@shocktrooper666 There honestly weren't /that/ many retcons, at least that I can remember.
And from the ones I do remember, they weren't egregious or anything. =o
People seem to hear the word 'retcon' and automatically view 'em as bad, there can be good or 'meh' retcons too.

Hmmm I could name a few that i can think of.

1. Dialogue Tree was horrendous. Don't defend the damned thing, we all know it's crap lol
2. The fact that you could obtain all perks. Where's the fun in being invincible?
3. Lacks true unique weapons and replaced it with legendary weapons that look identical to it's ordinary counterparts. Yeah bullshit that The Last Minute doesnt look different from a fully modded normal gauss rifle.
4. Some retcons, especially why power armors need goddamn double-a batteries now, wtf man
5. Most of the weapons have the same kind of attachable mods on them (reflex sight, suppressor, bayonet, etc) Good lord, they couldnt even bother putting an underslung nuka grenade launcher for the handmade rifle. They just had to make most of them have the same shit. Damn.

The first response from Tribal Raven covers a lot of it.

Most of Fallout 4 is bad. Most of Bethesda's design decisions, and the overall direction they decided to take with the game, was a regression. They should have just built on top of New Vegas.

I think the radiant quests and focus on procedurally generated content is the most poisonous thing they've done. That garbage is anathema to the open world experience Bethesda games are/were known for. It affects the quests, the loot, the enemies and all for the worse. It cuts the heart out of what made these games special. I was worried when I realized what radiant quests were in Skyrim but I was horrified to see Bethesda expand their use in Fallout 4.

@KukBuddy i have to totally agree on Karma's removal being a total fuck up, i was also disappointing not to see the return of the new vegas style reputation system and mild allowance to be as neutral as possible, it just seemed to be a case of, ''you work for us, kill everyone else''

I felt like Fallout 4 was more of a FPS with RPG elements than an RPG, kinda like the latest Ghost Recon on how it is a shooter first and had only RPG elements. You can upgrade you character in Ghost Recon with perks like parachutes and various skills and there is also a crafting system, but is still not an RPG. Fallout 4 removed a great perk system (not to say Fallout 4's isn't good, just different) and also the karma system. Anytime I leveled up in Fallout 4 I didn't really look forward to the next level or the perks that come with it as opposed to other games like the earlier Fallouts or TES. It was an enjoyable experience yes, but I did not find it as intriguing as passed Fallouts or other RPGs such as Mass Effect, which also was a shooter with RPG elements but the Karma system there was flawless. I just didn't find Fallout 4 to be a *true* RPG like other games of the genre. It also didn't feel like a true Fallout game, more of an expansion on the idea that is Fallout.

xtheoutcastedx wrote:

I felt like Fallout 4 was more of a FPS with RPG elements than an RPG, kinda like the latest Ghost Recon on how it is a shooter first and had only RPG elements. You can upgrade you character in Ghost Recon with perks like parachutes and various skills and there is also a crafting system, but is still not an RPG. Fallout 4 removed a great perk system (not to say Fallout 4's isn't good, just different) and also the karma system. Anytime I leveled up in Fallout 4 I didn't really look forward to the next level or the perks that come with it as opposed to other games like the earlier Fallouts or TES. It was an enjoyable experience yes, but I did not find it as intriguing as passed Fallouts or other RPGs such as Mass Effect, which also was a shooter with RPG elements but the Karma system there was flawless.  I just didn't find Fallout 4 to be a *true* RPG like other games of the genre. It also didn't feel like a true Fallout game, more of an expansion on the idea that is Fallout.

Hey I agree with you Kyle, that’s like my biggest problem with fo4 that it didn’t focus on the RPG elements, it would have been nice if it was a FPS and RPG at the same time, sadly it’s not

about the perk system, the only thing fallout 4’s perk system did better than fo3/fnv is that you can add a perk when you wish, I found it annoying in fnv that every time I lvl up I need to sit there and read perks for 5 minutes

KukBuddy wrote:

Hey I agree with you Kyle, that’s like my biggest problem with fo4 that it didn’t focus on the RPG elements, it would have been nice if it was a FPS and  RPG at the same time, sadly it’s not

about the perk system, the only thing fallout 4’s perk system did better than fo3/fnv is that you can add a perk when you wish, I found it annoying in fnv that every time I lvl up I need to sit there and read perks for 5 minutes

I 100% agree as well. I hated having to stop as I was in the middle of playing to level up, broke my immersion a little bit. The multiple ranks of each perk was also great in F04, I'm not complaining about the structure of it at all. It just didn't feel right to me. Sure the perks were all great, but they didn't really improve your play style like say Skyrim's perk tree does. Sure you can upgrade you sneak skill and semi-auto weapon damage so you can be a long ranged sniper, but that's really the far extent of it

xtheoutcastedx wrote:

I 100% agree as well. I hated having to stop as I was in the middle of playing to level up, broke my immersion a little bit. The multiple ranks of each perk was also great in F04, I'm not complaining about the structure of it at all. It just didn't feel right to me. Sure the perks were all great, but they didn't really improve your play style like say Skyrim's perk tree does. Sure you can upgrade you sneak skill and semi-auto weapon damage so you can be a long ranged sniper, but that's really the far extent of it

But the thing is I think I know why they chanced the perk system it’s because it’s easier for newer players. Because fallout 4 was my first fallout I played seriously and actually completed, the first time i played fo3/fnv I was a stupid 10 year old playing around with console commands. I loved fo4 perk system before, but after revisiting the older games and being used to that perk system, I can then say that the new system is a downgrade  

Bethesda have also chanced a ton of stuff just to make it easier for new fans, it’s a real shame there were a lot of great things from the old fallouts they removed or chanced, for example the fo4 limb system heals over a short time without stimpaks and you get your first power armor early in the game and there is no power armor training perk

[quote="KukBuddy"]

xtheoutcastedx wrote:

But the thing is I think I know why they chanced the perk system it’s because it’s easier for newer players. Because fallout 4 was my first fallout I played seriously and actually completed, the first time i played fo3/fnv I was a stupid 10 year old playing around with console commands. I loved fo4 perk system before, but after revisiting the older games and being used to that perk system, I can then say that the new system is a downgrade  

Bethesda have also chanced a ton of stuff just to make it easier for new fans, it’s a real shame there were a lot of great things from the old fallouts they removed or chanced, for example the fo4 limb system heals over a short time without stimpaks and you get your first power armor early in the game and there is no power armor training perk

I couldn't have said it better myself. I got Fallout 3 when I was 13 and couldn't get to Rivet City. then a friend of mine told me you can change the difficulty and I was like WHAT DO YOU MEAN THERE IS MORE THAN ONE SETTING!? Revisiting older Fallouts makes Fallout 4 look obsolete, but on it's own Fallout 4 is an amazing game.

I also agree with what you said about new fans. To me it seems like Bethesda tried to keep old fans of the series while entertaining new ones. Fallout 4 was so hyped as a AAA title that they had a lot to deliver on, and deliver they did to the new fans. Fans like us who have been around since the bombs dropped were a little disappointed but entertained all the same. Adding things like different pieces of armor was something we'd all wanted and settlements I at least wanted from playing the Wasteland Settler mod. Those are the greatest additions other than the upgraded crafting system.

Although those pieces outshine *vanilla* Fallout 3 and NV, the overall feel of the game is still so different. I'm a baseball fan and have family who live in Boston, so I loved seeing the Green Monster and visiting places I've actually been to. I also have family in D.C., and exploring the ruins of the Museum of Technology, Capital Building, the National Mall, and hit me so much harder than Boston did. It is a largely different feeling exploring each of them, maybe it is because I find Fallout 3 more geographically accurate, or maybe it was just because I was around 13 when I first explored it. Honestly, I'm not entirely sure. But the sense of exploration, at least for me, was so much more prominent in Fallout 3 than in 4.

I can't stress enough how much of a different feel these games have. Fallout 1&2 are different from 3 & NV while 4 & 76 are different from them but more close enough to still feel like the same realm. I'm sure when Fallout 3 first released the OG Fallout fans had the same exact conversation you and I are currently having

So many elements to comment on.

I absolutely HATE how colourful this game is. Fallout’s universe is supposed to be dark and miserable. The only glimmer of hope within all that darkness is the rebuilding of civilisation. Fallout 4 looks like a seven year old was given a set of crayons and told to design the next Fallout game after a self-inflicted lobotomy. Fallout has always had a unique style and atmosphere. If you want a Disney adventure go play something else.

Furthermore, I absolutely despise the map. There’s hardly any large expanses or fields or even anything that screams nuclear barren wasteland. It’s just all poorly designed and implemented city areas full of cannon fodder to kill. There’s literally only two “cities” and both of them are comparable to the size of Skyrim villages. Even Megaton or Rivet City felt bigger, and they were created just over half a decade earlier with less hardware capabilities! You want more life in the wasteland you have to build it yourself and grind for materials to build settlements which yield absolutely no benefit to the player other than having some more wooden shacks in the wasteland containing lifeless NPCs with only a few repetitive lines of dialogue.

The lack of interesting side quests are appalling. In Fallout 3 you could turn the synth in to Zimmer, give Zimmer a fake android component or tell Harkness he’s a synth. In New Vegas, you could trade one of your companions to be dinner for the White Glove Society, you could kidnap someone else to take Gunderson’s son’s place, you could convince Gunderson he’s not there, etc. In Fallout 4 you are given two choices. Kill them all or not do the quest at all. Gone are the days of actual roleplay and decision making, now it’s just gun-ho or quit the game! What quantifies the RPG tag on this game? The character creator?

Minor nitpick but holy God the design of the pipboy sucks. Why did they remove the glove too? It’s almost as iconic as the pipboy itself!

I also hate the clunky Power Armor in the game. While at first it was enjoyable and felt like a mech suit it now makes me feel like I’m wearing a walking novelty. Say what you will about the cardboard plating of 3 and NV’s Power Armor, but for gods sakes at least it wasn’t a burden which slowed down the game and made playing it a struggle. I’d gladly take weaker and lighter power armor over a clunky death suit any day of the week. The fusion cores are annoying considering it makes no sense how quick they run out of juice too. How are they running for 200 years to all of a sudden empty within an hour of use?

Scratch this edit/quote

Fallout 4 is unique among all these games, in that years and years later, it's still hated for its original release state. No one is truly angry today, about Doc Mitchell's spinning head or the backward flying dragons or the endless bugs that had to be patched by an unofficial patch mod. Even today, all of those games need patches made by modders. All of them. But no one rages and rages about those bugs, because, click, and they're gone. People used to be furious at the shit-hole disappointment that the city of New Vegas turned out to be. But... they modded their game. Now New Vegas is worshiped fanatically, its day one hatred forgotten.
Mod your game, just like you probably did for Skyrim and New Vegas. It won't fix everything, but it will fix so damn much. Stop playing vanilla fallout 4, no wonder you're so all angry. Just... stop.

Blonde wrote:

So many elements to comment on.

I absolutely HATE how colourful this game is. Fallout’s universe is supposed to be dark and miserable. The only glimmer of hope within all that darkness is the rebuilding of civilisation. Fallout 4 looks like a seven year old was given a set of crayons and told to design the next Fallout game after a self-inflicted lobotomy. Fallout has always had a unique style and atmosphere. If you want a Disney adventure go play something else.

Furthermore, I absolutely despise the map. There’s hardly any large expanses or fields or even anything that screams nuclear barren wasteland. It’s just all poorly designed and implemented city areas full of cannon fodder to kill. There’s literally only two “cities” and both of them are comparable to the size of Skyrim villages. Even Megaton or Rivet City felt bigger, and they were created just over half a decade earlier with less hardware capabilities! You want more life in the wasteland you have to build it yourself and grind for materials to build settlements which yield absolutely no benefit to the player other than having some more wooden shacks in the wasteland containing lifeless NPCs with only a few repetitive lines of dialogue.

The lack of interesting side quests are appalling. In Fallout 3 you could turn the synth in to Zimmer, give Zimmer a fake android component or tell Harkness he’s a synth. In New Vegas, you could trade one of your companions to be dinner for the White Glove Society, you could kidnap someone else to take Gunderson’s son’s place, you could convince Gunderson he’s not there, etc. In Fallout 4 you are given two choices. Kill them all or not do the quest at all. Gone are the days of actual roleplay and decision making, now it’s just gun-ho or quit the game! What quantifies the RPG tag on this game? The character creator?

Minor nitpick but holy God the design of the pipboy sucks. Why did they remove the glove too? It’s almost as iconic as the pipboy itself!

I also hate the clunky Power Armor in the game. While at first it was enjoyable and felt like a mech suit it now makes me feel like I’m wearing a walking novelty. Say what you will about the cardboard plating of 3 and NV’s Power Armor, but for gods sakes at least it wasn’t a burden which slowed down the game and made playing it a struggle. I’d gladly take weaker and lighter power armor over a clunky death suit any day of the week. The fusion cores are annoying considering it makes no sense how quick they run out of juice too. How are they running for 200 years to all of a sudden empty within an hour of use?

You have a a lot of good points here. It doesn't feel like a fallout, it looks like Fallout 3 with an ENB and sky mod on with half the dialogue or options for quests taken out. The game was obviously geared more so toward new palyers as opposed to fans of the series. I liked it don't get me wrong, but I had the option to remake it in the image of previous Fallouts you can bet your ass I'd take it.

Fallout 4 had a lot of short comings, as does the lack of original assets in New Vegas (what I mean by that is New Vegas is essentially a mod of Fallout 3 much like New California is to New Vegas). They both have their issues, but the original engine gave far less possibles but far more fun! Like you said with the quests, those alone are enough to cry about in Fallout 4 and cry I have. It's obscene how different the games are in feeling and content. The only thing that draws me back to Fallout 4 are the callouts and cameos from Fallout 3. I love to see how the little guys grew up and how they now impact the world of Fallout... if even it's too bright and happy for me.

@"KukBuddy" Bethesda removing traits and killing off the skill checks

Sirdanest wrote:

Fallout 4 is unique among all these games, in that years and years later, it's still hated for its original release state.  No one is truly angry today, about Doc Mitchell's spinning head or the backward flying dragons or the endless bugs that had to be patched by an unofficial patch mod. Even today, all of those games need patches made by modders.  All of them.  But no one rages and rages about those bugs, because,  click, and they're gone. People used to be furious at the shit-hole disappointment that the city of New Vegas turned out to be.  But... they modded their game.  Now New Vegas is worshiped fanatically, its day one hatred forgotten.  
Mod your game, just like you probably did for Skyrim and New Vegas.  It won't fix everything, but it will fix so damn much.  Stop playing vanilla fallout 4, no wonder you're so all angry.  Just... stop.  

I agree that fallout 4 gets to much hate, i personally loved fo4 but it’s not a perfect game, unfortunately dosent everybody think it’s good,

fallout new Vegas is loved by the community so much
because it had a overall good story, fun quests, rpg elements, much more, but it had terrible graphics and gameplay, that is a ton easier to fix   with mods rather than fallout 4 , in fallout 4 you can’t fix the story, quests, rpg elements  it’s is almost impossible for a modder to fix all of that in fallout 4 if they want the mod to be good and it would take them a shit ton of work

I know that fallout 4 mods can fix a lot things for example the settlement system and bugs but it can’t fix like i said  the story,quest etc

@KukBuddy Fallout 4 gets undeserved hate because there's certain expectations that come with a famous name. If they had released it with a completely different name everybody would love it, but because it's called Fallout you hear comments such as: but it's too colorful, but they changed the lore, but it doesn't feel like the classics -and my personal favorite- but it's not really an rpg.

So what? Can't you appreciate it as an individual work? Just because it's called Fallout it has to be heavy on the rpg elements? Did the devs made some sort of oath to always make Fallout a hardcore RPG? And BTW, what's the problem if it's not? Do you not like any other games besides RPGs?

Let's talk about the story. FO4 has a great story. What it doesn't have is the number of different dialogue options that NV has. Again, so what? The quality of a story is not tied to having 20 different ways to finish a quest. Would it be nice to have a bit more options? Sure. But does that make or break the story? NO. Bioshock Infinite has literally no choices, and it's a great story. But because it's called Fallout, people just have to have those 20 ways to finish the quest, most of which they won't do anyway, or they complain about it.

With FNV, people complained the desaturated wasteland looked awful and wanted a more vibrant and colorful environment, yet they hate FO4 for doing exactly that.
Players say they want to make choices, yet you see them complaining that you can't get the factions in FO4 to work together, even though that would make no sense since they have completely opposite and incompatible goals. Oh, and you can bet when they play NV they go and download a mod to make all factions get along nicely so that they don't have to make a choice about who lives and who dies. But they want choices, you see?
People hold the game to standards they don't hold any other game. One of the first comments in this post was tribal raven saying that FO4 was too restrictive because what if you don't want to find Shaun or what if you want to be born during the Apocalypse and not before. And I like I pointed out, what game does give you that freedom? NV certainly doesn't.

Ultimately, do you play a game for the bleak colors, or to read every line of dialogue? Do you enjoy spending more than half of the time you play figuring out stats and numbers? Is that what makes a game fun? Or do you like to get in there and shoot some stuff? BTW, you could enjoy all those things, but how is it bad just because it's not a hardcore rpg?

gavin gold wrote:

One of the first comments in this post was tribal raven saying that FO4 was too restrictive because what if you don't want to find Shaun or what if you want to be born during the Apocalypse and not before. And I like I pointed out, what game does give you that freedom? NV certainly doesn't.

I have to disagree with you there.

New Vegas simply gives you a profession, not something with a lot of weight either. Courier compared to New California soldier for example. One carries FAR more weight than the other.

You have no obligation to do anything in the game, not even find Benny. But FO4 puts them in a Wasteland where their ONLY object being finding Shaun.

Now, I'll agree with you that one must appreciate Fallout 4 for what it is, which is, a shooter with some RPG elements. In fact, I have several hundred hours in the game. I love the plot, roleplaying as a BOS soldier patrolling Boston is so much fun. Same with the settlement building.

But the hate IS justified. Why? Because the original player base loved that the series was a heavy RPG. Look at Wasteland (spiritual predecessor) and Fallout 1 and 2. Take those heavy RPG elements away and it pisses the original players off.

Should they be? I mean no because they should expect it. Bethesda is a business and this model of a video game is far more profitable to them. They have every right to make the game however they want. Fallout 4 appeals to a much wider audience and it's obvious with Fallout 76 that this style of game is what appeals to people.

Spoiler:

I just read your post mate, it was  really long and if I get something wrong I’m sorry, I just read it twice, I don’t want to sound rude or anything but I hate fucking reading ;( so me reading it a lot of times would take ages

Anyways I totally forgot to mention like you said that if it was called something else people would be fine about it, I totally agree about that part because I myself think it’s a good game but a bad fallout, because fallout was popular for being a RPG not a FPS, but if it was at same time a FPS and rpg that would be the best fallout ever, I know a lot of people would disagree with me, but games must evolve from its first game, if they did the same thing all the time it would become boring, look at fifa or cod they make the same shit every year.

About the story I know the biggest disappointment is the  choices in story but I disagree that it was a great story because I think it was not, don’t get me wrong I enjoyed it, but it was only in the beginning because I loved that your character lived before the war, nick valentine part was fun, the synths were also interesting and much more but the rest I didn’t like, Kellogg was a failed villain and I didn’t even care about Shaun, bethesda forced so much stuff from the story. I also forgot the minutemen they are a living cancer in the commonwealth cough cough Preston Garvey

the change to the art style, I personally am a huge fan of it because they mostly kept the original designs but made it a lot better

@KukBuddy Yeah, sorry man, lol. I tend to rant. I mean, I think the story is good. Maybe great was an exaggeration, but it's an engaging story.

@Tribal Raven So, I think it's the fact that they made a voiced character that gives people the sense that there's not enough ambiguity. Because, I think about it and I don't find that we know that much more about the sole survivor than we did about previous characters. We know his/her profession, we know he/she has a son and a spouse, and we know where they used to live before the war, that´s about it. We don't know anything about motivations, character traits, desires, goals... that's all on the player to decide. Compare that to say FO3, when we literally see the protagonist's childhood and life in the Vault. Problem is voices add a deep level of personality, so it breaks the immersion of that character being yours.

I think where I disagree the most is about the main quest. I find every single character in Bethesda's games has a clear goal. The courier has no other goal than to find Benny and recover the chip, that's the whole reason he's in the Mojave in the first place. The Dragonborn wants to stop Alduin. The champion of Cyrodiil wants to help Martin get the throne and end the Oblivion crisis. Of course, you can always choose not to do any of that, and instead focus entirely on sidequests and explorations. I don't see how that's different in FO4. You're not forced to do the main quest.

The thing for me is this. If someone says "You know, I love hardcore RPGs and I think that FO4 does not have enough of those elements, so it's not really for me." I'd say that's fair. But saying the game is bad because it's not as intense on the rpg elements as you would like is bizarre.

That's not to say there are no fair criticisms to be made. I think the dialogue system was a pretty huge miss. But this idea of just because it's not a hardcore RPG that means it's bad is completely unfair. Even if the original fan base was attracted to it because of the fact that it was an hardcore RPG. The devs never made a promise that they would always make the exact same style of game only with better graphics.  You gotta leave some room for growing and adapting, and if you don't like the direction the franchise is heading towards, that's absolutely fair, but that doesn't make the game bad. And I feel so many people confuse "I didn't like this decision" with "it's a terrible game."

gavin gold wrote:

@KukBuddy Yeah, sorry man, lol. I tend to rant. I mean, I think the story is good. Maybe great was an exaggeration, but it's an engaging story.

@Tribal Raven So, I think it's the fact that they made a voiced character that gives people the sense that there's not enough ambiguity. Because, I think about it and I don't find that we know that much more about the sole survivor than we did about previous characters. We know his/her profession, we know he/she has a son and a spouse, and we know where they used to live before the war, that´s about it. We don't know anything about motivations, character traits, desires, goals... that's all on the player to decide. Compare that to say FO3, when we literally see the protagonist's childhood and life in the Vault. Problem is voices add a deep level of personality, so it breaks the immersion of that character being yours.

I think where I disagree the most is about the main quest. I find every single character in Bethesda's games has a clear goal. The courier has no other goal than to find Benny and recover the chip, that's the whole reason he's in the Mojave in the first place. The Dragonborn wants to stop Alduin. The champion of Cyrodiil wants to help Martin get the throne and end the Oblivion crisis. Of course, you can always choose not to do any of that, and instead focus entirely on sidequests and explorations. I don't see how that's different in FO4. You're not forced to do the main quest.

The thing for me is this. If someone says "You know, I love hardcore RPGs and I think that FO4 does not have enough of those elements, so it's not really for me." I'd say that's fair. But saying the game is bad because it's not as intense on the rpg elements as you would like is bizarre.

That's not to say there are no fair criticisms to be made. I think the dialogue system was a pretty huge miss. But this idea of just because it's not a hardcore RPG that means it's bad is completely unfair. Even if the original fan base was attracted to it because of the fact that it was an hardcore RPG. The devs never made a promise that they would always make the exact same style of game only with better graphics.  You gotta leave some reason for growing and adapting, and if you don't like the direction the franchise is heading towards, that's absolutely fair, but that doesn't make the game bad. And I feel so many people confuse "I didn't like this decision" with "it's a terrible game."

Very much agree with all of this. A lot of people complain about the main quest, but, hell, I found New Vegas' main quest to not be very compelling. But, so? I mean, a sort of "I'll eventually get around to it." F4 was a lot more like f3, a search for a family member. But in all Bethesda games, I sort of ignore the main quest for a while, even when it's not realistic to do so. It's just the way these games seem to be made, that you can (and maybe even should) ignore the main quest and screw around for a while.
I loved witcher 3 too, but with me at the helm, Geralt inexplicably prioritized his card collection over Ciri, for some reason.

Fallout 1 and 2 had an urgency to them, though, that is unheard of in modern times. And Star Control 2, while we're here discussing urgent vs ignored main plots. There were actually big consequences for taking too long. I'm sort of glad that we can ignore the main quest in the more modern games, (if we so choose,) even if it's not terribly realistic.
The Elder Scrolls games might have a better idea though, in that it absolutely doesn't tell you who you were or are. I like that better, but that's just personal. The fallout games have always had more direction on who you used to be or were at the moment of game start.
Every fallout game has had a somewhat different tone and in some places/town aesthetic -- every single one. I guess I'm sort of used to that and expect it.

I don't mind a voiced protagonist (I simply can't picture Mass Effect without a voiced protagonist now.) But I don't think they should have told us that Nate and Nora were a soldier and a lawyer. It's so easy to create characters that wildly do not fit into those roles that it's un-immersive and was unnecessary for the plot, to identify Nora as a lawyer. (A lawyer can use power armor and is a killing machine that can brutally shred raiders, sometimes via a Nora-Lawyer all with 1 intelligence and 1 charisma... wow, what kind of court system did they have?) They could have just left us to imagine. But then, yeah, maybe that's my Elder Scrolls bias again for letting us just imagine their past. And I suppose a voiced character prevents us from, say, playing a raving, screaming, biting lunatic or anything that deviates widely from the basic tone of voice.

It's impossible to make a combat-incompetent character in f4, which is a break from the more distant past, where in f1/2 and Morrowind, you could piece together a nearly useless blithering fool of a character, if you were so inclined. I watched someone very new to rpgs try to make a character in Morrowind... and would have put together the most utterly useless, helpless creature every to walk the earth. I can't help but think that's why they removed the big customizations from the chargens in future characters.


I think, properly modded, it's a great game and the setting an ok part of the fallout universe, but not even close to a hard-core rpg by any standard. But I can handle a fallout story in any genre, sort of like how I love that Tell Tale did a game in the Borderlands universe that was nothing like the actual borderlands games, genre-wise. A war game, an adventure game, what have you -- I'd check it out and see how it tells a fallout story. It turns out that I felt like I had more choice to f4 than in 3. We conspicuously were expected to side with the shiny-happy brotherhood, and only the brotherhood, especially in light of broken steel. The glorious, hallowed fallout 1 and 2 didn't have the major faction choices of f4 either -- there was always definite villain who you weren't supposed to join and play through.


Bethesda hasn't tried to make a remotely hard-core rpg game like that in ages so I wasn't exactly caught off guard. It's technically more of an rpg than Skyrim, as at least fallout 4 still has its (under-utilized) attribute scores like strength and agility, that the skyrim completely dumped.
I wonder what the cascadia project will bring us, or if New Vegas in f4 is ever completed with a return to the old skill system ... maybe a full and complete return to the way things used to, a base for even more projects.