Self-insertion (the protagonist is 'you') fits much better with 1st person only games.

Games from BioWare, CD Projekt, and Uncharted/Tomb Raider function as: 'The player as "Director"' and that's a style of play that voiced protagonist as well as 3rd party play is much more aligned to.

Fallout 4 seems to have taken a small step further toward 'player as Director' which from my perspective is terrific,

but I recognise many people still like to 'self-insert'.

As I said I will still buy the game, but I am worried about it, and I hate this feature to the depths of my heart. My opinions are my own, and of course I know that this is bethesda's game . . . duh. Actually many gaming companies make forums just to hear about what people have to say about their game... so yeah... they do have a little control of the development. Not to mention many people agree with me on this subject.

not really, ultimatly beth still has control, because beth is not obligated to actually listen to what you say.

What im saying is that yes they have control, but to say that the consumer has none is is a little far-fetched.

Remember when doc mitch. did the picture thing? How everyone wanted to say 2 bears high fiving at one slide? They then added a tribal named that in one of the DLC's. They listened to what people had to say, and added it. Maybe for their own amusemant, but they still listened to everyone and made a joke of it.

Before you say that betheda only did it because they choose to, your right, but who did they get the feedback from?

Meaning, they pay attention to their fans, like the respectful gaming company they are today. I don't want them to get rid of speaking, I just want an option to turn it off.

Think I'm just going to wait until it hits bargain bin. I've loved the Fallout series even more than the Elder Scrolls series, but this whole thing about a dead husband and a random child just left a bad taste in my mouth. I'm not interested in forcing myself THAT far back into the 50's just to have a gaming experience.

Seeing how the Beth logo is now on F1,2, and Tactics, then yeah, they are canon, and they were canon before that logo. They packaging them, selling em, and even redistributing them in a lil mini nuke.

In this instance Beth is effectively the publisher of those old games and nothing more, and again they where canon yes...back when Black Isle own the IP, but now Beth has pickt up the book of Fallout Canon, and is completely free to cross over and write new.

People need to remember that your backstory details was very open in FO3. You are not necessarily the natural son or daughter of James and Catherine, not by any means. For example, Catherine may have been [censored] by a raider and then rescued before being killed for food.

The only thing you are restricted to in FO3 is that you are 19 (in vanilla) and that you are American. The latter point is a standard in all Fallout games due to the setting, at least in all games to this point. Excluding the idea of being an illegal immigrant or an immigrant who is in America on a work or student visa, or some other type of legal residence in America at the time of the Great War, you are an American regardless of what racial background you may have.

Likewise, at least from what we know so far, Fallout 4 has you as an American who is a young advlt perhaps mid-20s to mid-30s, unless there is something where you could be much younger or older). (sigh... very unfortunate, but hopefully mods will fix this). You are also (apparently) married, although the details have not been given yet so there may be some variations on this element. For "variations", consider how the "significant other" shown at the beginning may not necessarily be your legal spouse because it might be that your actual spouse is dead and a brother/sister has taken you and your young baby in. We don't know that level of detail, at least not yet. You are not an illegal immigrant nor someone here on a work or student visa, at least not from what we have seen. Other details also remain unknown despite the assumptions that people are making on various threads and comments.

Regardless, OP, you need to remember that an RPG is not about playing yourself as a character, but rather about playing a role OTHER THAN yourself. An RPG is the exact opposite of what you claim in your opening post. If you want a game where you play yourself, it would not be an RPG. Role playing requires playing a role that is not oneself. I have pointed this out in other threads/comments, but the anology would be acting and auditioning for a role in film or theater. If you audition for a role and attempt to play yourself, you will not be offered the role and will fail the audition. Likewise, if a game emphasizes or even requires you to play yourself, it fails to be an RPG. It may be a great game in other respects, but it is not an RPG. The problem, of course, is that there are no true RPGs on the market today, and the products offered as "role playing games" are, at best, hybrids of action-RPG or strategy-RPG. We can blame the market and capitalism/business requirements, but that's where we are at today as far as RPGs are concerned.

A voiced protagonist (and voiced NPCs, as well) have been standard in the industry since the 1990s. BGS is simply (finally) catching up to other companies. This is their first attempt at something that other companies have been doing for decades, so we'll have to see how well they do it (i.e., offering a role for us to play, including allowing lack of details to give us flexibility in defining the background elements of the role).

Lies. You're going to get the game with everyone else lol.

Especially after they start releasing more gameplay, you will be unable to holdout on buying it for a year.

No, they canon now. Which is why in FO3 there was an NPC named Harold who appeared in FO1 and 2, and why Enclave made references to their destruction of the rig in 2, and all of the other stuff that was then confirmed in FONV. The games are canon. BGS has never come out and said the old games are not canon. They aren't "writing new" when everything that has happened in 3 and NV have taken into account 1, 2, and even tactics.

In fact, it is even the contrary seeing how BGS has flat out said the stuff from 1 and 2 ARE canon and official, and Tactics was the major events canon. In fact, there basically no reason for FO3 to be called 3, or 4 to be called 4, if 1 and 2 were not canon. FO3 would have been called FO1 if they starting over, or just Fallout.

*clap clap*

I couldn't have said it better.

You get a star sticker. *sticks to your head*

It should only worry you if you don't like other RPGs with great voice acting. BGS wanted to compete as far as storytelling goes with other top RPGs and they didn't feel they could do that without a voiced protagonist. Bioware made the jump from silent to voice protagonists in their games and they turned out just fine. Obviously, Fallout 4 will have a different feel. It might even feel like a different game, but you will still probably like the game more than you did Fallout 3 and New Vegas just because of the gameplay improvements.

i dout both child & spouse were killed, spouse maybe but every main quest line is always something personal to the protagonist.

AFter I wrote that, I did look at that again.

Ill state now. I dont want both the wife and child to survive. If there has to be any survival its one or the other. Otherwise you hunting down your family feels a little too hollywood and not nearly Fallout enough. 200 years have passed .Even if you survived, they are long dead. Perhaps your wife survived but your child was too weakened by the radiation and passed, perhaps your wife/husband copped it badly and passed your kid onto someone else who took it somewhere else. Ive no idea. You are right having a PERSONAL connection to a quest is a big thing.

Look at thr Wilks quest. Didnt know the kid but he ran all the way to the Supermarket to ask for my help and not giving a crap about the supermutants and the like to tell me his family was under attack and would I help. I immediatly thought.. hell yeah. Il l rescue his family.

Which of course I couldnt do, and Ideally I thought it would be safer for him to follow me to Rivet City or Megaton (and wouldnt Sims take him In.. I save his town!). Leaving him behind in his pulaski or in his house with his dead dad inside was hellishly morally bad.

So that got personal for me as I imagined this kid scrounging by himself near Radscorpions and fireants. Not cool

But I want Fallout 4 to not force the connections on me but make me care about the connections I make, not have to rely on old pre war connections to get me going. I want to find a Bryan Wilks who needs saving (because I generaly play as the Paladin).

I have no clue what the base quest might be , but there are so many options to pick from.

Im not saying they arent canon, just that they arent hard canon, beth is free to change or even contradict canon establish by those games as they now own the rights to do so. Now for the most part they have chosen not to, but they could.

A role is a character played by an actor. The definition of role-play places no restrictions on who the character is.

Imagine an RPG where we play the role of Barack Obama. By your statements, it would not be an RPG because Barack Obama can play himself.

No, I haven't preordered it and I actually feel pretty strongly about this. If I do buy it, it will be when it drops to five bucks on steam.

The issue isn't so much that they want to tell a specific story. That's fine, it's their creation and they can tell whatever story they want. The issue is that they are doing this after establishing a generic character that players historically could take full ownership of. I'm not going to be able to take ownership of this character, so they might as well name it. And if they name it, they might as well gender-lock it as well. And then it becomes one of those games I will never buy like The Witcher, because while I'm sure it's a great game (everyone says so), I just can't see myself as whatever that dude's name is and I have zero interest in 'his' story. I bought Elder Scrolls and Fallout games because they were 'my' story. Even BioWare games, while they gave you a bit of historical information, didn't go so far as to assume your major life choices like getting married and having a baby. It's just a little much and it almost feels like a reactionary agenda. You're going to have this normal, heterosixual marriage and family and you're going to like it!

I think this crosses a line. They could have added a 'baby' in any number of ways if it was really that critical to the story. They chose this one and it just doesn't speak to me. They are just assuming far too much about their players and they really ought to just keep it generic like the previous installments so everyone can see themselves as the 'sole survivor'.

Most characters have restrictions. Some have set backgrounds, some don't. You just decide the personality, usually.