But I bet not when he was still 18.

Polymaths don't make compelling PCs [IMO]; where is the fun in playing the Beyonder or Superman; the fun is in playing Rorschach and Gambit, or Joker... Not a cross between Joker and Bain; mixed with Freeze and Mxyztplk.

But to each there own eh...
(Until their "music" is blasting 20 feet from your window for hours...)

I wouldn't want a D&D system in Fallout of course; but I'm already tired of FO3's approach... it treats you like Sabastion Cabbot's "Pip" from the Twighlight Zone.

It's a nice place to visit, but that's part of its problem IMO.

Arcanum did a bit of this. If FO4 does not start the PC in a vault, that might be a pretty cool feature to have. They could include (mostly non-beneficial) mutations as side effects from their history. Just no ghoulism (at least I would hope).

That long ..

Maybe you could even get exclusive special unlisted perks based on where you come from through their faction attributes. Not too many but some, it would encourage replay value.

I also want Ghoulism just as an optional self-agumentation like Skyrim's vampires and werewolves.It should give Max-radiation sickness something else besides just instant death. Then there are ghoul perks.

Not really, FO is hardly 50s-Sci Fi. Its just an alternative history story with an abstractly 50s theme.

Regardless because the 50s are the theme it still needs to apply the aesthetics but more so for the hair options in creation mode. All we had for selection was 2 real 50s hair styles, the rest were for old men or raider cuts. Raider cuts should be aviliable if you join their faction but hair styles intended to be the fashion of general society should just be that. There just isnt enough actual hairstyles. Especially for females.

Maybe give vats more options besides combat like parley to a group fighting you to stop fighting you or convince a member to turn on them and maybe smoke or flash bang for non violence solutions

It still feels like FO is missing its aesthetic theme or rather lacking consistancy in the claim that it is a prominent significance that trademarks the image of the more recent decendance of the franchice. I feel like it would help it more if it followed up on how its marketed. Its not manditory but it would just help imo. At most it would help players like me who want to atleast portray their own characters in the time. NV started to bring that aspect back to the surface but its missing so much more retrospection.

I should clarify that I don`t want Class = Race like the way Elder Scrolls have it. I see it more as what your base exclusive perks may get you in social interactions from a faction you`re character can be native to or decending from. Then in someway there should be something to mark your progress in your tile or image as you migrate from one faction alignment to another. It would nice to be an ex raider or have parental raiders while you become a Merc, or NCR, or whatever, just to branch your progression or regression in political image.There should also be some sort of log system that keeps track on what you do and what choices you made along the way.

It could also give NPCs differences among each other rather than just what they`re carrying on them for you to choose between (assuming you can recruit anyone) but their skills in combat. It could also make human enemies harder and put variety in their advantages.

I find it funny that in the FO3 guide it says enemies will stop attacking you if you stop... but that never happens for me.

On VATS I think that could be utilized to also give party commands as well. Lock onto your party and you can either shoot them or change commands.

So developers are wrong and you know better than the creators of the franchise what Fallout is?


wat

Hair is fine, the developers should focus on gameplay and things that matter, not providing hundreds of different haircuts.

Like all things Fallout 4 related this is questionable at best but here's an article pertaining to Fallout 4 http://www.product-reviews.net/2014/02/11/fallout-4-developer-may-not-be-bethesda/

Sounds like the dude is reading way too much into some job ads that have nothing particularly specific or special about them.

Although, I would be interested in seeing what would become of it, if Fallout 4 was indeed developed by someone else than Bethesda; there'd be no guarantees about anything (whether it'd be a good or a bad thing), obviously, but it'd be interesting to see nonetheless, a fresh perspective.

I'd prefer some consistency as the series has already what 5 different developers over 5 canon games?

This could only be a good thing. FO 1 & 2 did allow (or inflict) situational perks and traits depending on player actions. Arcanum did alter the PC stats and starting resources; and/or NPC rections based on the PCs [optional] origins.

This is the dread that many FO series fans hate & loathe (sorry, but it really is). Optional augmentation through technology is fitting the series; but optional super powers from the war aftermath; and curable ghoulism ~when ghouls are so complex ~prior to FO3... is just not fitting, and in many opinions is outright cheapening the fiction.

Myself I don't even want ghouls as a playable race; not because the player shouldn't be able to play them (though that is my opinion on it), but because it's rather predictable how they will be implemented ~and implemented wrong. See/// Todd Howard (and others) would mandate that ghouls be fun to play; have perks of their own ~so to speak ... ( as well as literally )... When ghouldom is harshly portrayed and they are in many places shot on sight... The only ~seriously the ONLY~ way to make it work is to rip-off "Blazing Saddles" when designing the MQ... and who thinks they can manage a feat like that? (I do not.) That is not a battle they want to pick. We would effectively get Argonians in Fallout 4 as a result. That's how it would happen, and that's the extent of the depth it would offer.


Not so. Fallout is an alternative future, as extrapolated by popular 50's sci-fi; it's the future if it had actually happend the way they guessed at it. It does not mean that it's the locked in the 50's. It does not mean that they couldn't have cell phones and Viagra ; it means they would make (and market) them with a 50's aesthetic to them. There is a none too subtle difference. Fallout has plasma rifles; plasma rifles are not from the 50's, but they guessed at ray guns and other high tech weaponry... Bethesda got it wrong (but did a beautiful result with it). Look at their laser rifle... It looks like it's made of 50's electrical parts; it does not look like a Flash Gordon prop. This is because the artist was thinking "a laser gun from the 50's", and not "a 50's guess at a 1970's laser gun". This is a misinterpretation (one among many, many, many); ~and also canon by fiat, so it's a moot point. Even Todd himself has joked (in the George Mason Speech), that he "had an out", and did not have to include a thing, because it happened after the 50's... He either has no clue ~or, more likely, he's just sticking to their re-defined & repackaged skewed version of the original concepts... onerous IMO, but easily marketable).


This is true, but I feel that it's a shame that it's true. It is marketed that way, and that's how people see it now, but that's not how it's supposed to be.

None of the games ever allowed that. Personally I've nothing against it, but I'd rather it copy Wasteland 2's methods, and make it never a guarantee. Also, I'd think that the PC's Charisma and Strength should combine for a derived intimidation/respect attribute, that influences NPCs loyalty and trust... Weak leaders would not be able to command a group on a suicide mission, unless they trusted him to get them back alive.... or were the type to do it because they wanted the mission to succeed even if they didn't come back. In Both cases, a weak leader would not convince them that it was worth risking their lives on the PC's half baked plans.

As Gizmo said Ghoulism is going to be extremely difficult to pull of and Bethesda would be tempted to put in a cure for when people complain about there choice of being a ghoul actually has consequences which would just curb stomp the lore pertaining to ghouls into tiny little bits to the extent that massive amounts of lore would simply not make sense all so the game could hold the players hand

If Bethesda are that bothered put in an easter egg ghoul mask in Fallout 4. that pretty much has the depth of a race from skyrim anyway...

I always thought they missed out on the chance to make the 'Pint-Sized Slasher mask' the vault-boy face.

Sure; that should've been - but wasn't - held in more high value much earlier already. Although, if the "consistency" - what ever all it entails here specifically - leads to nowhere preferable, it's not worth much to have.

Judging it on bethesda's presentation and observation compared to what the definition of the theme is.

Character creation and customization is apart of gameplay and altered all throught it outside combat and direct questing. It matters.

What definition?

Of what the theme they are advertiising to be the game's aesthetic identity.

And that identity is "retrofuturistic setting inspired by 1950s culture and science-fiction". Not "1950s copypasted AFTER THE NUCLEAR WAR."

"Copypasted 1950s" means Nuclear war after 1940s implying the actual 50s era just starts right after the world is picks up again and JFK is now president. Thats not what I said. I didnt say to repeat the history of the 1950s.

"Inspired by" means taking the political ideologies of the 1950s over their own in-universe history. Thats has nothing to do with design but the game still implies that it uses the visual appearances too. I said that they could use more "inspiration" to emphasize that as the basis for influences. If 10% of the game itself is the inspiration why have it at all? Why market it solely surrounding that gag theme when its near to non existant in-game?

Honestly, Fallout 3 is the only game that seems largely focused on that 50's aesthetic. I think they should focus less on trying to make everything look retro-futuristic and more on the actual Fallout universe.

Oh no, I'm not saying that they should be limited to actual 50's limitations and self-awareness. I meant that the people and culture should reflect more of the aesthetics of the 50s. Like how the Flintstones has all our modern accessibles intergrated into the fictional perception of the neanderthal age but the aesthetics are more predomanntly of that caveman age. The post-nuclear era for bethesda's FO society is just the enviroment and political divergances, the people, culture and socialization would and should still be 50s. I just want to see more of a cultural reflection, not limitation. My original request was that they had more 50s themed hair and clothing for you and the NPCs to do that not to literally turn back time altogether.

The ghoul mask doesnt make you a ghoul at all though, I feel more patronized having to pretend I am when I'm not. Nothing about you actually changes the experiences. So what if people complain about turning into one after they have their choice of being one overcome their inept decisiveness? I could say the same thing about being able to die in the game too.

I wouldnt go as far as insisting that being a Ghoul is like being a Dwarf of an Elf. I only speculate on how i could work if they allowed you to become a passive feral for aesthetic or combat purposes, and would only give you perks on what Ghouls are already immune to which can carry over. I woudn't at all want them to market being a ghoul as being an entirely different character. Ghouls should just be treated as mutations your character isnt just conviently immune to. I saw it more as how you can become a vampire in Oblivion, you're stull whatever you are underneath it. Not treated like a mask or a race but an effect on you if you allowed it to happen. The only way it wouldn't be a gimmick is if it didnt benifit you in any outweighing way than being normal. Being a turned goul should come with their costs as well. Maybe you lose intelligence and Charisma, you lose your Lady Killer/Black Widow, and people become more hostile towards you but Ghouls will give you some side quests about their life's prejudices.

It seems to me that the characters in Fallout 1 and 2 are heavily inspired by the characters of wasteland. This is why you have raiders with mohawks and crazy colored clothing but also have 50's inspired cars and robots. Basically, Fallout is a mix of 80's-90's punk (think Fifth Element) and 50's retrofuturism.

No thanks. Seriously... Essential NPCs are an invulnerable weapon for the player. They could sit on the sidelines and wait until their NPC kills a pack of Deathclaws.

Making them Immortal also removes any sense of value or risk with them. A ghoul..... A ghoul should loose hit teeth if he bites people, and that should never be allowed to transmit genetic damage. Ghoulism isn't rabies.

It's everywhere in the game. I suggest familiarizing yourself with the subject, particularly 1950s science-fiction movies, novels, and comics, before claiming there's not enough 1950s in the game. Do. Your. Research.

But I don't see why they need that; it's not the fifties in Fallout; it's not the 50's set in the future. Fallout's setting is the future as assumed or guessed at by 50's pop culture. It does not call for techno-beatniks and bee-hive hair.
If anything (and it is), Fallout was heavily influence by Mad Maxx.

You might not ~but they would. If enough people clamored for Ghoul PCs in Fallout 4/5, they would put them in, and change nothing else... You could then be a ghoul, and instead of 'You look strong', you'd get. "What happened to your face?".

Maybe.... just maybe, there would be this one grumpy outcast that hated ghouls and said so, or refused to deal with them... and after you find the quest for it... he'll say, I was wrong... you guys are alright! ".
No thanks.

There should be entire towns that refuse entry to ghouls; giving the player no access to the place, and immediate hostilities if they find a way in... I can't imagine Bethesda would ever do that. Ghoul PC's would get poisoned drinks at the bars on some towns; exploited and betrayed more often than not... IIRC Bethesda has a policy of never lying to the player... hows that work if the player is universally hated across most of the map?

It doesn't; and they wouldn't be.
The problem is that ghouls ~accurately portrayed~ shouldn't be fun in the common sense; if they are, then it's likely they aren't accurately portrayed; or the world around them isn't. Ghouls are Fallout's sci-fi version of 'the walking dead' ~and I don't mean zombies.