I feel like even Fallout 3 was better in this regard, however.

I like Fallout 4 more than fallout 3 because your choices are more morally gray than good or evil and I'm ok with that. IN real life sometimes good intensions can go wrong.

I'm a pretty reasonable person. But I'm tired of being gentle and kind to devs who keep releasing the same game since Oblivion. They have a mold and refuse to change it or even tweak it. I'm tired of Todd Howards lies and exaggerations. I'm tired of people who defend a pile of garbage just because it's new and they "want to like it"

Where the [censored] is the block feature?

How is Fallout 4 not tweaked from fallout 3 and even NV?

Its by far a better game than both. Its not even remotely the same game.

l

I'd rather not get into a philosophical argument on the concept of evil, but from what I've seen Fallout 4 is much more complex than your standard "good vs evil" stories.

If you're part of the railroad, wouldn't you consider the BOS to be evil, or vice versa?

The core concept if the same. I'm not talking about graphics or that sort of stuff. NV was made by Obsidian BTW.

And New Vegas kicks FO4 ass @ character interations and it doesn't shoehorn you into playing a caring mommy/daddy character.

In New Vegas I could cap that doctor who fixed me and kill him. Is it evil and immoral? Definitely. Did I do it? No. BUT I COULD. And that's the difference. Sure NV had it's own unkillable NPC's and I HATE that. But considering player freedom and choices it was by far better. In FO4 you do what the devs want you to do.

You will save everyone because your name is....John Cena! duduu duduu duuu!

Because crucifying people or selling them into slavery has shades of gray?

I know it was but they use the same engine do they not? As for the concept being the same, the core storylines always so so and fallout games the side missions and DLC is aways where it shines.

I think this is why people complain about the "roleplay friendliness" of this game. From what I've seen in videos it's hard to roleplay a male character anything else than a father who lost his son and wife. Constantly hearing the main character complain about his experience even in side quests makes it very hard to forget the character Beth made for the player. All I've seen is people trying to roleplay a character Beth built for them and it doesn't look very comfortable. Nor does it do any good for replayability.

Just my two bottlecaps. Not saying that FO4 is a bad open world shooter, but I'm pretty sure it's not a very good RPG. It's a shame Beth didn't pick an idea or two up from Obsidian.

I think that's the point. The Legion was designed to be so ridiculously evil that there was no way they could be seen as sympathetic. If they were written better, toned down the whole crucifiction thing and presented a more reasonable view of things, people could say "You know, maybe they have a point." But since you can plainly see that they're crucifying people left and right with hordes of slaves, while also saying they're a legitimate group that wants to push out the NCR and make things better, and you just can't take them seriously.

That would be fine, but why did we have to lose skill checks and all the cool flavor dialogue that let you give your character a personality and express himself? Why can't we have both?

But at the same time, you had 3 other sides that WERE morally grey. It was fun to have one group that was just bat[censored] evil (but was still 3 dimensional. Seriously, talk to Caesar about Hegellian Dialectics and all that [censored]).

You can be kinda evil.

Just not "blow up Megaton" evil.

And a lot of quests are very linear.

The Cooke quest, for example, can't be played good.

For whatever reason, you HAVE to murder a bunch of drug-dealers to steal their chems and then rob their drug lab.

I was like, "Was my Sole Survivor a huge The Wire fan? When did he become Omar?"

You're damned if you do and damned if you don't, really.

Fans wanted to be able to join the Enclave in Fallout 3.

Fans then could join the Legion but it's the kind of group only Idi Amin could love.

Now the Institute exists and a lot of people don't consider it evil.

It seems we need two evil factions.

Lawful Evil and Chaotic Evil to satisfy everyone.

I never trust anyone who claims to know any "universal truth".

If you can read what I wrote directly after that and tell me why 2+2 doesn't equal 4? I'm all ears.

2 drops of water + 2 drops of water = 1 drop of water or 1 pool of water. Just saying.

Evil exists. You dont need dialogue to express evil. Do raiders talk evilly to you? No! They just took out a gun and shoot your behinds.

The concept of evil dialogue is just stupid. Dialogue is used to negotiate and discuss ideologies. If you have the option to kill, that is evil.

No ,I think that's just Obsidian.

Strong is good for Evil Players.

A Cannibal Sole Survivor gets mighty approval for murdering non-hostiles and eating them!

OP is saying you can't be "story evil" as it were. You *can* be evil sometimes sure, like letting a sick kid die because you keep the cure for yourself, but there's not that many bits like that. In 3 and NV most quests had an evil ending, and the setting in general behaved like you were an horrible person. In FO3 the radio DJ shouted far and wide what a bastard you were and the slavers let you in on reputation alone. In FO4 I can kill and eat 100 people while I roam around, come back to a city and everyone acts I'm the nice new stranger, no one calls me out.

You can only be morally white or gray (arguably dark grey at times) but no matter what you do the game will never recognize you as straight up, flat out evil. Some people will say "hey you're being a jerk, go back to default nice!", never "yeah [censored] you, you're a complete monster, we're through, you should be killed for the greater good, etc"

And honestly, I think that is why some people like it. It honestly made no sense for me to murder an entire nation in LR and have that faction hate me because they 'magically knew it'. In FO3 the only choices that made real sense to be evil were blowing up megaton and the ending choice. All the other choices did not matter as much really except because of 'magic knowledge'.

And the math teacher fails you and tells you abstractions are next semester.

You're missing the point and I am literally dumbfounded as to why, but AGAIN, I'll try to explain:

1. On one hand, the game was designed so that the player has an equal incentive to play good, neutral or evil. There are storylines, quests, lines of dialog and in-game consequences all coded for the purpose of dynamic role-play choices.
2. On the other, the game was not designed this way. It does, on the other hand, have a big, open, kind of ambiguous and nonsensical world where you can do bad things but it doesn't amount to much because the game was not coded with these dynamic role-play choices in mind.

I'm not here to proselytize about which type of game is inherently better nor am I here to ridicule anybody for what is essentially "playing pretend" if that's what they enjoy doing in a game. My ONLY argument is that there is a difference between the intent and implementation by the developers of the game and it has a significant impact on the way the game plays out.

In NV I agree, but in 3 people know because Three Dog says it over the radio, and he knows because he has a network of some sort to "overhear" stuff, I guess. But ya you have a point. There could still be more evil dialogue and quest options, such as the near start Minutemen bit the intro is about.

Sidenote: When 1st arriving at Bunker Hill, you can tell the gate guard you're a raider, would be cool if that could be the truth.

In my book, if it does not show it, it does not happen/is not real. Just saying.

In the end, I think the reason you cannot be totally evil is the same reason you cannot be totally good (as in do the right thing and everything is fine). There are good and bad in all actions, you just have to be smart and look for it.

Help the settlements, they can get attacked (i think) and you have to have the defense score to help them.