Now that Fallout 4 is being teased, what would you like to see in the next installment?

[Pandabearparade]

I actually like them because they are people, who dont suffer from

They aren't people. They're glorified backpacks that shoot things for you. They have less personality than the characters in Star Wars Episode I.

-"I'll dump my entire back story on you at the slightest provocation, even if you dont want it" syndrome

If by 'the slightest provocation' you mean constant pestering. You have to badger Boone about it constantly to get him to tell you about his past, the same for Arcade. So you have to want it and go out of your way to get it.

-Aren't so mentally unstable, despite having lived in a terrible world their entire life, that they need me to play daddy/psychiatrist for them every step of the way.

They had perfectly stable, functional lives before the courier came to them. Your argument just doesn't hold up to scrutiny, sorry.

You're essentially saying that since the characters aren't on a par with Shakespeare (which even Bioware never manages) they shouldn't even try; it's much better to just have a vacant-eyed backpack who shoots things for you.

No.

Hes actually somewhat sane, and doesn't cry every 5 feet.

When you have to erect a straw man it's a sign that your position is very weak.

 

[SajuukKhar]

I cant tell if you legitimately like the fact they dont share the story, or your Roleplaying so hardcore you find it as points for badassery. Also, i dont think they cry every 5 feet...they dont in New vegas atleast. I know it was fucking brutal to get Gannon to talk to me in vegas. Prick is picky as crap.

It isn't that they dont share their story, they do tell you SOME thing about their past, but they dont go on a day by day itinerary like I gave a crap about what they ate last summer for lunch.

-Jericho tell you he was a raider who stole stuff, killed people, and lived long enough to retire, and is looking to possibly get back out in the wasteland.
-Ahzrukhal tells you Charon was raised by people who brainwashed him into following whoever held is contract.

they didn't info dump their entire life story, they summed it up in all that needs to be said.

snip

-Ive met more people who act like Fallout 3's companions then people who act like New Vegas's. People dont come up to me IRL and ask me o fix their problems for them, nor do most people have their problems affect their lives so much that they cant function. Whereas in an Obsidian game it seems to be every third person.

-Funny, because Boone ran up to me every other time I killed any sort of Legion group and told me about his backstory unprovoked.

-Except that boone was so depressed that he wasn't able to live normally, ED-E was well, dead, Veronica stayed away from her home as much as possible because everyone treats her her like shit, Raul is caputed by super mutants and works as a repair man to hide his insecurities of being old.

Yep, perfectly normal, stable, lives there.

-Trying means nothing unless you succeed, and those who do what they can are better then those who try and fail to do what they can't, and never could. I have no respect for someone who tries to do something they had no power to do, and fails because of it, all it does is scream of a person without any grip on reality, or realistic goals.

-There was no straw man, just an accurate representation of what happened in NEw Vegas.

 

[Pandabearparade]

It isn't that they dont share their story, they do tell you SOME thing about their past, but they dont go on a day by day itinerary like I gave a crap about what they ate last summer for lunch.

Straw man. This just doesn't happen. It would be nice if the characters had so much attention to detail, but they don't, and your argument falls apart because it's based upon nonsense you made up.

-Ive met more people who act like Fallout 3's companions then people who act like New Vegas's.

No. You haven't. At least you haven't unless you live among the mentally ill.

There is no 'acting like' a companion in Fallout 3 because for the most part they don't have personalities. They have a couple lines of intro dialogue and that's all. There are no 'characters' there.

People dont come up to me IRL and ask me o fix their problems for them, nor do most people have thier problems affect their lives so much that they cant function. Whereas in an Obsidian game it seems to be every third person.

Generally you only get tasked with a quest if you engage dialogue first, meaning you came up to -them- and asked them about their problems. There are very few exceptions. Again, if you have to outright lie to bolster your argument it should be a red flag for you that your argument is flimsy.

-funny, because boone ran up to me every other time I killed any sort of Legion group and told me about his backstory unprovoked.

He entered dialogue with you and gave his opinion on the situation? Egads! The horror! It's almost like he's a person with opinions on stuff and not a backpack!

-Except that boone was so depressed that he wasn't able to live normally,

He had a job and fed himself. He had problems emotionally, but he doesn't go into them unless, again, you borderline harass him about it.

Veronica stayed away from her home as much as possible becuase everyone treater her like shit,

Yes, but at what point does she start to fall apart over it? She doesn't. She has a problem and handles it like an adult. Are you suggesting characters shouldn't have any problems in their lives, and shouldn't mention them even if the protagonist asks repeatedly?

Raul is caputed by super mutants and works as a repair man to hide his insicruites of being old.

And he doesn't bother you about it unless pressed. Are you ready to just admit you're wrong and only defending a ridiculous point to save face, yet?

-Trying means nothing unless you succeed, those who do what they can are better then those who try and fail to do what they can't. I have no respect for someone who tires to do something they had no power to do, and failed because of it, all it does is scream of a person without any grip[ on reality, or realistic goals.

There are degrees of success, it's not an all or nothing enterprise. Obsidian and Bioware succeed in having some of the best characters and dialogue in the modern video game industry. Bethesda does not.

By your logic, Bethesda should have characters without names or dialogue. Because if you can't do something perfectly, why do it at all?

-There was no straw man, just an accurate representation of what happened in NEw Vegas.

No. It's not. Except for the character intended to be insane, all of the New Vegas characters are sane. None cry. A couple mention their problems if pressed, but they aren't melodramatic about it. Your argument hasn't got even half a leg to stand on.

 

[Therumancer]

There are all kinds of vicious child gueriellas throughout the second and third world, african warlords and muslims conditions kids to fight and kill as early as 8 or 9.

Yes. You just made my point for me. Who conditions the kids into ruthless killers? Adults. I'm not contesting the kids being violent, though - it's the idea of a town of kids who kick out anyone who turns 16. It's retarded. A bunch of malnourished, untrained kids in a damp cave filled with super mutants is NOT a sustainable population, and certainly not for two centuries.

Though it might help if they weren't something you have to pass through in the main quest, and if they weren't such annoying little cockroaches.

but the idea of a settlement of children isn't itself the problem.

But it is, unless they explain how they renew their population. As previously stated a bunch of malnourished 13-15 year old kids is not going to be a sustainable population. Infant mortality would be the end of them in fifty years, and giving them -that- long is being ridiculously generous.

Of course I also suspect Bethesda is gently trolling it's userbase, I think Bethesda knows how the obnoxious "invinci-children" go over, but they have put them in other games like Skyrim, so I get the impression it's a joke of sorts on their part to have some little kid running around talking about kicking your arse to the point where you just want to punt them but can't.

I didn't find the children in Skyrim nearly as irritating. They acted like children. Some were bratty children, but they weren't little immersion breakers.

You keep calling them malnourished and such and assuming that they aren't going to have kids themselves and such for that reason, but that's not true. Don't forget one of the sub plots in Little Lamplight revolves around the fungus they have which is supposed to be a really special mutation able to both nourish AND remove radiation. There is no real world parallel to that, but it is part of the concept. You might also remember that this is a group that is implied to hunt people to feed their fungal pit, since one of the big things you can do is trade that "strange meat" (ie human flesh) for the fungus.

Don't forget also that our idea of what constitutes an adult is very jaded in the scope of humanity. Once upon a time someone living 30 years could be a big deal, and girls as young as 11 and 12 would be married off and expected to have children.

To put this into perspective, LL was annoying and I wouldn't like to see it again, but it could be explained with some work. However the problem is that if Bethesda DID do that work and spell everything out the results would be so shocking to sensibilities that there would be crazy outcries and censorship. Bethesda is the company that wouldn't even stand up to Austrlia over something as petty as an animation of you injecting yourself with a stimpack when you used one. Fully plotting out and describing a group of kids that make "The Children Of The Corn" and "Lord Of The Flies" look like optimistic fairy tales... murdering adults to feed to their fungus pits, impregnating girls as soon as they are physically capable of breeding, and then exiling anyone who hits near adulthood to the hells of the wasteland... It would have been awesomely dark and twisted, and exactly the kind of shocking thing that should be in Fallout for the mature, jaded, gamers who are the audience, BUT it's not the kind of thing that a pantywaist company like Bethesda is going to spell out and push. I think they just abbreviated it and figured people wouldn't think about it too hard... but really if you do, you can think of ways it could be made to work, it's just all kinds of F@cked up.

Also understand that this is a work of fantasy, it's meant to be entertaining. Whether it's novels, comics, video games, or whatever else, civilizations that could not possibly exist or have developed the way they did are commonplace. If you analyze just about anything it falls apart. Little Lamplight was annoying on all kinds of levels, but as a basic idea I don't think it's any worse than your typical "Lost City In The Jungle" from like a Tarzan story, or how they took it even further with things like Marvel's "Wakanda" with no global impact. There is a point with any work of fantasy that you kind of just have to roll with it, and take it for what it is. I mean sure, the Amazons from DC's "Wonder Woman" could never work the way they are presented, but that doesn't mean it isn't fun to pretend when your reading the stories, and it has endured for a long time as a result, like anything in comics you analyze it too much and it falls apart. Right now a lot of these arguements are doing the same thing with a video game.

At the end of the day I'm less concerned with the mechanics of Little Lamplight than the fact that it was an annoying part of the game. When I dealt with it, I did not go "this is cool" or "this is a fun idea" or even "wow, that's really twisted". Instead I ran into an annoying obstacle that was sheathed in invulnerable plot armor, and which I had to endure. It simply did not work as presented. The comic examples I mentioned (Amazons, Wakanda) are fun, Little Lamplight was not, it has nothing to do with a logical anthropological examination of their society in the enviroment, if you want to do that pretty much nobody in Fallout 3 would be alive or functioning by definition.

I'll also be honest, Little Lamplight isn't the most absurd thing in Fallout either. Truthfully I always kind of loled at the very idea of "The Republic Of Dave". Though that was better than Little Lamplight, because at least it amused me.

 

[Darmy647]

There are all kinds of vicious child gueriellas throughout the second and third world, african warlords and muslims conditions kids to fight and kill as early as 8 or 9.

Yes. You just made my point for me. Who conditions the kids into ruthless killers? Adults. I'm not contesting the kids being violent, though - it's the idea of a town of kids who kick out anyone who turns 16. It's retarded. A bunch of malnourished, untrained kids in a damp cave filled with super mutants is NOT a sustainable population, and certainly not for two centuries.

Though it might help if they weren't something you have to pass through in the main quest, and if they weren't such annoying little cockroaches.

but the idea of a settlement of children isn't itself the problem.

But it is, unless they explain how they renew their population. As previously stated a bunch of malnourished 13-15 year old kids is not going to be a sustainable population. Infant mortality would be the end of them in fifty years, and giving them -that- long is being ridiculously generous.

Of course I also suspect Bethesda is gently trolling it's userbase, I think Bethesda knows how the obnoxious "invinci-children" go over, but they have put them in other games like Skyrim, so I get the impression it's a joke of sorts on their part to have some little kid running around talking about kicking your arse to the point where you just want to punt them but can't.

I didn't find the children in Skyrim nearly as irritating. They acted like children. Some were bratty children, but they weren't little immersion breakers.

You keep calling them malnourished and such and assuming that they aren't going to have kids themselves and such for that reason, but that's not true. Don't forget one of the sub plots in Little Lamplight revolves around the fungus they have which is supposed to be a really special mutation able to both nourish AND remove radiation. There is no real world parallel to that, but it is part of the concept. You might also remember that this is a group that is implied to hunt people to feed their fungal pit, since one of the big things you can do is trade that "strange meat" (ie human flesh) for the fungus.

Don't forget also that our idea of what constitutes an adult is very jaded in the scope of humanity. Once upon a time someone living 30 years could be a big deal, and girls as young as 11 and 12 would be married off and expected to have children.

To put this into perspective, LL was annoying and I wouldn't like to see it again, but it could be explained with some work. However the problem is that if Bethesda DID do that work and spell everything out the results would be so shocking to sensibilities that there would be crazy outcries and censorship. Bethesda is the company that wouldn't even stand up to Austrlia over something as petty as an animation of you injecting yourself with a stimpack when you used one. Fully plotting out and describing a group of kids that make "The Children Of The Corn" and "Lord Of The Flies" look like optimistic fairy tales... murdering adults to feed to their fungus pits, impregnating girls as soon as they are physically capable of breeding, and then exiling anyone who hits near adulthood to the hells of the wasteland... It would have been awesomely dark and twisted, and exactly the kind of shocking thing that should be in Fallout for the mature, jaded, gamers who are the audience, BUT it's not the kind of thing that a pantywaist company like Bethesda is going to spell out and push. I think they just abbreviated it and figured people wouldn't think about it too hard... but really if you do, you can think of ways it could be made to work, it's just all kinds of F@cked up.

Also understand that this is a work of fantasy, it's meant to be entertaining. Whether it's novels, comics, video games, or whatever else, civilizations that could not possibly exist or have developed the way they did are commonplace. If you analyze just about anything it falls apart. Little Lamplight was annoying on all kinds of levels, but as a basic idea I don't think it's any worse than your typical "Lost City In The Jungle" from like a Tarzan story, or how they took it even further with things like Marvel's "Wakanda" with no global impact. There is a point with any work of fantasy that you kind of just have to roll with it, and take it for what it is. I mean sure, the Amazons from DC's "Wonder Woman" could never work the way they are presented, but that doesn't mean it isn't fun to pretend when your reading the stories, and it has endured for a long time as a result, like anything in comics you analyze it too much and it falls apart. Right now a lot of these arguements are doing the same thing with a video game.

At the end of the day I'm less concerned with the mechanics of Little Lamplight than the fact that it was an annoying part of the game. When I dealt with it, I did not go "this is cool" or "this is a fun idea" or even "wow, that's really twisted". Instead I ran into an annoying obstacle that was sheathed in invulnerable plot armor, and which I had to endure. It simply did not work as presented. The comic examples I mentioned (Amazons, Wakanda) are fun, Little Lamplight was not, it has nothing to do with a logical anthropological examination of their society in the enviroment, if you want to do that pretty much nobody in Fallout 3 would be alive or functioning by definition.

I'll also be honest, Little Lamplight isn't the most absurd thing in Fallout either. Truthfully I always kind of loled at the very idea of "The Republic Of Dave". Though that was better than Little Lamplight, because at least it amused me.

That explanation of Lamplight...i think i feel sick of my stomach. It was GOOD, but fuck the creepy part is it makes all too much sense...im going to go look at kittens now...

 

[Pandabearparade]

-snip-

Assuming the magic mushrooms are enough to give the kids a well balanced diet and make the women healthy and fertile from 12-15, it still strains credulity something awful. The kids would have to have a really sex-heavy subculture, and.. well, like you said, that's just not the sort of thing Bethesda would want to implement or even imply.

Yeah, LL is either nonsensical or fucking sick. Knowing how unwilling Bethesda is to tread into 'moral outrage' territory, I think it more likely that Bethesda just can't write and didn't think very hard about LL.

Still, I will admit that your explanation is at least plausible, though very unpleasant in its implications and I highly doubt Bethesda -meant- it to be taken that way.

 

[SajuukKhar]

snip

-It does happen actually, I can ask veronica about her past and she goes on some long story about Elijah and what not when I never asked for anywhere near that level of information.

-Except they do have personalities, and to say otherwise is not only outright false, but disingenuous.

-I don't have to lie about anything, Arcade, Boone, and Raul, all ran up to me after doing some seemingly random thing/talking to a random person, and started shoving their personal quest on me.

-There is a difference between giving his opinion, and forcing it onto me. If I wanted his opinion, I would have asked. I dont know about where you live, but people normally dont just walk up to other and just tell them their opinions, on what might be a touchy subject, unprovoked.

-He had such serious problems that it was not only affecting his life style, but causing people around him, such as Manny, to be very worried.

-Considering that she basically spends most of her live away from home, means she isn't dealing with it, she is running away from it, shes already falling over it by the time you met her.

-Funny, he bothered me just by talking to some seemingly random people.

-Bethesda does, and accomplishes, what they try to do, which is just to make some people, not some "deep" characters. Also, if Bioware and Obsidian's success is based solely on copy-pastaing the success stories of films, and books, then it really only hows immature video game stories are. that does not make Bioware and Obsidian good, it just makes them good at copy-pastaing.

-If you consider New Vegas's characters to be sane, then I dread to think of your opinions of shinji Ikari. If the people of new Vegas are sane, then you live in a very emotionally disturbed, and insane place.

Bethesda is the company that wouldn't even stand up to Austrlia over something as petty as an animation of you injecting yourself with a stimpack when you used one.

Actually, Bethesda removed that animation because it slowed down the game, and it wasn't even an animation of that, it was an animation of you stitching up, and cauterizing, your own wounds while the screen was focused on your screaming face. Bethesda changed the name of morphine to med-x because of Australia, and even then it wasn't only Australia who wanted it changed.
.
.
Also, the kids of LL don't feed people to their fungus pit, their fungus pit grows in the place they dumped the bodies of the original adults who took the kids to LL in the first place, but it's not implied anywhere that they have ever actually hunted people and thrown them down there since the first adults died shortly after the war.

 

[Pandabearparade]

-snip-

The gist of your entire argument can be summed up as: Bethesda characters have little to no dialogue and one note personalities, which is good. New Vegas characters have problems, which they mention to the protagonist if they are around long enough and pressed, which is somehow horrible writing.

It's obvious that a character with a semi-consistent, developed personality, coherent dialogue, quest content, and varied outcomes depending on your interaction with said character is superior to a character who has his entire existence defined by two lines upon hiring. Your argument on this is one of the silliest things I've ever heard outside of the Ann Coulter fan forum.
Are you seriously suggesting that because there are superficially similar characters in film and literature that it automatically invalidates the cast of New Vegas? Then no one can ever write a good character. Ever. Because every character archetype has been done already at least five times. You seem to be willing to say just about anything, no matter how ridiculous, to defend Fallout 3's failings.

 

[SajuukKhar]

The gist of your entire argument can be summed up as: Bethesda characters have little to no dialogue and one note personalities, which is good.

Actually, I never said their writing was good, I said I prefer them more. Preferring them doesn't mean I like them, it just means they are slightly less annoying, and thus, I want to explore with them more.

Also, having every characters "developed personality" be "needs someone to play daddy/psychiatrist" for them, I would rather they have no personality, then that. I got enough of that shit from watching Evangelion.

And the characters in New vegas go FAR beyond superficially similar, its down right copy-pasta form start to finish.

 

[Pandabearparade]

Actually, I never said their writing was good, I said I prefer them more.

Alright, I can accept that. I want sidekicks who have personality, but I can see why someone would want a mute companion. I don't see why you'd hate ED-E if that's the case, ED-E almost never talks.

Also, having every characters "developed personality" be "needs someone to play daddy/psychiatrist" for them, I would rather they have no personality, then that.

...if daddy issues bother you why exactly are you fond of Fallout 3's main quest again? The entire plot revolves around a whiny kid with daddy issues trying to clean muddy water.

 

[SajuukKhar]

Alright, I can accept that. I want sidekicks who have personality, but I can see why someone would want a mute companion. I don't see why you'd hate ED-E if that's the case, ED-E almost never talks.

Ed-E, and REX, were fine, well Ed-E in the base game, not the lonesome road one. Though, I prefer dogmeat.

...if daddy issues bother you why exactly are you fond of Fallout 3's main quest again? The entire plot revolves around a whiny kid with daddy issues trying to clean muddy water.

Because I didn't play my character as being whiny, in fact, I didn't give two shits about finding my dad, and only found him via exploring, and when I got him out of tranquility lane, and I talked to him, I told him he was a prick, and to fuck off.

I loved how I could subvert the whiny daddy issues trope all through the game, playing through it normally, and not normally.
.
.
While not perfect by any means, I like what Bethesda did with the follower Erandur in Skyrim. Erandur is a priest of Mara, who you find in Dawnstar, who asks for your help in stopping the artifact of Vermina from consuming the dreams of the local townspeople, and causing them nightmares, and when you get to the temple you find out that Erandur was originally one of the priests of Vermina, who fled when the temple was attacked by Orcs, and they released a gas to put everyone to sleep.

What I like about Erandur is that he had a crappy life, he fled from his problems, but then, he actually took steps, on his OWN, to make his life better. He didn't just sit around moping, or running away from his problems, until you, the hero, came along, and talked him into doing something he should have done for himself years ago.

He was a follower that showed some self-initiative, and wasn't just some robot that needed you to puppet him into a better life. He didn't need you to fix his life for him, he didn't need you to bring about some giant revelation in his beliefs, he just needed you to help him kill shit, and I like him because of that.

Out of all the companions for any game I can recall, he's really the only one that actually had some ability to do shit for HIMSELF, instead of needing you to live his life for him.

It was cool to hear about his past, it was cool, when after drinking vermina's torpor, seeing him in the past, through his eyes, as the orcs attacked and he released the gas to put everyone to sleep, and it was cool to see him also kill his former cultist friends, and redeem his life in his eyes, and what made it better is that he did it himself, for himself.

And while it wasn't a perfect quest, I wish companions acted more like he did, I wish companions had some sense of self-determination, and didn't need you to fix their lives for them, or start them on the path of fixing their lives, or tell them what big moral revelation they should pick.

Companions in games that need you to do basically everything to fix their lives for them dont seem like real people, they seem like robots left by the game devs to give you something to do, and feel like god because you are essentially controlling every aspect of their lives, and what path they will take in the future.

 

[acosn]

-As little in common with how plot is delivered in skyrim as possible, even less with FO3. None of this black and white, all in or all out bullshit. Plot should be able to hold up under scrutiny. Skyrim's start was one of the worst I've ever sat through.

-multiple starts.

-Quantity over quality voice actors. Getting that one movie actor to do that one character doesn't save you from having fewer total VA's overall.

-Borrow as much from NV as possible; the gun modding, unique ammo selection, the companion scroll wheel, and so on.

-Quality over quantity of companions. Skyrim's sheer volume of companions means diddly when there's virtually no development to them.

-NV has the right idea for BOS / Enclave involvement, unless you basically visit completely untouched regions like the pacific NW or the midwest. Act like that god awful shooter never happened, please.

-Perks and flaws. Put the fun back in failure. Being a fuckup should carry consequences that are something other than "you are now dead." Especially if you're a repeat fuck up.

-More improvised / "creative" weaponry.

-Combat system in general for melee weapons needs a lot of loving.

 

[I am Harbinger]

be able to build "custom" weapons

I would like to point out that the "Custom" weapons in Fallout 3 where already pre-designed for you, and you just gathered the bits and put them together. When I first heard "custom weapons" I though I'd be designing my own guns, not just putting together someone elses creations. I know it's a minor quibble, but it's MY minor quibble.

any game regardless of quality can be improved when playing with a friend

I disagree. You have not met my friends.

 

[Animyr]

--A branching storyline that integrates the open world gameplay into it as much as possible. Really, the complete divorce between the gameplay and the story in these games, to the point where it's actually expected for the players to wander off and completely forget about the plot, feels like a gaint blunder. I would like to see steps taken to integrate the story(ies) and the exploration gameplay the series is based on together.

--Followers who not only are interesting personalities, but relate to the story and change or react in substantial ways to the stuff you do with them and to them.

--A skill system that forces the player to specialize, at least to a greater degree then previous games.

--More refined combat and conversation mechanics in general. Bethesda's engine is starting to get a bit clunky.

I haven't completed New Vegas yet, but the complex and ambiguous social and political landscape and the way it is organically presented to the player is a huge improvement over fallout 3, and unless they go for a "wild frontier" theme that's all about exploration and lonely landscapes, that should definitely be present in the next game.

 

[darkfox85]

I agree (almost) completely. New Vegas felt too rebuilt. Fallout 3 was a little 'too' trashed. How about a bit of balance? It would make sense for certain regions to be more progressed than others, due to the varied level of danger in some areas.

Maybe. The real problem for me is the whole ?200 years? thing.

...what characters? Seriously, other than Three Dog, Liam Neeson, and Lucas Simms I can't think of -anyone- in Fallout 3 who wasn't just a blank, cardboard character.

Fallout 3 had better characters. That?s what I feel. I?m not going to waste time giving a list of names because that just feels empty and weak. I just do. Overall, NV had lacklustre and interchangeable characters whilst F3 erred more to silliness. Voice acting was much better to.

While I'm usually one to defend New Vegas, I don't actually think 'challenge' was a point in its favor.I agree with the sentiment though, and I hope they implement a real hardcore mode in Fallout 4.

Okay now. I?m not saying one game did it 100%, I?m saying one game did it better than the other. F3 wasn?t very challenging at all which really let it down, whilst NV did it better.

The combat in Fallout 3 was dated even at the time, and these days...

The combat in Fallout 3 is absolutely excellent. And it?s certainly better than NV. ?Dated? is a meaningless word that it feels like it could be just as much praise as criticism. If you?re up for it, I need more details.

I hope [exploration] is even more than Fallout 3, which was a tad smaller than Oblivion and much smaller than Skyrim.

While we?re at it there?s a bunch more stuff we could wish for. But I get 80-odd hours out of each F3 play-through. That?s good enough for me. But this is mostly me rueing the invisible walls of NV which take away a lot of freedom.

[Vehicles] Luxury? Maybe a bit.. though jury-rigging a motor cycle that you have to bust your ass to keep maintained and fueled doesn't seem 'luxurious' to me, and it makes a lot more sense to me than teleporting from location to location with your pip-boy.

Warp travel may be unavoidable but if vehicles were the alternative I?d take them. But the other things I explained will be lost and I?m still really in love with the atmosphere these games give me.

But.. fiends were raiders, and so were powder gangers.

But it?s not the same thing.

They just gave the raiders extremely loose leadership and made them make some sense.

There are already small traces of leadership and structure in F3. And it makes more than ?some? sense. It makes perfect sense. These people are animals, criminals, psychos.

It's only logical that certain regions wouldn't have raiders because of a strong lawful (good or evil) presence. Enclave, Brotherhood, NCR, Legion.. it doesn't matter, any of them will fuck up raiders if they move into their territory.

Here?s an idea; how about if the player gets the fuck them up? I like my shooting games to have some shooting. This is part of what I meant when I say I feel F3 had better combat.

In other words you're willing to do all the writing for them in your head even if the game makes little to no sense. In that case the Mass Effect 3 ending was the best of all time. Because it's so empty you can just imagine your own ending in its place.

No. I?m not willing to do ?all the writing.? I may as well not play a game at all. I just don?t feel it?s necessary to spell out every little thing for people. NV had way too much dialogue and F3 was already pushing it.

Also, the ending of a three part trilogy and the economy of one of about a dozen NPC villages is very different. ME3 gave me nothing to work with. The Fallout games gave me more than enough to infer most of the things that the over-critical say don?t make sense.

I don?t need every tiny thing explained to me like I?m some sort of idiot with too much time to waste shifting through way too many conversation trees. I can make assumptions and judgements and infer the small missing pieces.

Again, intricate detail isn't necessary. Having an NPC say "We clean and repair weapons here. It isn't much, but it gets us by." is not intricate detail, it's a thin justification that allows the player to maintain suspension of disbelief.

And for every NPC that says that, there?s then a barrage of people asking:
?How do they get the materials and training to clean those weapons??
?Where do they buy all their supplies??
?Who do they trade with??
?How can they sustain their population??
?How do they deal with inflation??
?IT MAEKS NOO SNESE. My immersion is drowning.?

And this would need to be explained for every aspect of every settlement. Maybe even every NPC. The game would grind to a halt and get dull. There?s already plenty to work with and make connections. But I must admit, it?s great to see people really exploring the depths of these games.

When a primary theme of the game is 'resources are scarce, life out here sucks' there need to be explanations as to how certain areas acquire resources and continue living.

I feel the explanations given are adequate and I can join the dots for the rest. I want to use my imagination a little bit because things in life aren?t explained. But using this as a stick to beat the games with is unfair.

I do give it a chance. I just don't give everything a blank pass if it makes no sense. I'm not asking for intricate details, either, I'm asking for bare-bones justifications.

Bare-bones justifications are very easy to reach. Can?t you just assume certain things? Do you really need the Tenpenny economy explained to you rather than just assuming ?they?re rich, they get by.?

Little Lamplight, Big Town, Tenpenny Tower and Canterbury Commons do -not- make sense.

They all make perfect sense. If you want to grill me go for it. I kind of geeky about this sort of thing.

[Tone] It's all about balance. If the game is too serious it might as well just be any other shooter. If it's too zany it might as well be a cartoon.

Right.

No crashing: That'd be nice. Won't happen.

I?m asking for better performance. These two games are some of the worst. And you think it won?t be improved? If Skyrim?s anything to go by you might be right.

Anyway, I hope this doesn?t come across as harsh. I?m sure I read some where you admitted you were a bit too nitpicky and all this is just shooting the breeze.

But I strongly feel these games deserve the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Pandabearparade]

Maybe. The real problem for me is the whole ?200 years? thing.

Eh.. there isn't any undoing that, unfortunately. Bethesda isn't going to rewind.

=
Fallout 3 had better characters. That?s what I feel. I?m not going to waste time giving a list of names because that just feels empty and weak. I just do. Overall, NV had lacklustre and interchangeable characters whilst F3 erred more to silliness. Voice acting was much better to.

Some of the voice acting was better, in my opinion, and some was garbage. I don't know what the lady doing Dr. Li's voice was smoking. Malcolm McDowell and Liam Neeson were both excellent, as always. Mr. McDowell can make even the most retarded lines sound like Shakespeare.

The combat in Fallout 3 is absolutely excellent. And it?s certainly better than NV. ?Dated? is a meaningless word that it feels like it could be just as much praise as criticism. If you?re up for it, I need more details.

I'm not sure how you can say Fallout 3 had combat that was so much better than New Vegas. It's almost identical, except New Vegas has iron sights and more guns. Without mods I can't stand the combat in either game.

While we?re at it there?s a bunch more stuff we could wish for. But I get 80-odd hours out of each F3 play-through. That?s good enough for me. But this is mostly me rueing the invisible walls of NV which take away a lot of freedom.

There's a mod to remove those. And add dozens of bounty quests. And.. well, mods can fix most of the problems with New Vegas. Maybe that's why I like New Vegas to much more - I can just mod away all of the problems.

Here?s an idea; how about if the player gets the fuck them up? I like my shooting games to have some shooting. This is part of what I meant when I say I feel F3 had better combat.

You do get to, you're missing my point entirely here. The raiders exist in New Vegas, they're just actual factions and not generic 'raiders'. Powder Gangers and Fiends are raiders, and they have their own territory. Humans are territorial creatures, so it makes sense that raiders would have their own turf and be raiding other areas to steal stuff from more civilized people.

I'm being Captain Nitpick here, but in Fallout 3 there were a -lot- more raiders than civilized people. The raiders don't have much to raid.

No. I?m not willing to do ?all the writing.? I may as well not play a game at all. I just don?t feel it?s necessary to spell out every little thing for people. NV had way too much dialogue and F3 was already pushing it.

This is Fallout- dialogue is important. That's like saying Civilization has you managing too many cities. That's kind of an inextricable part of the experience.

Also, the ending of a three part trilogy and the economy of one of about a dozen NPC villages is very different.

A completely fair counterpoint.

I don?t need every tiny thing explained to me like I?m some sort of idiot with too much time to waste shifting through way too many conversation trees. I can make assumptions and judgements and infer the small missing pieces.

If you don't like the conversations I don't know why you like Fallout. Again, dialogue is a key part of the experience. Without the dialogue Fallout is just a poorly balanced shooter without multiplayer.

And for every NPC that says that, there?s then a barrage of people asking:
?How do they get the materials and training to clean those weapons??

Self evident. They live in the Capital Wasteland, there is no shortage of scrap.

?How can they sustain their population??

They found a crate full of Viagra. A big one.

?How do they deal with inflation??

The gold standard. Or the water standard, since the Brotherhood destroyed the gold reserves.

And this would need to be explained for every aspect of every settlement.

Again, moderation. It's possible to go overboard and explain too much. It's also possible to explain nothing and make no sense.

I feel the explanations given are adequate

We'll have to agree to disagree on that point.

Bare-bones justifications are very easy to reach. Can?t you just assume certain things? Do you really need the Tenpenny economy explained to you rather than just assuming ?they?re rich, they get by.?

The thing is, you aren't "rich" if you don't have anyone to buy from. Tenpenny Tower is isolated and reclusive and inclined to bomb their nearest trading partner for, you know, reasons.

Maybe you're fine with them just magically getting restocked, but I don't think the explanations given are sufficient.

They all make perfect sense. If you want to grill me go for it. I kind of geeky about this sort of thing.

I'll retract the statement on Canterbury. They're a trade hub, they get a pass. The rest? Yeah, they make no sense. Little Lamplight can be twisted into making sense if you assert some rather unsavory things involving reproduction and the medical skills of ten year olds.

I?m sure I read some where you admitted you were a bit too nitpicky and all this is just shooting the breeze.

To an extent. Despite all of my many, many complaints Fallout 3 still easily makes my top ten games of all time. That doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement.

 

[katsabas]

Better stealth and a hardcore mode like the one in New Vegas. Also, make ammo and utilities more scarce.

 

[spikeyjoey]

Duel wielding is a no-brainer (pistol + katana - hell yeah).. also makes pistols more of a valid option

Also, I know this will never happen, but I like the idea of Fallout: London - lots of Condemned style lead pipe skirmishes in dimly lit subway tunnels! Also would make guns that much rarer / more powerful ... running around in swat armour with an Mp5 would make you feel Godlike as opposed to just slightly above average..


I would also quite like to see the Real Time Settler mod (http://newvegas.nexusmods.com/mods/36922) implemented well...

After Fallout 1 the PC starts a settlement, and in most open world RPG's the world can get a bit dull once you have done most of the quests.. the idea of starting your own colony and gradually building its power is quite appealing to me

also, not sure if this has been mentioned, but ARMOUR MODS!!

there is already a neat mod that allows you to make custom armour by mish mashing all the various straps, spikes etc from raider armour and whatnot...

the idea of buying smoke spiked shoulder pauldrons (from metal armour) and slapping them on your leather armour is pretty cool.. (and realistic - its what id do in the post apocalyptic future )