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

These are awesome, loved the destructibility and procedural generation in the first, and although I'm not a fan of the aesthetics of the second, the combat mechanics are amazing.

Each got their own merits over the Bethesda system, which is far from perfect, I see your point, and I agree; But I still think it boils down to a good story, memorable characters, choice and consequence, interactivity. If they get these things rights, I can forgive them their insistence on not trying to innovate like these people have done. Hell, I think I can forgive them almost anything IF they do the aforementioned right. I think that's the most we can hope for after all we know from E3.

If they pull out another "good guys vs. bad guys" crapshoot with horrible characters and no real choice whatsoever, I'll... Be really sad and depressed and cheer myself up replaying one of the originals or modding New Vegas. And complain here.

@The Courier

The most I dare to hope is that they continue the tradition of low-Intelligence special interactions.
 
Stone Cold Robert House said:
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.
Click to expand...

Good points. However there is something else I don't understand, how can they build androids that look, act and think like a human, and yet enslave them? The only reason I can think of their construction and enslavement is for commercial purposes, like Codsworth. Which would explain why their civilization enslaves them, they're basically much more advanced versions of the Pre-war robots designed to serve humans. I question this, because Zimmer in F3 didn't explain why he has an android and why the Institute produces them. Thus giving me the impression the Institute makes androids just to make androids. If true, it makes it hard to make sense of such a moral dilemma.
 
Only way to make Androids work is if the "complex" ones turn out to just be streaming an AI from a huge ass Zax computer stored in a huge building and the only reason the guy in Rivet City was convinced he was human was because he brainwashed himself.
 
Walpknut said:
Only way to make Androids work is if the "complex" ones turn out to just be streaming an AI from a huge ass Zax computer stored in a huge building and the only reason the guy in Rivet City was convinced he was human was because he brainwashed himself.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of ways to make androids work. FFS there are robots with brains in them roaming about.
 
Yes, and those have very basic routines running, they are bulky and couldn't pass of for humans even if they tried. Hel lthe THink Tank barely have any advanced capabilities beyond keeping their brains alive and letting them talk and move. They can't even fight.
 
Honestly a game that isn't piss easy on hardcore would be nice, but those deathclaws look terrifying, so maybe...

anyhow, I'd like to see a little more focus, tbh. To quote a somewhat infamous reviewer, a game that lets you do everything focuses on nothing, and I think that's what'll happen. No push to play through the main quest, unlike 1 and 2, instead people will go for every tick on the compass and do every quest until they finally get bored, play MineOutCraft 4, and never actually finish the game.
 
What I want to see in a true Fallout title is best reflected in videos of my project. Despite the stuttering of it over the years, making the videos proved to be a wise decision because they capture things which aren't the same when put into words. Things that remind me how Fallout made me feel.

Atmosphere-wise:


Environmental reactivity-wise:


General feel (fast-forward to 1:50):
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd like to see proper NPC combat AI, at least some basic commands for companions binded to hotkeys, as „Stay behind my back!”, „Spread!”, or „Retreat!”. My companions are rushing right in front of my gun while chasing enemies in FNV, why they cannot flank them instead? Oh man, I cannot count how many times I've blown away Veronica's head accidentally while sniping deathclaws, because she decided to sneak towards enemy, putting her stupid head in front of my barrel suddenly despite her behavior being set to passive. This is how BOS military training she mentioned looks like, Bethesda?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top