In my experience, games go Gold generally about 4 weeks before launch, but that time can vary widely based on the game. I did a little research and according to what I was able to find:

Game Gold Release Time
Fallout 3 Oct 9 Oct 28 3 weeks
Skyrim Nov 4 Nov 11 1 week
Oblivion March 2 March 21 2 weeks, 5 days

So with Bethesda, 3 weeks has been about average for Fallout 3 and Oblivion, but it has been as short as 1 week with Skyrim. Personally, since they have been polishing Fallout 4 since July, I expect a 3 week gold announcement - so about October 20th - which will also be the date they announce the System Specs. But, I could be wrong.

Interesting. I had no idea about these numbers, thanks Daelda1.

Interesting, thanks for sharing.

My pleasure. I thought it might give us all some insight into where Bethesda might be in the process, and how long until they might go gold.

I predict gold and system spec announcement will be coming out in the next 7 days

You are probably right : https://mobile.twitter.com/bethesda/status/651470213096075264

You would be correct. They're up on Bethesda.net now

And Steam required.
Canceling my Pip-boy edition preorder right now.
I will never ever buy your games again.

Thanks Bethesda.

You thought Steam *wouldn't* be required for activation? Where have you been?

So you thought Steam *is* the only way, where have you been?

Steam has been required for activation for Fallout 3, for New Vegas, for Skyrim... NOTE: That's ACTIVATION - NOT play.

Why did you think Fallout 4 would be the exception?

  
WRONG.
Steam is not required for FO3.
Steam still is a requirement and a platform, if you don't activate via Steam you can't play AND you can't play offline for ever, this is discrimination, but, hey, to each his own.

I don't think you know what discrimination means.

Even if it wasn't required for Fallout 3, it has been for New Vegas and Skyrim. And all you have to do is *activate* it. It isn't discrimination. Discrimination would be if they said only left-handed people could play the game. This is their chosen form of DRM. You obviously have access to the internet - so what's the problem? Activate Fallout 4 and then disable Steam. Done. You don't have to use Steam again. That's it.

I don't think you know what freedom means.

What's the issue with Steam?

No, this is not The Elder scroll forum and we are not talking about TES so Skyrim doesn't count.
Isn't up to you and none of your business how I like to activate, play, whatever the games I like.
Activate Steam then disable it? You don't even know what is, how it works, how safe it is a software which runs on your PC.
Steam is a platform, the DRM is only just one piece of it.

Skyrim very much does count. Same developer. Same publisher.

And wrong forum area and wrong game serie.

Why does it matter?. Steam is not intrusive, you can install the game to any hard drive you want, you can still mod the game, easily access the game files and whatnot and if you really want you can simply move the game out of the steamapps folder.

As for system specs:

Minimum

• Windows 7/8/10 (64-bit OS required)
• Intel Core i5-2300 2.8 GHz/AMD Phenom II X4 945 3.0 GHz or equivalent
• 8 GB RAM
• 30 GB free HDD space
• NVIDIA GTX 550 Ti 2GB/AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB or equivalent

Recommended

• Windows 7/8/10 (64-bit OS required)
• Intel Core i7 4790 3.6 GHz/AMD FX-9590 4.7 GHz or equivalent
• 8 GB RAM
• 30 GB free HDD space
• NVIDIA GTX 780 3GB/AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB or equivalent

It'd be irrelevant if this were a thread on FO lore, but I think it's absolutely fair game to reference ES in this discussion.

  
Imho it is not, I could reference Oblivion, someone else other Bethesda games, I see your point and see the large picture but that would introduce more generalisation: right here, right now for me it's about FO.

But at this point it doesn't matter anymore, Bethesda/Zenimax chose to go that way, good for them, they are losing one customer now (I have Fallout 3, all DLCs, New Vegas, Dishonored, Oblivion, Rage every one CE/SE, NV and Dishonored have been a wrong purchase and are sitting on my shelf unplayed since day one) and many others like me will follow.

And for the record it isn't about Steam but what Steam means today and how with one hand it gives and with the other one it takes away, about a de facto monopoly, I'm not against DRMs but Steam sadly is not only that.

I'm sick and tired about that, I'm an old gamer who was playing games long, long before Steam existed and I've seen basically the PC gaming euthanasia courtesy of Steam and most of all developers and publishers willing to do it.
Steam has become a platform per se with all that comes with it: it turned PC games into something else, something more like console games, just look at the result of Steam surveys to understand what is the target today's games are made for. Let's be clear: not entirely Steam's fault, but that, I hope, is right in front of the eyes of everyone.

As guy working on my game I understand the logic and policies behind that choice and most certainly I will use Steam's services, BUT, the whole discrimination point here is that as a developer/publisher if you really care that most people enjoy your game and you really want to give people's the chance to like your art and your work, if you are really passionate about that and games and making games are your life then you should give ALL people the possibility to enjoy it, an alternative.

But now it is too much, too late.
Sic transit gloria mundi.

So you are not going to buy the game because it requires Steam just like they have stated since a week or so after the E3 announcement?

Thanks for the update and, "fight the power"?

Ya, I understand your principle here. I would just suggest you take a day or two to think about it before you cancel your pre-order (if it's not too late). Then, ask yourself if you still think it's worth it - which I fully acknowledge only you can decide that for yourself.

Had a good laugh at that.

Next there will be complaints that it has to run on Windows...

Seriously though I can sympathise with the intellectual argument that there should be choice

but in this case it is not a meaningful choice nor a worthy battle.