That isn't roleplaying, that is editing the script.

You are only allowed to edit the script if you are one of the world's top actors with people begging you to join their project and even then you might not be allowed to edit the script. If they won't let you edit the script your options are to accept the role, or you kick back by your pool, drinking stingers while waiting for another.

The rest of us are scale actors and either must accept the role as given and do our best at it, or go back to washing dishes.

Todd has a track record of making promises he can't keep, I won't buy strong story until I see evidence of such.

It's not a good comparison, because The Witcher games aren't about be who you want and do what you want. The games are specifically about Geralts adventures and are a continuation of the books. It's just not the same.

I 100% agree^^^^....But, the fact he admitted they needed to get better at writing is a huge step in the right direction....now I'm not expecting Shakespeare here, but I think it'll be an improvement from previous titles

Never claimed they achieved this. What I said is that they acknowledge this as a problem and their goal is to add strong story. But lets all QQ about Todd Howard cuz he didn't make the game you wanted currently or in the past. I'd hire this guy in my make beleive design studio before i would hire the countless whiners on these forums. Why? because the man KNOWS how to make video games and the man makes successful video games. Thank god he doesn't cater the wah wah wah crowd.

Meh. What was the last Beth game that didn't eventually have an alternate start mod?

Can you be more insulting and offensive? Seriously tone it down.

Emil's still lead writer, I will remain skeptical that the writing will be good.

I thought his title was lead designer?

But it's okay to be insulting and offensive toward the people who've spent the last several years working hard to make the game that you dismiss as "downright stupid" based on a few minutes of footage?

There are no people involved in making this game, just moving targets. Why should anyone worry about being offensive to targets, that is their entire function after all.

Except no one is actively insulting bethesda? There is a difference between criticism and insulting.

Not to mention crying "I'll believe a good story when I see evidence".

While in the same thread claiming that the dialogue system is bad despite not having any evidence for that.

It's funny how that works right?

@cider: If you think you have offered any form of criticism you are mistaken.

Ideally, critique is based on something, and is constructive.

Not "lol Bethesda svcks at writing stories anyway."

If you think that is criticism, I'm not sure you know what the word means.

It's not "anti-roleplay". Just adapt.

Definitely criticism from me, I love the studio a lot. Funny enough this and the UI is the only real issues I have with Fallout 4, everything else is amazing.

Oh, really?

You, yourself, have posted comments about Todd Howard that in another day and age would have meant pistols at dawn.

Except I'm not insulting Todd Howard, I'm pointing out that sometimes he promises more then he can keep which is evidence with the whole "You can climb any mountain" when they revealed skyrim. It's not an insult it's an observation.

I'm not calling him any name, I'm not calling him incompetent, I'm not calling him anything that can be deemed insulting or offensive all I'm doing is pointing out something.

I do find some amusemant in the fact that Bethesda apparently don't 'get' Fallout and at the same time are criticized for following a staple of the Fallout Series, the fixed origin of the Fallout Protagonist. NV actually went against the usual practice to give you a mostly blank slate....until Lonesome Road, but even then who you were before you became a courier is up to the player.

Just as TES always starts with a blank slate prisoners, Fallouts usually start with an established character.......I'd assume that if Bethesda had given us a blank slate character, people would be complaining that is not how Fallout games are supposed to start.

Pointing out that the choices they've made, in trying to deliver the best game they can, are "downright stupid". Nope, doesn't sound insulting at all. My bad.

Blank slate works for some games, and not for others.

In TES you are the hero out of prophecy. Elder scrolls talk about you showing up and saving the day.

And then fallout is a completely different beast; there is no prophecy to fulfil. You're a person that lives in this world, and this is how you got here. You aren't some divine being thrust into the world when the time is right.

Where did I say it was stupid? Even so calling something "stupid" can be considered a form of criticism if reasons are given. The only people who are being uncivil here is the people telling others to shut up or "stop being crybabies"

I would approach it the same way I approach any RPG. See what the character is, and decide how they would react; within the limits of their ability, and based on what I know of their history, and apparent skill preferences.

Oh... right... No skills. , but at least the rest still applies.

**Or maybe not... There might be no history either.
See... the PC might just be first seen in their house, and next they run to the vault, and then they sleep ~having no life experiences in the vault over the many years that pass; then they emerge, no different than they were when they entered the cryo-pod. How do you roleplay that ?

Its an lot of people complains about various things. You can not make all happy.

You also have people who want no level scaling but also be able to go everywhere on the map from the start.

It could all be a dream which is how I'm going to do an alternate start type playthrough.

The same way you roleplay starting the game and being told your quest is to find a geck.