OFFICIAL Fallout 4 (Discussion)

[AsRock]

Yeah, well, that may sound like a full description to you, but it really isn't. The reality is the shooting mechanics are so bad, and ammo so scarce, that most rely on VATS for tougher battles, and amass points specifically for that. That adds up to a flawed system overall in my book.

Well don't complain just go play COD.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Well don't complain just go play COD.

LOL, you know what's ironic about that, rather than appreciate the reality of what I said, and the right to an opinion, you responded like the typical CoD fanboy, as if you're fine with the game's many flaws, and are happy to jump on the hype train like the CoD puppies do.

Try again AsRock, you're slipping.

Honestly, the only reason I've taken interest in the discussion is I've seen rumors indicating they are going away from turn based combat, heading to a more real time system. If that's the case, it would appear there ARE quite a few FO customers dissatisfied with the combat system, and they may finally be actually listening to them.

I really don't get the Skyrim or general Shooter fears either. FO will never likely be like Skyrim, Stalker, or anything close to it.

 

[AsRock]

LOL, you know what's ironic about that, rather than appreciate the reality of what I said, and the right to an opinion, you responded like the typical CoD fanboy, as if you're fine with the game's many flaws, and are happy to jump on the hype train like the CoD puppies do.

Try again AsRock, you're slipping.

Honestly, the only reason I've taken interest in the discussion is I've seen rumors indicating they are going away from turn based combat, heading to a more real time system. If that's the case, it would appear there ARE quite a few FO customers dissatisfied with the combat system, and they may finally be actually listening to them.

I really don't get the Skyrim or general Shooter fears either. FO will never likely be like Skyrim, Stalker, or anything close to it.

Dam i hate COD, well loved the 1st and s2nd one but it ended there. So they should make FO4 like pretty much every other fps game due to you not liking VATS, Sure it's not perfect but it's some thing that should stay but improved on not removed.

And it sounds like you responded like a COD fan not my self as seen as i do not play them unless their $5 or less..

Last thing i want to see is that FO series just turned in to another FPS or in to Skyrim with guns which i think should be left for another title.

Me either about Stalker which i think it's pretty much one of a kind game. but removing VATS would make it more like it.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Well don't complain just go play COD.

I'm with Frag Maniac on this one. Shooting in Fallout 3 and New Vegas was terrible. To honestly look at the VATS system, and defend it as anything but a fix for a broken set of shooting mechanics is lunacy. How exactly can you justify a pistol with infinite accuracy, and a rifle that curves so bad at a distance that you have to aim two measures above the target to get a body shot? How do you explain magically being able to shooot through a target's arm, but because you were aiming for the torso have the bullet do no damage? How do you justify a constantly degrading firearm that has no components degrading that influence accuracy (I'm thinking of the Lincoln repeator that could be repaired by a 22 rifle's parts, so having never changed the barrel the accuracy can be increased by "fixing it" with non aim influencing parts) somehow losing accuracy?

Fallout 4 shouldn't be CoD, it shouldn't be Fallout 3, and it most definitely should learn from both. Competent shooting can be done in an RPG, look at Mass Effect. If Fallout 4 could do a decent job with the shooting mechanics you could completely remove VATS, and lose nothing.

Really, who liked VATS? Why does Fallout even need VATS? The truth is that it is a crutch, and incorporating the better parts of an FPS into the RPG of Fallout would suit everyone much better.

Dam i hate COD, well loved the 1st and s2nd one but it ended there. So they should make FO4 like pretty much every other fps game due to you not liking VAS, Sure it's not perfect but it's some thing that should stay but improved on not removed.

And it sounds like you responded like a COD fan not my self as seen as i do not play them unless their $5 or less..

Last thing i want to see is that FO series just turned in to another FPS or in to Skyrim with guns which i think should be left for another title.

Me either about Stalker which i think it's pretty much one of a kind game. but removing VATS would make it more like it.

Low hanging fruit here, get your low hanging fruit.

People called Fallout 3 Oblivion with guns. If we're going to start that train of circular logic I'll get off right now.

 

[AsRock]

I'm with Frag Maniac on this one. Shooting in Fallout 3 and New Vegas was terrible. To honestly look at the VATS system, and defend it as anything but a fix for a broken set of shooting mechanics is lunacy. How exactly can you justify a pistol with infinite accuracy, and a rifle that curves so bad at a distance that you have to aim two measures above the target to get a body shot? How do you explain magically being able to shooot through a target's arm, but because you were aiming for the torso have the bullet do no damage? How do you justify a constantly degrading firearm that has no components degrading that influence accuracy (I'm thinking of the Lincoln repeator that could be repaired by a 22 rifle's parts, so having never changed the barrel the accuracy can be increased by "fixing it" with non aim influencing parts) somehow losing accuracy?

Fallout 4 shouldn't be CoD, it shouldn't be Fallout 3, and it most definitely should learn from both. Competent shooting can be done in an RPG, look at Mass Effect. If Fallout 4 could do a decent job with the shooting mechanics you could completely remove VATS, and lose nothing.

Really, who liked VATS? Why does Fallout even need VATS? The truth is that it is a crutch, and incorporating the better parts of an FPS into the RPG of Fallout would suit everyone much better.

I never said it was perfect just that it should not be removed and i never said it did not need tweaking.

 

[Ahhzz]

Stalker Stalker Stalker Stalker


come on!!! Chant it with me!!!

 

[Frag_Maniac]

No you're not saying it's perfect AsRock, you're doing MUCH worse than that, and in doing so, pointing out more oddities, whether you realize it or not.

First off, it's extremism to imply anyone wanting the combat refined = them wanting it to play like a typical shooter.

Secondly, making such a correlation is to indirectly imply that FO is weak on RPG features.

A true RPG, as I said above, relies on the many role playing features to make it an RPG, NOT the combat. It's as if you're saying VATS is FO3/NV's only link to a role playing structure.

It borders on lunacy to imply such things, but again, maybe you aren't aware it sounds that way.

I also didn't say it SHOULD be removed, I said I don't mind if it is. It's just that FO3 and NV's shooting was so bad, it left me feeling they'd be better off with refined shooting vs a combat crutch in VATS.

Personally if they adequately refine the shooting in 4, I don't really care if VATS is still around, because that would obviously mean people won't have to use it as much.

I get the feeling though if rumors of real time vs turn based for 4 are correct, we'll be seeing a LOT more people using shooting than VATS, maybe even no VATS, or not really needing to use it all all, but just an option instead.

Fallout 4 shouldn't be CoD, it shouldn't be Fallout 3, and it most definitely should learn from both. Competent shooting can be done in an RPG, look at Mass Effect. If Fallout 4 could do a decent job with the shooting mechanics you could completely remove VATS, and lose nothing.

Really, who liked VATS? Why does Fallout even need VATS? The truth is that it is a crutch, and incorporating the better parts of an FPS into the RPG of Fallout would suit everyone much better.

Completely agree, which is why I think 4 very well could end up being real time vs turn based, because a LOT of people share this sentiment.

Mass Effect was the primary title I was thinking of too when people kept insisting no VATS means shooter vs RPG. In fact I'm sure without VATS FO would still be even more RPG than ME. I mean look how much more complex a skill system Bethesda uses than Bioware does. There's no comparison.

There's no reason combat oriented RPGs have to have clumsy combat, none whatsoever. If the horror genre fans are demanding more refinement, I would think there's no reason the RPG fans can expect and want it too. It doesn't have to mean compromise.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

I never said it was perfect just that it should not be removed and i never said it did not need tweaking.

Your exact words:

Well don't complain just go play COD.

How is that a fair shake? What you have said is that a reasonable request to dramatically rework VATS is tantamount to being forced out of playing Fallout and playing CoD.

 

[AsRock]

Your exact words:



How is that a fair shake? What you have said is that a reasonable request to dramatically rework VATS is tantamount to being forced out of playing Fallout and playing CoD.

Well i will take it back if your not for it to be removed, my bad taking that you said you support Frag who in which thinks it should be removed.

 

[MilkyWay]

Honestly i liked the VATS system, it never bothered me that Fallout was never a hardcore fps. I see Fallout games more as exploration and leveling your personal character. Granted it became quite the necessity in some parts, they should improve the weapon physics and accuracy either way imo.

Most of the time it was easier to just use VATS to blow off an enemies head; usually you could shoot the arm which was holding a weapon or go for a leg but head shot was an almost insta kill.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Well i will take it back if your not for it to be removed, my bad taking that you said you support Frag who in which thinks it should be removed.

?

I'm going to read a little into your response, because I can't make heads or tails of it. What I'm reading is that you believe that Frag and I both think VATS should be removed.

What Frag said, and what I agree with, is that VATS is a bandage to fix a broken leg. If the shooting mechanics were functional you wouldn't need VATS. If I could accurately aim a gun and shoot the skull out of a super mutant the % based "I'm screwed, help me out of this situation" nature of VATS would not be needed. Perhaps you believe that functional shooting mechanics in an RPG weren't possible at the time. Allow me to refute that point, with my previously mentioned Mass Effect. Both released on PC in 2008, both RPGs with heavy FPS action, both heavily focused on story driven universes, yet despite all of this completely mechanically disparate.

Go pick up a copy of Mass Effect (assuming you don't have it). Tell me, did you ever need to stop time to get a decent aim on your targets? Were the shooting mechanics solid, and did they follow the same rules at all times? Would VATS have improved your experience? My personal answers are no, yes, and no. VATS isn't necessary in an RPG with good FPS mechanics. It should be removed because it isn't necessary, not because of some desire to change a necessary part of Fallout 3. Neither of us is suggesting you remove VATS, but making it a non-default feature would mean the FPS mechanics are good enough not to need its crutch.

 

[Mussels]

Thing is, and I just thought of this, I hope they have fundamentaly changed the engine. The reason is, even wth LAA fix, it was limited to 3.1GB of RAM in Syrim. The biggest impact of that was that it limited the amount of and /or intensity of graphical mods, since that engine was so poor, for every 100MB of Textures loaded in VRAM, a corresponding 80MB was loaded in system RAM. This is why you'd get so many crashes with alot of intense textures, even if you had no dedicated mods, for instance. If there is no fundamental change, it will limit what can be done here.

welcome to directX 9, i copped so much flak when i made a thread here discussing the DX9 limits/memory sharing on the forum some time ago. Hopefully this is DX11 (no hope of DX12 IMO) and runs better.



and i loved VATS, it may need some tweaking but it was fantastic for breaking up the monotony of a regular FPS game - slow-mo firearm deaths, with the ability to aim better than i could with the in game combat system.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

welcome to directX 9, i copped so much flak when i made a thread here discussing the DX9 limits/memory sharing on the forum some time ago. Hopefully this is DX11 (no hope of DX12 IMO) and runs better.



and i loved VATS, it may need some tweaking but it was fantastic for breaking up the monotony of a regular FPS game - slow-mo firearm deaths, with the ability to aim better than i could with the in game combat system.

If I remember correctly you've played Sniper Elite 3.

Mass Effect RPG focus + Sniper Elite 3 levels of precision control + Fallout aesthetic = win. The formula is simple, it doesn't require VATS to compensate for crappy FPS mechanics, and now that you've seen the equation you want it. VATS is like the elevators from Mass Effect, the slow opening doors of Metroid, and the fog of war in most shooters. It hides substantial technical issues. While you may be able to embrace the obfuscation of flaws, there's no reason that it needs to endure.

 

[Mussels]

VATS made fallout 3, fallout 3. Even if the mechanics work without it, it has its advantages and i enjoyed using it.

 

[Batou1986]

VATS in skyrim would have been an improvement, I agree that if the shooting wasn't as bland as the slashing in TES VATS wouldn't be needed as much.

 

[Mussels]

VATS in skyrim would have been an improvement, I agree that if the shooting wasn't as bland as the slashing in TES VATS wouldn't be needed as much.

VATS for ranged combat would have been amazing in skyrim.

 

[Batou1986]

VATS for ranged combat would have been amazing in skyrim.

I was thinking being able to target limbs in close combat for amputation but whatever floats your boat

 

[rooivalk]

I do agree combat is lacking in ES and Fallout, but that's err... the 'beauty' of their games.
Generally we have difficulty taking multiple enemies at once, partly due to that and that's make your muscle type character only marginally better as the game progress.
You become greater at one-on-one but still bad at taking multiple enemies at once, especially with melee/range combo.

With more fluid combat system, I'm afraid it'll be far easier to take down enemies and the developer has to rely on ridiculous hp or tricky boss system or swarming enemies like Mass Effect, COD, Borderlands or most ARPG.
It will be very different game and make you feel like superman. Personally I don't like it.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

VATS made fallout 3, fallout 3. Even if the mechanics work without it, it has its advantages and i enjoyed using it.

Yet much of your love for it was admittedly "the ability to aim better than i could with the in game combat system". Add that to the slow mo not actually requiring VATS as per Sniper Elite and other games that have used such finishing shot visuals, and your acknowledging it needed some tweaking, and suddenly it becomes obvious VATS is no more than a bandaid for a clumsy combat system with copy cat slow mo visuals tossed in to keep people from dwelling on the awkwardness too much.

Clearly Bethesda pulled off a clever masking of a very flawed system. It's certainly got a lot of people fooled, even convinced they'd be playing a mere shooter without it, which is perhaps the most absurd part.

I found it just as baffling when horror fanatics were insisting CAPCOM's not being able to move while shooting, which later became not being able to strafe, was necessary to add to the horror feel. No, it's just clumsier.

Thankfully horror fans and CAPCOM/Tango have outgrown such beliefs. It would be nice if Bethesda and their fans would catch up.

 

[Mussels]

Why is it hard to accept that people liked it?

It allowed better aim than i had normally, allowed to aim specifically at body parts i wanted - and allowed me to pause time to assess a situation. All things i liked as an in-game 'ability'

No one forced you to use it.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Why is it hard to accept that people liked it?

It allowed better aim than i had normally, allowed to aim specifically at body parts i wanted - and allowed me to pause time to assess a situation. All things i liked as an in-game 'ability'

No one forced you to use it.

It's not so much hard to accept your liking it, it's hard to see the reasoning WHY. You have openly admitted much of it is because the non VATS aiming in the game sucks. You and others as well have said the slow mo is impressive. Fine, but you really don't need VATS for that. The vast majority of games that use slow mo finishing shots in fact use it with normal gun shots, not a freeze action, paint by numbers crutch system of shooting.

But the most absurd bit as I said, is so many people insisting it would play like a typical shooter without it, which makes it clear they think VATS is the only strong RPG feature in the game.

And I'm sorry, but not using VATS in a game like FO3 or NV, is tantamount to playing TW2 or 3 with no powers and just blades. It makes it a LOT harder because the shooting mechanics are so horribly bad.

VATS is no more than an "Accept this broken, drunken monkey shooting mechanic on our terms feature". It's one of those things that reeks of replacing flawed gameplay with godmode. It screams creative laziness and lack of polish.

There are LOTS of ways you can implement combat in an RPG without resorting to typical shooter gunplay, or even ME powers. You can build precision/firepower via skills or kills, you can have projectiles with enviro effects (rad sickness ammo for instance), you can have turret hacking, you can have various throwables, you can have trained animals that attack, etc, etc, etc.

Just about anything is better than a game that deludes players into thinking one has to deal with really crappy shooting, either by using it with all it flaws, or a crutch alternative.

 

[Mussels]

actually i have not admitted that non vats aiming sucks... thats your opinion. i used both without any issue.

you dont like it, you don't get it. others do. why argue about it?

 

[RCoon]

VATS made fallout 3, fallout 3.

True, but VATs was also terribly broken once you got the perk that enabled a complete reset of Action Points when you killed someone. It got to the stage in the mid game when you would initiate VATs, kill someone, then have you points reset, kill someone, reset, kill, reset, kill. It got slightly boring, and you became an untouchable god

 

[BiggieShady]

Yeah, well, that may sound like a full description to you, but it really isn't. The reality is the shooting mechanics are so bad, and ammo so scarce, that most rely on VATS for tougher battles, and amass points specifically for that. That adds up to a flawed system overall in my book.

The way you describe it, seems I am the only one that used VATS rarely and only in the time of need ... surrounded, outnumbered and about to die? Pull up your pip boy, take some stimpaks followed by jet, turn the VATS on and place a .50 caliber bullet in each of their skulls.
I don't think Bethesda should reduce options in gameplay just to be less possible for gamers to ruin their experience for themselves.

 

[rooivalk]

Other than shooting, VATS could be used tactically though such as scanning area (think of binocular from first Far Cry) and planning what to do with which enemy and what's next. It's applied to melee build too.

I don't like shooting through VATS (I think my aim is better especially at low level) but when I actually do and it's successful, it's satisfying.
Basically you could switch between action or turn based.

It's a choice and even without shooting things it's useful in several ways.

Go pick up a copy of Mass Effect (assuming you don't have it). Tell me, did you ever need to stop time to get a decent aim on your targets?

In my opinion it's a very different game:
- I think hit box in Mass Effect is very forgiving. Even if your aim sucks. Pretty sure it's one of the easiest that I have ever played.
- Many mass effect combat is in larger area than Fallout (as like in ES, most actual quest is in cave, narrow hall, or vault). Larger area = less accurate enemies = more time for you.
- Mass Effect enemies aren't very threatening (with relatively lots of heal, lots of indesctructible covers, lots of ammo, and not that smart AI). I'm worried with three enemies with iron pipe in Fallout.

 

[AsRock]

Why is it hard to accept that people liked it?

It allowed better aim than i had normally, allowed to aim specifically at body parts i wanted - and allowed me to pause time to assess a situation. All things i liked as an in-game 'ability'

No one forced you to use it.

I know right, like if they have a thorn in their ass. TBH i have had enough of their opinion they think everyone should agree with.