Oop hang on

To be fair, it's not that we're a pre-War citizen that's the issue for some folks. It's that regardless of who we want to play, our backstory is that we're a married wife/husband and mother/father to a small infant boy. That means whatever we role-play has to be centered around that background unless we do some mental gymnastics and pretend that the pre-War segment of the game never happened.

I mean, take my character for example: Originally, my FO4 character was going to be a descendant/close relative of my FO3/FO:NV character, that at some point between FO3 and FO:NV, my FO3/FO:NV character met my FO4 character, but not anymore. Now the closest thing I can get to with my original FO4 character is that he/she is a centuries old ancestor of my FO3/FO:NV character.

Sure, it's not THAT bad, but you can see how it is a tad disappointing that my original plan's been shot out the window. That's what the issue is: that no matter what, unless the player purposefully ignores the tutorial, that IS their FO4's backstory. He/she WAS a pre-War citizen, married and with child.

IMO this game will have to mantain balance between the storytelling,the roleplaying and the free sandboxing of the game.Bethesda wrote a general outline of the first perhaps 30 years of the main character before his world was desroyed.We get to write the sory of the rest of his life in a new world.I guess that's a fair deal.

The more I think about it the more I like the idea of having at least some fixed background. One of the reasons I have such an intense love for Commander Shepard, I could still change some of her background but it was mostly fixed. Of course it depends on the actual history of that character. But being a mother, housewife and later a wasteland warrior? Yeah I love that. I don't love the housewife part but hey, that's why we can change it.

Welcome to the Dark Side.

But you are assuming that everyone plays the same way. A good majority of people that play fallout want to play as themselves. Fact is I couldn't give a flying crap about being in another guys shoes because I want to see what I would do in my own shoes. Fallout is an advancement system, the way I Always played it is that I stayed true to myself. I made my skills as a person fit my skills in the game. After awhile I advance those skills, try new things, become a person I want to be. And even though fallout had have a pre determined story in every game it was just vague enough that it allowed me to be and act as I would if I was really put into that situation.

My problem with the well define predetermined story like in fallout 4 is that it's makes it harder to define this character as myself. I would never marry a woman and I do not like kids and I don't care if it is the 50s, I will not bow down to what is "normal" if it means I couldn't be happy. By forcing me to marry a woman suggests that I did bow down. That I am scum for fooling this poor woman and lying to her about myself. That I like men. I would rather die alone then do something like that to a sweet woman. And what kind of role model would I be to my kid if I say not being yourself is okay? I like playing as the good guy because I am like that in real life. How can I call myself a good guy if I have to settle with a back story like that?

Maybe I do not know what roleplaying is exactly, but I do know that Bethesda has always given us a vauge background for exactly that reason. They did in in both fallou 3 and new Vegas, they did it in Skyrim, oblivion. And I am sure they will do it in fallout 4 but my concern is what if they don't? What if I am constantly reminded throughout the game that I am that lying scum who married a woman because he is to weak to be true to himself.

But I won't know that until the game comes out.

So I am just gonna say what I been saying

Just trust Bethesda because I am sure they will have all of us cover.

Maybe it's my tabletop rog background but I've always understood roleplaying to be: you play a character. Typically this is a character you devise yourself, for the most part--personality, skills, goals, dreams, fears, etc. As fully realized as your imagination allows.

However, no rpger is an island. Whether there's a dungeon/gamesmaster (as in a tabletop rpg) or a dev/writer (in a video game rpg), there are limitations imposed on your character that depend on setting, concept, opening premise and general plot. I think a strong roleplayer views these limitations as a good thing; a tool to hone your character, make them believable and relatable and focused. They're not really limitations so much as fuel for good character ideas. Overpowered, one-dimensional Mary/Marty Stus are bad characters.

With fallout 4, I'm interested in exactly what happens when a seemingly normal, retrofuture 50s-ish, mundane person ends up in a crazy post-apocalytpic world, robbed of everything and everyone they cared about, and has to survive. The "limitations" of the premise actually fuels my imagination; there are so many ways this could go.

I'm assuming that RPGs are for Roleplayers; and even more naively assuming that specific RPG series sequels are designed for players of that specific RPG series, and that designing for another segment is seen as rude development.

It seems that none of that is true anymore. [Reminds me of the dictionary tangent a bit back in the thread.]

I've nothing against VR-sims, or alternate forms of roleplaying; but I do find it disrespectful (by them) to turn the Fallout series into an alternate form of roleplaying in line with TES instead of Fallout.

You don't/didn't know what role playing was, so no.

Eh, there've been debates about "ROLEplaying vs ROLLplaying" (i.e, people who focus on the characterization/personality/etc, and people who are more focused on the stats/numbers/game mechanics/etc) for decades. (And even then, there's more variation, since you have the roleplayers who think about what the character would do, but talk about it in third person; the ones who game in a more first-person voice; and the actor-types who truly speak as the character, voice & mannerisms included. And everything in between.)

And that's just in the tabletop RPG world. In the computer realm, where (especially in decades past, when there wasn't that much advanced tech) things inherently lean more towards numbers, combat, and mechanics; it seems like the balance between roleplayers and rollplayers would be tilted even more towards the second.

I know that in my experience, rollplayers are much more common than roleplayers, especially the more fanatical types (like the ones who are most annoyed by the more-defined PC here). But that may just be a function of me and the people I hung out with - the math & science geeks, rather than the drama geeks. So, people with a stronger tendency towards numbers. I'm sure that the D&D club at a drama school would have a much higher % of "act in character" type players, rather than rules lawyers & number crunchers.

tl;dr - in my experience, actual "roleplayers" playing RPGs is pretty rare. And this is stretching back decades, not some recent development.

This

If we must call it rollplaying then fine. Fallout to me has always been about rollplaying.

I would also agree that those who actually RP in RPGs are the minority. Especially now days.

But as I said in other posts
i have zero issue playing as someone else if I have to. Fact is, this is still a fallout game. To not play it over something so minor would be stupid of me.

Yeah maybe I won't feel right playing it as me in the lead role. However I feel playing as the mother would give the sense of investment that I look for.

So if I don't feel like myself in the game I will just play the mother.

In a world, where "having no imagination" equals to "dumbing down" or "handholding" because a game is actually trying to tell a narrative and not be as shallow as say Skyrim, where you must depend on your imagination to hide how little depth a game has.

What a crazy world it is!

I have to admit that nomather what i set out to do (Say evil playthrough) i always end up falling back to what i personaly would think i would do in the same situation. So i can understand your way of playing yourself in the games. Nomather what i try, when it comes to a surten point, wether it is bombing Megaton, or killing some poor lost pup, even if i decided i would be absolute evil, i can never set myself up to do it even if its a game. Guess despite being a roleplaying game we all probaly take a piece of our own personality and aply it to whoever we play as.

LOL, this game will probably be more shallow than Skyrim. Evidence=Beth history.

You know really what is the point of discussing all this when we have zero idea of what the story will be like?

Maybe we should wait till the fame comes out before passing judgment.

That includes for me too.

They make it harder for you to make your won story, because they want to tell their story. Now, I'm against the voiced protagonist as much as anybody, but to some amount a character has to have a set personality, especially if the story demands it. I don't like the implications of having yet another more personalized, emotional storyline - mainly because it's always cheesy - but yeah, if the fact that your character is a heterosixual family man / woman is essential to having a coherent story then might as well.

I think it's a given that the story won't change anything by the time of its conclusion [if it has one]. It will be just enough incentive to use the systems; the real meat of the game will just be the explore/execute/wash-n-repeat. I got the impression that FO3 was seen by its developers as a 'wander-wander-kill it' simulator, and I would expect no different in this next installment ~it sold really really well... They would surely repeat in the hopes of scoring big again.

If they have a complex and multi-layered story, they risk turning off a big chunk of their audience; I don't think they would risk that. [Everyone has to "get" it.]

There has never been anything that really confines you to following the preset story, in Fo3 you could very well do the main quest last above most other areas; (which I liked) the story itself doesnt even demand you to be a certain way or treat others a certain way, the objectives are just following the outlines of the plot - not the story. The only scripted interractions was your completion of what the main quest wanted and it was very very thiny defined outside the manditory objectives. Fo4 seems to have made it so that your character him/herself is confined into being of a certain type of protagonist with a tragic event in their life being the center focus; rather than an individual within a greater plot. Like in the DLC for fallout 3, the plotlines were bigger than your importance, you just had to catalyst the outcome. Thats what FO should be, the story should be bigger than your control over it's progression.

I honestly don't see this as limiting to rp at all. If you are already re-writing the plot in your head, why not just ignore the starting bit? (And any other bits and pieces of that start that bleed into the main game)

Or if your on the pc, wait for an Alternate start type mod?

Frankly, I don't want to have to water down every possible starting plot because a person might feel left out. It'd make the game blander then Skyrim.

We know so little about the game's story beyond the opening pre-war scenes and the brief post-war segment (while completely skipping over the events, if any, that transpired within the vault itself), It is entirely possible that after 200 years passing, the impact of seeing a world that is so drastically changed since the war that one can take whatever liberties they wish in establishing their character after those opening events. The sight of the wasteland could make one more hardened and cold, or maybe one of hundreds of other possible outcomes if that is what you wish. I have never really felt the urge to totally and completely lose myself in a character that I have created in a video game. If that's your jam, then more power too you.The fact is that we know next to nothing of Fallout 4's story and structure. It would be next to impossible for the developer to create a story and world that could accommodate every permutation of every possible character and cater to the whims of every player. The greatest good for the greatest number is about all we can hope for when dealing with a game of this scale.

I for one welcome the changes with a tentative enthusiasm until future information leads me to think otherwise.

That is NOT something to hope for if you want a quality RPG.

(That's not even something to hope for in general IMO... It's the bane of charm and odd character.

It's making a big tub of mush to feed the most you can... with no salt or seasoning.)

*And by feed, I mean sell food to.

While there is supposedly a increased focus on gunplay this time around, I think we can expect a bit more than just that. The whole point of including a voiced protagonist is that it enables them to create more emotional depth with what is going on.

That's the selling point alright, but I think that's secretly also the selling point.

We can hope for a great story though.