I do feel that TES set the benchmark for open world gaming...and I Def agree CDPR seems to be a very well run company with solid ppl in charge

Let's hope their writing matches their will... In regards to the OP, if you loved Fallout 3 you'll most likely love Fallout 4.Though if you significantly enjoyed New Vegas over FO3 for it's stories, writing and characters then it's a lot harder to infer if you will like FO4 or not.

Bethesda has a precedent for ineptitude in the aforementioned aspects, so it's wise to temper any pollyannaish expectations and to expect something along the lines of previous titles; even with the heightened focus in these ares.

It's hard to define what constitutes 'groundbreaking' but the Witcher 3 provides the most comprehensive RPG ever; in the sense that just about everything it does from artstyle, graphics, characters, choices&consequences, lore, moral ambiguty etc are exemplars for other RPGs to follow.

You may prefer other RPGs like skyrim, but skyrim doesn't provide the breadth of excellence across most aspects of the game that the Witcher 3 does.

TW3 vs. TES/FO is pretty much an apples and oranges type thing. I happen to like all fruits, some more than others.

As for FO4 expectations (back on topic), I am expecting more FO3 with some tweaks. So, basically fun but shallow. If it manages to rise to FO:NV levels, I will be quite pleasantly surprised. But the emphasis on the shooty bits has me a bit concerned.

I've met quite a few myself.

TBH, outside of the initial few weeks it was out, most people I have seen talking about it have had opinion of "its alright" to "its disappointing".

I'll drink to that. And btw, I am on your side. ^^

i guess u havent play other rpgs, Witcher 3 doesnt provides the most comprehensive rpg, ever. maybe on the last dacate, but if u want true Rpg go play Baldur Gate, Neverwinter, D&D game.

Witcher 3 have a lot of issues, one is combat, the lore isnt ground breaking anything since is base on a book but it move away from it to much.

I give u the Art is good but the Style is just realistic nothing else nothing particular, And Choice and consequences, isnt that groundbreaking either since most of the choice are A or B.

ground breaking is hard to define, I personally only have a few games I'd consider ground breaking, doom TES oblivion, half life...it all boils down to different tastes witcher 3 offered alot of good things to it's genre(story driven rpg) whilst bethesda games offer unparalleled world building(open world sandbox "rpg")...which is why I adore their games for how the world svcks me in and won't let go...witcher3 in contrast I had to force myself to keep playing at some points because of how barren the world was(i enjoyed it alot once I got past looking for ciri)...anyways.........there lol

ohhh i think u just describe to the perfect what i feel, like when i was looking for Ciri, the quest keep pushing me to do it, and it feel weird for me to go and do a side quest that maybe took me away from looking for Ciri.

Lol, Zanderat, you made another mistake. NV is somewhat of a dirty word in these forums. Get ready for another round. ^^

Well, TES games do that too. (Ooh, Dagoth Ur and Red Mountain are threatening, but could you please go kill some rats?)

Doh!

Damn it! You quoted my unfixed grammar. ^^

I expect the PC version to be better than Arkham Knight's.

How's that for reasonable?

The original Fallout was pretty groundbreaking.

Really? In what way? I've only played Bethesda FO and NV.

Actually, that ground was already broken by Wasteland.................(not taking anything away from FO1, but it was not ground breaking).

I have mixed feeling about the game. I loved the first 10 or so hours in the first area you get to explore. For me one of the main issues is the leveling process and to get reasonable amount of xp you need to quests that are a couple of levels within your character. And quite often you found when you can explore the whole world quests that are like 20+ levels than you are and then when I did get a few levels ups I was starting to get some of the quests that are way too low level to get xp. I stopped playing at patch 1.03 on Xbox one.

I did get the expansion pass since I do support the company since I like their passion for video games and making games for people that love to play the game.

I did starting to play the game from scratch again and will likely take it slower and hopefully they have looked at some of the things I did not like in the game. If you are interested in the game maybe take a look at a let's play of the game. Maybe you like the game.

----------------------------

As for the OP

I try to keep expectations quite low, especially if it is a sequel. When it comes to Bethesda games I am usually assured that the game is going to be different but still have a feeling that it is part of the series (at least with TES Series). Since this is the second game they are making in the Fallout series and from the few bits and pieces they have shown it looks like they are using the same style of making their games with each one having its own personality. I have loved all the games that I have played from Bethesda and this one looks like I will as well from the short gameplay video I saw since it looks fun to play for me.

i doudt any other companies that isnt WB can do a [censored] like they did with AK.

Did u guys read the new post about the re-lunch the game is still broken for a lot of ppl. I wonder why WB pull a move like that for a big game like AK.

On topic; Excited, positive... But not allowing myself to get too over the top, not that I doubt that I'll enjoy it, more of a cautious dose of reservation.

Off topic; TW3 was good for a while, but when i reached the point I had all these side quests that were for a lower level character, and even completing them would get me a) minimum xp + a weapon that was now useless, or no xp and a weapon that was useless. Though up till level 20 or so, when everything is quite new to explore, and you're going to new locations (and combat can provide at least some small challenge), I did enjoy it.

If we're talking about groundbreaking in terms of revolutionary... An RPG with fully realized dialogue trees, dialogue with stat checks, the ability to use different skills to find non-violent solutions to quests, and choices and consequences.

You have to keep in mind that prior to Fallout RPGs were really just about building a character\party and going dungeon crawling. The only one that really tried to step away from that formula and add more to the experience was Ultima VII, but ultimately Ultima VII's solution was just adding minor distractions like the ability to bake bread. At least that was my experience with U7.

What ground? Beyond being post-apocalyptic, and the setting isn't what I'm talking about when I say groundbreaking, the two have very little in common.

Dragonborn Crossover Cameo.

Nuff said.

I expect (hope) that this game will impress me more than FO3 did. Having been a huge fan of the original Fallout games, I was honestly not a huge fan of Fallout 3. Between the dramatic shifts in game systems and the change in setting, it felt too disconnected from the Fallout games I'd loved for me to really get into. It was a decent game on its own, but it really didn't feel like a Fallout game to me. Obsidian did a much better job with FONV, and I got absolutely giddy over all the recurring NPCs and continuing plots and whatnot from the first games.

Hopefully Bethesda has learned something from both FONV and their successes/failures with things like Skyrim, and will be more refined and bold when it comes to the writing for Fallout 4. I want a Fallout game, not just some nuclear apocalypse skinned FPS.

Well, if we want to talk about groundbreaking, The Witcher series has nothing on the Elder Scrolls series.

yeah for me a groundbreaking game, i will said was Baldur Gate.

I have NOOOOO fears about this game not meeting my expectations . . . and my expectations are astronomically high.

Being intimately familiar with every Bethesda game since Morrowind, I know what good things to expect and what not-so-good things to expect. Do I expect bugs? Sure. Do I expect minor annoyances and screwy design decisions that can only be remedied with the release of the editor? Absolutely. But I also know I'll be playing this game for years to come and it will be my virtual playground of choice. New games will come and go but I'll always return to Skyrim and Fallout 3.

All of that said, I maintain hope that this will be the least buggy release of all. Hope is different from expectation If I'm disappointed in that regard, oh well. Just last night I was fighting a dragon, defending Windhelm and it's people. I shouted Fus Ro Dah and accidentally hit someone's goat. Suddenly one red enemy marker (from the dragon) turned into about six as the town guards started attacking me. Things like this are unforgivable---but livable. You just reload and remember to be more careful next time. I'm fairly confident that glitchy or not-well-thought-out stuff like this will exist in FO3 as well, but big deal. It's a Bethesda game. We get these incredible gifts roughly once every four years and it's like four years worth of Christmas presents combined.