Follow TV Tropes

Following

Fallout 4

Go To

VeryMelon Since: Jul, 2011 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#15651: Sep 23rd 2017 at 4:51:06 PM

The mod in question removes the creation club option and news feed from the main menu.

Nikkolas from Texas Since: Dec, 2009 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#15652: Sep 23rd 2017 at 10:04:29 PM

So now this game has been out for years, what is the general consensus on how it stacks up to the other Fallouts, the post-Black Isle ones specifically?

Also what are personal opinions on its quality vs. FO 3?

Balmung Since: Oct, 2011
#15653: Sep 23rd 2017 at 11:46:44 PM

First, a disclaimer that I never played the DLC.

At the very least, I often thought "man, I really wish this game did X like New Vegas". I don't think I ever wished it was instead more like Fallout 3. Aside from the dialog system being garbage and using a boring family motivation again, 4 is consistently better than 3.

Mechanically, 4 is a lot of steps forward from New Vegas and a lot of steps backwards. For example, the expanded crafting system is great, but the loss of varied ammo types feels like a big step back. The new Power Armor system is great, except aforementioned crafting system renders it nearly obsolete, since you can give street clothes nearly the same functional DR and you can actually gain enough strength that wearing power armor makes you weaker. Gear not breaking (except power armor), insisting on DR over DT is not (DR means more DPS is always better, while DT means that more damage per shot can be better in some cases, but not all). Settlement building is great, any schmuck being able to hop in your power armor and make it their property forever is not. The pipe guns are great for filling early weapons lists, but the small size of the difference between the bolt-action pipe rifle and a proper hunting rifle is kind of WTF, as is the fact that guns that can be pistols or rifles weigh far less than guns that are always rifles. Grouping guns by use (pistol, rifle, full-auto, and heavy) makes more sense than kinetic/energy or small/big/energy and was a good call, but littering the game with essential characters was not such a good call. The return of non-pass/fail stat/skill checks was also a step back.

From a story perspective, I appreciate the increased grayness compared to 3 (4 factions ranging from A Lighter Shade of Gray to pretty close to actually evil instead of Knight in Shining Armor vs Card-Carrying Villain), but at the same time, the greatly reduced options to be a dick (or just kind of a dick) are kind of disappointing, since it means that despite being more gray as a story, on a day to day basis, it's pretty much either be goody-goody two-shoes or KILL EVERYTHING (except like a third of the wasteland's population is exempt from death).

edited 24th Sep '17 12:01:20 AM by Balmung

InkDagger Since: Jul, 2014
#15654: Sep 24th 2017 at 12:28:49 AM

I generally see the concensus as New Vegas is at the top with 4 usually above 3 but that varries some times.

Fallout 4 is beautiful graphically and the gameplay/AI has had some much needed updates, but it does have some problems. There are some parts of the Gamebryo engine that just need to be updated because the engine, even if they've been updating it, just kind of can't keep up with some other games.

Combat wise, the major issue is that combat is approached the same way almost every time and not varried enough. Maybe this is just me since I favor sneak-snipers in most games, but I never really felt like I had to change up how I approached every encounter. That's not always a bad thing, but I would have liked something more unique every so often. Thank god the AI doesn't just charge you like the last two games.

I don't want to give F4 credit for Settlements exactly. That... I don't know if the New Vegas mod was the reason it was added, but I don't feel like I can give the game full credit. Either way, Settlement crafting sometimes felt tedious and cumbersome. There's a reason why, on PC, I just give myself crafting materials. Not out of laziness, but because I already end up spending DOZENS of hours crafting my settlements and I really don't need even MORE filler to find the materials for them. And building in first person is finicky and hard to do since I can't get anything to sit straight. I guess it makes it feel 'real', but its annoying since I can't build in a straight line on a plot some times because I'm a micrometer off.

Plot wise... New Vegas is simply stronger. It has less elements or parts, but it had a more coheasive whole. The player character is a blank slate with only a couple of constraints: You were on a Courier job, you've done at least one (two if you have DLC), and there's a few smaller ones here and there. Otherwise, the game accounts for a lot of details, perks, and stats in the dialogue and conversation and regularly does so with extremely divergent and memorable quests. Also, almost every quest builds into the game's main themes and especially so with the different factions: The Legion is superior strength but at the cost of... basically everything else, Mr. House is security at the cost of freedom, NCR leans more to the morally good but is spread thin compared to everyone else, and the Wild Card basically is composed of every choice you make through the game as to if you're a good person or not.

Fallout 4's story is... weak and feels conflicted. It has the RPG parts of previous games, but uses them FAR less than New Vegas and 3 did separately. It also clearly has points where it dictates exactly what it wants you to do. You have to be some leaning towards heterosexual (because child), you have to be military or a lawyer (and, no, the female sole survivor isn't military as the USS Constituion quest tells us), upper middle class, and a few others. The dialogue options for quests usually have some variation of 'Yes', 'Sarcastic Yes', 'Ask a question'/'Semi-Yes'/'Maybe', and 'No (but you get the quest anyway)'. Hell, the opening narration is voiced by the male protagonist BECAUSE the game hasn't given you the choice of character yet. If you pick female, WHY narrativly is the opening voiced by the male? No real reason.

There are multiple times where the game clearly has a position it wants to put you in regardless of how the player actually wants to respond or feel about the problem given to them. For example, the meeting with Father for the first time should objectivly had more dialogue options if just because the emotions in that scene could be all over the place due to the complexity. And the dialogue just doesn't have that.

The narrative also has to bend itself backwards and outright ignore certain events or at least not let you confront them over it to make the Institute faction someone you can side with. Besides the bit plot twist elephant in the room, there's little to no narrative build up to that rational. The BOS vs. Railroad mostly comes down to 'Are Synths human?' and pick accordingly. The Institute the 90% of the narrative builds up as the bad guy? It doesn't add up really...

And let's not even get started on how the M. Men, while probably the most build up of any faction, basically don't give a shit about any Synths or themes the game had been built up and effectly gives the questions the game asks of the player a non-answer.

The companions start off fine, but don't feel deep enough. I don't want to say anything like Fallout New Vegas' companions were better, but it also felt like some had development specifcally tied to choices during their quests. Piper has a good start to her as a companion and so does Preston. But, once they become companions and the main plot moves on, they plateau and don't move anywhere. The player learns more about them, but they themselves don't change much at all. I'd say the Number One exception to this is Cait because I felt she probably had the most genuine development of character. And this is coming as someone who doesn't entirely like Cait. They also seem mostly blase about the main plot and don't react much compared to the Mass Effect/Dragon Age style they were clearly emulating.

Also, while I like the concept of poly relationships, I don't think the execution was genuine. It felt less like the game legitimately treated the relationships as poly or open and more that they simply removed the 'lock in' on the relationships. The game never really acknowledges that you have chosen to love multiple people at once.

The DLC had issues of its own, but the major one is Nuka World and mostly because of how counter it is to everything else. "You get to be a Raider!" The DLC doesn't make sense in a game that kind of makes you be a good guy all the time. Its out of place. If the PC was a blank slate and could be an absolute bastard, fine, but F4's protagonist is too structured to make that work and the switch between Nuka World and the main game is jarring and mood whiplash. Heck, MOST of your companions should abandon you straight out of the park.

What doesn't help it is that the main quest of Nuka World doesn't feel like a legitimate choice. You can go on a multi hour questline to work with the raiders or... One quest where you kill everyone and that's it. I feel VERY pressured into the 'work with the raiders' questline no matter how illogical it is if just because the game clearly wants me to pick that option. The 'Kill everyone' option needed to be clever and, idk, work in a plotline where you work with the raiders to earn trust and eventually either assassinate everyone or get the gangs to take each other out.

Far Harbor's only major issue is that it tries to suggest 'Oh! The survivor could be a synth! You'll never know!' no matter how contradictory that is to the main plot of the game. Bad idea? No. But it makes no sense to the main game at all.

edited 24th Sep '17 12:35:37 AM by InkDagger

TamH70 Since: Nov, 2011 Relationship Status: Faithful to 2D
#15655: Sep 24th 2017 at 5:27:15 AM

I'd put it New Vegas/3, with Fallout 4 a distant third. I've completed every game's DLC package at least once, so I've experienced everything the games could throw at me as per a vanilla game, so you can trust me when I say this - I almost wish I'd never bought Fallout 4, that Far Harbor and Nuka World came out as standalone titles with just the bare minimum of a framing device linking them, and that the follow-up to New Vegas was New Vegas 2.

Fallout 3 is always going to be the first ever Bethesda!Fallout game I ever played, and I loved it at the time and still do. (I'm one of those weird people who can play it on Windows 10, compatibility issues be damned.) That's why I rate that game alongside New Vegas. Both games have their issues, (New Vegas having the worst Bethesda!DLC apart from Horse Armor attached to it being one of them), but as a general sit-down-and-play gaming experience, they're head and shoulders above 4.

Bethesda seemed to ignore all the best bits of New Vegas, and to be embarrassed by the best bits of 3. Which they developed.

Balmung Since: Oct, 2011
#15656: Sep 24th 2017 at 6:40:13 AM

Oh come on, it's not like New Vegas had "Fallout does Call of Duty" (Operation Anchorage) or "TES does Twilight" (Dawnguard) (premise implausible - I'd cut down Bella Serana like all the other vampires before she could dump a quest on me if the game let me) or "Fallout does Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy: A failure in Gray-and-Gray Morality" (The Pitt) or "Fallout invites space aliens to hijack the entire backstory" (Mothership Zeta). Also, from the sound of it, Nuka World needs a lot of absent explanation for why any even somewhat morally upstanding Sole Survivor would suddenly work with raiders instead of mowing them down like the rest. Yes, "Fallout does Survival Horror" (Dead Money, which we all know is the one you're kvetching about (never mind that it isn't even the worst NV DLC - that was Honest Hearts)) was frustrating at times, but it was well-written, had some of the most mechanically interesting enemies in the series, and other than the speakers in the main heist, wasn't even that annoying

Fallout 3 was fun at the time, but New Vegas stands head and shoulders above it, and 4 stands at least shoulders above it, and aside from Broken Steel fixing the incredibly stupid original ending to Fallout 3, its DLC wasn't even good. Fallout 4's biggest faults are from not keeping the good of New Vegas, not from anything it ditched specifically from 3.

Nikkolas from Texas Since: Dec, 2009 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#15657: Sep 24th 2017 at 7:29:31 AM

I played a decent bit of FO 4 and it wasn't anything better than 3 outside of companions. The new dialogue system is total garbage for starters. They really wanted to be Bio Ware but just like how BW really wants to be Bethesda, it just doesn't work.

As for DLC, Operation Anchorage was pretty shit but I at least appreciate the fact it was trying to show what Prewar America was like. And Dead Money is a crime against humanity. Although you're right, Honest hearts was really bad, too.

edited 24th Sep '17 7:34:45 AM by Nikkolas

blkwhtrbbt The Dragon of the Eastern Sea from Doesn't take orders from Vladimir Putin Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: I'm just a poor boy, nobody loves me
The Dragon of the Eastern Sea
#15658: Sep 24th 2017 at 8:09:38 AM

Wtf e y'all on about? Honest hearts was awesome. Zion park was so amazing I almost didn't go back to the Mojave afterwards. Not to mention the .45 guns

Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for you
Balmung Since: Oct, 2011
#15659: Sep 24th 2017 at 8:45:02 AM

It's a buggy mess (no other part of the game crashed nearly as much for me) and .45 is mediocre at best. Hell, if you don't do it at the right level, everyone in the valley has either better or worse gear.

Also, it has the issue of being plot one way, MURDER MURDER MURDER the other way, and it's too easy to accidentally get locked into the killkillkill route.

And I'm salty about how impatient Graham is - get lost for 5 seconds in the last mission and he bails on you.

And beyond all that, it's really short and neither of the first two companions it gives you are all that interesting.

edited 24th Sep '17 8:46:24 AM by Balmung

blkwhtrbbt The Dragon of the Eastern Sea from Doesn't take orders from Vladimir Putin Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: I'm just a poor boy, nobody loves me
The Dragon of the Eastern Sea
#15660: Sep 24th 2017 at 8:48:56 AM

I dunno. I really liked the nice Mormon kid who just wanted to give everybody medicine.

Also, I only don't use automatic weapons for the ammo weight. The .45 pistols can be silenced, and are some of the most powerful silenced holdout weapons. Worth it.

Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for you
Kaiseror Since: Jul, 2016
#15661: Sep 24th 2017 at 9:46:37 PM

I've noticed bethesda seems to go out of their way not to mention the events of fallout 3 outside of some really basic stuff (the lone wanderer not sabotaging project purity or not blowing up the citadel) , the mot probable reason why fallout 4 doesn't mention the lone wanderer at all (something that still annoys me) is so it doesn't upset players that didn't play him/her a certain way. They also do a similar thing with their elder scrolls game.

edited 24th Sep '17 9:54:10 PM by Kaiseror

Yinyang107 from the True North (Decatroper) Relationship Status: Tongue-tied
#15662: Sep 24th 2017 at 9:52:34 PM

Got

... Oh, are we not doing the one word story thing? tongue

Edit: stupid ninja edit, now my post makes no sense.

edited 27th Sep '17 8:21:37 AM by Yinyang107

InkDagger Since: Jul, 2014
#15663: Sep 25th 2017 at 1:27:20 AM

[up][up]Unless they're Bioware, most RP Gs do that.

And I don't know how much longer that trend can go on before it becomes lazy.

JerekLaz Since: Jun, 2014
#15664: Sep 25th 2017 at 2:18:07 AM

It's hard to carry over elements, when some of your story is "player driven" - you have to factor in ever permutation and record dialogue, write alternative lore entries, amend in game logs to reflect etc etc. I can see why they don't do it.

As for ranking, I love NV. I'd love it more if it was a damn sight more stable. It breaks too easily (And that's as much Bethesda's fault as Obsidian not being granted time to optimise). F3 I loved because it introduced me to Fallout properly (I went back and played the originals afterwards... separate feeling).

F4 I love, but it doesn't have the sticking power of the other 2. Something about it just doesn't grip me as much as New Vegas. It gives you a toybox but nothing to really frame those toys around. Crafting makes you able to go out and combat the world - great. But the Settlements are just resource sinks and don't change the world all that much. It's like in Fable - you could own EVERY PROPERTY in the world and even get the whole "King" title... but it meant nothing. Barely any commentary in game. Same goes for Fallout. I think they should've limited the settlement scope in the smaller settlements, then expanded the real design to certain sites - that way people wouldremark on how you've expanded and built out say, Diamond City. Or built a vibrant trading hub.

When we really get to mold the world in an RPG, beyond just being the gopher, courier and sodding hitman-for-hire for every ruddy NPC... then I'll be happy.

If I run a damn Minutemen organisation, I want the option to dispatch THEM to a settlement. OR my fighters guild comrades to go off and clear that cave of trolls. Without ME. Give me that map, let me go and be a bit more world shaping.

Gameplay and Story Segregation I know. But New Vegas never made you the head of a guild or anything until the W Ild Card End Game. So it felt more "believable".

InkDagger Since: Jul, 2014
#15665: Sep 25th 2017 at 4:33:21 AM

Well, what I meant by 'lazy' was more 'The expectations of the genre and evolution of the series needs to be pushed, but it can't because we can't carry the plot across multiple games'.

Take Dragon Age for example. Origins had A LOT of plot flags and it constantly accounted for very very VERY minor dialogue choices and other things. Dragon Age 2 did this a lot less and even less from the original game came up. But, come Inquisition, we have intersections between all three installments bringing choices across three protagonist's journies, a full decade of plot progression, and absolutely countless plotlines that are all moving at once and could be continued or given a middle finger before dropping a bridge on them.

Taken to the logical conclusion, these plot changes will probably reach the point where entire chapters of the plot will be dramatically different due to some character no longer existing since the first game. The feasability of this from a development stand point is debatable, but Inquistion seems to be stepping in that direction so I wouldn't outright deny it.

Meanwhile, Bethesda tends to keep itself anywhere from 'self contained story' to 'STATUS QUO IS GOD' which can be understandably frustrating in comparison to other series' that do more with chocies across a franchise. And if they keep setting their games on the East Coast within distance of each other, its going to be harder to justify why some things just never come up again without canonizing something.

For example, Synths have now become a big part of the setting. They were a one-off thing in Fallout 3, but with a MAJOR plot that structured itself around asking the player if they're alive or not, it would be very strange if they just disappear from the series as quickly as they came, not to mention it'd be stiffling from a writing perspective. Meanwhile, if they don't account for player choice, they would probably end up making an ending canon and that would hit countless road bumps anywhere from 'You canonized the EVIL ending because the BOS won' to 'You're overwiting my choices again and you clearly have a vision for what you want the player to do despite giving us options'.

VeryMelon Since: Jul, 2011 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#15666: Sep 25th 2017 at 4:35:13 AM

I put New Vegas over 3 and 4, but I like playing 4 more than I did 3.

Nikkolas from Texas Since: Dec, 2009 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#15667: Sep 25th 2017 at 4:46:06 AM

There's an "evil" ending in FO 4? From what I saw and what I've heard, FO 4 is Mass Effect Andromeda levels of "can't let you do fun things." I blame all the people who complained about Karma and "stupid evil choices." (which actually just means any choice that isn't hugging bunnies)

On the topic of Karma, I know a guy who grew up playing all the old school WRPG's like Baldur's Gate. He talked about how the "mindset" has changed because, in BG, you could only get certain companions that aligned with your character's, well, Alignment. It doesn't make sense for a Lawful Good Paladin to travel with a Chaotic Evil lunatic.

FO 3, despite its "BETRAYAL!" of the old school RPG's, held fast to this belief with its Karmic requirement of Companions.

FO 4 though represents the changing mindset. Now everyone must see everything. Which means the game will let anyone travel with you. Like, I loved Cait and Hancock but does it make any sense for them to travel with some prissy goody two shoes? Absolutely not.

So Karma was good in terms of immersion and storytelling.

edited 25th Sep '17 4:53:04 AM by Nikkolas

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#15668: Sep 25th 2017 at 5:30:01 AM

I understand why they dropped the Karma system, while still lamenting the loss of verisimilitude. I guess the best way to put it is that the Sole Survivor develops individual loyalties and friendships that go beyond their reputation in the Commonwealth as a whole. For me, the immersion breaking point was that not a single companion got jealous if I slept with another companion, despite me almost always choosing the romantic option at the end of their respective quest chains.

Never was it more clear that the game literally orbits around the player character instead of taking place in a larger world where everyone has independent goals and motivations. I mentally picture them queuing up outside my bedroom at night and taking numbers, while trading stories about how good it was for them.

It was also a bit jarring to see their dialog shifts if I took that option, with Preston Garvey being the most blatant. To have him go from dedicated Minuteman commander to "hello, baby" style casual lover dialog just didn't fit with his character arc.

[up] There's no stark, raving evil ending, but then again I can't recall any other FO games having that sort of ending, either, unless it was a Non-Standard Game Over or you just chose to murder everyone you met. There's always been an element of moral ambiguity to the factions you can choose to align with. Even Caesar's Legion in NV had a slight claim to legitimacy, however dubious most players might find it.

To illustrate this, there was a point in my playthrough of FO4 where I seriously considered siding with the Institute, given that they are/were the only real hope for the Commonwealth ever recovering to its pre-war state and moving on into a technological future, at least without centuries of struggle. My reasons for choosing to betray them ended up being very personal: my character was passionately in love with Curie, whom I'd put in the body of a synth, and so I couldn't stand the idea of a world in which she was considered a slave (never mind vermin to be exterminated).

edited 25th Sep '17 6:24:32 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Nikkolas from Texas Since: Dec, 2009 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#15669: Sep 25th 2017 at 5:45:22 AM

I sadly never did finish FO 4 but the Institute sounds like the Mr. House option here. I too rejected House's promises of a glorious utopian technological future for entirely personal reasons.

Maybe I should think about actually finishing FO 4 once I get my new PC.

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#15670: Sep 25th 2017 at 6:04:42 AM

In NV, I gave up any chance of siding with the Legion (not that I was planning to, but I thought that I might try hearing them out) when I brought Boone with me to their little armistice, not realizing that he'd be automatically hostile to them. Oops. Caesar got his cancer cured, though — with a plasma bolt to the head.

edited 25th Sep '17 6:05:35 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Kiefen MINE! from Germany Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: It's not my fault I'm not popular!
MINE!
#15671: Sep 25th 2017 at 6:06:13 AM

The Institute are a bunch of hypocrites they justify their assassinations and replacements by claiming to be the Commonwealth's only chance for peace. Which is easy to say when they made sure that all other options were smothered in their cribs.

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#15672: Sep 25th 2017 at 6:17:21 AM

[up] Yes, they are, but there's hope that, as their leader, the Sole Survivor could persuade them over time to adopt a more open-minded approach. One of the problems is that the game doesn't provide any signs of that being possible, as Father seems to be offering you up as a figurehead rather than a person with real executive authority and it's quite clear that the various branches have too much invested in their lines of research to be open to change. That as much as anything persuaded me that they were a lost cause.

Meanwhile, the Brotherhood under Maxson is a bunch of cartoonish bigots living out a technological power fantasy. I miss FO3's Brotherhood — they were folks I wouldn't mind siding with. Too bad the Prydwen had a little "accident". That leaves the Minutemen and the Railroad, and while I think Desdemona is a bit too fanatical to make a good political leader of a unified Commonwealth, the Minutemen are a little too passive for my tastes. So I figure I'll try to get 'em both together and see what happens.

edited 25th Sep '17 6:19:40 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Journeyman Overlording the Underworld from On a throne in a vault overlooking the Wasteland Since: Nov, 2010
Overlording the Underworld
#15673: Sep 25th 2017 at 6:23:37 AM

Getting them to work together is the only golden ending. Too bad you HAVE to blow up the Institute if you don't side with them. I'd settle for sleep gassing the entire place and dealing with the scientists on an individual level.

Balmung Since: Oct, 2011
#15674: Sep 25th 2017 at 6:27:16 AM

There's a pretty decent case to be made for both the Institute and BOS being evil options. They're both invading powers (yes, the Institute is technically on, or rather under, Commonwealth soil, but for all practical purposes, it is a foreign power) with serious moral problems. The Institute does stupid shit For Science! (and sometimes just because they don't think things through) like synth gorillas and unleashing hordes of super mutants on the Commonwealth because they apparently couldn't be bothered to terminate their failed experiments (never mind the fact that they abducted random people and dunked then in FEV for dubious scientific gain). The BOS wants to slaughter every ghoul and synth in the Commonwealth, has little to no tolerance for dissent, and the fact that they keep shouting sieg heil ad victoriam is kind of worrisome.

I mean, yes, the Institute claims to offer progress and the BOS claims to offer stability, but the ends do not justify the means. Neither even remotely resembles democratic or otherwise accountable leadership. Both must fall for anyone to establish fair, stable, and accountable leadership.

edited 25th Sep '17 6:29:26 AM by Balmung

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#15675: Sep 25th 2017 at 6:31:08 AM

[up] There's an observation to be made that "democratic, accountable leadership" helped get us into the mess we're in in the first place, what with the nuclear war and all. That's a completely distinct moral argument, however, and it's external to the basic structure of the game's conflict.

As you noted, the Institute's biggest problem is the inherent amorality of its march towards progress, which would discard our fundamental humanity in service of science. What emerges at the far end of their vision might be awesome, but it won't be human. To turn all that tech to good, though... it's a shame it all gets blown up.

[up][up] My concern about "working together" is that there's an awful lot of anti-synth sentiment in the Commonwealth, even after the Institute and the Brotherhood are destroyed, and not without reason. So the problem is getting any democratic system of government that emerges as the Minutemen reclaim the place to recognize synth rights without causing a major conflict. Of course, since synths don't reproduce and the only facility for creating them got blown up, that problem will eventually go away all on its own... unless what's-his-name in Far Harbor figures out how to repair/rebuild them.

As an aside, the Shaun synth that you can take with you at the end... as sweet as it may be to have a replica of my son to hang out with, he's never going to "grow up". It's always going to be a kind of lie for as long as that body exists. Damn the Institute!

edited 25th Sep '17 6:44:19 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Total posts: 16,807
Top