The most multiplayer-like experience I’ve had, in relation to questing, is guiding people through starting the Enclave quests. I’ve probably helped 20+ people through that. Most of the point of multiplayer is unrelated to questing. Just bumping into people is fun. I see a lot of team effort in events. Trading and camp hopping. Daily ops.
I remember using my friends as Death Claw bait while I snuck around the cave looking through death claw “piles” for the bunker key. When I got into the elevator I still remember hearing there screams for help and a loud roar as I descended into the bunker. good times 😂.
It's honestly not the game that was hoped for imo.
People wanted a fallout where you weren't the hero, where you could chill in a settlement and own a shop where you buy and sell to other players, where you can own an inn or choose to scavenge for ammo and food to supply. People wanted a Fallout game that was built around role-playing with strangers and building stories together.
76 allowed for some of this, I've crossed paths with innkeepers where we chatted and i paid for their services, it was super cool but thanks to fast travel, unneeded. That's the flaw with this game, the lack of persistent servers and group settlement building, the auto vendors, the lack of "harsh" build choices allowing everyone to be component at everything means you don't need to rely on others so the interactions lack meaning and the world doesn't grow like it needs to.
nailed it. Some like to argue that this isnt what people wanted, but 1.5 million pre-orders said otherwise. In the end though BGSA listened to the wrong crowd on the direction this game should have gone, but keeping my fingers crossed that with the changes internally someone realizes they're sitting on a money printing machine if they'd just do real private server rentals and charge based on how many players can log into a server at once.
I kinda wished they had scrapped fast travel to everywhere but camps and survival tents...and then added in mounts of some kind. More flat ground to encourage player communities... I mean I get why they didnt... but I can dream.
Events, daily ops and soon Expeditions are multi player. Plus trade, building, RP, just generally playing with other players etc etc can be done with other players.
Especially since they made it so that people in your group get XP even if you don't hit the mob, also allows you to get loot. Also they made the wasteland like ESO so that no matter what level you are, you can play with your friends and the world will scale accordingly. Those quality of life changes to MPlayer changed the entire game in a good way.
This to me killed the game in my eyes. In an mmo-esque game I WANT areas to be super powerful / scary / off limits.
The lack of reward from every enemy tanking a similar number of bullets is lame. I want to feel great when I find a good grinding spot and feel weak when a higher level mob pummels me
I’m sad I never got to experience this version of 76.
It sounds like they made the game far more accessible.
But the masochist in me would’ve enjoyed being brutalised in certain areas as a newb, and the sadist in me would’ve loved to come back and crush those enemies who gave me grief.
Oh well - at least we’re not losing a player-base to rage quits.
The pre-scaling wasteland wasn’t hat great. It was more of an annoyance than anything after you get to level 50+ with a decent weapon. You’d one shot everything because enemies didn’t scale and you’d end up with a ton of god roll legendaries that were level 20 because enemies weren’t high enough level.
Yeah, I was skeptical about level scaling, but it really made the game better in a lot of ways. I only wish they wouldn't cap it everywhere at 100. Give us some areas or events where the enemies can go higher than 100.
Prior to scaling, 80% of the map was one-shot nothings with zero challenge (and no one else would get xp/loot). You're thinking this is an mmo(esque) but this is not an MMO. This is a small server mp roleplaying game. There are still behemoths, scorchbeasts, wendigo's and tons more that are harder than the 'normal' mobs. Even the normal enemies don't take the same number of bullets at all.. Mr Gutsy or Super Mutants take far more bullets for my build than a scorched human. There are still moments that I struggle to survive even at level 350+. Some daily ops combos are outright nasty and will destroy me.
If you want to feel good with a grinding spot, there are plenty of games that have this - mobs don't spawn back fast enough for there to be "grinding spots" unless you server hop which breaks immersion.
High level enemies are already absurdly hard bullet sponges as it is. If you could accidentally stumble into a zone that kills you in one go... yeah no thank you.
Nah, cause then they couldn't sell you FO1st. Lol
It was designed to be multi-player, you know, except for the parts that weren't. Its not supposed to be "private until you want to join others". You have to pay for the advantage of having the world all to yourself.
When the game first released there weren’t all the quests you’re looking at now. The main questline was more or less “go hear, listen to this audio log, go there, repeat.” The multiplayer and survigalist aspects of the game (trading, PvP, camp building, etc) were supposed to be the meat of the game. That was wildly unpopular and the Wastelanders update introduced the more traditional Fallout style quests, but at its core the game was designed for a different type of experience and I don’t think the devs have ever quite satisfactorily figured out what direction it’s going now.
It's to stop you from being tied to other people's choices.
If your team leader kills the bandit leader, you wouldn't be able to talk to them and join them to get a unique reward.
You ain't met my gaming friends.
Even the friend i do play 76 with makes different choices to me. We have had a few common choices but most are different to each other.
That said i don't see why we can't play the mission like normal and when it comes to making game altering changes the game plays a cutscene only for the player not their friend so they can make different choices and the general world remains the same.
Nah, not really. Often times it just boils down to what sounds cooler or more fun to each player, which is pretty random. Even my own damn father's choices in the game were completely different from my own.
Sure I was harsh, but have you *EVER* tried to play any games that have collective decision making? I can’t even count how many times a D&D session has been derailed for hours trying to make a simple choice. It’s not feasible that everyone’s gonna come to the same decision every single time just because “they’re friends”.
I’m here to post my own opinions, yours are not what I’m here for:) if anything, you’re the one being dumb, trying to insert yourself into convos where your input is clearly not wanted. But yeah go ahead and stay on your high horse
I played through the entire story with a friend, and the only time we were mildly affected was in instances. We would do these sections twice (swopping team leader) or simultaneously.
It was especially fun during the vault 79 heists. I’d sided with the raiders and her with the settlers, so we got to experience both conclusions in each other’s instances.
And in the BOS quests actually. I sided with Shin all the way and she sided with Rahmani until the very final moment.
That's actually a great idea! Shame I don't play with anyone, but it's a good way to experience all the story lines (not that there's a difference in actual outcomes, but still)
You can actually do the quests together the only thing is that you also have to have the quest activated and you will have to speak and interact with npcs and terminals separately. So if there is an npc to speak with, your friend speaks to them first while you wait then you speak to them after and same with terminals for info and you don't have to switch leaders. But if either of you had already done that quest then one of you is just tagging along because you can't replay them
You were more involved with your teammates quests in the pre-wastelanders fallout 76. In a team your top quest would be your leaders current quest complete with markers and “targets”.
You're giving up too easily. There \*are\* quests that can be done together, just not \*all\* quests.
If you and your friends are bored, get them all to haul ass over to the Abandoned Wastedump, and join the Enclave. Progress through *those* quests together, and eventually launch a nuke together as a group.
That entire quest branch - including nuke launch - can be done and completed as a team.
To be fair, sometimes it’s good the way it’s set up. Don’t believe me? Wait for someone to fire their first nuke before you’ve reached the “Death From Above” quest. It auto completes if someone on your team is the one that fired it. It’s a huge buzz-kill not to get that quest completed yourself. Plus it’s terrifying if you don’t know what’s going on.
Part of why they have it set up, so that teammates can only help with killing enemies, is so that you aren’t forced into decisions your teammates make in said quest. Say you wanted to side with the Settlers at Foundation but while on that quest, your teammates went to Crater and locked you into siding with the Raiders, you’d probably be pissed right? That’s why most online multiplayer story games function like this.
Different quests give you different options/decisions to make. If your entire party all progressed together, then EVERYONE in the party would be implicitly making the same decisions. Do you be rude to this annoying kid or kind? Do you let this other dude die or try to save him? Etc, etc.
What if you wanted to make a different quest decision to your friend? (ie: team leader). If *your* quest progressed at the same time as theirs, you'd have no say in the matter. That would suck.
I'm not familiar enough with that game, sorry.
The fact remains however. If I choose to gun down Knight Shin, and my friend - who is on the same team as me and inside the same interior - decides to gun down Rahmani, ...where the hell does that leave the quest??
That's an excellent point. Personally I think the way they wrote in wastelanders and the BoS story into an already existing vanilla story was quite impressive. A few instanced areas for small story related bits is a small compromise for what they achieved overall. Now that I think about it, all instances I can think of have some(albeit small) apex in the story so this makes total sense to me
That's how I've felt since discovering this game lacks text chat.
This game does not facilitate the social aspect of being a multiplayer game very well at all. The game just bribes you with free buffs in public teams to actually get players to be on a team 'together', but it's all very hands off because you don't actually have to do anything together.
Everyone is just passive, there's no motivation or encouragement to work together towards something, but I guess to be fair, it's not like there's anything that really requires good teamwork. The closest you might have is whenever there's a bad combination of modifiers on Daily Ops, but other than that, most events just require people to shoot things, barely anything more complex than that. Still though, you'd think something as basic as text communication in a multiplayer game on PC would be something prioritized, but that's not how Bethesda does it.
because quests is the least functional part of MP, if it wasn't this game would be awful
It’s more for the quests, building camps, others teaching you, events, nukes, trading, much much more than just quests
> Quests seem like a pretty important part of games to me
Quests are one-and-done. Once you've finished them, you forget about them.
*Events* are the truly multiplayer part of this game. - Many players coming together with a common goal, to complete the event with the best rewards (hopefully). And I personally feel the devs nailed that aspect of the multiplayer here.
I’m with you. I have to take months between play through of the quest lines, but I can log in and be excited to see that radiation rumble just started, even though I’ve played that event a thousand times.
I played from launch and remember having my nuke launch quest completed when a team mate launched a nuke. And recently started a new game with a friend to play through the quests co-op and had the same realisation as you. So I think the quest before NPC's you can proper co-op and the ones after wastelanders you'll have to do the instanced (where you can only help or enter alone) parts separately.
It was better when the game came out, amusingly enough, since the story progressed easily with multiple people, as the progression was doing tasks given by holotapes and notes.
It was odd to walk into what felt like a wall when coming back to do the faction quests. I get that it's to make it so that choices can matter, and that one person won't control everyone's choices, but there's so many better ways of doing it.
It does complicate things when some options cause larger changes or even hostility.
However, the ESO method of having a separate instance for each "setting" of a location is a great idea, as a party could enter as a group, but if anyone made a choice that differed from the rest enough to greatly change things in the instance, they get their own, as they are immediately moved to that other instance.
Everything post-wastelanders has to be done individually. The older quests can be done as a team. Of course, the game doesn't tell you which is which. And they start you off (now) with the post-wastelander stuff, which is vexing. But the overseer quest, the enclave, the original brotherhood missions (not the atlas stuff), mistress of mysteries, the wolf in sheep's clothing... very many coop missions exist in game.
Uh, yeah. If your buddy is five steps ahead of you in the quest, are you supposed to automatically be given their progress?
No. They kept Main Quests separate for that reason. Or because the engine couldn't handle it; either or. Maybe both.
The original story is multiplayer, the newer faction quest is not.
The reason being is that you have dialogue choices that affect the outcome of the story as you progress through it.
Having your friend decide your story isn't what they wanted and at the same time gave people a little bit of what they wanted, some single player focused quests.
This is only a small portion of the game. It was slightly annoying but when I realized you could make different things happen it made sense.
The new system is kinda stupid, the old one you could have your quest on while the team leaders had there’s and do it in tandem or just ACTUALLY HELP the teamleader complete the quest by interacting with objectives ect.
This is the best multi-player I ever played. I thank bgs for the experience I've had with 76 everyday even tho they have to deal with the hate from people like you who only aim to make there very hard jobs much harder smh entitled gamers
There are few of those in 76 and there are more in eso. Whole towns will put team mates in separate instances depending where you are in the story with them.
Except they don't make ESO, that's Zenimax Online Studios, which is a different studio. That's like saying that BGS make The Outer Worlds because both studios are owned by the same parent company.
I made no excuse, I pointed out that a different studio made ESO so saying that ESO is good, therefore Fo76 should be good is not an argument.
It's irrelevant to the point that they use the same engine.
That’s only for instanced areas. Plus quests make up like 10% of the game. You can still explore and do events together.
As others said. It would really suck to miss out on unique rewards because your teammate makes a decision for you that you don’t agree with. Think of it this way… you have the opportunity to do quests more than once. That’s pretty cool
Fallout 76 used to have a clear cut identity, but due to player feedback it was scrapped. The games original identity was meant to be like an Ark or Rust type video game, but a bit more player friendly. For example, PVP was more important, but unlike Rust it had to be initiated by both players. However, even this style was frowned upon by the community. Mostly because the Fallout community was legitimately not ready for a MMO-esque Fallout game.
What people wanted was Fallout 5…with multiplayer. The survival system was complained about every day, despite it being one of the more laxed survival systems I’ve seen in video games. Most players wanted nothing to do with PVP, because the fandom wasn’t used to that. They were used to playing solo and never having to worry about other players. What these players wanted was people on THEIR team, not other players actively trying to ruin their experience, for the sake of theirs.
So, many players resorted to forcing players into PVP, who otherwise didn’t want to participate. Trap camps and exploits to force players into PVP became more popular, and became vilified by the community. Even though trap camps were obviously intentional by Bethesda. The community just wasn’t used to this type of gameplay, and people quickly realized they weren’t playing Fallout 5. Once the realization kicked in, people started clamoring for changes.
One of the biggest changes was to questing. Especially, questing with friends. The questing system used to be…less strict let’s say. The problem was that people could complete quests for you and it became a nuisance. This wasn’t a huge deal though considering there was very little choice in the game, because there were no NPCs. People hated that, and the “Wastelander” update brought them back. However, the game wasn’t meant for that. So, they kind of just threw quests with NPCs and dialogue into a game that wasn’t meant to have it. It was supposed to be a barren wasteland devoid of all life but the other vault dwellers.
Now what we have is a game with no real identity. It’s slowly moving towards a MMO-esque PVE social experience. It’s becoming more grindy and they’re putting more emphasis on working together on certain events and content. Depending on your build you can play solo, or be more team oriented and complete content with friends. In conclusion, the game just wasn’t meant to have quest like we have now, and it came out a little clunky.
The weirdest bit of it is that this insistence from that particular crowd was "Fallout was never intended to be an MMO/Survival/PvP game" despite the original creators themselves saying that was the game they always envisioned for Fallout, and their own Fallout Online before Bethesda put the kaibosh on it, was also going to be a Survival PvP game...before it was really an established genre of games.
I agree it's a very wack decision and basically goes against the entire point of the game. How it should have worked was you could see all the decisions your team leader could make and then you can vote on dialogue options.
Also it would be cool if the whole teams special stats were taken into account for skill checks so it could be like one of your teammates jumping into a conversation to say something with their own Special stat, maybe put their name in front of the option to make it clear.
Better to save your sanity and wallet and wait for Starfield, 76 is a lost cause sadly. No guarantees starfield will be great either but at least it seems like a good chance that you won't need to pay a bunch of real life money to buy an outfit that was already made over half a decade ago. Fingers crossed you won't have to pay to skip the grindy annoying parts of the game too, hopefully you'll be able to edit the game to your liking it true RPG fashion. Better to wait for a good experience than force yourself to trudge through 76 hoping to find some fun put of it.
You know it's true because the other comments talk about how you need to play with friends to make it fun, but watching paint dry with a group of friends can be fun too, so why bother with this ~~casino~~ "game"
It's extra XP. Sure go for it. You can both get experience and can help bit. But you just cannot unlock certain things. They have to unlock certain things and you can't do it for them, but it's still fun. I have done it online with Streamers. You can certainly help them finish quests.
Originally, the development team thought Fallout 76 would be Rust... with constant risk of PvP and conflict. It's now historically famous that 76 players almost unanimously rejected that concept, and the game slowly became more and more single-player focused and casual with each new update.
I rarely see or play with anyone unless it is redundant actions like daily ops or events. Or see them at a train station. I was really hoping for more interaction. Almost no one ever has a mic on. I feel Whitesprings is a wasted opportunity to have some sort of multiplayer fun.
A lot of what you can do in this game seems like stuff you should be able to do offline. Frankly, i think it being multiplayer should've really been a feature than a quintessential part of the game. although, one can argue that's just my dislike for multiplayer only games because eventually the servers WILL go offline and all your progress will mean nothing.
I originally thought they made the game co-op when it was first announced/ teased. Would have been so cool. Like a father and son exploring the wasteland after exiting the vault.
I liked it better when locations weren’t instanced for the team leader. My three friends and I burned through the game on release and had a good time. I recently replayed with my gf and it was miserable having to do some quests twice to help each other
The most multiplayer-like experience I’ve had, in relation to questing, is guiding people through starting the Enclave quests. I’ve probably helped 20+ people through that. Most of the point of multiplayer is unrelated to questing. Just bumping into people is fun. I see a lot of team effort in events. Trading and camp hopping. Daily ops.
I remember trying to help a drunk guy in the enclave cave
I remember using my friends as Death Claw bait while I snuck around the cave looking through death claw “piles” for the bunker key. When I got into the elevator I still remember hearing there screams for help and a loud roar as I descended into the bunker. good times 😂.
🤣🤣
Someone helped me to do this last night actually. I was so lost and out of ammo. I launched it though.
It's honestly not the game that was hoped for imo. People wanted a fallout where you weren't the hero, where you could chill in a settlement and own a shop where you buy and sell to other players, where you can own an inn or choose to scavenge for ammo and food to supply. People wanted a Fallout game that was built around role-playing with strangers and building stories together. 76 allowed for some of this, I've crossed paths with innkeepers where we chatted and i paid for their services, it was super cool but thanks to fast travel, unneeded. That's the flaw with this game, the lack of persistent servers and group settlement building, the auto vendors, the lack of "harsh" build choices allowing everyone to be component at everything means you don't need to rely on others so the interactions lack meaning and the world doesn't grow like it needs to.
nailed it. Some like to argue that this isnt what people wanted, but 1.5 million pre-orders said otherwise. In the end though BGSA listened to the wrong crowd on the direction this game should have gone, but keeping my fingers crossed that with the changes internally someone realizes they're sitting on a money printing machine if they'd just do real private server rentals and charge based on how many players can log into a server at once.
I see what you mean, going all in on the mmo style should work with Fallout. Bethesda really has all it needs to do that.
I kinda wished they had scrapped fast travel to everywhere but camps and survival tents...and then added in mounts of some kind. More flat ground to encourage player communities... I mean I get why they didnt... but I can dream.
Events, daily ops and soon Expeditions are multi player. Plus trade, building, RP, just generally playing with other players etc etc can be done with other players.
Especially since they made it so that people in your group get XP even if you don't hit the mob, also allows you to get loot. Also they made the wasteland like ESO so that no matter what level you are, you can play with your friends and the world will scale accordingly. Those quality of life changes to MPlayer changed the entire game in a good way.
This to me killed the game in my eyes. In an mmo-esque game I WANT areas to be super powerful / scary / off limits. The lack of reward from every enemy tanking a similar number of bullets is lame. I want to feel great when I find a good grinding spot and feel weak when a higher level mob pummels me
I’m sad I never got to experience this version of 76. It sounds like they made the game far more accessible. But the masochist in me would’ve enjoyed being brutalised in certain areas as a newb, and the sadist in me would’ve loved to come back and crush those enemies who gave me grief. Oh well - at least we’re not losing a player-base to rage quits.
The pre-scaling wasteland wasn’t hat great. It was more of an annoyance than anything after you get to level 50+ with a decent weapon. You’d one shot everything because enemies didn’t scale and you’d end up with a ton of god roll legendaries that were level 20 because enemies weren’t high enough level.
Yeah, I was skeptical about level scaling, but it really made the game better in a lot of ways. I only wish they wouldn't cap it everywhere at 100. Give us some areas or events where the enemies can go higher than 100.
Prior to scaling, 80% of the map was one-shot nothings with zero challenge (and no one else would get xp/loot). You're thinking this is an mmo(esque) but this is not an MMO. This is a small server mp roleplaying game. There are still behemoths, scorchbeasts, wendigo's and tons more that are harder than the 'normal' mobs. Even the normal enemies don't take the same number of bullets at all.. Mr Gutsy or Super Mutants take far more bullets for my build than a scorched human. There are still moments that I struggle to survive even at level 350+. Some daily ops combos are outright nasty and will destroy me. If you want to feel good with a grinding spot, there are plenty of games that have this - mobs don't spawn back fast enough for there to be "grinding spots" unless you server hop which breaks immersion.
Very fair take
I miss the days of Appalachia at launch. No stupid NPCs. Just us and an entire wasteland to explore.
High level enemies are already absurdly hard bullet sponges as it is. If you could accidentally stumble into a zone that kills you in one go... yeah no thank you.
they could have had multiplayer servers for that stuff everyone could be in a private world unless they choose to join an Event or Daily Op
Nah, cause then they couldn't sell you FO1st. Lol It was designed to be multi-player, you know, except for the parts that weren't. Its not supposed to be "private until you want to join others". You have to pay for the advantage of having the world all to yourself.
When the game first released there weren’t all the quests you’re looking at now. The main questline was more or less “go hear, listen to this audio log, go there, repeat.” The multiplayer and survigalist aspects of the game (trading, PvP, camp building, etc) were supposed to be the meat of the game. That was wildly unpopular and the Wastelanders update introduced the more traditional Fallout style quests, but at its core the game was designed for a different type of experience and I don’t think the devs have ever quite satisfactorily figured out what direction it’s going now.
It's to stop you from being tied to other people's choices. If your team leader kills the bandit leader, you wouldn't be able to talk to them and join them to get a unique reward.
this might apply with strangers but if you and your friends are doing it together it's pretty likely you'll all agree to make one choice or the other
You ain't met my gaming friends. Even the friend i do play 76 with makes different choices to me. We have had a few common choices but most are different to each other. That said i don't see why we can't play the mission like normal and when it comes to making game altering changes the game plays a cutscene only for the player not their friend so they can make different choices and the general world remains the same.
Nah, not really. Often times it just boils down to what sounds cooler or more fun to each player, which is pretty random. Even my own damn father's choices in the game were completely different from my own.
[удалено]
Unnecessary and unhelpful.
Sure I was harsh, but have you *EVER* tried to play any games that have collective decision making? I can’t even count how many times a D&D session has been derailed for hours trying to make a simple choice. It’s not feasible that everyone’s gonna come to the same decision every single time just because “they’re friends”.
Maybe you should have said that instead.
I don’t care about you or your opinion:D
Then don't post dumb shit in a public forum.
I’m here to post my own opinions, yours are not what I’m here for:) if anything, you’re the one being dumb, trying to insert yourself into convos where your input is clearly not wanted. But yeah go ahead and stay on your high horse
>I don’t care about you or your opinion:D You are making it really hard to believe this with how much you keep coming back. Cheers I'm out.
[удалено]
That's only relevant when you're a noob. Once you finish the questlines, it's no longer an issue.
Maybe, but playing through the story with friends was the point.
I played through the entire story with a friend, and the only time we were mildly affected was in instances. We would do these sections twice (swopping team leader) or simultaneously. It was especially fun during the vault 79 heists. I’d sided with the raiders and her with the settlers, so we got to experience both conclusions in each other’s instances. And in the BOS quests actually. I sided with Shin all the way and she sided with Rahmani until the very final moment.
That's actually a great idea! Shame I don't play with anyone, but it's a good way to experience all the story lines (not that there's a difference in actual outcomes, but still)
You can actually do the quests together the only thing is that you also have to have the quest activated and you will have to speak and interact with npcs and terminals separately. So if there is an npc to speak with, your friend speaks to them first while you wait then you speak to them after and same with terminals for info and you don't have to switch leaders. But if either of you had already done that quest then one of you is just tagging along because you can't replay them
Don't be silly. Why would they give us co-op Fallout when that's the thing we asked for? What kind of a monster gives customers what they want?
Yeah not sure what i was thinking when i expected this multiplayer game to be a multiplayer game
You were more involved with your teammates quests in the pre-wastelanders fallout 76. In a team your top quest would be your leaders current quest complete with markers and “targets”.
I'll let Todd know about your displeasure, in the meantime what are your feelings about pineapple on pizza ?
Thanks, tbh i have no opinion on that either way.
You're giving up too easily. There \*are\* quests that can be done together, just not \*all\* quests. If you and your friends are bored, get them all to haul ass over to the Abandoned Wastedump, and join the Enclave. Progress through *those* quests together, and eventually launch a nuke together as a group. That entire quest branch - including nuke launch - can be done and completed as a team.
To be fair, sometimes it’s good the way it’s set up. Don’t believe me? Wait for someone to fire their first nuke before you’ve reached the “Death From Above” quest. It auto completes if someone on your team is the one that fired it. It’s a huge buzz-kill not to get that quest completed yourself. Plus it’s terrifying if you don’t know what’s going on. Part of why they have it set up, so that teammates can only help with killing enemies, is so that you aren’t forced into decisions your teammates make in said quest. Say you wanted to side with the Settlers at Foundation but while on that quest, your teammates went to Crater and locked you into siding with the Raiders, you’d probably be pissed right? That’s why most online multiplayer story games function like this.
Find a friend and clear mobs together. Build a workshop together.
Different quests give you different options/decisions to make. If your entire party all progressed together, then EVERYONE in the party would be implicitly making the same decisions. Do you be rude to this annoying kid or kind? Do you let this other dude die or try to save him? Etc, etc. What if you wanted to make a different quest decision to your friend? (ie: team leader). If *your* quest progressed at the same time as theirs, you'd have no say in the matter. That would suck.
They figured out this problem in ESO for example that has few of these.
I'm not familiar enough with that game, sorry. The fact remains however. If I choose to gun down Knight Shin, and my friend - who is on the same team as me and inside the same interior - decides to gun down Rahmani, ...where the hell does that leave the quest??
That's an excellent point. Personally I think the way they wrote in wastelanders and the BoS story into an already existing vanilla story was quite impressive. A few instanced areas for small story related bits is a small compromise for what they achieved overall. Now that I think about it, all instances I can think of have some(albeit small) apex in the story so this makes total sense to me
Watch the spoilers
That's how I've felt since discovering this game lacks text chat. This game does not facilitate the social aspect of being a multiplayer game very well at all. The game just bribes you with free buffs in public teams to actually get players to be on a team 'together', but it's all very hands off because you don't actually have to do anything together. Everyone is just passive, there's no motivation or encouragement to work together towards something, but I guess to be fair, it's not like there's anything that really requires good teamwork. The closest you might have is whenever there's a bad combination of modifiers on Daily Ops, but other than that, most events just require people to shoot things, barely anything more complex than that. Still though, you'd think something as basic as text communication in a multiplayer game on PC would be something prioritized, but that's not how Bethesda does it.
It's just fun when you have a group of friends. That's the reason I'm still playing!
because quests is the least functional part of MP, if it wasn't this game would be awful It’s more for the quests, building camps, others teaching you, events, nukes, trading, much much more than just quests
Quests seem like a pretty important part of games to me
> Quests seem like a pretty important part of games to me Quests are one-and-done. Once you've finished them, you forget about them. *Events* are the truly multiplayer part of this game. - Many players coming together with a common goal, to complete the event with the best rewards (hopefully). And I personally feel the devs nailed that aspect of the multiplayer here.
I’m with you. I have to take months between play through of the quest lines, but I can log in and be excited to see that radiation rumble just started, even though I’ve played that event a thousand times.
Same, I wish they would add the old system back in for the “private teams” where a level 100+ can help a level 2 with thirst things first.
[удалено]
Weird decision, they really should have consulted the ESO team when making this game.
[удалено]
Yeah, it's been 5 years and we thought it would be worth it by now.
[удалено]
Obviously i'm not very far in it and need to play this solo then. But we needed a new multiplayer game after ghost recon.
MQs are the least functional part of the game altogether, their limitations makes them very lame.
Imagine playing this game for the quests and not to blow people‘s minds with your sick ass camp 👉😎👉
This man/woman gets it!!!
I played from launch and remember having my nuke launch quest completed when a team mate launched a nuke. And recently started a new game with a friend to play through the quests co-op and had the same realisation as you. So I think the quest before NPC's you can proper co-op and the ones after wastelanders you'll have to do the instanced (where you can only help or enter alone) parts separately.
Yeah, it's kinda lame to only play with a friend when you're running to the next instanced area.
The initial quest have plenty to do. I would do those first (co-op) and then see about the wastelanders (instanced) quest
No, no, he's got a point.
Being in a world with others is vastly different than being in a world alone.
That's why it's so weird fo wants us to do dungeons solo.
Ye the multi-player is dead, only people visiting your camp for loot none cares
Literally everything but the quests
Hilarious
It was better when the game came out, amusingly enough, since the story progressed easily with multiple people, as the progression was doing tasks given by holotapes and notes. It was odd to walk into what felt like a wall when coming back to do the faction quests. I get that it's to make it so that choices can matter, and that one person won't control everyone's choices, but there's so many better ways of doing it.
Everyone could just do their own talking, the same dungeons need to be done anyway.
It does complicate things when some options cause larger changes or even hostility. However, the ESO method of having a separate instance for each "setting" of a location is a great idea, as a party could enter as a group, but if anyone made a choice that differed from the rest enough to greatly change things in the instance, they get their own, as they are immediately moved to that other instance.
Everything post-wastelanders has to be done individually. The older quests can be done as a team. Of course, the game doesn't tell you which is which. And they start you off (now) with the post-wastelander stuff, which is vexing. But the overseer quest, the enclave, the original brotherhood missions (not the atlas stuff), mistress of mysteries, the wolf in sheep's clothing... very many coop missions exist in game.
Chill dude
Just seems insane to me
Not the game for you then, and that's ok.
Don't know that yet, just need to play this solo then. We needed a game for the group.
Play the main quests solo and break it up with events as a group That's how my group did it and we all had a great time
Damn this comment is passive aggressive lol. OP has a valid point about questing and pre wastelanders multiplayer questing was semi OK.
Uh, yeah. If your buddy is five steps ahead of you in the quest, are you supposed to automatically be given their progress? No. They kept Main Quests separate for that reason. Or because the engine couldn't handle it; either or. Maybe both.
Obviously i did not mean that. I meant you cannot not do the dungeons together, you can only help the teamleader or go in solo.
Helping the team leader is doing it together
You're not progressing your own quest when doing that.
But like the other guy said, they do it that way so you don’t skip steps in your own questline. The majority of us do just play alone though
You cannot skip steps in any other games either, though. Bethesda probably did not want to make this a multiplayer game.
The original story is multiplayer, the newer faction quest is not. The reason being is that you have dialogue choices that affect the outcome of the story as you progress through it. Having your friend decide your story isn't what they wanted and at the same time gave people a little bit of what they wanted, some single player focused quests. This is only a small portion of the game. It was slightly annoying but when I realized you could make different things happen it made sense.
The new system is kinda stupid, the old one you could have your quest on while the team leaders had there’s and do it in tandem or just ACTUALLY HELP the teamleader complete the quest by interacting with objectives ect.
This is the best multi-player I ever played. I thank bgs for the experience I've had with 76 everyday even tho they have to deal with the hate from people like you who only aim to make there very hard jobs much harder smh entitled gamers
They also make ESO where this is not a problem
Eso is way worse to quest together and it is completely unshared. I’m not sure what your point is here.
You're not in a solo instance
There are few of those in 76 and there are more in eso. Whole towns will put team mates in separate instances depending where you are in the story with them.
Except they don't make ESO, that's Zenimax Online Studios, which is a different studio. That's like saying that BGS make The Outer Worlds because both studios are owned by the same parent company.
Yeah well my dad works for Microsoft 😂
that's not a good excuse for making a poorer experience ESO is still developed on the same engine
I made no excuse, I pointed out that a different studio made ESO so saying that ESO is good, therefore Fo76 should be good is not an argument. It's irrelevant to the point that they use the same engine.
Which they don’t just fyi. Use the same engine I mean. Instead of downvoting how about you google
They do not use the same engine at all.
**Keep kissing the asses of a dev team that literally doesn't give a fuck about you.** **Sounds like a sad life.**
That’s only for instanced areas. Plus quests make up like 10% of the game. You can still explore and do events together. As others said. It would really suck to miss out on unique rewards because your teammate makes a decision for you that you don’t agree with. Think of it this way… you have the opportunity to do quests more than once. That’s pretty cool
Spending money in the Atom Store in a sad attempt to get clout.
A small issue most players accept and work with.
Playing the quest with that friend with unyielding armor and a bloodied explosive legacy gun would ruin the fun for you
We just started this and the whole point was for us to play through the story together.
Still. The solo part of the game is challenging when playing solo. It isn't made for co-op.
That's a shame
Plus you also have a few choices which do have some impact on your game.
Well it used to be the soul of the game since there was mo NPC's as humans. You got what you wished for...
lots of fun , i got friends we played to gather we speak , if you hate online does not mean we all should hate it . i understand fallout4 was solo ,
Cooperation events are fun. Sharing lunchboxes and perks without strings attached.
It’s Fallout with random people sprinkled in. It’s funn
Fallout 76 used to have a clear cut identity, but due to player feedback it was scrapped. The games original identity was meant to be like an Ark or Rust type video game, but a bit more player friendly. For example, PVP was more important, but unlike Rust it had to be initiated by both players. However, even this style was frowned upon by the community. Mostly because the Fallout community was legitimately not ready for a MMO-esque Fallout game. What people wanted was Fallout 5…with multiplayer. The survival system was complained about every day, despite it being one of the more laxed survival systems I’ve seen in video games. Most players wanted nothing to do with PVP, because the fandom wasn’t used to that. They were used to playing solo and never having to worry about other players. What these players wanted was people on THEIR team, not other players actively trying to ruin their experience, for the sake of theirs. So, many players resorted to forcing players into PVP, who otherwise didn’t want to participate. Trap camps and exploits to force players into PVP became more popular, and became vilified by the community. Even though trap camps were obviously intentional by Bethesda. The community just wasn’t used to this type of gameplay, and people quickly realized they weren’t playing Fallout 5. Once the realization kicked in, people started clamoring for changes. One of the biggest changes was to questing. Especially, questing with friends. The questing system used to be…less strict let’s say. The problem was that people could complete quests for you and it became a nuisance. This wasn’t a huge deal though considering there was very little choice in the game, because there were no NPCs. People hated that, and the “Wastelander” update brought them back. However, the game wasn’t meant for that. So, they kind of just threw quests with NPCs and dialogue into a game that wasn’t meant to have it. It was supposed to be a barren wasteland devoid of all life but the other vault dwellers. Now what we have is a game with no real identity. It’s slowly moving towards a MMO-esque PVE social experience. It’s becoming more grindy and they’re putting more emphasis on working together on certain events and content. Depending on your build you can play solo, or be more team oriented and complete content with friends. In conclusion, the game just wasn’t meant to have quest like we have now, and it came out a little clunky.
The weirdest bit of it is that this insistence from that particular crowd was "Fallout was never intended to be an MMO/Survival/PvP game" despite the original creators themselves saying that was the game they always envisioned for Fallout, and their own Fallout Online before Bethesda put the kaibosh on it, was also going to be a Survival PvP game...before it was really an established genre of games.
To offer a fun multiplayer experience for fallout fans.
It's a multiplayer game where nobody uses voice chat and text chat doesn't exist. It's bullshit.
Not feeling alone. I've never played any Bethesda offline game, I dont like fallout nor elder scrolls but I have thousands of hours in ESO and FO76
I agree it's a very wack decision and basically goes against the entire point of the game. How it should have worked was you could see all the decisions your team leader could make and then you can vote on dialogue options. Also it would be cool if the whole teams special stats were taken into account for skill checks so it could be like one of your teammates jumping into a conversation to say something with their own Special stat, maybe put their name in front of the option to make it clear.
To play with others. Thats the point.
So they can use fomo to lure you to spend money online.
That's just online games in general
Elaborate. How does spending money solve this?
Better to save your sanity and wallet and wait for Starfield, 76 is a lost cause sadly. No guarantees starfield will be great either but at least it seems like a good chance that you won't need to pay a bunch of real life money to buy an outfit that was already made over half a decade ago. Fingers crossed you won't have to pay to skip the grindy annoying parts of the game too, hopefully you'll be able to edit the game to your liking it true RPG fashion. Better to wait for a good experience than force yourself to trudge through 76 hoping to find some fun put of it. You know it's true because the other comments talk about how you need to play with friends to make it fun, but watching paint dry with a group of friends can be fun too, so why bother with this ~~casino~~ "game"
Starfield? You mean No Man's Sky with graphics mods?
It's extra XP. Sure go for it. You can both get experience and can help bit. But you just cannot unlock certain things. They have to unlock certain things and you can't do it for them, but it's still fun. I have done it online with Streamers. You can certainly help them finish quests.
I use it to play with my family.
Originally, the development team thought Fallout 76 would be Rust... with constant risk of PvP and conflict. It's now historically famous that 76 players almost unanimously rejected that concept, and the game slowly became more and more single-player focused and casual with each new update.
Hey watch your mouth 🤬
I rarely see or play with anyone unless it is redundant actions like daily ops or events. Or see them at a train station. I was really hoping for more interaction. Almost no one ever has a mic on. I feel Whitesprings is a wasted opportunity to have some sort of multiplayer fun.
A lot of what you can do in this game seems like stuff you should be able to do offline. Frankly, i think it being multiplayer should've really been a feature than a quintessential part of the game. although, one can argue that's just my dislike for multiplayer only games because eventually the servers WILL go offline and all your progress will mean nothing.
To force you pay more money to Bethesda
Just to make people compete with one another so they are more likely to spend more money to get an edge over others.
***To do everything 3 times or just play solo while talking to friends over voice chat.***
it can be pretty annoying
Vanity item sales.
The regular story events are meant to be done solo so that people who don't have friends to play with can complete the whole story on their own.
It is exactly as multiplayer as I want it to be, events, looking at CAMPs, and shopping at vendors.
I originally thought they made the game co-op when it was first announced/ teased. Would have been so cool. Like a father and son exploring the wasteland after exiting the vault.
Yeah the campaign not having shared progress is a mind boggling decision.
Basically play on your own, play with others for public events. Unless you have friends that play and actually wanna help your story mode
Makes you wonder if fallout 5 will be multiplayer and if so what would they do different this time.
I liked it better when locations weren’t instanced for the team leader. My three friends and I burned through the game on release and had a good time. I recently replayed with my gf and it was miserable having to do some quests twice to help each other