But not different than we have come to play in the last years from this company?

You learn to avoid Giants and Dragon Priests and Mutants until you can handle them...

Not things with skulls floating over their heads that are leaping at you at level 1.

Yeah, I don't think Bethesda will do that. Worst case scenario, it will be similar to getting jumped by Saber Cats or Bears in Skyrim. Or it would be painfully obvious that you're in killer territory, like Red Mountain in Morrowind or downtown DC in Fallout 3.

Which is what the "Glowing Sea" will probably be; the high-level death zone. Deathclaw country.

Thank you... That's all I needed to know.. -s-

Combat functions more like modern shooters?

Does that mean the game will be ridiculously easy and I'll beat it in less than six hours, like with Bioshock Infinite?

TIL game length has something to do with combat?


It probably means it isn't a clunky mess like NV and 3, and weapons will have an impact and feel like actual guns instead of
things that make red pips go down at different paces.

Yes, that's what it means.

Funny, I never think in terms of 'beating' Bethesda games. It's more like I visit them.

As you've said this looks like a concession from Beth that FO4 is essentially a shooter...

Though the excerpt about the plot is promising to some extent.

Can anyone point me to example in 3 or NV where skills affected combat in a way that made them interesting save higher damage and less sway with a hunter rifle?

We can even argue that that isn't necessarily interesting, because you can crouch down and lessen sway, and hitting a magic number doesn't have much depth.

Also, it's not like perks are going to do the same thing in 4 or anything. Oh wait, yes the will! Silly me.

If Bethesda can pull off FPS, third person and VATS it seems it will give us the option to play as we like. FPS was never a strong suit with Fallout, this could change.

As concerned as I was initially, I think all they mean is they're trying to offer a wonderful Roleplay experience as well as provide a good combat experience for those who prefer to play Fallout as an FPS. As long as there's a balance, I'm okay. I'll wait until it's released before I make any real opinion of this.

My guess would be that character stats and perks will be a factor in VATS and equipment. Your Gun Nut perks, for example, will probably allow you to build more powerful guns which will make you more effective in combat. So character abilities will still impact combat, but more indirectly outside of VATS.

Alright, so the shooting's gonna be good, but can we get some actual decent melee combat?

Nothing new. FONV and Skyrim did the same thing. Skyrim had scaling in dungeons and outside, plus areas where lowlevel Dragonborns would get smashed. Giving something a new name doesn't make it a new thing. Then again, i've never thought the scaling was bad. Only for loot. I hope that the areas which are lvl 30 will have lvl 30 loot, no matter your lvl. Loot should scale with the enemy you defeat not the lvl of the player.

I think a lot of people are missing the point of "Rubberband".What I got was if you go back to a lower level area,it could randomly change to a higher level the next time. That never happen in FO3...ever!

Haters gonna hate...

Yup, they will...

Personally, it's better just to wait and see what happens, then whine/compliment/criticise...

Maybe it will make the game better if some changes are made, maybe not.

wish people would stop all the i want fps or rpg i think bathesda have made something new a bit of both its going to be good

its two sides of the same, weapon handling was poor in Fallout 3, hated how your bullets did not came from the barrel of the gun but somehow from the center of your chest, this was more of an problem in VAT actually as you lined up an row with head shot an all went into the wall in front of you also you can not hit something who is clinging to you with an sniper rifle. So we want this FPS part right.

The RPG part is how your skill matters, not only in VAT but also then shooting FPS style, this was done pretty well in Fallout 3, then you was low level your bullets went everywhere, at least with handguns, at high level you got aim assist, something I hate but makes sense as an master with guns are better at shooting than you.

Yes in Fallout 3 you had guns with no spread, this bypassed the character skill as you could snipe outside of VAT with as good accuracy as the sights allowed.

TES and Fallout are two series, too me the new start looks like how they want them to stand apart where Fallout have an stronger story at the cost of some freedom. However they learn from each game, that worked and did not work in Skyrim who can be transferred to Fallout. You can see a lot of Fallout 3 influence in Skyrim, few of them bad.

So they managed to make it more like an FPS and improve the RPG elements on top of that? I'm sold.

You really can though, as the overwhelming majority of RPG devs do not, nor have they ever, believed in this separation of play and character skill definition in RPGs.

Which is why you have seen basically every single RPG dev, even ones who have been making RPGs for like 25 years, make increasingly more player skill focused RPGs, and them still acting like they are RPGs..... because they are.

No offense to Todd Howard, it's likely he just svcks at explaining things. Here's what I think he's trying to say: Fallout 4 IS going to be an RPG, much like Fallout 3 and Skyrim was. He just wanted to fix the shooting aspect of it so it matched most modern FPS games we've got. So basically when we shoot now, our camera isn't going to be on our character's shoulder as we clumsily try to aim, but rather more along the line of the weapon's sight.

The inbetween system of RPG and FPS made the combat mecahnics, movement, and AI extremely clunky in Fallout 3/NV so while I like that they picked a side rather than try to please both I would have preferred the RPG side. Still, at least it means the combat won't feel like a clunky mess, and that's a good thing.

And the branching quests and stuff, until they go into more detail I won't hold my breath for anything.

I don't see why combat mechanics and RPG experience have to be mutually exclusive? And where did they say that they sacrifice RPG for combat?

There was a line about the inclusion of more choice and consequence which makes me happy. The other things I don't mind. I would rather no Radiant AI but as long as there is good quests that are well written, I am happy. I am happy they sought help on combat too. I think I am moving from a worry state that I was in to a more intrigued state so I think this was positive news.

I'm hoping they also consulted with Arkane about the Melee combat, if they did that.