Fallout 4 - 100% S.P.E.C.I.A.L.!

[un4gvn94538]

Originally Posted by Taipan

I can see this being an online only game with The Elder Scrolls going online only.

I dont. Seeing that they dropped the monthly fee i think its more likely they will be watching how successful they can make elder scrolls online first before thinking of another mmo. Just because elder scrolls went online doesnt mean they wont make one offline for consoles

[Randall Flagg]

I would HATE for this to be online.

[jomari]

Originally Posted by un4gvn94538

hehehe. good to see you too dude!

Originally Posted by Omegaice

Bro! Where the hell have you been? I was hoping I'd see a post from you once I posted that article.

i know right, anything that has MGS, Fallout, RDR, Battlefield in it, im all ears.

and of course, if this is going to go full online, i think id have to pass.

My bets on Fallout 4. or mindset at least.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Taipan

I can see this being an online only game with The Elder Scrolls going online only.

Because that worked out SOOO well for the Elder Scrolls series....smh

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by jomari

amazing that any rumors about fallout 4 can do to an old fart come out of the woodwork.

its been a while, but im glad that bethesda is or might or maybe considering fallout 4 to be on the table.

The glitches, yes, i have experienced it, but as others are miserable with them, i was able to get around most of them just by saving saving saving. Problem is my save files hit about 120 or something so i dont remember when or where i was at a good point.

I think this is when i decided when its a super important save point, i go back to the 'house' i chose to store all my loot, and then have him wearing his tidy whiteys to signify THIS is my main starting point.

Hello old schoolers, those who still remember me.

Good strategy. Also have plenty of saves, though only 30 or so, compared to 120.
All the significant points, even one where I can readily revisit the Surburbs in the "matrix" of Fallout 3, where your character is a kid and has to figure out the puzzle with that one evil house. Nice because all of the trees, like in that one safezone, have all of their leaves/foliage.

Originally Posted by Omegaice

I did manual saves often but I also adjusted the frequency of auto saving, ie. Only auto saving when I would transition through doors or map transitions.

Yes, save often was the insurance to keep from major set backs, as with any game or software where much time has been invested.

Originally Posted by saprano

I can't wait for FO4. It's going to be so good. I still put on FO3 sometimes for nostalgia. I put 200 hours into that game. The music, atmosphere of the DC wasteland, game play, characters etc. I loved everything about that game. FONV was good too but to me not as good as 3.

Nice to see all the FO players together again.

Agree.

Originally Posted by Taipan

I can see this being an online only game with The Elder Scrolls going online only.

There are rumors of a separate Fallout Online game in development, though with their main games, Bethesda Software definitely values the single player experience with their games for many years now. Likely that won't change for Fallout 4.
Online all the time for single player games... Game Informer's latest issue with Rise of the Tomb Raider on the cover, was hinting at that as the future of gaming. That would mean we would no longer own any game we "bought", just leasing it till they make it go away.

[Suntory_Times]

I wouldn't be against online, I feel it would have to be something unique like Dark Souls though. Meaning it is a single player experience where maybe other players could invade your game at set times and hunt you down. For example if you had killed innocents and where wanted, other players could enter your game and try and collect that bounty. Balancing that would be hard but doable.

I think mp is often disregarded to quickly because of how tacked on it often is. It doesn't have to be though and could be added in unique and beneficial ways to many games we think of as single player games.

[jomari]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

I wouldn't be against online, I feel it would have to be something unique like Dark Souls though. Meaning it is a single player experience where maybe other players could invade your game at set times and hunt you down. For example if you had killed innocents and where wanted, other players could enter your game and try and collect that bounty. Balancing that would be hard but doable.

I think mp is often disregarded to quickly because of how tacked on it often is. It doesn't have to be though and could be added in unique and beneficial ways to many games we think of as single player games.

this is interesting, and somewhat a good idea. but as long as its stable enough to handle the er... 'ins and outs' of the players jumping in. i guess having a 'designated' area to have, somewhat a dedicated mp section on the map or pretty much a dedicated mp side would be good too. its difficult to say considering mp is very much personal to some people, and for others its just an outlet to become 6 again.

i miss my VATS like mad magazine fold em ups.

[un4gvn94538]

I think i would rather have the next elder scrolls compatible with the mmo. With a regular single player game where you can take your character and gear and travel to another land where online exist. being able to aquire as well as lose gear with consequences that affect your game.

[jsteinhauer]

Given that I prefer Fallout 3 over New Vegas, I obviously don't see the need for any kind of MP game in this franchise. But, New Vegas would easily fit into a cooperative model, since you already had the ability to travel with NPC companions. An obligatory online game I would have to opt out of. But a game with Borderlands/Dying Light/Dead Island style cooperative play as an option, I would not take issue with, and while I don't really see how it fits the franchise, the Dark Souls cooperative/competitive model is tolerable.

[Hobbun]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

Online all the time for single player games... Game Informer's latest issue with Rise of the Tomb Raider on the cover, was hinting at that as the future of gaming. That would mean we would no longer own any game we "bought", just leasing it till they make it go away.

The day this happens is the day I stop paying money for new games. My remaining days would be replaying old favorites that I own, and catching up on my huge backlog.

[un4gvn94538]

Originally Posted by jsteinhauer

Given that I prefer Fallout 3 over New Vegas, I obviously don't see the need for any kind of MP game in this franchise. But, New Vegas would easily fit into a cooperative model, since you already had the ability to travel with NPC companions. An obligatory online game I would have to opt out of. But a game with Borderlands/Dying Light/Dead Island style cooperative play as an option, I would not take issue with, and while I don't really see how it fits the franchise, the Dark Souls cooperative/competitive model is tolerable.

It definitely doesnt need it but it would be a neat option. While playing fo3 when it was released i wondered what mp would be like. Neat option as long as the main focus was single player

[jsteinhauer]

Originally Posted by Hobbun

The day this happens is the day I stop paying money for new games. My remaining days would be replaying old favorites that I own, and catching up on my huge backlog.

That's the Destiny model.

[Hobbun]

Originally Posted by jsteinhauer

That's the Destiny model.

Right, I know Destiny is single-player but always online.

But I was responding to Zivouhr indicating (from the GI article) that it was the future of gaming. And if that is the only way we would be able to play new games, I would be done with them.

[jsteinhauer]

Originally Posted by Hobbun

Right, I know Destiny is single-player but always online.

But I was responding to Zivouhr indicating (from the GI article) that it was the future of gaming. And if that is the only way we would be able to play new games, I would be done with them.

I just meant that it's not the future. It's here. And it was hugely successful, so it's not going anywhere soon.

[jomari]

Originally Posted by jsteinhauer

I just meant that it's not the future. It's here. And it was hugely successful, so it's not going anywhere soon.

but it is an option, as long as it is executed stable enough, its a great possibility.

FO3 still in my book is a great lone star kinda model, FONV does fit the bill tho, great observation!

[Hobbun]

Originally Posted by jsteinhauer

I just meant that it's not the future. It's here. And it was hugely successful, so it's not going anywhere soon.

If my only option becomes where all games force me to interact with others, then I will stop getting new games. Not that I don’t enjoy multi-player, but I like playing only with friends.

But right now, Destiny is only an option, there are still plenty of truly single-player games. I don’t think ‘all’ games will go the way of Destiny, but you are probably right they will increase in number.

However, my original comment of stopping to pay for new games was more in regards to being forced to lease games, which I will never do.

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

I wouldn't be against online, I feel it would have to be something unique like Dark Souls though. Meaning it is a single player experience where maybe other players could invade your game at set times and hunt you down. For example if you had killed innocents and where wanted, other players could enter your game and try and collect that bounty. Balancing that would be hard but doable.

I think mp is often disregarded to quickly because of how tacked on it often is. It doesn't have to be though and could be added in unique and beneficial ways to many games we think of as single player games.

While that could be fun if the player was willing for that type of experience, there are many times in Fallout 3 where I just like exploring the world, taking in the sights and relaxing without worrying about another player disrupting. But I see what you're saying there.

Originally Posted by Hobbun

The day this happens is the day I stop paying money for new games. My remaining days would be replaying old favorites that I own, and catching up on my huge backlog.

Originally Posted by Hobbun

Right, I know Destiny is single-player but always online.

But I was responding to Zivouhr indicating (from the GI article) that it was the future of gaming. And if that is the only way we would be able to play new games, I would be done with them.

I feel that way too. I want to own my game, play it without having someone checking in to see if it's okay to play and if their servers are malfunctioning or offline temporarily, or permanently.

Alternate (possible future) world where every game required online to play:
Kind of like if I plugged in Fallout 3 and a message appeared on the title screen, "Please connect to the internet if you wish to play this single player game". Then I'd connect and it would say, "Try again later, the servers are down". Then I'd say, "Good bye freedom to own and play the game I paid for."


The good news is, that day isn't here yet, and a lot of Indie PC games prove you can buy it and own it without having to connect online to play it. That system works despite the industry's complaints of lost sales due to copying.

Ubisoft's decision was to initially punish the players who paid for it by requiring online only for games like Driver San Francisco, a single player game, just so they can track who bought a copy at all times... For PC.

I'll bet Fallout 4 won't require an online only connection to play the single player game.
PS4 didn't require online connection, unless you want the CD, DVD, and Blu Ray to work. Otherwise, single player games can remain that way for most games today.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

While that could be fun if the player was willing for that type of experience, there are many times in Fallout 3 where I just like exploring the world, taking in the sights and relaxing without worrying about another player disrupting. But I see what you're saying there.

Indeed which is why their must be systems that allow you in game to do that. For my example it would be having no bounty. In other words you would have real rewards for having a bounty (crime pays) but increase the risk of someone dark souls style invading and trying to kill you. My point it I don't want a standard or tacked on multiplayer mode. If their is one I would prefer something reasonably unique.

For a period all 'new' ubisoft games on pc required an online connection at all times. Their sales suffered so they patched it out and stopped such nonsense. DRM simply doesn't work outside of the rarest cases, but even then their is the very real chance that drm will put of more buyers purchasing then had it not been there.

[Derb]

Originally Posted by Hobbun

If my only option becomes where all games force me to interact with others, then I will stop getting new games. Not that I don’t enjoy multi-player, but I like playing only with friends.

But right now, Destiny is only an option, there are still plenty of truly single-player games. I don’t think ‘all’ games will go the way of Destiny, but you are probably right they will increase in number.

However, my original comment of stopping to pay for new games was more in regards to being forced to lease games, which I will never do.

Bungie's highly overrated Destiny game will change the online gaming structure? Maybe they have more sway then Sony. I mean Sony's biggest tactical advantage over Microsoft during the PS4's unveil was the fact they said you don't have to be connected to the Internet to play PS4 games. Anywhoo...

I am looking forward to another Fallout game. I don't think MP is necessary but I also don't think it would hurt the game either. More concerned over Bethesda's Compression House. lol

[jsteinhauer]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

Indeed which is why their must be systems that allow you in game to do that. For my example it would be having no bounty. In other words you would have real rewards for having a bounty (crime pays) but increase the risk of someone dark souls style invading and trying to kill you. My point it I don't want a standard or tacked on multiplayer mode. If their is one I would prefer something reasonably unique.

You could always just play the Souls games completely offline, too. But it was much more fun to fight bosses cooperatively, and some, such as Smelter Demon in DS2, I never beat solo. I was not very good at the PvP.

Originally Posted by Derb

Bungie's highly overrated Destiny game will change the online gaming structure? Maybe they have more sway then Sony. I mean Sony's biggest tactical advantage over Microsoft during the PS4's unveil was the fact they said you don't have to be connected to the Internet to play PS4 games.

Sony did leave it up to the developer whether to require an internet connection, though, which leads back to Destiny. And no matter what anyone thinks about it, it was very successful, so the model will be used again. I don't really expect the anticipated Bethesda game to follow Destiny's footsteps. If it is online, I probably expect an open world coop concept like Dying Light. That would fit very well with the types of games that FO3 and FONV were, and should make everyone happy, as well.