To me, part of the charm of all Beths games is jumping up cliffs.

NV had lots and lots of areas you couldn't get too, not being able to jump up on rocks or ledges that were not that high, the map kept you shoehorned in a lot of areas, the design of the map itself was very linear in many areas, mostly not being able to climb or pass over mountains or hills that were not that steep or high up, fallout 3 had areas like that as well, but NV was worse in a way because a lot of areas seem not too hard to get to or climb up but you just couldn't do it, thats the invisible walls, spots like ledges that are not too high but you just can't pass up to or over them. fallout 3 was more blocked off by destroyed buildings, i wish that unless a hill was just too steep or ledge was just too high that otherwise you should be able to get to the area, like in skyrim.

I thought the Deathclaw conga was charming.
(When they edge along a curb or low embankment... all in a line, following the edge to the end.)

In Skyrim, I was able to walk under hills and houses, for being able to get to the area. IMO it's better to wall off areas that have no point or purpose to the narrative. It certainly allows for more thorough quality control. In NV I found that I could walk off the map without noticing it... and because the bounds were invisible, I could not backtrack through whatever hole I slipped through.

TES is often lauded for being able to climb a distant mountain, but if there is nothing up there ~no reason to go there, then I find that a waste and a needless distraction. (*And finding an abandoned sleeping bag on the ice covered cliffs is not worthwhile justification IMO.)

I don't find the venerated freedom to arbitrarily wander off as being all that compelling.

YOU SEE THE MOUNTAIN? YOU CAN CLIMB THAT MOUNTAIN.

And once you get there... it's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matterhorn_Bobsleds#/media/File:Matterhorn_-_Disneyland_2012.jpghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matterhorn_Bobsleds#/media/File:Matterhorn_-_Disneyland_2012.jpg.

[size of]

And when they said climbing, they meant horse glitching your way to the top.

I've never had an issue with barriers (of whatever kind) at he edge of maps, but invisible walls to simply thwart movement into an area that has terrain you SHOULD be able to cross is just lazy design work. While "tcl" cures all these ills, ti's still horribly frustrating to find an invisible wall in a supposedly "open world" game.

As for how Boston will likely handle this, Not sure it will be any different than FO3s DC area. Large buildings and huge piles of collapsed buildings did a much better job of blocking off areas in the game than invisible walls (tho many of those rubble piles HAD invisible walls present). I never felt the blocked off areas in DC proper were overly inconvenient (once you learned how to get to certain places via the Metro) but I do wish they had had more ground level access points to reach the isolated DC areas such as ways to travel though partially collapsed buildings or across their roofs, small cellar entrances and exits (that could also connect to nearby Metro tunnels).

As i remember right there was that choice made preliminary not to add any of those ideas, like walking mountains and such because the psychological consequence to copy that by use of training online would be to much with the actual and to be expected states of war the untied states is undergoing atm.

QFT

Pan a soni-c

EDIT -- allright, i forgot to not do it again.

Oddly enough after playing Skyrim for 1400+ hours I only found an invisible wall once, and that was more/less on purpose cause I wanted to see it. But of course it had plenty of mountains.

The invisible wall message seems unavoidable for FO4 but I think I'll forgive them since having piles of conveniently placed junk around the border would be worse IMO.

This. In my time in the Mojave Wasteland I learned that the direction my map compass was pointing me in was never, ever the actual direction I needed to go to get to my destination. I always ended up in a cul de sac, or confronted by an impassable escarpment that took forever to walk around. And don't even get me started on all the gates in the Strip. (I realize that much of this was probably due to the limitations of Gamebryo and Obsidian's relative unfamiliarity with it, but still...)

i never have liked Invisible walls.."You can't go that way."

"Really? Why can't I?"

Because you're playing a game, and there's only so much actual gamespace they did/could give you.

And what about NPC's who only use melee attacks? If there is Navmesh on the other side of the wall the game can (eventually) teleport the NPC's there past obsticles if the AI is trying to get there. A common mistake modders make early on is to make a dungeon place enemy NPC's in it but no Navmesh, and then they wonder why the enemies stand there like dummies.

The invisible walls are there to stop the player from going where the terrain becomes extreme and so does the collision geometry. From my experience the games haven't been using a ray casting method to check collision geometry for pathing (because it's expensive) so if a rough terrain area has a navmesh NPC's will go there and get stuck by collision, clip badly, or float half off the ground (they don't have eyes to see the rock in front of them). Leave the Navmesh out and the AI goes crazy if they are trying to track the player while he / she isn't on the mesh.

I hope they do something with NPC bounding volumes in the future because up to now it's been a [censored]ing box, and it would also be nice if there was AI pathing that could handle vertical Navmesh.