Fallout 4 Pre-Release Discussion [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[CyberP]

Huh? They could have had those things in older Fallout dialogue systems too.

Jaesun: the dog couldn't die in FO3 either. None of the companions could.

New Vegas had less skills than 3, but were used more often and most of the times helped you to do quests differently. In 3 you mostly kill things.

Both games actually have 13 skills. In New Vegas, Big Guns and Small Guns merged into Guns, but Survival was added.

Brofisted, but that isn't quite right. It was big guns and explosives that were merged.

 

[Wild Slop]

The dog better be optional.

The way this is shaping up, I'm guessing he'll be a core gameplay mechanic.

Radiant Dog.


Maybe he can die but then one of his many long lost puppies will show up.



"Whats that boy? Looking for your father, middle aged dog? Wanting to fight the good fight?"

 

[Nuclear Explosion]

It was big guns and explosives that were merged.

Big guns was merged with both explosives and small guns.
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Guns
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Explosives

 

[CyberP]

My bad. I thought small guns were merged in FO3 first. Been a while since I played that one.

 

[Maldoror]

No skills and dialogue wheel? It doesn't even hurt anymore.

OH COME THE FUCK ON! So instead of building on the formula of NV we get Fallout 3's retarded young cousin. How the fuck is it even possible? Why? I understand the idea of lowest common denominator but this?! Was there really a retard who played Fallout 3 and thought that the game was too complex?

well fallout 4 is gonna be the best thing ever made, so if your so pretensus that you can't enjoy it then yeah you cant enjoy anything else either

Gee, that 'DUMBFUCK' wording about your head sure is apt, eh'?

 

[Gnidrologist]

I can't understand why you're being so mad at Makab. He's a funny guy.

 

[Infinitron]

Don't be mad, just ignore http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?members/makabb.18714/ignore

 

[MilesBeyond]

Big guns was merged with both explosives and small guns.
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Guns
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Explosives

Which for the record I was actually okay with, given how Big Guns were so bloody useless in FO 1, 2, and 3 that it was basically a trap skill. I mean, I would've preferred them to make Big Guns viable, but I guess merging it into other categories is a decent consolation prize.

Huh? They could have had those things in older Fallout dialogue systems too.

Oh, I don't pretend to understand their decision. Who knows what goes on in the Beth board room.

 

[Irxy]

It's a game made for children, after all.

It should be an optional feature like in FNV.
I personally prefer immortal companions due to how dumb their AI is (ignoring cover, environmental hazards, falling through textures...), that is, if they bother to make them interesting this time, not the boring packing mules.

 

[Metro]

I kinda like the dialogue wheel thing.

Your new name is now MilesBeyondRetarded.

 

[Eddas]

I kinda like the dialogue wheel thing. Apparently they put it in because it allowed them to make a system where "fuck this shit, put all the money into making her butt looking awesome instead" .

Fixed.

 

[Manjuice Nutella]

 

[Necroscope]

"fuck this shit, put all the money into making her butt looking awesome instead".

If only, man. Female bodies in FO3 look as if they were axed from a pile of wood.

 

[Gnidrologist]

Don't be mad, just ignore http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?members/makabb.18714/ignore

Ignoring = being mad.

 

[Metro]

Don't be mad, just ignore http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?members/makabb.18714/ignore

Ignoring = being mad.

Technically speaking I ignore 99.9999999999% of the Earth's population. Am I mad at them?

 

[Gnidrologist]

Technically speaking, you're dumb.

 

[Curious_Tongue]

What are these? Pictures for ants?

 

[Seerix]

Speaking of those pictures, I'm curious if you can actually mix and match pieces of power armor. There are only matching pieces shown on the presentation.

 

[Metro]

Could have sworn they showed a bit of video where you could mix and match various models. Of course, the question is what does that mean gameplay wise? Is it just aesthetics? My guess is probably yes and it doesn't have much of an impact on armor or stats or whatever. Especially since skills are gone.

 

[Somberlain]

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/06...discusses-companion-functionality-immortality

"[The dog] does not die, because we realize that's automatic re-load," Howard said. "We like to make the game where the only scenario where you re-load is your own death. So, like a lot of open world games, they'll have it where 'you failed this mission, go ahead and press "A" to redo it.' We don't ever want to do that. So, we've got to handle all failstates and some of those we have to do like, 'Okay, the dog can't die, because you're just going to re-load.'"

Is this the most retarded way ever to handle savescumming? Make everything immortal!

I'll take Sawyer's overly elaborate and occasionally retarded solutions to handle "degenerate gameplay" over this hamhanded sledgehammer shit any day. I wonder if NPCs no longer turn hostile if you attack them because "you know, we realize that's just automatic re-load".

 

[Irxy]

Could have sworn they showed a bit of video where you could mix and match various models. Of course, the question is what does that mean gameplay wise? Is it just aesthetics? My guess is probably yes and it doesn't have much of an impact on armor or stats or whatever. Especially since skills are gone.

Watched it now frame by frame, and the stats are different for various types of the same part.
Stats are 3 damage resist types (firearms, energy and probably radiation), weight, hp, stat bonuses.
Also every part has mods - model (seems to influence stats, maybe it is an "item level" or they may vary by functions), material (basically paint), misq (dunno). Helmets can have lamp mods.

 

[Nas92]

I hate companions you can't directly control, so for me the immortal companion isn't an issue, the only reason I would pick them up is to do their quest and to laugh at how many times it's possible for the AI to get themselves killed. I'm assuming they'll do the falling unconscious thing again, if they actually make them invincible then yeah, that's beyond retarded.

Still, this philosophy where you don't reload unless being killed is basically another kind of "no fun allowed" it's what made Skyrim so terrible, and it's what will make Fallout 4 terrible. I don't see Todd Howard and the team ditching this philosophy any time soon.

 

[Infinitron]

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/06...discusses-companion-functionality-immortality

"[The dog] does not die, because we realize that's automatic re-load," Howard said. "We like to make the game where the only scenario where you re-load is your own death. So, like a lot of open world games, they'll have it where 'you failed this mission, go ahead and press "A" to redo it.' We don't ever want to do that. So, we've got to handle all failstates and some of those we have to do like, 'Okay, the dog can't die, because you're just going to re-load.'"

Is this the most retarded way ever to handle savescumming? Make everything immortal!

I'll take Sawyer's overly elaborate and occasionally retarded solutions to handle "degenerate gameplay" over this hamhanded sledgehammer shit any day. I wonder if NPCs no longer turn hostile if you attack them because "you know, we realize that's just automatic re-load".

Companions in FO:NV already worked like this though, except in Hardcore mode

(they did go unconscious)

 

[Somberlain]

Companions in FO:NV already worked like this though except in Hardcore

Sure, but they could still die permanently. There were even ending slides for dead companions.

 

[Infinitron]

They could die permanently...in Hardcore mode. Or if you killed them when they were outside your "party". Or in a scripted event like the Van Graffs frying Cass