Well.. Here's some Notes

- BoS Don't ask/search for your tech at gunpoint. They ignore you even with Advanced items.
- Raiders Just try to kill you. They don't try to enslave you, Force six upon you, Rob you, strip you or even humiliate you. They just want to waste ammo against a well armed stranger?
- There's never a Moment when you feel the need to charge into a room and drink out of the toilet and fix your wounds.
- You never get the ability to "become" a raider. You can shoot innocents but that's It.
- Characters rarely encourage you to be a dike .
- Enclave are evil badguys that want you dead because reasons?
- You aren't realy ever put into a possition of "do what we say or you will die- Murder that mother".

All these are Bad things in my opinion. But hey... All of my skills are useful and hardcoe mode is a pain when you aren't sure on how to build your character (i should put more into medicine- Darn i am a fool)

(Edit: we can always go a little backwards in time. It should be more Interesting to be Post apocalyptic rather than the post-post-apocalypse that F3/NV are at)

I've always liked Fallout 3 more at lower levels, where you have to actually scrounge to survive and make the try to get enough cash to survive. As opposed to the higher ones, where everything falls before your endless might.

Well the Enclave dont Technically want you dead in FO3, but due to poor writing skills there was no option to side with them other then shelled out choices that meant nothing. As for the harshness of the wasteland hell yeah it needs to be harsh I dont think too many people would be acting civilized in post apocalyptia lol. Hopefully in FO4 they will rectify this mistake with the Enclave aswell as additional detail to wasteland life.

What the heck do you mean by "gamey?"

Wait... i'm kind of confused. Please elaborate?

when he says gamey he means easier and not realistic harsh and savage means more difficult and real.

I think that normal mode should be like it is now and hardcoe mode should be extremely realistic.like how many people do you know can fit 150-250 pounds of suplies and guns in their pockets?if hardcoe mode is turned on you should only be able to carry around 70 pounds unless you find a backpack or other carry item.or if you find a pistol holster you can put one pistol and like cut weight of pistol in half.Just so you have more uses for a home and it makes you think ahead.

yes this. i want the game to be more like the Road.

I still don't fully understand what this topic is about. It seems to be "do you want Fallout 4 to be like the Originals and New Vegas or do you want it to be like Fallout 3?"

If that is the case I want Fallout 4 to be like the Originals and New Vegas. It's been over 200 years since the Great War. Fallout should be nothing like "The Road."

i just meant the desperation of the people and such. the road was dark, gloomy, and hopeless, and imo a wonderful piece of post-apocalyptic fiction.

But Fallout is now now over 200 years after the Great War. In that time people have started rebuilding and the world has started to recover and heal. Fallout is about progress and people rebuilding and coming into conflict with others also rebuilding. The whole "War. War never changes" part of Fallout since the start. The old world is dead and gone and a new world has been born. Yet people still haven't managed to get over their mistrust and hate of others which caused the Great War.

Fallout isn't about sitting in a radioactive craphole for 200 years doing dike all for that whole time.

I suggest you go an play Fallout, Fallout 2 and Tactics

that is all well and good, but i feel that a world like would be very desperate, even 200 years after the initial disaster. some reconstructive aspects would be great. all im saying is that i would like the game to have a much darker, grittier, atmosphere. the ability to join raider factions, and possibly the enclave would also be welcome.

also i have played them and enjoyed them greatly. also wasteland (wasteland is amazing)

I agree with Styles, it is 200 years after the great war and people have started to rebuild, but the part with the raiders would be interesting as long as it doesn't hinder the development of a player at an early level. It would svck to be enslaved for the first 3 or so hours of the game.

I would like the wasteland to stay savage and harsh. I also think a good idea would be more creatures and more tougher and scarier creatures.

The games weak, when compared to how factions should be acting according to lore and the realistic affects living in a post-apocalyptic world should have.
It should be aimed more at making things seem realistic (where they can) and aiming to suit an 18+ auidence. Fallout 3 for example is rated 18 but I can't see anything in it that would justify such a tag.

Definitely the former. I play post apocalyptic games to explore a post apocalyptic wasteland.

If the time bothers you, then turn back the clock 100 years, but I play these games to see and try to carve an existence in a post apocalyptic world. Not play a third-world country simulator.

There were cities 80 years past the great war; cities with power stations and governments after that. The Fallout series is about recovery, not perpetual squalor. To have them living trash after 200 years recovery is bizarre and most out of place IMO; especially so when you consider that they have absurd access to fusion power and robotic labor, and advanced military weapons for defense.

Fallout is about how humanity will always be fighting over something or other. If there is no resource, territory, or rights it will be about ideals/religion. Humans are great at making excuses to fight when there are none.

The whole Survival/Horror theme of Fallout 3 is out of place. The games do have a component of survival, but do not focus on it as a major theme. They are more about sci-fi than horror, too.

Fallout 3 was a survival horror?

Gritty is all that blitz is saying. I don't disagree. It should be gritty in places. Gritty.. You know, like when you are trying to clear the squatters and have to save Crissy? Thats gritty.
You know, when you have to make touch choices
Things are still going to be harsh for a lot of people.
People that dont want to be taken over by emerging governments.
Those that are forced out of their lands as larger groups expand or expliot whatever resources they have.
This all ties into the grittiness of the game.

Lets face it. 200 years after, you will still have a whole lot of places that are somewhat lawless, or where emerging "Law" imposes itself upon people that never signed up for it. It would he pretty boring if the governments were so big that battles were much bigger than what we see in the end of NV.
Might as well not even be considered post apoc at that point as it would be far closer to a reniassance period.
I can see it now "Fallout 5: a post-post nuclear political strategy RPG"
Your whole goal is to get a 2/3 majority vote to pass a bill that your constituants want!
pay off officials! sign off on other items, to get more politicians on your side!
Uh, oh! its re-election time! Set up a super PAC!
That game sounds swell, dont it?





That brings me to my next gripe. I'm tired of everyone saying "Fallout is _________"
I've read from different groups of "dinosaurs" that fallout is either about eeking out an existence or that it is about rebuilding. These viewpoints are only slightly contradictory and may or may not rely on one's interpritation of the games.

I get that you dont want a bunch 'o noobs coming and ruining your childhood[tm] with their "noob-casual-console-gamer[tm] viewpoints" but come on.

I think the people who have played them all and expect to see some sort of linear progression happening in the 'Fallout world'... are probably going to be disappointed. It is after all, a game... and it's intended focus is a hostile, post nuclear, apocalyptic environment, drenched in radiation. Thus the name... "Fallout". So having Fallout 5 or whatever number, be all about a bunch of people building a new society and all that, doesn't make much sense. A 16 YO kid playing 4 or 5 would just go... "Why the hell is this called Fallout"? I think expecting a simply, new and improved version of a game revolving around survival in a dangerous post apocalyptic world, is much more likely and makes more sense. Otherwise it just becomes something else.

Fallout 3's "intended focus" is " a hostile, post nuclear, apocalyptic environment, drenched in radiation." That wasn't the focus of Fallout, Fallout 2, Fallout Tactics or New Vegas. This is why so many people are pissed off at Fallout 3 because it isn't consistent with the Fallout Universe and what Fallout is meant to be; which is about progress and rebuilding and people coming into conflict.

Also the word "Fallout" can also means "the outcome of" "The aftermath" as in "what was the Fallout of the event?" So "Fallout" has two meanings. Radioactive particals that "Fall out" of the sky after a nuclear blast and the "Fallout" "Aftermath"of the nuclear Armaggedon of 2077.

Fallout 3 is the odd game out. Fallout 3 is the game that "became something else."

Please understand that Fallout 3 isn't the only Fallout game out there. Fallout 3 is the third main Fallout game and the forth Fallout over all. Please go and play Fallout, Fallout 2 and Tactics. It will help you understand the Fallout Universe beyond Fallout 3.

IMO, places like The Pitt, Point Lookout and the Sierra Madre are important places despite the fact that Fallout tries to convey a different form of post apoc living (aka living in california where there are cities and structure.) In all 3 of those places, people try to overcome the obstacles and some try to rebuild(Elijah, Ashur for example) but their environments almost make it impossible to do so. The Mojave area was cool and so was the storyline, but chronic mutations and deadly environments are a nice spice.

Yep, certainly nothing hostile about the world in F1, 2, or tactics. Why just yesterday i was free walking the wastes south of redding and a random encounter yeilded radscorpoons that had balloons tied to their tails and then had another random encounter with a group of enclave that were handing out ice cream. The ghouls in gecko were super happy to start working for free for vault city and when i went to vault 15, dorian threw me a surprise birthday party, which was sponsored by caravaners that donated their shipments to the squatters.

Yes F3 was different. It was also a different location and Beths first crack at the series. And I would argue that the mojave wastes were justbas hostile in NV as they were in F3. Sure there was less radiation, but it was designed as not being hit by the bombs, either. The north and south eastern locations still had radiation though.

OK, but ARE they using the word in that definition? I don't think so. I think they mean 'Nuclear Fallout'. And isn't a lot of the more subtle social game play in the first two, pretty much attributed to the technical limitations of how the actual games functioned back then?

All I'm saying is... I think people expecting each game to be a linear progression, starting from the first... is just unrealistic. I can understand why diehard fans would want that to happen, so that they can move forward and see the Fallout world rebuild. But I just don't think they're going to do that. Most people are going to play each game based on the merits of that individual game. And that's how they're going to design it and market it.

I suspect you're arguing against a straw-man here, taking the "rebuilding society" thing a bit too far. No one is, as far as I can see, arguing for a setting free from hostile abominations, radiation, pre-war relics, etc... That just can't be all there is to it. Most dinosaurs are very happy with New Vegas, which as CannibalClub touched on has all these things, but it also reflects other struggles of a post-nuclear-world-war society.

I think the survivalism vibe needs to be in there - as it always has - but Fallout has traditionally had a very strong story element as well, putting these struggles in a greater context. A straight-up survival horror/action approach does not cover that. This is where rebuilding comes in, tying in factions vying for control, companions and other NPC's for emotional impact, and consequences that amount to more than just your character. For interesting quest lines and non-straightforward choices, with a weird 50's vibe adding a layer of comedy to it. That's where Fallout has always shined, setting it apart from the rest. Arguments to make it more of a irradiated bomb crater to just explore worry a lot of us.