Fallout 4 announced with teaser trailer

[djhater]

In response to post #25870909.

jihu918 wrote: One thing that I really hope to have in Fallout 4 is a "cover system".

I don't know how many times I killed myself by throwing a grenade, wasted bullets or lost my chance at a one hit kill sneak attack by a invisible wall and barriers between objects.

Oh yes, and I'm really hoping Fallout 4 to have more TES

maybe multiple characters and time travelling to tamriel or something.

[rickerhk]

In response to post #25848824. #25848904, #25854969, #25855279, #25857314, #25857619, #25858509, #25861909, #25866004, #25870814 are all replies on the same post.

JoshBadWriter wrote:

The thing I want the most is a speaking player character. I've never been one for role playing in a narrative or inserting yourself in the world or whatever. My favorite games, the ones with a narrative, player choice focus all have speaking characters with names and their own identities. Lee from The Walking Dead, Sheppard from Mass Effect, Geralt from Witcher 3. You can have a narrative that is influenced by the player and still have a main character with their own identity.

 

I take that bit at the end of the trailer as a confirmation that the player character will have a voice. From those three words, it sounds like Troy Baker, but it's hard to tell. I'm just going to say Troy Baker anyway because of course it'll be Troy Baker.

 

Does anyone else agree with me? I know a lot of people would flip out at the idea of a speaking player character.

janishewski wrote: It might be great for the game itself, but it will be a pain for modding when the protagonist suddenly goes silent. I'm personally torn. I've always said that if someone could get the characters of a game like the Witcher series matched with Bethesdas open world, we would have something truly special. And 44 hours into Wither 3, I can tell you that is not it. Good game, but not the instant classic the early reviews made it out to be and I still enjoyed the Elder Scrolls series more. Just my opinion.

Rioplats wrote: I agree with janishewski. On the one hand, it would be cool to actually hear the lines of dialogue being read out, but it also destroys mod making capabilities and restricts the dialogue itself. What about special speech options that require someone to be exceptionally smart or stupid? Will it be read out in the same gruff badass main character voice? That'd be terrible.
Then there's the fact that in Bethesda games, the point is to immerse yourself in the role. In the Witcher series and Dragon Age series (2 onwards), you're playing as a predetermined character. To force that on Fallout is a bad idea.
Overall, it's just that the downsides to having a voiced protagonist far outweighs the "innovation" it adds.

Belthan wrote: My preference would be to not have the protagonist voiced at all. Having a choice of voices (e.g. Saint's Row) would be second-best. Having a single voice would be less immersive, but not a deal-breaker. I love the Mass Effect series and The Witcher series, and in those games, having a character with a predetermined personality (or at best, a limited range of personality options) works. It just isn't what I expect from true RPGs like the Fallout and Elder Scrolls series.

EDIT - And I forgot to mention the player character in FO3 and FNV is voiced, at least when you get injured :)

EDIT 2 - I also forgot to mention re: modding, it seems that there will have to be some flexibility in the system so they don't box themselves in when it comes to DLC. What happens if the voice actor(s) wins an Oscar and wants 10 times as much to do the DLC than was paid for the base game, or God forbid, gets hit by a bus?

djhater wrote: NO Fallout 4 would be awwwseumz if Todd Howard narrated & Voiced the main character in Fallout 4!!! could you imagine playing the awesomeness of Fallout 4 hearing egotistical one liners .

Nacke wrote: Introducing a player voice would screw up the self-tailoring character element making FO and Skyrim the NO1 game for many players, and it would do some damage to modding which holds a huuuge audience for Skyrim and FO. If they are smart they will not introduce player-voice. There are already several good games with player-voice, and I think that's enough.

JianXintou wrote: "I also forgot to mention re: modding, it seems that there will have to be some flexibility in the system so they don't box themselves in when it comes to DLC. What happens if the voice actor(s) wins an Oscar and wants 10 times as much to do the DLC than was paid for the base game, or God forbid, gets hit by a bus?"
Introduce new characters.

I agree with the ambivalence towards a voice-acted player, particularly within the modding context. What I think would work pretty well for both modding, and both sides of the immersive realm (i.e. those who don't and those who would like a VA player) would be to just make it an option that you can turn on and off in the settings. That way, you can pretty much solve both issues (and the one you raised above).

Another (albeit vastly unlikely) would be Bethesda giving us a VA package with sound files so we could splice them together as we need them.

Dukoth wrote: how is the character speaking for the game and then not speaking for mod content any different than when NPC's do it, we've already been putting up with this since oblivion

@belthan - the voice actors would be under a contract for the game and the DLC, they cant ask for any more money

Rioplats wrote: @Dukoth When has this ever occurred? The vanilla player character has never had spoken any dialogue to any NPC in any Bethesda game ever... I'm not talking about NPCs talking back: that is easily remedied by using a voice actor. But if a mod adds new dialogue for the player to speak, it's not going to be voice acted, so the player becomes mute. Sorry about the rant, was just annoyed that you're missing the point.

jim_uk wrote: I don't like the idea of a voiced main character at all, it could force a personality onto my character that I don't want. If they must to it then I'd prefer a choice of voices much like you get in the Saints Row games.

LOL why do people think the player will be voiced? They just threw that in with the pat on the dog because it would have been an awkward end to the trailer if it was completely silent. Edited June 6, 2015 by rickerhk

[Poacher886]

In response to post #25834169. #25841134, #25847609, #25848799 are all replies on the same post.

Poacher886 wrote: I just cant stress enough how important the map size is to me. Skyrim / Fallout only became good / great games after approx 100 mods, the modders can incorporate just about everything from weapons to graphics to quests to buildings to complete overhauls.

But modders cant / dont / wont, increase the map size. Both Skyrim and especially fallout had tiny maps...a few sessions and you had it covered, a few more and you could tell the location from a screenshot, you wer neve more than a minutes walk from one of the two main roads in NV, you could never really get lost in any kind of wasteland, both games were limited by the small size and thus scope.

Now if we had a map 4x skyrim you then have a playground that with mods could go for years or certainly a long time before it became familiar....modders will fill the gaps in the games issues and make it a better game, you could have a least some semblance of a waste land which was not possible in FNV or any kind of forest in Skyrim etc.

The map size is everything, everything else can be modded in.

QDUB89 wrote: You want a completely new map or at least a modded one, then you take up programming/coding and do it yourself. A lot of people don't understand how daunting coding can really be. Some mods are made for years, released, and then improved for the next 5 years and can still have numerous bugs/glitches that sometimes even a team of modders don't understand why it's not working properly.

That and the fact that you are talking about, essentially, creating a new map (or modding the original one) takes a lot of room; not a lot of people want to take such a task of extending the map, let-alone the fact that now you have to retexture everything to blend in smoothly, code in hills, NPCs, building, quests, new lore, so on and so forth. You're talking about a crap ton of code. The "Tropical Skyrim" mod (for Skyrim, no duh) alone took at least a year to make (was release a year and a half after skyrim) and that is just a simple layer of code on top of the skyrim map, not actually coding the map to look/behave tropical; I can be standing in the middle of a desert and still get a SNOW storm. Physically extending the map would take YEARS and you're not even guaranteed it will work.

Poacher886 wrote: Im not on about extending the map..thats the point, i want the map to be so big in the first place it doesn't need extending!!

Then it can be filled or altered by mini mods thereafter.

The problem with SKYrim and Fallout was the maps were so small, it was familiar from a dew hours in and mods never changed that.

janishewski wrote: There are technical limitations that had to be considered. Remember that these were all last gen games, or even the gen before that. It is easy to say you want a bigger map, but I disagree. If there are vehicles, then yes, but I don't want to walk 20 minutes real time just to get a quest reward. Everybody wants bigger maps until they get them. I love Just Cause 2, but I never finished it and I bet I never saw more than 1-3 % of the map.

Could'nt disagree more, I want to walk for days to get a quest done..thats the point the journey, the scavaging for food, the looking for somewhere to sleep for the night, the need to survive the attacks on-route and the planning for such a mission, IS THE ENJOYABLE PART OF THE GAME, completing the quest is the anticlimax!

Having a map that is so big you can play for months having only seen a small part of it, makes it all the more repayable for years to come with still new area's to see and explore keeping it fresh....i just cant ever see ANY argument for smaller maps.

I'd here some folk going "Skyrim map is way to big Dude"....and i just cant believe what im hearing..Opposing Castles that are a stones throw from each other Lol...quite ridiculous...start a new game, oh here we go, same old road, same old places, same old game..Map size is everything, everything else can be modded.

And those that say " A smaller more compact and interesting map is better than a larger one" are talking nonsence. A much larger more interesting game world is better than a smaller one full stop.

Someone show me where the wastland is in FO3 / NV?, it doesn't exist, if you walk 2 minutes in any direction you either get to the end of the map or back on the road again!!!

A wasteland should be a big scary place where survival is the main enemy, where careful consideration of what you bring with you is paramount, Where you can ACTUALY get lost, where you can be days walk from human civilisation, where coming across some old battered shelter gives you a massive feeling of achievement and good fortune.

The size of the map give scope and endless re-playability for what im sure be years before the next game comes, the limiting feature in all these game is the map size.

[dwyzl]

In response to post #25865099.

thunderwolf86 wrote:

ok i really didnt want to be the guy to bring attention to this (maybe it already has, cant 100% confirm) but to be perfectly honest, despite the fact that i too and super excited for FO4, i am also incredibly concerned as it was only a month and a half ago that paid mods was momentarily integrated for Skyrim. it could be just as easily integrated into Fallout 4 right from the get go. again i really didnt want to draw more attention to this issue and cause an unnecessary flame war but i do feel that this needs to be discussed and looked into. i do have my own opinions on the subject like everyone else but thats not really what i am aiming for, id rather focus on whether or not Fallout 4 will have paid mods instead of the whole paid mods right or wrong thing. keep that in the back of your minds as i feel it is a little more then just a coincidense the only 6 weeks after the whole paid mods fiasco does Fallout 4 get announced.

There is no connection. Stop being paranoid.

[Deleted23213994User]

In response to post #25865099. #25877194 is also a reply to the same post.

thunderwolf86 wrote:

ok i really didnt want to be the guy to bring attention to this (maybe it already has, cant 100% confirm) but to be perfectly honest, despite the fact that i too and super excited for FO4, i am also incredibly concerned as it was only a month and a half ago that paid mods was momentarily integrated for Skyrim. it could be just as easily integrated into Fallout 4 right from the get go. again i really didnt want to draw more attention to this issue and cause an unnecessary flame war but i do feel that this needs to be discussed and looked into. i do have my own opinions on the subject like everyone else but thats not really what i am aiming for, id rather focus on whether or not Fallout 4 will have paid mods instead of the whole paid mods right or wrong thing. keep that in the back of your minds as i feel it is a little more then just a coincidense the only 6 weeks after the whole paid mods fiasco does Fallout 4 get announced.

dwyzl wrote: There is no connection. Stop being paranoid.

Here's the best thing Bethesda could ever do to generate revenue for the PC version

1. Place FO4 on another engine not allowing us to mod with toolkit. aka idTech
2. Male protagonist as main character and selection only.
3. Monetize system on mods.
4. Still create bugged out titles and broken patches.

That right there will guarantee PC users to support and buy Fallout 4 for sure.

And before any dumdum tries to retaliate on me. You can monetize mods without a toolkit. But who's going to be purchasing replacers and retextures? probably 99% of the STEAM fanboys that's who.

On a serious note: Bethesda will not integrate P2M (pay 2 mod) from the get go. That literally would be the dumbest move they do in 2015, or one of the top 5 dumbest things done in 2015.

If they plan to implement a monetize system for mods, it'll be done by the time they release the GECK after they've changed the EULA to their benefit, which will not be released at the launch of the game fyi (for your information).

Whether they go through with this or not, I'm not going to pre-order this game until...

1. I know for sure no monetize system will be integrated into Fallout 4.
2. If it's not integrated, I'm going to wait for the final edition. I'm not spending extra USD for the DLCs separate.
3. If it's using Creation Engine, are we going to get shafted with animations like Skyrim? having to use a havok system. Fore said himself he's not making a FNIS 2 for another game period. I know because I know.

If they meet my expecations and listen to me, then I'll buy the game retail price as a courtesy. If not, my money is not worth their financial interests.

[dwyzl]

In response to post #25804429.

elr0y7 wrote: Wow, I didn't expect so much salt in these comments. I think the game looks great, a definite step-up in graphics, presentation, and architecture. I can't wait to see what new mechanics and gameplay changes they've implemted, because that's whats really gonna matter to me. So excited!

Didn't you hear? Apparently it's cool to hate everything now.

[JianXintou]

In response to post #25865099. #25877194, #25877229 are all replies on the same post.

thunderwolf86 wrote:

ok i really didnt want to be the guy to bring attention to this (maybe it already has, cant 100% confirm) but to be perfectly honest, despite the fact that i too and super excited for FO4, i am also incredibly concerned as it was only a month and a half ago that paid mods was momentarily integrated for Skyrim. it could be just as easily integrated into Fallout 4 right from the get go. again i really didnt want to draw more attention to this issue and cause an unnecessary flame war but i do feel that this needs to be discussed and looked into. i do have my own opinions on the subject like everyone else but thats not really what i am aiming for, id rather focus on whether or not Fallout 4 will have paid mods instead of the whole paid mods right or wrong thing. keep that in the back of your minds as i feel it is a little more then just a coincidense the only 6 weeks after the whole paid mods fiasco does Fallout 4 get announced.

dwyzl wrote: There is no connection. Stop being paranoid.

endgameaddiction wrote: Here's the best thing Bethesda could ever do to generate revenue for the PC version

1. Place FO4 on another engine not allowing us to mod with toolkit. aka idTech
2. Male protagonist as main character and selection only.
3. Monetize system on mods.
4. Still create bugged out titles and broken patches.

That right there will guarantee PC users to support and buy Fallout 4 for sure.

And before any dumdum tries to retaliate on me. You can monetize mods without a toolkit. But who's going to be purchasing replacers and retextures? probably 99% of the STEAM fanboys that's who.

On a serious note: Bethesda will not integrate P2M (pay 2 mod) from the get go. That literally would be the dumbest move they do in 2015, or one of the top 5 dumbest things done in 2015.

If they plan to implement a monetize system for mods, it'll be done by the time they release the GECK after they've changed the EULA to their benefit, which will not be released at the launch of the game fyi (for your information).

Whether they go through with this or not, I'm not going to pre-order this game until...

1. I know for sure no monetize system will be integrated into Fallout 4.
2. If it's not integrated, I'm going to wait for the final edition. I'm not spending extra USD for the DLCs separate.
3. If it's using Creation Engine, are we going to get shafted with animations like Skyrim? having to use a havok system. Fore said himself he's not making a FNIS 2 for another game period. I know because I know.

If they meet my expecations and listen to me, then I'll buy the game retail price as a courtesy. If not, my money is not worth their financial interests.

If we're talking about P2M with past precedence in mind then I would even question: Is it that relevant for everyone? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think to remember this was solely a Steam Workshop thing. If you open the game up to modding in general, you can't really force people to pay for mods - I doubt there is a way to limit mods that work to mods that only come from Steam Workshop. So I don't see that being such a huge issue either way.

Plus they would be ridiculously stupid to repeat the same mistake twice in a year.

[Dukoth]

In response to post #25848824. #25848904, #25854969, #25855279, #25857314, #25857619, #25858509, #25861909, #25866004, #25870814, #25873419 are all replies on the same post.

JoshBadWriter wrote:

The thing I want the most is a speaking player character. I've never been one for role playing in a narrative or inserting yourself in the world or whatever. My favorite games, the ones with a narrative, player choice focus all have speaking characters with names and their own identities. Lee from The Walking Dead, Sheppard from Mass Effect, Geralt from Witcher 3. You can have a narrative that is influenced by the player and still have a main character with their own identity.

 

I take that bit at the end of the trailer as a confirmation that the player character will have a voice. From those three words, it sounds like Troy Baker, but it's hard to tell. I'm just going to say Troy Baker anyway because of course it'll be Troy Baker.

 

Does anyone else agree with me? I know a lot of people would flip out at the idea of a speaking player character.

janishewski wrote: It might be great for the game itself, but it will be a pain for modding when the protagonist suddenly goes silent. I'm personally torn. I've always said that if someone could get the characters of a game like the Witcher series matched with Bethesdas open world, we would have something truly special. And 44 hours into Wither 3, I can tell you that is not it. Good game, but not the instant classic the early reviews made it out to be and I still enjoyed the Elder Scrolls series more. Just my opinion.

Rioplats wrote: I agree with janishewski. On the one hand, it would be cool to actually hear the lines of dialogue being read out, but it also destroys mod making capabilities and restricts the dialogue itself. What about special speech options that require someone to be exceptionally smart or stupid? Will it be read out in the same gruff badass main character voice? That'd be terrible.
Then there's the fact that in Bethesda games, the point is to immerse yourself in the role. In the Witcher series and Dragon Age series (2 onwards), you're playing as a predetermined character. To force that on Fallout is a bad idea.
Overall, it's just that the downsides to having a voiced protagonist far outweighs the "innovation" it adds.

Belthan wrote: My preference would be to not have the protagonist voiced at all. Having a choice of voices (e.g. Saint's Row) would be second-best. Having a single voice would be less immersive, but not a deal-breaker. I love the Mass Effect series and The Witcher series, and in those games, having a character with a predetermined personality (or at best, a limited range of personality options) works. It just isn't what I expect from true RPGs like the Fallout and Elder Scrolls series.

EDIT - And I forgot to mention the player character in FO3 and FNV is voiced, at least when you get injured :)

EDIT 2 - I also forgot to mention re: modding, it seems that there will have to be some flexibility in the system so they don't box themselves in when it comes to DLC. What happens if the voice actor(s) wins an Oscar and wants 10 times as much to do the DLC than was paid for the base game, or God forbid, gets hit by a bus?

djhater wrote: NO Fallout 4 would be awwwseumz if Todd Howard narrated & Voiced the main character in Fallout 4!!! could you imagine playing the awesomeness of Fallout 4 hearing egotistical one liners .

Nacke wrote: Introducing a player voice would screw up the self-tailoring character element making FO and Skyrim the NO1 game for many players, and it would do some damage to modding which holds a huuuge audience for Skyrim and FO. If they are smart they will not introduce player-voice. There are already several good games with player-voice, and I think that's enough.

JianXintou wrote: "I also forgot to mention re: modding, it seems that there will have to be some flexibility in the system so they don't box themselves in when it comes to DLC. What happens if the voice actor(s) wins an Oscar and wants 10 times as much to do the DLC than was paid for the base game, or God forbid, gets hit by a bus?"
Introduce new characters.

I agree with the ambivalence towards a voice-acted player, particularly within the modding context. What I think would work pretty well for both modding, and both sides of the immersive realm (i.e. those who don't and those who would like a VA player) would be to just make it an option that you can turn on and off in the settings. That way, you can pretty much solve both issues (and the one you raised above).

Another (albeit vastly unlikely) would be Bethesda giving us a VA package with sound files so we could splice them together as we need them.

Dukoth wrote: how is the character speaking for the game and then not speaking for mod content any different than when NPC's do it, we've already been putting up with this since oblivion

@belthan - the voice actors would be under a contract for the game and the DLC, they cant ask for any more money

Rioplats wrote: @Dukoth When has this ever occurred? The vanilla player character has never had spoken any dialogue to any NPC in any Bethesda game ever... I'm not talking about NPCs talking back: that is easily remedied by using a voice actor. But if a mod adds new dialogue for the player to speak, it's not going to be voice acted, so the player becomes mute. Sorry about the rant, was just annoyed that you're missing the point.

jim_uk wrote: I don't like the idea of a voiced main character at all, it could force a personality onto my character that I don't want. If they must to it then I'd prefer a choice of voices much like you get in the Saints Row games.

rickerhk wrote: LOL why do people think the player will be voiced? They just threw that in with the pat on the dog because it would have been an awkward end to the trailer if it was completely silent.

my point still stands, you can mod in a player voice too

and don't say it wouldn't match the original, as you would have the same problem adding additional VO to NPCs

as I said, adding voice to the player doesn't change anything, we have already been dealing with this with NPCs

[VxdVxn]

In response to post #25824664. #25824914, #25825809, #25825919, #25826019, #25826209, #25826354, #25826574, #25828999, #25830289, #25830979, #25831614, #25832299, #25832644, #25850134, #25852914, #25864629, #25865409 are all replies on the same post.

Lisnpuppy wrote:

 

In response to post #25824069.

znancekivell wrote: Excellent.

In fact, I have only a single complaint about the whole trailer.

We all know that Fallout 4 will ( or should! ) let us choose which gender we want to be, so as far as the actual game is concerned this is a moot point, but I am disappointed that Bethesda chose ( yet again! ) a male stand-in for the PC instead of a female wanderer. I really am becoming utterly sick of all these Caucasian males running around in video games, and I would prefer to see some actual variety in the spice of nuclear apocalyptic life.

Love the dog, by the way. Wo/Man's best friend!

If rumours are correct there is no female player character, that's going to piss some people off, as for dudes in nearly every game...



Contains strong language.

 

 

If that is true...(and I hope to the internet deities that Bethesda has learned players want MORE choices and not less) then that may actually be a deal breaker for me. That is going backwards. The last two games you could play as female so it makes little sense why you would not be able to do so now.

 

It wouldn't even be totally about the fact I am female...it is at the end, choice. Bethesda seems to narrow games more and more with each one. I don't care how pretty the graphics are or if the game has drivable cars. Let me have at least a semblance of choice and be able to choose male or female.

 

With everything that has taken place in the past few years regarding women's place in gaming I would think that in a title that is looked forward to by so many that gender choice would be a no-brainer. I would smack of lazy and that Bethesda has had its fingers in the ears and are loudly singing "la la la la la can't hear you la la la."

jim_uk wrote: This woman was mocked at the time but so far what she's said has been on the money https://www.reddit.com/r/Fallout/comments/28v2dn/i_played_fallout_4 not just the date and location but if you check out of the developer making the spin off you'll find they're a Bethesda partner and looking to hire people with Gamebryo/id Tech experience. If the post in genuine then it's not looking good for those who want choices.

Darkspazz wrote: Good lord everyone chill out, They already hired voice actors for both the male and female character, You'll be able to play as a girl. Can y'all stop circle jerking nonsense?

SMB92 wrote: Can you back that, Darkspazz, with say, some EVIDENCE :/

Back to the topic, I don't particularly feel comfortable with having a "gender change" at the end of the story, in fact if at all. I always play my character as "Trinity" from the Matrix, this would piss me off severely. And hopefully that woman from reddit isn't joking about a new engine + map size, let's hope it's moddable. With all this talk of cutting everything else, I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't. But then, they'd probably want to charge wouldn't they?

JianXintou wrote: Are there any sources for these supposed VAs?

The reddit post above may not be 100% accurate but doesn't seem too far off, either.

CRBASF23 wrote: If we was really the person who leaked the information to Kotaku, why in the Kotaku article it says that they called for both Male and Female actors, when in her reddit post says you can only play as Male?

CRBASF23 wrote: Kotaku the supposed magazine which the woman leaked the info to, in it's article said that they had a casting call for both male and female VA's: http://kotaku.com/leaked-documents-reveal-that-fallout-4-is-real-set-in-1481322956

jim_uk wrote: Try reading the Reddit post, it says you can switch to female after the main quest, that would explain the female VA as would having women Npcs.

jediakyrol wrote: In every fallout you could play as a woman...even BoS for XBox... It would be the stupidest thing in the world if they locked you to one gender (unless it was for like a flashback chapter where you are put in the shoes of your ancestor)

frogzilla98 wrote: Yeah. White men are the devil. /s

monsterseventeen wrote: i play fallout as a woman, and most games as the same character where i can put her, the reason might seem sexist, i have put her there since oblivion on playstation 3, this was the first game i played where a player could fully customise there own character, so naturally i put myself or as close as i could as the character, then half way down the gold road toward anvil a bunch of female bandits jumped out and set about me, i killed one before feeling uncomfortable, since then i have had the same kick ass woman in every game i can, i feel a great affection for her, apart from the fact she is all i want to look at 'cos i play 3rd person, i always try to find her romance.

NDDragor wrote: If they are taking away the option to play as a female, then they are destroying the creative process of creating your own and unique character that was one of the things which I enjoyed the most in the Fallout and TES series because the different characters which I created felt alive and I could play the games again and again, always making my own and new story with a different character.

But to play with a predetermined character is making me feel like something is limiting me and I cant feel the freedom of the game anymore. But this opinion of mine is only about the Fallout and TES series. There are many games where I enjoy the predetermined protagonists.

CRBASF23 wrote: This is what the kotaku article said:
The casting documents describe some of the other characters in the next Fallout's wasteland, like a radio DJ named Travis Miles and an engineer named Sturges who is described as "a cross between Buddy Holly and Vin Diesel." Casting calls for both the male and female versions of the player character note that the player begins the game in a cryogenic sleep chamber.

JianXintou wrote: @CRBASF23: Thanks for the source.

" it says you can switch to female after the main quest"
That sounds like an odd design decision. "Hey, you're done with the MQ, congrats. Now you can go to some big MT-esque geniuses that can change your sex!"

"a new "Classic Mode" that will put the game into birds eye view and play similar to the classic Fallout Games."
This sounds curious, kind of like DA. Not sure how this will play out if it's true.

CRBASF23 wrote: She claimed that Fallout 4 is using a completely new engine: "This version uses a brand new engine built from the ground up to take advantage of the power of next gen systems. Absolutely everything is new, and no assets or scrips are being used from Fallout 3/NV or Skyrim."
From what I saw from the trailer it's more like a modified Gamebryo engine than a new one to me, but with tweaks to lighting and animations, that's all. But I'm Ok with it since this way modders will have an easier time modding it.

†TYRANICK†™ wrote: But gamebryo sucks. Look at all the problems with 32bit/64bit issues and limited RAM availibility and no x64 .EXE and the game not using more than 4 gbs of ram and a whole host of bugs, limitations and all sorts.

I for one hope it's on a brand new engine if it's really been in development for so long...I am hoping for UE4 but that's a long shot. the gamebryo engine is dead, dated and limiting, i really really hope it's not a tweaked skyrim engine or we'll suffer all the same issues as last time, but even worse.

People have 4-12gb GPUs now and 8-24GBs of RAM in there machines these days and rely on x64 a lot, if they are using a tweaked Skyrim engine well the game is crippled to x32 straight away unless they figured out how to make it x64 this time.

Time will tell.

Also that "leak" is so full of guess work, don't believe a thing.

Camonna Tong wrote: I highly doubt they would not make it x64. That would leave 1.3 GB of RAM they can't use. Yes, only 4.5 GB of the 8 GB is usable of the consoles for games. The rest is for the OS. It will be x64. I can guarantee it. Especially after seeing how big Boston is, and how much they've done.

Cinnaspice wrote: I too would prefer to be able to choose and create my own character including gender. I am a woman and never play RPGs as a male character. It is a role-playing game after all and per Gary Gygax a role-playing game is one in which you get to create your character. A game in which you assume the mantle of a pre-determined character is a role-assumption game. Of course, no one ever calls them that.

Unfortunately, some companies think it is a good idea to force people into a certain character so they can tell a specific story (even if they still give players choices, the narrative remains the same.) I fervently hope Bethesda isn't one of the stupid ones.

Just going to throw my 2 cents in and add that I don't think they would ruin the FO name by creating the first and ONLY FO game designed not to have a gender choice for the main PC (even if its only for main story). That would be insane. Insanely stupid that is.

I'm more concerned about the game play and combat system, and whether or not they will release a broken game or one that I can actually play. I wont be buying right away, I'm going to wait until I read and watch reviews after it's been out for a while.

[Deleted1755777User]

In response to post #25804429. #25877964 is also a reply to the same post.

elr0y7 wrote: Wow, I didn't expect so much salt in these comments. I think the game looks great, a definite step-up in graphics, presentation, and architecture. I can't wait to see what new mechanics and gameplay changes they've implemted, because that's whats really gonna matter to me. So excited!

dwyzl wrote: Didn't you hear? Apparently it's cool to hate everything now.

no need bombs when hate do -Ulysess