Fallout 4

I dont preffer none of them, I preffer to hear my videogames music with a mod

Watch the double negatives! You aint saying nothing right-like!

I very rarely use mods. I used them a lot more in the past, but now I've got this issue where I don't feel right about playing a game unless it's in it's official form. Unofficial patches are an exception. And Source Engine games.

Even with console games, I won't swap out music unless I've beaten it at least once.

edited 12th Jan '13 7:51:11 PM by Ryuhza

To be honest, I really preferred F3's Post-Apocalypse aesthetic over FNV's Pseudo-Cowboy-Ratpack gig.

Mods are the reason of why I still have Oblivion and Fallout 3 installed,

Problems is that FO 3 looked like the bombs hit again rather then a post-apocalyptic world,

edited 12th Jan '13 10:25:32 PM by LOEADITOOx

except it made no sense.

You're gonna tell me its been 200 years since the bombs hit and all these abandoned buildings that nobody is using are still standing? really?

By whose standards? This isn't early 20th century technology, It merely looks like it.

It's also justifiable with it being a fairly recognisable part of the Zeerust and Post-apocalyptic setting.

edited 12th Jan '13 10:40:16 PM by UltimatelySubjective

Yeah, the point is the atmosphere. Who cares about hard realism when you have mutants and lasers and SCIENCE! ? Atmosphere (atomsphere? ) is what made Fallout 3 truly great. New Vegas leaned too heavily on its roots, and partially as a result of that I'm more interested in the gameplay and characters than the setting (of New Vegas) itself.

Granted, the only reedemable thing about FO 3 was the world

I didn't know leaning too heavily on your roots can be a bad thing. >_>.

Really though after 200 years it shouldn't look like pre-FO 1...

By 200 years a lot of the radiation will be gone. If anything, the Capital Wasteland should be covered with lots and lots of plants. In another couple hundred years, people could bring back the world to what it once was.

Mods are cool- IF you have a PC. And even if you do, you might have already gotten the console game.

edited 13th Jan '13 5:08:19 AM by T448Eight

Fallout runs on SCIENCE! not any actual science. and if I'm remembering the back story right the cold war never ended. They spent basically a century nuke proofing everything. The damn robots work fine 200 years later, why would a building have fallen down?

FNV's game improvements are a big part of why I enjoy it more then FO 3 but I sunk more then 500 hours into both of them so -shrug-.

I like skyrim more then FNV though, so if the trend keeps steady FO 4 should be my new favorite.

I dont think that Skyrim should be the example that FO 4 must follow, it lacks of any depth and the plot is average at best, also, no multiple endings

Well you know man, that's just your opinion.

@T 448 Eight, on plant life and radiation: Beth knew that and chose to intentionally ignore that...

edited 13th Jan '13 7:23:22 AM by onyhow

It lacks depth? Have you seen the multi-page lore discussions? As for the ending...what ending? There's a MQ but that isn't meant to be an end to the story...

F03 had a ton of ways to finish quests and I don't see why they'd change that. They're pretty good about the two series being different styles. TES is about exploration and murder while fallout is about quests and murder.

Does this thread need to be 99% complaining? -_-

It has to do with beth, so yes.

As I learned from other games released this year: the more a franchised is loved, the more you'll get people bashing it for any flaws.

Believe it or not, the old Fallout games are more like TES then the new Fallout games.

New Fallout- Quests and fighting

Old Fallout- Explore and sometimes fight

I'm surprised everytime a new game is announced, theirs massive complaining. Dead Space 3, new Final Fantasy, and just about anything else that got looked upon will be bashed before it comes out.

edited 13th Jan '13 7:46:52 AM by T448Eight

Im not complaining, I just want that New Vegas and to a lesser extent the possitives aspect of Skyrim to be taked in account

Both games had their strengths, to me ideally Bethesda and Obsidian would co-develop but oh well.

skyrim with guns?

could you please put it in even more unappealing terms?

fallout new vegas essentially was skyrim with guns as far as i can tell. if thats all they've got then they either need to step up their game significantly or try to give us more to do. y'know, considering the games are supposed to be sandboxes, but i just dont see much point in sandboxes if by the end of the 3rd town or so youve essentially done every function in the game at least once...give us more to work for!

anyway spooky mentioned fallout 2's approach to ending quests in a multitude of ways (and then proceeded to give a shitty example) right? new reno is a pretty good example imo. you can work for any family (even the one comprised entirely of actual family) and become their made man (and get a nifty title with benefits for it), you can work for all of them and/or undermine all of them, you can skyrocket one family to success and control, and you can control to which degree of success they can reach.

on top of that there quite a few ways to undermine or help each family, from simple assassination of family heads (again in a multitude of various ways) which automatically cuts the family down to 0 power, to simply doing jobs (vary between taking or giving 20 to 1 or 5 points) and killing a bartender, casino bouncer, generic guard or unnamed adult Wright, each taking 1 point from the family said npc belonged to.

and finally, new reno has ten seperate endings and this is just one location in the game and one set of major questlines. even smaller quests have multiple ways to go about it, usually more than just two complete opposites.

so yeah.

regarding TES; morrowind was good. but the combat and balance was horrid. its only gotten better since then. and did someone really say oblivion was considered the best in the series nowadays?

how...baffling. i know this is subjective but...i could have sworn morrowind, shitty as the gameplay actually is, visibly aged and incredibly slow as it is, was the most popular, thanks to the setting, lore, quests and a main plot with multiple ways to go about it that was not a total idiot plot (oh and mods. lots and lots of mods. primarily relating to house telvanni, cuz they're awe- no wait, thats just me) whereas oblivion has memetically bad graphics, terrible writing, generally dull setting, a seriously buggy engine and pathetically inconsistant voice acting, and a plot full of idiocy, most of all that part where the guy who is a veteran blade member compels you to give him the mac guffin- only to put it in a drawer or chest in an unlocked room rather than on his person where he could fight to protect it...

anyway, about the whole "hp lovecraft" thing near boston in 4...i...would be fine with that. not only do i like hp love craft inspired work, i think it would give beth some freedom to use their specialty for lore to make something fascinating.

oh and i forgot to mention it but...i want more clothing slots. while TES has steadily been lowering the number of pieces clothes come in, the fallout series appears to be steadily increasing it (at like, the rate of 2 new pieces every 2 games) and thats something id like to praise. because i am a total dress up whore.

edited 13th Jan '13 10:38:34 AM by Tarsen

I think FO 4 will be more like New Vegas than Skyrim on alot of levels. If anything, one particular questline in Skyrim showed that they are ready to start working on multiple ending quests: The Civil War. That and the indepedent hold crimes showed they've learned alot from working with Obsidian. If you don't believe me on that, go mention it in the Skyrim thread and see if a discussion not unlike the Legion/NCR/House ones in the New Vegas thread pops up. And thats most because the lore behind it is rediculously complex and developed (Thalmor influence on the war, ethics of the Imperials and Stormcloaks, relgious beliefs), so I think Bethesda has it in them to make Fallout 4 interesting.

That said, they need to do more character development of traveling companions. Skyrim would have been alot better if they had cut down on the travelling companions to about maybe a dozen and given them all a questline for them like New Vegas did with the Courier's band of misfits. Serana in Dawnguard seemed like them experimenting with that.

If anything, I'm going to be cautiously optimistic about Fallout 4 because I'm seeing Bethesda explicitly trying to go beyond the safe zone of late. Sometimes they succeed (Civil War questline) and other times they bomb miserably (marriage) but they're trying for once.

@Linaewin- I thought the lore was easy to find, and Skyrim was where it was lacking. For me, theirs two chances.

Fallout 4 will be no different from 3, and will just have a different spin on things.

Fallout 4 will be improved from 3 in a distinctive way.