No, I wouldn't actually.

I would disagree however if that person said that their dream is what everyone expects, by pointing out how dreams are based on personal experience affecting the mind, and how many people saying they dont expect that kind of dream means they obviously don't.

That is the function of retcons actually.

Maybe it's headcannon but fast feral ghouls make sense to me.

To me, a "normal" intelligent ghoul would move more carefully - they wouldn't want to further damage themselves and can think of the repercussions of their actions.

But I can imagine a feral is just driven by pure feral hunger. They're basically in constant berserker rage. A thinking human is constrained by their pain, you're not likely to throw a punch that breaks your hand or run fast enough to snap a tendon.

I can see a feral just ignoring that self preservation. Might be kind of gory, but I can imagine seeing a group of ferals running at me and limbs just snapping off as they charge.

A thinking creature will still try to keep from damaging itself whereas a feral would literally destroy itself to get at you.

(Like I said, headcannon but I don't think it's a far stretch.)

Fast, slow, invsible, flying? It wouldnt matter to me if its in lore or not I just wanna snipe some heads and melt some faces with that curvaceous plasma sniper. Also beth owns fallout if the ghouls are fast then there fast why do some people make such a big deal of such small things? its like skyrim regen health all over again. PLASMA SNIPER!!!!

I look forward again to taking amusemant from people freaking out at them when they scream to the heavens and give the more intestinally fortitudinous of us a comically clean shot to kill them dead.

Agreed. I don't mind. I have honestly loved the countless moments where I hear their growl and [censored] my pants when they show up right behind me. And as I understood it, while ghouls are rotting, they are also constantly being regenerated, hence their long survival. They are already a far-fetched creation, and I can suspend my disbelief for the new ghouls.

BOOMSTICK!

The distinction only exists due to inflexibility of their engine. Intelligent ghouls are rot-decorated human NPCs, while the feral ghouls are combat creatures; incapable of the human interaction animations, and without any facial rig for lip sync or detailed expressions.

Feral ghouls (because they are creature NPCs) can http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/ghoul-comparison_zps6cceffc1.jpg; while the so called Intelligent ghouls cannot; (I assume, cannot without more work than is deemed worth it to them).

No it exists because they are "irredeemable".

IMO that means they are just too far gone and incapable of basic social interaction.

That's not the technical [real world] reason for it.

It would have been interesting forum reading, if they had retconned Fallout 1 & 2 in their re-releases of the titles; but of course that would have been pointless; as all the Fallout games have user patches to restore them from damage, and have so since since their beginnings.

No one denies that they have a http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/ToddHowardampco_zps24991817.jpg on the IP; but there is always hope that they will lose their grip, or have it loosened.

The premise is the same... There is always ~always a "Not Really" stated or implied in your posts.

No, the premise isn't the same unless you ignore all of how retcons work, which would make the point invalid.

Its hard to not have a "not really" implication in a post when you are responding to something that is wrong.

There is no real world technical limitation behind it at all.

If Bethesda wanted to make all ghouls look the same, they could have easily done what Obsidian did with Searchlight NCR trooper ghouls, and just make normal NPC ghouls hostile.

You tend to misunderstand many posts; including the one you've just quoted. The premise [as mentioned] is that you always think others are wrong; doesn't matter the topic apparently. Every response is a tut-tut from you.

I'll let sesom, or another chime in on that. I've already explained it.

The only ones I tend to "misunderstand" are yours, but that's apparently something a lot of people have problems with, given how often you tell people that in general.

And I don't think everyone is wrong, I have agreed with General Garbage, Jamar, and others on numerous occasions. The only people I generally tend to think are wrong seem to be you, Undecaf, and Longknife, but that's only because you all tend to use the same kind of arguments.

I'll be waiting.

I have read post of yours where you agree with people who are affirming your previous comments.

Have you looked at the way ghouls exist in the Geck? And have you made maps before; placed interactive assets? Made assets?

If not, then are you guessing?
[... he asked, expecting the answer, "not really".]

*My own guess, is simply that the game needed filler fodder, and the original ghoul appearance is appropriate enough to skin the asset with.
[Regardless of it being a wasteland sprinter]

sounded like a description of ordinary rabies in vast parts actually

ok just to get this very straight: NO INVISIBLE FLYING GHOULS PLEASE. )

Remember: They can do http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/fallout4oz_zpsbff89507.jpg and it's accepted by their fanbase.

*This is because it's not TES, and because it will always let the player do whatever they want.

Look a little harder then, and I would like if you stopped trying to derail threads via personal attacks.

Yes I have, and I know about the difference between creatures like feral ghouls, and NPCs like raiders and non feral ghouls, and the limitations of both. As I was saying, they could have simply made the feral ghouls into NPCs like the non feral ones, and given them the non-feral ghoul skins, if they wanted to. They did not, even though they easily could have like Obsidian did with many of the ghouls in Searchlight, as I pointed out. Hell, Bethesda made several "non-feral" type NPC ghouls hostile in Fallout 3, such as Gallo, but chose not to make the others work the same way.

Ghouls are the way they are because Bethesda wanted them to be that way, not because of technical limitations. They didn't HAVE to make feral ghouls creatures, nor did they HAVE to give ferals and non-feral different skins. That they did so was because they wanted them to act different, and look different, by design. Most likely so the player doesn't accidentally shoot a non-feral ghoul because they have the same skin as feral ones.

I'm going to go ahead and say you generally fiercely disagree with me even though I'd say I'm light in my criticism of Bethesda. Gizmo has a point, you are hostile to any views that detract from the glory of your beloved company. I've never seen you upset with the design choices of a Bethesda title, but other games you critique are often made to look awful. This might not be obvious to you, but others can see it fairly easily.

That's because few people have talked about the things I do dislike, and thus they have never been brought up in conversation.

What aspects of Bethesda titles do you dislike then? For the sake of specificity, let's use Fallout 3 as the main metric.

Getting off-topic guys. You can always PM if you want to discuss something not related to the topic.

edit - nevermind

If the ghouls are FEV mutants then they could be fast or slow (or fly for that matter).

There is no reason they couldn't continue to mutate over time and even maybe gain new abilities.

Ghouls are not FEV mutants.

At least not according to Tim Cain, Chris A, and Bethesda.