Also a case of a game chasing trends that were popular at that time. Take for instance the numerous pop culture references thrown at your face or inclusion of weapons like the P90 which is a gun that got included because every other game at that time had it because it was the new tacticool gun (even though it doesn’t fit Fallout’s 50s-70s aesthetic)
The Fallout tv show will retroactively make 1,2, and New Vegas worse by being set on the West Coast. They didn't even bother hiring an artist for the announcement image. I have a feeling this show will do more damage then 76
I'm also really afraid of the TV show especially since it's done in cooperation with Bethesda. But you know, I do not expect anything good so I won't be disappointed. At best it will be a horrible Fallout show but a decent series to watch, when you take it out of the Fallout context. That's all we can hope for...
Honestly I doubt that almost all of bad writing in the modern fallout games always has Emile’s name next to it. The show is being directed by people who did a good job on other things. I think if the show will fail it will fail in town. It will go out trying to be too wacky and funny. Which are both parts of fall out. But if they overdo it I can see it ending badly. However if they strike a similar town that they did in Westworld I will be happy. I’m not worried about them setting it in the west coast. I think they have to do that because their lore isn’t very good in the East Coast. and almost all of it is downstream from west Coast lore anyway.
@@Volgin93It’s weird making a Fallout show because it’s main concept is making different choices. You loose that completely. But there’s been good adaptations done lately. Would’ve been better as a cartoon.
"Hot take" : Fallout fans need to stop figthing each other about minor things and to just enjoy the unique world, lore, concept they all love (and that almost every other videogame franchise struggles to replicate).
Meh I don’t really think this is an issue. I think people can debate about lore and stuff. I also think that it isn’t so hard to capture the fallout feeling. I get similar feelings playing the BioShock games that I do playing fall out. I think the biggest problem is not a lot of other people have tried. I think a lot of people are scared of being called a copycat so they will never explore this realm of fiction. Basically of retro futurism and a never ending Cold War. and its aftermath. I think another Game company will come along and eventually try and make their take on it. Because that is how we got fall out in the first place. We got fall out because somebody wanted to make their own version of wasteland but couldn’t. consequentially the popularity Oh fallout has rubbed off on waste land. I remember people even buying copies of the outer worlds because it said from the makers of fallout new Vegas. I think companies are still going to try and make games like these. It’s just not in a very popular sub genre. Apocalypse is that result from nuclear war or a never ending war. Are always less popular than shit like zombies or a plague. Or even aliens being the main focus.
@@smokedbeefandcheese4144 the problem is only one: the existence of fanboys. I like a well structured and pacific debate. yeah I agree, I d like many more apocalypse/postapoc games about cold war, nuclear war, neverending war, etc
Hot take: Fallout 4 did automatic weapons better than new Vegas. I won’t bring up 3 because I haven’t played it, but I’d imagine it’s the same as new Vegas. In which I feel like the automatic guns always felt jittery and just had kinda bad animations that made them unsatisfying to use.
Capital Wasteland is the richest and most charismatic overworld we ever got Also, New Vegas BOS is the most realistic, sad and well written faction we ever got
I don’t find the capital wasteland deep, it’s extremely unrealistic when it comes to how areas would actually work and survive post apocalypse. It’s a collection of unconnected dungeons for the player to explore with no logic or connection
@christianwilson3853 I didn't said deep. I said richest and most charismatic, from a player pov. It's the most addictive and fascinating (THAT architecture in DC, and even outside!) wasteland I ever explored in 3d. Mojave is more "realistic" indeed
@@christianwilson3853 also you clearly didn't explored the Metro system. It's very faithful to real D.C and almost every Metro has connections to others Metros. It's kinda like Silent Hill, with a city underground the city
I have two hot takes: 1. The Elder Scrolls and Fallout are bacsiclly the same 2. The Edler Scrolls VI and Fallout 5 should have some form of multiplayer (I want servers with mods kinda like 5m and iconic rp for GTA V)
@@The_PunisherBecause it was a bad game and overly monetized. Taking people's money and providing little to nothing in return usually rubs customers the wrong way
We already have Elder Scrolls Online and Fallout 76. So making two new online games while they already have both series covered seems a bit repetitious
I dont think Fallout 3 and 4 are bad games. They are just passionately mediocre, like basically everything made from Bethesda after like 2003. Calling their recent games bad doesn't really get to the heart of the issue. Every single Bethesda game ive played has a great baseline, but doesnt actually manage to go above that standard most of the time. But the times when something is genuinely good in a Bethesda game, its really good. TLDR: Bethesda only makes aggressively mediocre games that occasionally have brief glimmers of quality. The rest of the time its nothing special, which is usually more detrimental than just being bad.
@@Asgero Malcom’s is scripted, he’ll always go after the player when they pick up a blue star cap. And even then I always shred his spine out when he comes
New Vegas, I do have some issue with it like can you use the same enemies from fallout 3 and it was made by a different company and I might have hurt a lot of people but just not very good graphics like fallout 3 came out in 2007 new Vegas came out 2010 it should have proof upon but aside for that it’s a good
Aggressively hot take: FNV is better experienced by reading about it than dealing with the boring nothingness of the world with terrible graphics and worse gameplay than even fo1.
Fonv and 4 are both good at diffrent things 4s combat power armor customization of your gear and world building is far better fall out new Vegas has better main city in the strip compared to diamond city which is just a marketplace and new Vegas has better rpg perk skills and dialogue and is more of a rpg fo3 in my opinion was good for its time and a introduction to 3D fall out but it is not better at anything compared to 4 and new begas
I completely agree that fours gameplay is way better than every other game. Overall combat is so much more satisfying in four. Things like automatic guns just feel awful to use in new Vegas.
I will never play a Bethesda game ever again new vegas was given hardly any time and a poor engine to work with but was ten times better then any other Bethesda game and still got screwed
Hot take Bethesda uses fall out as some sort of guinea pig. I think they test out features in this game that they want to put in future games. I think they do so because they don’t really think of it as their baby. It wasn’t made by them it was only picked up four brand recognition and because of Todd’s personal relationship with the game (supposedly) I think they were testing that lame system for speaking in fallout four because they wanted to put it in Starfield. I think Boston was also built to be unplayable and crash all the time to test how much they could do with the engine. So that they could build up the virtual environments of Starfield. It goes beyond that though and if you look hard enough you can start to see that they do not actually care about the fallout franchise and Each one that comes out is farther and farther away from what we expect from fall out. In my opinion because they have been using it to test features for other games. I think fallout fours gun systems And speech systems. Were the inspiration for the ones in Starfield and I don’t think this is an accident. They sacrificed fall out so they could make their own space game. I’m glad to see it didn’t pay off though and they didn’t get game of the year off of this. And what they did.
Be sure to comment your hot takes for the next video. Also be sure to join the Discord here discord.gg/nqUSnh9JuA . Thanks For Watching!!
I'm not going to sugar coated but my hot take that is Fallout New Vegas overrated. 4:00
“Fallout NV’s open world is the weakest, outside of the strip, it lacks.” Welcome to Nevada it’s kind of a barren fucking desert aside from Vegas
Unpopular opinion:
Moria brown from fallout three is a ABSOLUTE BADDIE.
Don’t attack me lmao
Let bro cook
i first played fallout 3 when i was like 12 and i thought Dr Li was hot
@@haventfoundanameyet wtf💀
WWWWWWW
Nah she definitely attractive. Now I just wish I understood my sexuality when I played fallout 3 so that I could have found your character’s dad sexy
“Hot take”: Fallout 2 is as much a product of corporate takeover as Bethesda’s games. The creator bailed on Fallout 2. Fight me.
He never even wanted to be on Fallout 2. From the very beginning of development it was higher ups acting like they knew better than everyone else.
@@r.rodriguez4991Why not? It was good.
Fallout 2 is not a bad game
@@AmericaTheSimpleMinded Tim Cain said he prefers to work on something different from his last project.
Also a case of a game chasing trends that were popular at that time. Take for instance the numerous pop culture references thrown at your face or inclusion of weapons like the P90 which is a gun that got included because every other game at that time had it because it was the new tacticool gun (even though it doesn’t fit Fallout’s 50s-70s aesthetic)
Fallout fans hate each other and the games but refuse to play anything else
Fallout 76 fans are the most chill fans in the fandom
The Fallout tv show will retroactively make 1,2, and New Vegas worse by being set on the West Coast. They didn't even bother hiring an artist for the announcement image. I have a feeling this show will do more damage then 76
I'm also really afraid of the TV show especially since it's done in cooperation with Bethesda. But you know, I do not expect anything good so I won't be disappointed. At best it will be a horrible Fallout show but a decent series to watch, when you take it out of the Fallout context. That's all we can hope for...
Honestly I doubt that almost all of bad writing in the modern fallout games always has Emile’s name next to it. The show is being directed by people who did a good job on other things. I think if the show will fail it will fail in town. It will go out trying to be too wacky and funny. Which are both parts of fall out. But if they overdo it I can see it ending badly. However if they strike a similar town that they did in Westworld I will be happy. I’m not worried about them setting it in the west coast. I think they have to do that because their lore isn’t very good in the East Coast. and almost all of it is downstream from west Coast lore anyway.
@@Volgin93It’s weird making a Fallout show because it’s main concept is making different choices. You loose that completely. But there’s been good adaptations done lately. Would’ve been better as a cartoon.
It did. It reeled in ALOT of new fans, but Bethesda will now only carter to these new fans and people like me will definitely be out
Ave, True to Caesar
"Hot take" : Fallout fans need to stop figthing each other about minor things and to just enjoy the unique world, lore, concept they all love (and that almost every other videogame franchise struggles to replicate).
I do find it funny that the elder scrolls fans all can get along but fallout fans all cant just love fallout as a franchise
Meh I don’t really think this is an issue. I think people can debate about lore and stuff. I also think that it isn’t so hard to capture the fallout feeling. I get similar feelings playing the BioShock games that I do playing fall out. I think the biggest problem is not a lot of other people have tried. I think a lot of people are scared of being called a copycat so they will never explore this realm of fiction. Basically of retro futurism and a never ending Cold War. and its aftermath. I think another Game company will come along and eventually try and make their take on it. Because that is how we got fall out in the first place. We got fall out because somebody wanted to make their own version of wasteland but couldn’t. consequentially the popularity Oh fallout has rubbed off on waste land. I remember people even buying copies of the outer worlds because it said from the makers of fallout new Vegas. I think companies are still going to try and make games like these. It’s just not in a very popular sub genre. Apocalypse is that result from nuclear war or a never ending war. Are always less popular than shit like zombies or a plague. Or even aliens being the main focus.
@@smokedbeefandcheese4144 the problem is only one: the existence of fanboys.
I like a well structured and pacific debate.
yeah I agree, I d like many more apocalypse/postapoc games about cold war, nuclear war, neverending war, etc
Same, tbh.
People only don't like Mr House because they don't agree with his politics
Mr house is the reason why I haven't finished an ncr ending. 😭
The Institute and Synths don't fit the aesthetic of the Fallout series. It feels way too cyberpunky.
Thanks for including me man!
Hot take: Fallout 4 did automatic weapons better than new Vegas. I won’t bring up 3 because I haven’t played it, but I’d imagine it’s the same as new Vegas. In which I feel like the automatic guns always felt jittery and just had kinda bad animations that made them unsatisfying to use.
Capital Wasteland is the richest and most charismatic overworld we ever got
Also, New Vegas BOS is the most realistic, sad and well written faction we ever got
The great khans are also kinda a sad faction.
Nah the capital is kinda boring for me tbh
I don’t find the capital wasteland deep, it’s extremely unrealistic when it comes to how areas would actually work and survive post apocalypse. It’s a collection of unconnected dungeons for the player to explore with no logic or connection
@christianwilson3853 I didn't said deep.
I said richest and most charismatic, from a player pov.
It's the most addictive and fascinating (THAT architecture in DC, and even outside!) wasteland I ever explored in 3d.
Mojave is more "realistic" indeed
@@christianwilson3853 also you clearly didn't explored the Metro system.
It's very faithful to real D.C and almost every Metro has connections to others Metros.
It's kinda like Silent Hill, with a city underground the city
My personal hot take: Fallout Brotherhood of Steel (for Ps2) was one of my favourite game and in general one of the best Fallout games.
My only problem with fallout NV is that sometimes the guns will glitch, & when you ads the gun will be at a 30° angle.
Fr. Literally my only gripe with new vegas is the bugs. It’s pretty much a perfect game if it weren’t for that
1:37 facts, I played interplay fallout too and I’ve enjoyed it just as much.
I have two hot takes: 1. The Elder Scrolls and Fallout are bacsiclly the same 2. The Edler Scrolls VI and Fallout 5 should have some form of multiplayer (I want servers with mods kinda like 5m and iconic rp for GTA V)
Fallout 76 has Multiplayer and people hate it
@@The_PunisherBecause it was a bad game and overly monetized. Taking people's money and providing little to nothing in return usually rubs customers the wrong way
@@The_Punisher but this is like a optinal you should be able to experince most things in a single player also have you not heard of a hot take
We already have Elder Scrolls Online and Fallout 76. So making two new online games while they already have both series covered seems a bit repetitious
@@zombiewarrior225 If it is good it'd be okay jc3 online mod?
I dont think Fallout 3 and 4 are bad games.
They are just passionately mediocre, like basically everything made from Bethesda after like 2003. Calling their recent games bad doesn't really get to the heart of the issue. Every single Bethesda game ive played has a great baseline, but doesnt actually manage to go above that standard most of the time. But the times when something is genuinely good in a Bethesda game, its really good.
TLDR: Bethesda only makes aggressively mediocre games that occasionally have brief glimmers of quality. The rest of the time its nothing special, which is usually more detrimental than just being bad.
Well, at least we can agree.
I guess I assumed this to be a hot take because of how many people tend to fight me on this
I'm a Horse shit Iteration fan of fallout.
That one guy’s comment that Roasted the NV fanboy was funny.
I am a nv fan boy but i agree with the Mojave feeling empty
As someone who loves FNV, I can somewhat agree. The game doesn’t even have random encounters
Honestly I don’t mind the empty wasteland. But I will forever get butthurt over the games bugs.
@@varietygaming33 it does. Everyone's favorite star battle cap collector, Malcom
@@Asgero Malcom’s is scripted, he’ll always go after the player when they pick up a blue star cap. And even then I always shred his spine out when he comes
Fallout 76 isn’t even that bad of a game
At yes it’s god awful, but now yes it a 8/10 experience with a friend
@@lost_pmc_3927 agree plus from my Experience its community is the most Pleasent one to interact with
New Vegas, I do have some issue with it like can you use the same enemies from fallout 3 and it was made by a different company and I might have hurt a lot of people but just not very good graphics like fallout 3 came out in 2007 new Vegas came out 2010 it should have proof upon but aside for that it’s a good
Aggressively hot take: FNV is better experienced by reading about it than dealing with the boring nothingness of the world with terrible graphics and worse gameplay than even fo1.
Do you think that fallout 1 has bad gameplay?
@@walu63 I’ve barely played it tbh, but I was more referring to it being worse than a far older game than saying the older game was worse
@@meateater1002 oh ok, I haven’t completed fallout 1 or 2 but the gameplay of those is pretty fun once you get used to it.
Hot take. The Fallout IP should be bought by another company
Shame I missed the time for posting, I probably got the biggest of hot takes
That being 76 is the best Bethesda Studios developed Fallout game
Good video
Interesting hot takes 🔥
See the thing is new Vegas fanboys are actually all completely right
🤓
Fonv and 4 are both good at diffrent things 4s combat power armor customization of your gear and world building is far better fall out new Vegas has better main city in the strip compared to diamond city which is just a marketplace and new Vegas has better rpg perk skills and dialogue and is more of a rpg fo3 in my opinion was good for its time and a introduction to 3D fall out but it is not better at anything compared to 4 and new begas
Fallout 4 is a great game. I have a hand made furious advanced receiver hand made rifle and gun kung fu, fight me.
Hot take: Ohio skibidi rizzler gyat university
Hot take: I'd play Fallout 4 over New Vegas any day, gameplay will always be more important than story to me.
I like both, New Vegas gameplay ain't bad
I completely agree that fours gameplay is way better than every other game. Overall combat is so much more satisfying in four. Things like automatic guns just feel awful to use in new Vegas.
True
WOOOOOOOOOOOOO PRESTON GANGGGGG OI OI
I will never play a Bethesda game ever again new vegas was given hardly any time and a poor engine to work with but was ten times better then any other Bethesda game and still got screwed
Ghouls are hot, that thumbnail is misleading
Hot take Bethesda uses fall out as some sort of guinea pig. I think they test out features in this game that they want to put in future games. I think they do so because they don’t really think of it as their baby. It wasn’t made by them it was only picked up four brand recognition and because of Todd’s personal relationship with the game (supposedly) I think they were testing that lame system for speaking in fallout four because they wanted to put it in Starfield. I think Boston was also built to be unplayable and crash all the time to test how much they could do with the engine. So that they could build up the virtual environments of Starfield. It goes beyond that though and if you look hard enough you can start to see that they do not actually care about the fallout franchise and Each one that comes out is farther and farther away from what we expect from fall out. In my opinion because they have been using it to test features for other games. I think fallout fours gun systems And speech systems. Were the inspiration for the ones in Starfield and I don’t think this is an accident. They sacrificed fall out so they could make their own space game. I’m glad to see it didn’t pay off though and they didn’t get game of the year off of this. And what they did.
Brand recognition? Brody nobody knew the FO games before FO3.
FO3 gave FO a brand. Outside of that just virgins who bitched about change knew about it
2:52 omg thank you for including me! (I’m a woman btw🤣) Preston gang rise upp
Thank you so much for including me!