Fallout 4

Hahahahaha. No.

Unless you mean Gamebyro has, since the creation engine is just gamebryo with a new name, in which case yes it has.

Yeah, that's what I meant.

There's basically no changes, right?

Some downgrades to the animation system.

Upgrades to the coding system, but at the cost of a glitch that would make me scream in agony if they were working under me. (It never purges fulty scrips, and saves them in the save file, so even if you remove them from the game, they will never go away, hence the massive save file bloat of upwards of 90megs you can get with mods, yet fallout never went over 8) combine that glitch with a lack of multithreading and it can get to the point where it takes 4-5 seconds for a script to respond if it ever does....

Other then that its the exact same engine they have been using for 10 years, and probaly will continue to use.

Dont get me wrong, I would love to see them switch to Unreal 4 or Frostbite 3, I just am pretty sure they wont.

edited 7th Feb '14 4:25:46 PM by Imca

Other then that its the exact same engine they have been using for 10 years, and probaly will continue to use.

Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. However, the engine they currently use is associated with game breaking bugs and hilarious acts of bad AI and scripting errors (but really, that's not entirely the engines fault so much as it is the lack of playtesters).

edited 9th Feb '14 1:38:13 PM by Bagrick

Doubly so if they got rid of the problems you mentioned. Basically made the PS 3 versions of Fallout, Skyrim etc the worst ones.

That was more a function of the (mustn't swear, mustn't swear) er... silly way that Sony actually built that thing. Split memory pools and not enough of the stuff to begin with. And a marchitecthure that made programming ANY game for the beggar much more of a problem than it should otherwise have been.

You could have the skills of David Braben, Harvey Spector and fricking Lex Luthor combined and you would still struggle to get a decent game out of it without one hell of an effort.

The PS 4 should be a helluva lot more easy to build games for, what with it just being an AMD desktop machine in drag...

So was it down more to the architecture of the PS 3 that made it so bad? Huh.

Yup. If you study the history of the PS 3 it is littered with stories of just how difficult the bloody thing was to make games with. Some studios rose above that, some didn't. Obsidian and Bethesda's engine being what it was, i.e. built for the PC, made sure they were going to be struggling from the start. I had much less bother with the X Box 360 version of Fallout 3 than I did with the PS 3 version of Fallout New Vegas because the Xbox is basically a PC in a stupidly small overheated and underventilated box.

No Fallout 4 at Gamescom. Really, people need to stop getting their hopes up.

Anyway, here's my wishlist for Fallout 4.

• Dual-wielding. Duh.

• Keep all the gameplay improvements New Vegas added, like the companion wheels, the return of traits, the revamp of the speech checks, the way each companion gave you a unique perk, the reputation system and disguises, weapon modding, etc.

• Since Skyrim added a Pickpocket skill tree, they should bring back Steal from the earlier Fallout games. (and they shouldn't merge Barter into Speech like Skyrim did...)

• Related to the above, they really need to add the Misdirection/Perfect Touch perks to Fallout 4. It's just absolutely hilarious and fun. Oh, and Unbreakable, that's essential.

• New Vegas did a really good job of making every skill have conversation checks (and even perks and attributes), but it still should be expanded, it just makes it feel like your skills actually matter which is awesome.

• I do like being a cartoon supervillain sometimes, but they really need to stop making moral choices so black and white. The factions too.

• The ability to craft and improve clothing and armor, and a larger variety of fancy outfits and accessories.

• A toggle helmet option.

• Keep the level cap from FNV Ultimate Edition.

• Make the game more...action RPG-like. I mean, improve the third-person camera (A LOT, it sucks), add dodging/rolls and a cover system, make melee/unarmed combat faster and more responsive and dynamic like an actual action game...Not that I think they'd ever do that, it'd just be nice. >.>

• A real next-gen engine. Again, they'd probably never do that. :T

• More wacky humor and off-kilter characters. Moira Brown was great, but that wasn't enough.

Why not merge barter into speech, does any one use it as any thing but a dumpstat?

Not really used on checks, or any thing but making cash, which once you start getting the game becomes too easy any way...

It has about 30 checks actually.

But hmm...You have a point. I just liked the flavor.

Maybe they could merge Barter into a new skill, maybe called Scavenger. It'd let you find more caps and ammo, and better loot in general.

That is actually an idea I could approve of myself, it keeps the flavor and makes the skill more useful.

I dont remember the checks though, I should probaly look them up.

....

Also am I the only one who wants the return of the big guns skill? but with more gun options for it?

edited 12th Jul '14 10:45:34 AM by Imca

Why no Fallout 4 news?

When will we finally see it?

Supposedly they're still "experimenting with ideas".

So at least they're in the concept phase, that's something I guess.

But anyway, my guess is we might first hear something about it around 2015.

Yay for Bethesda still not making the game I don't want Bethesda to make!

Seriously though, my opinion is probably unpopular, but I'd like to see something similar to original Fallout 3 aka Van Buren in gameplay wise. Aka good old classic crpg

Nah, I liked Van Buren sadly NV is probaly the closest were going to get to it, considering a good chunk of ideas were recycled into it.

....

Although are you watching Wasteland 2 in that case?

edited 12th Jul '14 11:32:13 AM by Imca

Ya, I was one of kickstarter backers so I now have access to beta when every backer got it while ago

It seems to be highly awesome so far. I actually enjoy combat more than fallout combat, but that might be because I always avoided putting combat skill points in favor of diplomacy skills so I always had 20% to hit and had to save scum to survive until I got to point with power armor and when I could put skill points enough into important combat skills :P

Anyway, rambling, it seems cool so far though I do have to admit that I feel like that some areas that are accessible to early access might be some sort of design test areas. I mean, one sidequest area starts of with you having to figure out how to save drowning person without hints and having a time limit(well, I didn't think of pausing :P). Oh and even if you figure out one solution, you can accidentally kill him if you don't pay enough attention. And later on same area there is minor sidequest which ends badly if you didn't pay attention to back to what is on scenery and used skill on it. So yeah, I have this strange feeling that this whole optional area is quest design test on those type of quests xP

edited 12th Jul '14 11:38:28 AM by SpookyMask

I saw on the latest update on Wasteland 2 they said the final game would not include a Silent Move skill or aimed shots, and they're not adding traits or perks either.

Sneak is always my favorite skill in games that have it, and I love traits and perks.

And I've heard from others that the combat has no tactical depth at all.

I hope Pillars of Eternity and Torment: Tides of Numenera will turn out better.

Big Guns has been a useless skill ever since the first game. I'd rather not see it again.

Wasteland isn't Fallout after all, so it makes sense for it to not have "Aim at the crotch".

Also, sneaking skill is pointless when avoiding enemies is done just by avoiding their line of sight by going around them behind wall :P I mean, it never really makes sense that if you have enough skill points, you can somehow walk in front of enemy without them seeing you. So the way Wasteland 2 does sneaking is fine by me

And don't trust on other people's word for it. Though I doubt(I save scummed a lot like I said :P But I don't think you really had much of opportunity. I mean, please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Fallout 1 and 2 just basically about whether you want to kill enemy with minigun, shoot them with bullets in funny places, energy blast or explosives and combat is all about how big hit chance is?) Fallout 1 and 2 had much of tactical debt besides "Shoot the enemy until it dies", but Wasteland 2 does have different firearm skills, hight differences, etc. Seriously, define "combat depth" does that mean "Combat is easy"? "Combat is so complex I don't know how to punch the enemy?" "There are dozen magic skills to use to do things at enemy?" Seriously, define "combat depth".

edited 12th Jul '14 12:13:23 PM by SpookyMask

You could make it less usless though by including better, and more usable big guns.

like say, a recharger cannon, how they miniaturized that thing is beyond me in the first place.

I'm still ticked out by random person saying "I heard [x] from people who have actually played the thing I haven't played, I'll proceed to make statement about how much I wish those other projects don't fail despite the fact those people's words might not be accurate due to variety of things" scenarios :P 1) Game isn't released 2) Which version did those people play 3) How do those people define it? Etc, so many things that annoy my mind

(Also, I kinda hate term "deep" and variations nowadays. I mean, honestly, Twilight fans use that term of twilight for example. Term has lost its meaning when people use it to describe "good" without actually defining what is "depth", kinda like when people use term Mary Sue to describe female characters they don't like when its just about badly written characters...)

edited 12th Jul '14 12:17:31 PM by SpookyMask

I mean, it's supposed to be a tactical RPG. So tactics is supposed to be a pretty important part of combat right? But I've heard that in terms of providing tactical combat it does that pretty poorly.

Anyway, my concern is that there's a mixed response from people who've played it. For the most part, these people were hardcore old fans who were backers of the Kickstarter a couple years ago.

If your core audience, the people who were big fans of your older games and were happy to hear of this project, are conflicted about the game, that gives me a bad message.

Again, is that from recent version or old version? And again, you didn't say why they think that.

Heck, I see nothing wrong with it so I'm kinda confused here about what they want .-. I have played original two fallouts and wasteland 1 too and I'm not really how those games are better combat wise

edited 12th Jul '14 12:33:25 PM by SpookyMask

The most recent version.

And do I really have to explain other peoples' opinions in detail? It's not like I'm trying to argue or anything, or write a review or something. Just saying that's why I'm kind of apprehensive about it.

Really though, you should calm down, you're taking this too personally. Relax, I'm not out to get you or anything. :P