Fallout 4

 PlayStation 4
Metascore
87

Generally favorable reviews - based on 58 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 52 out of 58
  2. Mixed: 6 out of 58
  3. Negative: 0 out of 58
Buy Now
Buy on
  1. Ars Technica
    Dec 9, 2015
    Series fanatics probably shouldn't cancel their pre-orders, but they should definitely check their expectations about ambition and next-gen series boosts at the radioactive vault's doors.

Awards & Rankings

16
#16 Best PS4 Game of 2015
3
#3 Most Discussed PS4 Game of 2015
2
#2 Most Shared PS4 Game of 2015

User Reviews

All reviews »
User Score
6.8

Mixed or average reviews- based on 6079 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 3,504 out of 6079
  2. Mixed: 1,171 out of 6079
  3. Negative: 1,404 out of 6079
  1. tdsmith5556
    Nov 10, 2015
    10
    Bought the game a five hours ago and I'm going to give a 100% honest review about it.

    Fallout 4 is a massive game. In the strategy guide    Bought the game a five hours ago and I'm going to give a 100% honest review about it.

    Fallout 4 is a massive game. In the strategy guide there's roughly 150 quests and I estimate the map is about as big as skyrim's, but there seems to be a higher density of areas to explore with fewer mountains and whatnot in the way to make the map feel bigger than it actually is.

    In comparison to previous Fallouts people keep saying it isn't a big step up. I disagree with them, but I will admit the facial expression are a bit stiff and lip syncing is a tiny bit off. Some people dislike the aesthetics of the game because they went with a much more punchy and bright color pallet rather than just make everything poop brown and puke green like Fallout 3. I actually enjoyed the more colorful environments.

    Looking at the pc specs this game is technically graphically superior to any other game out right now even if some people are saying the graphics are not very good. I honestly thought the graphics looked amazing, but I'm just putting it out there that not everybody shares my opinion and some people think games like Witcher 3 actually have better graphics. Personally, I don't think it should matter all that much because it's really about gameplay, not graphics.

    Gameplay wise what Fallout 4 brings to the table over previous games is a vastly improved combat system, much better balance regarding things like stimpacks and perks, and overall more challenge on higher difficulties. Gun play feels almost exactly like Call of Duty instead of very stiff and clunky like New Vegas. You definitely will feel noticeable improvements on how guns and things handle regarding sight clarity, draw animations, sway, recoil, and smoothness adjusting aim. Movement also feels more in line with Call of Duty. Sprint is in the game and is balanced by taking away action points to use in vats, a great mechanic imo that adds more fluidity and better pacing to everything. In other words you no longer have to worry about slowly plodding from one area to the next making for less overall downtime to deal with.

    What this game offers over Destiny, which probably it's main competition atm is a much more engaging story and much much more content than Destiny could ever hope to deliver. I mean in comparison I finished Destiny including all story missions, all strikes, and the two raids in about 20 hours. The story missions in the vanilla game itself you could easily get through in about 5 hours. Even if all 150 quests take a half hour each you are still talking about 75 hours of content to go through so even the most viscous haters on here would have to admit at minimum this game at least offers a lot in quantity of content even if one could make an argument about the quality of it.

    Sound wise Fallout 4 offers MUCH more voice actors than previous games leading to much more variations in how npcs interact. Games like Elder Scrolls online will recycle the same voice actors. It's not like that in this game. I also enjoyed how gun sounds have much more "oomph" than Fallout 3 and New Vegas. Everything sounded like it really had impact and the blood splatter in response seemed really satisfying. Unfortunately, didn't like the music track in the game so far, but oh well.

    People on here are complaining about very specific nitpicky issues with the game like for instance the facial expression/lip syncing issue, a few specific non game breaking bugs, color aestetics, and blah, blah, blah.

    All I got to say is please examine the facts for yourself. I encourage anybody reading this to just look at the amount of content and all the customization and what you are getting here and then decide based on that rather than some extremely specific little thing somebody is complaining about.

    I assure you this game has a lot of bang to offer for your 60 bucks and well deserves 10/10 in my very honest opinion.    … Full Review »
  2. ringontherail
    Nov 10, 2015
    4
    Thank you, Bethesda, for providing us the clearest picture yet of the "professional critic" landscape. Between the obvious lack of heartThank you, Bethesda, for providing us the clearest picture yet of the "professional critic" landscape. Between the obvious lack of heart involved in this cash-grab glorified Fallout 3 DLC, the use of a tired, buggy engine and the "streamlined" dialog one realizes that 90% of these review web-sites or magazines are clearly in Bethesda's pocket.
    We consumers need to do each other a favor, and stop visiting web sites that continue to rain 8's 9's and 10's on every high-profile, large studio release.    … Full Review »
  3. LudwigA
    Nov 10, 2015
    3
    Overall: sub-par.

    The game is basically worthless as a RPG or a Fallout game, so if that's what you are after, this is not for you. Play    Overall: sub-par.

    The game is basically worthless as a RPG or a Fallout game, so if that's what you are after, this is not for you. Play something like Witcher 3, Pillars of Eternity or replay F1/F2 instead. But even as a action shooter, the game is not actually good. Mediocre is the word that keeps popping into my head as I walk around the wasteland and shoot stuff while listening to 50s music.

    It's a generally clunky game, while the AI of both enemies and companions is a joke. "Hey we got some cover right there, but let's not use it and instead run straight at the enemy that just has mowed down my four buddies!" The story is weak, the characters one-dimensional and the dialogues are down right cringeworthy. And the whole conversation wheel is just dumb. The graphics are improved from previous Bethesda titles, but is still several years behind even when you take into the account the large environments. Witcher 3 has vastly superior graphics, for instance.

    The gun play is better than FO 3, but still clunky and uninspiring and still not on the level of your average first/third person shooter. The whole construction bit just feels pasted on and not really part of the game. The fact that all the game-play mechanics that New Vegas added and improved over FO3 have been removed, is just stupid. No one forced you to play hardcore mode in FNV, but the option was there for those who wished it.

    The world is basically the game's strongest aspect, and it ranges from somewhat interesting to dull. Many locations are nothing but enemy spawn-points with loot. Sometimes there is some sort of story or background attached to a location, but often it just feels like a waste of time to explore them. I like many of the power armor mechanics in the game, but Bethesda made the armor itself so easy to get and so prevalent in the world, that it didn't feel like anything special in the end.

    So all in all, I'm not at all impressed. I regret my purchase.    … Full Review »
See all user reviews »