Something like that is already in the game. You'll notice it most when a helmet that modulates the voice is worn.

To be fair, I'm not sure that's really very accurate. It's not like they knew that the fans of their previous games would have such a volatile reaction to the game *gasp* having a definitive ending. And it's not like they released that DLC for no other reason than to "fix" that "problem." Broken Steel was something they were going to put out anyway, and they simply decided to add that feature into it.

And regardless - how would one guard against putting out a game with something they're going to realize in hindsight wouldn't go over as well as they thought?

Ask NMA...

" Hi Guys, Emil here with a few Ideas we'd like to run by you..." :rofl:
~no seriously

The better ~yet now impossible~ option, would simply be to ask the leads of the FO1 dev team via paid consultancy. Aside from not likely being wrong, the fact that they are who they are makes them [almost] immune to flak.

*Of course, I'm only speaking about Fallout 4 & 5.. not future TES games...
(though it couldn't hurt :shrug:).

Not everyone here agrees with you. The cool thing about mods is that for every "hardcoe" mod out there, there are dozens of others that make the game easier. Difficulty, learning curve, working at a game, are all subjective.

I really don't think that a FO1 style game would have sold at the level of FO3. maybe we will find out next year. Would I like to play a modern FO1 style game? Sure, but I also like FO3.

Fallout 1: Vault Dweller

Fallout 2: Chosen One

Fallout 3: Lone Wanderer


I wonder what Fallout 4's main character's name will be.

That's a nice idea, but I also think the speech skill should be eliminated, and instead success in arguments should be determined by your charisma and intelligence. So instead of having a character with X speech skill having Y chance of success in an argument, have it so that only one with X or more of intelligence can put the argument forth to begin with, and only someone with Y or more charisma can succeed in it.


[Intelligence] So you didn't like the dialogues in F3?


Personally I think having every single line of dialogue dubbed is more trouble than it's worth. With the money saved by reducing the number of spoken lines to only the ones coming from important characters, they could hire more voice actors, and more competent ones at that.

Stop using the same 6 people for all the voice acting! You guys have made a fortune with Fallout; surely you can now afford to hire more voice actors for the next game? I am so sick of hearing the same guy do ALL the Raiders, the same guy do ALL the old people etc. It really breaks my immersion in the game to endlessly hear these same people talk.. <_<

Sup fellow wanderers of the wastes this is MythDawg your friendly neighborhood disk jockey. What's a disk? Hell if I know....lol my bad. So anyways I sent an e-mail to Bethesda with my suggestions for Fallout 4 or a Fallout Movie. I wanna know what you think about my ideas and maybe share your own...so here it is...it's kinda long...sorry.

For Fallout 4, I thought of the main setting of the story in New York, but not just the city. I'd like to see Rochester, NY included or referenced, but that's because I live there. It could possibly be an add-on entitled "The Roc" (just thought I'd add it). Or if NY is chosen for the next title's setting there could be add-ons for New Jersey or Maryland based off of others' suggestions. It could possibly take place after the events of Fallout 3 or during the same time and add in new features such as a vehicle to use on certain parts of the story...a vehicle that you build during a quest and is what you need for such quest. New enemies such as new animals like moose in the northern area of the state, mutated deer, beavers, wolves or bobcats. Maybe even a side-quest where you find mutated alligators in the sewers along with giant rats in place of mole rats. Or have mutated animals that have escaped from the Central Park Zoo...tieing in with the alligators in the sewer myth. The possibilities are endless in the city that never sleeps, but that's all up to you folks at Bethesda Softworks.

My other suggestion includes the possibility of a Fallout movie. It could be loosely based off of Fallout 3 or all the existing Fallouts together or none at all. Except in my mind there's 3 possible stories. The 1st would include a story very similar to Fallout 3's story but the decision shouldn't be of just a male lead and a female lead should be considered due to female fans of the franchise and to target a greater audience. The 2nd could be that both a male and female vault dweller escape together into the wasteland that awaits them and interacting with familiar scenarios or characters in the franchise. And the 3rd could again have either male or female escaping from a vault, then getting attacked by a pack of raiders and having the opposite lead saving them with the help of their dog, Dogmeat or another companion from the franchise. The choice of actors shouldn't be those of high fame to give it a certain feel that an unknown actor can give the audience...as a sense?of an ordinary person trying to survive the lands of the world that has become a wasteland filled with many hardships.

But these are just my suggestions and I hopefully wish they could be a possibility in your decisions so that Bethesda Softworks creates a great game/movie and I as a consumer get the satisfaction of playing/watching such a product/production. (It wouldn't be bad if I got partial credit/recognition/benefits/money either if you so choose to use my suggestions lol) But the decisions are all up to you fine people at Bethesda Softworks and so ends the story of my suggestions.......
Well that's it...And remember children Ghouls are people too.

there are hundreds of npcs, if you want a unique voice for each, it will cost them(dev) great amount of money to hire unique voice actors.

Less unique weapons and more schematics adding things to the vanilla weapons in the game.

Silencers, less recoil (yes, I think weapons should have recoil), larger clips/magazines, damage increases, scopes & so on.

Make some of them options like the reward from Those! where you can pick one or the other (so you can't get ALL of them in one playthrough)

Also PLEASE make handguns a more viable primary weapon from the outset, seems like they exist solely to get caps or just until you get a 2Her/unique twenty minutes into the game.

I think seeing the Commonwealth would be fun. That or New York.

Also, we need a vehicle of somesort. Walking all over svcks.

Lastly, make it seem more like the future. How about putting a Desert Eagle, an M14, or a Stinger Missle Launcher in? People in this era don't wear bonnets either, so make the clothing a bit more up to date.

The Lone Chosen Vault Wanderer!

Regarding reputation systems:

I'd like to see a difference between local and 'global' reputation. Local would come out of the actions towards factions. Do you help them, do you rob them blind, etc... This would effect how people of a certain faction treat you.
Off course having good standing in one faction will have effects on your standing with opposing factions.

The global one, looks at your actions as a whole and tries to find the driving motivations. I would also like to see the good-neutral-evil system be changed to something that was less black and white. Steal a lot become a (suspected) thief, ask rewards for any job you do and you become a mercenary and a few more of those preferably not mutual exclusive.

Well, of course! I'm not saying Beth should just copy the ultrahardcoezomg-Stimpaks-now-cost-100000-caps mods to make F4 100 times harder than F3...

There are some popular mods with great features like alternate item repair methods, e.g. Scrap Metal and Wonderglue, Perks, opening locked doors and containers with explosives... That sort of "good ideas" can be used in the future Fallout installments. That's what I was trying to say.

You do realise that its retro-futuristic, based on what the 50's thought the futures was gonna be like so the clothing is up to date, yes its not modern its not supposed to be.

however they should remove the XP modifer for the difficulty level

Agreed.

They should also remove levelscaling (the mainquest, IIRC, is levelscaled) and craft a game that actually requires you to play it instead of running through enemies that are scaled to you.

yeah that was great thing about fallout 1/2 having a random encounter at the beginning and just been killed outright, it also stopped you getting the best equipment really early

Fallout 3 is a spin off, and should have been named as such.
(Those that do not know what it should be... would just know that they like it ~whatever the name).

I am not of the opinion that one guts and modifies a thing to make it sell by making into something other than itself, rather one should exercise careful thought in what their consumers care about (and some 12 year old game that they'd never play isn't the best starting point).

Imagine a Nascar franchise game known for car customizing and racing for winnings... acquired by a Hasbro Interactive and re-envisioned as a Race Car Tycoon game where the player must create and maintain a racetrack with the right number of seats, concession vendors, bathrooms, and keep the drivers happy, all while promoting the park to bring out the crowds... Be a great game; Be a real kick in the teeth to the previous fans ~and its exactly what has happened to the Fallout franchise ~in reverse.
And as happened with FO, there would be previous "Nascar Racer X" fans that like the change and say, "They played the original, and they really like the change in format... and besides, it was the setting they liked ~not the gameplay".

If Fallout 3 is a spinoff (which I don't see how it is, I mean, the new location and gameplay styles didn't make GTA III-onwards spinoffs) then I doubt we'll see a non-spinoff game for a looooong time.

What is a spin-off? (in your opinion)

Tactics is a spin-off of Fallout, and it has a hell of a lot more in common than FO3. (and like FO3 takes place in a new city, with a new brotherhood )

My notion of a spin off is to retain elements of one IP and base a new one on it... Like how the tv show Frasier is a spin-off of Cheers. Different city, different format, and a few old friends from before. (Had it been a sequel to Cheers... Frasier would have opened a bar and attracted a new cast of barstool misfits.)

The game play itself between these products is discordant. Fallout 3 is an RPS centered around the "Play by doing" method [IE. you search for traps and find what you can]; Fallout 1 & 2 were character based RPG's [IE. you could have a character that was an expert in traps, and he or she could find ones that you might not ~because they are an expert].

PC development in Fallout was paramount (it affected what was possible in the the game; If the PC can't manage it, it doesn't happen*). PC development in FO3 is optional (and deliberately so, as a good portion of the expected market are coming straight from, and mostly concerned with, the shooter aspect).

*There has come about a named concept on these forums called, "The Claw Factor" (named for those Plushie quarter thief vending machines you find in arcades, Walmarts, and laundromats).

The idea is that the "Claw" is like your PC inside "the box" (the game world), and you are limited to your tool's effectiveness in the game, to get things done. Developing your PC in the game is like improving the Claw for accuracy and friction ~making it better suited to achieve your goals. The idea of such a game is to succeed through your character (without reaching in and grabbing ~as it were); As such, Fallout 3 [being designed with the opposite expectation],
has a lower "claw factor" than Fallout 1.

This is fine (and fun :drool: ~ for a spin off), but its not in keeping with the core series.

Forum feedback is likely only ever going to get you so far, though. Plus, there's little point in a Dev specifically going into a forum and asking for opinions - those tend to come out as soon as info about the game gets released, anyway. Why bother asking for what you're going to get by default, anyway?

As far as consulting the original Devs - I actually disagree on that point. For one, I think originally this particular topic was brought up in regards to the definitive ending of the game; something I'd imagine the original team would have encouraged as well (and has since proven to be a mis-step, considering that a large portion of Fallout 3's user base are coming to this game from previous Elder Scrolls titles.) Not to mention that idea of looking to the original Devs for input is predicated on the concept that Bethesda's ideas for implementation are somehow "lesser," and in need of a more skilled set of Devs to make a better game. If Bethesda had really wanted to do something that was closer to the original games; they didn't necessarily need to talk to Brian Fargo to accomplish that. Fallout 3 is a departure because that's what they'd set out to do in the first place - what use would someone else's input be if it would have little to do with the game they were trying to make in the first place?

It's all academic anyway (since I mean, it's still the same game regardless of what we call it.) It's not really going to make a difference if you decide to call it something other than what I consider the game to be. But GTA is not a good example; that's clearly a sequel. GTA 1 plays exactly the same as GTA 3 despite any changes in perspective - that's clearly the game they were trying to make from the beginning anyway. There's a clear connection between all the sequels in that franchise. If you play GTA 1, and then are given GTA 3 to mess around with; without being told what the name of the game was - you'd pretty quickly be able to jump right in and figure out that it's a GTA game.

Not so with Fallout 1 and 2 to Fallout 3. It's very much a different game, with a very different gameplay focus and different overall goals; and is even coming from a very different game design philosophy. The only real connection I see between the two are aesthetically, and that they're both RPGs. But there's so much more to a game than that. Otherwise, why isn't Medal of Honor considered a sequel to Call of Duty? That doesn't make one inherently "better" than the other. Just different.

Just because some of us feel that Fallout 3 is more of a spin-off than a sequel, doesn't mean that we feel that one particular element makes it inherently "lesser." I just feel it better describes what Fallout 3 is. If it were called Fallout: The East Coast Chronicles; I'd still feel exactly the same about the game as I do now - it's only that I'd have felt the title was more accurate to what the game really is. (And for the record - again - I feel that Fallout 3 is a decent enough game that deserves to be a "Fallout" game. That I feel it's more of a spin-off has nothing to do with whether or not I think it's "earned" the right to be a sequel - because one has nothing to do with the other.)

EDIT - ie, you don't get to be a sequel just because you're "good enough" to be one. Because value is totally unconnected from it. A "real" Fallout sequel could even have been absolute shovelware that was just terrible and flawed in every way - but it would still be a "sequel" by virtue of being a direct line of evolution from what had gone before. (Even if it was in every way a "worse" game than Bethesda's Fallout game...) Saying it's a spin-off isn't a judgement of value.

This isn't a "Fallout 3 is a spinoff" argument thread.

Please stick to the topic of Fallout 4.

Extremely far too short for you to even consider sending it to their HQ.
But i enjoyed the read, thanks.

All I have to say is, I can't wait 'till the Day Fallout 4 hits shelves.