But it would be neat tohave some bad effect similiar to it. I just need something better than simply needing to eat and drink just because and trying to toss out ideas.

The thing with "hardcoe" and "realism" is that they are all more or less subjective to the one who's making them. We all know you cannot mimic real hunger or thirst or energy in a game. The other part of course is to make it a challange not a chore. Now F:NV had a basic food/thirst/sleep mode which wasn't really hardcoe but for me personally it added a little immersion. The most realistic thing in F:NV's hardcoe mod was that the ammo had weight. The stimpak's healing overtime is pretty much already in F4 survival mode. The doctor's bag was also a neat thing to heal your limbs instead of a stimpak. Now some people look at all of this as annoying or as a chore, just like some players find building settlement's as a wasted feature. My issue with F4/Beth is that with every new game we should improve and build upon old/good features. That's why we have a lot of people complaining, since a lot of game mechanics were cut but weren't replaced. hardcoe mode will come as soon as the geck is released, probably with the F4 version of the MCM menu so you can tweak as much as you like.

The survival difficulty could also be the difficulty of settlements surviving instead of just the character.

You're tossing around those terms as if they are mutually exclusive. They're not.

No it was not just crafting skill. It increased effectiveness of food items and some chems and it was part of up to dozen different quests and dialogue checks. Plus it was requirement for several perks.

Now that you talking about the OUTDOORSMAN skill from F1/2, yes, that was just different name for survival skill.

Of course, because avoiding hostile encounters, dehydration and random rock falls have nothing to do with survival.

Preferred difficulty:

Enemies with normal health, but all kinds of enemies including legendary, of course the legendary have the best AI, but some also have stupid AI, especial animals have primitive behavior. If the enemies or the sounds get too ugly it's not worth playing at all, cause it has to be entertaining.

Sleep only restores limbs to for example 80%.

Purified Water is the most important thing for human survival. But making it a routine requirement is boring. Maybe it could start a little boring, but the be possible to upgrade to something superhuman.

Now it is possible to be right in a war zone and badly wounded. Sneak a little and sleep it out on a bed despite enemies are close. It should be difficult to sleep with enemies close and likely to spot you.

I think your idea would make a interesting mod add a few layers of things to worry about and boost the difficulty of just about everything but w/ that said I think it should Not be part of the released version / official DLC but the realm of the mod community

We have yet to involve mythology when the radiation fully kicks in and mutates lizards or deathclaws to fully become dragons. The same with the ghouls becoming living spooky scary skeletons.

Why the heck are people comparing FO4 to the classical games of D&D? Really? FO4 has nothing to do with mythology. Its completely science-based.

There is this wonderful, yet dangerous, REAL THING called radiation. It can do anything through MUTATION, which is the deformation and altering state of the atoms and/or DNA in your body. But there is also a disease called cancer. Physics and chemistry were the best classes I've ever took.

Citing D&D (especially 1st Edition D&D) as an example of a rules set that works well and makes sense isn't the most sound argument one could make. And I'm pretty sure basic needs were covered in typical "this isn't about stabbing something in the face or rolling on seventeen different tables for random treasure, so we'll file it under the catchall Paralysis/Poison/Death saving throw rules and forget about it" D&D fashion.

Be sure to keep the subject of D&D on the DL from this point forward.

I can't imagine why people bring the subject of RP to a matter such as this.

After much careful debilitation (That's a lot of thinking for those unaware of the term), I have finally come to the conclusion that NOT taking what was good in past games and adding them into your own game, when it's perfectly possible to do so and has been shown to be liked, is not a valid excuse to not have said thing in the game. Especially if it's been in one very similar.

It comes down to this. Proper survival (None of that bullet sponge malarkey) could have been added. It's been proven to be liked. Beth failed to add it into their games when it's been shown and proven to be liked. They did not take the element and put it on 4 to appease everyone when it's perfectly possible to do so. It's that simple. We could have had it. We don't. Why? It's been implemented before and they could have asked Obsidian how to do so effectively if Beth don't know how or even joined up with them to add this along with other gameplay elements that are missing. I just don't get it.

"Bullet sponge" adds nothing new. And is the absolute laziest way to make a game more "difficult". And I would have much preferred a "mutations" in the options menu that I could apply to all difficulties. Why do we not have this? What's so wrong with giving the players the option? It would appease as many people as possible and leave no one out. They could have, at the very least, done that. Along with an option to turn off "magic guns" (Ugh, infinite ammo). I like guns that operate within the realms of reality. Even the junk gun is somewhat realistic and has a reason on how it operates. But if I wanted magic guns with infinite ammo and such (legendary loot. Another lazy way to counter so called difficulty) then I'd be playing a game with magic like Dragon Age with infinate arrows because they're made of mana or something. At least then there's a reason, even if a mythological one.

Seriously, do we have to rely on mods to provide us options we can toggle on and off in the game? (I'm speaking of mutations and loot at this point) We should have had these options at the start on new game at the very least if nothing else.

Er, no it's not. Deliberation is long and careful consideration. Debilitation means to weaken or enfeeble.

Just FYI.

When playing the game on "very hard" then all food stuff - snacks, can food etc. - were more junk than the "junk", because the "junk" could be scraqed and used for all sorts of constructions, but the "food" stuff and the cooking station were useless, since all it required to "recharge" was 1 hours sleep in a bed. The only thing to do with that stuff was sell it.

In wasteland aren't the priorities 1) Water, 2) Shelter, 3) Defensive stuff, 4) Food ?

It does seem trivial if the player regularly had to visit bed, toilet, kitchen etc.; every one is already on that routine in the real world. But one of the player's special perks is strength, that has something to do with body-building. So why not let food be required somehow in the perks for body-building? Because upgrading is not trivial as routines and so perhaps more entertaining then ...

Trivial gun repairs in F:NV was ridiculous.

If you think survival mode is not worthy of effort, then I have to ask you: why all the simulators are successful? Are not they full of "chores"? But why there are players that actually like that?

Because I would call it "alternative" reality. People like to try things they could never do in their lives, that is the reason behind those simulators.

(someone didn't want d&d to be involved in arguments, so I thought simulators are ok hehe)

What it has to do with Fallout? Fallout as an RPG post apocalypse world with society evolved in alternative way - can I say that, right?

So it is quite understandable, that players want to experience that in all aspects? If that doesn't appeal to you - why do you try so hard to argue against it - it was just a mode, right? It is like - because I do roleplay, I cannot play on hard setting (with t-shirt it is not always possible), so I would try hard to destroy that mode for others, claiming that because I don't like it, none will? I can understand if Bethesda decides they leave it to modders, but I don't understand why some ppl are so upset about such requests?

And I think simulators are actually RPG

"Why all the simulators are successful"?

Watch your sentence structure pal, then I'll take you seriously.

You can say that it is society evolved in *an* alternative way. But that alternative way comes with more alternatives.

Fallout 4 is more than just a simulator. There is lore behind it, you know. If this game were to be a simulator, it would COMPLETELY COPY THE ACTIONS of Minecraft.

Fallout was never a settlement builder, either, but Bethesda felt that was needed. I'm sorry but "If you want X, play X" doesn't work with this franchise anymore.

No, Bethesda added the settlement building due to the complainers whining that the world was supposed to be rebuilding itself post-apocalypse. This allowed players to actually participate in the rebuilding they claimed they wanted to see in the world. Not only did this answer the whining of such players, it also added a role playing element within the world, an element that allowed people to create stuff without even using the GECK toolset. That is why they did it. It expands the franchise exactly in the ways requested by the player base.

As for basic needs, FONV would be a perfect example of failing to properly incorporate such things. The so-called "hardcoe" mode in FONV isn't hardcoe at all, but simply trivial differences to play mechanics.

However, pretty much no game has done decent difficult levels and almost every game has always resorted to merely changing damage dealt/taken formulas. The ONLY games I can think of that have done otherwise would be (1) Halo with different enemy group compositions depending on difficulty and (2) the original Half-Life where batteries charged different amount on max difficulty than on lower settings.

For an RPG like Fallout, from a development viewpoint, it is better to allow players to make their own choices about how to create a survivalist context because different players want different elements of such a setting ranging from many elements to none of them.

Fixing and rebuilding the world isn't much of a role playing element. Its common knowledge to build a new home, which definitely peaks for the survival aspect. I would be complaining if my leader didn't build at least a bed for me.

Even then, if my leader svcks and just blows off a community (including me), I would leave and find my ways to fix and rebuild a home suitable for me. Maybe that will bring in people who look at my technique and make me even a leader.

The thing with role play is that you get to become anybody you want, doing anything: you are not the real you. For example, I could be a total psychopath and kill everybody with 100 mini nukes. Because that is who I am. "The man who ended society with nukes ablaze".

But when you mix role play with survival, you get this new awesome element called realism. Where you could say "you" are actually "you" in the game. And a "bullet" is actually a "bullet". It only takes a few shots of a combat rifle to end you. Or one swipe of a deathclaw. Though these are only nutshells. Realism has a whole branch of things you need to take into consideration. Role play isn't one of them, because you can't "act" like the real you. Role play is all based on free will on what you want to become.

That's simply incorrect. Role playing is all based on playing a role. Period. Sometimes such roles are narrowly constrained, sometimes they're wide open.

You're just playing No True Scotsman with RPGs.

Mods.... mods will never change.

. more to the point they'll never disappoint. There is plenty appetite out there for a real hardcoe mode with realistic damages, sleep, hydration, satation etc. Soon after the GECK I'm sure we'all get something we want.

You should go to New Jersey. Sure it ain't a game, but post-apocalyptic, yes.

I love this "realism" thing y'all are demanding.

It's a video game. You want realism. Go outside.

BTW THIS IS NOT FALLOUT: NEW VEGAS! Stop comparing it.

You're just quibbling with terminology. How about "self consistency" instead of "realism"? Self consistency is the sine qua non of fictional universes. The Fallout universe is pretty well defined as much like ours except for very specific changes. So, except in the case of those very specific changes, we should expect the universe to behave like ours, i.e. realistically.