Think up the worst feature? Why?

I guess perma-death. Character dies then you have to start from scratch. That would svck.

I can think up better features I'd like to have!

Like: Occasionally our characters getting knocked out. Then while you're knocked out you get robbed or captured rather than just getting killed. This could also be a great addition to the radiant quest system. Getting captured could then be a way of discovering certain locations which otherwise you wouldn't find, and those areas could contain powerful weapons or other items.

Imagine getting knocked out then moments later your character opens their eyes and is in some dark cave with nothing!

That would be fun

I know of RPGs that delete the save game when the PC dies. Permadeath would not be new to Fallout; Fallout had it, unless the player decided to save a backup; and plenty unwittingly didn't.

That would be horrible. I'm guessing it's an older game that deletes the save?

The worst idea would be including 'Johnny Guitar' on the soundtrack. I had to turn off every radio in the Mojave lest that dirge come on and make my ears bleed.

Yeah, I have to go along with this one.

Weirdly enough I can't really think of one. Hmm. I suppose I'm more concerned about the stuff they won't include or things they might remove.

quickscoping

Leaving vault 111 and finding Doc Brown waiting for us in a Delorean.

I think what would really ruin the game would be something that either stops you from being immersed into the world like a voiced Protagonist or that takes a bigger part of Player freedom like a character with a largely pre-determined history.

It would be a lot of fun were NPCs to greet us with mood prompts to tell us how our character feels.

"Why are you scowling at me?"

"My, you look happy!"

"You seem really sad. What's wrong?"

"Why are you crying?"

Multiplayer ruined Borderlands 2 where some enemies aka Hyperious, Dragon Keep, etc. with great legendary weapon drops required you to break out of your immersive experience and have to go online just to get past them. Not fun. The quality of your online co-players is random and frequently unproductive yet you must hack at it, try again with a different online player mix, or abandon the task. Don't need the hassle.

Then you eventually beat the enemy or situation then who gets the legendary, unique item or achievement? The first one to reach it walks off with it. Games like the Fallout series you should be able to go through each level, solve each puzzle, defeat each enemy and accomplish the game by yourself without the need for 3 other random participants at ridiculously overpowered hard parts just to continue the questline. Multiplayer is an excellent way to destroy Fallout and ruin the experience.

Removal of Weapon Condition

Removal of Skills

Removal of the Companion Wheel (or equivalent system)

Removal of Ammo Types

Vanilla FO3/NV Ending Idiocy

Basic Features being Locked behind the upcoming Pip-Boy App

Lack of Wild Wasteland Option

Linear Story Locking you to 1 Faction (like FO3)

Edit: and Multiplayer of course, only a "not so intelligent" person would advocate such a disaster

Why guess it's an older game? (Are you really assuming that... it must come from a time when they didn't know any better? That's backwards IMO, as modern games are the ones that don't seem to know any better; all they try to do is cajole their players. You will see this in FO4.)

It's not horrible, it's a wonderful option, by a refreshingly un-servile game that treats the player not with "Whatever I have is yours, good master", but with "Lets see what you can manage to take".

You would perhaps be shocked just how different the gaming experience is with a game like that; it changes one's whole outlook on it.

Legend of Grimrock 2 (for instance) ~does not delete the game, but it does offer an optional Ironman mode (save points only), and optional single use 'save points'. For my first game of LoG2, I chose both options; and it took me three months of intense sessions to complete the game. Each time knowing that I could lose the party and an hour or two's progress if I made a mistake; and that happened. I completed the tombs three or four times, only to die horribly in the pit of undead at the end.

I think Witcher 2 offers a similar option; one life for Geralt.

Making your SPECIAL stats increase as you level up (by force, not optional), which it looks like they are doing... Argh. I really hate this idea. It's has always been my biggest issue with The Elder Scrolls series and the reason why I love Fallout 3 and New Vegas a lot. (Discounting that SPECIAL perk you can pick. I never pick it myself).

Seriously, this will probably be the first mod I'll get for Fallout 4... To undo this change and make it more like Fallout 3 and New Vegas. (Which isn't perfect but very close to being perfect).

If you're advocating this type of play style as an option I am all for it, but not as the only way to play the game. Many people have far too many outside real life responsibilities to dedicate the amount of time it takes to get through a game as long as a modern day Fallout 4 using such a system. However those that want to play that way should have the chance to do so if they wish.

Content locked behind a companion app.

I wasn't assuming I was guessing because I've never played a game that had that feature. I save often in games when I can.

I only play and follow a few games. Fallout and Elder Scrolls series, Far Cry Series, Total War series, Wasteland II, and the Civilization (Sid Meier) series. Although I did recently get Witcher III and GTA V. Those are pretty fun.

I suppose I would have to play one before forming a definitive opinion, but something like that in Fallout would certainly annoy me.

ohhhh you just gave me a evil mod idea! Hmmmm . . . Ohhh make one a ghoul and the other a supermutant.

EDIT: "You built a time machine out of a... wait...what?"

un actually not exactly, I had a Mod I've been tinkering with that has Doctor Amilea Brown and her husband Enoch Brown that was up briefly on nexus then I voluntarily took it down.

Let's just say they ran a brothel, and no kids were sent to lil lamplight and leave it at that.

And no it's worse than what you think....

Let's just say ....If you don't know what I mean by saying PDs version of London then it will take WAY too long to explain.

I'm not advocating it as mandatory, no.

*What I would advocate (personally) is that buying the game should never come with a guarantee of ever finishing it; one's own schedule is one's own problem.

**The original Diablo (IRRC) allowed the player to save & exit at any time, but you had to do both.

Voiced protagonist.

no branching stories

bad writting

choices having no consequences

no reputation

quest markers even for things you aren't supposed to know where they are

fast-travel teleport

inconsistencies

breaks of the lore

running ghouls

voiced protagonist

essential npcs

skills/traits/perks being removed

filler location

underdevellopped characters

black & white morality

Making BoS vs. Enclave a thing again.

Ohh boy.

I would be fine with that. I have plenty of games that I have never finished, mostly because I lost interest. BGS games are the only ones I have that I regularly come back to and play all the way through.