I still wish they would have considered complete freedom from the start of the game as well, not total control but freedom to craft yourself up to the point where all the origin stories would intersect. Like if we could choose what faction we come from, raised within,(or even in this case; what job you had before the war) who you're allied with and where you were brought up. Even if it was generated from a survey sheet like in games like Gladiator Road To Freedom. It would at least apply to what you start off with even if the narrative takes over after the first few introduction quests.

I am no denying that fallout 4 is like that. The other fallout games where not.

In every fallout game the back history was indeeded set, but was vague enough that anyone if any race or sixuality can see themselves in that situation. Giving them a chance to BE that character.

Being married may wirk in that sense for straight folk, but gay folk find it hard to believe they would marry a woman.

However if you read the rest of my post you will see that I thibk that is okay

... Because they want to dumb it down and hand hold the folks with no imagination. Nothing you say will change this. Nor do I care what people that blindly defend Beth say or think.

Because Bethesda couldn't write a good story if their lives depend on it. FO3 and Skyrim are proof oof this. And giving our character a voice doesn't help tell a better story.

It sounds to me the people who are complaining about this are the ones with no imagination.

Just pretend/believe the backstory isn't there.

If you can convince yourself of something as outlandish as this being an example of dumbing down, you should easily be able to convince yourself that the character is a blank slate.

I could be overestimating such a person's mental capacity though.

Sorry, you lost all credibility days ago.

LMAO at Beth having to hand hold people that have no imagination.

Well, these two have certainly made up their minds.

So...we'll see you in the line at midnight release?

The previous games left much to the imagination and player preference; this was a good thing.

But my question had nothing to do with Fallout, it was addressing the comment about roleplaying.
~Specifically: "having a predetermined background makes difficult to forget that this character you are playing isn't you."

**Why would that not be preferable to a roleplayer? The very fact of their differences serves as the guide of how they would react differently than the player. I would think that the last thing a roleplayer would want or seek out, is to mistake the character for themselves, or have the character behave as they themselves would.

You realize that makes no sense, right? The "dumb" players who can't manage to "roleplay" as awesomely as you? Aren't even thinking about any of that. They just play the game straightforwardly, taking what's there, without thinking about "telling their own story" in the first place. They just play the game.

As they did with Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3.... so there'd be no point in / need for any supposed "hand holding" that you're claiming. None at all.

You lost it all the moment you argument stemmed from dumbing down. I suppose my loss of credibility came from pointing out the holes in the worst kind of logic.

I apologize for bursting your bubble, sincerely.

@Gizmo: B--- please. You gotta put yourself in those shoes. You gotta get inside that player characters head, become them, no matter the setup. You gotta dig in, and make that person, a person, not just your avatar. This setup is full of possibility and wonderful potential. You just have to want to get in there. That's Role Playing. Assuming a role of a person and put yourself into it.

Sorry, nothing you say is going to change the fact they've been dumbing down their games for years now.

lol all the lonesome road dlc established was that you were a mailman and you delivered packages to some places before. everything else was conjecture on ulysses part and the player still has the choice to reject all the stuff hes saying (which i did personally, dude was crazy obv)

You've yet to form an argument. You're completely transparent. If Beth didn't have a backstory and people were complaining, you'd be defending that instead. Typical Skyrim come lately.

Maybe you BECOME a Raider. Maybe you BECOME a cannibal. MAYBE you choose to become a tribal savage gnawing on bones! All that after you emerge into the horrid wastelands. It's all there, it's all possible. After that vault opens, the sky is the limit to shirk off the mantles of being a well-to-do suburbanite! You can then forge your new destiny in this new wild world unfolded before you on the ashes of where your home used to stand!

You. Just. Have to see. The Potential...AFTER the Vault.

You can look through my post history and see very quickly and very clearly that I do not blindly defend Bethesda. I criticize them heavily on a lot of subjects, but not this. This particular choice is not "dumbing" anything down or catering to people who lack imagination. They have a story they want to tell, and it requires certain circumstances to exist around the main protagonist. Just like in Fallout, Fallout 2, Fallout 3, and Fallout New Vegas.

Correction.

I've yet to form an argument you can refute/comprehend. When your initial response is LMAO, you've kind of conceded and this is no longer an argument. Such a thing assumes both parties are capable of debate, and clearly you are not.

The two are very easy to get confused, so don't feel too bad.

On the other hand, should Bethesda ever write a good story you'll be there calling it dumbed down, despite the original games having a god-awful plot themselves.

I guess some people think video games age like wine?

Not really. Just like NV, this doesn't actually require any sort of set up, much less the super played out "Start in a Vault, herp derp scenario." How original.

More hand holding, unlike what NV offered.

You've interpreted that I have the opposite opinion? That is the definition of roleplaying... But not yourself, them. None of use here grew up in a vault, or under that kind of social environment... None of us would behave as they would; not without careful extrapolation, and deliberate behavioral changes.... IE. Roleplaying. Roleplaying is not "What would I do in their shoes", It's "what would they do in their shoes".

But neither of us grew up in ravaged wastes, or irradiated hovels, or lived a life of robbing and killing either.

You have to suspend your disbelief, Gizmo. It's not where you start...it's where you're going.

Life. Begins AFTER the Vault.

To be honest, I haven't been able to take anyone who uses the phrases "dumbed down" or "handholding" seriously for years. Ditto for "ruins my immersion". (The absolute tops for that one was the one dude on the Wasteland 2 forums who claimed that having a graphics option to change the post-processing/visual tone of the game, would ruin his immersion. As well as disrespecting the devs. Even though the devs would be providing the option. )

doom is a roleplaying game

How can you see it so clearly, and not see it at all?

**And the character starts before the game.

The only thing I'm defending against is blatant ignorance.

You also have the definition defend confused with debate, which is something easily confused by one who isn't well versed in such an activity.

I'm not saying this is a perfect idea, but it was an idea that a lot of thought went into and someone felt it was the better option.

Both sides have pros and cons. Dumbing down is not on of them.

Role playing to me was being the kind of person i would be in that kind of situation. Have MY decisions effect the world. Not the characters decisions. You and I must have a different definition of role playing because every person I know would play themselves but in a different setting.afterall we are not acting out a movie, fallout has always been a way to explore our lives if we were set in a different world. Skyrim did this, New Vegas, Fallout 3. If I was alone in this feeling that then this topic wouldn't exist.