Fallout 4 Won't Have DLC Exclusives

When they announced 4 a little while ago I reloaded Vegas and hated how it played, the engine felt so bad. But when I tried 3 again it didn't seem to feel as bad and I have no problem with it.

Now I have to admit, I never liked Vegas as I did 3, Vegas always felt too linear, not as open as 3.

I always liked New Vegas more than Fallout 3. To me 3 felt boring and the story too generic, and the ending stupid.
You have to go into the irradiated chamber, or you have to send in another npc to their death, and you can't send in the mutant who is immune to radiation anyway.

Everything I hated in F3 NV seemed to do better. Or at least try to be better. And the hardcore mode was the best thing that happened to the game. It gave a new level of immersion.
 
Am I the only person who has never bought a DLC? I mean I play a game, I beat it. I move on. By the time the DLC's come out, I'm onto something else

that is a good point...I feel that way as well most times unless a DLC sounds really amazing...when I finish a game and move on to another it's hard to go back just for DLC...I get into a groove playing and once I lose that rhythm I find it hard to go back unless I'm replaying the entire game again
 
DLC is just a new name for mission disk. Those were always around as far as I can remember. I don't buy cosmetic or multiplayer DLCs, but I do buy those that expand the story. But only for games that I like and didn't bore me by the time I finished them. So for this reason I didn't get any DLCs for DA:I because I had enough of it's chores. But I did buy every DLC for both ME2, and ME3.

What is da:l?
 
I always liked New Vegas more than Fallout 3. To me 3 felt boring and the story too generic, and the ending stupid.
You have to go into the irradiated chamber, or you have to send in another npc to their death, and you can't send in the mutant who is immune to radiation anyway.

Everything I hated in F3 NV seemed to do better. Or at least try to be better. And the hardcore mode was the best thing that happened to the game. It gave a new level of immersion.

That's the real difference. I never saw that as an ending. It's just a release to continue to explore all the other content the game has to offer and all the different ways you can go about enjoying it. And I'm not even talking the mods yet.
 
I couldn't stay interested in Dragon Age, I don't even know why, it just lost me.
 
And DLC in general shouldn't exist anyway, just a cash grab for games that might not make projections, or publishers that are greedy.
 
Yeah i am not a fan of DLC either normally it works out more expensive than just having it as an expansion pack, which back in the days had alot more content and cheaper even by todays prices.
 
I played through all of Fallout 1 through to NV, and I must admit, while gameplay wise 3 was fine, environmentally it is probably the least realistic of the 4 games.

3 is set in capital wasteland. I repeat, CAPITAL, one of the first things that we would expect to be HEAVILY nuked in the event of war in an effort to knock out any of the political/military heads. Comparing to the destruction we saw in WW2 with the 2 atomic bombs, Capital Wasteland is far too intact to be realistic. For example, Lincoln Memorial, Washington Memorial, the Pentagon, and ESPECIALLY the Capitol building and Rivet City. These buildings/Carriers looked more like they went through 2 full centuries of neglect, intact, rather than being have their rears nuked out of them.

My 2cents.

Technical side, I bought the original FO3 disc when it came out, but I couldn't avail any of the DLC's by the time I wanted to play them so I bought the GOTY on Steam (and started my whole steam addiction), bought FO:NV on GOTY as well. Don't know about FO4 yet though.

I always thought bugs being patched wasn't a big deal since the first thing I always mod a game is with community patch, solves half of the headaches for me.
 
Back
Top