Fallout 76 Petition Demands a Single-Player Only Mode

Bethesda drew some cheers when it announced that Fallout 76 would be a multiplayer title during its E3 conference, but one disappointed fan has set up a petition to revert the series back to a more personal endeavor. Nearly 13,000 have signed it thus far. “The heart of Fallout has always been conquering the wasteland by yourself.”

The map of Fallout 76 promises to be four times bigger than that of Fallout 4 (which was huge). Pair that with the fact that the online experience will pair you with a player size of no more than 12, the likelihood of running into enemy players won't be terribly common. Still, many are think of this move as an assault on single player despite the many assurances that it can absolutely played solo with no problem.

I would play it solo (if the definition holds like in past Fallout games) but it is the "always online" part that irritates me . . . if I understand correctly how this game is to be set up.

The only thing I need to make sure of is that it has first person mode (or the ability to switch to first person mode) like FNV, F4.

I simply want to buy it, (down)load it , turn off my internet connection on the gaming computer, and play it until I drop dead. Just like all the other Fallout games I have played in recent memory.

I'm impressed that his petition has gotten that much activity already. We'll see what happens.

Wasted effort. Bethesda is not going to change their mind.

There won't be many players to bump into 3 years from now when they shut the servers down.

There also won't be any connection issues, too. Just a single "Cannot connect" message box.

I love to play fallout solo, however I found myself A LOT of time wanting to play fallout 4 with my brother, we love fallout, we have more than 1500 hours of gameplay on that game alone, it would be great a classic alone approach but with the ability to join up to 3 friends in a single game to explore and quest together.. that's a feature I always wanted to have in fallout 4, but not an entire always online experience.

glutto said:

There won't be many players to bump into 3 years from now when they shut the servers down.

There also won't be any connection issues, too. Just a single "Cannot connect" message box.

Click to expand...

Haha! Yep, eventually they'll have to make it singleplayer.



I was kind of excited about the multiplayer, I was gonna grief everybody anyway, "Hey Im RP'ing as a raider". But then Bethesda said, oh were gonna clamp down on player killing......totally fuckin lame, ESPECIALLY for a Fallout.

Fallout pussy edition.

The online-only aspect is pretty disappointing but this isn't supposed to be Fallout 5. I know everybody wants the game they want to have but like Todd said during the initial E3 showing, sometimes you have to challenge yourself with something new and go outside your comfort zone. I can't remember the number of times I was playing F3/4/NV and said, "wow, this would be awesome if I could play in co-op." Now I realize F76 is very much beyond that, but after seeing the success of building in F4 (especially among players who normally wouldn't be interested in Fallout) I think it was a pretty obvious fork, not to mention the obvious survival aspects. "Online" is the challenge (albeit it seems to be closer to SimCity than Ark).

As far as the PVP aspect goes, in response to Krenum here specifically: why reinvent the wheel? MMOs had separate PVE and PVP servers almost two decades ago. WoW let you enable a PVP flag on a PVE server and in certain enemy areas, and you could also duel (this is likely what they intend for F76). I cut my teeth on Ultima Online where a death outside the city meant you COULD be robbed (and they already stated you can't be in F76) much like I imagine other contemporary survival games today so again - all of this has already been done, and successfully. I'm starting to think they wanted to combine the city building folks (who tend to be more casual and passive on the whole) with the survival freaks (who tend to be much more hardcore) and you'll never find an appropriate balance unless you simply open up the servers.

Maxx said:

As far as the PVP aspect goes, in response to Krenum here specifically: why reinvent the wheel? MMOs had separate PVE and PVP servers almost two decades ago.

Click to expand...

That's the thing though, they're not separate, a choice between PVE or PVP would be fine.

All this game is , is Fallout 4 with muliplayer code built in. Todd said it himself. They were going to add it into Fallout 4 originally but didn't have the staff or tools, until Zenimax purchased Battlecry in Austin.

Araxie said:

it would be great a classic alone approach but with the ability to join up to 3 friends in a single game to explore and quest together.. that's a feature I always wanted to have in fallout 4, but not an entire always online experience.

Click to expand...

This is exactly what I wanted in a "online" Fallout and/or Elder Scrolls experience to be like... basically just online co-op with your friends. Who asked for this online-only/survival type of Fallout?

I have to admit I was suspicious when this game was announced. It took 7 years to get from Fallout 3 to Fallout 4 and only 3 years to get from Fallout 4 to Fallout 76. I really am not holding my breathe for this game to be honest. It'll be low on my list of games at the moment, but it is intriguing enough for me to wait and see gameplay and thoughts from people here about it once it releases.

zamardii12 said:

Elder Scrolls experience to be like... basically just online co-op with your friends.

Click to expand...

Just wait, It'll be in Elderscolls VI, Fallout 76 is just a test / social experiment to see how well then can do it in Elderscrolls. You'll probably be able to build towns and castles too.

This game started as a piece of DLC for Fallout 4 and then it grew. I am all for them trying new things. I hope it is fun. If multiplayer games are not your thing, there are a lot of RPGs out there to bide your time until Starfield, TES:6, or Cyberpunk come out.

The fantastically watered down Fallout 4. (Game play machincs. Story and lore options.)
The raising of the Fallout 4 DLC (to give us more... in fact we got less than NV.)
Now cramming in online play into a game that has no business having it. (The call of any money grubbing developer in the last 10 years.)
Oh yeah and micro transactions.

Bethesda is dead. EA just needs to buy them up too. But I guess they have not because they are screwing themselves over on their own good enough.

EDIT- Why does this forum become a buggy slow mess as soon as you sign in?

Krenum said:

That's the thing though, they're not separate, a choice between PVE or PVP would be fine.

Click to expand...

I know, I was agreeing with you...my question was posed towards "them" (the developers). I'm not entirely sure why they're acting like it's difficult.

For years and years I've wanted to be able to have the fallout experience shared with my closest gaming buddies, and now it's finally happen. The person being referred to in the OP can just go right on ahead and go frick himself.

I have a simple solution for every "fanboy" who wants to cry about something being different than they want it to be... don't fucking play it, watch it, buy it, own it, rent it. Just go do something else. Sick of this shit, and everyday I'm reminded a thousand times over about how many people have just forgotten how to simply have fun.

Hopefully not a Sim City repeat.

Sounds like a single player only mode just wouldn't be fun or make sense from what I've seen of the game so far.

theplaidfad said:

everyday I'm reminded a thousand times over about how many people have just forgotten how to simply have fun.

Click to expand...

I hate to derail this thread but I agree with you here outside the scope of this game. So many developers favor "balance" over fun these days. Plenty of examples, but let's take Overwatch. It's balanced around the elite (top 1% of players) and CCs (community contributors). These guys drive the meta and the argument is always that it makes sense to balance around them, despite the fact the vast majority of players have a significantly distinct meta and use the characters differently. I've been gaming for over thirty years and a good heap of my beloved games were broken in one way or another; quite simply, fun should trump balance.

Now of course I once was part of that 1% so I know the "real" reason it's like this: money. eSports and streaming, specifically. These guys are invested in keeping on top of the meta and ultimately that creates a conflict of interest, and the developers also have their reasons. I won't go too deep into this here but instead I'll bring it back to F76 and fan criticisms: people watch these streamers, become involved in the community, then feel entitled to nitpick over every last thing for their own narrow desires. It's special interests carried over to gaming so if someone tells you politics isn't related, they're lying to you; what Fukuyama calls the "vetocracy" (gridlock because everybody is a snowflake) becoming emergent with the always-on platform of the Internet.

It's pervasive in gaming and getting worse but ultimately it's about money and identity politics when it should be about entertainment.

Gamers complain when companies make the same game over and over.

Gamers complain when companies do something new with their games.

Gamers complain.

Teenk9 said:

Gamers complain when companies make the same game over and over.

Gamers complain when companies do something new with their games.

Gamers complain.

Click to expand...

Doing something new is fine, but if this game is treated as a 'game as a service' there should be cause for alarm. Once the servers are shut down you wouldn't be able to play if it depends on servers to run... Fallout 3 is going on 10 years old, Fallout 76 might not last that long. Fans should be concerned. Just allow private mode servers or something, that is not asking the game to go from co-op support to no support.

I am looking forward to the game because of the co-op but I hate the idea that years from now I wouldn't be able to play it, especially if the game turns out to be amazing.

Eh, I don't play co-op or MMO games. Just give me a good single player RPG or action game. And if it's a single player game, requiring an internet connection is a negative.

Teenk9 said:

Gamers complain when companies make the same game over and over.
Gamers complain when companies do something new with their games.
Gamers complain.

Click to expand...

You've never seen bigger toddler meltdowns over a spin off. "Bethesda ruined the franchise and betrayed us all!".

Maybe the biggest clue that this game isn't Fallout 5 can be found in the title. Did people really expect a new mainline Fallout after only 3 years? We know they're working on Starfield and TES6, so a fully fledged Fallout probably isn't due for another decade. We're lucky we're getting anything Fallout related this soon.

The game wasn’t made for lonely, diehard single player fans. They’re taking an engine that they know and understand and they’re trying to answer a question we’ve had since Morrowind: “What if my friend could drop into my game?" The whining seems to mostly stem from those who would rather see the franchise stagnate than evolve. I for one have wanted co-op in Fallout and Skyrim from their very first moments.

These folks don't seem to realize that F76 is not a full-on numbered Fallout release, it's a small-scale interim title using the same IP, something they can bring to market this calendar year while the bulk of the studio is focusing on TES6 and Starfield.

In a way, it's like complaining Fallout Shelter doesn't have VATS combat and modding support.

I can get past the mulitplayer aspect. I think in the end it will be fun. But Im having a hard time wrapping my head around continuity. I understand that Bethesda owns Fallout. They haven't explained where the Supermutants are coming from or why even Deathclaws are in it. Are they coming from Vault 87.....is Westek involved or has a base in WV? This is 60 years before the first game, they pretty much leave it to "well this is a fallout game, so there's supermutants". They wouldn't do that to Elderscolls, Elderscrolls is their baby, they would explain everything and make sure the storyline makes sense.

I just wanted co-op like borderlands, Is this too much to ask?

Croak said:

These folks don't seem to realize that F76 is not a full-on numbered Fallout release, it's a small-scale interim title using the same IP, something they can bring to market this calendar year while the bulk of the studio is focusing on TES6 and Starfield.

In a way, it's like complaining Fallout Shelter doesn't have VATS combat and modding support.

Click to expand...

I don't believe that. I believe if the game does well we probably won't ever see a Fallout title like we've been accustomed. If it does poorly they'll roll out a Fallout 5 and claim the above.

Small scale? Isn't the map 4x larger than FO4? Do you mean small in terms of story?

Krenum said:

Wasted effort. Bethesda is not going to change their mind.

Click to expand...

"Dear game makers ... here's what I want for Christmas" lol

You don't petition with a vote online, you do it with your $$$

These companies believe many gamers have no spine and will buy whatever they put out and so, you see happening what you see happening. How can a company like EA charge everyone $ 60 for Mass Effect Andromeda and then drop all DLC, updates and leave the game not working right just a few months later without any apparent repercussion?

Vote with your wallet/purse

Silentbob343 said:

I just wanted co-op like borderlands, Is this too much to ask?

I don't believe that. I believe if the game does well we probably won't ever see a Fallout title like we've been accustomed. If it does poorly they'll roll out a Fallout 5 and claim the above.

Small scale? Isn't the map 4x larger than FO4? Do you mean small in terms of story?

Click to expand...

Small scale in terms of team size and burn rate. F76 is "easy mode" for Bethesda, in terms of what they're capable of, and that's by choice for this title.

Maps are the EASY part of an MMO, especially one that's meant to be an online "canvas" rather than a guided/semi-guided single player set-piece experience. You could dress a good map the size of F76 in a matter of days or weeks if the assets already exist (and for the most part, they do). The big unique landmark models, those take a bit of time, but not as long as you think. And I strongly suspect there's not going to be a whole lot of new interior instances to model either.

Then it's down to finding geometry bugs, which does take longer the larger the map, but not exponentially so (and Bethesda bug tolerance is pretty high). And since they have a full-time QA team that's sorta idling when TES6 and Starfield are in pre-pro or early production, they can easily spare them for F76 with little additional cost (burn rate), and since the scope of the game is so small (see below), a small QA team can handle the load, even more so since Bethesda is going to have an actual external beta program that will pick up a lot of the bug-finding slack.

Now, F76 is going to use what looks to be a nearly identical base building system as Fallout 4+expansions, it's also going to use all of the Fallout 4 character models, weapons, buildings, flora and most of the old NPC models along with a limited amount of new WVA-specific critters, so most of the art and animation in the game is already paid for. There's maybe a few months worth of new asset creation time in F76, and that from a small team. Same with the sound department, other than whatever (limited) new VO and SFX they add, and some new music based on the existing score.

The backend net code is new from the ground up, but that's been a small team burn for a few years (think two or three people), and I guarantee it's still got a lot of hair on it (especially the server-side, which will also be new hardware and new facilities and new staff), which will be revealed in the beta.

Gameplay mechanics take time to iron out and tweak and test, but they're not particularly manpower intensive, nor is itemization (other than item 3D modeling and animations, which also goes faster than you think). And it doesn't look like (could be wrong) that F76 is going to be vastly different than Fallout 4 in terms of combat mechanics, and the SPECIAL/Perks system ain't rocket science, so for the most part its probably going to be down to spreadsheet tweaks, and a whole lot of reliance on post-launch PvP balance hotfixes.

What REALLY eats time in RPG games (online or off) are the story quests and encounters, multiplied by production values (full VO, cutscenes, etc), and the bottleneck they impose on the rest of the game's development. That's the half-decade, huge team part of a good single player RPG in the scope Bethesda typically makes. And since they've already said there's no humans in F76 other than players, the amount of questing you can do compared to Fallout 4 is going to be very limited.

The reality is, F76 is more of a large, standalone expansion pack for Fallout 4 than it is a full title release.

These damn game devs trying to build ip into different market segments is shameful. Couple that with them being totally transparent about what it is and giving you a choice on what to spend your money on is even more abhorrent.

There's a reason this game isn't called "Fallout 5".

Even though I am disappointed with Fallout 76 (Sandbox survival games suck and are the hallmark of lazy development). This petition is idiotic. Bethesda wants to make a survival sandbox game in the fallout universe If you don't want to play a sandbox survival game in the fallout universe (I know I don't) then don't buy it. Just because it's a shitty game for you (I think it's shit myself) doesn't mean it's a shitty game for everyone. Asking the devs to basically make a completely separate game is ridiculous. If you want to play single player fallout go play fallout 4. If you (like me) want a real fallout mmo and not a sociopathy simulator set in the fallout universe too bad that game doesn't exist (and it's not this game).... but guess what that's ok there are billions of people on the planet with different tastes not everything has to cater to everyone. Fallout 76 looks like something I would only play as an alternative to smashing my dick with a framing hammer (and only just barely) but for someone else it's the best game ever and I don't think Bethesda should have to re make the game to suit me.

This petition is like demanding that Quentin Tarantino make his next movie more family friendly or conversely like complaining that Frozen didn't have enough gun fights ..... no shit that wasn't what the creators were going for if you want Frozen with more graphic violence or Kill Bill but Uma Thurman hugs people instead of decapitating them then go make those movies (or make a petition asking to have those movies made too instead of changing existing ones that other people like) stop expecting everything to cater to you.



TLDR: I am also of the opinion that fallout76 will not be the kind of game I want to play... but other people may like it not every game is for everyone a petition asking for the game to be overhauled to suit you individually is moronic.

glutto said:

There won't be many players to bump into 3 years from now when they shut the servers down.

There also won't be any connection issues, too. Just a single "Cannot connect" message box.

Click to expand...

Whoa now, let's get real. I think they'll leave it up at least 4 years.

Krenum said:

Haha! Yep, eventually they'll have to make it singleplayer.

Click to expand...

No they won't. They'll just shut it down and keep your money, like every other online-only game nowadays.

Mode13 said:

. Will the online service be a free continuing service with the purchase of the game though? Or is this month to month? I haven't seen the details on that yet.

Click to expand...

It wont be subscription based (Their not THAT stupid) BUT Bethesda will be charging for mods & extras (Creation Club / Microtransactions). They haven't said anything yet but they will be.

Krenum said:

It wont be subscription based (Their not THAT stupid) BUT Bethesda will be charging for mods & extras (Creation Club / Microtransactions). They haven't said anything yet but they will be.

Click to expand...

I figured it wouldn't be subscription based, I would certainly not play if such were the case. I'm surprised by the way they are trying to profit off of mods after that entire company (Bethesda/Zenimax) success was built upon giving us games we could hack to bits. I can't even remember the last time I played Morrowind - Skyrim without modding it halfway unrecognizable. So that's too bad, I'm not paying for mods unless it's a donation directly to the mod maker.

Mode13 said:

I figured it wouldn't be subscription based, I would certainly not play if such were the case. I'm surprised by the way they are trying to profit off of mods after that entire company (Bethesda/Zenimax) success was built upon giving us games we could hack to bits. I can't even remember the last time I played Morrowind - Skyrim without modding it halfway unrecognizable. So that's too bad, I'm not paying for mods unless it's a donation directly to the mod maker.

Click to expand...

They say they love the modding community, which is probably true, but since about 2 years ago they've been trying to push their Creation Club modding environment to be in competition with Nexus Mods. Which you can already donate to a modder on nexus if you want to but Bethesda wants to control it.

I really hope there's a single player option. It just won't be a game I choose to play otherwise and have thoroughly enjoyed all the past Fallout's. There are plenty of games out there that allow other humans to shit on you.

I would like to see a single player mode....

But if people are demanding via petition - Screw them. I'd rather not have single player just to spite them and their entitled attitude.

This is just Fallout 4: Online to me. Did you see in the presentation where that guy got his left arm shot but his right arm blew to pieces, classic.

This is like telling Valve to make a single player CounterStrike... and Valve gave them Condition Zero.

Hey, hey!
Wait for the loot boxes and play to win before complaining.

They can do it like Blizzard did with Diablo 2, have a Single Player mode only character. All Bethesda has to do is have you "role" a Lone Wanderer character that's an offline only character and tone down the difficulty to a solo player level and have at it. This Lone Wanderer just cannpt ever join multiplayer servers for the sake of private mods and such ?

An Offline Single player mode detached from Multiplayer.