Probably never; completely at least.

Something like that would be pretty cool. It seems weird to me that I am basically just gluing guns to other guns to repair them. Something more in depth and detailed would be really cool.

1.The ara was part of the New England Commonwealth before the war so,it's most likely just a name jsut like the Capital Wasteland since Washington was the capital.

And about achivments the tribals degenerated into superstitous tribals despite being educated shorty after the war so no I wouldn't say they achieved anything note worthy at all.

Most parts of America in Fallout are at war either tribals or radiers,etc.I doubt that there is anything special going on.

Absolutely should not be able to repair any weapon during combat. If you experience a critical failure with a weapon than you are forced to switch, ie. my 10mm handgun jams or breaks I have to chose a melee weapon or a rifle which gives more damage (DAM but less DPS). Repairing out in the Wasteland still has to some consideration. The example of an axe might work finding a branch or chunk of wood to replace the handle but mostly you need to work the material at a workbench etc. or find a payable repairperson to get the item back to whatever degree that repair is able. Degradation of weapons and/or armor I think has a realistic value but I can see that is also a grind. Perhaps Beth can find some way that finds a middle ground but I doubt it. It seems Their attitude is if it ain't unpopular don't fix it.

Of course there shouldn't be any armor or weapons repair during combat, no one said that there should be there should be armor and weapons degradation though and not removed like in The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim.

But think of the immersion! Hyper-realism is the only way to go if we're ever to prepare ourselves for an ultimate virtual world.

The only thing I want to see, is permanent and lasting effects of the decisions you make in the game so that role play is brought back like in Fallout 1 and 2. No risk, no reward.

Gregarious relationships shouldn't be distilled as a factitous prompt or a contrived gameplay mechanic, having the screen dim and having the npcs spew some amorous lines that are even dimmer doesn't validate "romance".

This seems to be the fulcrum of the romance feature, a transient prompt usually in the form lascivious interactions to declare that two characters are in a romantic relationship, that's less than satisfactory and entirely reductionist.

It's like asking for 'friendships' to be in the game, having a prompt like "press x to fistbump" doesn't constitute a friendship.The player should be able to form different dispositions or relationships with characters predicated on the character's personality etc.

I love Mass Effect but it's the quintessential example of how romance can be simplified to a risible degree, I love some of the characters (to an extent) but it's not because of a two minute cutscene that is tantamount to softcoe porm.

I'm highly skeptical that love/romance can be adequately depicted within the mechanics of a game — cutscenes are about as close as it gets.

It should be removed imo as all it does is hurt the unprepared reckless game player and is nothing but a time sink to me. Basically in FO3 and NV I always roll out with fully repaired gear. I'm never caught with a broken weapon or armor, so all repairs do is make me return to home base or to a repair merchant more frequently which does nothing to improve an experience.

That is all degredation does, make you go someplace to fix stuff or if unprepared make you fix stuff on the fly.

Now, if there were critical failures and weapon breakings, that does create an instant problem to deal with.

Imo, weapon and armor repair works a lot better in a strategic game like Jagged Alliance 2 when I can set a mechanic to repair stuff, but not so much interesting in a solo RPG.

That is a terrible assertion to make, because it ignores the fact that sometimes the best fix to something, is to change how it works fundamentally.

The idea that they "threw away" attributes is absurd, because all they really did was just change what those attributes did into perks

Throwing away would imply it didn't exist, throwing away would imply they just went 100% pure action game.

Never, though you don't actually have to do much to explore such things.

Simply having quests with some sort of moral/ethical relation to them in the game, and having the NPCs react to them, counts as exploring whatever ethical/moral situations brought up, even if the quest isn't specifically about the ethics/morality of those things.

What exactly is stopping you from hiding behind a crate or something, while being attacked, and getting a jammed weapon unstuck, or any similar situation?

Also would be nice if it had faction missions. For example, in NV, after you join the BoS should have a specific mission for paladins. Same thing with the Followers. But dont have it.

But it was done moderately. Which is not equal to Skyrim, where a barbarian warrior can be the big boss of the college of magic, and the next day become the best thief in the continent.

About the Institute, I belive that Bethe gonna do more or less like NV. A place of progress and tecnology (like the Cassinos), suround by misery and disgrace (like the rest of the Mojave). I just hope you can join the Institute, without gaining a bad end just because they are powerful and the others are the poor things.

You know, we basically think the same. There's nothing world-changing going on there, nothing special in the sense that anyone in the Capital Wasteland for example would bother.

But the people there, those who are directly affected, they'd bother. People in the stone age bothered about their superstitious cults and rites, people in the antics bothered, people in the middle ages bothered, and now we have our smartphones and bother. Gizmo has it right, exploring the culture and ethics of a post-nuclear world is what it's about.

I could make you care. I hope Bethesda realizes that therein lies the key.

Agree with the quests.

I hope that contrary to NV, the factions within the Commonwealth (or at least in the proximity of Boston) hold a stronger presence as people directly involved in, opposed to merely affected by the conflict. Thus I'd like to see no invaders, only local factions.

The Institute has the chance to be what Fallout 3 makes them, a deeply flawed, if highly sophisticated society. They are overwhelmed by the Exodus of the synths and even by the ethical problem of their sudden consciousness. They've been so preoccupied with their own arrogance and technological paraphernalia, that they didn't realize that control has silently slipped away and now they've got to suffer the consequences. They are of scientific genius, hopefully channeled primarily into the field of robotics, victims to their own superstition, their own staggering idolatry to the machine they believed to be the future. And now they stand incompetent, foolish, bereft of rationality and common sense.

They need a reason to participate in the conflict. I think it's all or nothing for them. They have to overcome their blind pretension or else they'll be consumed, their glorious future nothing but the afterglow of another closed chapter in the legacy of the old world.

The are not as shrouded as they'd like to think. The Exodus makes it plain. Their walls are impenetrable to violence, but not treason, not theft, not thought.

Osmosis. The Commonwealth slowly accumulates the wondrous technology of MIT.

The Boston game should make the quest for the future their number one goal. The war for the future. A war of clashing ideals as to where the very people affected by it want to go.

What is a synth? A machine to control, a servant, a slave without sorrow? Should we take away their conscious mind in order to evade the ethical conflict?

Or should we treat them as humans? Then how can we grant them freedom? Where's the difference between a synth who wants to enhance him or herself with technology beyond the grasp of humanity and a human who wants to live as he sees fit? Should we take this freedom from them in order to save society?

Peaceful coexistence is a dream. I want the Boston game to clarify this.

What of the the replication process, the technology itself? Isn't the mere existence of synthetic humans a problem we need to get rid of? Not necessarily by violent extinction, but by taking away the means of further complicating the matter, of creating more synthetic humans. I bet there are synths who share that sentiment.

Or is synthetic humanity the future?

My suggestion for Fallout 4: Have a great midgame changer after which the entirety of the area is affected, including visual changes, new dialogue, developments and new quests. In Boston, the threads could converge at MIT, ending with either the destruction of a faction and/or the destruction of the replication centers and/or the takeover of MIT systems for a faction and/or something else.

The decision you make there would change how the second half of the game plays out, with the focus shifting away a little from the question of how to handle technology and synths and more leaning toward which faction's ideals will further coin the location and culture and how.

A personal quest in Boston is imo unneeded, especially since I think the game should start with you awakening in a cryochambers Vault, with all ties to your past cut. Personal experiences should however make up a great part of all quests. Stories of encounters with normal people.

By the way I love that the thread title continues the 'amd' mistake. That's continuity par excellence!

It's not terrible, nor is it ignoring anything. It is simply urging to look at the design and to explore its possibilities (the rights and wrongs and how to make it more right than previously) before ditching it instead of going all out "Oh, it didn't really work the last time, let's not do it again".

Come on man, you know better than this.

It's not the same thing at all. The attributes are no more; that some of the effects got scattered and merged around in some sort of new system that's nothing alike is no compensation for what was the core mechanic previously. The attributes were not really well done in Oblivion; they could've been had they been looked at more closely for what they represented, but they weren't. Just like ditching the Big Guns skill from the set in New Vegas removed a whole tactical layer and consideration from the character build possibilities.

As for the "action game" stuff... From where I am looking at it, that exactly what they did -- and they already started with that with Oblivion. My guess is that the attributes got axed because they got in the way of their intended action gameplay, that they didn't serve a purpose (or that they couldn't figure out one) anymore due to where the gameplay was going. There was no need for more finetuned character progression minutiae, because that wasn't wanted nor warranted by the design. The perks they have now are also pretty damn lazy for a major part -- the effects are largely incosequential and some are completely useless. It's fine if that's what they like and if that's what people like, but they don't compensate for the loss of the attributes, they do their own thing.

Character's in Bethesda titles are window dressing as opposed to being the window itself; that is the problem.

I disagree. Big Guns don't need their own skill (because that doesn't mean tactical layer at all) but only a character build possibility.

This possibility should be given through exorbitant STR requirements, heavy weight and perks (much like shotguns or rapid fire weapons, which do not deserve their own skills), especially one that allows skill mastery of heavy weapons without the need of being trained in all three weapon skills.

Character building should require thought and an extremely limited resource in skill points.

I saw a cool mod once. Outside the cities, the night is all dark. It reminded me once I returned home and light over. I had to light the way with the phone, because I could not see anything.

It would be interesting to have something like that, only the moonlight illuminating and little visibility. It made more sense to have some perks, such as Friend of the Night.

And this is not a idea, but Bethesda have to work better in the Frames per Second.

would be cool, but I doubt it. Even in the 3, when the BoS is distributing water, still has beggar asking for clean water.

It doesn't anymore with how the games are (just hold down the trigger and backpedal and circle strafe while minding the quick key for the stims; does miracles), but it could.... But you think building a specific kind of character and trying to adapt him to the situation as per your dedicated skill doesn't take some tactics and strategizing? Like melee character encountering some snipers and assault rifle wielding dudes, or having a big gun character and ending up in a situation where you're wielding a bazooka but the fight is likely to happen close quarters?

Of course the choice of combat tools and style means tactics. How could it not?

On a sidenote, I think you might just get your wish with the "skills for perks" stuff. II disagree with it but it just seems more likely than the other choices.

Nonono, I mean the skill itself doesn't equal tactics. To wield the weapon that you've specialized in, to actually fight should of course require tactics as should specializing. In order to properly wield a Big Gun, Strength and the respective weapon skills in Guns, Explosives, Energy Weapons should be enough.

I just mean you don't need a skill for every weapon subtype or thing you can do. You can make them distinct and skillable through other means than skills. There are multiple layers of building a distinct character that should be used.

Broken Steel kind of made the original end a gamechanger, only that there's no end after that (there should be one) and that you have no choice during the original ending that affects the world (there should be one) and that nothing actually changes, only new stuff is added (stuff should change).

It's only a small step from there. This would be something of actual consequence. Maybe even something that involves spontaneous decisions where you can't quite grasp the outcomes beforehand - surprises.

What I have to say is that Bethesda Game Studios now needs to really get serious about developing their open world RPG video games from now one.

Here will be my explanations why.

CD Projekt RED with The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is one of those reasons. The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt will redefine RPG video games and should set new standards.

#1. The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is bigger than like 5 The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrims's, the video game world map of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 75 square kilometers or 76 square kilometers from what I remember reading sometime in 2014.

#2. Just 2 Places in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt Novigrad and the Skellige Islands are both bigger than The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim so 2 The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim's can fit in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt just from those 2 locations.

I forgot to mention, but Novigrad has 2,000 NPC's in it all of the NPC's have their own schedules bandits, merchants, prosttutes, etc.

#3. All quests will have choices with consequences depending on the actions you make with branching paths. From a lot of video game journalists who played a few hours of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt they said that fetch quests were EXTREMELY RARE.

#4. I just learned this yesterday, but there are over 800 hours of recorded dialogue in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt.

#5. CD Projekt RED added some features in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt which did not exist in The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings and which Bethesda Game Studios removed from The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and added to The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and that is no armor and weapons degradation and regenerative health, which CD Projekt RED added weapons degradation in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt and removed regenerative health in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt.

Now I am not saying for Bethesda Game Studios to copy everything from The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt for Fallout 4. I'm just saying it is time for Bethesda Game Studios to develop their RPG video games to feel like RPG video games, because The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim to me without any mods just playing the vanilla version of The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim feels like a action First Person Shooter (FPS) video game.

If CD Projekt RED's The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt succeeds then Bethesda Game Studios will need to take notes and one up CD Projekt RED and wow the whole entire Earth with Fallout 4. Even with The Elder Scrolls VI.

I find dialogue choices much better and making sense in Fallout: New Vegas compared to the dialogue choices for quests in Fallout 3.

This is how Bethesda Game Studios will get me to purchase Fallout 4 and earn themselves money from my sale. If none of this is in Fallout 4 then no sale from me at all.

Yeah I think too you should stay with the Witcher and not even consider a Bethesda game. (Btw. Witcher 3 isn't even out yet.... and yes all what a game publisher advertises is always true ).

I want to be able to break into certain locked doors and containers with a high enough strength and a crowbar. There are locked doors with glass in them, sometimes broken, that I'm sure in rl I could get into.

http://40.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m6i53ijofM1qj82e9o1_1280.jpg

I need 100 lockpick for this door? I could just reach my hand in and unlock it from the other side. I could climb into the room though the gap. I could use a crowbar or even go roadhouse on that raggedy door. It would just be a good way to give more reason to use strength and not have lockpick to be so op.

True, but the focus should be on raising the worth of other skills to the level of lockpick rather than marginalizing lockpick down to the level of barter.

There should be some overlap (like with dialogue options, speech comes first, then barter - or the overlap of all combat skills due to them breaking the barrier of enemies - that overlap is justified through the complexity of that gameplay element) but there should be more exclusivities.

But it dictates your tactics if it works the way it should as defining the practice of your chosen tool of trade. Your ability to maneuver isn't worth much if you can't shoot for [censored] (and the design should allow you to not be able to. before you are; elsewise they could just throw the skills away and make the shooter they want to make).

Big guns is hardly a subtype, it's a full category of hip and shoulder mounted conventional weapons (just like small guns is a category of all sorts of small to medium size conventional firearms and EW is a category of all types of energy based weaponry).

Further on that note, I do think that every significant task that the PC can take that differs from the mundane (like walking, breathing, talking....) should be governed by a related skill, and the gameplay adjusted to that requirement and what comes with it.

CD Projekt is a WONDERFUL developer. The guys are talented, passionate about what they do and extremely respectful to his fans. I am in strong hype for that Cyberpunk game they will do.

I'm not saying that Bethesda is not talented .... but they could put so much energy on some things. Do they thought no one would notice, for example, that only has "half a dozen" of voice actors in Skyrim?

Anyone else want a perk that lets you repair deactivated robots and get a temporary follower, kinda like necromancy in skyrim? I think it would be pretty cool, havin a mister gutsy robot followin me around.

P.S. can you guys just chill with the whole arguing over opposing ideas thing, it's pretty annoying when people are trying to read suggestions for Fallout 4, and it makes it harder for developers to actually find quality suggestions, so just chill with the bickering.