» Sat Feb 20, 2016 8:59 am
What the majority thinks is irrelevant.
F1, F2, & F:T are all 2D isometric games, and there was no difference between how you moved when armored vs. how you moved unarmored; you simply looked like a walking tank.
The T-51, a major improvement over the T-45, was designed to be a low maintenance, close-fitting, highly damage-resistant extension of the wearer, enhancing their abilities not hindering them; basically Iron Man suits. That's why they were so successful at repelling the Chinese.
F3 actually portrayed power armor correctly in that sense (except for the T-45 model) because power armor is supposed to be a suit you put on that boosts stats. T-45 should've moved in a slower, clunkier manner.
F4's portrayal of power armor as a lumbering vehicle no matter the model runs completely counter to what Fallout power armor is supposed to be.
If only the T-60 model was armor you had to climb into and was slow because it is classified as heavy assault power armor designed to carry super-heavy weapons into combat while being supported by T-51 units, it would make sense. The T-45 power armor should be a large step below the T-51 in every way. The more advanced armors should be evolutionary improvements over the T-51, but maybe not go so far as to be revolutionary improvements.
Basing all armor on the same frame makes no sense because now there's no way to meaningfully differentiate between armors.