GO FORWARD EVEN IF IT IS TOWARDS A CLIFF AND YOU HAVE TO BETRAY YOUR OLD FRIENDS FOR A BUNCH OF CHEAP NEW ONES!

Hey now dont be bashing on COD. That is something that is not acceptable.

Nope, I do too.

I value beautiful vistas, an eye for visual detail and imaginative and striking art design and architecture just as highly as I do good writing in a videogame, and so dearly hope for both in Fallout 4. I can't wait to see what they do with the new Skyrim engine and beyond.

(Enclave General's enthusiasm upthread is a sight to behold. Bravo to you.)

You know what, to hell with CoD. I dont care, CoD used to be good, back when it had the premise of regular men working together to make a difference, now it is "super special spec ops black operations soldier helltrotter spartan dude" killing thousands of opponents like nobody even cares, and i dont.

Yes Cod was good back when it was Cod3 or 4. After that it wen down hill. The Single player is pretty damn good but the multi just ruins it. I still have some respect for what it is.

Totally agreed, nodes make teh world seem incomplete, tehyare good but incomplete.

nodes make the world larger and more coherant, it allows settlements to be larger and more detailed, it allows for better random encounters and it gives you an accurate timescale and a true far-reaching aspect of the game world, none of these can be used in a small cramped sandbox like Fallout 3.

I know but the thing is if it is first person you jsut walk up the an invisible wall adn it brings up a map and says where would you like to travel to.....

And I like walking everywhere.

It wouldnt say anything, it would present you with a map, and you would select a spot where you would travel, and you would travel there over time, over miles and days.

That is not true, there are many games that use map nodes today. And I think Fallout can do that even better.

But ok. I'm for realistic distances, so... make a node map system, that when you exit a "point of interest" or whatever we shall call them, the world map shows up, but you can chose to travel by foot if you want to, that would make people like you happy, travel through a couple of miles of randomly generated wasteland. So we don't get these "isolated" settlements a stonethrow away from eachother, and it'll be "realistic" for the FPS crowd, and also "immersion" because you get to walk alot(?)

Do you really think Bethesda is going to shy away from what they do best? Large open worlds is what made them. Getting lost in the middle of no where and trying to get back to a city because you are seriously injured makes games like theirs exciting and immersive. Dragon Age II uses a map node system and the world seems incomplete not to mention it really annoys me when this map pops up each time I want to go to a different location.

You want the instant gratification and convenience of a modular world which is fine, I can understand not wanting to travel long distances now and then but that's why there's a map in the game.

As I said, I don't want "isolated" settlements to be a stonethrow away. Trying to get back to a settlement from nowhere and being seriously injured? Then there's fast travel. And really, you never have to get back to a settlement because you are injured, just shoot up a lot of stimpaks, they work instantly and there's loads of them in the capital wasteland (from what I remember when I played FO3, had 200 or more of them, if you take heavy fire, just press the stimpak hotkey a few times) But with a travelling system similar to the older Fallouts (I'm not saying "the same system", mind you) where you, as a marker, actually move on the map, and can get ambushed and everything on the way, I'd favor. With fast-travelling as it is now, you just teleport to a settlement with no risks at all. You can walk if you want to, in a way it's far and tedious because it's in a game, but realistically, everything is really close to eachother, too close. Especially compared to every other Fallout game, and take in concideration the post-apoc setting (like in every movie, book, comic, or game, everything's got several days of travelling between them.) Not like Northern California + little of Oregon + little of Nevada like Fallout 2. It's just the immediate area around the city of Vegas in Nevada, or around D.C. in Maryland.

Dragon Age: origins used it too you know, it was a much better game than DA 2/ "EA cash grab". I agree with Gab and the others Map node would make it much better. they could even make the grid map wasteland randomly generated between the points of interest as mentioned so you can walk there if you want to spend days in the wastes walking through nothing or interest. Random encounters can be truely random like they where in the originals, plus it would be much easier to put in Special encounters like they have them in the originals.

That's why the dinosaurs went extinct.. too resistant to change

Edit: I was going to validate my arguement more.. but instead Im gonna sit here, read the forums and drink beer till my head hits the keyboard.

Dinos would've survived had the change been reasonable.

You're telling me that when you played Fallout 3 you always had stimpacks and ammo.. I find that hard to believe but I won't deny that it's impossible as I play with fast travel as little as possible. The game becomes extremely challenging when you walk everywhere and after awhile I get totally immersed in this world.

I challenge you to try playing FO3 or New Vegas for a few hours 2-3 from the beginning with no fast travel what so ever. If you are not completely immersed in your character and the world around you after that then... well I don't know what to tell you then to be honest. Maybe I just really enjoy the tedium. To each his own I guess. :fallout:

Walking everywhere and exploring becomes unchallenging after the first couple (1-7 or so) of levels in Fallout 3. The game tries, that can be said, but it just doesn't succeed. It being done right in the beginning isn't forgivable for the rest of the game though. In Fallout 3, stims and other supplies were literally everywhere. It didn't feel like a "post apoc wasteland" which I believe they were striving for, it felt like an average, and remarkably easy, game structured for the players convenience. An average themepark ride would be an adequate adjective, Fallout would be a gross overestimation.

Fallout New Vegas is also to blame of the same symptoms up to a degree, though it does try harder and succeeds a bit better - even more so, due to the writing department (not because the story's exceptionally good, but the way it is structured). Though, only a bit.

I did a "without fast travel" run on as my first run on both, because I hate the fast travel they've implemented and I hate how it trivialises the challenge those games "should have" but which they decide to ignore (even on harder difficulties).

On both accounts, it is - imo - unforgivable to leave the games as easy as they are, as that really hurts the overall feel of the games.



They should. It is a different francise from what they've done before. What they are showing now is a "one trick pony" act that really does trump a good portion of the creativity they have. I mean they're professionals (at least they should be), they can do better than copying themselves. Right?

Yes, they bought a franchise that used different features, and instead of twisting it to their own ends, the should learn how to do it right, it is as if someone bought the word "airplane" and changed its meaning to "small pebble" because "small pebble" is what they are used to.

Yes, I am.

Don't look at me in that tone of voice

Burning Man.

Fight of the century/

Umm but Fallout 3 is still fallout...

No, it is Oblivion: Wasteland edition, it abandoned a lot of the plot, the wasteland was completely different, the mechanics were completely different, and the writing was atrocious.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yg2u_De8j5o

http://www.halolz.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/halolz-dot-com-teamfortress2-captainfalconheavy-hyes.jpg