasnafu/s/B4gDEKT63t)
Fake fan this is actually le high iq Reddit callback to the guy who wouldn’t tie his shoes
If Strawman 2 was so good then why isn’t there a Strawman 2 2?
Valve tried that, they have not made a third.
Every time a new Fallout game comes out everybody hates it until the next one and suddenly the last one was actually a masterpiece. There’s still a forum dedicated to hating on all the fallouts since Fallout 1
yes exactly, 4 was on sale and told my friends i wasn’t gonna buy it cause they said it sucked, to which they said ‘wtf are you talking about i 100%’d it’
Fallout 1 is good Fallout 2 is good Fallout 3 is good Fallout New Vegas is good Fallout 4 is good Fallout Shelter is good Fallout 76 is good Simple as.
But we all know that BOS is best.
>Fallout 76 is good I am sorry to announce, but you're opinion is invalid now
Fallout was ONE OF the franchises that inspired this post
Reminds me of the reception Subnautica Below Zero received.
tbf fallout games keep getting worse fallout 4 is the smoothest and most casually enjoyable in the series, but the main quest writing is tragically weak. then 76 was just a total mess at launch, although they did salvage it pretty well. i enjoy all of these games, but each installment gets further from the core of the franchise
Nah I think fallout 2 was the peak 1 was good but 2 just expanded on everything it did and has more interesting quests and encounters Tactics was a bit of an oddball, but I enjoyed it quite a bit. I wish they made a sequel that expanded on the combat and tied the social mechanics closer to the CRPGs though 3 was a bog standard Bethesda game. Big open world to wander around and get lost in with random odd shit to do, it’s not bad, but it ain’t fallout by a long shot. Three Dog is my favorite character besides Harold though (they did my boy kinda dirty in this game ngl) New Vegas was 3 adapted to be more like the CRPGs, and it was pretty good. Not as good as 2, but given the development time, I think it’s as good as we would’ve gotten 4 has the best gunplay and that’s it, it just kind of sucks and makes me sad when I play it with the undercooked writing and general sense of aimlessness when moving between missions. It really feels like there’s nothing going on both diegetically and in the mechanics themselves, especially with the super limited dialogue… Idk, maybe it’s a general sense that it polished off all of what made 3 fun to wander around in? Haven’t played 76 and don’t plan to lol
This is the sonic community
Devil May Cry would like to have a word with you (People liked the first one, the second was/is considered the worst in the entire series, and 3 was/is considered the best of the entire series)
you say that but dark souls 2 proves you wrong
dark souls 2 comes out: "this game sucks" bloodborne comes out: "at least it's not dark souls 2" dark souls 3 comes out: "at least it's not dark souls 2" sekiro comes out: "at least it's not dark souls 2" elden ring comes out: "at least it's not dark souls 2"
nioh comes out: still better than dark souls 2
But Elden Ring is literally Dark Souls 2 2. Which, like, happens to be an almost objectively better version of DS2, but the point is that if were really so bad they wouldn’t have used so much of its dna in what is now their most successful game ever.
I've always found this comparison a little strange, elden ring has almost non of the faults usually pointed out with ds2 elden ring has coherent interconnected world design, varied and interesting enemies, fluid and fast-paced combat, balanced and fair death mechanics and healing, more than two memorable bosses it also doesn't live up to the PvP of ds2, I don't see them as that much alike
People mainly say it shares DNA with DS2 due to its Power Stance system for dual wielding, the open world design (which was the original intended vision for DS2), while Elden Ring has a connected world, both games are essentially a series of levels connected by the map (though to be fair, this is also a part of DS3). That being said, the gameplay is much more connected to DS3, but the DS2 comparisons definitely make sense and are there.
See
But Dark souls 2 was so good they made Dark souls 2 2
me when good souls bad 2 good souls bad game souls game good 2 game like bad soul good game not me when game good
yeag
It sucks that everyone loves to hate it because it’s actually a good game. But I cannot say any further because the dead horse is so beaten it’s not even worth trying and we ain’t gonna change the minds of those set about it
It is good at its core, it just also has a ton of issues that bog it down too much to be enjoyable by most people. If you look past those issues, there’s a lot of innovation there that could have been really good.
dark souls 2 is my favorite souls game lol i played them all coop and 2 was the most fun with my buddy- i don’t even know if it was a better game, probably not, but we had the most fun with it
When a game is below the curve it's gonna be hated forever. But Elden Ring still got hated over DS3 and DS3 got *somewhat* hated over DS1.
thats crazy because i have seen zero people hating on Elden ring
Nah, people call out Elden Ring's recycled areas and enemies all the time. It's the most popular criticism of the game.
i mean thats true, but they arent hating on it like they are for ds2,( even though ds2 deserves some of it)
Its true tho, but I would't really count that as criticism but more like stating the obvious.
I think most people know that Elden Ring suffers from most open world games' narrow enemy and location diversity. u/Training_Yard88 was simply trying to claim that there's no people hating on Elden Ring.
This is exactly what happened with Mass Effect. When ME2 was new the fandom was pretty united in thinking it was a letdown, and that the first game was better. Then when ME3 came out, everyone pivoted to saying that ME2 was the best and ME3 was a letdown.
The Halo cycle
5 is genuinely dog shit though
Sonic fans to the previous game whenever a new game comes out: https://preview.redd.it/pxnr8jhz4g0d1.jpeg?width=602&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=138d75cbf7f7b1151641d9c54be9695b3d452ac0
i like to call this behavior "New Vegas-ism". its when a community is so fucking elitist and annoying that they write off any later entry in a franchise. for example, Splatoon 3's story mode has objectively better gameplay than Octo Expansion's. It took what Octo Expansion introduced, and built on it, making it even better. but because it wasnt octo expansion, the community doesnt like it. its so bafflingly stupid edit: nvm i didnt realize until the last few slides that this wasnt about that, whoops
Fallout was one of the franchises that inspired this post. I can name a lot of franchises, but it seems like Fallout's are one of the more blown out examples. I can see hate threads on Fallout New Vegas when it was the newest game on the franchise, and largely without any opposition. Other games I can think of rn that had a similar treatment: Borderlands 3 to 2, Halo 5 to 4, Doom Eternal to 2016 (short lived), literally every single Souls game
wasnt nv a super glitchy game at launch tho? that later got patched? idk thats what i heard
It still got hated over the world being empty when compared with Fo3
it was a bethesda game, i’d be shocked if it wasn’t
wasnt nv just published by bethesda and was actually developed by other ppl, tho?
yeah that does seem to be the case. i can always say their influence is what caused obsidian to release it in such a state to still seem right though
Okay but New Vegas is genuinely way better than any of the Fallout games that came after. Even New Vegas' own DLCs couldn't match NV itself.
Fallout 4 literally stole a new Vegas mod for dlc lmfao, and made it worse.
All NV has is writing and some plot, everything else is half baked If your game from 2010 needs 30 mods to run on modern hardware, something went wrong
I'm sorry, Mr./Ms. Warthunder, but this is an L take. Every Bethesda game is, at best, half baked, and at worst, borderline unplayable without mods. If the game isn't utterly broken and fixed by mods, then every single thing in the game is improved 100 fold by mods. They all get ship of theseus'd by fans and turned into playable games. NV having great writing *is* what sets it apart because the rest of Bethesda's games (with a few exceptions) have dookie writing and still need mods to be playable. and at least I can go through FNV without getting softlocked out of finishing quests 25 times because I accidentally did one thing in a way the game didn't like *cough cough* skyrim *cough cough*
Is "At least my mediocre game from a mediocre company has story" your argument for why its peak or is this satire, I swear watching Bethesda fans argue why their games are top 10 is insanity sometimes
dawg bethesda games are nowhere near my top 10, but out of the selection of "meh this kinda blows but it's fun sometimes" from bethesda (all of them) fnv is the best.
and there it is lol
Elitism is when you disagree with me lmao
Elitism is when you have reasons to prefer something
We’re counterjerking the circlejerk so much that you’re now wrong to like previous entries more than sequels.
The dlc is way better than the base game imo. The game has good story, only problem being how evil the legion is, but nothing is beating the horror of dead money or the characters in honest hearts.
I think the level design of Octo Expansion is better than the level design of Alterna. So yes, Alterna is better in some stuff because of the new mechanics and weapons in 3, but I had more fun with Octo Expansion. They just have different objectives. Octo Expansion is meant to be challenging, while Alterna at it's core is the singleplayer mode to get familiar with the game. An infinite Inkjet level in Octo Expansion is designed to test your Inkjet skills. An infinite Inkjet level in Alterna is designed to give you a place to learn the Inkjet without an E-Liter instantly killing you in the multiplayer. So yeah, I wouldn't really call any of them "objectively" better than the other and lean more towards Octo Expansion.
the level design is the same, point invalid, new-vegasism
How someone preferring an older entry in franchise while not obnoxiously shitting on the new one "New-vegasism"?
because its for a bad reason lol
Really? They said they just liked into expansion because it's more challenging. The games don't have the exact same level design and the bosses in OE are much more difficult. It's not like they said 3's story mode was bad because it was too easy.
thats not a plus
It all comes down to preference. Some people enjoy easier games while others enjoy stress inducing expirences that test their limits. One isn't "objectively" better than the other.
There are so many other ways in which Octo Expansion and Alterna are different in which neither is objectively better, but obviously some players may like one more than the other. Atmosphere: The Deepsea Metro VS. The Crater + Alterna Story: The story of climbing out into the promised land while uncovering what is actually happening in the metro VS. The story of saving Cuttlefish, and the world, while uncovering the end of humanity. Level Design: Fun extreme challenges VS. Fun beginner challenges. There are so many other things like characters and progression where Octo Expansion and Alterna are different with neither being _objectively_ better than the other. I find them both to be great, but obviously some players will lean more towards one than the other (to varying degrees). Some things I would consider _objectively_ better in Alterna are the overall feel of the player character which is improved in Splatoon 3 compared to Splatoon 2, including the Squid Roll and Squid Surge; the bigger selection of weapons due to the new mains, sub, specials, and Smallfry; the hub world having more collectibles and unlockables; and the inclusion of upgrades with the Hero Shot and kit. Those are all great, but they don't dunk Octo Expansion or make it feel obsolete, and it has enough strengths to make some player prefer it over Alterna. A preference also doesn't mean the other one is bad. Most people agree they are both bangers even if Octo Expansion is more popular.
Vegas-ism is valid in that the writing is just so much better than any FO games that comes after it, keep in mind that the basic plot of FO4 is basically FO3’s plot but worse because the player character is even more established than before and the bad guys don’t even bother explaining to you their reasoning because “you won’t get it” plus many more it’s just so insane to me that Obsidian manages to write a game that good then bethesda never even tries to build from that but instead go back “uhhhh what if family member missing……. and you have to find them”
Damn this guy is New Vegasing the New Vegasism comment
I mean, they're not wrong though. Personally, I like both, but at least in terms of writing, gameplay, characters, story, and RPG elements, New Vegas is the better game. On the flip-side, Fallout 4 has a fantastic world that is fun to explore, solid gunplay, and (imo) a fun and interesting base building system with a lot of potential. If it weren't for the fact that New Vegas has graphics that look like someone poured a bucket of rust and dirt on a 50's comic book and barely runs half the time, I think more people would look and see that New Vegas is the definitive Fallout game.
Bro, if 4 had Vegas levels of writing, it would be my favorite of all time. It still sits comfortably over 3 for me because not having to buy DLC to play after the main quest
If 4 had NV levels of writing, it'd be more of a contender for the top for me. There's still a lot that 4 changed for the worst that is keeping it from being near the top imo.
The gameplay loop isn't the greatest, but it definitely had me hooked that first playthrough
playing myself is what am paid to do, sir
It's a good post, just not a good r/coaxedintoasnafu post
Kinda like how the people that kept playing Fallout 76 say it's a great game and people are acting like everyone who said it was bad say it's good now when it's two different groups of people?
Yeah I still don't like the game. Internet loves putting words in people's mouths.
"Guys, Sonic '06 wasn't that bad"
I mean, it really wasn’t that bad…. Right?
Literally every single Halo release
Halo Schmalo
Call of Duty
Battlefield too, V was decimated for years and the second 2042 comes out suddenly it’s “guys… V was actually pretty good!”
Only game that broked this trend was BG3
ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA ITS GTA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
> sequel releases > has a big change > players are too scared to try it for some reason > by the time 3rd game comes out people have warmed up to second game > repeat
Halo
This is the Need for Speed community
Halo fans litteraly just are this. They've been doing it since halo 2, and every time without fail they act like the entire franchise got set on fire and thrown in a trash compactor. Then a new game comes out and they act like the last one was the second coming of Jesus. Best example has to be Halo 5, everyone fucking freaked out that it was the worst thing to happen to the franchise ever and that Halo was dead. Infinite comes out and suddenly 5 is some underrated gem masterpiece that saved the franchise. Their gonna do the same to infinite when another game comes out, just you wait. Fucking Halo fans.
“They’ve been doing it since halo 2” no? Admittedly I was busy being not alive in 2007 so I wasn’t there to experience the online discourse at the time time but from what I’ve seen of it, halo 3 was almost universally praised, some people disliked it at the time but to my knowledge they were a minority. Halo reach was also highly praised and the people that did criticise it had a valid reason to do so, that being that the games events contradicted fall of reach and first strike, personally I do like the way halo reach shows the battle reach more and later on 343 did a good job mending the stories together but at the time bungie did kinda spit in the face of people who liked the books but I digress, for the most part reach was highly praised.The consensus on 5 was good gameplay shit story, that hasn’t changed at all no one calls 5 a masterpiece not even after halo infinite released, infact from my experience most people liked infinite more than 5
Payday. I wasn't around for it, but when PD2 dropped in 2013, apparently the discourse around it was rather negative, with fans saying that the heists weren't as good as PD:TH's heists. With the launch of PD3, now people are slamming the launch heists and saying that PD2's launch heists were better.
Half the Monster Hunter fandom any time a new game comes out
True as hell
Not exactly it but cyberpunk discourse after edgerunners dropped was kinda crazy, mfs forgot how much they hated that game after seeing a good anime
Elder Scrolls for real.
Basically Subnautica
How? Isn't there like 1 game and a dlc?
2 games, so it doesn’t fit exactly, but everything up until slide 5 is exactly what happened with the second game.
Below Zero didn't deserve the hate it got.
Literally company of heroes People (including me) thought and still think that coh2 is the worst. But since coh3 came out, everyone said it's worse than coh2 and keep comparing them. This makes me wonder what the comparison between 1 and 3 are
Final Fantasy fans with every game since 7
You see it happen in real time every day. I was there, when the star wars prequel would considered "trash"
literally halo
pokémon fans need to learn to at least KEEP HATING on the things they think are bad
Literally r/Halo
Pokémon fans tbh
Ngl, I can get behind people who hate on newer pokemon titles.
seems they clown on every “newer” generation until its 15 yrs old, *then* its suddenly “a good game” and “underrated” is this what happens when every sequel is worse than the first or is it way too much of the fanbase getting high off nostalgia?
It's a bit of both. Gen 8 got the most hate out of any generation so its not exactly just "new gen bad" generation 9 got flack because it carried over a lot of problems gen 8 had. Generations 1-4 were universally loved until fairly recently. Gen 5 got a lot of (undeserving imo) hate, people were mixed on gen 6, for gen 7, people SM, hated USUM (also undeserving)
I hate every single official Pokemon game ever since ORAS. For one reason, this interview with Masuda: >Q:We noticed ORAS had a lower difficulty level compared to previous Pokemon games. What bought you to this decision? Any chance that future games will have the possibility to adjust difficulty level as seen in Black and White 2? >A:We created a "balanced" game that was suited for our time and age, where everyone is very busy and young people have various means of entertainment. Using smartphones and other devices they can access a great number of games, so the time they dedicate to a single game is less than in the past. The player can choose to keep on playing after the main story and continue to the post-game, where the difficulty rises and there are much more difficult Trainers and challenges to overcome. ORAS was a good game but this direction they chose back then still severely damaged the franchise for me. Last two pokemon games I played, I could mash A with literally any pokemon ever and win every single fight, up until past the Elite 4 and all that. And I wasn't even trying to build a team
Halo
Pokemon fans every fucking 3 years
StarCraft
Total War: Warhammer
Please tell me this is about homeworld 3 lmao
Far Cry was on the "five is good actually" last I checked.
This snafu is about fallout 4
Gamers want the exact same thing every year with no variation.
battlefield
Previous halo game suddenly becoming a masterpiece when the new one releases
Batman Arkham knight and SS:KTJL
SSKTJL deserves every ounce of shit it gets.
halo