Nobody who think expect that every weapon you carry should show up in a game where weapons is common loot.

It only work then you have maximum 3-4 weapons you can carry totally.

However nobody expected that holstering held weapon, a feature who has been standard since Morrowind is removed.

Armor is not the issue, neither is armor parts, they use an offset value for various parts, its the back and the left side who is relevant here. Yes weapon modding is more of an challenge, you could have some weird setups like an giant scope and a huge drum magazine on an small sub machine gun as an example.

Here the inner parts will clip inside your leg and might look stupid. On the back it would be far less visible. you back is static. Clipping into the back will not be very noticeable during play.

Not as noticeable as stuffing an fatman up you ass

Well, I haven't read the art book but my impression was that it was concept or illustrative art so no, I would not expect the game to be exactly that.

My point is that I consider that image to be a marketing image. I do not believe it is concept art, I do believe that it was created for a purpose, and that purpose was to show a representation of the player character in a representation of the fallout world. As such I am disappointed that that representation, which I am fond of and connected with based on my experience of previous BGS games, is not a reflection of the in game representation.

I'm really not trying to force or convince anyone of anything; we're 99.9% confident that it's not in the game, and I think we're all ok with that based on the comments in this thread. I was merely following up on a post that was querying the presence of a holstered weapon in other marketing material.

I have never seen such vivid discussion about the ideal of holstering a weapon.

My only concern with the absence of holstered weapons is that it would become more difficult to assess the threat level of enemies. One could walk up to a seemingly unarmed Raider thinking he won't be a challenge and then get blown away by the missile launcher that was suddenly conjured by him.

We are true, immersive fans, what can I say?

*explodes someone with a Bloody Mess perk 9mm round* We favor reality around these here parts. *takes down a Deathclaw unarmed*

My point has always been aesthetics, but this is the real, physical argument. And I utterly agree with it.

*rummages through pockets containing 300 pounds of stuff* ...Yeah, true. I mean that just stands to reason. *pulls a rocket launcher out of my pants and opens fire on a giant mutant mosquito* There's a standard these games have set about how grounded in reality they need to be. *eats 200+ year old packaged food*

Heh. I was disappointed by the change, but not overly so. Now I'm actually concerned by it. This is a salient point.

Seems like patrols have their weapons out at all times anyway, judging by the Diamond City guards. So eh.

YOU GET THAT ROCKET LAUNCHER ON YOUR BACK WHERE I CAN SEE IT. What do you think this is, fiction?

Edit: still hard line pro-holster.

I love you

Strange for marketing image as I've never seen either of those before. They released and publicized a ton of the art somewhat after E3, and was much more visible to anyone than what you had posted. Lots of gaming sites made "articles" about it and it was hard not to see the art designs. I just feel like you're taking an image that was never meant to hold much weight and running with it. Hell in the live action trailer we saw a ton of stuff that won't be in game and that is direct marketing that anyone will see on TV. Just can't take everything to heart and then get upset when it isn't in game.

People tend to put Bethesda on a pedestal. Yeah they're a good company but Todd Howard has the same rep as Peter Molyneux about lying

Edit: This is coming from someone who put 1800 hours into Skyrim and around 300 into Fallout 3. I love Bethesda, but they're not perfect.

WOW.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SPhiXmQCcW8

LOL what did they lie about?? People taking art to mean confirmed announced fact is the problem here. We don't think you can one hand shot rad roaches because of the Wanderer trailer do we? SMH

Honestly no ability to holster your equipped weapon makes no sense to me. In Oblivion and i think Skyrim most weapons floated off of your characters body. So I don't believe the reason it is not in the game is because how it looked whether it was clipping or floating. But nonetheless, it's not game breaking, i'll just probably slightly cringe every time i see someone pull a weapon out of their butt.

Fair enough, I was just trying to be clear why I was disappointed with the disparity between the image and the reality of the game. I think if you go back over my posts you will not see any indication that I am upset with the change; I would say in all honesty that I have taken it to heart though, I mentioned very early on in the thread why this was and why I was disappointed.

That's not to say I'm a BALL OF RAGE inside though, just disappointed as I would have enjoyed that particular feature.

Probably. I just hope that since holstering is gone, enemies don't equip powerful weapons too often. I would hate to get surprised by a foe who just magically made a Fat Man appear out of thin air.

Seriously! Oh internet.

I was more talking about past games. I never said the art confirmed anything. Chill the [censored] out.

Yeah understandable. I was just trying to show the other side of it all. Seeing one image and being upset that it wasn't in game, shouldn't we do the same? Otherwise we're just being choosy and the whole "but there's art showing ____ feature is there" Hell I'd love some of the art stuff that was shown but a lot of it was purely concept.

And as a note, while I'm not destroyed it's gone, I can feel for the people that liked it as a feature. I can understand why it may not be there though. Playing NV last night and dressed as a Legion member, my rifle poking out of my cape was more annoying visually then me not seeing a weapon. Personal preference of course

You should probably mention that when quoting someone talking about Fallout 4 and not past games then. Would help identify your out of context remarks lol

Considering I was on your side in my previous posts, I figured that was eno ugh context.. I did not say Todd lied, I said he has a reputation for lying.

http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?s=e8d2a4ee82dd2fdf3b2783fcb09e9fe0&&app=forums&module=extras§ion=legends#

Appologies then it had seemed like you were responding with Todd lying, to my post about not taking the art released to heart