Yah, F:NV is not really a good example of faction diversity. Apart from the Big 3 factions (NCR/Legion/Mr. House) all the others were just window dressing

This is that moment where I need to pull up that post about the 5 types of gamer.

From http://www.gamesas.com/user/652779-alithinos/

exactly and as i said, fallout 4 focus on completely different target than before and that why so many people complain about it. Because the target is mostly console player and fallout is one of the most classic and loved PC game.

I have played them. They are just different game types. One is turn based rpg, the other open world action rpg.

If Fallout 4 would be like original Fallout, just with better graphic, few people would have played it. That Bethesda changes things is not bad as long as these changes improve the game. In my opinion, most of the changes were for the better and I have no problem with them as long as game is kept in original spirit and setting, which it does.

That said, I love return to original Fallout music theme.

I second this. Game is not isometric turn based anymore. Original skillset was for example taken from old tabletops and pen and papers. It does not fit first-person shooter where most actions are not abstract anymore (as an example, shooting someone does not require dice roll as lot of other actions does not either). It was painfully obvious in New Vegas. Developers clearly struggled with giving some skills and attributes purpose. Current perk system is more appropriate and much more comprehensive to the player.

People excusing Fallout 4 for being a poor RPG because it "Wasn't trying to be good" is hilarious.

I agree,i think i prefer the perk system also if it is going to stay fps based.I do think the game as a whole is a bit more shallow to the earlier fallouts,but in saying that,it still holds my attention whereas every other fps i have ever played(and that includes the halflifes) are lucky to hold my attention for more than a few days.Fallout still has some depth and a huge amount of content.There's very little on the market that matches even current beth games in value for money.

In saying that,i wish they'd add in more in an update,but specialise them so you can only go down one perk path with a specific set of weapons.One of my small gripes is having everything available to you.I doubt they would change how current perks operate and close some of them off,or put in a level cap.

yeah, having skill "trees" would help, then you would be forced to think "hmm do I want a soldier type skillset, or a stealthy type skillset, or a social type skillset. At the moment you can randomly take any/all the skills, and it gets a little silly when you get to the higher levels. I'm all for making you choose a tree and locking you out of the others. If you're like "damn I wish I'd taken the commando" perk that forces you to work to your limitations and the skills you have, rather than just adding it in. That's what this game is missing imo, that's why it isn't a "RPG" in the traditional sense. You can be a commando/gunslinger/hacker/sniper/robot expert/animalfriend all at the same time. Which doesn't make you choose perks strategically, just choose the order you get them in.

I'am liking Fallout 4 , but it is a so-so RPG no questions asked .Only bought it because of what the mod community will do with it .

How many more posts is it going to take for old guard to state they don't like the games story?

You certainly cannot claim its not an RPG, not in a world where something like Final Fantasy clearly has the Tag "RPG"

That "Five Major Types of Players" thing left out one of the major types...the Explorer. Bethesda games are simply fantastic for those of us who love practically nothing else but to explore our game worlds and seeing what kinds of interesting things are over the next horizon and look in every nook and cranny that exists in the game.

I loved Fallout 1 and 2 (and Tactics back when the NMA-type crowd were complaining endlessly about *that* game because it wasn't Fallout 3 and therefore it svcked) but they are different types of RPGS than the type Bethesda makes, and that's okay. Different game company and different direction. While I probably would have enjoyed Van Buren had it happened, it didn't happen, but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy other similar games from Obsidian and others. I was/am in the kickstarters for Project Eternity, Divinity: Original Sin, Torment: Tides of Numenera, etc. I was pretty underwhelmed by FNV, but I think the engine was wrong for it and I would have enjoyed it better as an infinity-engine game so that the game world wouldn't have been so empty and uninteresting.

I've played the entire Ultima Series (including Savage Empire and Martian Dreams), some early MIght & Magic, The Magic Candle, Dungeon Master, many AD&D Gold Box games, and naturally Icewind Dale, Baldur's Gate 1 & 2, and the masterpiece Planescape Torment. I Have a huge library of old games, some of which I've already played and others that I've missed, on GoG.

I've even played that little console game Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel, of which I've heard no ends of complaints, though I suspect many have never actually played it. It was a fun little game for what it was and that's all it was, but people saw Fallout in the title and it wasn't like Fallout 1 or 2 and so they seethed with hatred.

For Bethesda's games, I've been playing their games since Daggerfall (which I *still* play) and Morrowind (which remains my favorite). And yes, I've also enjoyed Oblivion and Skyrim.

I'm about as "Old School" for cRPGs as a person can get and yet...YET....I can somehow enjoy and appreciate Fallout 3 and Fallout 4. I'm probably older than many of those here harping about the "kiddies and their consoles", for that matter. Do I believe they are perfect? No. Do I and will I have *some* criticisms? Yes, of course. There are things I'd like to see improved, but I believe the positive vastly outweighs the negative. They are fantastic games in the free, open-world style in which Bethesda excels. I like the direction Bethesda has taken them. I love RPGs and that means *all* different types of RPGs, which includes *all* of the numbered Fallouts.

Maybe, but you "original fans" clinging to the foolish idea that Bethesda will either revert to a 10 year old style for their games even though it was a failure, or give the franchise back to the studio they bought it from is one of the dumbest things i can think of. You think you'd have realized after 3 they aren't going back to crappy turn based games

I can agree with that. There is tendency to "cassualisation" evident in Fallout 4. Standard that original Fallout set for dialogues, quests and humor is for example something worth preserving. Fallout 4 does not stay to it's predecessors in this regard. On the other hand I see effort of developers to deepen some other aspects of the game so there are pros and cons.

Actually u arent one of those. U have constructive criticize

Fallout 4 is clearly not the kind of RPG that Fallout 1 and 2 are. I don't think anyone is trying to debate that at all. It is a totally different type of experience that is centered around a different kind of audience.

What I don't appreciate is the attitude some people have, that Fallout 4 was made for dumb people who don't like thinking, or that Fallout 4 was made for people who only like shooters.

Most of the people I know who play Fallout 4 don't even like shooter games... I don't play shooter games, I play games like Civilization and Total War and Sim City mostly...

It is the type of game that is built around exploring and having a storytelling experience. It is totally different than what was popular in the late 1990s what had a rather small following in the late 1990s. But different isn't bad and doesn't mean you should disrespect the people who enjoy different.

People are more about having an entire media experience now, they care more about feeling like they are part of the action than they do about having 10 different dialogue options to choose from. That doesn't mean they are dumb, just because they don't want to pay $60 to read some text on a screen.

I'm not some dumb kid who hates reading and thinking and just wants to shoot things and doesn't appreciate the classics... I like reading and happen to even more enjoy writing novels. I just happen to like games that are voice acted. That doesn't make me a brain dead COD player as certain people seem to imply.

Character design is an art form, acting is an art form, writing is an art form, music is an art form, programming can be an art form... To me a good videogame is a collection of many, many artists using their unique skills to bring together an experience. To me, simplifying the time spent crawling through a menu allows better pacing and a more powerful gaming experience.

I respect if you believe otherwise, but I'm not stupid because I have a different view on what I look for in my art.

no really not many, is just the minority of hard-core fans of RPG. I mean dont get me wrong i love RPG games, but Fallout 4 is a different kind of it, and isnt like i hate this game for that. It just different and yeah is becoming more like Skyrim. I really dont care since i like Skyrim.

I mean i really cant take serius the complain sometimes when i go to Tiwter and i only see super nerding complains about lore from faboys of Fo1 and Fo2

Only Thing i don't like in Fallout 4 is the Mainstory and less Options to really influence Factions or Persons. It could also have more Side Quests and more None Good/Evil Quests.
Good Quest was like the one Brootherhood Guy feeding Ghouls. Bad Quest was Parsen State Institute.

Fallout 4 is a "real" enough Fallout that it got a full priced purchase from me. I cant say that about the last Fallout that came out. Nor the first 2.

I am one of the original fans. Is there something wrong with me then? Or maybe i can just appreciate what lies before me and see the good in what Fallout 4 does. I was never expecting it to be a sequel to the originals, it is a damned sequel to Fallout 3. Bethesda got their East Coast Fallout, and Black Isle/Obsidian has covered the West Coast. But we are going over this again and again, it will just go on forever at this point.

i've never seen a oldschool fan ask for the old isometric form to be used again for fallout 4. i dunno why you people think that's what they want.

1. Is it a 10 year old style (assuming this clumsy strawman is your way of saying Turn-based/Isometric) when game after game is getting overwhelmingly over-funded on Kickstarter over the past 3 years? If you'd like a list of great crappy turn-based games that have come out or are in development in present tense, I'd be happy to provide it.
2. That is one of the dumbest things you can think of? Because it already happened, sonny. It's called Fallout New Vegas. I mean, it's not like they can give it to Black Isle or Troika so Obsidian will have to do.
3. After 3 I realized a lot of depressing things indeed. One of those was: Oh, they don't actually get 'Fallout', do they? [censored].

1. Well....
2. Sure. I can see the good in what Fallout 4 does too. That unfortunately doesn't blind me to all the stuff it does poorly.
3. And what was Fallout 3 a sequel to, out of curiosity? Because it's obviously not a sequel to Fallout 2.
4. It will, indeed. See perk #5: http://imageshack.com/a/img907/2061/Adabq4.jpg

Think of it this way though, if they do end up giving the company who knows the series best again, I'll be over in that forum defending the game against Bethesda die-hards.

i want the ron perlman perk lol

but the bethesda [censored] aren't understanding why we're upset. they're just straw-manning the arguments and saying we just want old-school isometric to be in all fallouts when that is simply not the case.

I mean I'd certainly prefer it but I'll take Bethesda actually writing a good game which honors the source material.

The stupiest post I've ever seen on Internet. You must identify yourself with East Coast mutants.