Fallout V23: "I got another thread that needs your help." - Games

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49329234] Raiders in the Commonwealth are human garbage, they know nothing other than shooting and looting dead bodies.[/QUOTE] They also love seeing people in power armor which to me seems ironic since they usually don't live to see another one

Powder gangers and khans are still raiders concerning to the overall fallout lore regardless of your take on them. Also you were the one who mentioned The Pitt and compared it to Vault 3 all of a sudden, i just said they werent instantly hostile if you had a purpose to be there and it made sense, i never praised it or its quest in any way [QUOTE=Samiam22;49329219]Raiders work just fine as some hard-coded hostile faction that just serves as enemies that can be fought regardless of who you're aligned with or how you play the game. They pretty much voluntarily gave up their civility, look at how they're dressed, how they bark taunts at you and kidnap or kill random settlers. [/QUOTE] No wonder you agree with how they are portraited, you have the same single mentality as Bethesda Raiders are not one huge group of dumb bad guys running around doing bad stuff for shits and giggles. Raiders since the days of fallout 1 were basically the guys who fallen of the moral spectre and became outlaws. There were several groups of different people, with different ideas and mentalities, and they all were classified as raiders. And you still could reason with several of them because people don't lose their brains when they decide to become bandits, you know. Again, the problem isn't that most raiders will attack you on sight and try to rob you, it was this way in the old games too. The problem is that ALL raiders do that regardless. Just common fodder for you to shoot. This kind of oversimplification is stupid to anyone who bothers to think a bit more about of the game instead of just looking for things to shoot [QUOTE=Samiam22;49329219]There are better ways to have an evil playthrough without resorting to the chaotic evil alignment of raiders. The slavers of Paradise Falls or Ceasar's Legion are more pragmatic for an evil player to side with than random raiders. The only way I see "friendly" raiders working is if they try to shake you down instead of shooting you.[/QUOTE] No one is asking for buddy Raiders becoming your best pals, for god sake Non hostile doesn't mean friendly. Just because you can talk with some of them doesn't mean they're friendly. You could work for raiders in 1 and 2 and still be opposed to them and they didn't liked using your services. You could talk to the raiders hired to harass vault city and convince them to leave, without becoming their best buddies. The other side of the F4 coin of "raiders are all hostile" isn't supposed to be "raiders are all your friends"

Bethesda provides a modding platform so that people are able to do weird things that would break the consistency of the game if it had been put in the vanilla game. Being able to join the raiders and effectively remove the shooting aspect of a very large portion of the map (zones that are supposed to be dangerous/a challenge to explore) would have been stupid in vanilla. If players want to go for really weird runs like a bandit king who runs drug dens across the wasteland and demands tributes from raiders, or a deathclaw tamer who runs a deathclaw ranch, or play as an escaped synth or anything of the sort, then they'll have alternate start mods and settlement mods that will provide this sort of weird experience that wouldn't fit in the normal context of the game. Whether you like it or not Bethesda does build their games around the concept that modders will add more to them. It may be lazy but that's how they make their games.

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49328194]Can't wait for F4SE to be out so we can finally have a separate key for grenades and bashing.[/QUOTE] [url]http://f4se.silverlock.org/[/url]

All this talk about friendly raiders reminds me of the bandits from STALKER. In Clear Sky, you could join them. Not only did this involve letting a group of them shake you down for all your money, you had to do odd jobs for them first. Once you did, you were then shot on sight by Loners and Duty (the former of which is everywhere, and the latter could be quite scary) as well as Freedom gunning down your mates if they get seen. Trying to take checkpoints while in Bandits is also quite hard as they weren't very well equipped or trained, which also basically meant being alone in firefights because your bandit buddies would drop like a sack if they got shot by peashooters. Also, it was buggy. Sometimes, it could be impossible to finish the game because some stalkers you needed help from to progress the main quest would shoot you instead. Moral of the story: don't side with the bad guys, you idiot.

[QUOTE=IrishBandit;49329282][url]http://f4se.silverlock.org/[/url][/QUOTE] Needs the actual mods that make bashing a separate key now though :v:

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49329281]Bethesda provides a modding platform so that people are able to do weird things that would break the consistency of the game if it had been put in the vanilla game. Being able to join the raiders and effectively remove the shooting aspect of a very large portion of the map (zones that are supposed to be dangerous/a challenge to explore) would have been stupid in vanilla. If players want to go for really weird runs like a bandit king who runs drug dens across the wasteland and demands tributes from raiders, or a deathclaw tamer who runs a deathclaw ranch, or play as an escaped synth or anything of the sort, then they'll have alternate start mods and settlement mods that will provide this sort of weird experience that wouldn't fit in the normal context of the game. Whether you like it or not Bethesda does build their games around the concept that modders will add more to them. It may be lazy but that's how they make their games.[/QUOTE] You're so eager in your quest to defend Bethesda that you can't realize that you are calling anyone wanting to deviate from the goody two shoes path that they crafted or just not wanting the forced backstory "trying to do weird runs" Trying to roleplay in a RPG now is "weird things that would break the game" Jesus fucking christ.

Yeah but uniting the raider gangs and declaring yourself king of the raiders is [b] awesome [/b]. Plus they could satiate the need for guilt free blasting by adding a minutemen style faction that would attack you on sight for your raiderness, and attempt to destroy your camps and forts if you chose to side with them. Hell if you are so bent on blasting raiders, maybe there could be rival gangs that oppose your rise to power and try to break your warband and assassinate you- and they could have their own territories where you could take the fight to them if you wanted to. I get the purpose raiders serve, because i too enjoy some no strings attached gun-fights from time to time, raiders provide fights where i dont have to worry about factions, friendly fire, objectives etc, but i feel there has to be a balance for it not to feel lame at this point, because it just doesn't make any sense. Having a random faction of [b] thousands[/b] of idiot raiders that apparently spontaneously generate from holes in the ground and attack everything on sight is like putting a big plane in the skybox pulling a banner that reads "THIS IS A GAME"

[QUOTE=Ruh-roh;49329291]You're so eager in your quest to defend Bethesda that you can't realize that you are calling anyone wanting to deviate from the goody two shoes path that they crafted or just not wanting the forced backstory "trying to do weird runs" Trying to roleplay in a RPG now is "weird things that would break the game" Jesus fucking christ.[/QUOTE] Strawman. He's not talking about pretending to be something other than a pre-war soldier or a lawyer. Changing that to something as drastic as a raider leader would require pretty much entire rewrites of the first third or so of the main quest at least, as you need help from some of the most moral characters in the game to find Kellogg. I can't imagine Nick helping me out while I'm peddling drugs and raiding farms. A deathclaw tamer would have no reason to find the Institute, you'd just have deathclaws that deal with whatever chromedomes come your way, and playing as an escaped synth would require a huge amount of rewriting, especially since you'd then need to find a way to incorporate your character's knowledge of the Institute.

It'd be pretty awesome to get a full fallout game based around running your own posse of raiders but in order to make it work it'd have to actually be the focus of the main quest. Like you start the game left for dead in a ditch somewhere or you walked all the way to the region to find and kill someone you have a grudge with as the first part of the game, and once you've killed the guy you practically take control of his gang, from then on you can dismantle every raider group in the region to pacify it, forcefully merge them under your command, or create some form of proper government for a brighter future. Wouldn't work as a side quest in a game where it's not the focus but building an entire game around the idea of running your own group of raiders/mercenaries/lawmen would be fun. [editline]a[/editline] So basically Assassin's Creed Syndicate but post-apocalyptic and also not complete trash [editline]16th December 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=fulgrim;49329295]Having a random faction of [b] thousands[/b] of idiot raiders that apparently spontaneously generate from holes in the ground and attack everything on sight is like putting a big plane in the skybox pulling a banner that reads "THIS IS A GAME"[/QUOTE] Well... it IS still a video game.

[QUOTE=Samiam22;49329322]Strawman. He's not talking about pretending to be something other than a pre-war soldier or a lawyer. Changing that to something as drastic as a raider leader would require pretty much entire rewrites of the first third or so of the main quest at least, as you need help from some of the most moral characters in the game to find Kellogg. I can't imagine Nick helping me out while I'm peddling drugs and raiding farms. A deathclaw tamer would have no reason to find the Institute, you'd just have deathclaws that deal with whatever chromedomes come your way, and playing as an escaped synth would require a huge amount of rewriting, especially since you'd then need to find a way to incorporate your character's knowledge of the Institute.[/QUOTE] You're the one using strawmans left and right still pretending i'm wanting to make all the raiders our friends just because i wanted some of them to not be hostile on sight Removing the backstory and just letting you wake up in the vault without the pre war segment with your wife and son would break nothing in the game too, if anything they would have even more time to develop other aspects of the plot instead of the SHAAAUN one I'm not asking the character to be a raider king and just having the option of talking to some raiders somewhere (like combat zone) instead of shooting his face wouldn't make this. Nice strawman though, no wonder you like the word so much.

Yeah im the one who has decided i want to be raider king, not Ruh-roh. What im saying is a bit more of a big ask than just "hey maybe all the dudes dont just shoot on sight because thats dumb" tetanus inducing crown please

[QUOTE=fulgrim;49329295] Plus they could satiate the need for guilt free blasting by adding a minutemen style faction that would attack you on sight for your raiderness, and attempt to destroy your camps and forts if you chose to side with them. [/QUOTE] Why even "Minutemen-style", why not straight-up Minutemen even. I really don't like how in Bethesda's RPGs if you don't join a faction, it just breaks down. Same thing was in Skyrim - if you don't join a faction, they will never resolve their problems, they will never grow, hell, they will never even show up anywhere; they're inconsequential to the world they happen to be in and may as well not exist if you don't join them. O mighty player, our world is obviously and blatantly artificial, please come play in our sandbox that makes no effort to hide the fact that it exists just for you to mostly shoot at. BoS is the only faction that actually feels like a faction - they have constant presence, if only by virtue of their unlimited supply of tactical spinning Air-to-Ground vertibirds, which is its own can of lore-devouring worms. And even they don't dare come after the mighty Player with his/her empire of settlements that puts to shame any effort ever made by anyone in the Commonwealth.

[QUOTE=Samiam22;49329219]The powder gangers were basically a bunch of convicts playing tough, as was explained by the NCR victory slide if you didn't kill Eddie yourself. The Great Khans aren't raiding at the time of FO:NV because they'd almost been wiped out and have a much safer time running chems. I don't know why you're getting defensive about Vault 3. That was just me stating my opinion on friendly raiders. I liked Ashur. He made sense, The Pitt as a whole was an awesome DLC of quality that I didn't really expect from Bethesda. Raiders work just fine as some hard-coded hostile faction that just serves as enemies that can be fought regardless of who you're aligned with or how you play the game. They pretty much voluntarily gave up their civility, look at how they're dressed, how they bark taunts at you and kidnap or kill random settlers. There are better ways to have an evil playthrough without resorting to the chaotic evil alignment of raiders. The slavers of Paradise Falls or Ceasar's Legion are more pragmatic for an evil player to side with than random raiders. The only way I see "friendly" raiders working is if they try to shake you down instead of shooting you.[/QUOTE] who the fuck said raiders have to be "chaotic evil hurr durr kill everyone" With very few exceptions, raiders are just people who need food and shelter, and believe raiding is the best or only way they can get it. Honestly, Bethesda's insistance on having fucktons of "generic enemies" everywhere is just hugely annoying to me, in so many ways. You really don't need to be in combat all the time, fucks sake.

In Fallout 4 the minutemen are practically the only faction that can't function without you because the last remaining minuteman is a fucking depressed emotional wreck who's lost all hope for mankind unless you join him. The BOS lives on whether you're with them or not. The Railroad just goes on with business as usual. The Institute pretty much doesn't give a fuck whether you join them or not [sp]at least until you decide to blow them the fuck up.[/sp] As for the fact the plot doesn't really move forward without the player's influence, well, that's a consequence of Fallout 4 still being a video game. The story still needs to be somewhat centered around the main character or else it wouldn't be interesting.

My thing with raiders is that I wish they'd at least tell you to back off before just automatically shooting at you

[QUOTE=Ruh-roh;49329343]You're the one using strawmans left and right still pretending i'm wanting to make all the raiders our friends just because i wanted some of them to not be hostile on sight Removing the backstory and just letting you wake up in the vault without the pre war segment with your wife and son would break nothing in the game too, if anything they would have even more time to develop other aspects of the plot instead of the SHAAAUN one I'm not asking the character to be a raider king and just having the option of talking to some raiders somewhere (like combat zone) instead of shooting his face wouldn't make this. Nice strawman though, no wonder you like the word so much.[/QUOTE] I used it once. And I assume what you mean by "removing the backstory" means getting rid of Nora and Shaun completely? That would have huge ramifications that would basically require a complete rewrite of the story of the game.

[QUOTE=Samiam22;49329423]And I assume what you mean by "removing the backstory" means getting rid of Nora and Shaun completely? That would have huge ramifications that would basically require a complete rewrite of the story of the game.[/QUOTE] GOOD

[QUOTE=Samiam22;49329423]And I assume what you mean by "removing the backstory" means getting rid of Nora and Shaun completely? That would have huge ramifications that would basically require a complete rewrite of the story of the game.[/QUOTE] Not really Removing the backstory doesn't necessarily mean erasing everything they did, it just means cutting the intro sequence and letting you wake up from your cryo sleep without it. As i said it could be something you could retrieve in the memory den if you felt like it, as one of the possible outcomes for your character. Having such a place like the Memory Den avaliable and not using it at all for a good story point is not only a waste but pretty dumb too Your wife is "important" for 5 minutes at most and all the effort spent on the shaun plotline could be used to flesh out way more important things in the game.

I honestly wish they hadn't gone down the same route as Fallout 3, only not your Dad, I mean at least in Fallout 3 your Dad was fucking Liam Neeson, in this you've just got some [sp]old guy with some pretty shit views on Synthetics.[/sp] Also people talking about Nora and Shaun and I'm just here like, "You mean Nate and Shaun, gawd."

There's a lot of places that could've been fleshed out but weren't other than the Memory Den, like the Combat Zone, Easy City Downs, etc. With 143 hours logged somehow I can't complain too much but it feels like a lot of missed opportunities either way.

[QUOTE=Samiam22;49329322]Strawman. He's not talking about pretending to be something other than a pre-war soldier or a lawyer. Changing that to something as drastic as a raider leader would require pretty much entire rewrites of the first third or so of the main quest at least, as you need help from some of the most moral characters in the game to find Kellogg. I can't imagine Nick helping me out while I'm peddling drugs and raiding farms. [/QUOTE] That's kind of the point mate, the main substance of my complaints is that the plot rail-roads you into a particular character and severely limits the kind of decisions you could make. You can't say "no you can't change anything because otherwise it will conflict with the plot" as an excuse because my complaint is literally that i can't change anything or it will conflict with the plot.

[QUOTE=Ruh-roh;49329278] No wonder you agree with how they are portraited, you have the same single mentality as Bethesda Raiders are not one huge group of dumb bad guys running around doing bad stuff for shits and giggles. Raiders since the days of fallout 1 were basically the guys who fallen of the moral spectre and became outlaws. There were several groups of different people, with different ideas and mentalities, and they all were classified as raiders. And you still could reason with several of them because people don't lose their brains when they decide to become bandits, you know. Again, the problem isn't that most raiders will attack you on sight and try to rob you, it was this way in the old games too. The problem is that ALL raiders do that regardless. Just common fodder for you to shoot. This kind of oversimplification is stupid to anyone who bothers to think a bit more about of the game instead of just looking for things to shoot. [/QUOTE] Can't remember who or where it was (not much stuck with me regards to this game) but isn't there a pretty great terminal log of someone trying to hold a band of survivors together, slowly running out of supplies, losing men and faith and starving. He even executes the first few caravan raiders and then realises that it is the only way to survive and finally starts attracting other misfits and is surprised he is labelled as a raider. You can see he is ashamed and in the end even stops the logs for what he has become. I mean it was pretty hamfisted and this character development happens over 5 entries of 20 lines each but still it was a nice touch and a reminder of the humanity of raiders. And then you obviously murder all of them.

[QUOTE=Fetret;49329556]Can't remember who or where it was (not much stuck with me regards to this game) but isn't there a pretty great terminal log of someone trying to hold a band of survivors together, slowly running out of supplies, losing men and faith and starving. He even executes the first few caravan raiders and then realises that it is the only way to survive and finally starts attracting other misfits and is surprised he is labelled as a raider. You can see he is ashamed and in the end even stops the logs for what he has become. I mean it was pretty hamfisted and this character development happens over 5 entries of 20 lines each but still it was a nice touch and a reminder of the humanity of raiders. And then you obviously murder all of them.[/QUOTE] I read that in a terminal aswell and also can't remember where it is, but I liked reading it because it shows that there are Raiders who were human at one point.

[QUOTE=Samiam22;49329423]I used it once. And I assume what you mean by "removing the backstory" means getting rid of Nora and Shaun completely? That would have huge ramifications that would basically require a complete rewrite of the story of the game.[/QUOTE] I still think New Vegas had the best approach to the MC. They basically make you the mailman and then give like minimal hints to your past so you can basically be anything you want to be.

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49329281]Bethesda provides a modding platform so that people are able to do weird things that would break the consistency of the game if it had been put in the vanilla game. Being able to join the raiders and effectively remove the shooting aspect of a very large portion of the map (zones that are supposed to be dangerous/a challenge to explore) would have been stupid in vanilla. If players want to go for really weird runs like a bandit king who runs drug dens across the wasteland and demands tributes from raiders, or a deathclaw tamer who runs a deathclaw ranch, or play as an escaped synth or anything of the sort, then they'll have alternate start mods and settlement mods that will provide this sort of weird experience that wouldn't fit in the normal context of the game. Whether you like it or not Bethesda does build their games around the concept that modders will add more to them. It may be lazy but that's how they make their games.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Ganerumo;49329234]East Coast Raiders are one of the most inconsequential aspects of the series and are here so that there's more things to shoot at than wild dogs and ghouls. They actually spent the time to explain why they act like this and to develop them a bit further than just being angry chem-heads with guns which is nice, but that doesn't mean Bethesda really needs to do any more than this, because ultimately Raiders are just bandits, and bandits are the braindead cannon fodder of a metric ton of RPGs out there. [editline]16th December 2015[/editline] Because there was a guitarist in Mad Max doesn't mean there needs to be one in Fallout. Raiders in the Commonwealth are human garbage, they know nothing other than shooting and looting dead bodies.[/QUOTE] Your arguments basically boil down to "it's fine this way because it's a game" and "it's fine this way because that's how the game is". Pretty much everything you cite had the potential to be more, but like the vast majority of the rest of the game, that potential wasn't taken advantage of. That's complacent as hell, why would you [I]settle[/I] for that? To just have some subpar product foisted on to you because it mostly works, even though it [I]could[/I] be more, and then saying it's [I]not the fault of the people making the game[/I] and that the community is supposed to deliver on the actual quality?

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;49329597]That's precisely why there SHOULD be one! You can never have too much Max[/QUOTE] Aren't the Leather Armors in the earlier games a nod to Mad Max?

[QUOTE=GHOST!!!!;49329582]I read that in a terminal aswell and also can't remember where it is, but I liked reading it because it shows that there are Raiders who were human at one point.[/QUOTE] At the top of Libertalia, I think. I felt kind of bad after reading it too.

Considering how insistent Bethesesda was on giving the player character a predefined backstory with Sean, Nate, and Nora, it's incredibly disappointing how poorly written, shallow, and ultimately inconsequential that whole story is in regards to the larger plot of the game. Your spouse is literally removed from the game less than twenty minutes into the story, and has no further impact on the game besides being occasionally referenced in an inconsequential dialog choice. Plus the whole Sean storyline more less comes to a grinding halt once [sp]you meet Father[/sp]. The whole backstory thing exists in an awkward state where it's too shallow and poorly written to be a genuinely gripping character driven narrative in the vein of The Witcher or The Last of Us, but it's also too forced and intrusive to be a traditional blank slate RPG character that Fallout and TES fans would be familiar with. You'll only ever be able to play Nate/Nora under a different name. IMHO Fallout 4 would have been a much better game if Bethsesda either removed the PC backstory entirely or doubled down on it and made a genuinely good character driven narrative. Sorry if a lot of my post is redundant, I've just had a lot to get off my chest since I've been playing from Launch Day :v:

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49329419]In Fallout 4 the minutemen are practically the only faction that can't function without you because the last remaining minuteman is a fucking depressed emotional wreck who's lost all hope for mankind unless you join him. The BOS lives on whether you're with them or not. The Railroad just goes on with business as usual. The Institute pretty much doesn't give a fuck whether you join them or not [sp]at least until you decide to blow them the fuck up.[/sp] As for the fact the plot doesn't really move forward without the player's influence, well, that's a consequence of Fallout 4 still being a video game. The story still needs to be somewhat centered around the main character or else it wouldn't be interesting.[/QUOTE] By "functioning" I don't just mean the plot. I also mean their presence is the world. Out of 4 factions you can join, only one has a presence in the world outside of story missions. And I'm not considering environmental dangers (raiders, critters and supermutants) to be factions, although some very well could have been. All the while you can actually make an impact on the world outside of story missions, with your settlements - but that interests no one at all, apparently - surely not the Institute, not the organization that actively tried to influence the Commonwealth's situation. Not the BoS, who apparently send out random Knights to demand food from the settlers. Not the Railroad, who usually go as far as to infiltrate anything they can infiltrate. In Fo3 there were Regulators and Talon mercs, non-factions (so, environmental dangers) that would come after you if you got too kind or too naughty. That's badly implemented, shallow, but it's still world reacting to you, the player. Commonwealth, apparently, cares not one bit about you, even when it absolutely should.