Obviously the gameplay is pretty much set in stone at this point. So can we know if skills have been removed or not?

Or have they done a classic Bethesda and removed all the depth from another game.

Its only a loss if what's removed is not replaced, we seen signs that something like skills must exist, we just not gotten confirmation if it is skills or if the common theory that they become perks is true.

Hopefully quakecon will answer things.

Flame bait topic.

This word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

skills have been merged with perks. there will be more perks, and they will have 4 levels. not much different than the old skill system, as they only changed effect at 25, 50, 75, and 100. having a science skill of 73 was no different than a science skill of 50. the old system, with 100 pts but only 4 of those meaning anything was just complexity for the sake of complexity.

some stuff we've seen I'm a little iffy on, like flying power armor and the sims style building and "decorating" a pretty house for your character. but the perk/skill merger doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

I'll like my RPG's to be RPG's, not action games with slight RPG elements. [censored] me right.

Creative and original thread!

Todd already confirm there is still RPG number crunching in the background, including how weapons like guns handles, they have just been working on making sure that number crunching doesn't make things like combat clunky, like 3/NV.

And yes Todd confirmed that feature wise the games done, so honestly the best way to get the message across is to speak with ya wallet and not buy the game.

In Fallout 3/NV yeah I get that, wasn't so with Skyrim though. You could try to pick any locks no matter the skill, higher skill just made it easier. That's how it should of been done. However lack of skills isn't a big issue for me as we still level up and can shape our character, works fine in Witcher 3 and DA:I and I'd say their both RPGs.

You had no skills in Baldur's Gate too... but yeah... without skills a game isn't a RPG anymore... of course. And also the Witcher don't has skills...

The whole "25/50/75/100 is equal to perks" thing isn't really true, there were multiple thresholds besides 25,50,75,100 so having a skill at 40 or 80 still meant something and for some skills like guns, every single point counted. Sure it might of been a small change to the weapon sway among other things but it still made a difference.

Bethesda makes Open-World Action RPGs. They are still great RPG games but they also focus around an Open-World setting with action in it.

Oh you mean like how it supposedly is in Skyrim?

right riight

We'll see, people will complain and moan(The Massive few of em us) but FO4 will be a top seller and after 6 months no one will give a poot, Just like Skyrim

Such a Shame.

That's good news, I loved Skyrim!

Skills or no, it's going to be the best Fallout I have come across.

Well technically yes there is in Skyrim, its just with that and 4 they clearly been striving to make it less intrusive and "choppy", which is good in my book.

You would think that adding a layered armor system, enhanced crafting and customization, would qualify as RPG elements. But no the loss of static skills is what bothers people the most.

Well of course because *gasp* its not like the old games.

A layered armor system and enhanced crafting doesn't define the character.

Skills are the character. A 20 in Gun and 100 in Speech defines the character as someone who avoids combat in favor of dialogue. The ability to add a RDS on a laser rifle doesn't. It's why we don't consider Battlefield 3 an RPG.

A skill system is indeed one way to define a character, but its far from the only one, so its maybe a bit to hasty to jump to conclusion just because skills might be gone.

I don't really need numbers to define my character to be honest...

It could be argued that that's what their - the numbers - purpose is: to make things clunky (until you progress past that).

Todd said that you can now better compensate for the lack of the PC's skill (in combat) than before; I think that's the wrong move when they still insist of having these skills. What's the purpose anymore if it's but a mild hindrance (even milder than before, as stated) to the player FPSing and seemingly only exists because it is accustomed to have some ability progressions in a game that is labeled as "RPG"? Wouldn't it just be easier to throw it all in the trash since that seems to be the general direction anyway (I don't think they should, but it seems like a logical step looking at what they generally try to strive for)?

In a purly number crunching RPG such clunkyness is acceptable, but in this fps/rpg hybrid it really doesn't in the long run, ultimately since it spoils the fun. Ultimately RPG at its core is about playing a role and even tabletop RPG can prove that can be done with little to no numbers, so yes Fallout is still a RPG, just not your definition of one.

If you can't accept that Black Isle Fallout is already permanently and irreversibly dead, that is your personal issue to deal with.

Calling it, we'll see hundreds of Steam reviews saying something akin to "not New Vegas 2, 0/10 bethesda is the devil"

Where'd you pull that from? I didn't say anything about Black Isle's Fallout. If you are willing to swallow any [censored] that a cogwheel shaped spoon is shoving down your throat, that's your business, but the point of the comment was to point out that when you have metrics to represent an alterable aptitude level, call it numbercrunching if you will, they should also do something that makes their existence worth it and mean something to the gameplay. Otherwise they are redundant; FPS or not. A good chunk (if not even most of it) comes from noticing the improvement of your progress; overcoming the "natural" hindrances of your character. Or... is it not anymore?