So you want to complain about "lack of depth" but are unable to define what you mean by that? Ah, gotcha.

You guys do realize of course that your complaints will have absolutely zero impact on the success of the game?

Maybe you should scroll down to the bottom and look at the logos real quick.

It's certainly a very pretty puddle. Pretty boring, that is.

I'm so underwhelmed and disappointed by a game I had zero expectations for that I can only sit and:

I don't really feel constrained by the intro, background-wise. In time of war, in a fifties-era culture, conscription would be the norm, so I would have expected all able-bodied persons to serve in some capacity, especially those with exceptional skills (e.g., medical, scientific, or technical). That covers a lot of backgrounds, linked only by military service. As for the home life, I see it as the calm between storms, a momentary reprieve for any personality type.

I am a bit annoyed that we don't have options for different player character voices (just three would do it), or that we can't toggle an old style text dialogue instead.

As for the "ocean / puddle" thing, I don't really expect open-world games to be deep, or deep stories to allow much variation in gameplay. Intense stories tend to force limited options to preserve the integrity of the story, and giving more options would require the story to be that much broader, and more shallow as a result. I don't know of anyone who has struck a happy medium. That said, I enjoy games that fall on either side.

Well, i was curious why he asked what depth was considering "deep" is in the forum title.
Whatever you can say - someone has a counter argument for and vice versa.

"What is depth? Depth is but an illusion"
Well, how philosophical of u
Pls, tell me more
Next we'll be getting
"What is the English language? What do these words we speak really MEAN"

Illuminati confirmed

People already have with unofficial ones. For me it will be as simple as changing the six of the person whose face was blown off. Maybe we'll be able to change him\her to a super mutant or even a synth. Nick Valentine's character model as the husband, anyone?

Then I might actually care about the main story and not have to swallow back the bile at the character creation screen. We won't be able to mod the boy out, but at least we can fix our biggest life choice.

LOL. I preferred the Mel Gibson, GIVE ME BACK MY SON! Of which I was super excited when my character got to say that exact line in game.

Lol would you look at that, they took Obsidian's logo off.

Woot. I'm rpging the crap out of this game. I'm that super charismatic guy who is completly screwed in the wasteland cause everybody shoots on sight.

Yup!

Not even any examples of "depth"?

So let me ask you this: was "Dr. Bloodmoney" deep? If memory serves, it had ONE character, and pretty much all took place in a space station. What about the movie "Moon" (which I won't spoil)?

If someone is going to complain that the game "lacks depth" then it behooves them to explain what they mean by depth., otherwise it will be quite easy for anyone reading such complaints to simply dismiss them as meaningless prattle.

I'm not saying all this to be confrontational, though I do find it annoying that people complain and then cannot explain what it is they are really complaining about. I honestly have not clue what someone means when they say "FO4 'lack depth.'" I just do not see it that way. Maybe I do not understand what the statement means though.

I miss in Fallout 2 how certain characters would react to certain dialogue opitions. If you said the wrong thing or tried to be witty/sarcastic it could pissed that character off and cause him to just whip his gun out on you.

In Fallout 4 I can say any of the 4 opitions and it still leads to the same outcome. Its the illusion of choice with no consquence.

That was a laughably wrong sentiment when said about Oblivion and Skyrim and its even more wrong for this game.

I don't remember it ever being in the F4 forums (and I think Obsidian wouldn't really want to have their name under this game anyway). It's still present in Fallout Series, Fallout Universe, Fallout Fanfiction, and FNV (obviously) forums.

I think there is a ton of depth and breadth to the game. Considering how much time and effort I end up putting in managing skills, gear, inventory, crafting, managing settlements, picking apart questlines, exploring areas in a semi-orderly fashion, there are a lot of moving parts under my control. I also do feel that your character build can be highly specialized and that the progression and perk system is highly meaningful and rewarding and the effects are apparent because they are concrete.

I even appreciate the level-gating of higher level perks in specific perk categories because it encourages spending perk points. If I know I can't upgrade gunner for another 5 or 6 levels I can go ahead and put the next couple of points into other skills and I have more capabilities at my disposal at a given level. I understand why some people might not like that, though.

And all that said, I haven't even mentioned yet all the stuff going in on-screen as I explore the world and different sites. Your actions have real consequences. You take out a raider group with a named leader and that causes other raider groups to react to that. They change tactics, arm up, recognize you sometimes, stuff like that. The atmosphere, the lighting system, tracking an enemy while in stealth by watching their shadows play across walls, being stalked by monsters, even having your companions react to that. NPC's addressing you and the actions they know you've taken, this game is hoppin'.

It has flaws, sure, but patches are just beginning. I would LOVE for my companions to not block my view when aiming. I'm now messing around with giving them more explicit commands to suit my stealth/sniper approach. Mixed results so far. I have a couple of Pip-Boy related problems, partly from display SNAFUs when I'm equipped with Chameleon and with strange info about my settlements, like some showing the wrong numbers of beds, food, defense, etc, when in the field. Nothing I can't live with, and most of which seems patchable.

I'm happy.

There was the Live Another Life for Skyrim, where you had the choice to be dumped basically anywhere on the map. That was cool. I used that mod on my 2nd character. I'm sure there's a way to do something like that here.

Not that I have any complaints over this game. I generally take it as it is. If I enjoy it, then great. If not, I'll go play something else. Turns out that I do really enjoy this game. I have just made a 2nd character, ignored the intro and decided to make a detective guy who is now partnered with Nick. I won't even touch the main quest with this guy. My first character will, however, do as much is possible towards 100%. That's how I always play Bethesda games. First character for everything. 2nd, 3rd...etc. characters for tailored styles. Yes it is possible to do in F4.

As for that comment. Well, are you saying that we are all stupid? As it turns out, I make a living from being an Engineer who makes parts for hydraulics systems. Is that low level intelligent enough for you? I also know damn well there are people on these forums who have quite a high intelligence rate. Playing a game you enjoy for fun does not show how intelligent you are with other attributes in the real life world. Seriously, what a comment.

If you don't enjoy the game, fine. It does not matter to those that do. People like different things. Let them enjoy those things and you enjoy yours. I harbour no one any ill will.

Qft, people might want to read before saying we aren't explaining the lack of depth Bethesda has.

Can you tell me what this qoute from TotalBiscuit actually means? Gaming elitists love to repeat it ad nauseum but seem to have a very vague idea of what it actually means.

Does it mean you think the roleplaying elements have been dumbed down?

Does it mean the writing is bad?

Does it mean you think the setting has no depth?

Does it mean you think your actions don't have consequences?

I mean, having a character with a somewhat pre-defined backstory is no indicator of a lack of depth at all, in fact, it allows writers to give the story more depth. Fallout is not a sandbox-roleplay like the Elder Scrolls. All Fallout protagonists have had a backstory that was both predefined and tied heavily into the story: in FO1 you were a Vault dweller searching for a water purifier (you even had a limited amount of time!), in FO2 you were a tribal looking for a GECK to save their tribe, in FO3 you were a Vault dweller looking for their missing dad.

Basically, it seems this phrase is little more than a meaningless zinger. I hear it all the time but not once have I heard a consistent definition of what it actually means.

None of this speaks to a lack of depth, only a list of specific features this poster wanted but did not find or like in the game.

I agree on the armor side of this. But I have 3 different versions of most guns so the weapon customization is very deep. But yea everything else is pretty agreeable. Games still a 9.5/10 for me though

depth
d?pθ/Submit
noun
1.
the distance from the top or surface to the bottom of something.
"water of no more than 12 feet in depth"
synonyms: deepness, distance downwards, distance inwards, distance from the outside; More
2.
the quality of being intense or extreme.
"he was surprised by the depth of Eloise's vindictiveness"

That is literally the definition of depth, stop complaining about it.
When you talk about the depth of a game its the intricacys, I.E;

I walk into a building i never have before and (unlike fallout 3) theres basically nothing there but literally junk to collect and a magazine. And the enemys there have no purpose - theyre just there for you to shoot. Its fun for a while but then it feels like the game is forcefeeding you enemies.

In fallout 3 youd enter a building, have a chance to find a unique pistol with a unique texture and a unique effect and the enemys would be there for an actual reason - for a quantumn recipie or otherwise. You could walk into one and be wandering in circles for half an hour trying to figure how to get up one floor.

Fallout 4 is streamlined to the point where a skyscraqer takes 5 minutes to get up the top, why? Well because that lift thats been there for 210 years is magically powered and can withstand an age of supermutants entering them day in day out

Why on earth are there people living at the centre of a nuclear blast and more importantly how did they actually survive -unghoulified- with no quests or anything to give you an incling as to how?
I dont know. When you ask them they say "atom protects us" which sounds like superstition or leads to even more bizarre questions.

Like i said, i love the game. But while the game has ALOT to offer it rarely expands on what it does offer. Thats what i mean by the depth of a game

If youd actually read the original post instead of skimming everything like i presume you have - i gave another good example; theres all these clothes and such but truth is - your vault suit is the only moddable clothing and theres only like 5 sets of armour that progressively upgrade on enemies as you level up whereas there was upwards of atleast 25 viable armours and such on a 7 year old game that had been worked on for 2/3 years prior. Fallout 4 was given alot more time. Get the idea?

I lol'ed.

What quote?

You're right about how the "white boy voice" ruins the immersion, the voice actor's tone doesn't match my character's appearance.

Stone Cold Steve Austin?