Fallout 76: E3 Trailer

[Gizmojunk]

doesn't the first one only work with fixt? but anyway, these are kind of cool ways to utilize these skills, i agree, but they are just not necessary most of the time (e.g. why would i bother with stealing ammo or meds if most enemies won't even live long enough to use them). i can't get myself to use these tricks being aware that i can just go in there guns blazing and get the same results.

Shouldn't it depend on the character, rather than the player? Should the game not offer options to suit a character's own personal preference for dealing with a situation? Think of the archetypes... In Conan 2, We know that Conan would handle it with a sword, but would Malak (the jewel thief) choose the 1:1, hit for hit sword battle to handle his problems? Not when he could run, or could backstab he wouldn't.

Have you watched TORD's let's play of Fallout? He plays a jinxed sociopath PC who is so clumsy that whenever she gets a new gun, it breaks in the first combat round. Not every PC would go in guns blazing; and even those who would, might—have crippled arms or be blind at the time. A diplomat isn't likely to resort to handguns as a first choice.

to be sure that my stand is clear: i said it was a good idea to merge the medicine skills. if it was actually as impactful as you presented, it would be really cool but it's not.

The problem with merging—skills, attributes, traits, perks, etc... Is that you further homogenize the possible PCs that can be made with the system. If you merge Melee Weapons with Unarmed Combat, then in the game, a skilled swordsman and a skilled boxer are effectively equals in each other's preferred sport, because to be skilled in either, is to be skilled in both—equally.

In Fallout, most of the adventurers will have basic medical experience, but very few will be surgeons. Merging the medical skills makes them all surgeons for free, where before, they would have had to commit to a skill path and become a doctor instead of a sniper, or negotiator, or repair specialist. With merged skills, there is no longer a distinction between Doctor and Nurse... there is just 20% vs 50% —medics. That eliminates specialization. That means there can be no 95% skilled nurses... they must all be top notch medical doctors, instead of expert in their limited area of expertise.

 

[Crni Vuk]

So companies must stick to design forever and NEVER EVER have another creative thought or....? What? "Hey were going try something different and all the people buying our game means that we probably did the right thing with that decision, lets keep doing it" Im sorry but game sequels change all the time be it big or small. Being static is frankly boring and is what happens when you get the same CoD game every fucking year.

If you ask me, you kinda shoot your self in the foot with this argument.

I mean yeah ... if only that's what Bethesda would have done, trying something different for a change. I had this kind of argument now a thousand times already. A 'shift' from one genre to another is NOT trying something different, particularly when this shift is happening in to a gameplay that can be described as a safe bet, because first person and real time is extremly popular these days among gamers. But there is actually more, because funnily enough, if Bethesda would have actually made Fallout 3 a turn based top down game, they would have really tried something different for a change, that's strictly speaking from their and their fans perspective. Think about it, Bethesda would have tried something similar to this with Fallout 3:

I can imagine the ... bitching disapointment in their community about the 'shift' in gameplay and visuals.


When they made Fallout 3, all they have done is giving the Fallout franchise the Oblivion paint job and applying a formula on Fallout which they used at least since Morrowind, I would even argue Todd Howard is only applying the same formula he already used with Terminator Future Schock and only refined it over the years - A First Person Shooter that was actually pretty interesting for its time, with a relatively open map, indoor/outdoor gameplay and items, seriously it's inredible how close Fallout 3 and Terminator Future Schock are ... it also had exploding cars when you shoot them.

So in that sense, you could make the argument Bethesda actually sticked to their design forever ... definetly since the 1990s which is like forever in gaming terms.

 

[Hassknecht]

It's weird how they could do vehicles back then, but could never get them to work again.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Terminator Future Schock or Fallout 3?

 

[mef]

Shouldn't it depend on the character, rather than the player?

of course it should. i agree with you that a good rpg should present the player with many different ways to handle a situation and many different paths to develop a character. and fallout does that but it's not completely well-balanced and fair.

If you merge Melee Weapons with Unarmed Combat, then in the game, a skilled swordsman and a skilled boxer are effectively equals in each other's preferred sport, because to be skilled in either, is to be skilled in both—equally.

In Fallout, most of the adventurers will have basic medical experience, but very few will be surgeons. Merging the skills makes them all surgeons for free

you're right, that would be logical but the game system also have to consider the gameplay itself. that's why there are skills "small guns" and "energy weapons" and a character who can shoot rat's balls off from a mile away with a 10mm pistol shoots themselves in the face while trying to use a laser pistol (i don't really like that idea myself, but it's just an example)

 

[Hassknecht]

Terminator Future Schock or Fallout 3?

Terminator, of course. It was their apex game in many ways

 

[Gizmojunk]

So companies must stick to design forever and NEVER EVER have another creative thought or....?

Of course not, but if they make something fresh and new... they should call it something fresh and new. If Bethesda made Elder Scrolls Six, and it played like Fallout Shelter, or like Unreal Tournament, would it matter that it still had the same races, and character mechanics of TES? Would they be justified in calling it TES6—to TES5 players expecting a new sequel? What if it were instead... a graphic adventure, that played out like an interactive novel, or Gabriel Knight style adventure set in Tamriel?

There is nothing wrong with making any of these examples... except calling any of them Elder Scrolls: VI

 

[Crni Vuk]

Angry Elder Scrolls ... like Angry Birds, but with ... Scrolls!

 

[Gizmojunk]

you're right, that would be logical but the game system also have to consider the gameplay itself. that's why there are skills "small guns" and "energy weapons" and a character who can shoot rat's balls off from a mile away with a 10mm pistol shoots themselves in the face while trying to use a laser pistol (i don't really like that idea myself, but it's just an example)

I was never a fan of broad catch-all skills, as you see in Fallout, but as it is... The skill for aiming a kinetic projectile rifle is not the same as aiming a laser or plasma based rifle—minigun, or a rocket. In this respect it is at least delineated across technology, and is not a generic 'Guns' skill. I always thought Flamers should be a separate skill; and the same for explosives. It just annoys, in the same way as seeing a game lump axes into the Blunt weapons category.

My impression of Fallout has always been that none of the PC's skills (not even Doctor) are formal; that they are all the pinch-hitter —more or less— self-taught loose equivalents of a jack-of-all-trades adventurer. Meaning that no matter how high the skill level, they should not be a match for the formally trained. This doesn't actually play out in the game though.

 

[mef]

i'd try to divide it into more skills, like pistols, smgs, rifles, shotguns, heavy weapons. then game would be more fair as combat skills would be more spread. just my little design idea
now a combat-oriented character can just pack into one skill the whole game and get their way, shouldn't be like this

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

Van Buren would have overhauled the SPECIAL system from Fallout 1 and 2.
From what I recall some skills would be split such as speech into lying and another one, and the firearms skills would perhaps be merged.
But in order to become at certain weapon types the player would have to choose skill related perks and the drawback of being proficient at one weapon type is that the player would be less capable at other ones. So being good at using shotgun weapons would mean that you be terrible at using an automatic rifle type of a sniper rifle type.

 

[TerminallyChill]

@Supreme Shah Ismail Make no mistake, I have no problem with you or your opinion. In fact, I actually agree with half of the stuff you say. The thing is, you're making a complete joke of yourself by acting like you understand concepts you clearly don't, and your reasoning is awful. I will call people out on that.

Contrary to popular belief, playing video games as an end user doesn't automatically grant you expert status on all things related to entertainment software. While you tried your best to sound authoritative in these posts, you unfortunately aren't fooling a developer. It's obvious to me you aren't familiar with the idea of gameplay continuity in sequels, so I will try my best to spell it out in the simplest terms I can.

There's a reason the classic community loves New Vegas so much but despises Fallout 3. Video game genres are not like categories in other disciplines such as film and literature. Whether you're watching a horror movie or a rom-com, the basic user/media interaction remains the same at the end of the day. You sit in front of a screen and passively watch what occurs. Interactive software however, isn't that uniform.

The decisions you would make in a turn-based strategy game aren't even comparable to that of a platformer. One is going to involve resource management and route planning, while the other is testing your reflexes and spacial awareness. Any developer who knows what the fuck they are doing, (and is in the business for the right reasons,) understands that in a sequel to an established interactive title, the single most important thing you must preserve are the types of decisions made.

In Fallout, Fallout 2, and New Vegas, the player mainly focuses on making choices about their character's statistics as well as the direction of the narrative. Conversely, in Fallouts 3 and 4, the player is far more concerned with exploring new locations and collecting items. While neither of these gameplay loops are inherently bad, a problem does arise when you try to replace one with the other. This is why people are acting like 'obsessive haters', and to an extent are treating you like an idiot. (Which I know you are not.) Bethesda continually commits industry sin without backlash... for some reason.

 

[Norzan]

because sequels aren't static? Like maybe its not a racing game but the newest zelda game differs quite a bit from previous entry's. Bioshock 1 and infinite are very different games. Almost like developers change over time and so do design priorities? Also I never said it wasnt a poor decision not to include them but a minor and again optional customization choice that was actually probably more interestingly implemented in new vegas than 1 or 2 isn't the end of the world. Was it a bad decision? Yeah. Was it the removal of a whole system? No, unless you consider removing gender options or a singular skill the removal of a whole system which its not.

They were still removed for no reason and you saying it's not a big deal that they were removed is my big issue. Made even worse when you called it a "nitpick", which is one of the laziest ways to "counter" an argument.

Bad, really bad examples. Bioshock 1 and Infinite are actually really similar. They are both FPS, have very similar guns and plasmids. Only thing different in Breath of the Wild compared to the previous games is the open world, everything else is pretty much the same. Collecting upgrades, completing dungeons and defeating bosses. Heck, one could see Breath of the Wild as a 3D version of the first Legend of Zelda. The core is still the same as before in all of these games.

Fallout 3, 4 and New Vegas don't have the same core as the first two games. They are too radically different from the first two games. And that's a big problem to a lot of people because it can be alienating as hell. And this is coming from someone who loves New Vegas.

And i would bet the only reason Fallout 3 is even a FPS is because Bethesda are lazy pricks and decided to just reuse their gameplay from Oblivion. Hence why people call Fallout 3 "Oblivion with guns".

 

[TerminallyChill]

@Gizmojunk @mef @The Dutch Ghost Ultimately, it's irrelevant how specific the skills offered in an RPG actually are. A phenomenal game can include four of them and an awful game could have hundreds. What it comes down to is how well each individual action is implemented into the game world. A well made RPG will utilize skills in roughly equal amounts, while a sloppy one will see some abilities greatly exceed each other in usefulness. I've seen a lot of stupid arguments in defense of Fallout's bad skills, like that it helps add 'variety' or 'realism'. The fact of the matter is, any piece of interactive media eventually boils down to making choices. The more interesting these choices, the better the experience. In an RPG, when every skill is just as useful as the last, choosing between them is difficult. The trade-off is not obvious, and therefore enjoyable. However, when everyone knows that the Traps skill is only ever used in a few very specific contexts, the decision not to pick it is extremely easy when other universally useful skills like Small Guns exist. This is a boring choice for players to make, and makes the game worse as a whole.

 

[MPPlantOfficial]

...when everyone knows that the Traps skill is only ever used in a few very specific contexts, t

Hmmm.... I can imagine Traps working in conjunction with Outdoorsman by implementing a mandatory sleep/camp mechanic while travelling with the possibility of getting robbed (stimpaks, unequipped weapons, non-quest items...) That'll give you a reason to actually collect junk items to be used as noise makers or something.

Have some critters/encounters only be accessible while sleeping and have that mechanic synergize with Luck. That'll also give you a reason to select specifics paths in the map besides varying travel speeds.

 

[TerminallyChill]

Hmmm.... I can imagine Traps working in conjunction with Outdoorsman by implementing a mandatory sleep/camp mechanic while travelling with the possibility of getting robbed (stimpaks, unequipped weapons, non-quest items...) That'll give you a reason to actually collect junk items to be used as noise makers or something.

Have some critters/encounters only be accessible while sleeping and have that mechanic synergize with Luck. That'll also give you a reason to select specifics paths in the map besides varying travel speeds.

That would be one way to solve the problem, if you wanted to keep the skill in the system. The alternative would just be to remove it entirely. Either way would work just as well, although your solution would likely lead to a more complex game. At that point it's a matter of preference, though.

 

[MPPlantOfficial]

That would be one way to solve the problem, if you wanted to keep the skill in the system. The alternative would just be to remove it entirely.

Yeah I would think dedicating points in Per is enough already but have it require absurdly high like require a Per of 7 for avoiding beartraps and 8 for mines and so on. Why does traps need to be a separate skill in itself?

 

[TerminallyChill]

Yeah I would think dedicating points in Per is enough already but have it require absurdly high like require a Per of 7 for avoiding beartraps and 8 for mines and so on. Why does traps need to be a separate skill in itself?

Its inclusion would be absolutely fine if traps were a core component of the game. Unfortunately, the way Fallout's world was designed, you encounter things like dialogue and combat far more often than rigged safes. In other words, there is a clear disconnect between the character building screen and the overworld. That is bad RPG design. One of the things I give Bethesda credit for is tidying up this issue in Fallout 3. While they completely dropped the ball in new ways (stat checks), there are pretty much no skills that are objectively "bad" since each one is utilized just about equally throughout the game.

 

[mef]

One of the things I give Bethesda credit for is tidying up this issue in Fallout 3

yes, we must give them that. as for fallout 1, i would just merge traps and repair skills so the player can see traps with perception and dismantle and set them with repair skill (i'd change the name, it would be technical skills in general)

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

That is one of the things that the FNV team did. You now need a repair skill in order to deactivate or arm traps.

I guess traps would have to be part perception (to detect them) and technical skills in order to do something about them.