Fallout 4 wasn't broken. Skyrim was fine on 360/PC too, and the only reason it was broken on PS3 was because of it's god awful architecture. Bethesda was never able to solve the PS3.
Full of bugs? Yes. But "half broken" is a big exaggeration.
Fallout 76, though, is an entirely different story. Critics should slam the game as much as they can. And even that wouldnt be enough.
While not at the catastrophic level of FO76, Skyrim still was quite buggy at start with quite a few game-breaking bugs. I played it from day one myself and remember having a lengthy Dwemer quest almost finished only to discover that the final act couldn't be completed because of a bug that didn't allow a container to open. That was quite annoying, since I had spend a couple of hours on this quest. Bethesda fixed it after a couple of months, but only for the people that had not started the quest yet. People like me never got it fixed. And that's just my personal example. There were many more at the time. And the game still has tons of bugs, alas lesser game-breaking ones now, but still. Bethesda just doesn't know how or care to polish their games.
Otherwise there wouldn't have to be the unofficial patches for Skyrim and FO4, each fixing hundreds of bugs that Bethesda never fixed. That is unheard of when you look at other major AAA titles. This has become a regular thing for Bethesda titles and their games have become synonymous with buggy gameplay and glitches and I think that's a shame.
In 200hrs of Breath of the Wild I didn't encounter a single bug, maybe one tiny graphical glitch. And hat was Nintendos first open world project of that scale. RDR2 so far seems also really well polished. So there is no excuse for Bethesda, they could if they wanted to, but they don't.