I would have loved to see these things with a reactionless engine rather than that single rocket thruster underneath because I keep thinking "How the heck does it keep running for 200 years without having to restock fuel" and "If this is a nuclear engine then how much heat is being pumped into the home" and "I wonder how many young kids crawling on the floor got burned".

Stupid I know, as it's a sci-fi game but OMG does it seem to be dangerous. If you have played Kerbal Space Program you know how long a rocket lasts with a small amount of fuel that would be contrained in the Mr Handy/Gutsy... as in sneeze and you have run out of lifting thrust hehe.

Now if they had used a reactionless lifting engine that they stole from the aliens it would have made much more sense.

How is using alien tech on a mass produced robot more senseable then a human made rocket system?

The only [two] things that bother me about them, is they talk, and they have the wrong appearance [which includes the wrong number of legs, and not enough hands.]

Its just a sign of how wastefull they were by then. Ironicaly the male protagonist was suposedly giving a speach . . .

This from a guy who ownes a Rocket proppeled robot butler for reasons Wonder what his AC bill is like. oh right hes got a cronic problem with is Air conditioning system. . .wonder why given hes got a perpetual fireplace roaring away in his living room year round. . .

...the talkt in the old game too ya know.

As for apperance, creative freedom, but then again, your clearly allergic to that.

when said rocket tec is in a house that is loaded with easily combustible things like rugs, newspapers, clothing, people. . ..

Creative freedom is great for new robots, but the Mr. Handys' are antiques, and they have an established appearance.

(And that appearance was shown in the title intro for the original game of the series.)

It's trivial to have made it look like it should, rather than change it to not even resemble it's known style.
It was always a perplexing and odd choice IMO.

and? Super mario bros establise a apperance for mario, yet he has changed since then, so why cant mr.handy do it?

THANKYOU!

your muleheadedness on this topic was EXACTLY what I needed to break through my writers block!(goes back to my mod!)

Eh... not really appreciably. He still basically looks the same, with the same general features. That change was surely hardware influenced, as the later games had higher fidelity graphics.

This is where you're overreacting. To say it doesn't even resemble how it looked previously is completely wrong. What are a couple of missing legs anyway? It's obviously a design choice that Bethesda have made since the game is no longer isometric.

and the handy here has also the same general features as the handy from the old games, in the same manor as the first mario and the current mario do.

What are a couple of legs?
*Isometry hasn't any bearing in it.

Do you know that from seeing it?

It was just a thought exercise... They must use some futuristic nuclear cold thrust motor that draws fuel out of the air. But if they were nuclear then why don't they blow up like the cars do.

There are a lot of questionable things in Fallout (like the 200 year old food the the NMA peeps harp on about) but I'd never seen anyone mention the thruster coming out of the bottom of these flying bots... Oh and the fact that they can fly through an area that has FLAMMABLE GAS!!!!! Which points to the fact that the jet isn't a flame. I just wondered how many people had caught on that fact.

remmus... dont even try it

i've seen maybe 1 out of every 12 of his posts/comments that have some hint that he may actually not 100% hate fo4 XD

I don't see advocating creative freedom getting much traction on Gizmo not being happy about everything recent in FO

Huh?

Look, I get that you like the old games and perhaps you don't like the direction Bethesda is taking the next one. But to be all up in arms over ONE tiny aspect of the game changing is a bit...

Isometry does have a bearing on it. Lots of design decisions are made with not only a game like this, but a transformation in a game series like Fallout 2 to Fallout 3 experienced. You can't just take every little thing from Fallout 1/2, exactly the way it was, and place it directly into a sequel that plays completely differently.

Of course you can; it's positively trivial. If you are making the models of established artifacts... Why reinvent the wheel? The original design fits the 50's aesthetic; the new one doesn't.

eh I draw some fun out it by imaging his posts is being read out loud by a grumpy, grey haired old man.

Sadly or thankfully (depending on your point of view)... People aren't THAT easily combustible... on the level of rugs, newspapers and clothing.

As a clumsy person and a smoker... I would have combusted many many times now, if that were the case. Though offcourse rockets are quite a bit more fiery.

Seriously, does anyone here actually defend the official design against the look of original, in terms fitting the setting?

Ah... I'm guessing the original is unknown. Here is an approximated comparison:
http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/comp.jpg

It's trivial to model the original, and have it look the same in 3D.
http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/mr-handy_sprite-and-3d-Concept.jpg
http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/reworked_handy.jpg

Apart from the legs thing, which is most definately silly, when you think seriously about it. Yes, I most definately prefer the newer design.

Actually, this is an interesting question. Who thought a floating robot with a pincer, a blowtorch, and a spinning saw for arms AND has a constant open flame underneath its body was a good idea? How does Codsworth change Shaun's diapers without hurting the kid with those dangerous-looking arms? How does he not accidentally set anything on fire with that open flame? He's basically a ‘WARNING! DISASTER PRONE IMMINENT!!’ sign.

Imagine if Howard/Nora woke up to this:
“Good morning master! I...seem to have accidentally chopped Shaun's leg off when changing the young master's diapers.”

“Good morning, Ms. Nora! I am dreadfully sorry, but it appears I've burnt down the house with the open flame that roars constantly underneath my metal casing.”

The Mr. Gusty, I can understand because they're built for war, but the Mr. Handy were made to serve civilians. Even if I liked robots and Synths, I'm not sure I'd trust having a Mr. Handy anywhere near my baby/in my house all together.

Apart from the legs thing?

I like a lot of designs better than either of the Mr.Handy styles; but I know of none more suitable than the original.
Bethesda was desperate to link FO3 to the Fallout series, and used everything they had ~even when it didn't make sense, but this was an easy one to get right I think... They had a wonderful opportunity to show returning fans the Fallout world they remembered ~in interactive 3D, and instead they re-imagined it all. So it wasn't a homecoming, it was a loose reinterpretation of everything, and so nothing at all was familiar.

That's definitely an aspect of the humor; and it's not too far off the mark I think.

Having to animate a 5 leged version, have it interact with objects, and make it fit through doors, would require signficantly more work then the 3 leged version.

It also looks ugly as sin, and doesn't really fit the 50's "sleek" ideal of the future. Same with the sentrybots.