A nice pop in the head from the Anti Material Rifle is also nice.

because it's defeating the purpose of developing your character.
they way they removed dice-rolls AND making the weapon damage independent of your respective weapon skill corrupted the skill tree to a point where it seems almost pointless to waste your skill points on weapon skills and use perks to make VATS a viable option in comparison to real time combat.
so, in the end, those who are not primarily seeking a nice challenge for their trigger skills, but a game where your character build counts, aren't evenly treated.
the game, to a certain extent, encourages you NOT to play it like a rpg, which is kinda ridiculous.
so, by making the player not longer a liability by your very own definition, every thought on which combat route to take with a character is now the new liability
the worst thing is, i can already see the next guy coming after you and complain of other rpg-aspects they deem as 'boring' and 'not fun'...

There was always an ongoing argument between the FPS types and those who preferred VATS. Me? I prefer it...it separates these two games from other games, it gives a movie like cutscene of the combat, and combat is a bit more than either an ultra-long range snipe or a run and gun fest chewing up ammo.

Are you guys kidding? It was the only way to attack in the first two games.

You want to criticize a poster for appointing himself 'overseer' and yet you universally declare a whole class of gameplay mechanics 'boring.'

Ok you think they're boring - does that mean they have no merit?




Food for thought? Not really. Yes you could classify almost any game experience as 'role playing.' By doing so you're being so loose in the systems your referring to that for the purposes of conversation with other gamers your ideas become so all encompassing that the exchange is pointlessly broad.



There's that boring word again. And while our unidentified Wikipedian avoids editorializing (surely if he mentioned a turn-based combat system he'd declare it boring) he does namecheck Dungeons and Dragons as a benchmark for RPG systems. D&D of course has a rather elaborate turn-based stat-driven combat system.



Cool dude now you're making sense. I believe majority opinion is on your side here. Certainly Bethesda agrees with you. Though I wonder if opinions and buying habits like yours haven't flattened our genre by encouraging AAA developers to completely jettison game-play systems that have their own merits and advantages over those of action games and action RPG's. I wouldn't bother picking on your tastes - I mean, they're yours after all. Except ... I have the feeling your opinion is monolith. And our gameplay systems are becoming monolith.

There is a goldmine in turn-based systems that is relegated to the back burner. There is potential there for some very interesting systems. Yet as time advances and the gaming audience grows ... variety in play styles is actually flattening. I do wish titles had at least maintained their diversity or even increased it with the advent of new ideas and technology. Action games have continued evolving while other genres are gutted.

Thus action based systems are bleeding over to fill the void...

I love how fired up and serious some people get about these things. :lmao:

How was it the only way to attack in the first two games? They had turn-based combat. Do you think VATS is a turn-based system?

If you don't use VATS then you just shoot at a random body part during your turn.
So if you don't use AIM (what it used to be called) and try to hit the eyes, head or crotch then you'll end up dead at later part of the game when enemies get tougher.

FO1 , FO2 and Tactics were turned based.
When combat began the player with the highest awareness would go first ( shoot, move, etc) and then the next highest ( enemy or NPC ) and so forth.
Tactics added the option of squad based turn based.
You used Actions Points based on Agility score.
Awareness I think was a combo of perception and agility....I think it might be actually called something else....can't remember. It tells you in the character screen what it is.
APs in combat were used for healing, shooting, reloading, moving....etc.

you know, i've started to consider the shooter crowd as the strange matter of the gaming world quite a time ago

Yeah I've played the games, but VATS is entirely unique and is barely even a reference to the aiming system in the first game. The two don't compare in any meaningful way - VATS has more in common with the real-time-with-pause setups that've been most notably used in Bioware RPG's since the infinity engine days. VATS is like a RTWP system cross pollinated with some Max Payne.

You do understand that Wikipedia is really an opinion aggragator. It is not authoritative in any real sense.

I thought cheating was what you did when you discovered a complex series of button presses to magically fill your inventory with every weapon and armor and useful item in the game. Or calling up a console on the PC and giving yourself max exp, atts, and skills.

Funny how VATS is just... kind of... *right there* ready to be used. Wanting to be used. Begging to be used. With a press of a single button.

Yeah. Sure. That's cheating. Right. :shakehead:

Not really. I get lots of headshots. I will not use that RPG toy.

Well lets back up a bit.

I play shooters not RPGs so my shooter skills are pretty good. I prefer to take my chances with real time combat, no matter how flawed, and boy is it flawed in this game. No matter, I'm doing very well on hardcoe hard.

Lots of people are not shooter players and have no real fighting skills. I would much rather see something like VATS for this crowd than dumbing down all the shooters, which is what's happening.

VATS shots are generally weaker, and occasionally glitch causing no damage at all (if, say, an enemy runs behind a wall mid-VATS, the player will waste ammo on the wall). The way I see it, VATS trades power for accuracy. It's a tactical decision that doesn't always pay off - far from "cheating".

Come on now people, VATS is nothing near cheating! Think about it first: This is a single player game, and you have an available feature that lets you view the battle from a better perspective, which is what at least I use it for. Cheating in a single player game is pointless, unless you're looking to trick yourself, and VATS is as said, a legit feature.
I believe that in the Fo3 manual there was a "message" from the Bethesda team saying something like: "There is no RIGHT way to play the game, neither is there a WRONG way to play it, just let loose and have fun!" Point is, it is a single player game. If you don't like VATS, and think it's cheating, you're missing out on some good moments, just don't use it! In a single player game, as well as most other games, you are entitled to play the game the way you see fit, just don't go saying that it's cheating, no-one has the right to tell someone else how to play a game "properly".

It's a single player game. Cheating is irrelevant. But you are missing out on a great experience if the game isn't challenging. If you want to play it like a shooter because you like shooters, do it. If you want to play it like and RPG because you like RPGs, do that. Either way, if the game is no challenge, just crank up the difficulty. If it's too hard crank it down. If it's still too hard, your build svcks and you should make a new one more suited to your strengths and play style, what ever that style happens to be.

how is that a glitch? i wouldnt expect the bullet to hit my opponent if he moves behind a wall mid-VATS. this game doesnt have advanced bullet physics(in the sense that, bullets can go through objects, which they cant in this game).

Outside of the Arma series, I can't think of any other that actually do have a realistic ballistics and physics engine. On the otherhand, Arma has a much smaller following because it's simply too hardcoe for the vast majority and frustrates people on how to adjust their sights (if applicable) and/or adjust aim for range. Not to mention that the mils and ranging information on scopes actually work as intended, rather than simple eyecandy like in most games.

As far as skills and stats not effecting combat outside of VATS, that's not true. Your weapon skills still determine your baseline damage for your weapon, and your luck and perks apply to your crit chance and/or damage mods depending on the perk. Aiming is definitely easier since VATS' range has been drastically reduced. By the same token for any kind of close quarter combat, you're at far greater risk than with VATS since you're doing it in real time.

The clipping issue exists in and out of VATS. It's just easier to immediately fix outside of VATS since you get instant feedback rather than watching in horror at your AP being wasted in slow motion.


The main problem with VATS being translated into FO3 and now FONV is that the core elements of the GERPS system were left out. Those core elements are what made it a strategic TURN BASED combat system. While they could have included it within the game in all it's glory, they decided to dumb it down and make it more of a semi bullet-time mode that you could engage/disengage at will.

It wasn't CALLED V.A.T.S.!!! There was a targeting system, but it was just part of the aiming feature which cost an extra AP. It was not called VATS.

Yes, in a way, they are trying to bring the traditional turn based combat system feel of the original games and adjusted it to better fit a first/third person perspective, why do you think the V.A.T.S is there at all?

I think this system is fun and everybody wins, FPS fans if you don't like it, don't use it. For RPG people it's pretty fun to use, kinda nostalgic in a way and allows the series to evolve into a third person or first person perspective that makes us feel more immersed than the top view we used to have in the original.

But please FPS fans, don't come here with your bravado about how you are so hardcoe and the people using V.A.T.S have "no skills" and are cheating, this isn't counter strike and no one cares how l337 you think you are.

Personally I use a mix of both since I am a fan of both genres. I think this game has something for people who enjoy either types of gameplay

Now that ironsights are included I notice I'm using VATS a little less, but I still use it and don't consider it cheating at all, It is part of the game, right?

Dunno if this has already been said, but i think people mean that they just select a target in VATS, press ok and watch them kill (or damage) the enemy without much effort. And using ironsights isnt that easy as the bullet doesnt seem to go where you aim it, i assume ths is based on the skill you have with that type, but hey i love both methods :shrug:

I let you in on a little secret...

I agree the iron sights is awesome, for some reason it really adds to the feel of the game, there is a thrill you get when you're looking down the sights at a charging deathclaw that is not the same as having a little cursor on it. It's also fun to line up a perfect stealth shot with a silenced varmint rifle.

Same here, a LOT. I always use VATS in close combat because i'm not a FPS player so svck, am using a controller so svck, and get motion sick so svck. VATS is awesome. Since I can't hit spit outside of VATS, it makes FO:NV effectively turn based for me, just like when I played FO 1&2.

VATS also lets me enjoy the scene more, I can look around at my leisure and say 'damn, im boned'.

Lots of people like VATS, lots don't. Use whichever makes it a better game for you. Like hardcoe mode, its your choice.

Of course, some people gain the most pleasure out of [censored]ing about a game, so here we are.