Sure. There is nothing wrong with the ES skills system. Skyrims perk system on the other hand was atrocious. Packed full to the walls with filler perks that were better off being built into the skills system itself.

They bought the IP because it's a good and interesting one, not because of some deep love and respect for the previous games' gameplay. That's fairly apparent. Your Starwars equivalency is also false, because Bethesda is not changing or removing core elements of the setting, they're changing gameplay. I would agree if you if they were removing the sci-fi 50's setting, power-armor, mutated wildlife etc. If you think the new Star-wars movies will have the exact same story beats and innovative non-CG effects, I'm afraid you'll be wrong.

can I just point out that if they had gotten rid of skills and went with just perks they wouldn't have kept S.P.E.C.I.A.L. for any reason ?

Getting rid of skill doesn't preclude keeping SPECIAL.

All it does it make SPECIAL more valuable if anything since now all powers are tied to perks which are tied to SPECIAL rank.

and where did you get that info?

From the trailer, where SPECIAL is clearly visible, and from the pre-E3 reveal trailer, and the pipboy edition perk poster, which shows all the perks being under one of the SPECIAL attributes/tied to them. there was one perk for each of the 10 ranks of each SPECIAL.

so you're reading into A BACKGROUND DECORATION as the source of all your info instead of seeing the game or seeing if Bethesda says anything ,nope just a poster ,did you ever think for a second that it may not represent Final gameplay?

If it didn't, why on earth would they include a physical version of it in the collectors edition of the game.... as I previously mentioned.

as an extra ,do you have said poster in your possession right now?

No, but you are seriously making a massive conspiracy theory here.

says the guy assuming entire game details from a poster,also what special would bloody mess fall under? (look at the partial picture with the pip boy edition and you can see that perk )

Will there be perks that reduce reload time, gun type accuracy, recoil, etc?

Or will everyone just be the same at shooting?

As I said there are expectations attached to the IP, Bethesda obviously saw the IP as having inherent value as they invested millions of dollars into it. Again, If they held no interest or respect towards the fanbase of it and tapping into it, it's better to just make a new IP than have people be disgruntled right from the get go.

Also, core elements tie directly into gameplay, we're talking video games here, steering away from the Roleplay elements into shooters or whatever else is the same thing, by naming the game "Fallout 4" Bethesda is promising to deliver a "Fallout Game", not a "Fallout setting" housing a different game. If they want to step away from that, one would fully expect Bethesda to make it plain and clear for everyone.

The new Star wars movie looks to be an epic action adventure with space combat, jedis and the dark side. So, exactly what fans of the franchise have come to expect.

And NV outsold FO3 as well as being better received by the playerbase. Also it's completely useless comparing the sales of a game released almost 20 years ago, the gaming landscape as a whole is of a completely different scale today.

But is FO4 trying to evolve and build upon the series in the same way, as NV did to FO3? It looks to be taking steps backwards.

If you have, then that's good for you. I'm commenting on the general attitude of entitlement and self-importance that's so pervasive on these forums. And no, in the real world not every opinion is equal, the weight and importance of the person that's been behind the franchise and supporting it for almost 20 years is incomparable to the fan that's just recently been introduced, this is undeniable. If you do not have the decency to at least understand this as a person, it's just poor manners.

It's like stepping into someone else's house and doing things as you please. I'm not saying these opinions don't matter, but if this fan that has been supporting the franchise for 20 years tells you "this isn't right for Fallout" the opinion of someone that's just liked the latest game of the series is of considerably less value. I will go with and respect the opinion of the elder fan.

For instance lets use Star wars again, I didn't see the movies when they were released but I like them. If I had an idea I considered cool that I would really like to see, like say using the force to blow up planets, if fans that have been supporting the franchise for a much longer period of time disagree with that change and say it isn't right for Star wars, in no way can you place the same value on my opinion especially when it's going against what's been established and gets in the way of them enjoying something they're so heavily invested in and supporting. I'm just a guy that enjoys the movies, I don't really have a particular investment in it. It simply isn't right. I know it's a bigger deal to them than it is to me.

No, that's just an example. You can substitute Shooters for any other favorite (not RPG) genre of yours. The point is that it's getting away from the core RPG experience that it's established itself as. No matter in how small incerements. While I personally actually very rarely use guns instead of melee, I think improving the mechanics if that's all it is, is strictly a positive for everyone.

Also, regarding the responsibility that Bethesda has for the fans of the franchise, it's good to use a bit of healthy common sense here. If you have no respect for the franchise or IP, you do not work on the IP. It is, that simple.

For instance this E3, the rebooted Tomb Raider and Hitman both, made it a focus on how they've been listening to the IP's fans and implementing changes considered to be core for the franchise, like a more open and varied approach to missions and assassinations in Hitman for example.

You will see this same thing in movies, books and games. Bethesda is not strong arming anyone into accepting the changes or getting off the wagon... You are.

No, change isn't inherently bad, but there are changes that are bad. And, objectively we're talking about Fallout here, so all commentary is made within that context, what's right and what isn't for Fallout. For example bringing Rocket Launchers into CS:GO is something that I consider not right for CS, and hence bad.

Also, if we are to advance as a medium, changes that limit and marginalize player choice and freedom to do what they want is counter productive. This is a lot easier to grasp when boiled down into something more basic, continuing to use CS as an example, if we were to take the Famas out of the game, despite it not being a popular gun, all it does is limit the players experience, for no reason. You objectively have less, and you're upsetting the few people that actually liked that gun. No one ever forces you to use it, it's there but it's only as distracting as you yourself make it out to be. It's the same with skills but to a larger extent.

Your example about Eminem isn't directly correlative to this though. Eminem is his own person and he is his music. If he wants to do something else there isn't the option to "make another IP". Elder Scrolls for instance is a different game than Fallout and I respect that. Eminem didn't buy another IP and name his stuff as a direct sequel. Bethesda is even using "Fallout 3-4", instead of branding their version the definitive "Fallout 1" like Tomb Raider did. I am not saying Bethesda isn't allowed to do whatever they wish as a company and express their creativity in various ways, I'm saying do it in your own undefined setting. Don't come and make a mess somewhere it doesn't belong.

A good example of this is when Christopher Tolkien continued to work on the Lord of the Rings lore and setting after J.R.R had passed away. And took great care to keep everything as close to J.R.R's vision as possible.

More dumbing down to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Nothing new for Beth, been watching them do it for 15 years now.

Luck, as is shown on the poster.

You are "lucky" in that you get a random chance for a more gory kill animation.

There don't seem to be any weapon specific perks like shotgun surgeon.

Only more generic ones like commando, sniper, gunslinger.

Yes! Yes it is

*In the same way as losing an eye... (makes the remaining one far more precious.)
Special becomes more valuable, because that's probably all there is that's left.

I just hope you aren't allowed to max out SPECIAL like you could in Fallout 3. Getting 10 in everything kinda defeats the point of having stats in the first place.

Not really, its more like having three eyes, while having your total vision power split between all three, thus making each eye not see well at all, then removing one of them, thus enabling your remaining two eyes to much better.

I would much rather have two eyes that can see very well, then three eyes that cant see much of anything.

When you put emphasis on everything, you fail to put emphasis on anything.

You keep using that word, [pair].
Not at all... however, to use your example, it depends highly on the clarity and capacity of the mind with the eyes, and its ability to use them. It is a mistake to assume that more eyes mean less acuity.

I wasn't sold on the lack of skills and what's happened to SPECIAL at first, but the more I hear about the revamped system, the more hope I have for it. If it means I can't become a master of skills I've never actually used (heeeey there, unarmed) then that might keep me from becoming ridiculously overpowered.

And charisma might not be a dump stat anymore thanks to the new settlements feature. (I'm probably the only one jazzed for the changes to charisma.)

If Beth was to announce they were bringing back skills for a hypothetical Fallout 5, the same ones defending their cutting would defend them being brought back. Transparent defenders are transparent.

Because its true in all situations I have used it. Also, I could say you use the word pair "it's obvious" too much.

In this hypothetical example it does. The division of perks, skills, and SPEICAL spread everything across so many factors none of them were able to really shine in any way, at least not without breaking any sort of balance in the game like was commonplace in Fo1/2. By removing one of them, you can more evenly divide power amongst the remaining two, thus making them both far more worthwhile, and making increasing them far more worthwhile, while still keep the same total balance of power you had before.

Its the opposite solution to the opposite problem TES had, where they removed the greatly overpowered attributes to make the previously useless skills and perks actually mean something. Fallout is now removing the greatly overpowered skills to make perks and attributes actually mean something, whereas they didn't much in Fo3 and NV.

What a rather childish comment to make. and, in fact, no, I wouldn't.

No, it's blatantly obvious.

If Beth never announced or hinted at cut skills, there would be 0 threads asking for them to cut skills. Just like 0 people asked or wanted skills to be cut in the hundreds of "what do you want in Fallout 4" pre release threads.

Again, transparent defenders are transparent. Watching 15 years of it makes it pretty obvious when it rears its head. And considering how defensive you got about it, I must have hit the nail right on the head.

But I can point to more than one use of term, you cannot.

Greatly overpowered skills? Like what? [Like which? the merged one? Medicine? Of course that was overpowered, they took two skills ~each with their own limitations, and made one skill that simply boosted the effect of healing drugs. No trade off or devision there, just pump points in to Medicine, and heal concussions with hypos. ]

Anytime you merge skills, it is to be able to bundle abilities at a lower cost; IE cheaper power.

Any time you merge existing systems into one, you tend to lose granularity and precision... Like merging thrown and unarmed; it means that all base & basketball players are expert HtH fighters. It means a long rage sniper, is equal to a short range pistol expert; (Fallout already had that problem) .