I have never been less enthusiastic about a BGS release. Regardless of the mod situation, i do believe this is now permanently on the "GOTY from a sale" list for me.

Well, it's a good thing i'm not invested in this series

There were no percentages next to speech checks in NV. You either made them or you didn't.

Absolutely no dice rolls save in gambling and VATS.

You sure you played that game?

Good effort on trying to back peddle though, the game you are thinking of was fallout 3. And it has the same sway that is quite easy to compensate for by crouching down.

As for combat being developed first; game design was much different back then (even if that is true). While I highly doubt they said lets make a turn based RPG, and then happened to set it in the fallout universe, games change over time and so does interest.

Not many people enjoy that combat style, and art changes through the years. Video games are a medium of art, and changed.

Well, I just preordered. The game, from what we know, isn't my ideal but it's close enough.

Looks like a solid game.

For a shooter.

I don't preorder games because I just really don't see the point, but I will be getting it. They've made some design choices I disagree with, but I hardly expect them to keep everything the same between games.

It is a Fallout game by name, but it shares no resemblance to the series other than few names. It's a ok if people like that, but that doesn't really change anything. The series has went from a cRPG to an open world first person action simulator.

Does it matter when they don't have a choice?

I just listed exactly what it shares.

We've got RPG elements, and everything in the fallout universe. Your argument is just 'no it doesn't' but you haven't provided any evidence save for some vague nonsense.

If you're going to argue that it doesn't...well..you kind of need an argument.

Not some head shaking and covering your ears;that's just childish.

@gizmo, you know constructive criticism is a thing. I know it's fun to believe that they are trying to cover themselves instead of being professional and actually enjoying a successful game but you're gonna have to do better than that.

It's your word against theirs, and they said they approve. So now you're telling them they don't?

This is so stupid I'm not even sure how you think that's an appropriate argument.

I don't back-peddle.

For some reason Sawyer loves his thresholds, but in FO3, the skills had a percentile, and worked [afaik] the way the skills in a Fallout tile are supposed to.

At the core, dice represent situational probability, and in Fallout 1 & 2, they represented aim and other factors. In FO3, the randomization represented aiming skill (and presumably other factors). That is the same thing conceptually, and technically.

If you're going to argue that it doesn't...well..you kind of need an argument.

Fallout was intended that the player had freedom, but had accountability. There is no such concept in Bethesda titles. Bethesda title do seek and intend to more to offer a Westworld style simulation experience, rather than a Fallout style RPG, and all that entails.

Yes. A few names. But no functionality.

A lot of games these days have "RPG elements", yet are not RPG's. So that does nothing. Fallout had specific sort of functionality, and that is now gone even further from where it was already.

Fallout 4 shares all but skills and traits with the originals.

So I guess that makes a fallout game then.

Not the setting, or making a character, or making choices. Just traits and skills.

I mean, silly IGN, or game spot or Bethesda or any video game journalist. They are very confused when calling fallout an RPG.

Clearly you have some secret, well kept knowledge that can only come from playing mediocre turn based RPGS made in the 90s

Got it.

@Gizmo, I'm sorry, considering you seem to think you know what the people who made fallout actually meant when they complimented Bethesda, better then themselves even, I can't take you seriously. You have yet to formulate anything remotely resembling an actual argument. To dismiss 3 or 4 as having no accountability is just being willfully ignorant.

What ever you say. You are clearly not grasping the point which would be clear if you only looked at the games and how they worked. I'm sure you'll have lots of fun with Fallout 4.

Not at all... I don't know any of them; but I... have watched all the interviews.

FO4 is an educated guess... That seems to be what they want to make; it certainly seems that from the demo.
FO3... Well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXJX-tnuZ0c
(You can even shoot these guys in the face, and later ask them to join up.)

Oh Jesus.

"I'm not going to play this game because it has a stereotypical 50's family in what is one of the better progressevive game series!"

Lol. People and their gender-rage.

I'll probably post my thoughts later, but I was wondering if anyone else noticed during the weapon crafting section that there was a science requirement for energy weapons? Maybe skills are still in the game.

It's a ranked perk (it says Science Rank 1 required or something). You can count on it.

What a way to make a point.

Oh, wait, you didn't make one, funny how I failed to grasp what isn't there.

@Gizmo, those character's are essential to the story being told in FO3, one which paints those characters as good guys. In 1 or 2 they would have sat indoors all day, unable to be attacked or interacted with, so you didn't have much choice to shoot them now would you.

I guess the lack of choice = accountability? And I guess in the interviews the winked at the camera, at you specifically, to let you know it was all a ruse.

I can't believe I'm entertaining such ridiculous logic. Have you ever taken a course on debating? Or read a book about it? Or even a wikipedia page. I can point you to one for some pointers if you'd like because, man, you've got a lot of reading to catch up on.

It's everything I wanted in terms of features. I like that your SPECIAL choices will be more meaningful than in previous games.

What's with the obsession about the dog btw? It reminds me of Fable 2.

Oh, that's awful then! How can they just drop one of the fundamental aspects of character creation?

Don't use them then; [still... it's bad design].
Pick any NPC's you like in the game. You can rob and shoot at anyone in any town, and all is forgiven for donating water to a vagrant, and letting the targeted NPCs cool off for a day.

Because they only need avatars.

I was unsure about the voiced protagonist, but after seeing and hearing it in action...I'm all for it.

First game I will ever pre-order in my life.

That's the direction they want to take the series towards. There's no room anymore for more nuanced character customization; but there is room for all sorts of fluff like tower defense features.

I think you are just looking at it the wrong way. Fallout 3 was a reboot. That makes Fallout 4 a reboot of a reboot. At least that's how I see it.