Fallout 4 - Cooling the Hype @ TechRaptor
- Thread starter HiddenX
- Start date
- Joined
- October 19, 2006
- Messages
- 2,469
So the game does have special system still even if there are no skills. Atleast in the fallout 4 presentation Todd allocated points to special just like in previous games. I looked that part very closely and stats do have some significance to gameplay, but none of them seem to contribute to weapon accuracy or damage outside vats (although str contributes to melee damage). Maybe this change makes the shooting more fun, but the roleplayer inside of me cried a little, because skills have always been a big part of fallout. If you think about it, skills are almost an iconic fallout feature.
Now I wonder how are they going to simulate character development. Maybe the perks system is going play more important role this time around. And probably some perks are going to be linked to special stats like in previous games. Aka melee oriented perks would require some number of strenght etc.
Intresting thread about this: https://www.reddit.com/r/fo4/comments/3aidk7/fallout_4_skill_calculator/
Now I wonder how are they going to simulate character development. Maybe the perks system is going play more important role this time around. And probably some perks are going to be linked to special stats like in previous games. Aka melee oriented perks would require some number of strenght etc.
Intresting thread about this: https://www.reddit.com/r/fo4/comments/3aidk7/fallout_4_skill_calculator/
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2006
- Messages
- 2,469
coboney
Seeker
- Joined
- June 27, 2011
- Messages
- 27
Well I can only write here my feelings on this as the author - and that is I was sharing my thoughts on it and things I'm worried about there and I get tired of the over the top hype show on everything Fallout 4 so trying to raise a few points to say 'hey take a second and look at it'.
I personally was disappointed in Fallout 3 as a sequel to the original fallouts due to it missing a lot of the spirit of them in general.
As for several comments here about the emptiness, what in particular I meant was that instead of building communities well, or populating areas or designing it well, Bethesda by the nature of this system has to include multiple open areas where people can build towns. I'm presuming that this has to be done on set locations just because of the difficulties in making people attack you wherever and supply driven but thats a supposition on my part.
Empty areas can be good when designed well - they can add ambiance, world building and a lot of things. The issue is that its harder to do that when the area has to also be built for the player to build up on.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2011
- Messages
- 27
I'm going to take a wild guess that this guy will still play the game, and just grumble along during the 100 hours he spends in it, about how it could be sooo much better. 
Millions (and millions) of people play MMOs these day.
So if you disagree with a point, the fact that millions of people support it is irrelevant, but if you agree then millions of people liking it supports your point. Your arguments are all over the place.
- Joined
- April 12, 2009
- Messages
- 23,459
Missing the point obviously. For whatever reason I suppose.
FO4 will be singleplayer game. When did Bethesda ever promise something and not delivered? The only thing they didn't deliver is their MMO.
btw, playing something is not equal to caring for something. Most MMOs I played because of friends. Never cared for any of them. You saying I'm the only person who accepted the grind for sakes of friends? Okay, perhaps I am. But please, dont make words play and care equal. They're not.
Eh?
Now I got confused. And again, probably, missinterpreted or something.
If I agreed on his point, I'd wrote it something like this:
"I agree and the guilty party we're seeing that design crime bullshit avoidware phonegames crapware etc are millions of grindlovers…" oops, got too excited, sorry "… simslovers".
I can't agree however, thus the sentence(s) look like they look.
Millions are always relevant. I may agree or disagree with them. And I write in a way I write, sometimes this way, sometimes that way.
Sorry, I see no problem with that. Perhaps you should call the pest control?
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2009
- Messages
- 23,459
Giovanni1983
Sentinel
Have to say that this article did hit some sensitive areas.
It's true that in the past years Bethesda has been stripping their games of game mechanics, the most recent was the removal of stats in Skyrim.
As it seems the skills will be removed as well from Fallout 4. I know that this isn't confirmed yet and just based on a few screens of the pipboy and the crafting page but knowing Bethesda i am pretty certain at this point that skills will be stat/perk based.
Also expecting a mediocre story as usual and generic NPC's, since they can't seem to ever change that.
BUT as many people say, it's Fallout 4 and will probably be a good game despite these short comings and i'll possibly buy it fully knowing what i am getting and not expecting miracles or major differences from their previous games.
It's true that in the past years Bethesda has been stripping their games of game mechanics, the most recent was the removal of stats in Skyrim.
As it seems the skills will be removed as well from Fallout 4. I know that this isn't confirmed yet and just based on a few screens of the pipboy and the crafting page but knowing Bethesda i am pretty certain at this point that skills will be stat/perk based.
Also expecting a mediocre story as usual and generic NPC's, since they can't seem to ever change that.
BUT as many people say, it's Fallout 4 and will probably be a good game despite these short comings and i'll possibly buy it fully knowing what i am getting and not expecting miracles or major differences from their previous games.
coboney
Seeker
- Joined
- June 27, 2011
- Messages
- 27
Missing the point obviously. For whatever reason I suppose.
FO4 will be singleplayer game. When did Bethesda ever promise something and not delivered? The only thing they didn't deliver is their MMO.
btw, playing something is not equal to caring for something. Most MMOs I played because of friends. Never cared for any of them. You saying I'm the only person who accepted the grind for sakes of friends? Okay, perhaps I am. But please, dont make words play and care equal. They're not.
Radiant AI? Kinetic combat in Oblivion? I can bring out a list of stuff from my cutting room floor here as well I went shorter for the sake of the article and just went with the most illustrative point on the Radiant AI e3 demo.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2011
- Messages
- 27
Apparently a lot of people do think exactly that
DISCLAIMER: This comment was not meant to offend or demean any person, no matter their colour, creed, race, gender, sexual orientation or RPG preferences.
I have found frequently this complain about FO3 (and FO:NV), but was never quite capable of understading why there was disapointment on that particular thing. Was the Fallout spirit so connectec to the type of game and gameplay of the classics? Because if we're taking about the universe, the quirky characters, the weird quests, the retro-futurism of a society inspired by 1950s America, the post-apoc world... Well, I found all that in Bethesda's games.
In fact, I daresay that the fabulous intros narrated by Ron Perlman never felt so really "palpable" in the classic games. Sure, it was there, but the feeling of an open world 1st/3rd person made much more immersive, and the years that went by between FO2 and FO3 (even if FO3 could be better in the visual department) allowed for a much better translation of the Fallout universe.
This is my opinion, of course. I don't intend to convert anyone to my cause.
The best thing IMHO of Fallout 1&2 was that it features really many, many possible solutions depending on character stats and choices with consequences to solve quests in the game.
I remember playing the game at the same time as two friends and day for day we talked about the quests and most of the time we solved the quests in a complete different way.
I replayed Fallout 1&2 several times with very different characters and it was always a new experience for me.
I remember playing the game at the same time as two friends and day for day we talked about the quests and most of the time we solved the quests in a complete different way.
I replayed Fallout 1&2 several times with very different characters and it was always a new experience for me.
I'm going to play Fallout 4 and love it. It also will feature many cut-corners and simplifications. It will surely have half-baked features that were hyped as grand. I will still love it and play it...and mod it most likely.
This article is fine of course. Good for him for expressing his doubts. But Skyrim delivered most of its promises. Going back to Oblivion from 2006, three games ago is tired and unhelpful. Bethesda learned from Oblivion in many ways. Let Oblivion go.
The bottom line: no other game company makes open-world games of this scope and quality. That is my firmly held opinion. Go ahead and try to persuade me otherwise if you can figure out what dialogue option that is...
This article is fine of course. Good for him for expressing his doubts. But Skyrim delivered most of its promises. Going back to Oblivion from 2006, three games ago is tired and unhelpful. Bethesda learned from Oblivion in many ways. Let Oblivion go.
The bottom line: no other game company makes open-world games of this scope and quality. That is my firmly held opinion. Go ahead and try to persuade me otherwise if you can figure out what dialogue option that is...
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2010
- Messages
- 626
Well I find myself agreeing with you once again Rune.
See I have bought and played every Bethesda game. So I know what their weakness and strengths are by now. I will just simply enjoy playing Fallout 4 when it's released.
Look I love the old Fallout games but I'm glad that Bethesda updated the series, and kept it alive for a new generation of gamers to play & experience.
I thinkt the article is pretty spot on, I agree with pretty much everything. That doesn't mean I won't buy the game, of course I will. But I just might wait until it goes on sale and there's a GOTY version though, after Fallout 3 I've stopped pre-purchasing Bethesda.
I'm pretty sure the game will be great for alot of people, just not for me.
I'm pretty sure the game will be great for alot of people, just not for me.
lackblogger
SasqWatch
- Joined
- November 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,778
Because RPG elements are fun?
Stuff like character progression, NPC interaction, stealth/thievery, inventory managment, crafting, loot progression and so on are great fun. It doesn't mean everything has to be tied to a visible number that the player must deal with.
That would be my guess
It's much like if you compare the dialogue sequences in Witcher 3 with a dialogue sequence in Baldur's Gate.
Is Baldur's Gate more of an RPG because you can click pre-written sentences and you have to actually read text?
I don't really think so.
Well, technically, there's no such thing as RPG elements to the same extent that everything you could possibly imagine can be classed as an RPG element. Just stating "RPG elements are fun" is so vague and generalised a statement as to be entirely worthless as a comeback of a discussion point until you list what you class as RPG elements, to which your list:
Character progression - Too vague. Do you mean stat progression or just story progression (like how people describe character progression in movies)?
NPC interaction - Too vague. Adventure games and FPSs and other game formats have NPC interaction.
stealth/thievery - Games which have a heavy emphasis on this are normally referred to as Stealth games rather than general RPGs. One would expect a general RPG to have elements of this, but only by proportion to percentage of classes available. You have a particular bias for this mechanic and have over-expectations for general RPGs.
inventory managment - Yes, I would agree here, getting IM right is very important. What that exact right actually is is much harder to define than a check-list use of the word.
crafting - Crafting has never been considered a primary selling point of RPGs and even in some high profile examples is often an unnecessary additional luxury for those that like that kind of thing.
loot progression - It's not the progression of the loot that makes loot fun, except for a small niche of 24/7 aRPG grind fanatics. Simply progressing from a +2 sword to a plus 3 sword or a 10% extra damage to a 12% extra damage sword is not fun, per se, as just providing this can cause hamster wheel boredom in the majority. It's like the final step before someone requests the end to loot progression. What makes an item "fun" is if it's better than your present items and/or different to your present items (the highlighted part being the most important feature for the concept of "fun").
Your big example is dialogue methods between Witcher 3 and Balder's Gate 2 when dialogue methods have never been considered huge RPG elements aside from the fact that people prefer the ability to give variances for replies. It's the desire for variance that is more the RPG element, not the method of delivery.
Further, that's just one loose comparison, and one that's a massive minority of interest compared to the general concept of micromanagement versus simulation. Perhaps you didn't feel like comparing the character creation aspects of both games because you realised the Witcher would indeed emerge from that angle as being extremely weak on the RPG elements debate angle and you have a specific bias to push…?
Am I just pushing a bias? Not intentionally. I'd gladly write a post on how Witcher is better than Balder's Gate. I just wouldn't be coming from the angle of RPG elements. Less can never be more, however you can fudge that topic by use of words like "more funner" and "better game" - but less is still less…
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,778
D
DArtagnan
Guest
Why would I need to be technical? All we need is a common understanding of what's traditionally part of RPGs - specifically those we're talking about.
This isn't about elements that all RPGs and only RPGs have. It's about common RPG elements.
It's not rocket science.
I mean character progression. As in power and arsenal progression.
It's not vague to people who're not being deliberately obtuse.
It doesn't seem like logic is a strong point with you, but let me demonstrate why your point is flawed:
RPGs more or less always have NPC interaction, which is why it's a common RPG element.
If NPC interaction was a staple in FPSs, it would also be a FPS element. It's not that, however.
As for adventure games, it kinda depends on the kind of adventure game. Games like MYST don't have much in the way of NPC interaction - but I'd concede that NPC interaction is a common adventure game element.
Conclusively, NPC interaction can actually be both an RPG element and an adventure game element.
Incidentally, both genres share a lot of elements.
Clear?
I didn't mention heavy emphasis, so what's your point here?
I mentioned it as an RPG element, as it's common in RPGs - and stealth games tend to have many elements that are common in RPGs as well.
Why would I need to define it? For you? I'd have to believe you were interested in understanding and productive exchange.
Clearly, you're into this as some kind of competition.
Maybe if I had a frail ego and I felt challenged by you, I'd engage in such a thing.
That's not the case, though.
I don't know what primary selling point has to do with anything. I'm talking about a common RPG element.
Loot progression is one aspect of power progression. It's fun if you enjoy power - which people universally do. End of story.
Dialogue is a pretty big part of most RPGs, which is why I mentioned two ways of handling it that were relevant to my point.
Perhaps you enjoy fantasizing about how people think based on feeling inferior for irrational reasons?
All kinds of things are possible.
Less can very much be more. I guess if you had a point about why not, you should be making it with some measure of rational support.
I'm not really seeing any of that.
You seem to miss all my points on a quest to prove me wrong no matter what.
That won't work, believe me.
The first step to refute any of my points is to understand them. The first step to understanding them is to want to understand them. Then comes the ability to read. Then comes the ability to focus on what's written without assumption and conjecture.
If you demonstrate the capacity for such things, I'll gladly give this a real shot.
lackblogger
SasqWatch
- Joined
- November 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,778
I've deleted all the superfluous ranting from your post so we can concentrate on the points:
power and arsenal progression - Yes, most games generally have power and arsenal progression, from tower defence to Strategy and from platformers to driving games. What makes RPGs unique is that the specific items are found via combat or 'looting' or quests and that the items are in some way 'interesting', most objectively by the use of attached world lore. +10% to +12% alone does not make for 'general RPG element'. It makes for 'less'.
Yes, RPGs share a lot with Adventure games. At what point would you consider something "more adventure game than RPG"?
Stealth re: a common RPG element - is it? Really? Yes, I think I said that - in proportion to it's class. Do loads of RPGs have stealth to the extent that someone would list it as a first thought common RPG element? No.
No, loot solely for the sake of power progression is not end of story and has nothing to do with the concept of loot specific to an RPG as oppose to any other genre (see above paragraph about power progression).
Dialogue is not a huge part of any RPG, it's a huge part of those that make it a huge part. You wont find more than a few sentences in an aRPG, all the way to walls of text in the more Adventure gameish RPGs. A vast number of RPG players skip all the dialogue possible and complain bitterly if dialogue is unskippable, particularly cut-scene dialogue. For you it is a first-thought RPG element though…
Less cannot be more. Give some examples of common RPG elements where Witcher has abundantly more than Balder's Gate 2. Larger open world is your stater…
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,778
D
DArtagnan
Guest
That's an interesting opinion, but I don't agree that world lore attached to items is necessarily unique to RPGs.
For instance, Battlefield 4 has a very involved item progression - and all weapons are tied into real world lore - complete with details about their history when looking at these items.
I don't mind calling BF4 an RPG, though - as it could be. I don't fret about genres as much as you seem to do.
As for the power progression of loot in itself, yes I think that's interesting and entertaining - and I don't see it as a "lesser" element.
Many things can make RPGs unique - and they can do that while being common in other games as well.
I have no idea. I don't fret about having readily available distinct definitions of these genres.
If I did, I'd be locking myself down and making a huge mistake.
I would be one of those people believing my own opinions objective - and I'd be claiming other people couldn't be right about what an RPG means and what an adventure game means.
I care about fun games and I don't care about genres.
But I do recognise common genre elements, as I have quite a lot of experience with the topic at hand.
I have no idea, and who cares? Who's talking about it being a universal first-thought RPG element? I'm saying it's a common RPG element, because it's a common RPG element.
You're still stuck on logic, I see.
Not sure I have the stamina to educate you, but I'll try once again:
I'm not talking about elements unique to RPGs - I'm talking about common RPG elements.
As I've just demonstrated, attributing world lore to items is not unique to RPGs either. That's your ignorance talking, I'm afraid.
I don't know why you switched from big to huge here, but it serves to demonstrate my point about not being interested or capable of productive exchange here.
I don't know why you think what I write is the first thing I think of, but I guess that's some kind of projected limitation?
But, it's true, dialogue is a very common RPG element - and it would definitely be among the first things I'd mention as common RPG elements.
I'll get to that once you demonstrate the abilities and interests I mentioned.
Again, you don't seem capable of logical exchange - and you don't seem terribly interested in understanding what I'm saying.
As such, you're more or less without value in a productive exchange.
So, once you demonstrate that's not the case, I'll bother repeating my point which really should have been clear from the beginning.