That's the problem for me. I can choose how to develop the character, but I can't choose who my character was prior to the game and is by the start of the game.

Whatever character development happens has to happen to the character Bethesda chose for me, not the character I personally created.

The background and start-of-the-game is too set in stone and allows me very little room to define my character.

In short; I can choose who she becomes, I can't choose who she were.

In previous games I could, is it any wonder I feel bitter about it?

Why the hate? Well, people hate things they're scared of. And they're scared of things they know nothing about. And they know nothing about the story.

What do we actually know beyond the pre-war background?

It's not even clear if our family survived. If they're still alive, then they either left the vault earlier or were removed whilst still in stasis for some reason by persons unknown. If it turns out that they died in the blast or in the vault, everything's up in the air.

In the E3 presentation, Todd says that "you do survive and are lowered into the vault", then (cryptically) "events transpire"... "and you then emerge 200 years later, as the sole survivor of vault 111". He gives no clue as to how it is that we don't age for 200 years; most people seem to be assuming some kind of stasis or cryo-sleep, but we could be a clone, an android or... time travel We just don't know.

We don't even know for certain exactly what year it is; I suspect that this is deliberate, as it would give clues to the story, such as the origin of the Brotherhood faction seen in the trailer for example.

Something else a lot of people don't seem to like is the fact that the protagonist is married with a child; commitment and responsibility scare some people more than any Deathclaw ever could.

I'm wary of "too much" background, but I think it's be possible for a little more depth to exist while also sticking to the "play how you want" philosophy. It's part of the reason I'm rooting for the "android" theory.

Because nothing disappointing ever comes from overhauling what's worked before. *sips bottle of New Coke* And skeptics know about as much on the story as everyone else does. So. Yeah.

You can't in NV if you play LR.

Yeah, you can. All we know for certain is that the PC was a courier at an earlier point in his/her life and delivered a package to The Divide.

Doesn't mean you've been a courier the entire time.

And Ulysses can be interpreted in a number of ways, if you feel like he's talking bullcrap then that's what he does and he knows squat of your character.

Simple; its the internet, people complain about everything.

Yes, your right... It is the internet. We are all guilty about complaining about this or that, honestly.

At this point we really don't know what the story is so I can't really say whether it's good or bad.

I liked the story of 3 better than NV because I felt I could connect with the story better. Once I caught up with Benny I kept thinking why does my character care about who rules vegas? I'm a mailman not a solder.

But I felt that NV was better for RPing since the the character was such a blank that you could be who you wanted because you had no or at least very little backstory.

As a previous poster as said Bethesda seems to have taken "your stories svck" to heart and are trying to make a better story. Which means more predetermined stuff is gonna happen.

I feel like some people are gonna be upset no matter what. Either their gonna say *the story svcks" or "where's my freedom?"

I'm gonna wait til I play and decide from there.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SequelitisBasically until proven otherwise its gonna svck

The one thing i always hated about FNV was the whole inconsistenties in the dialog, hell even Raul jokes about it when you ask "Who are you?" twice to him. ("You got hit on the head boss?"). Your a courier that has walked all the way throught the west coast like new reno and such, yet you have to ask trudy about what the NCR is??? that realy breaks my immergence.

My fear is it just a retelling of FO3 story with a few changes like instead of looking for your father your looking for your wife and son.

I don't think that will happen, but my own concern is they not retell a hybrid tale made of Tactics and Fallout 1.

That's just the forums whenever a new Bethesda game comes out. Been the same thing in the forums ever since Morrowind. And it'll be the same with the next TES game after Skyrim.

yes but new players to the series may not know who the heck the NCR is . its kind of like reading the old Spiderman comics where you have stuff like this http://www.spinnyverse.com/comic/03-11-2015where they have to explain everything with redundant exposition that happened the last last issie who did not get the last issue

what is wrong with complaining? idiots is the answer.

Yeah that is true. I personaly have the problem that i do know all those things, and its more in the way that the character should have know seeing the background he/she has.

As a player who has played FO1 and 2 i know what the NCR is, but you are right that someone who only played FO3, would not know what the NCR is, or how they were formed. I understand the need to retell some history or lore for those who dont know it. I guess with FO4 main character living in or around boston might mean he should potentialy know things about its pre-war history, but i as a player dont know that history, so i do expect it to be in their for the sake of me and others who dont know it.

Now just to make it more clear what my argument is, cause i understand the above might confuse it.

I find it strange, and sometimes immersion breaking, that information a character should natively have is not present to him/her. But i do understand the reason behind it is to give that info to those who are unaware of it.

The more anoying i find are seperate topics in a conversation that dont referance earlier topics you discused. Let's take veronica from FNV for a second.

-------------------------

Say i take my character to the BOS in hiden valley and run throught their queest before meeting her, i now as a character know of their excistance. I go meet her and she ask wether i know them (BoS) and what i think of them. I can litterly tell her i met them and think there ok. Yet later she reveals she is a BoS herself, and then ask wether i still want her to join me.

Basicly the first part of my conversation with her regarding my disposition towards the BoS is ignored/forgoten by her, and then she asks in a generic way sugjesting i was not to fond of them wether i still like her to join me. This is what i mean with a break in conversations not remembering earlier topics discussed.

Rather then forcing the standard talk of her joining me, they could have change the whole direction of that conversation so she would reveal her allignement with the BoS and then just offer to go with me as a companion. (ie: ommiting the whole "sorry i lied" to you stuff.

Now this isnt a big thing, and can easily be ignored, it just never felt like the conversations in FNV flowed well for me, to manny time a NPC asked about a topic, would iignore previous comments in favor of pre-scripted dialog trees.

I think it will at least early on. I don't see why they would introduce your family just to kill them off in 5 minutes.

The only things known about the story yet are good. There's a lot of unoriginality in Boston (BoS, wildlife, Supermutants) but that doesn't mean the story will be rubbish.

Umm... the opening of FONV tells you exactly who the NCR and Legion are. People who skip the OP have only themselves to blame.

Regardless, in an RPG where you are assigned a specific role that would already have such knowledge, it is very poor writing to have the player ask NPCs for that exact same knowledge. Superior writing would be to have the player learn more specifics within the world context without needing to ask for exposition from NPCs. Examples might include (but not be limited to) dead bodies with notes or diaries of events, encounters, lives, etc., terminals with a variety of information, and even simply having NPCs from different factions encounter each other or having NPCs discussing topics among themselves so that the player overhears various details. In fact, this type of problem could have been improved by simply having the PC suffer from amnesia or similar lapses due to physical and mental trauma after being shot in the head. It wouldn't have been a major effort to include a couple of lines about the PC not having fully recovered mentally after being saved.

As was stated, this problem is one of many examples of poor writing in FONV as far as RPGs are concerned (and happens due to the assignment of a specific role and being shoved into a spaghetti Western revenge storyline, since a "blank slate" approach would have allowed a player to make some sort of back story that included the absence of knowledge). Yes, you can make up the excuse of the courier having amnesia, but you're still assigned an unwanted role in a very specific genre (spaghetti Western) rather than being allowed freedom, and there is still no reason not to write a few lines for NPCs to such affect in order to enhance suspension of disbelief.

I still find it troubling how much Bethesda makes it sound like they confuse writing that has emotional weight and impact with writing that is read aloud. Voice acting can help make writing more emotional, but it can just as easily cripple it. But an emotional story will have an interesting plot, characters with arcs, compelling themes, and so on. Their PR makes it sound like they're applying cosmetics to the outside hoping it will fix the core issue.

I fail to see how that's possible. Hearing a voice that isn't the one I envisioned for my character tells me that I'm not playing as that character, I'm merely directing them through events. That's fine for predefined characters, but it really bothers me for games where I'm making the character myself.

The problems of this extend much further than just the NPCs that might reappear...

I find the LW to be a bad example here because they aren't more defined than Courier Six in terms of their past. You play as them throughout various parts of their childhood, and help shape them from the get go. How they treat their elders, how they treat bullies, etc. It's defined by you. The Lone Wanderer's past before you entered the picture was being inside their mama.

That's actually where my gripe with this character comes from. They have a very, very, very concrete past. They're ex-military, they're a spouse, and they're a parent. And, from everything we've seen, it appears they're in a happy marriage. I doubt we'll get dialogue choices that hint at marital hostility or give you the chance to flirt with a neighbor in a way that can be taken as you being unfaithful.

It's not just a matter of the PC's past being defined, it's their personality being defined. You can say being in the Wasteland will change you, and I'm sure it will, but I doubt it's going to open doors for our character to express anything but love and longing for their spouse. I doubt they'll go "I'm glad they're dead!" when talking to Codsworth or anyone else, and I'm afraid that part of the story is going to be with us for the whole damn ride. Especially if they went through all of this to provide a more emotional story.

I agree with you OP.

I find it difficult to hate something we know next to nothing about.

Hate? No, just people thinking they are entitled to have a game made specifically for them.

I think the "hate" is just incessant concern. A lot of people play Fallout and RPGs to have characters they define. In some cases players want to live their life in another world, this is what I try to do. Voiced dialogue, limited conversation options and a pre-defined (opposite six) spouse and child add limitations that I'm just not sure will have rewards. My concern is that the writer's want to add "emotion" in a very rudimentary way, the loss of a wife and child (if you're a man). Bethesda's never been known for great storytelling so when they take away things that they are known and loved for like player freedom, to make way for storytelling: something they haven't really proved to be all that great at, it is worrying. I only have these concerns because I am passionate about video games and Bethesda and Fallout games in particular.

That said, from what little we know I'm open to the story and game itself being good, I have it pre-ordered already. I want the game to have impact, drama, storytelling and allow the type of choices I want, but I am sceptical.

I think a set character is more similar to a 2D isometric game and as technology evolves I think we'll get away from them with really interesting branching stories and character creation possibilities.

That's what genre is about, and that's what consecutive series are supposed to be about. It's the same principle as expecting Aspirin in an aspirin bottle, and expecting that Doom 2 would not be a Tetris clone. Doom 5 may not be really close to Doom 2, but no one should have to worry about it being closer to Bejeweled than it is to Doom 2; even though their might be more Bejeweled fans than Doom fans.