Fallout 4

[Doland J. Trump]

Don't want to believe this after the "2299" bullsh*t but it's sort of convincing. Though the main character narrating the intro is a bit strange...At least this is sort of conformation FO4 is in production.

[Mr. House]

Don't want to believe this after the "2299" bullsh*t but it's sort of convincing. Though the main character narrating the intro is a bit strange...At least this is sort of conformation FO4 is in production.

Don't worry man, you can say it's sh*t. No need to say 'strange'.

[iNero]

tbh, Im not really interessted in the game unless it uses a brand new engine. not only because of graphics but all the other stuff like physics and mechanics.

 

I think you just cant bring good shooter mechanics to this engine.

[rudy]

Ain't gonna buy into sh*t from Kotaku. It's notorious for posting incredibly inflammatory and controversial decisions just so that they would get more site visits. That is how they make money.

 

Anywho, this is not fake though. The evil c*nt behind the hoax speaks out.

 

http://www.kotaku.com/fallout-4-hoaxer-just-wanted-to-watch-the-world-burn-1479362778

[Mr Rabbit]

Fallout set before or during the great war, or at least part of the game will be - NOT BUYING IT (as in not buying this story)

 

And at the end it says "war never change" - CLEARLY FALSE. That kind of typo would not be on any ''casting documents'' that were anything close to even being considered to be real.

[a20characterusername]

Don't want to believe this after the "2299" bullsh*t but it's sort of convincing. Though the main character narrating the intro is a bit strange...At least this is sort of conformation FO4 is in production.

Funny thing is, Kotaku originally said TS2299 was fake, then this gets relased by them...on the day the TS2299 countdown would've originally ended.

 

*adjusts tinfoil hat*

 

IGN reported on it too, but Kotaku and IGN don't exactly scream "credible", so eh, who knows. Either way, Fallout 4 is coming; it's just a matter of when. Bethesda didn't have that long, drawn out legal battle for nothing. No matter how the game turns out, I'm sure mods will fix it, as is tradition.

Edited December 12, 2013 by gtarelatedusername2

[UtricularEwe001]

GOG is giving away Fallout 1 & 2 for free for the next 48 hours!

 

http://www.gog.com/promo/fallout_series_giveaway_winter_promo_2013

[Node]

GOG is giving away Fallout 1 & 2 for free for the next 48 hours!

 

http://www.gog.com/promo/fallout_series_giveaway_winter_promo_2013

 

That websites sh*t, It's slow as hell and I've spent 20 minutes trying to download them, god knows how many and "Page doesn't exist" and "bad gateway" errors I've had..

[Knife]

 

GOG is giving away Fallout 1 & 2 for free for the next 48 hours!

 

http://www.gog.com/promo/fallout_series_giveaway_winter_promo_2013

 

That websites sh*t, It's slow as hell and I've spent 20 minutes trying to download them, god knows how many and "Page doesn't exist" and "bad gateway" errors I've had..

 

Well, that's because everyone's trying to get their free copies. To be honest it's lucky the site isn't totally down.

[caseclosedjk]

 

GOG is giving away Fallout 1 & 2 for free for the next 48 hours!

 

http://www.gog.com/promo/fallout_series_giveaway_winter_promo_2013

 

That websites sh*t, It's slow as hell and I've spent 20 minutes trying to download them, god knows how many and "Page doesn't exist" and "bad gateway" errors I've had..

 

Funny because I downloaded all 3 in less than 10 minutes, so you might wanna consider dropping "Elcheapo Net" and get better internet.

[Daz]

There's no reason why gunplay in Fallout can't be more visceral while still providing more mechanics to reflect its RPG elements. Headshots could kill most humans but they could also kill you, and you can introduce more intricate systems of repair and maintaining firearms. You could also make firearms less prevalent in the hands of novice raiders or criminals, considering these folks would get themselves killed too fast.

 

I think Fallout could be a wonderful setting for an RPG that is visceral and has fast-paced combat, while still retaining a sense of depth through its character interaction, world building and most of all player agency and choice. You don't need to have a roll-of-the-die combat system to have great role-playing elements.

 

I agree there.

 

There are many ways they could introduce much more in depth features to put more emphasis on the skills, for example, maybe most common ammo purchased could just be hand loads, and possibly prone to jam automatic weapons, making weapons such as revolvers, double barrel shotguns and manually cycled weapons much more reliable in firefights. Maybe if crazy high tech weapons were expensive to maintain and did the same amount of damage as an accurate shot from more obsolete weapons. Add a different value to give certain redundant weapon types more of a purpose. I hate it in games where they can't balance weapons right so a lot of the older weapons become pretty much useless, where in reality, any bullet is going to kill someone if it hits them in the head.

 

Besides, the difficulty of that could be scaled by their armour and if they were mutant or not, then it makes more sense if a headshot doesn't kill them.

 

But personally I think the system is great the way it is, but it would be nice if some aspects were like Skyrim, where doing the skill increases it. It would be nice if every time you reload you get better at it, and fumble less, and eventually could reload very smooth, even if it was just with that one weapon, which might have more of an edge over a new weapon found which you may not be as familiar with. It would also be nice to maybe have a "clean weapon" option in the pip boy and the weapon is out of action for a short time while it is cleaned and being soaked in cleaner fluid, and possibly allowing for it's condition to go back up to 50% of some sort, but I really think condition should not effect the damage of the weapon only just how much it jams, etc. It would also make sense if less complex firearm designs would degrade at different rates, if a single shot rifle with barely any moving parts would almost never degrade. But all this decreases depending on how high your small guns skill gets etc.

 

In short, there is easily room for RPG elements and also having a more realistic damage system and a way to get easier kills in the earlier portions of the game. Adding new mechanics and benefits to weapons is a better way forward with that. To make every weapon have some sort of advantage over another in some fashion.

Edited December 16, 2013 by Daz

[Guest]

I was just watching some Fallout gameplay where someone used a grenade launcher to kill someone.

 

It look FOUR grenades to kill this dude. It's a regular human. I can understand that for things like Deathclaws (they should feel like mini-boss fights rather than a common enemy) but seriously? Four grenades to kill a human is bullsh*t. How is that even fun?

 

IMO what Fallout needs is a change in gameplay depending on the enemy. Currently it's just endlessly fire at it until it dies. That shouldn't be the case.

 

Humans with weapons should be killed with cover-based movement and accurate shooting. You know, like every other normal gunfight out there.

 

Things like ghouls should come in huge clusters, maybe 2-3 shots to the body to kill one. Explosives etc. come in use, as they're following you.

 

Things like deathclaws should take a lot of bullets, but have an actual weakspot. Instead of just endlessly firing at it, I should be in cover, waiting for it to expose a weakspot, it could open its mouth and I'd VATS a grenade in there, or fire a shotgun at its foot, causing it to tumble over then I'd run to it and finish it off by stabbing a knife in its back. Stuff like that. Give us choice.

Edited December 16, 2013 by Guest

[Daz]

I understand your issue, however once you level up the specific weapon type, you can easily f*ck sh*t up realistically, it just might take some time.

 

It all depends if they decide to keep VATS or not, I hope they do in some form, but I guess if it did not exist and if it was more like skyrim then it would allow for possibly some co-op gameplay and I am sure they would then change how weapons worked.

 

It is mostly due to the fact most perks and bonuses towards accuracy, damage and etc only have an effect within VATS and not free aim, maybe if that changed it might make it more realistic.

 

Though personally I found no issue with it because I would always do everything I could as soon as I could to max out my guns skill and possibly sneak and all the right perks to be able to just f*ck sh*t up in one or two hits.

 

It is just harder for players starting out that is all.

 

I just want a new game, and for them to leave everything relatively the same, just new content is what I want.

[Input]

Gameplay wise, I expect a pretty similar formula.

Aesthetically, the only thing I ask is that the Pipboy be removed. I hate the way that thing looks, it just makes armor look stupid because you have this POS stuck to your damn wrist along with it's stupid glove.

[Daz]

Gameplay wise, I expect a pretty similar formula.

Aesthetically, the only thing I ask is that the Pipboy be removed. I hate the way that thing looks, it just makes armor look stupid because you have this POS stuck to your damn wrist along with it's stupid glove.

 

It has it's charm, though they could go with a pip-boy 4000 model that maybe is slimmer, or something along the lines of what a lot of mods followed and have it just as a PDA/Tablet layout but then I guess if there were sections in the story where you get all your sh*t taken, it wouldn't make much sense to still have it.

 

Unless they implanted it in your head or something.

[Zancudo]

They could implant it in your cock, that would be just awesum.

 

I know, dicky move, hehe.

[a20characterusername]

Gameplay wise, I expect a pretty similar formula.

Aesthetically, the only thing I ask is that the Pipboy be removed. I hate the way that thing looks, it just makes armor look stupid because you have this POS stuck to your damn wrist along with it's stupid glove.

But the Pip-Boy has been a part of Fallout since the beginning; it'd be like getting rid of vaults.

 

Maybe just make it less clunky looking?

 

As far as gameplay goes, I wouldn't mind some changes to shooting mechanics, like aim outside of VATS actually being determined by accuracy rather than it be rolled against a gun skill, and drop the hitscan for non-laser guns, but I hope Bethesda doesn't go the "make it more like Skyrim" route, because I'd rather not have TES in Fallout or vise-versa. As much as I like Skyrim, it feels very simplified compared to say, New Vegas. Even Fallout 3 felt a bit too simple for my tastes, with being able to take a perk every single level (I won't even get into the writing...).

Edited December 18, 2013 by gtarelatedusername2

[caseclosedjk]

Or introduce new pipboys. Say they were "Prototype" and somehow the protagonist got one.

[Input]

I don't know, I think it should just become an inventory system similar to Skyrim or Oblivion. The menus could still be styled like the pipboy, but I'd prefer to not have the thing physically. But I do agree with Daz, the Pipboy Readius is a must have mod so I could enjoy a PDA version of it too.

[D- Ice]

I was just watching some Fallout gameplay where someone used a grenade launcher to kill someone.

 

It look FOUR grenades to kill this dude. It's a regular human. I can understand that for things like Deathclaws (they should feel like mini-boss fights rather than a common enemy) but seriously? Four grenades to kill a human is bullsh*t. How is that even fun?

 

IMO what Fallout needs is a change in gameplay depending on the enemy. Currently it's just endlessly fire at it until it dies. That shouldn't be the case.

 

Humans with weapons should be killed with cover-based movement and accurate shooting. You know, like every other normal gunfight out there.

 

Things like ghouls should come in huge clusters, maybe 2-3 shots to the body to kill one. Explosives etc. come in use, as they're following you.

 

Things like deathclaws should take a lot of bullets, but have an actual weakspot. Instead of just endlessly firing at it, I should be in cover, waiting for it to expose a weakspot, it could open its mouth and I'd VATS a grenade in there, or fire a shotgun at its foot, causing it to tumble over then I'd run to it and finish it off by stabbing a knife in its back. Stuff like that. Give us choice.

I see what you mean, and I do agree that fights in Fallout 3 (the only game of the series I have) can be frustrating.

But the way I see it, the reason is to balance out gameplay. Enemies become tougher later on in the game (humans wearing better armour), and you will have to adapt accordingly by having better weapons in better condition.

 

It is also generally to allow shootouts to last longer, to justify the rewards you get from perhaps the most detailed enemy body looting systems in gaming. If enemies only take a few shots and a few seconds of fighting to kill off, then all you'll really need is a simple system of picking up dropped weapons or simple body looting like in Assassin's Creed - otherwise the game will be too easy.

 

Also since more programming, detail and memory is assigned to each enemy in game (you can loot everything from them, cripple various body parts and shoot them off). It's very difficult - if not impossible - to spawn large numbers of such enemy types to be used as cannon-fodder. The choice is either to have large numbers of low-quality enemy types, or small numbers of high-quality types. Fallout 3 chose the latter, making them difficult to kill in order to balance out gameplay.

[Daz]

I hope Bethesda doesn't go the "make it more like Skyrim" route, because I'd rather not have TES in Fallout or vise-versa. As much as I like Skyrim, it feels very simplified compared to say, New Vegas. Even Fallout 3 felt a bit too simple for my tastes, with being able to take a perk every single level (I won't even get into the writing...).

 

 

It always seems to baffle me that anyone could in any way knock Fallout 3, or even consider that New Vegas was better when it so clearly wasn't. In some aspects, sure, as it added upon the groundwork created by Fallout 3. But as an overall game, f*ck no.

 

Sure, blah blah, it's an RPG what the f*ck ever. But I felt skyrim had it bang on. It is much better to be able to train a skill just by doing it and not being restricted to a specific number value. The same goes for repair, which was a little more improved in new vegas. It was a constant annoyance but in the end I think I would prefer to keep the degrading weapons over skyrim's style of weapons and smithing. But you should be able to repair anything at any point, and attempt a hack or lockpick regardless of your level. Levels should just decide what perks you gain access to.

 

But overall I think skyrim was pretty much what I want from fallout, in terms of the overall world and not setting any classes or traits before you have played the game yet. Buffing tag skills is good to start off with but I don't think we should be picking traits or classes. If they include traits again they should work as a removable and addable option, similar to the stones in skyrim.

 

But generally the way I want it to be like skyrim is to have hundreds of locations of enemies. The main issue I always had with new vegas, though it had many gameplay improvements, it had too many factions and diplomacy options. Because let's face it, why piss off a group for no reason, you would want any benefits and unique items from them above anything else. So in the end of my 500+ hour game save the only hostile humans in the vanilla game world were fiends (who get boring fast) and viper gangs (which are in seriously short supply). The map was drastically smaller, and there were not even decent underground areas like Fallout 3 had, no metro tunnels no enemy strongholds or anything. The factions ruined that.

 

All enemy types were also drastically fenced in, you would NEVER see a randomly roaming enemy, I managed to get through the entire game only seeing two centaurs, one at close range one at long range, and though I avoid those things like the f*cking plague because they freak me out, in this instance it was a good thing, but the downside to that is that I rarely ever saw super mutants, never fought them other than a few occasions ever and the world ends up being a stagnated bore zone.

 

The shooting mechanics were greatly improved in new vegas, though I felt a lot of the damage had been removed, and with the inclusion of DT, it was worthless attacking any enemy that had armour with anything other than a weapon doing over 40 damage. So with that, all fully automatic weapons were made redundant. I want the feel of the chinese assault rifle back. Also the new running and shooting animations in new vegas were terrible. I am probably the only person I know that prefers playing in third person the majority of the time.

 

 

So really, improvements for Fallout 4, would be to make sure the map was as large and included enough enemies and constant hostilities to keep you busy, but also to have random events just like skyrim had. I can't think of ANYTHING non scripted happening in fallout new vegas aside from a random wastelander roaming around south east of novac. Where as in Fallout 3 and even more so in skyrim, there were random spawns everywhere, and I loved that, and it kept the game fresh.

 

I essentially want Fallout 3 but with the updates and additions from new vegas, but on a skyrim engine and using it's leveling system. But using the normal pip boy menu system and not skyrim's awfully jumbled up lists of bollocks.

 

If anyone can make sense of that.

[Guest]

I got New Vegas the other day, been playing it and so far, I'm liking it more than Fallout 3 purely because the shooting mechanics are FAR better. In F3, I played on Very Easy and had to VATS everything. I hated the combat but I still loved the game because of all the stuff you can see and do.

 

In New Vegas, I'm happily playing on "Normal" difficulty and for the majority of the time, playing with real time combat. There are a few bullet sponge enemies, but I actually like that because the game gives you some powerful weapons early on, and it rewards you for keeping them and not wasting the ammo on easy enemies. When I got the Incinerator, I kept it knowing it would come in handy, and it sure did when I encountered my first Nightkin.

 

Right now my character is in Vault 22 (The one with all the plants in. Or is that 21? IK one's a casino and another is full of plants.) and I'm struggling because I have no stimpaks or anything, I have only a third of my health and those Spore Carrier Savage things jump up at me and wipe out my health. If this were F3 I'd say poor game design because EVERYTHING else is a bullet sponge. Because it's NV, so far I'm thinking that's good game design because it makes that Vault feel scary. It's kind of my fault too though. I could've used my Plasma rifle but I wasted all the ammo at a reloading bench not knowing which is which and there seems to be no way to convert it back to Microfusion Cells, so I've been using a grenade launcher to try and kill them, but they always get too close and I take damage myself lol.

 

I've pretty much never been forced to VATS in combat. I only use VATS with things like explosives because I suck at judging where it will land, but luckily VATS does that for me.

Edited December 22, 2013 by Guest

[B Dawg]

In F3, I played on Very Easy and had to VATS everything

 

In New Vegas, I'm happily playing on "Normal" difficulty

What the f*ck I played F3 on Hard with multiple characters. Try being a stealthy chinese guy with a sword (one of the characters) if guns are too innacurate for you hahaha.

[Guest]

 

In F3, I played on Very Easy and had to VATS everything

 

In New Vegas, I'm happily playing on "Normal" difficulty

What the f*ck I played F3 on Hard with multiple characters. Try being a stealthy chinese guy with a sword (one of the characters) if guns are too innacurate for you hahaha.

 

I don't want to be a stealthy Chinese guy. I want to shoot things.

[Mr Rabbit]

Sure, blah blah, it's an RPG what the f*ck ever. But I felt skyrim had it bang on. It is much better to be able to train a skill just by doing it and not being restricted to a specific number value.

When I realised that in skyrim my mind was blown and I was in, such a good system. Plus the levelling system is based solely on these skills and not XP from kills or quests, that could be an idea to go down too because this way a higher level would still mean a more powerful character. Like in skyrim if you took on a giant at level 3 you would do the team rocket impression but do it at level 30 then it's a match. Both systems enable this kind of thing but if you do the skill by doing thing you need the levels based on skills thing too otherwise you would be level 50 but could be weak as f*ck, thereby making levels kinda useless. Skyrim had it nailed for an RPG and I hope that's the template moving forward

[a20characterusername]

Responses in green.

It always seems to baffle me that anyone could in any way knock Fallout 3, or even consider that New Vegas was better when it so clearly wasn't. In some aspects, sure, as it added upon the groundwork created by Fallout 3. But as an overall game, f*ck no.

 

Maybe because people have opinions that differ from yours? Crazy, I know. I think New Vegas had better writing, and the choices you made actually mattered, rather than "join the BOS no matter what you do". Fallout has always been about freedom of choice and how those choices affect others. People who played the older games tend to like NV better, because it feels more like an actual sequel, where Fallout 3 feels more like a spin-off.

 

Sure, blah blah, it's an RPG what the f*ck ever. But I felt skyrim had it bang on. It is much better to be able to train a skill just by doing it and not being restricted to a specific number value. The same goes for repair, which was a little more improved in new vegas. It was a constant annoyance but in the end I think I would prefer to keep the degrading weapons over skyrim's style of weapons and smithing. But you should be able to repair anything at any point, and attempt a hack or lockpick regardless of your level. Levels should just decide what perks you gain access to.

 

As far as training a skill by doing it ala Skyrim, look how that turned out. It's stupidly easy to exploit skills to 100 just by crafting daggers or casting the same spell over and over on a follower. I get what you're saying, but Skyrim's way of leveling was way too easily exploited.

 

But overall I think skyrim was pretty much what I want from fallout, in terms of the overall world and not setting any classes or traits before you have played the game yet. Buffing tag skills is good to start off with but I don't think we should be picking traits or classes. If they include traits again they should work as a removable and addable option, similar to the stones in skyrim.

 

There were never classes in Fallout except if you count the pre-made characters you *could* use in the first two games, and traits are optional (they don't even exist in Fallout 3). I don't know about you, but I don't want to play a character who's basically a master at every skill; it takes the challenge out of the game for me.

 

But generally the way I want it to be like skyrim is to have hundreds of locations of enemies. The main issue I always had with new vegas, though it had many gameplay improvements, it had too many factions and diplomacy options. Because let's face it, why piss off a group for no reason, you would want any benefits and unique items from them above anything else. So in the end of my 500+ hour game save the only hostile humans in the vanilla game world were fiends (who get boring fast) and viper gangs (which are in seriously short supply). The map was drastically smaller, and there were not even decent underground areas like Fallout 3 had, no metro tunnels no enemy strongholds or anything. The factions ruined that.

 

Diplomacy options exist because some people like doing a speech-oriented character; not everyone likes killing everything in sight.

 

Actually, the map in New Vegas was about the same size as Fallout 3, but I agree that there should have been more locations that weren't tied to a faction or the main story. One point I'll give to Fallout 3 is that it had a lot of places to explore just for the sake of exploring them, which I liked.

 

All enemy types were also drastically fenced in, you would NEVER see a randomly roaming enemy, I managed to get through the entire game only seeing two centaurs, one at close range one at long range, and though I avoid those things like the f*cking plague because they freak me out, in this instance it was a good thing, but the downside to that is that I rarely ever saw super mutants, never fought them other than a few occasions ever and the world ends up being a stagnated bore zone.

 

That's because scaling enemies didn't work in Fallout 3. Remember how once you'd get to level 20+, you'd start seeing Deathclaws pop up everywhere? Yeah, got a little annoying. I do wish that New Vegas added some more random enemy encounters though.

 

The shooting mechanics were greatly improved in new vegas, though I felt a lot of the damage had been removed, and with the inclusion of DT, it was worthless attacking any enemy that had armour with anything other than a weapon doing over 40 damage. So with that, all fully automatic weapons were made redundant. I want the feel of the chinese assault rifle back. Also the new running and shooting animations in new vegas were terrible. I am probably the only person I know that prefers playing in third person the majority of the time.

As far as DT, that's how it worked in all the other Fallout games besides 3. Also, did you ever bother using different ammo types? Because they can make a huge difference. I don't want weapons or armor to be simplified again like they were in Fallout 3.

 

Also, This Machine>Chinese Assault Rifle, jussupersaiyan'

 

So really, improvements for Fallout 4, would be to make sure the map was as large and included enough enemies and constant hostilities to keep you busy, but also to have random events just like skyrim had. I can't think of ANYTHING non scripted happening in fallout new vegas aside from a random wastelander roaming around south east of novac. Where as in Fallout 3 and even more so in skyrim, there were random spawns everywhere, and I loved that, and it kept the game fresh.

 

I agree 100% about random events; that's one place where New Vegas disappointed me. Wild Wasteland just didn't cut it.

 

I essentially want Fallout 3 but with the updates and additions from new vegas, but on a skyrim engine and using it's leveling system. But using the normal pip boy menu system and not skyrim's awfully jumbled up lists of bollocks.

 

If anyone can make sense of that.

 

Yeah, Skyrim's UI was terrible I agree, but I'd rather see a new engine in Fallout 4 rather than re-using Skyrim's. And a new character creation system would be nice, too.

Edited December 23, 2013 by gtarelatedusername2

[Guest]

I was gonna suggest Fallout should have vehicles a while back but I imagined everyone would tell me it's against the lore.

 

But I just found out Fallout 2 had a functioning car in it called the Highwayman, and F3 did have Vertibirds, and F:NV had a functioning B-29 Bomber....

 

 

...so how about vehicles?

Edited December 23, 2013 by Guest

[a20characterusername]

I was gonna suggest Fallout should have vehicles a while back but I imagined everyone would tell me it's against the lore.

 

But I just found out Fallout 2 had a functioning car in it called the Highwayman, and F3 did have Vertibirds, and F:NV had a functioning B-29 Bomber....

 

 

...so how about vehicles?

Like you say, Fallout 2 had a drivable car, although the map style of the old games is a lot different than the 3D ones. Personally I'd be for it if the map was large enough for vehicles to make sense and/or if fast travel was cut. Maybe even make it so you can fix up an old one yourself with the right scavenged parts and a high repair skill, and have it run on MFC cells or flamer fuel.

 

Of course, enemy factions could also use their vehicles against you...imagine a random encounter with the Mad Max vehicle. ;D

Edited December 23, 2013 by gtarelatedusername2

[Guest]

Although if we had vehicles the game would have to be a little more demanding. In F:NV, The Strip is split up by gates as it is, and was seen without gates in an E3 2010 demo so the gates were obviously technical limitations rather than design choice. Having to stop and go through a loading screen every corner would be pointless.

 

Hopefully with next-gen, Fallout gets a complete overhaul. New engine, no more separated maps, and vehicles.

 

Of course, if they wanted planes, a good idea for the edge of the map would be not to have invisible barriers, but to have a huge empty desert or something around it, and going too far out would give you a sh*tload of rads and kill you.

Edited December 23, 2013 by Guest

[Lee Everett]

The rumors are false, visit http://fallout3.com/

 

It's not owned by Bethesda Studios. They are working on a new Fallout game, but Fallout4.com won't be owned by them, it'll probably be on http://fallout.bethsoft.com/