What would we like to see in Fallout 4 (impossibilities we will probably never see)

[Chromevod]

A return of hardcore mode, and revamped to be actually... well more difficult.

Children that can die/be killed. In that same vein, children who I don't want to kill. I want to have some sense of loss if a kid gets caught in the middle of a firefight.

Branching storylines that are mutually exclusive from one another and extend beyond mere alternatives for individual quests. I want another situation like with New Vegas where going past a certain point in a major faction's questline locks you out of the stories for the others.

Honestly, I think it's time to do away with the karma system entirely. It's not that it can't be an effective tool, I just don't think the kind of game Bethesda is going for can be trusted with it. Bring back the reputation system, and have that be that. Without a karma system, Bethesda may be more willing to have grey morality for more quests.

Companion quests, maybe even entire questlines dealing with companions. If done right, that would be swell.

I want to see my legs/body from the neck down when I look down.

... Let me pet the dog. An actual animation. I want this. I want it in every single game where you have a dog. I love dogs. Let me pet the dog.

 

[Gizmojunk]

Fallout 1, 2, and Tactics were 3D assets (in-house), and rendered out as sprites for the shipped game. Realtime 3D (now that everyone has integrated 3D hardware) would produce far better results than rendered sprites.

... Let me pet the dog. An actual animation. I want this. I want it in every single game where you have a dog. I love dogs. Let me pet the dog.

I bet they will have this.

I didn't think of it as dialing it back in a quality sort of way, but rather as a chronological reference.

But it is not.

FPP games came first ~in the 80's. In the 90's, two years before Fallout, Interplay shipped a first person dungeon crawler, with dual wielded weapons, that swing to attack where you click to hit opponents. Two years before that we were all playing Doom Deathmatching. The same year as Fallout 2, Interplay shipped a fully 3D TPP sword fighting title, that included full 360° player control over the weapon, force/impact determined location specific damage ~with gore textures applied to the wound, and joint by joint severing and decapitation, along with alternate animations for combatants with a missing leg.

Isometric, TPP, and FPP are just presentation modes; and developers [should] simply choose what presentation best suits their game.... Not every game is best suited by an FPP presentation; certainly not a Fallout title.

"Fallout has a look and even if we do a 3D version we're not going to change it so much that it looks unfamiliar" Feargus Urquhart

 

[Walpknut]

At one point gamers got almost brainwashed into thinking that the only acceptable presentation for games was Shooters. Funny how with more technology the medium has become so much more homogenized.

 

[PossibleCabbage]

At one point gamers got almost brainwashed into thinking that the only acceptable presentation for games was Shooters. Funny how with more technology the medium has become so much more homogenized.

Is it weird that (except for Goldeneye 64 interludes at tabletop parties back in the day, which I would try to get out of), I had never played a first or third person shooter until like 2008? I've still only played like a half-dozen such that aren't RPGs in some sense, and I still don't like shooters. How did it happen that they became the biggest thing there are in games? For the most part they're really dull.

 

[RangerBoo]

To be able to kill any and all characters, specially hateworthy characters (in Bethesda games, annoying and despicable characters are aways immortal like Raven Black Briar in Skyrim and Mayor MacCready in Fallout 3). To be able to follow a sort of "anti-hero" path where you take cruel choices with good reasoning (contrast it to blowing up Megaton for no reason). To see factions and places that are believable and interesting (contrast it to every single faction in Fallout 3). To not see the plot twisting itself into dumb situations just to create dilemmas for the sake of creating dilemmas ("someone needs to be the hero and sacrifice himself to start up the purifier!")

What is it with Beth making their most irradiating and rage inducing characters like Maven Black Briar immortal. Is like Beth knows that we want to bash those characters skulls in with a war hammer but are like "Nope! Their immortal and can't die without bugging your game! HAHAHA!" I fucking hate that.

 

[Khannis]

At one point gamers got almost brainwashed into thinking that the only acceptable presentation for games was Shooters. Funny how with more technology the medium has become so much more homogenized.

I don't think that's the case, really. Personally I think this is the right step for Fallout, I like it better that way, but that doesn't mean I want it for every game. I love Pillars of Eternity, Wasteland 2 was good, loved Neverwinter Nights, and I'm so excited for the new Torment, which I backed on KS. These are all isometric games, and they are awesome for what they are. I just think that in the case of Fallout, it worked, and worked very well. Furthermore, I'm not even a shooter player since the original CS in my teenage years, and I while I like shooter gameplay, I tire quickly of those games because only rarely does a point exist; For the most part, it's endless shooting the bad guys, no questions asked, but modern Fallout (a.k.a. New Vegas) gave it meaning. It's that mix I like, not shoehorning shooting in absolutely everything. I'm far from a Bethesda fanboy, and I loathe Fallout 3 as an RPG, but I think it did introduce some good gameplay.

But anyways, I know some people must think that way, but those new isometric games prove that an audience still exists for these new isometric games, and in some cases even remakes, like Baldur's Gate 2 Enhanced Edition. I just wouldn't want that for Fallout; I'd always hoped, and still do, that Fallout 4 was a true sequel to New Vegas, even if made by Bethesda.

But it is not.

FPP games came first ~in the 80's. In the 90's, two years before Fallout, Interplay shipped a first person dungeon crawler, with dual wielded weapons, that swing to attack where you click to hit opponents. Two years before that we were all playing Doom Deathmatching. The same year as Fallout 2, Interplay shipped a fully 3D TPP sword fighting title, that included full 360° player control over the weapon, force/impact determined location specific damage ~with gore textures applied to the wound, and joint by joint severing and decapitation, along with alternate animations for combatants with a missing leg.

Isometric, TPP, and FPP are just presentation modes; and developers [should] simply choose what presentation best suits their game.... Not every game is best suited by an FPP presentation; certainly not a Fallout title.

I meant internal chronology, of the Fallout series itself, sorry if I wasn't more clear. As for the mode best suited for a Fallout game, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that point, there's really no right answer. It's just an aspect of the change I embraced, while rejecting many others, first and foremost crappy storytelling, choice and reactivity, which I think are the most heinous crimes an RPG can ever commit.

 

[TorontoReign]

All I want is Fallout New Vegas 2. Hardcore mode. Skill checks. Consequences. Factions. Multiple endings. Companions that live and die, not lifeless robots that can't be harmed. Dialog that doesn't look like a 12 year old shat it out. Stuff like that. Less focus on cute teddy bear helmets to wear, more on story that doesn't contradict lore unless absolutely necessary, and with good reason if so.

 

[Walpknut]

New Vegas worked because the people behind it actually had passion for the older Fallouts and good RPGs in general. Bethesda doesn't. They are just focused on the one Game they always make, the only changes they make is to make it get away as much as possible of what an RPG is supposed to be, and unfortunately those games are what is considered the measuring bar for the entire genre.

 

[Presper]

I would like to see the Institute as a developed civilization with a working economy, for I can't think of any other reason why they would build and enslave androids other than for commercial purposes.

 

[Stone Cold Robert House]

I would like to see the Institute as a developed civilization with a working economy, for I can't think of any other reason why they would build and enslave androids other than for commercial purposes.

The thing with the Institute, at least from the little we know of them, is that they're so much more advanced than everybody else in the wasteland. Nobody else seems to have developed miniaturized electronics, yet they have perfectly working androids that the average person wouldn't be able to tell apart from a human. Every other robot has huge mainframes and, to generalize, serve much simpler functions (or, if they are more complex, it's because they are dedicated supercomputers like ZAX or Eden). It's better technology than even House and Big Mountain have.

It's kind of a similar situation to the Shi: they're in a completely different situation, and it's better to remove them from the storyline (like Van Buren would have done) or ignore them (like New Vegas did) than try to integrate them with the rest of the world. But obviously they can't ignore the Institute for Fallout 4 so they have to find a proper explanation for all of this.

Now you mentioned being a developed civilization, and I think that's the only sensible way to explain how successful the Institute is. They'd only have room to develop technology so far ahead if they were already incredibly prosperous. They certainly already had a huge intellectual groundwork before the war, which helps, but it appears the android technology was only fully developed fairly recently if they best Pre-War minds weren't anywhere near achieving such feat. So it would make sense for the Institute to be the biggest power in the entire region, especially considering you can't focus on creating new science if you're still trying to survive/expand.

 

[AbullSinCara]

High level inteligence and REAL characters not r3tard ones and fictional like Caesar's legion.

Vehicles:Hummer,Tank,VTOL(Vertical Take Off and Landing),all of them drivable.

No more invincible characters like Ulysses,it's plain stupid,everything of SPECIAL set to 10 to a simple character this is outrageous.

Humanoid Robots like in Fallout Tactics seriously those robots are the coolest robot designs in whole fallout series,especially the Robot Behemoth one.I think liberty prime could be a cool design but not good as the behemoth one.

Also after I saw the airship I think there will be Midwestern brotherhood in Fallout 4 they are allied with the capital wasteland BoS.

No bugs,lag,crash-after-3-minutes-of-gameplay,glitches.

Have anyone as companion if you only convince them

 

[Khannis]

New Vegas worked because the people behind it actually had passion for the older Fallouts and good RPGs in general. Bethesda doesn't. They are just focused on the one Game they always make, the only changes they make is to make it get away as much as possible of what an RPG is supposed to be, and unfortunately those games are what is considered the measuring bar for the entire genre.

I wholeheartedly agree, but I only choose to believe for the time being that some good can come out of this fourth installment still. That's sheer hope for ya. But I guess we'll see.

And yes, even more so the measuring bar after the success of Skyrim. Don't get me wrong, I played a lot of Skyrim and had a lot of fun, but a true RPG it is not. I'd call it more of an adventuring game with RPG elements.

 

[Richwizard]

Replay value.

 

[Gizmojunk]

I don't think that's the case, really. Personally I think this is the right step for Fallout, I like it better that way, but that doesn't mean I want it for every game. I love Pillars of Eternity, Wasteland 2 was good, loved Neverwinter Nights, and I'm so excited for the new Torment, which I backed on KS. These are all isometric games, and they are awesome for what they are. I just think that in the case of Fallout, it worked, and worked very well.

I don't think that it worked well at all. First off, consider why Fallout was turn based Isometric in the first place, and then (additionally) consider that FO3 devalues the PC by making it effectively an optional costume, rather than the player's lens in the world, their only implement of change... and that what change there is, is now negligible and in most cases laughable. In FO3, the PC can hit targets regardless of the PC's skill with the weapon; also they can beat the hell out of anyone, and buy back their reputation by giving water bottles to vagrants ~even the same vagrant they just beat up. The PC can shoot the BOS paladin at the Citadel in the face, and later ask to join the Brotherhood.

In Fallout, only the PC aimed and pulled the trigger; only the PC affected how the shot was placed. Bethesda's titles (all of them) encourage player substitution of the PC ~outright... They make of it a digital costume, with the intent that the player run amok in their semi-static sandbox doing whatever the hell they want, with no practical consequences, and the FPP further encourages the player that the PC doesn't even exist... much less that they should role play the PC (if that were even supported in FO3).

I just wouldn't want that for Fallout; I'd always hoped, and still do, that Fallout 4 was a true sequel to New Vegas, even if made by Bethesda.

New Vegas was a spin-off of FO3, which was itself a spin off of FOBOS. Bethesda ~if anything, will have learned the lessons from NV, but not the ones we'd like or respect. Obsidian got flack for a lot of New Vegas' strong points, and so I do not at all expect any of its strong points to appear in a Bethesda title. It will be worse than Skyrim 2.0 with gunz.

As for the mode best suited for a Fallout game, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that point, there's really no right answer.

We can do that.

But we cannot agree that there is no right answer. Fallout is the right answer, and Fallout can be compared to FO3, as one might compare Vegemite to Nutella.

As it stands today, Wasteland 2 is the best Fallout game to ship in 15 years, (and they know it); yet it isn't one. Don't expect one from Bethesda; you can only expect their TES clone draped in the Fallout IP assets ~all of them... regardless of whether it makes any sense or not. (This is 'me too' ~ism at its worst.) Fallout is like a special sauce they bought the last of, and can't figure out the recipe for, so they smear it on thick over whatever they can invent for themselves, and they were scrapping the bottom of the pan by the end of the FO3 DLC.

How to write for it and how to have it play, seems a mystery for them, strangely akin to the Brawndo argument; with NMA and other fans freely speaking the obvious, and being derided for it.



They only make TES, they only know TES ~and TES sells well to the mainstream empowerment fantasy crowd, who do not want an RPG, or a tactical turn based game... so they do not want Fallout, they want a themepark activity app that emulates the experience seen in the movie Westworld.

 

[Khannis]

@Gizmojunk:

When I said it worked very well, I certainly didn't mean Fallout 3. I don't really know that Vegemite is haha, but I certainly catch your drift, Fallout 3 was crap and we know it. My whole point is that Obsidian did what Bethesda couldn't, create an FPS/VATS which is also a true Fallout, a Fallout which, in my opinion, we can love and respect.

New Vegas is modern Fallout, but at the same time you can't do everything while unskilled, far from it; Nor you can max every skill in the same playthrough. You can't become Mother Theresa by distributing a few bottles of water either, and you obviously can't slaughter Caesar's Praetorians and be welcomed in the Legion. And through the miracles of modding, an already fantastic game became even better, in New Vegas in can truly roleplay. I've been a brainwashed, fanatical Legion recruit, a stalwart NCR Ranger, a bitter wanderer from a lost Brotherhood chapter, and through that, you can shape the Mojave. That, to me, is true roleplaying, true to the original Fallouts. It's not perfect, and we all know that constraints they faced, but it laid an awesome framework that, through the work of a loving community, turned into one of the best RPGs of all time to me.

All in all, my point is: Bethesda had the idea, but only Obsidian made it truly work. When I said there's no right answer, I mean two things: First, its not being isometric or FPS that makes for a true Fallout game, and second, there is certainly a WRONG answer, and that's called Fallout 3. I just don't think its the wrong answer because its a FPS/VATS, but rather because of its horribly failed implementantion. I felt it too, it feels like a mockery of true Fallout.

But while we don't get our hands on Fallout 4, I choose to see a light, not because its truly there, but because I want another true Fallout RPG so much. Maybe, even probably, I'll be sorely disappointed, but for now, I think a little hope can't hurt.

P.S.: Always though this movie was far too realistic to be funny...

 

[PossibleCabbage]

Also after I saw the airship I think there will be Midwestern brotherhood in Fallout 4 they are allied with the capital wasteland BoS.

ED-E's logs in Lonesome Road point to there being an Enclave base in Chicago.

"If you are listening to this log from one of our Enclave Outposts in Chicago, give this unit whatever repairs it needs so it can continue to Navarro"

So I imagine that we're going to see a Fallout game set in the ruins of the Windy City sooner or later, so they may refuse to comment too much about what's going on in the middle of the country.

 

[Gizmojunk]

All in all, my point is: Bethesda had the idea, but only Obsidian made it truly work.

Indeed; but they were on Bethesda's leash; imagine if they had had the option (and chose to) of making a Fallout sequel with their PoE engine, or InXile's WL2 engine... without their hands tied.

Recall that Tim/Troika was working on something like this before Bethesda got Fallout.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzYmQyHl2bc

First, its not being isometric or FPS that makes for a true Fallout game...

While true, I certainly think we are talking legs on a three legged stool.

Spoiler

"Fallout has a look and even if we do a 3D version we're not going to change it so much that it looks unfamiliar" Feargus Urquhart

P.S.: Always though this movie was far too realistic to be funny...

Same here.

 

[Khannis]

Wow, this demo looks amazing, the lighting and the switch to first-person view really surprised me... I'd only known Troika for Bloodlines, a very good RPG with a lot of potential, and an awesome setting in the World of Darkness.

I'd always thought a real shame they had to close doors, even more so now after seeing this

 

[Gizmojunk]

Here is a different demo ~not by Troika... This was a couple of guys with a hobby. This is DOOM4!

(When I first saw this I mistook it for leaked Bethesda video; before I had learned anything about Bethesda.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewN2qBXQKXY


A lot of new fans say that Bethesda is the best thing that could have happened to Fallout, but I say the best two things (that we know of) never got a chance.
(Just imagine if core gameplay in FO3 was based this, with Bethesda committed to it, and to making it as polished as possible.)

This mod is why I bought DOOM4.

_______________

Alternatively... Imagine if combat in FO3 had been something like this:
All it would have taken was some careful thought, and a willingness to not clone Oblivion as a Fallout sequel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7qY7s1tCtU

 

[The Courier]

I'm still holding on to the concept of allowing an event to happen which turns you into a Ghoul. Like, not just aesthetically, but in a way that NPC's would react to. But that would be asking for alternate dialogue and character creation, which would be extra work. Bethesda are not fans of having extra work. I just want my Ghoul role-play, dammit. I've written this character for ages.