I wouldn't mind getting my Mad Max on if it was done right, but I'm just happy that we have Vertibirds and jumpjets in F4.

You could likely ran an engine on Squeezing of some kind if you could grow enough grain.

Worse comes to worse, you could use steam power.

The Boston area is a terrible places to introduce ground vehicles in to Fallout.

It is one of the most densely populated areas in the US and after 200 years, it would be nearly impassible with a ground vehicle.

Before the colonist came, the East Coast was one huge forest.

It has been 200 years so unless an area is a radioactive wasteland, it is likely either dense forest or covered in dense brush.

Any roads have faced not only a nuclear winter, but also 200 years of New England winters with no maintenance.

Now sailboats on the coast and canoes and the like on the rivers should work pretty good if nothing eats you.

For ground vehicles you need some place that is wide open.

Vegas would have been a great place to introduce vehicles.

Texas would also be a great place for Fallout 5 if you wanted to introduce vehicles.

Without the intervention of man, about half of Texas would have returned to grass land.

Prairie fires would clear most of the brush and scrub trees from anywhere except those areas right next to a river.

And if any place in the USA would have oil or natural gas left it would be Texas.

Still if Bethesda can't hit it out of the park, I'd prefer they leave ground vehicles out until they can.

I know that there have been some great motorcycle and truck mods for Fallout.

The trouble is level design I think. A world made to be walked around in won't look the same or be created the same as a game world meant for driving around in.

I mean you wouldn't want to play a GTA game without cars - it would take too long to walk anywhere and there wouldn't be enough stuff in between areas.

If I plopped a car into Fallout 3, I'd only be driving for like 10 seconds at a time.

I'd be all for a Fallout game with an emphasis on vehicles, (heck I'd pay a Fallout game ABOUT cars) but I think you need to design the game world around that at least a little bit.

With vertibirds we don't really know how that functions, but I'd imagine the level design takes it into account.

Think of power armor as a human-shaped tank...

Mr Stark

This.

"oh oh I got a quest to finish!"

*gets in vehicle*

*drives at full speed*

*10 seconds later*

*exits vehicle*

"that was easy..."

It seems that no matter how I attempt to explain what I'm talking about, people don't get it.

One could say the same thing for both Skyrim and The Witcher 3, both had vehicles (horses) but both were very much designed with plenty of content and things to "walk around" in and discover.

There's plenty of open areas in Fallout 3/NV that a vehicle or mount would have worked for, and plenty of landmarks and things that would make most players stop and get out to explore and look at things.

Obviously I don't know the exact reason why we don't see vehicles but I tend to side more along the line that the game simply is not designed for traveling at speeds that vehicles would take us. The map simply would feel so small imo if they had cars ans such. Also think about all the Things u Would miss when driving through the wastes. BGS spends a crazy amount of time filling the areas between the major zones/ cities for the player to explore and discover things, I believe all of it would be wasted by adding vehicles that would allow u to skip right over that.
Now having said that I still don't see why we don't have mounts like tamed giant molerats we can ride and such... but that's a whole other topic so I won't get into that.

Bottom line I feel like the game simply is not designed to be speeding all over the place. They fill in every nook and corner so walking from one place to the other is rewarding. A game where it made sense and honestly u needed a vehicle to get to every location is RAGE. If you remember it was a fairly large map.... but there was simply nothing in between every major city/town. That's how I feel the wastes would end up being designed if they added fast moving vehicles. And I for one simply don't want that to be the case.

its something i hope we never see in a fallout game. mounts i would be fine with, but i rather vehicles just not be implemented. mounts =/= vehicles

plus, i think it would take away from the fallout experience more than it would add to it. not to mention roads would be hellish to drive on these days

just my opinion

Love how he said Fallout 5 lol. Dude do you even know when Fallout 3 was released lmao? Come on bro settle down with that type of talk. Will come back to it sometime around 2021.

Bethesda games don't really need vehicles. Most worlds that utilize them are static and get very boring extremely fast. If there were truly grade A vehicles in fallout it should be restricted to travel lanes built into the game world... and to my eyes that is really as uninspiring as a game world built to handle vehicles. And there is nothing wrong with Bethesda's engine. They have developed far more flexible game worlds than anyone else could ever hope to achieve even on a 4 year cycle.

Well, mostly it's because they didn't want to have to design the world with vehicles in mind. Even if you had a vehicle in fallout 3 you'd most likely get it stuck somehow. Designing a world for vehicles is a completely different beast than designing a world for ambling about on your legs. People don't get stuck on fences or trapped on one side of a river.

"Dude," re-read the OP. Point is the engine/world doesn't make vehicles a feasible option. Fallout 4 is running on a updated version of Skyrim's engine. I think it's safe to say that when Fallout 5 comes out (yes I know when Fallout 3 came out) it will most likely be using a new engine and by that time would be able to accommodate vehicles.

Next time before you want to act cute, make sure you've read the entire post.

As others have said, it's a matter of Bethesda having to implement it. Beyond that, they'd also have to build the map to accommodate land vehicles. However, Bethesa enjoys experimenting with new things in DLC. Having one with a flatter terrain and a raider gang that uses dune buggies sounds like something Bethesda would consider doing. I'm really looking forward to F4. Bethesda really showed some fresh ideas with their Skyrim DLC, and they've implemented the lessons learned from that in Fallout 4 from the looks of it. Fallout 4's DLC is sure to have a pretty big impact on the game, as well as future installments.

tldr: You never know what Bethesda will try next. Land vehicles may become a thing, although probably in a limited way.

It's the same in New Vegas - you have operating railroads and trains (mentioned several times in the lore), but caravans walk on their legs for mile after mile - in a hot desert climate(!)... Surely a society with the technology to have operating railroads and trains, also would have the technology to devise a Brahmin-drawn cart?

Skyrims horses were slow and clumsy. Witcher 3 you need the horse to move around quickly due to the sign post fast travel system. Both are a lot slower than a vehicle would be, mounts don't really exist in Fallout with horses being dead.

Cassidy caravans sort of implies they use trailers/carts but as others have said animating them seems a tough job.

A vertibrid makes more sense than a car, top tier military vehicle that can be stored in bunkers that allows quick and easy travel over long distances without need to maintain roads or bridges.

So, I've been kind of thinking about it, looking back to Fallout 3 and New Vegas and the travel times between places and how the overworld is set up...

I wouldn't mind a motorcycle or a mount or something, really.

You say "vehicles" and what springs to my mind is a car that can go super fast (relatively-speaking) and tear across the Wasteland. If my primary mode of transportation is a car that can go 80mph, you kind of need these big open stretches of land - just to be able to open up and drive around. I think there's absolutely potential for a Fallout set in an area that would make sense for that sort of gameplay. A region that takes place in a very open space and where it's inhabitants make use of vehicles. You could tie a lot of gameplay to keeping your vehicle running and scavenging for upgrades and even just fuel to keep going.

(There was a really great Ken Burns documentary some years ago about the very first cross-country road trip in 1903 ("Horatio's Drive," if anyone wants to check it out - it's pretty good.) It was just Horatio Nelson Jackson and his mechanic (with Horatio's dog along for the ride.) That car pretty much constantly broke down, and they were always getting mired in mud and poor roads and using whatever they had at hand to keep the car limping around. It made me think that could possibly make a great post-apocalyptic game in it's own right. A road trip would tie in wonderfully with Fallout's sense of Americana, and the scavenging and maintenance angle would be a great fit for a post-apocalyptic game.)

So yeah, a game that would make a car useful would be too big and open to be something very optional - like walking around in GTA, it would by it's own virtues be a game that required use of a car.

But then I started thinking, that most of the time when I'm exploring the Wasteland I'm running, or I'll hit caps lock and auto-run. The average travel time when I'm out in the Wasteland sort of encourages me to run instead of walk, and if I'm running then having a mode of transportation that would allow me to move at about that speed or slightly faster could make perfect sense to me. Like a run-down motorcycle that kind of chugs at maybe 25mph or so I don't think would require greatly re-arranging a game like New Vegas. An ATV of some sort would be notably suited for getting across the uneven terrain. Or a bicycle or even some sort of post-apocalyptic mount of some kind.

I could see all of those things working... pretty well, actually, for a game of the scope and size of something like New Vegas or Fallout 3. Something that didn't move so terribly fast that you'd need to scale up the size and density of the world; and if you drove to the DC ruins and then parked your motorcycle outside because it was better suited for walking around in that area, I think that would be perfectly fine, too.

Probably need some mechanics associated with it - you'd need fuel to keep it going, obviously. And a map marker so that you didn't lose it. And probably a side car so that your companion could ride along with you. I'd probably also want maybe an option so that your companion could run and fetch your bike for you - most games with mounts let you "call" your horse to wherever you are, or just have tons of vehicles for you to hijack. Since a motorcycle wouldn't be able to drive itself to you whenever you called it, it might be nice if your companions could fetch it for you.

So yeah, maybe a car would be unwieldly in a game like this (and I'm trying specifically to base this on past Bethesda Fallout games - we just don't know how big or dense Fallout 4's world map is going to be, or what it's level design looks like - how much urban vs rural area there is, etc.) But something like a motorcycle or another vehicle that moved just a bit higher than running speed - I think that would be fine, off-hand. Something that was relatively small and maneuverable and didn't take a lot of time to park and get in and out of, and didn't require so much attention just to drive and get around with that you'd be missing landmarks or other neat things, or undermine the random encounters.

No cars in Fallout games and no guns in The Elder Scrolls games, that's my motto.

Gibbs Quadski amphibious quad bike!

Setting development reasoning aside lets consider the setting.

Doesn't make a whole lot of sense if there are no maintained roads to drive on... War torn pathways with huge un-repaired potholes would leave most of the sedan vehicles in the waste stranded in seconds. It might take more time to simply avoid the hazards than to walk through them with brahmin and cattle.

We don't really see any civilian jeeps, there are trucks that might be able to get around but still it's pretty implausible to get around a lot of a war torn landscape in a vehicle when buildings have collapsed cinder blocks into the road.

Also where do they even get tires from? Rubber to make them? 200 years of dry rot will make any pre-war tires useless. Rubber trees are down in south america and asia.

Most of all it doesn't make a lot of sense for the player character. If you aren't an army it doesn't sound wise to draw that much attention to yourself with all the noise of an engine and vehicular travel.

IMO the disbelief would be suspended by having vehicles in the game. There simply isn't the societal infrastructure to back them.

Vertibirds are far easier to use in the landscape and that's why you see them.

Don't play Fallout 2 then.

Came here to say this. I could see a beat-up old motorcycle that we assembled from scrap parts putt-putting across the wasteland fitting just fine in the Fallout world, a motorcycle or ATV that lets us travel just a little bit faster than sprinting.

The first question to ask, would vehicles add to the game play or just be a gimmick? Given the scale of the recent maps, I can't see how a vehicle would add to the gameplay in that you would not really be saving time or effort to get from one place to another. I used a vehicle mod in FONV and it was fun the first time I used it, but after that it was more of a pain to get to the vehicle, get in it, and drive it somewhere than it was to just walk. So, the game would have to be designed around vehicles. Mainly, there would have to be a reason built into the game to use a vehicle, one other than, it would be neat to have something to drive around in.

But dad, can i play Fallout 2 but without using a car?!

You know what would be kind of interesting? Moving trains that you could ride on, rob, or get attacked on. Maybe even set one up as part of the settlement system to transport goods and services between settlements more easily.

I mean, think about it. It's on a track, so if it's implemented correctly it shouldn't encounter any geography. It would also be on a set course, so there wouldn't really be any pathing issues. The only problem would be if a mod/DLC gets added and new terrain/buildings intersects with a set of tracks.

Doublepost