So, can we get some confirmation skills? : Fallout 4

» Sat Nov 28, 2015 4:58 am

Oh please. It's an RPG, regardless of whether or not you agree with the changes they have implemented.

» Sat Nov 28, 2015 7:07 am

Is this the rational side you are talking about mjairam, because to me this look like a useless comment used to incite a negative reaction and not a rational form of discourse. I mean Fallout 4 walks, quacks, and looks like an duck, but you're saying it's a pig? The developers have said it's an RPG and most people agree it's an RPG (though maybe not enough of one), so I don't really see the point in denying it's an RPG (arguing about how much of one is at least reasonable and, maybe, constructive). Dragon Quest is undeniably an RPG, despite no skills, maybe two or three choices in the entire game (of mostly limited importance), being fairly linear, and offering no choice in who you are or what you get at every level. It is turn based though.

» Fri Nov 27, 2015 9:18 pm

Are you saying that you have first hand experience with the game? How can you know, it hasn't even released yet. You are prejudging the thing before it even has a chance to prove itself.

When has that ever made anything a fact? None of us have played the game; none of us truly know; and won't until we play it.

It is actually. Search the article for the word 'gems'. It's a hyperlink.

» Sat Nov 28, 2015 6:50 am

The devs have said that it's an RPG, it still focuses on perks, immersion, and exploration from what we've seen, how is it not an RPG.

Or did they turn Fallout into a side scrolling platformer when I wasn't looking.

» Sat Nov 28, 2015 1:28 am

That's rich, given that you've been prejudging the game since it was announced.

» Fri Nov 27, 2015 11:30 pm

He isn't the only one guilty of that particular sin to be fair.

Lots of people are saying the devs are lying about their product, for some reason. I guess because Bethesda is the devil.

» Sat Nov 28, 2015 11:34 am

The CDProjekt devs said that Witcher was isometric. I can see that, but do you agree?

We'll have to wait and see what they [Bethesda] meant by that statement.

Do you agree with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doom_RPG ~being an RPG?

» Sat Nov 28, 2015 9:18 am

Ah, I see it now. thank you.

» Sat Nov 28, 2015 4:26 am

I'll go ahead and make the shocking assertion that Bethesda aren't lying about their product and it's in fact still an RPG.

Crazy I know.

» Sat Nov 28, 2015 12:01 am

After watching a review, I would say yes it is an RPG. It seems to very similar in some ways to the old Dragon Quest/Warrior games, crossed with Zelda, and shooter elements.

» Sat Nov 28, 2015 8:10 am

And I took that to mean that you spoke of FO4; and I agreed ~at first. I apologize. I quickly realized that you had meant DOOM RPG.

For the most part I agree with the article that Motsie linked above.

** The Doom link was an aside, just for the absurdity of the name; it was never once meant to be vetted.

» Fri Nov 27, 2015 10:11 pm

role-play·ing game

noun

noun: role-playing game; plural noun: role-playing games; noun: r?le-playing game; plural noun: r?le-playing games; noun: role-play game; plural noun: role-play games

1. a game in which players take on the roles of imaginary characters who engage in adventures, typically in a particular computerized fantasy setting overseen by a referee.

The problem here is the yardstick being used. RPG is a term that has evolved over a long period of time. If you ask 10 different people, you're liable to get 10 different answers as to what constitutes an RPG. I hail from the original TSR age of D&D. If we used an 80's yardstick of 'what constitutes an RPG' would Fallout 4 be one? Probably not. But, over the last 30 years...RPG has grown to encompass a great deal. It has evolved as video gaming has evolved.

Fallout 4, whether I have played it or not...is an RPG. Plain and simple. Why? I am taking on the role of the protagonist, and I am using a system of rules which are governed by a referee (the system which has been developed by Bethesda, the game backend). Now, I am sure there are a hundred people who will disagree with me. There are 100 more that will agree.

To which I say: so what? It essentially boils down to the fact that you're using a general and broad term to measure specifics based on a standard nobody has, or will agree on. Yes, there are "pure" RPG's. But there are also things that push the envelope. That's how games evolve and get better. Instead of trying to pigeonhole based on arbitrary terms, perhaps embrace the fact that Bethesda is trying something new. That something positive will develop from it. That it evolves the genre more.

That's how you avoid being stuck mired in the past. If we had stuck to "pure" RPGs, without any evolution, well...we would be playing this game on a table top, with dice.

Just my two cents. By all means. Feel free to pick up where you left off. =)

» Fri Nov 27, 2015 10:39 pm

Which is why there's sub-types of RPGs, in my book. The Elder Scrolls games (Daggerfall+) and Fallout games (Fallout 3+) are Action Open World RPGs where their main focus is all about the world and what you do within it, not necessary about the story or your character. Which is why I've always forgiven Bethesda for messing up attributes, every single game in The Elder Scrolls, and messing up skills in Fallout 3 (and New Vegas, though New Vegas isn't Bethesda's work). Simply because Bethesda doesn't make those types of RPGs that really focuses on the character that much...

So to me... The removal of skills in Fallout 4 is similar to the "removal" of attributes in Skyrim. Most likely, there will still be some "remains" of skills, just like with attributes in Skyrim. I just am afraid they mess up the SPECIAL too much in Fallout 4. That's was the one thing that Fallout had going when it comes down to character creation: the SPECIAL system.

» Sat Nov 28, 2015 4:07 am

I can dig this post. And it seems Bethesda's happy enough with their worldbuilding to start focusing on improving other areas. They outright said in interviews after Skyrim that, they were really happy with their game worlds, and that they'd spend more time on characters. What we've seen of Fallout 4 definitely proves they made an effort; we'll see if it bears fruit in November.

As far as their character stats and progression goes, I like the direction Bethesda's been taking. The focus has shifted from character creation to character development, and they prefer to design it so that it doesn't need a level cap. I don't see how it's any less "deep" than the older systems, although they might not accomodate or limit the same systems as their older titles. They're certainly not the simplest systems out of all RPGs, either.