I think FO4 is taking a step in the right direction.

[DehOtherGuy]

I'm probably going to get oodles of flak for saying this, but I'm liking where Bethesda's going with Fallout 4, at least more than where they went with Fallout 3 (Which I personally enjoyed, but I understand the hate for it). Here are a few details that I liked.

-Bethesda's apparently going to work more on branching/overlapping quests, and wants the game to be able to deal with failures in quests instead of forcing the player to save spam. Whether or not quests should have dead end fail states or not is up for debate, and we'll have to see how well Bethesda pulls these quests off, but I think it's a step in the right direction, even if Bethesda's writing isn't as good as that of other FO games.

-There will be scaling, but the ranges will depend on the area, and are set up so that there are actually areas that you will get demolished in, provided you aren't ready for that area.

-Fallout 3 did both stat based and FPS combat pretty badly. I don't know a lot about how stats will work in FO4, but I know that they're working to refine combat so that it feels better than in FO3. Bethesda's FPS approach is definitely still controversial, but if they're going to add FPS combat, they might as well do it right.

-For those who felt that FO3 had a lackluster selection of weapons, FO4 will have over 50 base weapons with over 700 parts to customize those weapons with.

There's more, but I think those are some of the more notable details. Whatever your view on Bethesda or FO3/4 is, again, I personally think FO4 is taking a step in the right direction, however big or small that step might be to you guys.

 

[ChildServices]

Aaand exactly what I said on the other thread you posted this on:

>mfw believing a single thing Todd Howard says

 

[Walpknut]

THis only works if the Fallout franchise was ENTIRELY and EXCLUSIVELY combat oriented. THe changes they have done have made the pacifist and alternate quest solution rather limited, probably even more limited than in Fallout 3. They have forced a voice and a backstory on you even more intrusively than in FO3. Te combat was improved and it added some interesting extra things, but in the process they carelessly destroyed the very core of the Fallout series.

 

[fred2]

Honestly you have to be blind or stupid, not to see that FO4 is a vast improvement over FO3.. although I wouldn't call it the "right direction" just much better aRPG.

 

[Courier]

It does look better than Fallout 3, but it isn't rare for developers to lie about their games this early on. I wouldn't be surprised if it is better than Fallout 3 but that's really setting the bar kind of low. The question is whether or not it will be better than New Vegas.

 

[Yamu]

In some ways, it's bound to be. In others... well, far be it from an NMA moderator to make cynical predictions or anything.

 

[Courier]

i'm trying to be optimistic just let me pretend please

 

[Marionettetc]

I'm probably going to get oodles of flak for saying this, but I'm liking where Bethesda's going with Fallout 4, at least more than where they went with Fallout 3 (Which I personally enjoyed, but I understand the hate for it). Here are a few details that I liked.

-Bethesda's apparently going to work more on branching/overlapping quests, and wants the game to be able to deal with failures in quests instead of forcing the player to save spam. Whether or not quests should have dead end fail states or not is up for debate, and we'll have to see how well Bethesda pulls these quests off, but I think it's a step in the right direction, even if Bethesda's writing isn't as good as that of other FO games.

-There will be scaling, but the ranges will depend on the area, and are set up so that there are actually areas that you will get demolished in, provided you aren't ready for that area.

-Fallout 3 did both stat based and FPS combat pretty badly. I don't know a lot about how stats will work in FO4, but I know that they're working to refine combat so that it feels better than in FO3. Bethesda's FPS approach is definitely still controversial, but if they're going to add FPS combat, they might as well do it right.

-For those who felt that FO3 had a lackluster selection of weapons, FO4 will have over 50 base weapons with over 700 parts to customize those weapons with.

There's more, but I think those are some of the more notable details. Whatever your view on Bethesda or FO3/4 is, again, I personally think FO4 is taking a step in the right direction, however big or small that step might be to you guys.

No one on this board has an issue with people being optimistic or positive about Fallout 4. Believe it or not, we don't generally go around threads insulting people who have an interest in the newer fallout games. A lot of us played Fallout 3, to varying degrees of like/dislike and it's whatever.

I personally was initially upset (we're talking 2006-2007) when I realized that a new Fallout game was coming out that didn't involve any of the original writers but it's whatever. We've all made peace with the fact the Franchise is being continued by Bethesda.

I think the main thing we have an issue with is that when people register on this board just to tell "us" how much better Fallout 3 is than the old games, or "I can't believe anyone wouldn't like Fallout 3!!!!" <-----Literally every other post.

So that's to respond to your comment about "getting flakk". There's even been minimal in this thread.

To respond to what you're saying about Fallout 4's improvements, I say sure. These changes personally don't excite me or instill me with optimism about the game but I'm glad other people will enjoy the game.