How the video game Fallout became a backdrop for live Shakespeare shows | Hacker News Reader

How the video game Fallout became a backdrop for live Shakespeare shows

theguardian.com

118 pointshelsinkiandrew53 comments

Fallout has been a great game for those wanting to invest heavily in the role-playing aspect of a game. Fallout 76 and its groups are an example of how the internet can be fantastic.

IGN released a good video on some of the players of Fallout 76, including the Wasteland Theatre Company featured in the article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0wccxcmrlA

Paradoxically, this mostly happens because Fallout 76 doesn't have much to offer after finishing the story, so players found other ways to amuse themselves than perpetual grinding in a glorified slot machine.

Ha. I'm starting a chain store of vendors near train stations (run 6 copies of the game and sell stuff to other players) for pretty much that reason.

The game is overmonetized trash, and the fallout game doesn't seem to add anything at all to the theater company's performance. It might as well be second life or vrchat or any of a million other games that aren't abusive microtransaction garbage.

Fallout 76 was a real turning point from bethesda, where they went from inept buggy RPGs to actively evil over monetization on a game that should never have been released in that state.

Bethesda is the company that invented microtransactions (horse armor in TES IV Oblivion) and coined the term "DLC" if I'm not mistaken, so I'm not sure if that was that different from what they were doing before.

I thought it was Microsoft that basically invented microtransactions for their Xbox Live Marketplace, and encouraged developers to utilize the model. But you can go all the way back to the 1980's with Atari's GameLine to see the very first "download a game for $1" type of digital transactions.

As to who coined the term DLC, could have been Bethesda, I don't know that one.

play fallout 4 and then 76 and tell me which is more overmonetized. Even better if you can somehow play the launch fallout 76 before they started taking back their "game design decisions" that removed NPCs and the entire story was told through reading and tapes. Don't forget your premium fallout 76 monthly subscription.

Two very different game types, F76 was not a sequel to F4, and it was not even a spin off like Fallout New Vegas. It is a forever game/Game as a Service/ Always Online game. They were super duper clear about it all too. All good if you don't like it but you are spinning tales if you act like they put microtransactions into a singleplayer game.

I never said it was a sequel, I said one is overmonetized garbage, and it isn't free to play overmonetized garbage either - it was a full price game at launch. A full price fallout full of microtransactions, now with a premium monthly membership, etc.

that it isn't a sequel isn't relevant.

Bethesda on the other hand offers some of the only console titles that lets you actually install user modification in the game. They aren't totally evil. I think its surprising you can mod skyrim to the point of it blowing up on xbox just like you can on pc actually.

sure, but for fallout 76 there are no user mods at all. the trend is not positive.

The horse armor wasn't evil in any way, they haven't really joined into the microtransaction mania and if they hadn't been the first someone else would have.

I agree on the "should never been released in that state" part, but currently Fallout 76 is by far the best Fallout game Bethesda has made. The newer campaigns are fun and engaging, well written even and there's lots to do. Best of all the community is super friendly and non-toxic: something that is almost impossible to find in 2023.

Sure, there are things that are grindy and made grindy on purpose (eg. getting gold bullion or legendary scrip which are capped daily) and there are things that have worked and things that have not, but as far as monetization goes the game lets you enjoy every single piece of content without grinding or spending a single dime outside of the initial investment. I have played the game hundreds of hours and didn't feel like I was missing anything - I have even bought all of the cosmetics I have wanted purely just by using the currency the game occasionally drops you.

The game is currently -75% off on Steam (https://store.steampowered.com/app/1151340/Fallout_76/) and while it still might not be on par with the likes of 2 or New Vegas, I highly recommend it to anyone that were disappointed in Fallout 4 or even 3.

Is it worth playing as a single player?

I'd say it is, though interacting with other players do make the game better. You can do the main storyline together with friends, but only the party leader can complete the missions - so if playing with group of friends you need to repeat every quest with everyone which is not optimal. That said you can easily complete all of the missions solo: only the really end game missions are so hard that they are easier to complete with others.

There's tons of content where all the people on the server contribute together, but you don't need to communicate or coordinate. There's some content that are meant to be done with group, but you don't need to communicate too much on those either: just jump into a random party, have fun and jump out of the party.

And of course you can also just roam around the map with friends or visit the houses of randoms and that's neat too.

Usually when I am playing solo, I just jump into a random party to get some perk bonuses and do whatever I need to do, then jump into another party that's build around some objective and do that, then continue playing solo and so forth.

Like I said, the community is SUPER friendly and non-toxic, so you can engage with other players or ignore them as much as you want to without one anyone grieving.

It was always meant to be a game as a service, they had to monetize it long term and they have been adding free content regularly.

I think the mistake they made was not calling it Fallout Online in order to set expectations and of course, release a complete game at launch.

they also launched a full price game and then later dropped the price because it didn't sell. Whatever they always intended, microtransaction laden games launching at full price without justification is a anti consumer.

If they had made it free to play or inexpensive with microtransactions at the start that would have been less bad, but their intention the whole time was to take people for the full price, then have microtransactions, and also a monthly premium subscription. I think it has gatcha mechanics too. It's basically the holy grail of anti consumer business models.

Required watching for anyone curious about how bad the launch of 76 was: https://youtu.be/kjyeCdd-dl8

Blizzard and Bethesda used to be my favorite game companies, and I'm grateful they noticed my migration to Linux and decided to make it easy on me by making me either not want to play their games at all or wait for years until they're available on Proton and I can buy them cheaper with all DLCs and bugfixes.

That whole video watched like an ad, it made me sick.

I have a children's book of illustrated story versions of Shakespeare's plays.

After seeing how much my kids enjoyed the book, and how much they enjoy watching Minecraft role play videos on youtube, I wondered if there would be a market for videos of Shakespeare plays performed in Minecraft.

But, I suspect it would be hard to get traction. Minecraft youtube is a flooded market, and the popular channels are often really lazy with their content. They just churn out improvised drivel featuring other media properties that kids recognize.

I wondered if the article would make mention of the parallels to Station Eleven. Neat.

It's always nice to see players create their own game or story on top of what they're given. I'm reminded of a RP focused telnet MUD I played in the dialup days. There was a sort of roleplay credit system where you'd earn points from other players for contributing to the overall story and atmosphere. You'd get prizes from the admins such as custom content (sort of the textual equivalent of cosmetics in graphical games) after earning enough points.

That's a really awesome idea, I was just thinking coming into the thread that it'd be cool if there was a way to actually motivate players to do this more, and frankly, "play the game" less.

The most fun I ever had in multiplayer games was when things went against the game itself. Funny interactions with reps in WoW, working with the enemy faction in WoW to ensure that literally nobody is allowed to leave a given town of either faction because, why not? Walking around CS source maps and just speculating about wtf the maps actually were, like, is de_dust2... just... a road in some town?

Anyway I'd love to hear about more games with these kinds of interactions. According to what I see on youtube, the final fantasy MMO seems to have this kind of things in droves. I wanted to explore it but I found the actual gameplay to be mind numbingly grindy and was turned off by that, plus lots of people telling me it sucks until level cap.

There's a huge community of roleplaying GTA 5 custom servers. Some take it pretty seriously and have really talented actors/performers.

This is the first time I've read anything positive relating to Fallout 76

It breaks my heart thinking about Fallout 76. It’s just so bad and it seems like everyone I talk to has the same response. Who is playing this game?

It improved since launch (much less bugs, NPCs added, less PvP focus). I liked the story and exploring the world but I find the combat to be too grindy compared to 3/4/New Vegas. I also don't like there is no way from the UI to pick a server or make free community servers.

However I would say if you liked fallout 4 then current 76 is worth it on sale especially if you have a friend to join.

I played hundreds and hundreds of hours of 3, NV, and 4. Multiple play-throughs of each, and then lots of screwing around with mods.

I played 76 for about two hours and gave up. It's just not the same. I guess that's not inherently bad, if people want different. But I wouldn't say that if you liked 4 that it is definitely worth playing 76.

So you got the same experience us fans of 1 & 2 got when trying 3/NV/4 ;)

Honestly I no longer resent the Bethesda games but for whatever reason despite replaying 1 & 2 multiple times (including in recent years) I just can’t get into the 3d ones. NV was the closest but it still didn’t manage to grab my attention for more than a weekend. 3, 4 & (via gamepass) 76 didn’t even get that far (a couple of hours each).

Yes, exactly. I completely understand why many earlier fans couldn't make the transition to the 3d games. Just like with 76, it's just a different experience and the enjoyment doesn't necessarily translate.

I tried three separate times to get into it and had to walk away in disgust every time. The netcode is and has always been terrible. The last time, the time when I knew it would be the LAST last time, was when my teammates fast traveled to me and caused all the super mutants I had just cleared out to respawn. Then the super mutants started phasing through doors I had closed to stay hidden. I couldn't think of any reason to ever play again. It was almost as if the game achieved sentience and hated me. Or perhaps it loved me and wanted me to spend my time better.

At launch it was terrible. But these days it actually is pretty good. If you treat it like a single player Fallout game and not bother with the multiplayer or microtransaction stuff. It's basically just more Fallout 4, but with new quests.

>If you treat it like a single player Fallout game and not bother with the multiplayer

This kind of defeats the purpose of the whole game though.

I do level 89. Got a camp setup, sell stuff. Scrap stuff to make ammo... Explored most places but still areas on map. I don't play it too much but yeah. I like running into lower levels and giving them stuff.

I play it, maybe one longish session a week (2-3 hours) with my brother. We'll bounce around to events, sometimes just pick a direction and start walking. Can usually find some detail we haven't seen before, or get into some sort of dust up with a bunch of monsters. We don't worry about min-maxing our characters, and I've never felt the need to put money into it, although my brother has a subscription. We've played since shortly after launch, and he felt like it was worth his support.

I liked the game much better before they 'fixed' it by adding NPCs- before that the desolation was just creepy, and there was a lot of storytelling in the notes and tapes you'd find. But it is pretty much just wandering around an open world- there are grinds if you want them, but mostly I've just used them to guide our meandering. And the main quest line is ok, it's just not as extensive as doing 3 or 4 with all the dlc.

What is weird is that people who don't like it just can't accept that it's just not to their taste, and that maybe they're not as big Fallout fans as they think- every post about it has people who act like it's a crime against humanity, whether they've played it or not.

The thread on Fallout 76 on the gaming forum I'm often browsing had a handful of people defending the game, especially once the wave of the original release had passed

>This is the first time I've read anything positive relating to Fallout 76

It's actually improved a TON since launch. I'm not talking about a No Man's Sky situation where it's 100x better, but better.

Also two huge points: Fallout 76 is free on Game Pass, and works really well coop with friends. Those features go a LONG way.

I had to do a hotel quarantine once and happened to have my VR kit and PC on me (bringing it into the country). Set it all up in hotel quarantine, noticed No Man's Sky in the steam library had a VR option, and then basically spent two weeks straight wandering around alien planets.

I am still flabbergasted at how far that game came along, and then on top of that added a whole ass VR mode that to date is one of the coolest, most fleshed-out "true gaming" VR experiences I've ever had. Not poorly implemented like "woowee you're playing the game but have full-directional vision, still have to click to swing the sword though," not gimmicky like a rails shooter or slice-to-the-beat game, just a whole ass videogame in VR like I hoped it would be as a kid.

I still don't understand how they funded continual development like that but I'm happy about it.

Supposedly, they've sold 10+ million copies of the game so far, and have well over 75 million pounds in the bank, and they're a small team (25-ish people in the whole company). Seems like a great setup for funding continual development.

In case anyone hasn’t played it the original 1997 Fallout is still the best one, you can snag it on GOG, I believe it runs on DOSBox.

It's the Windows version; you can run it on Linux with Wine though. I'm not sure there ever was a DOS version of Fallout.

IMHO Fallout 2 was a lot better; it's a lot larger and has a lot more story to it. Neither game has aged especially well though. The UI in particular is awkward.

Underrail is a pretty good "modern Fallout", although it also shares some of the general problems (e.g. too much reliance on randomness, can be unfairly hard unless you already know the game well, bit of a walking simulator at times).

I liked Fallout Tactics a lot.

> aged especially well ... The UI in particular is awkward

Both views extremely subjective. Some judge the '97 and '98 as "excellence" and Vegas as "excellence bound to compromise with the times". And still dream of a proper sequel to the original (same line, style and features).

Oh by the way: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a4/b0/ff/a4b0ff508d5e7fda4a6a...

where is the screenshot from?

the original Fallout series

That's certainly not Fallout 1 or 2, which didn't look anything like that.

Looks like it's from "Fallout New Vegas isometric concept": https://www.artstation.com/artwork/nQrlXo

As far as I can see, it's just a bunch of graphics, and not an actual game.

ahh!! my eyes are even older than Fallout

There's lots of little things, like inability to use the mouse wheel, scrolling that doesn't work quite smoothly, UI designed for low resolutions and being needlessly inefficient in some places, pathfinding that works only so-so. Stuff like that. The constraints of 1997 are very different from the constraints today.

It's still perfectly playable of course, and none of that is "core" to the game, but it doesn't take much imagination to see how it could be improved and I don't think it's uncontroversial to state that many players will at times be frustrated by some of these things.

Part 516,415 of "I wish they'd just release the source so people could improve on these little things which would also improve sales and makes complete sense from a business perspective".

It's highly subjective. Fallout 1 is quite enjoyable once you learn the ropes (Internet is your best help there, not the game), but I prefer Fallout 4 in terms of gameplay mechanics, content quality and amount of content. Fallot 4 was much more immersive and overall enjoyable.

If someone has enough time to give it a try: look up on the Internet the controls beforehand and have very balanced SPECIAL, otherwise you won't reach vault 15 (the first mission). Also, there is a gun behind a toilet in that vault, even if you can't see it when looking for it there. Don't bother trying to escape if the mutants capture you.

Those are the acivities I lost too much time figuring out, which can be quite a turn off in the start. I well spent much more time enjoying the game.

P.S. SPECIAL can't be upgraded later

Fallout 3 was a great remake but I wouldn’t count it as a sequel for sure, but I remember when it came out and it was a real trip seeing the old isometric sprites come alive in 3D around you with essentially the same colors/textures. As a fan of Fallout growing up it was a real trip, but still a totally different game.

That's fantastic. Reminded me immediately of Emily St. John Mandel's Station Eleven as well. During the pandemic I spent a fair amount of time with VRChat and the platform has a lot of theatre or performance art related people on it as well.

There seems to be an increasing overlap between immersive online games and the arts.

Is this the metaverse?

Or perhaps a covert Fallout 76 ad?

Related and mentioned in the article - Station Eleven is a pretty good show. I have to admit though, the Shakespeare stuff was kind of lost on me but really enjoyed the dystopian surviving the virus scenes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com