New Vegas was the perfect synthesis between old-school Fallout, and Bethesda's rather casual-ized envisioning of it in Fallout 3. We can only hope that Beth learns from their mistakes and hear out the community in providing some more mature material in the next game when it comes to CHOICES and DEPTH.

Nostalgia is a weak argument when actually counting the number of spells, armors, enemies, quests, and choices in previous games that dwarfs those in Skyrim. The mindless puzzles, linear quests and dungeons; the constant hand holding in Skyrim doesn't support the argument either.

Just look at a map of an Oblivion dungeon compared to one in Skyrim and compare the quests in Oblivion to those in Skyrim. Count the weapons and armor as well, nostalgia isn't the case, I assure you.

I believe I remember when there was this longer discussion about these videos where the consensus was that the "not dumbing down" guy was more or less grasping at straws and off the point notes, full of [censored], so to speak. I don't remember exacts, but I remember the overarcing response. That's all irrelevant anyway though. TES can become as dumbed down (or the contrary, which would be nice, but which doesn't seem to be the direction it is take to) as it is wanted to be. This is the Fallout section.

Not the same, it would be similar to what has happened if Bethesda announced that tes will from now on be an mmorpg series only.

I've discussed this issue to death but for me advancing on the good things that fonv brought to the table and not skyrim is enough for me

Edit:

Also I have a video on the Fallout series on my youtube channel if anyone cares...

And once again, the exact same things were said about Oblivion, and said about Morrowind. I havent played very much Oblivion, but in terms of Morrowind to Skyrim the game hasn't really improved or worsened, its simply changed. There are many things in Morrowind that are simply broken, and those things are removed in Skyrim. I don't see removing a broken feature as inherently bad, I would say it is more neutral. as fixing the feature would be good, and leaving it broken in the next release would be bad.

I think that the perfect game would be Fallout 3 and New Vegas together. I dont see why the whole choices and consequences thing has to come at the expense of open world exploration like it did in New Vegas, I think they can both perfectly co exist together.

It doesn't but exploration and C&C can't both be top priority UNLESS they systematically make every feature and location etc that caters to exploration also has to have a location or feature that caters to C&C, would people really be happy if every second location was only tied to a quest for examples sake?

Well, there's a difference between making a boring world populated with interesting people, and making a interesting world populated with boring people. Its getting one side fo the equation right, and not the other, and I dont see why there has to be a design philosphy of distributing the interesting onto one side instead of the other, rather than evenly distributing your talent to each end of development.

I'd be more than happy to sacrifice some of the mindless exploration that Fallout 3 had, if it meant having more/better real choices with real consequences in game. For example: In Skyrim, I can join the Stormclucks, yet freely waltz into a Wimperial camp without fear of any repercussions. With C&C, I shouldn't be able to do this, my reputation with the Wimperials would be ruined, and they should attack on sight.

A major point for me is that TES has stressed the simulation angle from day 1. Regardless of whatever else was intended, the games always sought to put the player on the ground in the moment... all the way back to Arena.

*But Fallout was not like Arena, and did not attempt a reactive playground. It was not about a super smart scientist/rambo/cat burglar. The game allowed for an average PC with the option to increase stats a the cost of decreasing others ~ensuring below average weakness for above average abilities. This entire aspect was tossed out in favor of constant linear empowerment every level; including perks every level ~that then had to be toned down... because they were every level. In Fallout, the stats don't improve. Picking your stats is a commitment, while FO3 encourages the player to revoke any and all prior commitments at whim ~after~ leaving the vault.

I would say that they have so much to learn about Fallout ~but they don't, it wasn't a mistake, this was deliberate... it follows Oblivion to a 'T', it's formulaic. http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/Fallout3-1.jpg.

FO4 will follow the pattern. ("What were the hang ups players had?" "well they didn't like that the guns weren't precise", "It's an RPG", "they didn't like it"; "make the guns more precise.")

I do expect it to become more of a survival simulation, offering 'How would you fare, if you were there?'... and that's the last thing I'd ever want inflicted upon the series.

I personally disagree with fonv having a boring world, what do you mean by exploration?

What is an interesting world to you?

Indeed.

The player should need to cope with the game (and the rules), not the other way around. The thing that makes these systems interesting is the power to influence how the game works on a larger level and need to adapt to it at the same time. Not many games do that anymore, and certainly not Bethesda games (and when they try, they offer an illusion, a toupee that just doesn't seem to hold its place for long once you take your hand off of it).

FO3 had an encounter over every hill, and a coin in every crevice (figuratively). NV did not; (from what I know of it).

Amazingly, FO3 is praised for the entire land being untouched until the player arrives; where Fallout was a pre-looted world full of empty crates, because the player is 80 years late to the party. The crates with loot were either in someone's house, totally out in the middle of nowhere, or in places so deadly that no one had survived trying to loot them. In FO3, you can find a free mini nuke in a barn.

NV had places that existed without special reason for the arriving prince [player].

(It also had some mildly restricting barriers that ~because invisible rather than unsightly~ were interpreted as lazy and abusive of player rights to freedom..)

After playing Alppha protocol just there I've noticed how useful the dossiers are for factions and individuals, I've suggested ideas of a similar ilk before but would people be open to having fleshed out descriptive dossiers on people and factions?

To be honest, I think a lot of my problems with New Vegas is that its wasteland is mostly mapped out, and that you are dealing with large groups in a rebuilt world instead of doing the rebuilding and mapping out yourself. I think Fallout 3 is the best game of all time percisely because it put so much of its work into a fusion of exploration and choice, and I think that the world of Fallout fits them a lot better than a medieval fantasy world.

I guess what I mean, is that in New Vegas and TES, you already know whats ahead of you, for the most part. There is a central government that patrols the roads, and either by reading it in books in previous games or by having a long conversation with someone in the starter town, you have a good idea of what to expect from the world map. In Fallout 3, you discover the goings on of the wasteland by witnessing it yourself, you figure out that the super mutants are kind of a big deal when you blunder into them going into DC, you see that the Enclave is mysteriously watching the wasteland by taking a look at the eyebot in Springvale.

Even then, I think that the true thing that made Fallout 3 great was less the overarching storyline, and more the immediate exploration and choices. My vision for Fallout 4 is to be able to wander through the wasteland, crest a hill, come across a community with very unique circumstances, characteristics, and way of looking at things, and then make a massive impact on that communities history by your actions only to dissapear into the wastes as you crest the next hill. That, alongside picking through ruins of the old world for both supplies and small stories about the old world itself, is what I think New Vegas really lacked in a lot of places.

New Vegas is still a great game though, and in Honest Hearts I basically see what I described. From learning about the tribes of the land after a hard journey through danger, to finding pieces of a world once forgotten with the survivalist, and making a grand impact on that community that will reverberate through generations, only to wander out of the sight of their history and end up doing it all again when you find a different land.

But you don't know anything when you start Fallout, they give you a location a weeks trip though who knows what, in the hope that you can find what they need there... and that's it. The game covers the area of a US State. You know nothing, and must explore everything to find anything. You even have to find people to tell you of other places to look.

Any place you go on the map is generated on the fly ~based on what terrain is on that cell of the map when you visit; cities; the coast; desert; mountains, or settlements.

http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/FO1_map_Behavior_zpsa30410f2.gif

It would be a nice touch if FO4 did that.

I really don't see how the player can infer what is to come in Fallout New Vegas?

The player is shot and left for dead for a platinum chip that he has no idea what it does made for Mr House an elusive largely unknown figure for reasons that the player doesn't know while the NCR and the legion are also in the mix for the chip with there own ideology that the player isn't aware of (maybe not the NCR if you've played previous games).

In Fallout New Vegas you traverse the wastes dealing with settlements like the strip, freeside, novac and the boomers etc.

Fallout new vegas does this better than fo3, with the faction reputation you have an idea what standing your are in just what your actions mean to these settlements or factions.

Not in Fallout New Vegas. You can glean the major goings on of the wasteland through talking to a few characters in the starting small frontier town. And infact, that is put in there for first time players, since in almost every character background you can come up with for the Courier he would already know a lot about the NCR, and have no reason to ask people what exactly a NCR is.

I don't see that as a problem; it's an inherent part of the job of a courier.

** For the record, I'm far more in favor of limited PC background ~that is supported, over unlimited PC background ~that is ignored.

The greater the scope of the limits (while being supported) ~ the better, but when it stops mattering, then it's a waste of time IMO.

The role in NV is that of a courier.

You are able to learn about the major politcal struggles of the Mojave by just asking around in a single area. All of this will be new to people playing the first time, but I think its a bit of a flaw that the Courier by all rights should know a lot of the high level stuff, since he has been in the firm hands of the wasteland for many years by now.

There is some mystery to a lot of the goings on, but the journey of exploration and discovery is not all that well represented. Encountering the Boomers and learning about their history, problems, and aspirations is something that I want more of, but moving in and out of a major city hub to set up for a big conflict in the future, not so much. I think the game should be about mapping out and making a impact on a completely destroyed world, not so much being a mercenary for a rebuilt nation state.

He was also shot in the head, and has had meatball brain surgery.

*Which is funny... because the PC never seems to have the scar, and usually starts the game with hair. If they do similar in FO4, I would hope they start with plausible recovery in progress... and not a PC in perfect health ~that was just seen to have been injured.

Yeah you here some limited information about each factions at the start but you still have no idea what they want and what they represent, the revealing (both forms) of Mr House and discussion with Caesar highlight this.Also by this point you still have no idea what Benny has to do with all of this, there is a lot of mystery and very little assurance or certitude for what's to come in fonv at the start.

Also why should the world be completely destroyed 204 years since the great war?

Not even Obsidian could manage this in New Vegas, though. I could be idolized by both the Legion and NCR without fear of repercussion until I progressed in the storyline and had to choose a quest between the two.

I've never managed to be on good terms with both factions at the same time. TBH, I've found it extremely easy to get vilified by the Legion in NV. All it takes is one gunfight and voila, you are now vilified by them. I've found it's also extremely easy to have this happen with the Powder Gangers as well. Desptie trying on several occasion to remain on good terms with them, I've only managed to do it once.

...And Obsidian did a far far far far better job in this area than Bethesda Game Studios has ever done...or likely ever will, given their current (and likely permanent) design philosophy.

This. Wait a while after release and see what people think of it. Trailers and info sites only show what's on the surface of the game and you don't gain anything by pre-ordering.

I agree, while the consequences of rival faction status wasn't ideal in New Vegas, it was certainly a step up from what it was in Skyrim. I was a bit disappointed by the lack of response by certain faction members even though I had butchered a few in the past, but I loved how once you progressed enough with one side, you were locked out of any form of assistance from the opposing groups, even without a direct offense. I'll be completely distraught if reputation doesn't return in Fallout 4.