I wonder if Wasteland 3 gets a bump, I really enjoyed what I played till I got stuck.
I think it's probably shelved with it and Fallout being both under Xbox now.
I think it's probably shelved with it and Fallout being both under Xbox now.
FO76 is a coop live service game that has been getting a significant amount of support, this is not the same situation that Starfield is in.
I mean, to be fair, people were way harder on FO76 than Starfield. It's totally in the realm of possibility that Starfield gets a second chance at life.
They did that by keeping pretty much the same exact team as the prequel, the engine, the technology and the assets.Well look at ff7 rebirth for example. A huge ass game made in like 3.5 years and its more polished than any bethesda title ever with quality content and amazing cutscenes so its doable, you just need a good dev team
Yeah but they had incentive to work on 76 cause if they got it to work it would make money over time. Starfield being an SP game isn't going to bring in that kind of money even if they "fix it".
You could say the exact same thing about Cyberpunk 2077, but we all saw how that turnaround went.
FO76 is a coop live service game that has been getting a significant amount of support, this is not the same situation that Starfield is in.
Cyberpunk got some of the biggest sales numbers since release by the release of the Netflix series. That plus a couple of good updates made sales bump up incredibly high.Did it really give them much off a sales bump? Honestly I liked the game even with its flaws at start but the turnaround hasn't gotten me to even buy the DLC (and honestly the turn around was far too late imho, by that time I gave up and had moved on). Maybe I'll get the DLC someday but gotta finish more important games first and need something to play.
I think CP2077 is under a different category than Starfield. Sure, Starfield didn't work for some people, but I'd say a lot of folks still liked it quite a bit, even if it's flawed. CP2077 was a reputational catastrophe for CDPR. While I'll commend them for turning it around, I'd argue that they *had* to do something to turn that around if they wanted people to ever trust them again. I don't think it's quite the same for Starfield. It's by all accounts the most well-optimized, least buggy BGS game to date.You could say the exact same thing about Cyberpunk 2077, but we all saw how that turnaround went.
LMAO... sorry but "significant" is not what I would call the amount of support F76 has gotten over the years. They got like a bare minimum life support team on it until maybe recently.
Nobody has Paramount+ and no one is signing up for a streaming service FOR a series based on a gameThe Witcher saw a sales bump. Last of Us saw a sales bump. Now Fallout has seen a huge sale and engagement bump.
Why didn't this happen with Halo? Even if the show wasn't of the quality of the others surely it would have done something for engagement?
If any of you reading this started playing on Xbox, shoot me
As someone whose played 76 since the beginning, significant is not the right term used to describe the support the game has recieved. It's just that it looks significant in total because it's SIX years old and the drip feed finally filled the cuppast half full. Starfield is less than one year old and hasn't even received its first major DLC. Also, not being a coop game has NOTHING to do with predicting a Renaissance. All of their other games have had huge bumps when official mod support gets added, DLC comes out and the game gets anniversary rereleases. Assuming the same won't happen here is just stupid.
Besides that br mode that eventually got dropped, there have been major content releases since 2020 with the Wastelanders expansion. Even comparing FO4 to SF, there is a massive difference in how much they were able to retain player numbers.LMAO... sorry but "significant" is not what I would call the amount of support F76 has gotten over the years. They got like a bare minimum life support team on it until maybe recently.
I bought all the games because of the show. Actually I bought all the games on two different systems. Playing F76 now, and it isn't what I expected. It feels more survival game than deep rpg. Maybe it changes?
LMAO... sorry but "significant" is not what I would call the amount of support F76 has gotten over the years. They got like a bare minimum life support team on it until maybe recently.
It's a casual survival game set in Fallout. Your not getting a deep RPG, it's a game as service fallout with some story content and lore throughout it, but it's not narrative heavy as single player fallouts.
Tell me you know nothing about 76 without telling me.
Game is literally about to get a map expansion too in the coming weeks.
Besides that br mode that eventually got dropped, there have been major content releases since 2020 with the Wastelanders expansion. Even comparing FO4 to SF, there is a massive difference in how much they were able to retain player numbers.
The entirety of the story stuff that's been added to Fallout 76 in the years since launch is equivalent to less than Far Harbor from F4, until the Atlantic City update a few weeks ago. I played it all, I know. And waiting a year for the big brotherhood update after wastelanders only for it to be literally an hour and a half of unrepeatable quests and 2 new buildings is once again, not major content. There are probably more people working on starfield DLC right now than there have ever been working on 76 post launch. Bethesda games have a very long curve, and dismissing it before it hits any of those milestones is just naive and feeds into the ridiculous negative online narrative that the game wasn't successful that people strangely want to manifest
Tell me you know nothing about 76 without telling me.
Game is literally about to get a map expansion too in the coming weeks.
I not dismissing longevity and actually liked SF over FO, but the original post used the term renaissance which implies more than what I think this game is going to get.The entirety of the story stuff that's been added to Fallout 76 in the years since launch is equivalent to less than Far Harbor from F4, until the Atlantic City update a few weeks ago. I played it all, I know. And waiting a year for the big brotherhood update after wastelanders only for it to be literally an hour and a half of unrepeatable quests and 2 new buildings is once again, not major content. There are probably more people working on starfield DLC right now than there have ever been working on 76 post launch. Bethesda games have a very long curve, and dismissing it before it hits any of those milestones is just naive and feeds into the ridiculous negative online narrative that the game wasn't successful that people strangely want to manifest
Also tried it over the weekend.
Played 2-3 hours and followed the questlines in the beginner area.
Looks really nice for a Fallout game but I eventually gave up, because it's far too easy and if it's too easy i get bored quickly.
Is there no way to increase the difficulty?
Does it stay this way or does it get more difficult in later areas/quests?
Also tried it over the weekend.
Played 2-3 hours and followed the questlines in the beginner area.
Looks really nice for a Fallout game but I eventually gave up, because it's far too easy and if it's too easy i get bored quickly.
Is there no way to increase the difficulty?
Does it stay this way or does it get more difficult in later areas/quests?
It gets much harder around level 30. So much so that you constantly get people asking how to survive and not run out of ammo and stuff.Also tried it over the weekend.
Played 2-3 hours and followed the questlines in the beginner area.
Looks really nice for a Fallout game but I eventually gave up, because it's far too easy and if it's too easy i get bored quickly.
Is there no way to increase the difficulty?
Does it stay this way or does it get more difficult in later areas/quests?
Yeah, it's not a bad game rn honestly. They did a great job sticking with it and getting it up to where it should have been.Probably should've gotten this on Steam for 8 bucks when I had the chance.
Wastelanders update alone has more story content than Far Harbor so that's an odd thing to say. Story content is a tough bar to set for a game like this really, as they have to focus on putting out game content that is meant to be repeated and keep people playing. It's the issue with all online mmo style games, and devs for these types of games have said it since forever. Supporting story content in online games is a huge investment in time when players are going to play through it in one sitting often. Many months of work to just be done in one day, then the players are online screaming for more.
Hence the focus on stuff like events, grinds, and online friendly activities.
76 is an online game first and foremost, any story content added is always going to be on the lite side.
What MMO games are not dumb easy the first 10 -20 hours?Also tried it over the weekend.
Played 2-3 hours and followed the questlines in the beginner area.
Looks really nice for a Fallout game but I eventually gave up, because it's far too easy and if it's too easy i get bored quickly.
Is there no way to increase the difficulty?
Does it stay this way or does it get more difficult in later areas/quests?
That has always been my issue with 76. The focus on making it Fallout 4 instead of the Fallout Online it was pitched as. It took 2 and a half years for the game to get a new world boss for instance. It was averaging about 2 new events a year while drowning players in camp items. The focus on making quests you do once instead of repeatable goals and content has always been baffling to me.
Fallout 76 is absolutely not an online game first and foremost, as evidenced by almost everything of substance they added being story quests.
Probably should've gotten this on Steam for 8 bucks when I had the chance.
The only thing keeping me from doing that and instead playing 76 is because I don't want to spend the next 50 hours modding the other games lolIm so overwhelmed because I want to play all the fallout games again at the same time lmao
They should be in charge of the games that move the tech forward, like numbered sequels, since they develop the engine.This seems like a problem for them to me.
They were banking on Starfield being the new Skyrim, which would ease the presure for a new game.
It's been 13 years since Skyrim released.
That is just entirely too long to go between entries in a very popular IP.
theres a real value to older games being readily available and i hope publishers learn from this
The Witcher saw a sales bump. Last of Us saw a sales bump. Now Fallout has seen a huge sale and engagement bump.
Why didn't this happen with Halo? Even if the show wasn't of the quality of the others surely it would have done something for engagement?
Lmao i am level 40 atm and i was just thinking it's kinda hard solo at this point. I still am running into the issue of struggling to find ballistic fiber to keep up with armor like i did way back at launch and big boss events hit like a truck.Also tried it over the weekend.
Played 2-3 hours and followed the questlines in the beginner area.
Looks really nice for a Fallout game but I eventually gave up, because it's far too easy and if it's too easy i get bored quickly.
Is there no way to increase the difficulty?
Does it stay this way or does it get more difficult in later areas/quests?