I would say make the main character age over time so TIME itself has meaning.

But then it would just be weird and awkward to see all those NPC's young and nimble while you risk croaking it from tripping over the hilt of your-ahem-sword hilt.

Best solution would be the more time spent whilst fast-traveling the stronger the hiccups.

yeah, play hardcoe (i am with your friend on this one - i like having a largen inventory) and leave the rest of us alone (it beats me, why the hardcoe players, that would ruin a company, if they only catered to them (because, let's face it, hardcoe and old-school players are not the large numbers a modern game needs in sales in order to be successfull) are always the loudest - why are the "casuals" (hate that name btw.) not taking to the forums?)

greetings LAX

ps: survival just for survivals sake and more tedium with having to eat, sleep, scavange (sorry, i like my ammo being on raiders i kill, because i expend ammo to kill them, too) and craft? - nope, not for me!

I definitely think hardcoe should remain a side option.

It just could be because the "hardcoe" or "old school", as you put it, are the ones not being served, while the "casuals" (again, your term) have the whole market for them - all they really need to do is pick the right kind of "casual" from the big catalogue of "casual", and be as "casual" with it as they "casually" please; there's no need to make any noise because all you need is right there waiting to be picked up, and more is coming all the time from all directions.

Eugh, trying to TES it up is a poor subsitute for a proper new Fallout. I need to figure out some way to kill time until april, so I can be dissapointed all over again when it passes with no Fallout 4 news.

While that is totally unrelated to what my post described, you bring up a grand point that I should have; yes of course they should bring that back. The whole point of it was to make the player prioritize the expenditure of their finite amount of time that they had to save their home. The problem is not that it restricts the player's access to the game, the problem is that the restriction is seen by modern audiences as a problem at all; it should be a hassle that they have no control over, and the game should be able to quit if they choose to ignore the main quest. (Why should it bother continuing the game if the player ignores the point of play?

As with above, allowing meaning to time is simply allowing time to pass, and remove the game's infinite stasis. If the PC is told there is a raider attack in the next village, and they choose not to go there, then when they do eventually go there, they should see the smoldering aftermath and/or be vilified, not have some villager run up to them days later ~shouting, "Thank goodness you came, the raiders are mounting an attack, and we need help!".

I agree with this 100%. Todd Howard always is going on about going your own way, at your own pace. Which is great... For a TES game. I think a healthy sense of urgency is a great element to add to a game, especially Fallout.

Something I found beautiful about Fallout 1, which I am playing for the first time, but there is a supermutant I think called Leu.. Well, I asked a super mutant to bring me to him and I was absolutely terrified of this man. He was asking for the location of the vault and said I would be dropped in FEV. Though in the newer fallouts I never once felt that way. I liked the time requirement for the water chip too. I would hate failing, but thankfully there are ways to prolong the time limit, it adds a ton to the feel of the game. Many emotions are often brought out in my gaming experience, worry is not one of them, which I wish was. It adds realism in the sense that your realistic about your approach to sitatuations. Bethesda's approach for having the player make believe that there are boundaries and time limits doesn't cut it. You "never" recieve worry from making up situations in TES games, unless your going kooky.

This is a very palpable difference between the games; I've mentioned it several times myself. Fallout had it, Fallout 3 does not. It just doesn't feel right without it IMO.

I'm sure it is obvious that it has a lot to do with Beth's aspirations of making Fallout into a post-apocalyptic Elder Scrolls. Only, y'know, without the dragonborn.

...

There is no dragonborn... only Vault Dweller.

Fallout 4 hero: Vaultakiin

There is no spoon... only a spork.

*Trying to please everyone cannot result in pleasing anyone... it just makes the effort tolerable to everyone.
(This is to be expected when you shoot at http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/FO3_Arrow_to_the_Knee.jpg.)

Born with the irradiated blessing of being able to shoot deadly lasers from his groin and to harness new kinds of crotch-laser abilities from other vault documents he discovers.

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/5152733440/hA728D903/

You should have acted. Enclave is already here (again...) But no one wanted to believe, believe they even exist. And when the truth finally dawned, it dawned in (nuclear) fire!

I like #1and #2. #3 im neutral. I would prefer they focus on item placement.

Back the the great tedium debate

Calling a game "CoD" is basically calling it unoriginal or mediocre (at least on these forums). Which is what removing realistic features from fo would do.

To be clear, i dont want tedious [censored] thrown in "just because." I want immersion creating tedium/realism- anything to make me forget i am playing a game. I want to be drawn into it. Things like: magical fast travel; weapons that never need to be repaired; a PC that never sleeps, eats, or drinks water; or quest markers that tell me exactly where to go all pull me out of world. They clearly remind me i am playing a game. I know i am playing one (of course) but there is no need to be constantly reminded by the game itself.

On top of all that, a little tedium/realism can draw you into the story. As i have said before, a far off, long lost ruin feels more like one when it is far away and hard to find. They are just empty words when the place is a 3min walk and has a huge arrow pointing at it.

Some great examples are the starts of fo1&2. They are much more engaging because of the real time limit placed on you; not just the suggestion of one. It creates sense of urgency that is lacking in both fo3 and nv.

Edit: another important aspect of a game that realism enhances is difficulty. Fps can really only increase difficulty by just tossing more, or tougher, baddies at you. A good rpg can make an encounter harder in several ways: the environment could be dangerous, your supplies could running low (making you weaker), ammo could be running low, gun could be in need of repair, etc.

You know one thing I'd kind of like to see? Knee dropping when shot. Nothing is more fun to me than in games like GTA when I shoot an enemy in the knee and they collapse/fall to the ground on their knee/knees.

In before mandatory arrow to the knee joke...

No. I'm so sick of that [censored] line, it's not even cute saying it to be ironic.

As long as the same thing happens to the pc i am all for it. Being on even ground with npcs is a must.

Vaulting, Mantling, Climbing and improved Ladders:

Players should move naturally over obstacles with movement modified by armor type worn and weapon carried. Each type of movement should have a respective animation in first and third person. Animations should include weapon carried. Battlefield 4 is a good example of movement animations.

No armor or light armor will have no obstacle penalties.

Medium armor will take longer to traverse obstacles, but will receive no restrictions

Heavy armor will take the longest traverse, and will be restricted from climbing ledges higher than the characters chest after jumping and mantling when jumping from one object to another.

Power armor will have an increase jump height, but will fall under the same restrictions as heavy armor.

Movement speed should also be affected by all armors with power armor movement speed falling between heavy and medium armor.

Weapon restrictions to obstacle movement will depend on height of obstacle and number of hands required to operate weapon. 1 handed weapons will have no restrictions. 2 handed weapons will not be able to climb up head high obstacles or higher. Heavy weapons will not be able to climb up chest high obstacles or higher. Any obstacle movement that requires hands will receive a speed penalty depending on type of weapon un-holstered.

Being able to climb up surfaces should be a perk with use restricted to No armor or light armor. Weapons must be holstered during climbing.

Ladders should not require a loading screen. Weapons should auto-holster and climbing should commence in first or third person. You can equip a pistol to defend yourself if your are stationary, but it holsters when climbing begins again. Climb ladders faster or sliding down them when pressing sprint button. Faster climbing and sliding creates more noise and affects stealth.

To implement this properly, sliding on surfaces needs to be adjusted and all invisible walls should be removed for maximum fun.

absolutely not (!)

that's something that makes my skin crawl - i hate forced urgency (i mean, if it serves the quest - like your are sent for medicine for a person dying without it, then ok, but not if they tell you to fetch some random stuff with no live or death attached to it etc.)

in FO1 it was used ok (you only had it at the start, with fetching the water-processing-chip (and it was logical, that without such a chip, the vault would die, after they ran out of their emergency-water-reserve and it was enough time (you didn't need to constantly check the clock...but i would say i breathed a little easier (and had more fun!) after having resolved that quest...i dislike being on a timer!)

greetings LAX

ps: oh one thing i don't want back at all (it gets kind of old):

being banished after finishing a quest or finishing the game...twice is enough (well three times, if you count FO3 after daddy leaves (you are not formally banished, but forced out...still...

Of course, I don't think he meant meaningless tasks are timed. Meaningless tasks have no urgency either.. Though a meaningful task when logically placed should have a time limit, when there isn't one, the life of the game is just svcked out and everyone seems fake along with the world.

But for people like me Fallout 3 was our first fallout game and anything different from that wouldn't "feel" right. Adding a doomsday clock would ruin the game for me, I want to explore and take my time with the game. I dont ever want to feel rushed while playing in a vast open world. Obviously that's also just my opinion. But after playing both fallout 1 and 2 recently I can say that I like the newer versions much better.

Exactly!!!

i would like a few timed quests in the next fo. I really enjoyed the sense of urgency those quests created in fo1&2. They really breathed life into the games. As time wore on i always pictured the situation deteriorating back home