Fallout 4 Pre-Release Discussion [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Metro]

4k resolution screenshot:

High-res shots from the trailer: http://imgur.com/a/Wt0Ad

 

[Love]

They both seem happy.

Yeah, but Vault Boy seems happy when the 100 megaton bombs are dropping...

 

[Echo Mirage]

4k resolution screenshot:

High-res shots from the trailer: http://imgur.com/a/Wt0Ad

I guessing this is going to be the players home base. The work bench on the left has a Pipboy on it. So I would say it possibly upgradable along with weapons and perhaps armour. Or the player has to make and upgrade their own power armour instead of just looting it from the BOS.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Why do so many people think that the true essence of Fallout is about wandering in empty piles of rubble?

This is the part of Fallout 3 that raises my hackles the most. The idea that the Fallout games were all about survival when both of the original games were fucking loaded with communities rising from the ashes. In the original games you have Shady Sands turning into NCR and for some reason people are still more compelled by empty subway tunnels with growling ghouls rushing at them. "The spirit of Fallout, we've missed it."

I think you guys are conflating ideas with implementation. There is absolutely nothing wrong with making a post-apocalyptic game be about survival to a large degree, as long as its implemented well, which neither F3 nor NV were in this regard. Nor does it matter how the first two games did it, because series and franchises are allowed to evolve and do new things. If anything, I think a post-nuclear wasteland setting naturally lends itself to survival gameplay and atmosphere, the challenge is to build RPG mechanics around that without falling into the typical unchecked power and resource gain curve. FNV did a terrible job of this as pretty quickly into the game, you are drowning in weapons, ammo, money and everything else, not to mention mountains of food and drink. But the excellent Dead Money DLC was significantly better in this respect, and had the best survival feel of anything in F3/NV.

Obviously, F4 will not be that game, but imagine if a game managed to combine NV-type writing and worldbuilding with an extremely resource-barren world, where you are not pointlessly rifling through drawers and chests for stuff you don't really need, but because you are looking for your next meal, or the precious materials you need to construct your first gun. This would make exporation much more meaningful and strategic. What if you couldn't find a gun around every corner as if pre-war US had an armory in every refrigerator, but instead pretty much all guns had been destroyed/buried/out of ammo, and you had to construct your own primitive ones, based on acquiring knowledge, blueprints, materials, and setting up your own workshops. I personally would love to play such a game.

 

[Curious_Tongue]

Good writing = bored and confused tards = lost sales

Bethesda isn't chasing after a niche market, they're chasing AAA money.

 

[Curious_Tongue]

I don't think New Vegas would be much of a success if it was released as an original, standalone game.

 

[Jaesun]

Please Obsidian, get permission to use this license, and do an isometric turn-based Fallout, and do a game with this. So we can have an actual Fallout game. Instead of this fucking shit action garbage.

 

[Sykar]

'dexers just trying to be edgy saying the game looks no better than 3. Lots of reasons you can critique a Todd Howard game. Will it be popamole? Sure. But so is Witcher 3. Funny part is seeing all the Tit Witcher fan boys trying to act superior. Is the game as visually impressive as it could be? No, but does that surprise anyone?

I think it looks crap. Better than an unmodded FO3? Sure but considering how bad the graphics were with low texture resolution and shitty animations that is hardly an accomplishment and those god awful faces. What irks me even more is that nagging feeling that this is again just a rehashed Shitbryo engine albeit I could be wrong about that.
Also I prefer a good post apocalyptic cRPG with drab colors over yet another shitty mole popper. Why can't we have nice things?

Why do so many people think that the true essence of Fallout is about wandering in empty piles of rubble?

Cause that is what the retards did in FO 3 while popping dem moles.

 

[Metro]

I think it looks crap.

 

[Mech]

Please Obsidian, get permission to use this license, and do an isometric turn-based Fallout, and do a game with this. So we can have an actual Fallout game. Instead of this fucking shit action garbage.

What, Age of Decadence not good enough for you?

 

[Achiman]

At the beginning of the game, you create your character (You can only be a male in the main story), and afterward, you start the game with a blast. After the blast, you awake to see the building you are standing inside blown apart and your wife, Lydia, dead. Robots and Androids are storming the place, killing and kidnapping the people inside. You, known as "The Officer", must escape and get revenge.

Unlike Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas, you can only play as a man. This is due to the storyline requiring it. However, after the main story is over, you can have a gender change. BGS did not rule out Females for possible standalone DLC, however.

Day 1 "Director's Cut" trannification DLC

Even if this game does nothing else but this "trannification DLC" then the game will be 100% metacritic GOTYWTFBBQ must buy purchase!


If that reddit post is legit, who would bother playing through it before the 5 DLC packs are released anyway? The GOTY (read full version) edition will be 1/3 of the price, more stable and be the definitive version in 10 months or so, not like there isn't anything else to play at the moment.
I might be in the minority, but I have little to no interest to revisit these type of games (hiking simulators w/e) once I've completed them once, mainly because once you gone over the next hill, or into the next cave or explored the discovered outpost, the sense of discovery and anticipation is gone.
Also for 90 bucks for a digital game they can fuck right off. Who do they think they are COD or something?

 

[Curious_Tongue]

Please Obsidian, get permission to use this license, and do an isometric turn-based Fallout, and do a game with this. So we can have an actual Fallout game. Instead of this fucking shit action garbage.

Disregard this Obsidian.

Most of us will be happy with whatever you can cobble together from Bethesda's game.

 

[Ismaul]

Disregard this Obsidian.

Most of us will be happy with whatever you can cobble together from Bethesda's game.

Had to brofist just so I could brolapse.

 

[J_C]

If there will be turn based combat you get a better tactical view from birds eye than from FPS.

Fallout 1-2 showed that top down view doesnt add any tactics if you only control one character and not a party. Positioning meant shit in those games (except Ian shooting you in the back).

 

[Dreaad]

That's a lie! Running around a corner and waiting for the 30 enemies to follow you one at a time is tactics!

 

[undecaf]

Fallout 1-2 showed that top down view doesnt add any tactics if you only control one character and not a party.

Nah, I'm sure something could be cooked up now that it's almost 20 years since those games. I rather liked the unpredictable feeling of only getting to rely on my characterbuild and having to adapt to the AI quirks.

 

[Ismaul]

Fallout 1-2 showed that top down view doesnt add any tactics if you only control one character and not a party. Positioning meant shit in those games (except Ian shooting you in the back).

Wrong.

While it's true that positioning meant shit in Fallout 1-2, it's not because of top-down + one character. If Fallout: Tactics did anything right, it's by adding cover, crouch and prone positions, and vertical movement. Taking a sniper position on the top of a building behind cover was possible and viable.

But yeah, overall, turn-based is well suited to party control.

 

[J_C]

Fallout 1-2 showed that top down view doesnt add any tactics if you only control one character and not a party. Positioning meant shit in those games (except Ian shooting you in the back).

Wrong.

While it's true that positioning meant shit in Fallout 1-2, it's not because of top-down + one character. If Fallout: Tactics did anything right, it's by adding cover, crouch and prone positions, and vertical movement. Taking a sniper position on the top of a building behind cover was possible and viable.

But yeah, overall, turn-based is well suited to party control.

Hm, yeah, I guess you are right. If they expand on the possibilites of Fallout 1-2, then it can be ok. It's just that Fallout 1-2 was pretty basic in this regard.

 

[Doktor Best]

Fallout 1-2 showed that top down view doesnt add any tactics if you only control one character and not a party. Positioning meant shit in those games (except Ian shooting you in the back).

Wrong.

While it's true that positioning meant shit in Fallout 1-2, it's not because of top-down + one character. If Fallout: Tactics did anything right, it's by adding cover, crouch and prone positions, and vertical movement. Taking a sniper position on the top of a building behind cover was possible and viable.

But yeah, overall, turn-based is well suited to party control.

To be honest thats also possible in first person shooters which claim to be rpgs.

 

[Makabb]

Imagine Bethesda making actual Fallout game

vs

 

[Makabb]

Romance in fallout 4, this is what average beth fan wants:

Do you think Fallout 4 will include romantic interactions? Skyrim took a pretty cool step forward in introducing marriage as a system

I'm hoping Fallout 4 expands on it a bit more, and even does romance candidates in a similar way to how New Vegas handled companions; have a smaller amount of possible partners with fleshed out personalities that you have to do a moderately sized (and romantically oriented) quest for to earn their affections.


And karma should definitely be a huge factor in whether they accept you, or even stay with you. Nothing like getting dumped for blowing up a city, am I right?

 

[Cthulhu_is_love]

Romance in fallout 4, this is what average beth fan wants:

Bioware and Bethesda merge into one sentient being: gay-romance-walking-simulator confirmed

 

[Catfish]

A

Fallout 1-2 showed that top down view doesnt add any tactics if you only control one character and not a party. Positioning meant shit in those games (except Ian shooting you in the back).

Wrong.

While it's true that positioning meant shit in Fallout 1-2, it's not because of top-down + one character. If Fallout: Tactics did anything right, it's by adding cover, crouch and prone positions, and vertical movement. Taking a sniper position on the top of a building behind cover was possible and viable.

But yeah, overall, turn-based is well suited to party control.

So true. When tactics came out I kind of thought it was a spinoff with the main goal being being a proof of concept for the combat system. I seriously expected the next proper fallout to be a normal rpg but with combat from tactics thrown in.

 

[KevinV12000]

Romance in fallout 4, this is what average beth fan wants:

Bioware and Bethesda merge into one sentient being: gay-romance-walking-simulator confirmed

Gay-Romance-SJW-FreeTheSlavesFightRacism-and-walking-simulator.

All they have to do is add in the opportunity to play a male character while demanding that everyone say you're female (Suggestion: Name him "Winston") and it's the perfect game of our time.

 

[Astral Rag]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-06-05-fallout-4-high-res-screenshots-analysed

also

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-05-29-a-brief-history-of-fallout

Codex gets mentioned in that last one.