Bring back Michael Kirkbride aka "I'm always high I fly above the sky".

One thing i hate about the writing in bethesda games is that they assume you want to be the "leader" of the factions (especially on the TES series), you are the listener,the harbinger,the head Nightingale,the magic guild master or whatever on skyrim it just feels so contrived no way someone can be all that at the same time, they should just make you choose one to be the leader while just a member to the rest .
On fallout 4 you are the damn minute men general but go around doing quest like a soldier would, why make you a goddamn general????just let Preston be the general and it would make way more sense i think.
While in fallout New Vegas things make sense, sure you can work for a lot of factions but you never become a general or something, why would a general in the NCR work with the Khans or go around bounty hunting?
Aside from that the "motivation" for the main quest in Fallout 4 was very weak, i mean who cares for that child?who cares for synths when people don't have water?So yes i think they should hire a new writer or the one now needs to improve.

@Pharah The latest Elder Scrolls games certainly have lacked the wonderful weirdness of Kirkbride. His worldbuilding abilities wouldn't have saved the writing, but it would've elevated the games artistically. Morrowind was like another planet while Skyrim/Oblivion were generic humanlands.

@lolzao On the Minutemen thing - yeah, that was super stupid. I was watching a FO4 Let's Play series where it was suggested to make Preston a delusional nutjob, who thinks he's the General despite sitting there doing nothing, and you're just indulging his madness further to somewhat fix the character.

Also to further Elder Scrolls quest nonsense - Morrowind had several factions where doing the quests for one locked you out of another - Thieves Guild/Fighters Guild, Mages Guild/House Telvanni, you could join only one Great House in general. There were actual requirements and you couldn't became Archmagister of Mages Guild without any knowledge of magic.

lolzao wrote:

One thing i hate about the writing in bethesda games is that they assume you want to be the "leader" of the factions (especially on the TES series), you are the listener,the harbinger,the head Nightingale,the magic guild master or whatever on skyrim it just feels so contrived no way someone can be all that at the same time, they should just make you choose one to be the leader while just a member to the rest .
On fallout 4 you are the damn minute men general but go around doing quest like a soldier would, why make you a goddamn general????just let Preston be the general and it would make way more sense i think.
While in fallout New Vegas things make sense, sure you can work for a lot of factions but you never  become a general or something, why would a general in the NCR work with the Khans or go around bounty hunting?
Aside from that the "motivation" for the main quest in Fallout 4 was very weak, i mean who cares for that child?who cares for synths when people don't have water?So yes i think they should hire a new writer or the one now needs to improve.

A agree with you Sir. it seems like Bethesda forgot their own roots of role-playing experience RPG they made from the past. in Daggerfall, there are reputation system in every guild & faction, but interesting is that those guild & faction have their own opinion & hate each other. julianos and the mages guild openly hate each other. ( tell ya what, in Daggerfall there are so many faction & guild ya can join compare to what you have in Skyrim ) even in Morrowind. now its sad that in Skyrim none of this would happen. since they choose to dumb down the RPG to save their company from bankrupt, more likely..

Yes, they do. Badly. IIRC Morrowind had writers not employed by Bethesda but hired to write the story, and that is (in my opinion, widely disregarded) the best story a Bethesda game has ever had.

DEFINITELY! They really need some fresh ideas.

Also, there are 4 Bethesda Fallout products that start with a missing person. (Fallout 3, Point Lookout, Fallout 4 and Far Harbour). The idea machine at Bethesda HQ needs more juice.

@Nrichards still better than nearly all of the DLC in NV being that you are contacted by a broadcast, and then you basically naively walk into the DLC for no reason. There's no real goal to any of the DLC, in Dead Money you just get captured by Elijah and try to get out the Sierra Madre, in Honest Hearts you just protect some caravan, and then have to get inbetween some war with tribals, and Lonesome Road you just kill tons of marked men to get to Ulysses. With Fallout 3, you are forced to go search for your Dad, by not only the game and your own instinct, but by the Overseer. You get chased out of Vault 101, so what else would you do in that situation. The point of the Fallout 3 is that you are forced into that situation by the circumstances you are in. Point Lookout is like Far Harbor, but not entirely because the Lone Wanderer makes that decision by himself. In Far Harbour you are sent by Nick Valentine. In 4 the SS is forced into doing so by his love for his family. The Courier is not forced into anything, he could've just not acknowledged the broadcasts and would be better off. In 3 and 4, it is quite different, as you are forced and motivated to look for family.

Bethesda's writing isn't perfect, but neither is Obsidian's writing. I never really felt motivated to kill Benny, and I never really felt motivated to side with a faction. In 3 and 4 this is very different, as the character develops bonds with their family so does the player, and this makes the player want to search and find out where the missing person is. New Vegas just assumes you want to do all of this and by doing so forces you into a certain character, you MUST do this, you NEED to do that. Why should I care about the NCR or Legion or House when they havent upset me in the slightest? The Enclave in 3 and the Institute in 4 are tied into the storyline and therefore make the player give two shits about those factions, because they killed your father or they have your son. In doing so, the story is MUCH more emotional and engaging. The only two reasons to side with any faction in NV is the fate of the Mojave, which most players wont care about anyway, and what armors and weapons you get out of these quests.

@lolzao none of the factions in Fallout 3 accept you as a leader, and in Fallout 4 only 2 factions make you their leader, one being the Institute and the other the Minutemen, and the Minutemen can be left alone and not met even after the ending. The Institute makes sense for you to be leader, as your son was the previous leader. I will agree with you that the Minutemen were poorly written, but they play such a small role in the storyline it is essentially just a bonus ending.

Fallout NV is a great addon to Fallout 3, and while I would enjoy a new Obsidian Fallout game, I feel you Obsidian fanboys ignore Obsidian's faults with the game. Fallout NV was a lot better from an RPG perspective, but Obsidian's writing is not that much better.

@"Corvo" I think this comes down to personal feeling. Yes me and many others rag on at Bethesda for the things they do, but I (at the very least) know Obsidian is not perfect. I do prefer Obsidian's writing style and the plot hook up to the plot end had me engaged. Like i said, it is personal preference. Regarding the DLC, they do basically boil down to receiving a message and going to it. But this i think is a major improvement on you not dying at the end of the base game and receiving it that way. Messages are quick and efficient way to start a DLC like any other quest. F3 had 2 dlcs that didn't use this technique (i think), those being Mothership Zeta and Broken Steel.

@Nrichards I'm glad you understand that Obsidian is not perfect. Many would blindly defend Obsidian and demonize Bethesda, and I'm quite happy you say you know Obsidian have their faults. However, Broken Steel was a continuation of the main storyline, and a sort of true ending to the Lone Wanderer's story. Broken Steel couldn't be executed any other way tbh. It just wouldn't make much sense to get a broadcast for a DLC that's supposed to be after the main game, and Mothership Zeta (I would not even try defending this DLC as it IS poorly written) is supposed to be a surprise. The player is supposed to not know they are going to be abducted, although this was executed poorly not because of the writing, but because of the overall design, as many players would have disliked if they were forced into a DLC at random points, and the quest title kinda gives it away.

I personally think MZ was executed poorly and thus is terrible, and the writing is terrible mostly because they state it is canon but MZ is just absurd, and then they say the Great War was the fault of aliens? Emil kinda went full retard on this DLC, I will admit, but some of the problems with MZ lies with the designers and the rest of Beth, and not Emil.

It's not Emil's fault that Broken Steel was executed as it was. It was probably the decision of others to have it be a DLC. Broken Steel was probably a part of the main storyline, but was cut off for money. This isn't Emil's fault, as Broken Steel isn't poorly written at all. Most probably the rest of Beth decided this, and I will defend Emil on this, but Bethesda not so much.

@"Corvo" With Broken Steel it wouldn't of made a lick of sense to have a radio broadcast, you're completely right. It does feel like it was supposed to be in the base game and the actual end of the base game feels like the end of the second act to a traditional story. If a DLC is a pure add-on with little relation to the over-arching plot, i think a simple pip-boy message is fine. And (while i think it was scummy of Bethesda to release the proper ending to their game as DLC) Broken Steel does continue the main plot, unlike other DLCs. Mothership Zeta I think is one of the worst bits of Fallout content since Fallout:BoS, a truly awful DLC in my opinion.

Going back to an earlier point, neither Obsidian or Bethesda are perfect. I would be over the moon if Bethesda released a Fallout game on par (In an RPG sense) to 1,2 or New Vegas. I am not a blind Obsidian fanboy (Unless i'm talking to my Fallout 4 obsessed friend).

Corvo wrote:

Many would blindly defend Obsidian and demonize Bethesda

You don't have to demonize them, they do it just fine themselves(RIP Prey 2). If I have to defend obsidian it's because normie casuals fail to grasp that Fallout is supposed to be a CRPG that is meant to have adaptive and involved character-based dialogue, and role playing mechanics that could be translated into a tabletop session.
To be fair though, Obsidian after New Vegas is trash. All of the key people left, including Avellone.

@cyber_funk First of all, Prey 2017 at least by my knowledge, has a 9/10 score on Steam, so no, Prey is not dead. Bethesda only published the game anyway, Arkane created the game, the creators of Dishonored.

Second of all, by complaining about "normie casuals" you don't see your own elitism. Fallout would have been dead if Bethesda never revived it. Bethesda brought Fallout to the mainstream, and by saying you constantly have to remind "normie casuals" of the original goals of the franchise, you are effectively saying you have more right to Fallout than they do. I cannot grasp how you use the term "normie" and "casual" in this kind of community anyway, as it is not COD or CSGO, and as I said, casuals have as much right to the franchise as both you and I do.

What you fail to understand is that YOUR idea of Fallout is dead. Bethesda has learned from Interplay's mistakes and developed on the franchise, made it better in some respects and made mistakes themselves. As I've said in the past, being a mainstream game is not always a bad thing. Before you bring up Fallout 4, Bethesda clearly wanted change. They thought that the Mass Effect franchise including others is popular, so why not implement Mass Effect's voiced protagonist into Fallout. Clearly that was a foolish idea, but at least they want innovation. If they were a company like Activision, or even Interplay, they would've just followed what they did last time.

If you don't like a game, just move on. Stop infecting the community and complaining about the game, even going to hilarious lengths to try and have a company remove their own writer just so you can try to get your parental figure Avellone one step further to Bethesda. Let Bethesda make up their own mind, you don't own Fallout, and you certainly don't own Bethesda.

Get out and go make up your own company and make your own game if it gets to you that much. Bitching isn't productive, and you can cloak this as "criticism" all you like, but I can criticize your criticism too, and my criticism is that your criticism isn't criticism, but mindless fanboyism.

@Corvo Reluctantly I awaken from my slumber to address this nonsense once again...

Using the argument "go make it yourself if you don't like it" shows you still have no grasp of how criticism works, dude. And Bethesda hasn't revived Fallout because they don't have the slightest idea what made Fallout unique and so beloved. Their games aren't Fallout just because they have the name on them and share similar visuals. The soul of the product is completely changed and you have to ask why they chose to buy this property at all if they had no interest in keeping anything but the surface level aspects from it.

Also, a nitpick, but I love to death how you whine that New Vegas DLCs start with a radio broadcast... when FO3 DLCs did the same thing, first.

@superpele you have proven my points. You call my posts nonsense because you don't agree with it, fanboy. Maybe if you weren't biased on one side you'd see you've fell into proving my points

You never addressed it properly in the first place anyway, all you did was label it as criticism and then think you're untouchable. Dude, try to actually think up more points and not just sit there and play the criticism card.

Lmao back to this "criticism" thing I see. Yes, it's completely fine to criticise, but if you're obsessed with criticising the same game over and over again you should just make your own game instead of repeating yourself. I can criticize your criticisms of the game as well, so there. Stop bitching and go play another game if it gets to you that much, or go make your own game. Repeating yourself over and over obnoxiously isn't helping.

Face it YOUR vision of Fallout is dead, and it's fair to criticize Beth for it, but stop fucking repeating yourself hoping you'll bandwagon some more fanboys into "taking back" what's not yours in the first place. I'm not a big fan of your repetitive autistic screeching.

If you read my previous points, you'd know I said FO3 obviously should've not had quest markers to start their dlcs, as it was quite obvious MZ and OA were supposed to surprise the player, but because would not know where the DLC is, they placed the quests markers there. This was done for the ease of access, but not for overall immersion. You really think the LW would deliberately walk to a certain spot get abducted by aliens? The startup locations were in places the LW would actually know, like PL was close to the Citadel.

NV's DLC always starts in discrete locations that the Courier would not even care of. The only reason the Courier visits these locations is because of the broadcasts, 3's DLC were obviously designed to simulate random encounters, because the Pitt's startup location was close to Raven Rock, instead of "go to this discrete location nobody cares of". 3's DLC was obviously supposed to be much more, while NV's was a safe bet.

Keep deliberating ignoring my previous posts and explanations just so you can make them much weaker to attack. Keep calling my points nonsense. It only proves how ignorant, elitist and hilarious you fanboys are. Go back to No Mutants Allowed if you want a limp biscuit about Fallout.

@Corvo You say I haven't read your posts, but I have. Every one of them. And you know what I saw in them, as you posted more and more? A person who constantly contradicts themselves, calls others who disagree with them "fanboys", projects their own qualities onto others, admits to trolling, thinks that Bethesda gets flak only to garner some upvotes and has a personal vendetta against New Vegas, because it had the sheer audacity to be well written. And if you see constructive criticism only as synonym for complaining, instead of as a platform for discussion about what did and did not work with a product, then, well, I really don't know what else to say.

And while it's pretty hard to phase me, you using autism, a neurological disorder, as an insult is incredibly repulsive.

Corvo wrote:

@cyber_funk First of all, Prey 2017 at least by my knowledge, has a 9/10 score on Steam, so no, Prey is not dead. Bethesda only published the game anyway, Arkane created the game, the creators of Dishonored.

Did you not know about the original Prey 2?


You see, bethesda likes to do this thing where they milestone-abuse a studio under contract until they're left with no choice but to sell off their studio. EA is a veteran of this practice and is much more successful at it.
When they did it to Human Head, the original developers of Prey 2, the project was canned despite being 90% complete and in the polishing stage. Years later bethesda replaced it with a game that has absolutely nothing to do with the original prey, it's a completely different franchise with the same name. It doesn't even have the same basic premise or themes.

What was originally supposed to be a open world parkour alien bounty hunting game got turned into a generic system shock clone with the most uninspired setting imaginable. I'm sure it was OKAY, it might have even been a good game. Regardless, it would have been nice to live in a world where both games had come out.

Corvo wrote:

casuals have as much right to the franchise as both you and I do.

I think you misunderstand me. I'm not upset that more people are playing the game, I would absolutely love it if more people played classic CRPGs.
However, the people that play Fallout 3 and 4 look at the first two and go:

Spoiler:

Needless to say there's some contempt.

The problem is that games are becoming less and less diverse. Why does every game need a half-assed crafting system and shallow level up system comprised of linear numeric value changes if the game is just a QTE third person hallway shooter anyway?
Why does every game need to be a QTE third person hallway shooter or LoL clone? Why can't we also have games that still cater to niche audiences instead of taking niche franchises and turning them into generic soulless corporate garbage?

Corvo wrote:

What you fail to understand is that YOUR idea of Fallout is dead.

Oh no, believe me, I realize it's dead. I don't expect to get another game like New Vegas for a long time.

Corvo wrote:

implement Mass Effect's voiced protagonist into Fallout. Clearly that was a foolish idea,

Correct!

Corvo wrote:

but at least they want innovation.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=What+does+innovation+mean%3F

Hint:

Corvo wrote:

even going to hilarious lengths to try and have a company remove their own writer just so you can try to get your parental figure Avellone one step further to Bethesda. Let Bethesda make up their own mind, you don't own Fallout, and you certainly don't own Bethesda.

I... What?
What "hilarious lengths"?
I never said anything like that. I never even said anything close to anything you just typed here. Nothing I said in my post could possibly be misconstrued like that.

Corvo wrote:

Get out and go make up your own company and make your own game if it gets to you that much.

Tu quoque fallacy; does every person need to design a multi-million dollar AAA game to criticize it?

Corvo wrote:

you can cloak this as "criticism" all you like, but I can criticize your criticism too, and my criticism is that your criticism isn't criticism

Why is what I said not considered criticism? Who made you the authority of what can be criticized?
What makes you think you're the only one here who's allowed to have an opinion?

Right! Hello there! I thought I'd jump on in for some cent tossing! Y'know, through some cents there, some cents there.. Pish, posh, ping, pong, bing, bang. Anywho, I'm completely impartial to this whole conversation, I don't swing either way and I'm a little proud of it.

Right! First off, I have to agree with @Corvo on a few of his points. I'm also of the party that gets a bit frustrated when seeing people blindly jump on the 'FALLOUT 4 IS BAD BECAUSE NEW VEGAS' trailer. Some folkes started a nasty little Mexican wave when Fallout 4 hit the shelves, downing it as a bad game that was an absolute travesty compared to New Vegas. Fallout 4 is fine, good even. Great by some standards! Is it objectively better than New Vegas? Maybe? Who knows? But it's important to recognize that both are great games and both have their own flaws, it's all about where your theme, gameplay and writing preferences lie.

That being said... @Corvo... I look up to you a lot, you make a lot of really good points in other threads that I'd normally have no problem whatsoever upvoting. But here, oh boy, I'm sorry friend but you're really not doing yourself any favors with the choice of wording. Throwing out bombs like 'Fanboys', 'Elitism' and poking the sleeping bear by calling out serious opinions as 'Hilarious' or 'Silly'... It's just not helping your cause. >_<

Honestly, the whole thread has become something of an eye-sore to passers-by I'd assume. v_v

New LEAD writer? No man, they need to clean house. They need ALL new writers, the whole writing department should be replaced.

On a related note, Bethesda needs to seriously tone down the content padding, generic faction related quests are seriously a cancer on Bethesda titles, there was also lost potential in Fallout 3 & 4 with the dominant mercenary outfits being instantly hostile on first contact, the Gunners and Talon Company merc groups would've made for some great questlines.

They should just hire Someguy2000 and let him sort everything out. His mods are better written than Fallout 3, New Vegas and Fallout 4 put together. Bobby Bass is God.