|
Can I choose between dating a rapist redhead ghoul or an uptight raven-haired super mutant? Bethesda has a lot they have to compete with in terms of dating simulators.
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 23:42 |
|
|
I enjoyed Fallout 3. NV was better but I still had fun with FO3 and I suspect I'll have fun with FO4, even if it isn't as good as other games.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
There is a 0% chance that you won't be able to customize your character.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
Phil Tenderpuss posted:Lol how can you defend this poo poo I would assume based off Bethesda's long-running history of games that look kind of rear end and yet people still play for roughly seven thousand hours.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
CJacobs posted:Ten bucks says they're gonna pull the "well Fallout takes place in a post-ALTERNATE REALITY 1950s, so they're probably actually really progressive" card. The fact this was not true in earlier iterations of the series will likely have no bearing on this decision. Yes, this would totally be out of place. Fallout certainly never did this before. There were certainly not established lore-based situations where, for example, women were part of the army pre-war. Not at all. God drat Bethesda ruining the lore by following the idea that it was an alternate version of history that expanded out of the 1950s, not Literally The 1950s.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2015 21:29
|
|
"Nrgh... sorry Elizabethmeat... I was just thinking of my husband.... huff....... he was the best man I ever met..... our son was so beautiful"
<Weren't you alive in the 1950s Troy Baker?>
|
SunAndSpring posted:I honestly think it'd be an interesting start if the female PC starts off as a simple housewife instead of a soldier. Gives you both sides of the pre-war conflict; soldier gets to see the pre-war jingoism and single-minded hatred of the Chinese that goes on around the military, housewife gets to deal with the repressive and stagnant values of pre-war US culture. But, Bethesda wouldn't be skilled enough to pull it off in a way that doesn't make people cringe so yeah they'll probably just make both genders soldiers and call it a day. That would be legit interesting but probably just not something you can pull off well in a game. It's almost impossible to make a player-controlled character have thoughts and feelings the player doesn't. The best you get is like Geralt and even then he's pretty open-minded/progressive/ect based off player action. You can show the values but you can't really make a character who lives them AND has player choice.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2015 21:46
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:Honestly, the player character being voiced and having a tragic back-story seems really limiting to me. I liked that the New Vegas guy was just some dude or lady from the wastes who delivered mail and got shot in the head. That was it. I didn't like that the DLC introduced this weird narrative revolving around how you accidentally ruined a budding wasteland community and some guy was trying to kill you because of it. It really takes the imagination out of the game. Just let me play pretend as my custom wasteland dude that I spent an hour making. Well, you just described Witcher (which is in fact a licensed game series based on books, even if that gets overlooked a lot!) You can absolutely pull it off with good writing. "With good writing" being key there.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
A. Beaverhausen posted:Compared to the previous Fallouts and every other Bethesda game, it is taking away control. This is not Bioware. Fallout 1 and Fallout 2 had you have very defined set backstories that you couldn't alter that were critical to the character. Fallout 3 obviously did too but I assume people are talking about the classic Fallout games here. You absolutely did not set your own backstory in Fallout 1 or 2. You were put into a specific role that you could define by your actions but you didn't have much of a choice of being a vault dweller looking for a water chip/tribal looking for a Geck for your dying village I mean I guess you can argue that FO4 has a 'harder' backstory but Fallout has never (except maybe New Vegas) been about complete blank slates. Edit: I mean that said I don't like the four-choice option but just because it means that speech options are way less likely to be viable and varied and that was one of the best parts of New Vegas, but maybe I'll be surprised. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 07:28 on Jun 18, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2015 07:22
|
|
|
2house2fly posted:You still have to play through the annoyingly log tutorial once to get to that part. If you're fighting for games never to have any form of buildup at all, even the first time you play the game, you're going to be a long time waiting. Even the older Fallouts did that.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:there should always be an option just to get a checkup, a pat on the back, a "go get em, tiger" and then let the player choose whether to go through the tutorial by whether they follow the quest dialogue or not. goodsprings was a great intro to the game from first playthrough to last New Vegas was the sequel/expansion/whatever to Fallout 3 and so the developers could generally assume players were familiar with the basic mechanics. Even then a vast majority of people who played New Vegas most likely did the Goodsprings area of the game their first time through. Having to do a tutorial all of once and getting angry about it is pretty silly.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2015 03:41
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:you get to do it all over again once you reinstall it though!!!!! If you're on console then your save files are not deleted. If you're on PC then they're still not deleted unless you're moving to a new PC with no form of backup in which case getting a save file at the end of the tutorial is trivial.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:thus, "having to do a tutorial exactly once" is kind of a really big exaggeration No, it really isn't. At this point you're basically moving the goalposts to "well, I do a lot of modding and my mods break the games in way that force me to redo the tutorials!" Which is fine but the mods breaking the game is the cause of that. I think New Vegas setup better but that is because I think Fallout 3's main plot is a pile of rear end and don't care about it or Guest Voicedad Liam Neeson. A game having an opening isn't an inherent flaw.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2015 03:59
|
|
|
Dr. Gene Dango MD posted:You're right, I was thinking of Fallout 1 and 2 where they really mattered. Still they inform a little about your character, getting that boost at the start. I just feel like perks are perfect as they are. If they wanted to do something new with the mechanics great, I wish they had made something new instead of rehashing Skyrims constellations. I guess I don't really get how they inform differently. How is "Tag Science" any different than "begin with Science 1." They both just mean "you are better at Science."
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2015 06:38
|
|
|
homeless poster posted:they should have made it so that you can always try to manually pick any lock or hack any computer but the skill thresholds or talent ranks just give you auto success. example: if you have 48% lockpicking you can just automatically open things that are locked that are Very Easy or Easy, but you have to do the minigame for anything above that. get 2 more points in lock picking and you can now auto open Average or below! also the locks or computers scale the difficulty of opening relative to the delta between the required skill level and your current skill level, so someone with 12% lock picking has a hell of a time even trying to set the pins for a Very Hard lock or whatever That effectively makes lockpicking worthless because rather than being an investment it becomes a punishment for being unable to do a minigame. Unless the minigame is absurdly difficult or impossibly designed it just means nobody will ever take the skill.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2015 07:36
|
|
|
It's true, I don't want characters voiced by Troy Baker, flashing lights or gun customization so that is why I'm playing Phantom Pain.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Kind of makes Fallout 4 seem like crap, considering the protagonist only has 13,000 lines: ... really? You don't see the flaw in that logic? (Neither of the previous games had voiced protagonists at all. The numbers counted there were only for NPCs. The protagonist having 13,000 lines doesn't mean the NPCs won't have a comparable number to either FO3's 40,000 or F:NV's 65,000.)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:You know what a conversation is right? People talk back and fourth, so if the protagonist is talking in every conversation that means there can't be much more NPC lines than protagonist lines. If Fallout 4 is to have as much dialog as New Vegas it means that every NPC would have to speak four lines for every one line the protagonist speaks, which I don't think is likely. ... yes it does. Like even in games with voiced protagonists the NPC dialogue outnumbers the voiced protagonist due to things like audio logs, conversations between NPCs, and just the fact that NPCs explain things to your protagonist.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
2house2fly posted:Someone earlier in the thread said people would be into the Mass Effect conversations if it was Obsidian and I've got to admit, I would. This is objectively true. Look at Alpha Protocol which literally has three (sometimes four) dialogue choices for every option. It's actually as simplified a system as Paragon/Neutral/Renegade/Interrupt Punch but executed better.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
Crabtree posted:Right now, all we're getting is badly spelled tweet play-by-plays of someone watching the Quakecon demo, but at least there's confirmation that Dog can ride airships and wear a scarf! Welp. I'm not really sure how I can't play as Mr. Fuckface.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 20:13
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:Ahaha, the robot called him Mr. Fuckface! My rips are about to split from this quality Bethesda humor! It's true. It is no match for the subtle and restrained humor that is Steven Heck or the restrained hilarity of finding the TARDIS in the middle of the wasteland.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
Lotish posted:Finally robosexuals can get a handy. ... Finally? Did people forget Fisto?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
Azhais posted:I don't think handies were Fisto's speciality I am positive that Fisto is an expert at using his hand.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
I have to say that "there are 12 companion characters, all of them bisexual" is a legitimate step back from New Vegas which was perfectly willing to recognize the existence of gay and lesbian people and maybe even the idea someone didn't want to gently caress your player character.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
Zoq-Fot-Pik posted:This makes no sense because they could just write something good for the game targeted at whatever demographic, instead of bad. In many open world games people care more about the sense of freedom or ability to do what they like over the actual strength of the writing.  Part of the reason there is a fairly strong pro-Fallout 3 crowd is that, like it or not, they felt like this catered to them more despite NV having about as close to objectively better writing for its core plot and companions.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
Zoq-Fot-Pik posted:That also makes no sense because New Vegas has better freedom to do what you want within the game. A lot of Fallout 3 fans don't like that because it means they can fail quests. "Freedom to do what you like" and "If you do the wrong thing you fail quests" don't necessarily go hand-in-hand. Not everyone plays video games to be challenged. See also: you can gently caress anyone.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 22:17
|
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:"I want the freedom to do what I want but I don't want the freedom to be in whatever faction I want." I don't get it either but it's a pretty common complaint from people who dislike New Vegas that they feel railroaded and lacking in freedom. You can argue "well, you're playing it wrong" but that has never worked in the history of ever.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
Zoq-Fot-Pik posted:I can't believe people complain about railroading in NV because they don't want to put in the effort to go north of Goodsprings. They also think you can't ignore Benny to do sidequests for some reason. I think it's an interesting game design flaw in that players encountering too-strong enemies will just instantly assume they're not supposed to go that way as surely as if it were a barrier. (Though the invisible barriers over the deathclaw sanctuary probably don't help.) Like I said, I don't get it since I found NV to be way more free in what I could do but I think it's just that people are trained to think specific ways about games. Lord knows if I'm playing any form of RPG and I encounter dangerous environments my first strategy is to see how far I can get before being mechanically forced to retreat, but not everyone does the same.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 22:29
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Looks like the perks are going to suck in Fallout 4. If they are only gated behind stats they all have to be balanced for a level 1 character taking them, potentially. I don't get why you think that. Perks being gated by level and stats has been done before and there's no reason to assume it won't be gated again without levels. You might not need to be level (x) to get the perk but I bet they'll be gated in some fashion that means you can't get them at level 1.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 22:41
|
|
|
HalfHazard posted:Meta-knowledge, such as knowing that Stealth Boys make you invisible I bet that runs into the "I have a limited number of these, what if I use it now and need it later?!" problem.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 22:52
|
|
|
Have we really gotten to this point of the thread?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
NotALizardman posted:Fallout 4's dialogue system is even worse than mass effect's. Only 4 choices. And lol if you think bethesda is going to have a "more options" button. Every conversation will be good karma, bad karma, special check, goodbye. It's true. Check out this terrible dialogue system. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
Paid mods are a good idea in theory but the actual execution needed a whole lot of work. A whooooole lot of work. Also not screwing over the mod makers.Bholder posted:I mean, would you pay money for re-balance or bug-fixing mods even when people worked hard on them? Re-balancing? Sure, if a good job was done on them, I'd pay for it. Something like DmC: Definitive Edition effectively charged for a full-game rebalancing.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
FronzelNeekburm posted:Well, you don't need to be able to pick everything, but if you have, let's say, 50 perks per game to dole out, and each perk has four levels, just filling them out from top to bottom would let you max out the first tier, then half of the second. Apparently there are something like 270 levels of perks total, so unless you get a LOT of perks, you'll need to specialize pretty heavily. I mean... you're basically saying "If I want to be the literal best at guns I have to heavily specialize." That doesn't actually sound like a bad thing to me. It depends on how the game is designed but it'd be kinda nice if not having max level in everything was considered a perfectly valid choice.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2015 06:57
|
|
|
FronzelNeekburm posted:That depends on whether anything else in the perks menu looks interesting. If you want to just punch everything to death so you can max out "dog sings along with me around the campfire," cool. But usually Fallout uses a lot of guns. I'm still not sure why this is a bad thing. Like if you want to choose to focus on non-combat perks so you're good at talking or crafting or whatever but have a harder time in combat that is only a bad thing if the game doesn't actually offer you valid options to get around your lack of combat skills. Just in theory this sounds more engaging to me than the previous SPECIAL skill method which amounted to "take high INT or else you're intentionally gimping your character for no real reason and once you do you're effectively going to end up the best at most things."
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2015 07:12
|
|
|
Pwnstar posted:The main issue people are having with the skill system is that the primary way you interact with the world is by killing things. So investing points into gun skill or whatever can be considered a necessary cost as opposed to a specific character choice. There are a lot of ways around that though. Like just off the top of my head, and of course entirely theoretical: The game has an in-depth crafting system. If you choose to invest in crafting upgrades instead you have less pure mechanical skills but can balance that with superior weapons that offer passive bonuses. Obviously you can stack the two if you just want to murder guys with absurdly overpowered weapons. The game has 12 companions and you can focus on a high-Cha built that allows you to buff your allies to do the fighting for you. Allow players who focus on non-combat skills options they can use to make combat easier. Have your Crafting perk also allow you to jury-rig explosives or whatever. Actually allow for non-violent (or non direct violence) solutions to quests, as shocking an idea as this is. Allow most if not all major areas to be solved without the player directly fighting. Back Hack posted:You mean like every Beth game since Morrowind? I played Fallout 3 mostly as stealth and talking and had genuinely little trouble getting through the game. New Vegas was way better in that regards and shows that the mechanics can actually support a very low-combat character. FO4 might not match NV but it isn't an absurd impossibility that they can offer other solutions. They probably won't be well written but "[SPEECH CHECK] You shouldn't do that" ain't exactly new for Bethesda Fallout.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2015 08:19
|
|
|
frajaq posted:Oh that's excellent, hopefully that will stop the Bethesda hate right? ...right? Nothing, including buying all the games, the expansions and putting several hundred hours into the game will stop the Bethesda hate.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
MariusLecter posted:lol consoles limited responses due to buttons I'm legit curious how you assume it is due to buttons.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2015 22:42
|
|
|
CrazyLoon posted:Main reason I still like Fallout more than Fallout 2. Yeah, Fallout 1 never had super-blatant pop culture references.  
ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 06:28 on Sep 6, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2015 06:26
|
|
|
Azhais posted:Was it Fallout 1 or 2 with the monty python bridge? That was 2. 2 was heavier on the references than 1 but it's (as mentioned) basically a core part of the franchise. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 06:34 on Sep 6, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2015 06:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 23:42 |
|
|
Crabtree posted:And even then I bet Witcher and GTA never had content actively cut from them to balance costs as those games are still the bread and butter of their respective developers. Both Witcher and GTA not only have cut content, they have actively openly cut content that the developers have discussed and cut content people found by poking around in game files. Witcher 3 had entire areas cut because they were not cost or time effective to make/finish.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 17:48
|
|