Skills in Fallout 4: What We Know

[SMBComix]

If you can't seriously see the OCEAN of differences between New vegas and FO3 then you might not be a very observant person at all. They are so obvious I kind of thought people notcied. Guess I over estimate people sometimes.

I don't appreciate being called an unobservant idiot, thanks. It couldn't be farther from the truth. There are differences, yes, but not enough or big enough to write home about. Just the same changes/improvements that typically come with a series over time. I'm pretty sure it wasn't just Obsidian behind most of the design choices in that game, since they were basically hired by Bethesda to make it so we wouldn't be in a Fallout drought while they were dreaming up Skyrim and Fallout 4.

The only ones who even attack in general are the beth fanboys

Excuse me? I haven't seen anything like that at all. If anything, it's the INTERPLAY fanboys that do the attacking!

that come here to tell us to think like them and just accept what there is with a smile

Sounds a bit like you're taking someone giving you some advice on stress relief and blowing it out of proportion.

If you like it that's fine

On NMA? Hah, lies.

tell us why, we might not agree or even see your point

After all my attempts, this isn't even a "might not," it's a guaranteed "won't."

the moment you kids start with the "Oh my god, you just want isometric and you are living in the past" shit is when we lose any kind of interest in respecting your opinion.

There was never any interest in the first place. You ask us why just so you can rip apart our reasons and call us stupid, brainless Bethfags or whatever the new insult is. Doesn't matter how much I tell you I enjoy the classic titles, you STILL do it.

Specially since I didn't play Fallout 1 and 2 when they came out, but I can still respect a franchise's genre when I get into it.

I was under the impression the genre was RPG. That can take on many forms, and I prefer the current one over the old one even though the old one is still good and solid.

I play a lot of different types of games so I don't have this weird compulsion where I just want to see the exact same thing in every game, when I am playign a JRPG I expect a specific set of things set by the genre and the franchise, I won't ask Shin Megami Tense Nocturne to turn into a Brawler, the same way I don't demand Bayonetta become turn based.

Even if those changes will suit the game better? I'll be honest, while it was a solid system, I just can't see how the turn-based combat in Fallout 1 and 2 was in any way beneficial to the setting or atmosphere of the originals. There was nothing in the original games more immersion-breaking than that system. That's why I only do lore-friendly playthroughs with them -- I don't have the sense of freedom I get from the current titles.

Variety is the spice of life, and when people peddle the idea of homogenization as "evolution" of the medium it just pisses me off.

I don't really see this as homogenization. Homogenization is when you take the various character classes in World of Warcraft and make them all functionally identical to the point where the only differences are lore and aesthetics. In Fallout, there are no character classes -- there's just one simple wanderer running around getting him/herself into and out of all sorts of trouble using whatever he or she has at hand. If there was ever any homogenization, it occurred during the development of Fallout 1 because even with the skill system, you're still only playing one type of character.

 

[fred2]

So...maybe when leveling up, you gain "perk points" that make different things happen?

Pretty much, however, I was trying to find a different comparison, preferably a visual one, that wouldn't result in an immediate gag reflex among the more single minded NMAers.

[..pointless rant..] I mean, who today could handle percentages anyway, you'd probably need a degree in mathematics to properly read those.

Are you suggesting that changing the skill system from percentage to points will dumb it down?

FYI: wasteland 2 --the second installment of the spiritual predecessor to fallout, recently developed by inxile with most of the original team on board, and aimed at cRPG players who loved both-- has a point based system.

I still don't think the skills thing is that big of a deal. In fact, I think it'll probably help the game in the long run. We'll have to see when it comes out though, no use making judgements right now before we've even played the damn thing.

While I try not to judge and entertain myself by playing at what if scenarios. Lets not kid ourselves, skill system and its use in dialogues/solving-quests is a big thing for pretty much everyone here, and going by TES series progression I have very little expectation on this front..

The only way for Beth to avoid wild speculation and criticism is by getting ahead of it, and explain the supposed changes in a dev blog.. like best of devs do.

 

[Walpknut]

I don't appreciate being called an unobservant idiot, thanks. It couldn't be farther from the truth. There are differences, yes, but not enough or big enough to write home about. Just the same changes/improvements that typically come with a series over time. I'm pretty sure it wasn't just Obsidian behind most of the design choices in that game, since they were basically hired by Bethesda to make it so we wouldn't be in a Fallout drought while they were dreaming up Skyrim and Fallout 4.

Wow, you are pretty unobservant. Also Obsidian was given year and a half to complete the game and Joh Sawyer was pretty specific with the things he wanted changing, they only design choice they probably had to keep for Bethesda's sake and the sake of getting done in time was VATS and the FPS gameplay.

Excuse me? I haven't seen anything like that at all. If anything, it's the INTERPLAY fanboys that do the attacking!

First off, no one likes Interplay here, we like Fallout and Black Isle RPGs, everyone here hates Interplay.
ALso Half of your messages have been bitching about how yo uare the special 1% special fan and everybody is a poopy head and a hipster if they disagree with you. That's like what most FO3 fanboys that register here to bitch about how we don't like FO3 do. And those are the ones that get made fun of.

Sounds a bit like you're taking someone giving you some advice on stress relief and blowing it out of proportion.

Well your Advice is dumb, offensive and preposterous. So what did you expect?

On NMA? Hah, lies.

One of our admins likes Fo3 and some other regular members like it just fine, the only ones that people have problem withare the ones who register to bitch about how NMA doesn't like FO3.

After all my attempts, this isn't even a "might not," it's a guaranteed "won't."

Because your attempts are kind of dumb in a very self important and futile task. Hint, you get nothing by calling anyone who disagrees with you a hipster to begin with.

There was never any interest in the first place. You ask us why just so you can rip apart our reasons and call us stupid, brainless Bethfags or whatever the new insult is. Doesn't matter how much I tell you I enjoy the classic titles, you STILL do it.

Because your arguments are pretty much dumb? You literary said that quality and tonal consistency are things only hipsters care about, so tell me how am I to even take half of the stuff you say as anything other than dumb?

I was under the impression the genre was RPG. That can take on many forms, and I prefer the current one over the old one even though the old one is still good and solid.

Even if those changes will suit the game better? I'll be honest, while it was a solid system, I just can't see how the turn-based combat in Fallout 1 and 2 was in any way beneficial to the setting or atmosphere of the originals. There was nothing in the original games more immersion-breaking than that system. That's why I only do lore-friendly playthroughs with them -- I don't have the sense of freedom I get from the current titles.

"Immersion breaking" Oh please, stop saying that kind of dumb buzzwords. What is more immersion breaking than immortal NPCs and killing Supermutants with a 10mm gun?
How does the first person shooting benefitted Fallout? Since the switch there have been nothing but simplifications and removal of things from the game, no Dumb character dialogue options, FO3 didn't even have multiple endigns for settlements and the writting in 3 was atrocious. What was exactly gained? Some superficial sense of "immurshunz" from it being a shooter? The negatives outweight the positives by a land slide. New Vegas fixed a bunch of that, but Bethesda doesn't even seem to have cared. So tell me how is this switch "better for it"?
Are you saying that Bethesda knows better than the original creators on what fits the series they created better? They aren't even being creative, they are just doing the same game the ydid before. TES.

I don't really see this as homogenization. Homogenization is when you take the various character classes in World of Warcraft and make them all functionally identical to the point where the only differences are lore and aesthetics. In Fallout, there are no character classes -- there's just one simple wanderer running around getting him/herself into and out of all sorts of trouble using whatever he or she has at hand. If there was ever any homogenization, it occurred during the development of Fallout 1 because even with the skill system, you're still only playing one type of character.

Wow. It completely flew over your head.

 

[Reaper Shackal]

I don't understand this war we're having with SMB, Fred, and I think some others as of late.

I think I'll make a thread elsewhere on this topic as to not derail this thread, and I'll link it here. Please wait for that thread instead of replying to this.

http://www.nma-fallout.com/showthre...neral-Consensus-Debates&p=4059597#post4059597

 

[Practicat]

I don't appreciate being called an unobservant idiot, thanks. It couldn't be farther from the truth. There are differences, yes, but not enough or big enough to write home about. Just the same changes/improvements that typically come with a series over time. I'm pretty sure it wasn't just Obsidian behind most of the design choices in that game, since they were basically hired by Bethesda to make it so we wouldn't be in a Fallout drought while they were dreaming up Skyrim and Fallout 4.

Wow, you are pretty unobservant. Also Obsidian was given year and a half to complete the game and Joh Sawyer was pretty specific with the things he wanted changing, they only design choice they probably had to keep for Bethesda's sake and the sake of getting done in time was VATS and the FPS gameplay.

Excuse me? I haven't seen anything like that at all. If anything, it's the INTERPLAY fanboys that do the attacking!

First off, no one likes Interplay here, we like Fallout and Black Isle RPGs, everyone here hates Interplay.
ALso Half of your messages have been bitching about how yo uare the special 1% special fan and everybody is a poopy head and a hipster if they disagree with you. That's like what most FO3 fanboys that register here to bitch about how we don't like FO3 do. And those are the ones that get made fun of.

Sounds a bit like you're taking someone giving you some advice on stress relief and blowing it out of proportion.

Well your Advice is dumb, offensive and preposterous. So what did you expect?

On NMA? Hah, lies.

One of our admins likes Fo3 and some other regular members like it just fine, the only ones that people have problem withare the ones who register to bitch about how NMA doesn't like FO3.

After all my attempts, this isn't even a "might not," it's a guaranteed "won't."

Because your attempts are kind of dumb in a very self important and futile task. Hint, you get nothing by calling anyone who disagrees with you a hipster to begin with.

There was never any interest in the first place. You ask us why just so you can rip apart our reasons and call us stupid, brainless Bethfags or whatever the new insult is. Doesn't matter how much I tell you I enjoy the classic titles, you STILL do it.

Because your arguments are pretty much dumb? You literary said that quality and tonal consistency are things only hipsters care about, so tell me how am I to even take half of the stuff you say as anything other than dumb?

I was under the impression the genre was RPG. That can take on many forms, and I prefer the current one over the old one even though the old one is still good and solid.

Even if those changes will suit the game better? I'll be honest, while it was a solid system, I just can't see how the turn-based combat in Fallout 1 and 2 was in any way beneficial to the setting or atmosphere of the originals. There was nothing in the original games more immersion-breaking than that system. That's why I only do lore-friendly playthroughs with them -- I don't have the sense of freedom I get from the current titles.

"Immersion breaking" Oh please, stop saying that kind of dumb buzzwords. What is more immersion breaking than immortal NPCs and killing Supermutants with a 10mm gun?
How does the first person shooting benefitted Fallout? Since the switch there have been nothing but simplifications and removal of things from the game, no Dumb character dialogue options, FO3 didn't even have multiple endigns for settlements and the writting in 3 was atrocious. What was exactly gained? Some superficial sense of "immurshunz" from it being a shooter? The negatives outweight the positives by a land slide. New Vegas fixed a bunch of that, but Bethesda doesn't even seem to have cared. So tell me how is this switch "better for it"?
Are you saying that Bethesda knows better than the original creators on what fits the series they created better? They aren't even being creative, they are just doing the same game the ydid before. TES.

I don't really see this as homogenization. Homogenization is when you take the various character classes in World of Warcraft and make them all functionally identical to the point where the only differences are lore and aesthetics. In Fallout, there are no character classes -- there's just one simple wanderer running around getting him/herself into and out of all sorts of trouble using whatever he or she has at hand. If there was ever any homogenization, it occurred during the development of Fallout 1 because even with the skill system, you're still only playing one type of character.

Wow. It completely flew over your head.

I wish people would get their point across without being so cynical. Just say you acknowledge what they're saying, but disagree and explain why without insulting anyone.

 

[TheGreatCornholio]

Ok lets drop the "hipster" / "fanboy" stuff and get back to skills

If a combination of perks and SPECIAL is replacing skills would it not be possible to have the various skill checks but have them require a perk or special point instead of a skill number? Example instead of needing 50 speech points to pass a check you need 5 charisma or maybe a speech related perk. Wouldnt this be more or less the same thing? The checks would still be dependent on how you allocate what youre given to build your character.

 

[TheGreatCornholio]

I don't appreciate being called an unobservant idiot, thanks. It couldn't be farther from the truth. There are differences, yes, but not enough or big enough to write home about. Just the same changes/improvements that typically come with a series over time. I'm pretty sure it wasn't just Obsidian behind most of the design choices in that game, since they were basically hired by Bethesda to make it so we wouldn't be in a Fallout drought while they were dreaming up Skyrim and Fallout 4.

Wow, you are pretty unobservant. Also Obsidian was given year and a half to complete the game and Joh Sawyer was pretty specific with the things he wanted changing, they only design choice they probably had to keep for Bethesda's sake and the sake of getting done in time was VATS and the FPS gameplay.

Excuse me? I haven't seen anything like that at all. If anything, it's the INTERPLAY fanboys that do the attacking!

First off, no one likes Interplay here, we like Fallout and Black Isle RPGs, everyone here hates Interplay.
ALso Half of your messages have been bitching about how yo uare the special 1% special fan and everybody is a poopy head and a hipster if they disagree with you. That's like what most FO3 fanboys that register here to bitch about how we don't like FO3 do. And those are the ones that get made fun of.

Sounds a bit like you're taking someone giving you some advice on stress relief and blowing it out of proportion.

Well your Advice is dumb, offensive and preposterous. So what did you expect?

On NMA? Hah, lies.

One of our admins likes Fo3 and some other regular members like it just fine, the only ones that people have problem withare the ones who register to bitch about how NMA doesn't like FO3.

After all my attempts, this isn't even a "might not," it's a guaranteed "won't."

Because your attempts are kind of dumb in a very self important and futile task. Hint, you get nothing by calling anyone who disagrees with you a hipster to begin with.

There was never any interest in the first place. You ask us why just so you can rip apart our reasons and call us stupid, brainless Bethfags or whatever the new insult is. Doesn't matter how much I tell you I enjoy the classic titles, you STILL do it.

Because your arguments are pretty much dumb? You literary said that quality and tonal consistency are things only hipsters care about, so tell me how am I to even take half of the stuff you say as anything other than dumb?

I was under the impression the genre was RPG. That can take on many forms, and I prefer the current one over the old one even though the old one is still good and solid.

Even if those changes will suit the game better? I'll be honest, while it was a solid system, I just can't see how the turn-based combat in Fallout 1 and 2 was in any way beneficial to the setting or atmosphere of the originals. There was nothing in the original games more immersion-breaking than that system. That's why I only do lore-friendly playthroughs with them -- I don't have the sense of freedom I get from the current titles.

"Immersion breaking" Oh please, stop saying that kind of dumb buzzwords. What is more immersion breaking than immortal NPCs and killing Supermutants with a 10mm gun?
How does the first person shooting benefitted Fallout? Since the switch there have been nothing but simplifications and removal of things from the game, no Dumb character dialogue options, FO3 didn't even have multiple endigns for settlements and the writting in 3 was atrocious. What was exactly gained? Some superficial sense of "immurshunz" from it being a shooter? The negatives outweight the positives by a land slide. New Vegas fixed a bunch of that, but Bethesda doesn't even seem to have cared. So tell me how is this switch "better for it"?
Are you saying that Bethesda knows better than the original creators on what fits the series they created better? They aren't even being creative, they are just doing the same game the ydid before. TES.

I don't really see this as homogenization. Homogenization is when you take the various character classes in World of Warcraft and make them all functionally identical to the point where the only differences are lore and aesthetics. In Fallout, there are no character classes -- there's just one simple wanderer running around getting him/herself into and out of all sorts of trouble using whatever he or she has at hand. If there was ever any homogenization, it occurred during the development of Fallout 1 because even with the skill system, you're still only playing one type of character.

Wow. It completely flew over your head.

I wish people would get their point across without being so cynical. Just say you acknowledge what they're saying, but disagree and explain why without insulting anyone.

FUCK YOU SCUMBAG!!!!!!!!

j/k youre absolutely correct

 

[fred2]

The problem is that there is no new info, so unless someone takes the challenge and try to figure out a way in which this can be a good thing, the only thing left is rant about RPGs-aRPGs progression into mainstream (e.g. Morrowind->Oblivion->Skyrim)

Luckily FO4 is coming soon so hopefully we will see more info on this topic soon-ish.

 

[Walpknut]

What needs further explanation? The last bit? He seems to think that I am talking about classes in RPGs when what I am talkign about is homogenization on the medium. Every big game that comes out nowadays has to be a shooter, has to have an overly "Dramatic" story, be "cinematic" and a gruff voiced protagonist. Fallout didn't need any of those things before, they also add nothing to th genre, which is why they changed it to another genre, the idea that we have to just accept it is kind of a bizarre show of pesimism disguising itself as optimism, like we can't hope for something better or voice ones opinion if you aren't being "possitive" about "what you get"? That's not how Movies and literature are discussed, why do people use that on videogames?

 

[TorontoReign]

Can we stop the double posting and quote pyramids? You noobs need to learn proper netiquette. If you want your arguments to be taken seriously, convey them properly.

 

[Madbringer]

Are you suggesting that changing the skill system from percentage to points will dumb it down?

FYI: wasteland 2 --the second installment of the spiritual predecessor to fallout, recently developed by inxile with most of the original team on board, and aimed at cRPG players who loved both-- has a point based system.

Yes. Not the change from system A to system B, to be clear - just the mechanics of both. Also, I don't care one single droplet of a spit about Wasteland, one or two.

 

[fred2]

Well I always thought that USA five-point latter grade system was silly compared to our 0-100, and don't get me started about their date format and... well I digress.

Please do tell why replacing the FO3\FO:NV skill system scale of 1-100 with 1-10 will for example, will "dumb down" the gameplay. Also you don't need to care about wasteland, only to understand the reason behind its mechanics..

what I am talkign about is homogenization on the medium.

Nope wrong thread.

 

[Walpknut]

Except it's relevant to the topic at hand. Sorry bud, actually try to form an argument that isn't just strawmen and personal attacks.

 

[The_Time_Master]

Please do tell why replacing the FO3\FO:NV skill system scale of 1-100 with 1-10 will for example, will "dumb down" the gameplay. Also you don't need to care about wasteland, only to understand the reason behind its mechanics..

A change in mechanics.

With FO1/2 mechanics allowing skills with 200%, this skews things a bit, but it does apply well for FO3 and FO:NV, so please be gentle

Skill magazines.

If you only have a skill rating in explosives of 19, you can read a magazine that grants your +10 skill in explosives to bullshit Easy Pete to help in Goodsprings. That makes (some) sense from an RPG standpoint that you read through a magazine to get some buzzwords ling, that helps you on or narrative.

If your skill with explosives is only 9, even though you learned a few buzzwords, you still can't bullshit Easy Pete to help in fighting the powdergangers.

When dealing with someone on a check based on a 1 - 100% skill range, it allows you a more scalar check against someone trying to BS their way past you. If someone tried to tell me the dilithium crystals in the flux capacitors of the server were failing, and I needed to grant them root access to the server to prevent meltdown, I would lock them out of my server immediately (not only for mixing multiple memes / sci-fi movies) for not speaking the accepted lingo. If they said that they needed access to root, it would have to go against a high science skill check [95%] against rootkit subversion via escalated priority processing due to the new chroot exploit in RobCo software / Charisma check (I know the name of your boss and you are afraid he will actually call your boss).

If the same scenario goes against a Science Level 4 check, that is removing some of the story drama to ease gameplay. It may be thematically the same for the amount of XP the player needs to earn for Science Level 4 perk, but it removes the plot if the check is against SL4 vs Science 95% with speech option, boosted by Programmer's Digest to add some buzzwords. There's missing narration/exposition that can give the player more background about the game, replaces with a level system that doesn't have to explain the context of the actions. (Not saying that setting an arbitrary level of 45 Picklock makes any useful sense unless there's some exposition tied to it, but generally any leveled skilled/perk system that glosses over common actions does just that - glosses over them, removing immersion).


Or maybe I'm stuck in the past. Fuck if I know anything other than I'm sad that skills are replaced with perk levels. I'll just hack the game differently.

/typed while drunk, hope it made sense!

 

[fred2]

That argument essentially boils down to "a 100 point system is more flexible then 10 point system", following that logic a "1000 point system will be more flexible then 100 point system", so why aren't we using a larger scale with 0.1% skill increments? -- Because its not the size, but how you use it.

I can't recall if there were any skill checks in FO3/FO:NV that were not rounded up to 5 e.g. >63. But will offer Wasteland 2 as a recent example that use a 10 point system and books, that works fine (although It did had a couple of pointless skills and books did made sense at all)

Also PoE used a 10 point skill checks, and had much less skills compared to FO or W2, still IMO not only it wasn't dumb down, but using its small number of stats\skill it provided a more richer set of viable options that added a lot of verity to gameplay.

Or maybe I'm stuck in the past. Fuck if I know anything other than I'm sad that skills are replaced with perk levels. I'll just hack the game differently.

/typed while drunk, hope it made sense!

To be honest, I am still hopping that skills didn't made it into the presentation or just moved to perks without much change. Because despite my best effort I am pretty certain that if streamlined for aRPG crowd, it will loose many of unique elements I remember it fondly for.

Also I wish I could compose my thoughts in English at least as sensibly as you are in your drunk state...

 

[Practicat]

I don't know whether this has been posted, but in one of Gopher's videos, he proposes the presence of "hidden skills" affected by perks. I would be fine with that, considering the traditional Fallout skill system does have its drawbacks - Kill raiders, become a master at hacking terminals.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOOz_fHHt0o

 

[Walpknut]

Are you capable of coming up with arguments that dont rely entirely on absurdist reductions and strawmen?

 

[Battlecross]

I don't know whether this has been posted, but in one of Gopher's videos, he proposes the presence of "hidden skills" affected by perks. I would be fine with that, considering the traditional Fallout skill system does have its drawbacks - Kill raiders, become a master at hacking terminals.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOOz_fHHt0o

Yeah the previous system had a lot of drawbacks, I'm hoping this new system is an improvement.

 

[dufake]

I don't mind the old system. Do you want to picklock 5000 times to become a locksmith? I had it enough in Skyrim.

 

[Battlecross]

I don't mind the old system. Do you want to picklock 5000 times to become a locksmith? I had it enough in Skyrim.

It makes more sense logically to do something to level it up, rather than not being able to do something at a higher level without a total respec because you're locked into a certain path.