Not really, I mean the general theme is there but I think the setting, characters, and tons of side quests will set them apart. Besides, I'm not sure what the last video game I played was that had a truly original story, and I'll at least give Bethesda the benefit of the doubt. Just hoping it's less black-and-white than "noble Railroad of freedom vs. evil slaving Institute"

On a side note, I enjoyed the new trailer and I'm pretty buzzed about The Day being less than a week away.

Fun fact: I read somewhere about what the original plot twist to Mass Effect was going to be: the relays obviously manipulate spacetime to function, but the side effects linger. Basically, the more species advance scientifically, the more the can use the relays, and the faster spacetime degrades, which will cause gravitational anomalies to slowly destroy the universe. This is still hinted as a reason the Quarians' sun is failing. The Reapers kill civilization to stop spacetime degrading, saving the universe. They still allow a certain time for civilization to flourish, I guess based on their calculations of how much the relay use impacts spacetime. Really makes the Reapers more sympathetic, especially since they make a point of saving the genetic material of species they exterminate. So the choice wouldn't end up being synth vs. human, it would be "sacrifice ourselves to give other civilizations a chance in the future" vs. "pull out all the stops, doom the universe but enjoy it while it lasts." I'm not sure if this was an official story at one point or if I made that up, but it makes you think.

Mass Effect 3 was largely about whether synthetics are people too and if they should be saved. That was a major part of the theme of the game. BioWare even stated that Synthesis was the best ending, from their perspective, which allows Shepard to sacrifice himself so that organics and synthetics can become one.

Rather than having synthetics hunting down organics to "save" organics, we have organics hunting down synthetics, or that's how it appears in Fallout 4. We can easily look at characters such as Legion and EDI to gain a greater sense into this dilemma, and without a doubt we'll have comparable characters in Fallout 4 that will try to make us sympathetic to synthetics and their impending doom.

Again, there are a variety of franchises that also touch on these points, but Mass Effect is likely the most closely related being in the same medium as Fallout and being the most recent to release.

I love it when people think ideas they learned about in 2000+ are original.

Mass effect is a fine game but not one single ounce of it is original. So, no they did not copy mass effect.

Which turned out not to be true. The Quarians feared the Geth would turn on them so it was they who started the war. Legion will reveal that the Geth don't harbor ill will towards there creators and would welcome them home if they believed they could be trusted not to try and destroy them again.

the setting and the technology are kind of married, so the androids being part of the story was there from the start. In an interview Todd pretty much says that the replicated man quest was the seed for F4.

You are referring to the Dark Energy theory, which was actually official. I'll provide you a bit more context. Drew Karpyshyn was the original lead writer for the Mass Effect series. He wrote Mass Effect 1 and most of Mass Effect 2. He departed from BioWare Edmonton to work on Star Wars: The Old Republic, before leaving BioWare entirely for a short time. Mac Walters, who was the co-writer with Drew on Mass Effect 2, was the lead writer on Mass Effect 3.

The whole sequence with Tali in Mass Effect 2 was setting up the Dark Energy theory about how the Reapers were trying to prevent the destruction of the universe due to frequent use of the mass relays. That was scrapped when Drew was off the team as Mac went his own direction, organics versus synthetics. This is why in some cases Mass Effect 3 was seen as an odd turn because there was a change in writing leadership for the franchise.

Whether the Dark Energy theory would have ultimately been better had Drew stayed on for the duration of the franchise is anybody's guess. On a side note, Mac Walters is not the lead writer for Mass Effect Andromeda, but rather the creative lead. The lead writer from Halo 4 took over writing duties, so the next Mass Effect game should be vastly different from its predecessor.

Anyways, that's as far off topic as I'll go. The point remains that Fallout 4, incidentally or not, does seem to be sharing many parallels with Mass Effect 3.

ME was good story wise the first game. The second game, the story was blah. It didn't advanced the ME story at all. The third game, story wise it was actually pretty good... up until they made you do a "blue or red pill" situation. And what made it worse was that you had to play the multiplayer in order to get the "best" version of that ending.

And to be honest, science fiction has had this ongoing robots v human thing since the 1950's. So it's not BGS "copying" Bioware, it's both of them copying a popular science fiction theme.

I believe the original poster was referring to when the Leviathans created the catalyst who in turn created the reapers. The catalyst was created because the synthetics the Leviathans created were in fact turning on organics. The Geth and Quarians was an anomaly as it was the Quarians who ultimately instigated the conflict, so the premise that synthetics always turn on organics wasn't always true.

BGS knew that the game would take place in Boston, where the Institute was located, so certainly synthetics were going to play some role one way or another. Yes, the synthetic quest was mentioned and referenced that made its way into Fallout 3. The point is, the actual story came much later in the creative process. BGS builds their world first before they do anything else. I'm just suggesting it appears BGS took a lot of inspiration from Mass Effect 3. Certainly the entire dialogue system and VO came directly from BioWare's formula and BGS more or less admits it without explicitly saying it.

Mass Effect 2 didn't even have a story, which is why the game is criticized. It's just character development and final mission. Not that it matters, but you weren't actually forced to do the multiplayer. There was a mini-game on the official ME3 website that allowed you to build up your forces around the galaxy without doing the multiplayer. Either way, I still agree it was a lame component.

We aren't just talking about man vs machine, man vs AI, etc. Organics versus synthetics and whether synthetics are people too is a very specific and particular understanding of that larger theme that has long existed. Again, this is why there are similarities between Mass Effect and Fallout in this respect because of these implications and whether they should be treated as equals or something lesser.

certainly entitled to think they borrowed from ME:3. I, personally don't see it in the story, based on what we know.
Sure, they borrowed voiced protag. But that's been fairly common for a while now. I'm not saying they didn't borrow some innovations from other games, as they actually acknowledge that. I am only speaking about story. From all we see in F3, we know that there will be conflict between humans and synths, with some thinking they are human. They can't have a game set in Boston without it really, unless they want to ignore the lore they created, and which was the reasoning for picking the location in the first place.

We still don't know to what degree the actual synths as sapients part of the story will be a focus, but as soon as Boston was even hinted at by Dellums, that's where my mind went, and I haven't even played ME:3.

Any synthetic plot can be considered to have borrowed from:

• Metropolis
• The Twilight Zone
• Doctor Who
• Star Trek
• Westworld
• Alien series
• The Terminator
• Blade Runner

And those from each other.

It's fine.

There are few or no truly original stories,

it's all about how you pull it off...

we really don't know if organics versus synthetics and the moral dilemma of whether machines are "people" too is the main quest or one of many quests.

Maybe there are several large quests vs one large MQ with a bunch of small sidequests.

I'd say it had some semi original aspects (that were completely technically moronic). Not sure I recall the reduction of mass technology used before, but I could be wrong.

Why does this whole thread remind me of the whole Microsoft stole the idea for Windows from Apple flamefest from the last century? (btw, it should be noted that Apple stole the idea from PARC. )

This isn't a thread accusing BGS of being "unoriginal," as some have attempted to articulate it as. Those are merely fallacious and straw man arguments being made by those who either don't understand the point of the OP or are suffering from fanaticism. In actuality, this is a thread determining whether this is a good direction for Fallout to go. Regardless of one's understanding, Fallout under BGS has always been about survival and trying to maintain one's humanity in a harsh and chaotic new world.

Fallout 4, without a doubt, seems to be a lot more optimistic than its predecessors. One of the major criticisms of Fallout 3 is it was too depressing, and we see BGS attempting to rectify that not only articistically but even in how the experience is presented. My question is the humans versus synthetic dynamic has never been a major theme or element of the franchise. Does it make sense that this should be such a large focus in this game? Yes, the Institute is in this game and obviously synthetics were going to play some role on some level.

To what degree is this appropriate and does it make sense? Again, Mass Effect 3 is the most recent and closely-related source to tackle this idea and anyone would be a fool to believe BGS did not take inspiration from it. The voiced protagonist and dialogue wheel are straight out of BioWare's toolbox. BioWare also took from Skyrim when making DAI, so this kind of behavior isn't unusual in the game industry. Great developers borrow from other great developers.

Yeah, ME2 has [censored] history, where the best part is from a DLC (Lair of Shadow Broken). Baby-human-Reaper? For what? And the Reapers dont need the relays to come to milk way anymore? Why? The first game revolving around this fact.

But, the final mission, is the best final mission from a game ever. I had to do 6 times until I learn how to save the crew and all my squad.

That Garrus.........You know you can trust him.

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/harrypotter/images/6/6f/Eagames.gif/revision/latest?cb=20080909093245

Aside this, is totally and completely irrelevant if the Illusive Man keep or not the Collector base. Shame.

The story for ME2 svcked, but I loved playing the game! Shadow Broker was fun, loved playing with Liara again. Though in my first play through, I romanced Tali when I had been in a relationship with Liara in ME... it was really awkward.

And funny thing was, they originally weren't going to bring Garrus back! But because he was such a popular character, along with Tali, that they brought them both back.

Yeah, keeping or destroying the Collector base made almost no difference in ME3. Which was a shame, lots of great ideas were on the forums for how to use the Collector base in 3. And I still can't believe they never made Chakwas a romance-able character!

But that's what I do like about Bethesda and games like Fallout. Sometimes it's annoying how Bethesda doesn't just come out and say something is canon, like what they did in Skyrim with some major events in Oblivion. But that's also the great thing about it too! You decide the games canon based on your playthrough.

The idea of "are androids people" has been done long before Mass Effect 3.

Just watch star Trek the Next Generation. Blade Runner and so on.

Or, if you were to ask PIcasso: Good developers borrow - great developers steal.

On topic, though - It seems to me one of the more prevalent criticisms of Fallout 3 was that it mostly rehashed creatures and factions from the previous two games without adding much of their own to the lore. Synths are (for better or worse) one of the new things that Bethesda has brought to the table, here.

You can see how it's true that you can't please everyone all the time on this forum. Bethesda will be criticised if they don't bring any ideas to the table, but no matter what new elements they come up with there's going to be people who dislike those things as well.

Also, Deus Ex (1) did it better.

Again, missing the point. Yes, the idea isn't "new." However, Mass Effect is the same medium and the most recent form of entertainment to pose the question. It's obvious BGS has used Mass Effect 3 as inspiration. Either way, the point is to determine whether this theme is appropriate for Fallout.

>Its obvious they used a game, made after they made the plot of their own game, for inspiration.

time does not flow in reverse.

actually Mass Effect isnt the most recent, the most recent is Wastland 2

Honestly Fallout 3 was a bit of a toss away game, and I think BGS understood that. They had to figure out a way of bringing in the established fan base if possible as well as trying to redefine Fallout for a new generation of fans. They made radical departures by getting rid of the isometric RPG approach and using their own TES formula. Then, to try and make the game not too foreign, they threw in a bunch of references and cues to the previous games in ways that didn't necessarily make sense.

Now that BGS is undisputedly in control of Fallout creatively, I think they are more prone to just create lore and build a truly immersive world which is what they've done with TES all along. I'm not against this idea of synthetics versus humans, I'm just skeptical of how well it works in Fallout, which has always been more about surviving and maintaining one's humanity in a harsh and chaotic post-apocalyptic world. Perhaps there is more to the synthetic element than we know and the protagonist is even more deeply rooted in its creation before the bombs were dropped.

Except you have provided no evidence that the plot was created before Mass Effect 3 was released. Again, the actual story and dialogue for Fallout 4 came late in the development cycle. Yes, the game was being "developed" since 2008, but that was almost entirely concept art and world building. There was no story for the game then. BGS builds their worlds first, then the story later.

Wasteland 2 is an indie game, so it being an inspiration is quite unlikely. Not that it's not possible, but again BGS clearly took inspiration from BioWare on a variety of levels, not just the story.