Hasn't there been like a thousand of these threads already?

I don't know about that. I didn't feel Skyrim's story (stories) was/were weak. Sure, the civil war could've been better (and there's a mod for that) but over all I enjoyed the main quest and the many other quests around. Hell, I'm STILL playing Skyrim with over 200 mods.

Fallout is a huge world where you can do whatever you feel like doing (within limits of the game engine of course). Like Skyrim. If you want to find a nice lake and fish for 6 hours then have at it. What is so wrong about freedom?

As for the RPG elements; make your own. When the modding kit is available make your own story. There are many good ones for Skyrim. So again, what's the problem? If you looking for a game like TW3 or DAO (not DAI - which is terrible IMHO) or ME then go play them.

PS: I also think it's a great idea to take the best mods and incorporate them into the game. Even better if they threw a few bucks (or credit) to the original author.

The more popular mods are largely things that people add to the game that they feel are missing.

So when Bethesda pays attention and add things from past mods that many people wanted to begin with in their next vanilla game, they're bad?

Bethesda can't win, can they?

considering the series was about 100 years dead when they did it, and that they had to stick to lore that wasn't their own, i say they did an awesome job.

and considering nv built on this tech and assets, and 1 and 2 were ugly and technically outdated even for their days (which just was what killed the series in the end, remember?), i think all in all fo3 was the best fallout so far (and for myself personally, no other game ever had even close to the same emotional impact on me anyway).

looking back to when i played it now, the only thing i still even can remember i really disliked was the total barrenness of some regions at the map's borders, but that's about it for me (edit: ok totally forgot about how the game ended after fixing the purifier - AND THAT , original-falloutish as it may ever have been)

so, this said and with all i've seen of the new game so far, except for that darn voice acted pc, i'm VERY confident for fo4.

Accusing bethesda for stealing mod ideas is very stupid. This is the whole idea of a FREE modding community, to share ideas with everyone else so everyone else gets a better game. Everything that Bethesda includes in the next game, be it inspired from mods or not, will make the game better for every buyer so...

Also, what's with all the CD Projekt flame baits lately, are they using paid shills? If you love CD Projekt's work so much and hate Bethesda's why don't you just go and play CD Projekt and be happy there? Now they have TES'esque fantasy rpg and Falloutesque Cyberpunk so they got you covered.

This is part of what I don't get... I hear these same comments all the time, certainly more so than hearing 'Bethesda games are the most amazing!'

As you said, even Morrowind "needs mods".

Why accept that they will need to be modded for full enjoyment?

Skyrim on looks alone I can't say this with, but with FO 3 especially... Some indie games come out more complete with more depth than Bethesda stuff, because everone expects the mods. Thats fine, but when you want me to pay for a AAA title then I shouldn't need any mods. But that said, there are so many mods that make Skyrim what it should have been out of the gate, even as pretty as it was there were so many graphical mods alone.

It's like fans are just apathetic and settle because they know the mod community will fix it all. (incidently this is why I don't think paid mods are a bad thing, if done right). I'm not spending my AAA title money on a game, half of it is for the game, the other half is for the mod tools and modders it seems, too bad the modders don't see any of it.

The Companions Faction storyline was weak .

Thieves and Mages Storylines were lackluster but not bad

Dark Brotherhood was the best and enjoyed it. I wish it was longer just to give more of members depth so I grow attach to them before they was killed.

I still haven't done the Civil War to be honest. I feel like Dragons are a much bigger issue over who can and can't live on the land and if they can worship Talos.

The Main story is fine but it's too many fetch quest. And the final battle was too easy. At least with Dragonborn DLC I make the First Dragonborn the last villain.

I thought they did dragons very well in Skyrim and I enjoyed fighting them when I wasn't some OP mage lol.

This post is a prime example.. mod this mod that, make my own RPG elements...

So what are you paying Bethesda for, pay the modders or make your own game. If I buy their game I buy it expecting the same things I expect from any other dev/publisher of any genre. I expect Total War's to have good AI and strategy elements without mods. When I got Pillars or Eternity I expected a cool story. When I got/get Mass Effects I expect to get svcked into an immersive world.

For myself and, judging by your own comments, what you expect from a Bethesda game is something decent that mod's will pulish up into what you actually wanted. Sorry, but there is a serious problem there.

Look I believe we can all admit that Bethesda makes great games and we love them without mods but with mods it becomes more refined and in certain cases and superior game I believe most of us would still say Bethesda makes great games if mods didn't exist but with mods we have something to look forward to to enhance the vanilla game. Surely I'm not the only person who believes Bethesda's vanilla games are spectacular.

Isometrics were ugly and outdated in the time of FO 1/2? Interesting that Pillars of Eternity, and others like it, has been so widely accepted in this age of next-gen'iness then.

The series died out because for whatever reasons (finaicial most likely) they couldn't continue making them. But look around any gaming site, the originals are generally accepted as a classic, FO 3 was popular I'll never say it wasn't, but it'll never match the originals. Part of that is due to the fact they are so very different though, FO 3 is a sandbox more than anything, the originals had nothing like that at all, but were far superior in the writing and design.

i'd like to state that the 1st game i ever installed a mod on was fo3, that i hence played both morrowind and oblivion several times without a single mod, and that i enjoyed them both big time.

so i think that's just bs (decidedly not saying you can't improve your game with mods. but you can as well acchieve just the opposite, depending on selection). and i'm saying that as a modder (that i happened to become 1.5 years after installing above first mod

yes, because it was the mid 90ies 3d craze and anything 2d was impossible to sell. that's just what i'm saying. and i was in the business back then, so i _know_ what i'm saying.

The series died out because of Herve Caen.

Interplay had set their hopes on 'Decent to Undermountain' [in 98].

In 97.. Fallout's competition was Diablo from 96... They even forced feasibility studies on the team to see if they could demand it be changed to realtime combat.

I do believe, that had they chosen to, Interplay could have released a Fallout that was an FPP realtime combat shooter...
Perhaps even looking like this :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVAyhlgYSc4

I don't think it's a problem. I buy Bethesda games for their worlds. Sure, I like a good story, especially one that takes me around the map. But for the most part, I buy their games for the world. It's a play-ground: Bethesda creates the sandbox and the rules (the modding kit) and I get to play.

But for those who don't want to create (mod) they can play the game and enjoy the story. I mean, were the many stories in Skyrim any worse then DAI? I don't think so at all.

Fallout 4 is only more of the same in the sense that it's still very much an open-world game with tons of detail set in the Fallout universe.

I hear people praising things like the customization in crafting weapons and being able to build a house from parts, etc. You know what? Those advancements are things I think should be required for a next-gen BGS game. Those were things I was expecting them to fulfill naturally. It's a wasteland, crafting is a huge deal in Fallout. Those things being in, aren't elements I really give them a plus on making additions. They should be there. So now we're back at neutral grounds. What can they do to make it more inviting?

Not voicing your protagonist and giving them a living condition players inevitably might not want, that's for one. That's a couple steps back. This isn't Mass Effect. This is a franchise that's been giving a silent hero to become someone and make a name for themselves. Todd can't say "You can be who you want, you can go where you want".

No, no I can't.

I will overlook these things and enjoy this game so much, but it still doesn't change the fact that certain parts of the game shouldn't have been changed, whether you are comfortable with them or not.

I find it difficult to judge the story and writing of a game that hasn't been released yet. The amount of people that are just writing this game off based off of a e3 demo that only really showed gameplay mechanics surprises me. As far as continuing to do more of the same, what do you expect? The last three games that they have released have been awarded game of the year. Why should they start doing massive overhauls when there is an obvious demand for the type of games they create? You all say that they should make more changes to tell a better story, but the minute they try something new like have a voiced character in an attempt to have characters show more emotion everyone launches into complaints about how they are ruining the series. I for one would rather them use their time to create massive detailed worlds that are fun to interact with. I don't need them to make a great story for me, just give me the world and I'll create the story myself.

:-D

awesome. just still too high texture detail for authenticity )

Not that is the only problem I see on the horizon. Giving a voice to my hero doesn't leave lots of room to run off course. But Tom did say they recorded over 13,000 lines of dialog. So maybe there's so much "stock" dialog; things like "Thank you", "Drop dead", "Sorry about that" (etc, etc) that it won't matter. Then no matter what the occasion there's some dialog that fits.

We'll see though.

But it is.

That is the Build engine, and Interplay released that game [http://www.mobygames.com/game/redneck-rampage] the same year that they released Fallout.

yeah, pretty much sums up what was wrong with gaming back then

They also released "Die By The Sword". Fully 3D ~by Treyarch no less. It had 360° control of the weapon, and acceleration sensitive location damage... You could cut opponent's limbs off at the joints, and their textures changed on the site of the injury... Their animations changed too... they'd be hopping around after you ~after you cut off their leg.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXS7F6VL4hI

**This was five years before Morrowind.

_________

They did do tests to see if they could use polygons for Fallout, but they just could not get the performance they needed from common hardware.

Me personally, I'm gona be in line to get it. I've been happy with everything they have done since Daggerfall. I have confidence in Bethesda to make a game I enjoy.

Games evolve. Franchises change. If you want to play fallout 1 just play that. Lose the dream that it's coming back because it bloody well isn't.

Never lose the dream. Just face the facts that [censored] has happened, and the fan is still rolling.

More of the same is exactly what I want.