If the game is designed from the start with no cap, it could prove to work better than either previous system in FO3 or Skyrim. It would be interesting, to me at least, to play a character for many years and countless hours and the game to still offer the chance to keep leveling up.

This would actually be very cool! We would of course have to keep two saves going though, one for each protagonist

I've said it before and will again here: I can see threads now like "What level are you and what perks have you taken?" the threads could go on for years! Could be interesting! I can see myself doing a play with a single character in one file, and a possible second or third save just to see if initial builds really do affect anything early on.

I had actually suggested a soft level cap of 50 on my perks/skills thread, but this sounds like a lot more fun! I may have to make a few additional amendments on top of the ones I'm already working on

I doubt there will be a level cap, just a good curve. Why would they put down a level cap?

That would be cool, though I would think at some point we'd get tired of playing our fearsome Godlike character that we'd have to make a new character. He/she would make Lone Wanderer run for the irradiated hills he/she would be so damned powerful.

If the perks are balanced for different things then no level cap could work if there was a hp cap.

Then a very high lvl char would just be MOAT but not break the games balance much more than a normal end character.

If we got bored after a year or two, we could always test out the 'exploding Codsworth' scenario that Todd hinted at. Shoot from as far away as we can manage, run up to pieces, rebuild. Rinse and repeat. Or we could try and collect every pencil in the Commonwealth!

Broken Steel was a mess in a lot of ways, but the biggest issue I had with the DLC wasn't that it allowed you to become statistically perfect if you played right. It was that an attempt to add challenge to the game was just to introduce damage sponge enemies that took way too long to kill. They didn't require better strategies or tactics, just more bullets. It turned combat into battles of attrition and just made things tedious.

Balance really got messed up in the dlcs.


Magic damage from point lookout people, overlord mutant tri beams etc

What I'm hoping (but have seen no hint of), is that they've implemented target nodes (or something better) into the models; and have the engine conform the stock melee attacks to the targets ~as the targets move.
This could allow targeted melee attacks to the VATS targets.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zycqh8q1xnbj33i/Target_Node_Concept_zps7dfcc060.mp4?dl=0

*As well, it could possibly apply to tool use if they wanted. Interactive items in the world could have target nodes, and animations would veer towards them, despite minor rotation mis-matches.
http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/yeah_right_sure_zpsd3a5952e.jpg
But they could do this without that system. They could have done this in FO3 I bet; no different (or more difficult) than [the animation assets for] sitting on a chair I would think.

I don't mean CoD itself but the model that it's known for (focus to much on making it pretty and lacking in the rest of the categories like interactivity,replayability,variety ,ETC. )

Nodes would still work with actors of varying heights, right? I think I know what you're talking about; like in the Sly Cooper platformers, that would happen with buttons to push, or hooks to latch your cane onto. That would be nice; maybe with a system like that Bethesda could actually incorporate ladders into their level design.

For Skyrim, Bethesda used Havok Behaviors for their animation middleware. I think shortly after Skyrim came out (or late enough in its development that it wasn't viable), Havok put out a more comprehensive Havok Animation Studio SDK. Robust, but there isn't much documentation for modders to go off of when they want to incorporate more than just a scripted idle animation.

As soon as I saw this I realized that Bethesda Softworks was going after http://www.inquisitr.com/2192562/gta-v-is-the-genius-behind-fallout-4-todd-howard-reveals/. Pete Hines is going to have one hell of a time trying to sell super casuals on this game in 30 second commercials, print media, and box cover art. Seriously, what do you use to convey to an extreme casual that Fallout is the new GTA?

I seriously don't think there is anything anyone could do to recreate that sort of hysteria around a game.

Umm... What?

Haven't you heard that the casuals are invading our beloved hardcoe video game developers and forcefully converting them to their wicked ways

Skyrim sold like 20 mil. GTA5 sold 50 mil. I think they are aiming to close that gap with Fallout 4. I don't think consoles have the install base to the support that though. I think they are going to put forth a lot of effort to make the sandbox aspects a lot more lively than Fallout 3.

Nah, that's not my point at all.

I just think they are going to work to out match GTA5's sandbox gameplay.

What?

I meant that they are going to make the sandbox gameplay more lively.

I guess that sounds nice, depends on what their definition of "lively" is though.

Think of how GTA did it and apply that to DeathClaws, Super Mutants, Raiders, Townfolk, Feral Ghouls, etc. etc.. I doubt you will be able to go too far without seeing people fighting off ghouls or raiders. Then once you get into a town area there will likely be a lot of side pvssyr that's unrelated to the player.

I honestly can't think of any other reason why Todd Howard would have been http://www.inquisitr.com/2192562/gta-v-is-the-genius-behind-fallout-4-todd-howard-reveals/ besides the sandbox gameplay.

For me it's less about the colors and more about the "tone" of the story and overall experience. GTA5 had a very campy tone to it. I think that's the direction that they wanted to go with the dialogue, quests, and general storyline. Even the GTA sandbox got a little wacky sometimes. Even if the player character is more of a straight man, there might be more campy characters than in previous Fallout games.

I doubt it's going to have a lighter tone than New Vegas, and I don't see how stepping away from utter joylessness would be a bad thing.

I think by Lively he means that we might see more Traveling groups of ghouls, of power armored mercenaries, of Institute soldiers, of Talon Company mercs, of regulators of caravans on roads and around the place. Someone herding their Brahmin for example.

Hopefully you'll still be able to just find the guns in the world as well.. It'll feel a bit unbalanced if the only way get the most powerful version of a gun is to craft it yourself.