That is the #1 point of contention. Elder scrolls is Elder Scrolls, and Fallout is not [wasn't before they damaged it].

To homogenize them is like remaking all flavors of ice cream [eg. games] into whatever one flavor seems to be the most popular; and just change the sprinkles around for variations.

It's a nightmare mentality to seriously consider the option of doing that, and far worse to actually do it.

And it reminds me of the https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSZfUnCK5qk where they asked about the kind of music the bar owner liked.

You can have things like bullet spread, random deviation and recoil intensity be affected by character skill while the player takes care of the actual aiming. It's a good compromise that gives control to the player but also makes character skill count. In shooters you can usually control recoil and aim, what you can't control is the randomness of the cone of fire and things like that.

I'd love it if at a low whatever-governs-guns-perk level you couldn't hit anything that was beyond close to close-medium range while at max rank you can use even automatic weapons to burst fire people at long distances. Basically as you advance more towards the higher levels of gun mastery you won't be able to blame your character as much as your bad aim if you miss.

Or you could just have the aiming take care of itself, based on the PC's defined skill with the weapon; let the player select the target, and let the PC try to hit it.

*And before anyone brings FPP into it, I've seen it done in FPP, and it played just fine.

Why is it that no matter where I go people have to [censored] about everything. I'm sorry, but this is how BGS has been making games for a long long time. You don't have to play it. I can't believe people cant get over the fact that the reason these new fallout are not like the original [censored] games because, you know, Bethesda makes them now. They did not make the original games if some of you are not aware. I just laugh because I know fallout 4 is gonna kick ass. Only reason I bought an xbox one. This will be the first game I have bought since Skyrim in 2011 and I for one am [censored] stoked.

Opinions are more nuanced than "I love it" and "I hate it". The whole point of forums is to discuss things and voice opinions.... about FO4 in this case. Fallout has a very diverse fan base at this point regarding how they view the franchise's progression. Some hate it, some love it, some are OK with it but want some things improved (I'm in this last one). If you don't like your views challenged then don't engage in the discussion.

It's the way Bethesda's been making worlds for years, and it's what put them on the map in the first place with Morrowind. It's not supposed to represent exact scale; it's scaled down so that everything's interesting and so that Bethesda can incorporate the level of detail you find in the world. The townsfolk NPCs and clutter aren't just decoration like in other games.

But what about the action? Haha

Please remember that this is the Bethesda forum where, yes, Bethesda fans gather to discuss the games they love which are Bethesda Games. Please don't ask the fans of Bethesda games not to participate in a discussion here no matter your reason. Basically, this is a place to talk about Bethesda's games and all are able to state their opinions of it. They are even allowed to question your reason for being here when you do not seem to be a fan of the games for which this forum exists.

Agreed Although are non fans permitted to post here, is that like frowned upon or perfectly ok?

They can of course post here as long as they post with the realization that when they are dogging on the games the fans here love it could indeed be perceived as flamebaiting if they are not careful.

And fans must be careful not to flame the non-fans in personal ways. But again, this forum exists to give fans a place to discuss the games and not all fans will like everything in the games they love. It's fine to be critical of the game or the company as a whole. But they sure can't go about telling those that love the game to get out of the kitchen if they can't stand the heat. It is after all, Bethesda's kitchen and we try to keep the heat down best we can.

Oh ok, I understand now. Seems reasonable enough to me. I myself am a huge fan of their games, although I do have some points of contention as well, probably like anybody else. .

And now an on topic post to help get this back on track.

Dense areas in these games, I believe, should depend upon the area in which they are made. On the east coast I would imagine settlements and structures and destroyed buildings to be a dime a dozen and placed closely together. In the west I would expect them to be further apart with lots of wasteland in between.

If it were in my home state, I would expect almost nothing but a remote cabin or two spaced very far apart and the spaces to be covered with ice and snow.

Density should depend upon the area in which the game is taking place.

As I wrote elsewhere on the forum...

Everybody has the right to their opinions and I have the right to point and laugh at those opinions.

I really didn't have a problem with Fallout 3 density, of course I had issues with F3 like settlements with no visible means of support and the numbers of raiders who apparently never raided anybody but just hung around waiting for the odd person to wander by etc. But having played all of the games (well apart from that game which was so bad and so screwed up the lore that its not considered canon or to even exist by many of us), I prefer the open world to the fast travel via map of the originals since it lets me 'immerse' (as cheapened as that word is) myself in the world much more than the originals which I enjoyed at the time but never set my world on fire.

Oh and I wasn't talking about Tactics above, which is a game I still regularly play.

Does anyone still play fallout tactics multiplayer? On Tunngle maybe?

I've no idea......a quick look on the web suggest gameranger but I've never looked myself personally as I prefer the single player, mainly because I never replace a squad member unless they are killed and I'm always saddened when one of them gets killed on a mission.

Entirely false, hence why places like Zion and Point Lookout exist. Not to mention places like Arroyo, Klamath, and Modoc, which showed large forests, although they were in the very northern part of California/the southern part of Oregon, where it isn't a desert.

Fallout 1/2 was empty, beyond the areas mentioned above, because the area they covered was a desert even before the war. However, all places that did have something before the war, still had lots of stuff after the war. LA, San Fran, Bakersfield, Reno, Klamath, all had fairly extensive ruins, and all places in areas with large amounts of trees, still had large amounts of trees.

Realism in first person would mean modeling about 200,000 homes in and around Boston instead of the 50 we are going to get in the Bethesda version.

Realism also means spending a month in real time walking across the map to reach a quest objective instead of the 15 minutes it will take the first time and 5 seconds once fast travel is unlocked.

I prefer the Bethesda version.

Nostalgia for old games only lasts until you go back and play them. Watching a dot move across a map while 'days' ticked by every few seconds isn't as fun as it used to be.

i cant agree more with this this.

back in the day there wasnt any other way to make it, now is just crazy to think to come back to it, just go and look the forums on games like Wasland or similar game, is nice to have the nostalgia, but when u need to play it the game end empty.

u are compare 2 diferent ideas, Fallout 1 and 2 visit ALOT of diferents areas, while Fallout 3 and Fallout NV just stay center on a section making alot more rich, one of my main hate about Witcher 3 as a example was like NIlfgaard was just a castle that all what i see, same happen to me on DAI, i prefere the aproch Besth have about concentrating on a area, and them maybe exploring something else as a DLC

I know; that was the point.

Not at all. They just released Eye of the Beholder on GoG this week, but the last time I played it through to the end was a few months ago.

*However... I am not aware of anyone who has asked ~or even hinted that they wanted clones of the older Fallouts. Taking that from their posts is likely reading into them what one wills.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=529g5dxkOlg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrqm9qK_Mlo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDrALvAqsaI

The thing is though is that I love and welcome challenge to my opinions. You have no right to tell me not to discuss, this is a forum after all. My problem is real simple. I love good CONSTRUCTIVE criticism. However, I am not seeing much of that on here from some folks. I'm just seeing a hole lot of just straight up complaining that fallout isn't rpg enough for some people, or its that the world is too dense. What? Have you played and Beth game before? I'm not talking about interplay or obsidian. I'm talking about Bethesda, you know, the ones who are actually developing the game for us all to enjoy, fallout 4. Bethesda has never been the best at delivering a great story. Hell, they don't even have the best graphics. However, they're game world's are [censored]in insane. I remember getting morrowind way back and it just blew my little [censored]in mind. I didn't know an open world game like that even existed. Bethesda had always built dense open world's that I can walk around and explore, learn the history's of the land. That's why I keep playing Bethesda made games. I just live [censored] like that. I hate to break it to ya, but what you are getting from Bethesda is what your gonna get. Nothing more or nothing less. I can't wait for fallout 4. In fact I'm taking time off for the first time at this job that I've been working, just so I can play the [censored] outa some fallout 4. Gonna be a great game that sells like hell and guaranteed to do well in the eyes of the public. I hope you enjoy it, I know I will.

There were no "large amount of trees", yes there were some trees, but not more then you would find in places that are considered to be desert, like middle east. However i can't explain Point Lookout, it seems just a very bad idea and very out of place in fallout. Have not seen Zion, so i can't comment on that.

However, fallout is a Science Fiction not a Fantasy, means that it has to be realistic, you can't just ignore the fact of atom war and expect things to look like they did before war. Atom war means deadly radiation, temperature increase and sand storms that turns everything into a desert. Yes there are some trees in desert. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thar_Desert

Actually, radiation will make plants grow and grow stronger. By the time fallout 3 and 4 takes place. Massive amounts of plant life should have theoretically returned to the waste land.... In areas that were not desserts originally.

ur state die with u, since on Fallout 3 u can hear ghouls speaking about the Fire from sky and all that, if we base fallout on reality all those ppl will be ashes and no ghouls, that can live 100000 years, and dont die from radiation.

Uhh what?

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/9/9c/FO2_Klamath_Canyon.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20150320145357

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/4/44/FO2-Klamath-GrazingGrounds.png/revision/latest?cb=20141209233106

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/9/9d/Fo2_Arroyo_Hunting_Grounds.png/revision/latest?cb=20110210003413

http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/8/8e/ModocBrahminPastures.png/revision/latest?cb=20110612190300

http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/6/64/Farrels_garden.png/revision/latest?cb=20140928224939

No it doesn't. Hence why radiation turns people into ghouls, and mutates animals into giant versions of themselves. Which isn't realistic in the slightest.

All science fiction means is that instead of using "magic" to explain everything, you use "techno-babble".

As shown in NV's NCR Sharecropper farm quests, radiation in the Fallout world actually INHIBITS plant growth. Radiation form the nearby Vault was preventing the crops in the NCR sharecropper farms from going as well as they should have.