No, combat in Fallout 3 was awful. But they should've had moved the other direction in fixing things, away from the FPS thing.

because maschism! right?

Because it's an RPG and Todd Howard explicitly mentions this. Therefore combat should reflect an RPG where skills and character stats influence the combat. Otherwise you have nonsensical scenarios where the pacifist wastelander who has never touched a gun is magically as skilled at handling one as the a mercenary. That character with 1 STR can handle a SMG recoil just as well as the 10 STR character.

The two systems are contradictory by nature in terms of combat at least. Otherwise you may as well consider Halo an RPG because you assume the role of John-117.

Know what happens when an incredibly weak person tries to fire a fully auto SMG?

Edit: Just remembered isn't it supposed to be a military vault? Or was that just rumors? That might save it for me. I still don't like it, but at least I'd feel better if the whole military thing was part of the set background.

They could have improved the FPS side while still adding things to the RPG side. Look at Deus Ex. Its an FPS-RPG and its weapon handling depends greatly on character skill.

I'm hoping low skill means things like increased wobble, slower reloading, less jamming? For melee on the other hand, I have no clue how they could fix that.

i am one of them BUT I wont judge it as a failure of a mechanic until I play it. My one concern is that it will be a shooting system that is determine by player skill vs character skill. Most pro shooters hear this and think haha you svck you have no skill that is why you wantthe game to shoot for you and it is actually the opposite. I am not worried I won't be able to shoot. I am worried that my own skill will be more than enough to compensate for a character that can't shoot or ratehr shouldn't be able to shoot well. So why invest the points when i can shoot down anything but my character is suppost to be unsure which end the bullets come out of?

That said i am not going to worry and fret about it. I am curious what this change means but I wont prejudge anything. i'm going to wait and play for a month and then make an informed evaluation of the game in general.

2 things

1] Your character is a military vet in FO4 whether we like it or not

2] Nobody said that stats wont affect how you use weaponry, they have only stated that the combat is more polished...seriously insane that people can complain about improvements...

You people would cry about world hunger being solved

Do we even know if the main protagonist is a military vet.

I don't know that the two are innately and diametrically opposed, necessarily. It's just a matter of how it's going to be implemented, I think. I remember Alpha Protocol, for instance - you could certainly tell a marked difference in using a weapon you had no relevant skills in versus one you'd focused your skill points on. In Deus Ex, you were always going to be pretty adept with any weapon, but there significant rewards for improving in your chosen skill.

What I've long been a proponent of for Bethesda's Fallout games (though I'm doubting this is what they've done with Fallout 4) is simply having a targeting reticule that shrinks and grows to represent your accuracy in real time. Various other games have made use of this (both RPGs and FPSs,) and I've always thought it worked pretty well. The circle represents your bullet spread, any shot will fall somewhere within that cone - so obviously a tighter reticule will make for a more accurate shot.

And there's plenty of room for skills and attributes to impact that impact (ie, trying to use a big gun with a STR rating much higher than your own with no skill points in it and your firing cone is going to be so big as render it nearly useless. A higher-STR character might recover from recoil quicker, while a high AGI might mean swifter aiming time, etc.)

Either way - we all knew (I would assume) that Fallout 4 was going to use real-time combat a la Bethesda's other past games. Having not been that big of a fan of their combat mechanics in previous games, necessarily, I like to hear that they've tightened up on this aspect.

This essentially confirms that Fallout 4 is an action game with RPG elements like borderlands and not an action RPG.

Jeez Fallout 4 will probably have the same ranked perk system as well...

As opposed to FO3 and NV?

I'm not opposed to making the combat better. However, I really don't want to see Fallout turn into your typical FPS shooter where you spend half the game hanging out behind jersey barriers and concrete pylons.

I think comparing Fallout 4 to Borderlands is a bit of a stretch. This game seems to have more RPG elements than Skyrim this far. All they did was improve the action aspects of the game.

I don't mind Better Combat but I don't want Borderlands 2 combat, that's too fast for what Fallout does.

Yip.

Player skill wasn't the overriding factor in combat, if Fallout 4 plays like a modern shooter it will be.

We know the male one is. The female one may or may not be.

From what we've seen Fallout 4 and Borderlands share many integral similarities, from the FPS clone gameplay (Todd's implication) and the new ranked perk system there's a significant similitude between the games.

It'll be interesting to see just how similar the new Borderlands is to Fallout 4.

1.) Source from Bethesda's mouth please? I sure as heck didn't see it. Edit: Heard the male going to Veteran's hall, but the female?

2.) No they said "Combat is receiving a major stimpak thanks to some consulting with id Software to improve the second-to-second shooting. Bethesda's goal? To have the shooting stand shoulder to shoulder with the other great options on the market. The studio even hired away some Bungie talent to help with this remodel. With the new, built-from-scratch shooting system, Howard says Fallout 4 plays much more like a modern shooter. You can aim down the sights, use V.A.T.S., and play in first or third person." Different articles have said different things, but most of them write it in a way that's suggestive of it being FPS combat that is similar to other big name modern shooters.

I ain't even getting into your last statement because it sounds to me like you're goading.

I'm just going off the words in the article. It sounded [to me] like they were turning the combat into an FPS that can stand shoulder to shoulder with other large market FPS titles. Additionally, the way they talked it sounded like the only hindrance to combat on character skill was in vats where Todd said you could build your character towards that and be effective.

We don't really have much, so it's speculation based on his words.

As you say though, it could very well still be tied to the character. I personally don't care how they do it, but in a RPG I would take clunky RPG combat over CoD/Battlefield shooter combat. Which they said it'd be more like a modern shooter in some article or another.

Obviously with such ambiguous statements it's impossible to have anything concrete. So it's just speculation. **

This is why I am going to wait and have experience to make an informed decision before I pass judgement. There are multiple ways this can be handled some good some bad and fretting over them isn't going to help so we all might as well wait and see because until we have experience with the game we just don't know what the situation is.

Oh certainly. I don't plan to cancel my pre-order yet. I'll wait before there's more information where I can make an informed decision.

Just speculation at this point.

It's kind of refreshing to see people talk about level scaling without taking a huge dump on it. I guess on the Elder Scrolls forums, people only ever think of Oblivion's bandits clad in Glass Armor and that sours them on the idea. But an open-world game needs consistent and reasonable challenge; You either have the game scale with you to a degree, or reduce the range of power the character goes from in early game to late game.

As for RPG vs FPS mechanics, Bethesda has emphasized that this is first and foremost an open world game. And Bethesda's RPGs have always been simple action RPGs; over time, they've shifted the paradigm from skills on a spectrum to perks acting as milestones, so that you can feel a tangible difference when you level up and take a new perk. I welcome the FPS gameplay, because it does serve to make real-time combat more fun regardless of the discussion of "player skill vs. character skill". And seeing as how tighter combat mechanics means nothing about the RPG aspects of crafting, settlement building, quest choices, and dialogue, I strongly doubt it will disqualify the game from being an RPG. A different kind of RPG, of course, but with how nebulous the definition of RPG is Fallout 4 isn't disqualified by a longshot.

Nothing right now has convinced me to not buy this game. Day bloody one for me.

I think that's where the similarities end. Borderlands was an FPS that desperately wanted to be an RPG. There was almost no character customization, zero in depth character story apart from a few antagonists, etc. Fallout 4 appears to have more RPG elements than Fallout 3 or New Vegas, but with better shooting mechanics. Hell, the crafting has gotten even more in depth. Honestly, I think that this game will be a better shooter and a better RPG than most of the games we get nowadays.

I'm kind of torn on this. I can, sort of, empathize with the notion that if FO plays like a modern shooter IE skills/stats have little to no effect on combat it would hurt the RPG aspects, because it makes skills kind of useless (obviously). However, that is not stated anywhere in that article and just pure speculation.

I have however heard the argument made that lining up a perfect headshot and then having it miss because of some invisible dice-roll is inherently counter-intuitive and not a fun/good experience. Now I know some people really disagree with this, and I guess it just comes down to what you are looking for in a game: fun or strict roleplaying. I myself and I would guess the vast majority of Bethesdas customers would prefer fun, at the cost technical RP stuff. But again, I'm sort of torn. Hopefully skills and stats will still meaningfully impact combat and we'll all be happy (or as happy as we were with FO3/NV anyway).

Also the PC being a military vet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOIksI1k-vs

The very first thing the female PC says is "you'll knock em dead at the veterans hall". Also, in the Kotaku leak that so far has proven to be quite accurate the PC is referred to as being a vet.

Was kinda hoping that being a Vet wasn't forced but with Anchorage the draft could've been a thing. I can't condemn it until more info is released.

Close enough ti Post Limit