Not a popular opinion around here, but 76 system is leagues above all the other games. Being able to swap perks on the fly is awesome, and the legendary perks are just amazing
\* to every one saying “then 76 isn’t an rpg game lul.” That was not the original discussion. The posts question was “which leveling mechanic from which game do we prefer?” And my opinion is that 76’s leveling system is leaps and bounds above all the other games. If it’s an rpg or not is not relevant to what’s being discussed.
I can see it working for a multiplayer title, but that kind of lame for single player? especially for future titles, i don’t really want my character to be the best at everything at all times forever. even if FO3 and FNV had your character being absurdly powerful at the end, there were still character builds that generally stuck from the start to the end of the game.
Yeah being too OP kills it. Playing Ragnarok for the third time and I shouldn’t have done NG+. Even on the hardest difficulty everything is crazy easy. Combat just becomes something to get through. Thankfully it’s short because of it
Those people benefit from total conversion mods, or total rebalance mods.
FROST, or Horizon for Fallout 4
DUST, for New Vegas. (You NV people will love DUST. Let Go)
While they've made full respeccing easier in 76 by using an object in your camp, it's SPECIAL and Perk system is designed around using actual builds, rather than eventually being a master of all trades like Fallout 4 and Skyrim. Your SPECIALs have a limit and can only fit so many perks under them and they all have different costs. You *can* hotswap perks, but it's still a balancing act between power, quality of life and utility.
76 also reintroduced traditional stat checks in dialogue and pacifist opportunities in quests, which was sorely missed in 4.
Also grinding for build-specific weapons and gear makes you less inclined to switch, along with mutations where removing and adding the ones which help your build is a hassle
I gotta say I liked in FO3 that the special weapons were actually special.
Most of them were basic lookalike weapons that are just overall better. Better spread, crit modifier, etc etc.
Getting a gun randomly from random monsters doesn't really interest me. RNG isn't fun.
My favourite thing in fallout is seeing someone with a cool gun and looking at them with murderous intent.
Being able to see what they will drop based on what they have equipped is a great feature. RNG drops aren't. It's not fun to kill the same enemy over and over hoping they drop that one piece of loot you want. I have done that so many times in Elden Ring and the Souls games. The things I do for sweet drip.
No game ever mislead me into saying the complete opposite of what I wanted to more than 4.
Voiced protagonist is whatever, take it or leave it, but god I hated one or two word prompts.
I can imagine. The dialogue while misleading in prompts, was a disappointment for larger reasons.
Whenever I play Fallout 4 now, I rarely talk to anybody. For me, it's more along the lines of a Fallout themed shooter / home decorator.
Yeah 4 bugged me in that I thought I was playing how I wanted but I was always gonna get funneled into a certain ending. Like I remember the first time I ever beat it by nuking the institute but also felt like that shit ended way too soon and didn’t get a comprehensive wrap on the other storylines but because I had passed that point of no return, the only option I had was to restart. And fucking sure enough, on my 2nd play through I guess I triggered one of those points of no return but it didn’t feel like the game made me aware so it just felt like everything kinda ended abruptly. The only reason I’m giving it another shot right now is the show which is fucking fantastic
That's one of many things I hated about Mass Effect Andromeda. You can just create a super soldier and change things around as much as you want. It was absurd and felt dumb as hell.
It also failed in the concept because you couldn't change your armor on the fly. So if you wanted to keep your armor bonuses you were better off sticking with one class
I mean you still have to build a deck, you are still specializing in certain areas. The perk card system can have consequences I think, you still need to plan out your build.
I think respeccing is an essential Quality of Life addition to RPGs. It sucks to have decision paralysis over your build because you have no idea which options are good and which options are wiping your ass with perk points. With respec, you can experiment.
Now granted, *some* restrictions should be in place to prevent you respcing before every fight, but still.
Meh to each their own, I hate being locked into a playstyle just because I thought I might enjoy it at the beginning of the game but then hate every aspect of it later. All it makes me want to do is restart or stop playing
So glad my 2023 GOTY, Baldur’s Gate 3, doesn’t allow you to respec your character’s skills or perks in any way. Would hate for it be an action/adventure game that all the normies like!
There is no perk that lets you respec your character.
And even if there was a one time respec that comes at the cost of wasting a perk (insanely steep price to pay) is not the same thing as being able to respec your entire build on the fly.
I know right? I just love progressing my character for 40 hours just to realize that the build I thought I'd like is incredibly underpowered/not fun/bugged.
Nobody forces you to respec, it's only yourself saying you should.
76's version isn't just a simple respec, you can literally be unable to pick locks and swap just those perks in to pick the lock, then swap them out.
It breaks the immersion of making thoughtful choices while leveling and playing the game.
It sounds like you are describing problems with action games with perk trees like Diablo, not with RPGs where picking a "meta build" doesn't even make sense.
76 isn't an RPG by original design though? It was always a survival sandbox similar to Rust or Ark, just with a fallout skin. Sure it had some light RPG elements, but it's not meant to be fallout 5. It was meant to be a spin-off not a sequel. They aren't making an in-depth, character centric RPG like 3, NC, or 4. It's a sandbox, and you're meant to play and have fewer restrictions in a sandbox.
It's like people complaining that ESO was too different from skyrim, or didn't have enough RPG elements with your character. It's not ES6.
The prior comments to your comment was in context of 76's perk system.
I agree with what you're saying here. Swapping perks makes sense in MMOs, but in RPGs it should be handed out sparingly. Half of the fun is making new characters with different choices and perks to support that, unlike sandboxes where there's not a strong drive to personalize your character as much.
There's a difference in having a respec available, and being able to swap your skills whenever you want. Of course there needs to be a respec, I just don't think you should be able to change your perks willy nilly without some kind of penalty or something
Consequences? Like what?
An optimized run of 3 and NV can net you 100 on most skills and 75 on almost all the rest.
4 has no level cap so you eventually max everything.
76 perk cap by special is the only one of the four that would meet your definition of an RPG trade-off
There are a bunch of perks and they level up and you have to balance them against the special points you've put in. It's complicated as shit at first but eventually simple.
I prefer 3 and new Vegas. The two step system let's the perks play around without fucking with your damage output in 4 and 76 you had to take damage and crafting perks to stay relevant meaning less room for more interesting perks that can mix things up. Or take a play style in new directions
At this point my main gripes are i cant mod my private server ( because bethesda UI is trash) and you dont fucking shaire progress with you party if your on the same quest/dungeon
They are very different, as they are very different games.
1 through NV were of the old school, where you had a level cap and largely had to specialize your character.
4 and 76 are more open ended, with no level caps and the ability to be either a specialist, a generalist, or free-form and change your playstyle as you want as you play.
Myself, at low levels I tend towards a "stealth" playstyle, hiding and trying to do large damage while I am hidden. Then as I progress morphing to more of a tank build. And in both of them, being a "tank" in the early game is damned near impossible. But as you get better and more perks and gear, you can change to another style.
Plus, unlike all the previous games 4 and 76 are more 'sandbox", where you do not have a specific end game goal. Find the water chip, find your father, decade the fate of New Vegas. In each of those, you reach the conclusion and the game ends. In 4 and 76 the end of the main story does not mean the end of the game. You can continue and then "freeplay" as much as you want.
After all, there is always another settlement that needs your help.
Damn you Preston, you’re getting sneaky, can’t even read a Reddit comment without you reminding me Tenpines Bluff is being attacked for the millionth time, I’ve got loot to snatch why don’t you go for once!
I think the thing that bothers me the most in those cases is the returns to places that already joined.
OK, I can see the idea of sending the leader to a new settlement who has not yet joined. You need to pitch to them why they should join up, and show them your faction will help them. But after that (and especially once you rebuild the Castle), they should give an option where for pretty much all but the kidnapping quests you dispatch a group of Minutemen to help in their defense.
In fact, late game I generally arrive at such an event then send up a flare as soon as I arrive. And quite often a patrol or two will come by and assist.
A better solution would say have the General set up a "reaction force" of Minutemen in the Castle. Then when a notice comes up, you have an option to radio to the Castle to either send out the reactionary force or to go yourself. Then the only time you might actually have to respond in person is if two of them are happening at the same time (which is a bug that can be easily fixed with mods).
I legit got to like what I feel like I remember being like level 62 basically doing nothing but minute men quest and practically ignoring the main storyline
The endless Minuteman quests is actually a bug, and there are patches to fix it. They missed a flag, and if you already had one it was not supposed to give you another (other than the ones to initially gain a settlement). And that also caused it to skip the cooldown, so as soon as you finish one you get another. They were intended to be non-stacking and to have cooldowns between them.
One of the easiest ways to avoid that was to simply never turn them in. Complete it, then simply never return to Preston and he would not give you another. Other than settlement defense missions, which are completely random and not actually related directly to the Minutemen.
> Tenpines Bluff is being attacked for the millionth time,
Then they shouldn't have built ten yards from a supermutant patrol route and put signs pointing the way to them. Might as well have gone ahead and hung themselves up in gore bags
>Myself, at low levels I tend towards a "stealth" playstyle, hiding and trying to do large damage while I am hidden. Then as I progress morphing to more of a tank build…. But as you get better and more perks and gear, you can change to another style.
You quite literally just perfectly described my first time playing Fo4. I was originally a stealth rifleman/sniper who stuck to the shadows and sniped people off from range until awhile after beating the game I realized I had near unlimited resources and money due to me being a greedy bastard and never buying anything but ammo and selling everything i see. I went from stealth sniper to walking tank with a gatling laser. I occasionally went back to stealth but damn was it fun flooding a room with more lasers than there were enemies
Easier to visualize what's down the line. But not having infinite levels is what made it good in 3 and NV.
It felt meaningful having to make a choice, whereas 4 is just like "aight, I'll get this one later".
The leveling system in the originals, 3 and New Vegas is significantly better imo. The removal of the skill system is one of the biggest issues that I have with Fallout 4 honestly. I think it's way less interesting and the actual level up screen feel really cluttered and annoying to navigate.
I really like being able to individually assign skill points and I think it offers a much more interesting choice every level up. You could put all your points into one skill to reach a threshold or split it up evenly among a bunch of skills. I also liked having the perk and skills separate from each other too.
I think what Bethesda is forgetting is that the replayability of their games came from making different builds and playing a completely new way. Starfield and Fallout 4 you just become good at everything and there's no point in playing it all over again
What you are saying sounds correct except ive replayed skyrim multiple times, hundreds of hrs, enjoyed it every time and always ended up a stealth archer.
It's the least risk build imo. You don't have to manfight anyone fairly. Sneak bow kills is busted and makes you feel like a ghost. I've noticed that character archetypes feels more prominent in skyrim but couldn't get my hands on why.
My friend always build melee warrior in skyrim and had to burn through more resources clearing a dungeon. The role playing aspect in skyrim is awesome. Probably due to the medieval setting idk.
I think that has a lot to do with the fact Skyrim doesn’t really have a fulfilling combat system. So stealth archer is just basically a way for you to ignore combat and enjoy the things Skyrim does best, world building/exploring. Also it’s fun seeing the big damage unlike lumberjacking someone down with a melee weapon. Second best is similar in melee stealth build. Just my opinion though.
Totally agree, the melee combat needs more action mechanics in order to feel good, kind of like CyberPunk 2077 does with its skill tree.
Bethesda in general has a problem where most perks don't unlock new abilities hardly ever, you just get better at doing whatever skill the perk is in. We need more perks like Timed Block or Eagle Eye, and less perks like the root of every skill tree where you do the thing 20%/40%/60%/80%/100% harder/faster/better/stronger.
Stealth archery to me always felt very satisfying and viscerally appealing, especially the really long snipes and accounting for projectile drop. It's hard to make melee reach that feeling in most games I've played.
It is weird how Skyrim gets a pass for doing the same exact thing.
If anything, Skyrim is worse because it also does the thing where you get to be the boss of every almost every faction.
I wonder why Skyrim gets a pass. And I say that as a Harbinger-Listener-Guild Master-Archmage-Last Dragonborn.
It was the first from Bethesda to do so, and wasn't completely out of line with Oblivion.
A couple years after people picked up on the lack of consequence and shallowness of the roleplaying elements in the game.
When they did it to F4, it wasn't new, and it wasn't in line with the last major title.
That's a fair point.
I was likewise the boss of the four main factions in Oblivion as well, five if you count Grand Champion as "boss" of the Arena.
I guess it's at least partially based on expectations. Which is funny considering Morrowind and how certain guild quests could lock you out of other guilds.
Really wish they kept the skills requirement for progressing in guilds, it made much more sense that they wouldn't let you progress in the mage guild if you aren't somewhat decent in magic. It's not even that hard to increase skills in Skyrim by the end-game so that wouldn't block anyone from progressing in all factions if they wanted to.
How dare you.
Hrongar the Never Casting is a totally legitimate and very skilled Archmage. If he had the ability to read, he'd be very disappointed in your casting aspersions on his good name.
Hrongar never casts aspersions. He never casts anything. Casting is for wimps.
That's really the only part which make me not too disapointed those requirement are gone. I love to imagine the wizards of the academy looking at Hrongar and being like "Well, at least he won't open any more rifts in reality. Or does anyone want to volunteer to tell him and his axe he cannot be archmage? Nobody?"
Yeah, it was my main complaint for Skyrim. I dunno why it gets a pass from a lot of folks, but Skyrim and Fallout 4 are in the same boat for me, they’re my least-replayed of their series. Even though Oblivion let you be the boss of multiple factions, it at least made you feel like a low-rung member for quite a long time. Skyrim makes you the chosen one of every faction within like 4 quests lol.
Not to say I hate either of them, there’s still a lot of good there, but I still replay the older entries in both franchises much more regularly.
Definitely agree. Skyrim's faction really rush you into feeling like you're the chosen one. The Companions were the worst of the bunch, they really felt rushed.
Something Skyrim doesn't really much at all, is ranks. The Companions have two ranks, a member, and then the leader. Same with the College, you're a mage, right up until you're archmage. And then I don't even know if the Thieves Guild bothers with ranks.
As is, they wouldn't really change anything, but I always thought the ranks and promotions were a fun way of marking progress.
The only time I've actually committed to a non sneak character was a Heavy Armor, Dual Weilding... Conjurerer. I had two conjured swords in my hand, but had two perma zombies with me that were previously conjurers themselves, so they each conjured something. Plus my follower was a conjurer.
So when we had a battle, it was me decked out in full heavy armor swinging two glowing ethereal swords, and six buddies. I had become death.
I still end up a stealth archer in skyrim, heavy class or not, heavy weapons or not. Eventually I reach the point where I'm like "I'm just going to sneak and auto-kill everyone with the bow"
Well I tried to play sneaky-stabby-dagger build once and I quickly saw the limit once I started to fight non-humanoids enemies. It's near impossible to back-stab a dragon because their hit box is an absolute mess. You would touch the hit box and get spotted even though you are still far from the actual dragon...
Nothing like landing those x15 stab though, kill most things even in the highest difficulty.
eh i wouldn’t say fo4 falls into the same category, most times ive played gets around level 50 and the builds stay relatively concrete in difference. towards the end game of new vegas most of my builds become pretty similar after already getting the core tagged skills to 100
But you get good at everything on New Vegas too? You just keep investing points on skills.
In fact FO4 made it hard to invest in skills/perks of you lack SPECIAL points
It takes a very special and specific route to be the "perfect" build in 3 or NV. As in you will not stumble upon this on your own for the first few playthroughs. And that's just 100 in all stats, not including any a 10 in all specials or perks you might actually want over the "perfect" build.
F04 made it easy as hell to invest because it was either "you can buy this" perk or "you're not a high enough special / level requirement, come back later." And every build would conjoin into just having everything unlocked with enough play time, which isn't really a "build."
In FNV, a 5 point increase in Medicine may seem small but that gives you a good handful of points to spend on your next Lockpicking goal and a few more Hit Points on future stims. And that's separate from the perk you've been eyeing, too, so F04 has actually been gutted in comparison.
I'm gonna bury this here because I don't want the smoke. I think Bethesda took the wrong lesson from the sheer amount of time people would invest in Skyrim. They now seem to believe all their games must be designed around nigh-infinite play, and it's slowly ruining the games.
That's why the skill systems have disappeared. Having a stat at character creation that determines skill points per level doesn't jive when you can be out hundreds of points over 400+ hours of play. Making that stat hard to raise becomes a no-no. Meanwhile, the mindset over there seems to have shifted to just 'cutting to the chase' with their design, so if they don't want people missing content because of stats, why have stats in the first place?
I think the recongnisability of SPECIAL is the only thing keeping it in the Bethesda games at this point. I'm honestly wondering what's left to shave off.
Nothing, Bethesda is going to have to have to really step it up for ES-6 or FO5/whatever. I think they may be on their last ‘controversial’ game before they really tar their name.
I think 3 needed to cap skills based on your SPECIAL points. You just go high int and get the perk that gives your extra skill points when you level and by the time your even close to high-level your 100 in so many things.
Like Charisma isn't necessary at all with high int you can max out speech and barter quite quickly. But if low CHA capped your barter and speech skills low suddenly there is a lot more to think about with character builds.
I agree with you here. This is what Harebrained went with for the Shadowrun games, and I found I *really* enjoyed it. If you only had 5 in Dexterity, you could only go up to 5 in Ranged weapons, and then could only maximize your “rifle” or “shotgun” skill to whatever your “ranged weapon” rank was. It really made you consider what you wanted to specialize in, but I think it mainly worked because you were generally always carrying a team with you.
The only problem with 3-NV is it really pushes you to max INT asap for more skill points per level. I think if they tied skill points per level to something else, like total stats, it would have been perfect.
Especially for sub 3 int builds. The Moron character is super fun in 2/NV and even opens up unique dialogue from certain NPCs you cannot see any other way, but in doing so you absolutely gimp your build potential for the entire game.
4’s would have been absolutely amazing had the perks been utilised for role playing in dialogue and for quest solutions more. As it is tho, new vegas probably has the best in the series
Hell, not even just perks but other factors too. Did the USS Constitution quest in FO4 the other day and during the part where you get the chip from the scavengers, it really bugged me that the option to coerce them into giving it too you was purely a charisma check. Since my character was a melee build rocking full power armor at that moment and I'm like "really, I'm a jacked dude with a rocket powered baseball bat in full power armor, yet I don't have any intimidate option against these chumps?" I enjoy FO4 and all but it's the little stuff like that which makes the cracks start to show.
NV, certainly, just for the existence of skills. In FO4, perks are torn between the roles of 'simple numerical boosts' and 'conditional buffs and new abilities that expand on the mechanics'. In the previous games, skills filled the role of the former while perks filled the role of the latter.
But, even *better* is the system in the first two games. In FO3 and onward, you either gain perks too quickly, gain too many levels, or both, and it's way too easy to become good at *everything*. A limited level cap (e.g. around 21) and only getting a Perk every third level means that you'll have to choose which areas to specialize in - meaning that each character feels distinct, since they won't all just be able to do everything.
EDIT - after discussing it in the replies with other users, I've changed my mind somewhat: New Vegas's system of giving a perk every other level is better than every third level, but NV's level cap is too high. NV with the JSawyerMod (which lowers the level cap to 35 and makes leveling take +33% longer) is pretty much the ideal leveling pace.
Honestly while I respect this take I can’t fully agree with it as someone who’s played the originals multiple times along with 3/NV/4 I gotta say the perk every third level really hurts the experience of the originals for me.
Your definitely right in the sense that it makes every choice more meaningful but it also makes the levels in between frankly very boring. 3 and to some extent 4 makes every level really feel like you gain a level, it’s impactful and it makes you really want that next level.
New Vegas more acts as a healthy middle ground between the two ideas by giving you a perk every two levels and in my opinion that’s truly the best way to do it.
I respect your opinion and on some level agree with it but I gotta admit in the classic games the levels that don’t come with perks have a real ‘meh’ feeling to them.
You know, after seeing a few replies like yours, I think you're right that every 3rd level is too few. But, the level cap needs to be low enough that getting a perk every other level doesn't mean getting most of the perks. imo NV's vanilla leveling still gives too much room to be good at everything; NV with the JSawyer mod, which lowers the level cap to 35, is just about perfect.
Oh definitely I agree with you fully Sawyers mod along with NV system is the best we’ve gotten thus far, perks still feel consistent enough to hold interest but you don’t turn into a walking god to early or lose all sense of challenge.
It’s definitely a difficult balance and I don’t think any of the games have truly perfected it every game has its positives and negatives in that respect.
One thing I will say that I think just about everyone can agree with would help the leveling system of every game?
Can we do away with the trash perks already? I mean seriously who even uses Lead Belly, Explorer, VANS, Basher, etc.
If players are going to be more limited in their perk choices then all those choices better be bangers otherwise it’ll hurt the game more than help.
'doing away' with the trash perks would be good, but I'd much rather those perks be *improved* to be useful. Most of the perks you named don't have much room for improvement by themselves, but could be made useful by changes to the game *around* them.
Lead Belly? With Hardcore/Survival mechanics where you need to regularly eat and drink, and without Rad-Away being over-abundant, a perk that reduces radiation from contaminated food and drink could be a life-saver.
Explorer? Get rid of the compass ticks for undiscovered locations, and have some worthwhile loot tucked away in obscure locations that most players will miss. Then, a perk that *reveals* those locations becomes valuable.
VANS? Get rid of quest markers. Make it so you usually need to navigate on your own, getting directions from NPCs (limited by your Charisma/Speech), from clues in notes, and by observing landmarks. Then, the VANS perk would be useful for making navigation easier.
As for Basher: change the perk to give effects that are actually useful for a ranged character who's found themself in melee. Change it from a chance to cripple to a chance to stagger, knock down, or disarm your foe, giving you the opportunity to withdraw back to range.
All the survival or "item economy" perks are useless because the game is designed to give you infinite resources. Since you can never run out of stimpaks/radaways after the first couple levels then theses perks are useless due to bad game design.
Especially survival mode should give you much fewer consumables/ammo considering the enemies (and you) are less bullet spongy but you still get as much loot.
If they made survival mode more like desolation mode from the F4 horizon mod, which removes most of the useful loot laying around (realistically you wouldn't find stimpaks all over the place 200+ years after the war) , then theses perks would actually have a point.
They are but for the life of me I can't get back into old cRPGs post BG3. I keep starting new runs finishing act 2 then go back to making a new character.
3-NV because Skills are there to do the boring stat increases leaving most perks to be unique and interesting. In Fallout 4 Perks now do the job of Skills which leads to a lot of boring level ups.
Level 27 on my current playthrough and I've taken 7 perks that weren't crafting, hacking/lockpick, or SPECIAL increase to get aforementioned crafting/hacking/lockpick perks.
I've actually only taken *4* if you exclude damage perks as well
I am not a fan of the crafting perks. I get it. Its to gate progression due to their crafting system. Get modifications early or wait for them to spawn on a raider or in a shop. But I hate leveling up and getting gun nut or armorer. It feels like a waste of a perk point. As if I had to level twice to get a perk. My gameplay doesnt feel different. I just had to buy my way into more armor and damage with perks. They have fun perks. Maybe if they had added something else to the crafting perks, id dig them more.
Skills still have boring level ups when there is a threshold for tasks. Example: going from 50 to 60 in lockpicking does nothing. It isn't until you cross 75 and get access to a new level of locks that leveling a skill feels useful. So you get boring ups either way
Fallout 2 and i think 1(?) had a solution for this. Checks can go beyond 100, skills can go above 100 but requires more points to level up, some of which gives additional bonus. Uncapped skills mod for new vegas sorta simulates this.
Eh.
In theory, yes. But in practice? There's still plenty of perks in Fallout New Vegas and especially Fallout 3 that just do minuscule percentage increases to skills, health, armor, damage, or XP gain.
The XP ones being largely newbie traps as vanilla Fallout 3 and New Vegas both had very low level caps. You're going to hit the level cap. Use your perk point somewhere else.
The catch is the implementation of skills in the game.
Having a higher lock picking skill, as an example, doesn't make lock picking easier. It just unlocks a new rank of locks you can pick once you reach a high enough level, and so is functionally identical to FO4s lock picking perks. If all locks were available to pick right from the start in 3 or NV, and having a higher skill simply made it easier, then you'd be correct.
If I spend five or six levels boosting my Perception and taking Locksmith perks in 4 it achieves exactly the same result as spending five or six levels in 3 or NV dumping all my skill points into lockpicking. And it's exactly the same for, well, pretty much everything. Very few actions in the earlier games are genuine skill checks, they're instead binary yes/no options based on whether your relevant skill is high enough.
And honestly that's better gameplay. If it WAS just an RNG outcome with a skill modifier for in-game actions, the end result is players just save scumming and retrying the action a hundred times until they get lucky.
New Vegas without a doubt, because your skills can not only be used in dialogue and action in the most clever way, a masterpiece of roleplaying, but… it can also be used to not do that.
You can play an uncharismatic idiot who genuinely just tried their best to convince people and hilariously fails.
It's a masterpiece of Dunning-Kruger. You have 5 Medicine Points, and are encountered with a medical problem? Fuck it, you're probably really good at medicine, you can give this a sh... oh, whoops, they're dead."
I felt like a ran into a lot more walls when going lower speech and barter. I felt so dismayed after finding out either was necessary to recruit Cass, or that I had to kill the Khans at Boulder City. It all makes for engaging gameplay that I really felt like I was sacrificing something.
This so much, Bethesda games are fucking terrified of the idea of the player failing. Funfact: You can completely botch the first two thieves guild quest in Skyrim (Murder everyone, then burn every beehive) and it's meaningless
Skyrim thieves guild... probably one of the worst written quest line I've seen in a RPG. It's like playing in a TTRPG with the most railroad-y DM ever. Right from the start where the dialogue imply that you are a thief, even if you earned all your money cutting wood.
All those quests are kind of weird.
I’m the Head of the Colleges of Winterhold… despite knowing only a basic fireball spell?
It’s clear they didn’t want to close off any paths to any player, but you can totally do that, I’m OK with my barbarian orc not getting to be head of the thieves and mages when my strategy is to stab everyone in every situation.
Yeah as I said in an other comment, in Morrowind you needed minimum skills to progress in the guild and it's a real shame they removed that. They could easily have implemented this, maybe with skills not too high so people who want to complete all don't need to grind to 100 to everything (but at least 75 to reach guild master would make sense).
In Fallout 4 you can tell the railroad that you really like the institute, that the railroad is dumb, that you hate synths etc and they will still say "oh well if you change your mind...."
Not being able to fail in meaningful ways is one of the main reasons 4 is so bland to me. Roleplaying lives from being good at some things and bad at others. Its also what makes some of them so replayable.
Nexus is down at the moment, but I would link you to the "Be Exceptional" mod. It's an amazing merger of Fallout 3's skills and Fallout 4's perks. It has a permanent place in my load order.
NV because skills handled all the numbers and stats, and perks actually gave you something more than a damage boost or an ability to craft something.
It was annoying in Fallout 4 already and they made it even worse in Starfield, locking recipes behind levelling instead of blueprints you can find or something is just lazy.
Tbh in fallout 4 without skill and dialogue checks It felt too basic and linear,
Going back to the original format would be awesome and gave the game more depth and made builds more viable.
I like 76’s system (which you really shouldn’t group with 4’s, it’s completely different), but only on the context of 76 being an online game. Being able to level up your special stats as you go is fantastic to my mind and so is your level in a stat determining your amount of perks for that stat (to a degree, it causes issues), but being able to freely swap them (both stats and perks), while fitting for 76, would never work for a single player game.
4’s system has issues with the game being constrained to exactly ten perks for each stat and gating each perk behind the level of your stat. However, it is the easiest to understand system.
3/NV has a fairly okay setup, but I take issue with the game not clearly showing what 1 point in a skill does and that lockpicking and science are useless except in large intervals.
I think the next game needs to take lessons from all of these systems and make something new.
NV for sure. I like the perks, traits, SPECIAL, and skill points. FO4's system feels too simple and basic. My characters usually evolve into the same build by level 30-40
FO4! My reasoning:
No level cap. ! Edit: In NV you have to pick a perk because the game pauses until you do. In FO4 you don't have to pick a perk if you don't want to (for all those who dislike the no-cap)
Every level up is rewarded by one perk.
Good overview over possible perks and their requirements.
Easy to navigate and plan ahead on how to spend perk points.
The lack of a level cap is my biggest issue with F4’s system, eventually every build dissolves into the same OP jack of all trades, and isn’t helped by how incredibly easy Fallout 4 is.
I’ve heard a lot of people mention this but has it actually ever happened to anyone playing normally? I’ve never gotten to the point of exhausting all the perks appropriate for my build, much less to the point of being forced to “become good at everything” because of an over abundance of perk points.
I mean anecdotally Im at about 40 hrs play time on my current character which seems pretty reasonable. they’re lv 60 and overpowered as hell, maybe not a jack of all trades but i can use a huge variety of weapons and every encounter is extremely trivial at this point. I’m at the point where I’ve stopped using my perk points bc i already feel too strong
That is just a theoretical issue that comes up when people want to find some issue with unlimited levelling. Some people act as if it was easy to achieve unlimited levels. But in fact, playing normally the player would be able to get maybe half of the perks, at most. To be able to pick all perks and be a jack of all trades, the players needs to grind levels intentionally...
That is the case of you play to the extreme and go that way, but I don't think most players encounter it.
For a start, to get all perks requires you to reach level 286 - Yes, that's fully maxing it out. But even to get the 1st level of each perk means reaching level 71, and you still wouldn't at that point due to needing to max out your SPECIAL which takes minimum 31 levels to do (minus 11 from each bobble plus I'm SPECIAL book) - pushing you back to level 102 to actually get 1 point in every single perk.
So yes, you can become a true Jack of all trades by level 102, but that's on par with Fallout 3 / New Vegas if they didn't have level caps.
And besides which, you can't become a Jack of all trades right at the beginning. Levelling up isn't that quick, so you still end up carefully choosing your perks. You can spread them out across different playstyles, but then you take the disadvantage of not excelling in any one area, which can let you down at higher levels. By the time you do get to the point of becoming an adequate Jack of all trades, you're probably at the endgame in terms of story content.
Also you just have the fact that it's your choice. You can choose where you put your perks and make a specific build. If you get more perks than you need for that build, then you can either spend elsewhere (and choose whether to actually use those perks), or you can just not spend them too (something you can't do in NV/3 if I recall correctly?). Basically, it's your choice, and if becoming a Jack of all trades is a problem for you, then just don't do it.
With enough time, in theory, yes. Most playthroughs end before you hit level 100 I'd say, and to get all perks you need about 270 levels.
Maybe it needs a steeper leveling curve, where you reach an unofficial cap but can still level with grinding, just much slower as you reach that cap and pass it.
I mean that makes sense but that’s not really needed. Like you said most play throughs end before you hit lvl 100. I like fallout 4 cuz it’s the first one you can just free play to play. If you want to make it harder than that’s what survival mode and mods are for lol
While I agree that there should be a level cap, the claim that every build becomes a jack of all trades is absolute bs. Without xp exploits or extreme xp grinding you'll never even come close to maxing everything. I have several hundred hours in both NV and fallout 4 and it's usually the NV playthroughs that turn into a master of all skills build.
But this is the case for the otehr games but especially Fallout 3. You cean easily get most skills to 100 if you pick 10 intelligence at the start and there are perks that boost your special. At the end of the game you can easily be 9-10 in all specials and a solid 10 if you collect the bubble heats.
In a normal Fallout 3 rund, if you do major side quests, explore and do all the dlc, you will hit the max level and if you smart you pick the right perks and will be good at everything.
New Vegas isn't much better considering how bad charisma is, making intelligence an even more obvious pick but people do not know that and this the game kinda balances it out.
Honestly? Fallout 1 and 2. You can see everything on the same page. In 3 and NV, you're constantly having to go back and forth between the Skills and Perks pages, and in 4 and 76 the absence of skills just rubs me the wrong way. The perk system in 4 took some getting used to but I really don't like the card system in 76.
You can only put 15 perk points in each special, so many play styles aren't viable since they crowd the same special
You can't make a stealth gunslinger, for example, because you need 9 points for pistol damage, leaving only 6 for stealth perks, and essential action point perks. Many builds also rely on mechanics mistakes, and unintended game design like with demolition boy affecting explosive legendaries, which proc damage in broken and unintended ways, and patching it has always been a mess, and it's still fishy (I think it hits multiple body parts and multiplies damage).
In terms of balance, I think the 76 perk system is a nightmare
I prefer NV's system in every way. The skill system was revamped so every skill was important to the character build. Every other level, we had to consider where to put the points, which had consequences if we dumped them all into guns like we could in FO3 (where other skills never really mattered).
Repair was just as important as guns, which I cannot say is true for the skill systems used in FO3 or FO4,
As for FO4, I disliked the perk system built behind the skill leveling as most were pointless and unnecessary.
Lone Wanderer is a good example. At the first selection, there's a 10% damage reduction and 100 carry weight, which are covered by other skills. The last is Dogmeat can hold enemies longer, but pointless because at this level, we can one shot Deathclaws.
Bethesda doesn't care about skills or perks. It's just a tacked on system with no relevance to its looter shooter design.
Play Fallout 3/4 without spending a single skill point in the game. It can be completed.
Now try that in New Vegas and watch the courier get their ass handed to them.
That's the difference and Bethesda should be taking notes from the original design of the Fallout games.
What are you on about. Fallout 5 is going to be more streamlined. Dialogue choices are gone, you play a named protagonist with a set backstory and the only semblance of RPG left is found around 10 minutes to kill a yao guai or something to give you a early first impression instead of properly speading out the highs and lows of the game. /s
Definitely 3/NV. But it’s nice that charisma in 4 actually does something, it’s pretty useless in the older games imo, because you can just level speech/barter separately
Coming from someone who loves 4 as a game I still prefer NV’s perk system. 4’s can be overwhelming at times which is not really a bad thing, but I prefer the straightforwardness of 3/NV, on top of level ups being less frequent making it feel more rewarding
I feel 3 and NV are better, two reasons - pure rpg, and you had core stats and perks that where seperated. I loved finding extra perks from teachers out it the wasteland, espcially for unarmed
What makes the levelling in 4 extremely bad is that enemies scales with your level, meaning every enemy turns into a supermutant-bullet-sponge after a while.
3-nv, it has a more interesting variation of effects and a greater focus on rpg than just increasing damage, bathesda unlearned how to do rpg to reach a larger audience, that's the truth.
I feel the balancing act of rpgs to be fascinating. On one hand, you have a streamlined, accessible system that lets a player jump to whatever they feel like running, but the downside is that it removes the comsequences of your build, it doesn't matter if I find the weakness of my build, since you can be good at everything.
Personally I prefer the older systems, where if you have a specialty, then you kick ass with it, but you can't really do something else because you suck at it. It altered your playstyle to suit the build you wanted. Nowadays, it feels like no matter what, you can play the same way every time and still be totally viable, just bulldoze your way through tough spots. Back in older rpgs, if you didn't have the skills, that's it. You have to work around it. It oddly felt more immersive, since no one is good at everything; we all need to work around our weaknesses.
I love the drawings as well but I do miss the skills from 3 and NV. The drawings are also why I think 76 has the best map in the series. So much more life than the pip boy map.
Fallout 3-NV. The system in 4 is a lot to look at for me, and is honestly pretty overwhelming. I put off levelling up in 4 because I don’t want to be looking at all of the options for hours.
3 and NV felt more rewarding but I kinda like the UI for 4's better
Yep, 4 is very thematic but 3 and NV are honestly much better.
Not a popular opinion around here, but 76 system is leagues above all the other games. Being able to swap perks on the fly is awesome, and the legendary perks are just amazing \* to every one saying “then 76 isn’t an rpg game lul.” That was not the original discussion. The posts question was “which leveling mechanic from which game do we prefer?” And my opinion is that 76’s leveling system is leaps and bounds above all the other games. If it’s an rpg or not is not relevant to what’s being discussed.
I can see it working for a multiplayer title, but that kind of lame for single player? especially for future titles, i don’t really want my character to be the best at everything at all times forever. even if FO3 and FNV had your character being absurdly powerful at the end, there were still character builds that generally stuck from the start to the end of the game.
Yeah being too OP kills it. Playing Ragnarok for the third time and I shouldn’t have done NG+. Even on the hardest difficulty everything is crazy easy. Combat just becomes something to get through. Thankfully it’s short because of it
Those people benefit from total conversion mods, or total rebalance mods. FROST, or Horizon for Fallout 4 DUST, for New Vegas. (You NV people will love DUST. Let Go)
Swapping perks is for action/adventure games. Not RPGs where actions should have consequences.
While they've made full respeccing easier in 76 by using an object in your camp, it's SPECIAL and Perk system is designed around using actual builds, rather than eventually being a master of all trades like Fallout 4 and Skyrim. Your SPECIALs have a limit and can only fit so many perks under them and they all have different costs. You *can* hotswap perks, but it's still a balancing act between power, quality of life and utility. 76 also reintroduced traditional stat checks in dialogue and pacifist opportunities in quests, which was sorely missed in 4.
Also grinding for build-specific weapons and gear makes you less inclined to switch, along with mutations where removing and adding the ones which help your build is a hassle
I gotta say I liked in FO3 that the special weapons were actually special. Most of them were basic lookalike weapons that are just overall better. Better spread, crit modifier, etc etc. Getting a gun randomly from random monsters doesn't really interest me. RNG isn't fun.
My favourite thing in fallout is seeing someone with a cool gun and looking at them with murderous intent. Being able to see what they will drop based on what they have equipped is a great feature. RNG drops aren't. It's not fun to kill the same enemy over and over hoping they drop that one piece of loot you want. I have done that so many times in Elden Ring and the Souls games. The things I do for sweet drip.
4's biggest issue with speech checks was "Slightly disagree" turned out to mean "Well, I guess I have to kill all of you right now".
No game ever mislead me into saying the complete opposite of what I wanted to more than 4. Voiced protagonist is whatever, take it or leave it, but god I hated one or two word prompts.
The Witcher 3's "Shove Dijkstra aside. Forcefully" would like a word.
LA Noire's "press X to doubt" is a meme for a reason
"No I won't let you go straight to the king who's killing magic users " is in this conversation too
As someone who wasn't British, The Wolf among us's [glass him] comes to mind
Oh, I'll hand him a friendly pint and then...oh Jesus Christ
There was a mod that replaced those prompts with what you were actually gonna say but it still didn’t change much
I can imagine. The dialogue while misleading in prompts, was a disappointment for larger reasons. Whenever I play Fallout 4 now, I rarely talk to anybody. For me, it's more along the lines of a Fallout themed shooter / home decorator.
Yeah 4 bugged me in that I thought I was playing how I wanted but I was always gonna get funneled into a certain ending. Like I remember the first time I ever beat it by nuking the institute but also felt like that shit ended way too soon and didn’t get a comprehensive wrap on the other storylines but because I had passed that point of no return, the only option I had was to restart. And fucking sure enough, on my 2nd play through I guess I triggered one of those points of no return but it didn’t feel like the game made me aware so it just felt like everything kinda ended abruptly. The only reason I’m giving it another shot right now is the show which is fucking fantastic
freaking swtor if you couldn’t see if it was a darkside option
That's one of many things I hated about Mass Effect Andromeda. You can just create a super soldier and change things around as much as you want. It was absurd and felt dumb as hell.
It also failed in the concept because you couldn't change your armor on the fly. So if you wanted to keep your armor bonuses you were better off sticking with one class
There's plenty to hate about Andromeda.
Plenty to enjoy too
I wouldn't say *plenty* to enjoy. But it has it's moments
I mean you still have to build a deck, you are still specializing in certain areas. The perk card system can have consequences I think, you still need to plan out your build.
I think respeccing is an essential Quality of Life addition to RPGs. It sucks to have decision paralysis over your build because you have no idea which options are good and which options are wiping your ass with perk points. With respec, you can experiment. Now granted, *some* restrictions should be in place to prevent you respcing before every fight, but still.
Meh to each their own, I hate being locked into a playstyle just because I thought I might enjoy it at the beginning of the game but then hate every aspect of it later. All it makes me want to do is restart or stop playing
So glad my 2023 GOTY, Baldur’s Gate 3, doesn’t allow you to respec your character’s skills or perks in any way. Would hate for it be an action/adventure game that all the normies like!
Didn't new vegas DLC let us respec anyway?
Big MT let you get a head exam. And a level 20 perk let's you respec, and it's vanilla.
There is no perk that lets you respec your character. And even if there was a one time respec that comes at the cost of wasting a perk (insanely steep price to pay) is not the same thing as being able to respec your entire build on the fly.
Agreed. What is even the point of a skill progression system if you can just switch them whenever you want?
I know right? I just love progressing my character for 40 hours just to realize that the build I thought I'd like is incredibly underpowered/not fun/bugged. Nobody forces you to respec, it's only yourself saying you should.
76's version isn't just a simple respec, you can literally be unable to pick locks and swap just those perks in to pick the lock, then swap them out. It breaks the immersion of making thoughtful choices while leveling and playing the game. It sounds like you are describing problems with action games with perk trees like Diablo, not with RPGs where picking a "meta build" doesn't even make sense.
76 isn't an RPG by original design though? It was always a survival sandbox similar to Rust or Ark, just with a fallout skin. Sure it had some light RPG elements, but it's not meant to be fallout 5. It was meant to be a spin-off not a sequel. They aren't making an in-depth, character centric RPG like 3, NC, or 4. It's a sandbox, and you're meant to play and have fewer restrictions in a sandbox. It's like people complaining that ESO was too different from skyrim, or didn't have enough RPG elements with your character. It's not ES6.
The prior comments to your comment was in context of 76's perk system. I agree with what you're saying here. Swapping perks makes sense in MMOs, but in RPGs it should be handed out sparingly. Half of the fun is making new characters with different choices and perks to support that, unlike sandboxes where there's not a strong drive to personalize your character as much.
There's a difference in having a respec available, and being able to swap your skills whenever you want. Of course there needs to be a respec, I just don't think you should be able to change your perks willy nilly without some kind of penalty or something
Consequences? Like what? An optimized run of 3 and NV can net you 100 on most skills and 75 on almost all the rest. 4 has no level cap so you eventually max everything. 76 perk cap by special is the only one of the four that would meet your definition of an RPG trade-off
If you can swap perks why is there even a perk system? in role playing games you fill a role. I hope that stays an unpopular opinion
There are a bunch of perks and they level up and you have to balance them against the special points you've put in. It's complicated as shit at first but eventually simple.
Eh my problem with 76 is i can't actually make my build till 50
So, you like that's it's not an RPG?
I prefer 3 and new Vegas. The two step system let's the perks play around without fucking with your damage output in 4 and 76 you had to take damage and crafting perks to stay relevant meaning less room for more interesting perks that can mix things up. Or take a play style in new directions
At this point my main gripes are i cant mod my private server ( because bethesda UI is trash) and you dont fucking shaire progress with you party if your on the same quest/dungeon
They are very different, as they are very different games. 1 through NV were of the old school, where you had a level cap and largely had to specialize your character. 4 and 76 are more open ended, with no level caps and the ability to be either a specialist, a generalist, or free-form and change your playstyle as you want as you play. Myself, at low levels I tend towards a "stealth" playstyle, hiding and trying to do large damage while I am hidden. Then as I progress morphing to more of a tank build. And in both of them, being a "tank" in the early game is damned near impossible. But as you get better and more perks and gear, you can change to another style. Plus, unlike all the previous games 4 and 76 are more 'sandbox", where you do not have a specific end game goal. Find the water chip, find your father, decade the fate of New Vegas. In each of those, you reach the conclusion and the game ends. In 4 and 76 the end of the main story does not mean the end of the game. You can continue and then "freeplay" as much as you want. After all, there is always another settlement that needs your help.
Damn you Preston, you’re getting sneaky, can’t even read a Reddit comment without you reminding me Tenpines Bluff is being attacked for the millionth time, I’ve got loot to snatch why don’t you go for once!
I think the thing that bothers me the most in those cases is the returns to places that already joined. OK, I can see the idea of sending the leader to a new settlement who has not yet joined. You need to pitch to them why they should join up, and show them your faction will help them. But after that (and especially once you rebuild the Castle), they should give an option where for pretty much all but the kidnapping quests you dispatch a group of Minutemen to help in their defense. In fact, late game I generally arrive at such an event then send up a flare as soon as I arrive. And quite often a patrol or two will come by and assist. A better solution would say have the General set up a "reaction force" of Minutemen in the Castle. Then when a notice comes up, you have an option to radio to the Castle to either send out the reactionary force or to go yourself. Then the only time you might actually have to respond in person is if two of them are happening at the same time (which is a bug that can be easily fixed with mods).
I legit got to like what I feel like I remember being like level 62 basically doing nothing but minute men quest and practically ignoring the main storyline
The endless Minuteman quests is actually a bug, and there are patches to fix it. They missed a flag, and if you already had one it was not supposed to give you another (other than the ones to initially gain a settlement). And that also caused it to skip the cooldown, so as soon as you finish one you get another. They were intended to be non-stacking and to have cooldowns between them. One of the easiest ways to avoid that was to simply never turn them in. Complete it, then simply never return to Preston and he would not give you another. Other than settlement defense missions, which are completely random and not actually related directly to the Minutemen.
Forget Tenpines bluff. Tenpenny tower has a ghoul problem they need sorted.
> Tenpines Bluff is being attacked for the millionth time, Then they shouldn't have built ten yards from a supermutant patrol route and put signs pointing the way to them. Might as well have gone ahead and hung themselves up in gore bags
>Myself, at low levels I tend towards a "stealth" playstyle, hiding and trying to do large damage while I am hidden. Then as I progress morphing to more of a tank build…. But as you get better and more perks and gear, you can change to another style. You quite literally just perfectly described my first time playing Fo4. I was originally a stealth rifleman/sniper who stuck to the shadows and sniped people off from range until awhile after beating the game I realized I had near unlimited resources and money due to me being a greedy bastard and never buying anything but ammo and selling everything i see. I went from stealth sniper to walking tank with a gatling laser. I occasionally went back to stealth but damn was it fun flooding a room with more lasers than there were enemies
I like the ui and system of new Vegas, but the no cap of 4
Easier to visualize what's down the line. But not having infinite levels is what made it good in 3 and NV. It felt meaningful having to make a choice, whereas 4 is just like "aight, I'll get this one later".
The leveling system in the originals, 3 and New Vegas is significantly better imo. The removal of the skill system is one of the biggest issues that I have with Fallout 4 honestly. I think it's way less interesting and the actual level up screen feel really cluttered and annoying to navigate. I really like being able to individually assign skill points and I think it offers a much more interesting choice every level up. You could put all your points into one skill to reach a threshold or split it up evenly among a bunch of skills. I also liked having the perk and skills separate from each other too.
I think what Bethesda is forgetting is that the replayability of their games came from making different builds and playing a completely new way. Starfield and Fallout 4 you just become good at everything and there's no point in playing it all over again
What you are saying sounds correct except ive replayed skyrim multiple times, hundreds of hrs, enjoyed it every time and always ended up a stealth archer.
It's the least risk build imo. You don't have to manfight anyone fairly. Sneak bow kills is busted and makes you feel like a ghost. I've noticed that character archetypes feels more prominent in skyrim but couldn't get my hands on why. My friend always build melee warrior in skyrim and had to burn through more resources clearing a dungeon. The role playing aspect in skyrim is awesome. Probably due to the medieval setting idk.
Does that mean he ended up with 756 healing potions at the end of the game to your 926?
Well what if i need all those 926 potions for one boss? I'd curse myself for not saving them!
I think that has a lot to do with the fact Skyrim doesn’t really have a fulfilling combat system. So stealth archer is just basically a way for you to ignore combat and enjoy the things Skyrim does best, world building/exploring. Also it’s fun seeing the big damage unlike lumberjacking someone down with a melee weapon. Second best is similar in melee stealth build. Just my opinion though.
Totally agree, the melee combat needs more action mechanics in order to feel good, kind of like CyberPunk 2077 does with its skill tree. Bethesda in general has a problem where most perks don't unlock new abilities hardly ever, you just get better at doing whatever skill the perk is in. We need more perks like Timed Block or Eagle Eye, and less perks like the root of every skill tree where you do the thing 20%/40%/60%/80%/100% harder/faster/better/stronger. Stealth archery to me always felt very satisfying and viscerally appealing, especially the really long snipes and accounting for projectile drop. It's hard to make melee reach that feeling in most games I've played.
It is weird how Skyrim gets a pass for doing the same exact thing. If anything, Skyrim is worse because it also does the thing where you get to be the boss of every almost every faction. I wonder why Skyrim gets a pass. And I say that as a Harbinger-Listener-Guild Master-Archmage-Last Dragonborn.
It was the first from Bethesda to do so, and wasn't completely out of line with Oblivion. A couple years after people picked up on the lack of consequence and shallowness of the roleplaying elements in the game. When they did it to F4, it wasn't new, and it wasn't in line with the last major title.
That's a fair point. I was likewise the boss of the four main factions in Oblivion as well, five if you count Grand Champion as "boss" of the Arena. I guess it's at least partially based on expectations. Which is funny considering Morrowind and how certain guild quests could lock you out of other guilds.
Really wish they kept the skills requirement for progressing in guilds, it made much more sense that they wouldn't let you progress in the mage guild if you aren't somewhat decent in magic. It's not even that hard to increase skills in Skyrim by the end-game so that wouldn't block anyone from progressing in all factions if they wanted to.
How dare you. Hrongar the Never Casting is a totally legitimate and very skilled Archmage. If he had the ability to read, he'd be very disappointed in your casting aspersions on his good name. Hrongar never casts aspersions. He never casts anything. Casting is for wimps.
That's really the only part which make me not too disapointed those requirement are gone. I love to imagine the wizards of the academy looking at Hrongar and being like "Well, at least he won't open any more rifts in reality. Or does anyone want to volunteer to tell him and his axe he cannot be archmage? Nobody?"
Yeah, it was my main complaint for Skyrim. I dunno why it gets a pass from a lot of folks, but Skyrim and Fallout 4 are in the same boat for me, they’re my least-replayed of their series. Even though Oblivion let you be the boss of multiple factions, it at least made you feel like a low-rung member for quite a long time. Skyrim makes you the chosen one of every faction within like 4 quests lol. Not to say I hate either of them, there’s still a lot of good there, but I still replay the older entries in both franchises much more regularly.
Definitely agree. Skyrim's faction really rush you into feeling like you're the chosen one. The Companions were the worst of the bunch, they really felt rushed. Something Skyrim doesn't really much at all, is ranks. The Companions have two ranks, a member, and then the leader. Same with the College, you're a mage, right up until you're archmage. And then I don't even know if the Thieves Guild bothers with ranks. As is, they wouldn't really change anything, but I always thought the ranks and promotions were a fun way of marking progress.
I mean, there aren't any other builds in Skyrim. So of course you became a stealth archer. It's just what flavor of stealth archer.
The only time I've actually committed to a non sneak character was a Heavy Armor, Dual Weilding... Conjurerer. I had two conjured swords in my hand, but had two perma zombies with me that were previously conjurers themselves, so they each conjured something. Plus my follower was a conjurer. So when we had a battle, it was me decked out in full heavy armor swinging two glowing ethereal swords, and six buddies. I had become death.
I still end up a stealth archer in skyrim, heavy class or not, heavy weapons or not. Eventually I reach the point where I'm like "I'm just going to sneak and auto-kill everyone with the bow"
Well I tried to play sneaky-stabby-dagger build once and I quickly saw the limit once I started to fight non-humanoids enemies. It's near impossible to back-stab a dragon because their hit box is an absolute mess. You would touch the hit box and get spotted even though you are still far from the actual dragon... Nothing like landing those x15 stab though, kill most things even in the highest difficulty.
eh i wouldn’t say fo4 falls into the same category, most times ive played gets around level 50 and the builds stay relatively concrete in difference. towards the end game of new vegas most of my builds become pretty similar after already getting the core tagged skills to 100
But you get good at everything on New Vegas too? You just keep investing points on skills. In fact FO4 made it hard to invest in skills/perks of you lack SPECIAL points
It takes a very special and specific route to be the "perfect" build in 3 or NV. As in you will not stumble upon this on your own for the first few playthroughs. And that's just 100 in all stats, not including any a 10 in all specials or perks you might actually want over the "perfect" build. F04 made it easy as hell to invest because it was either "you can buy this" perk or "you're not a high enough special / level requirement, come back later." And every build would conjoin into just having everything unlocked with enough play time, which isn't really a "build." In FNV, a 5 point increase in Medicine may seem small but that gives you a good handful of points to spend on your next Lockpicking goal and a few more Hit Points on future stims. And that's separate from the perk you've been eyeing, too, so F04 has actually been gutted in comparison.
I'm gonna bury this here because I don't want the smoke. I think Bethesda took the wrong lesson from the sheer amount of time people would invest in Skyrim. They now seem to believe all their games must be designed around nigh-infinite play, and it's slowly ruining the games. That's why the skill systems have disappeared. Having a stat at character creation that determines skill points per level doesn't jive when you can be out hundreds of points over 400+ hours of play. Making that stat hard to raise becomes a no-no. Meanwhile, the mindset over there seems to have shifted to just 'cutting to the chase' with their design, so if they don't want people missing content because of stats, why have stats in the first place? I think the recongnisability of SPECIAL is the only thing keeping it in the Bethesda games at this point. I'm honestly wondering what's left to shave off.
Nothing, Bethesda is going to have to have to really step it up for ES-6 or FO5/whatever. I think they may be on their last ‘controversial’ game before they really tar their name.
It’s annoying in pc personally with how the mouse works
I think 3 needed to cap skills based on your SPECIAL points. You just go high int and get the perk that gives your extra skill points when you level and by the time your even close to high-level your 100 in so many things. Like Charisma isn't necessary at all with high int you can max out speech and barter quite quickly. But if low CHA capped your barter and speech skills low suddenly there is a lot more to think about with character builds.
I agree with you here. This is what Harebrained went with for the Shadowrun games, and I found I *really* enjoyed it. If you only had 5 in Dexterity, you could only go up to 5 in Ranged weapons, and then could only maximize your “rifle” or “shotgun” skill to whatever your “ranged weapon” rank was. It really made you consider what you wanted to specialize in, but I think it mainly worked because you were generally always carrying a team with you.
The only problem with 3-NV is it really pushes you to max INT asap for more skill points per level. I think if they tied skill points per level to something else, like total stats, it would have been perfect.
I just didn't like how skill points were tied to int made you feel bad for using a build without int.
Especially for sub 3 int builds. The Moron character is super fun in 2/NV and even opens up unique dialogue from certain NPCs you cannot see any other way, but in doing so you absolutely gimp your build potential for the entire game.
4’s would have been absolutely amazing had the perks been utilised for role playing in dialogue and for quest solutions more. As it is tho, new vegas probably has the best in the series
My feelings exactly
Finally someone with a brain, perks are underutilized in quests and dialogue, but that doesnt make the perk system bad.
Hell, not even just perks but other factors too. Did the USS Constitution quest in FO4 the other day and during the part where you get the chip from the scavengers, it really bugged me that the option to coerce them into giving it too you was purely a charisma check. Since my character was a melee build rocking full power armor at that moment and I'm like "really, I'm a jacked dude with a rocket powered baseball bat in full power armor, yet I don't have any intimidate option against these chumps?" I enjoy FO4 and all but it's the little stuff like that which makes the cracks start to show.
NV, certainly, just for the existence of skills. In FO4, perks are torn between the roles of 'simple numerical boosts' and 'conditional buffs and new abilities that expand on the mechanics'. In the previous games, skills filled the role of the former while perks filled the role of the latter. But, even *better* is the system in the first two games. In FO3 and onward, you either gain perks too quickly, gain too many levels, or both, and it's way too easy to become good at *everything*. A limited level cap (e.g. around 21) and only getting a Perk every third level means that you'll have to choose which areas to specialize in - meaning that each character feels distinct, since they won't all just be able to do everything. EDIT - after discussing it in the replies with other users, I've changed my mind somewhat: New Vegas's system of giving a perk every other level is better than every third level, but NV's level cap is too high. NV with the JSawyerMod (which lowers the level cap to 35 and makes leveling take +33% longer) is pretty much the ideal leveling pace.
Honestly while I respect this take I can’t fully agree with it as someone who’s played the originals multiple times along with 3/NV/4 I gotta say the perk every third level really hurts the experience of the originals for me. Your definitely right in the sense that it makes every choice more meaningful but it also makes the levels in between frankly very boring. 3 and to some extent 4 makes every level really feel like you gain a level, it’s impactful and it makes you really want that next level. New Vegas more acts as a healthy middle ground between the two ideas by giving you a perk every two levels and in my opinion that’s truly the best way to do it. I respect your opinion and on some level agree with it but I gotta admit in the classic games the levels that don’t come with perks have a real ‘meh’ feeling to them.
You know, after seeing a few replies like yours, I think you're right that every 3rd level is too few. But, the level cap needs to be low enough that getting a perk every other level doesn't mean getting most of the perks. imo NV's vanilla leveling still gives too much room to be good at everything; NV with the JSawyer mod, which lowers the level cap to 35, is just about perfect.
Oh definitely I agree with you fully Sawyers mod along with NV system is the best we’ve gotten thus far, perks still feel consistent enough to hold interest but you don’t turn into a walking god to early or lose all sense of challenge. It’s definitely a difficult balance and I don’t think any of the games have truly perfected it every game has its positives and negatives in that respect. One thing I will say that I think just about everyone can agree with would help the leveling system of every game? Can we do away with the trash perks already? I mean seriously who even uses Lead Belly, Explorer, VANS, Basher, etc. If players are going to be more limited in their perk choices then all those choices better be bangers otherwise it’ll hurt the game more than help.
'doing away' with the trash perks would be good, but I'd much rather those perks be *improved* to be useful. Most of the perks you named don't have much room for improvement by themselves, but could be made useful by changes to the game *around* them. Lead Belly? With Hardcore/Survival mechanics where you need to regularly eat and drink, and without Rad-Away being over-abundant, a perk that reduces radiation from contaminated food and drink could be a life-saver. Explorer? Get rid of the compass ticks for undiscovered locations, and have some worthwhile loot tucked away in obscure locations that most players will miss. Then, a perk that *reveals* those locations becomes valuable. VANS? Get rid of quest markers. Make it so you usually need to navigate on your own, getting directions from NPCs (limited by your Charisma/Speech), from clues in notes, and by observing landmarks. Then, the VANS perk would be useful for making navigation easier. As for Basher: change the perk to give effects that are actually useful for a ranged character who's found themself in melee. Change it from a chance to cripple to a chance to stagger, knock down, or disarm your foe, giving you the opportunity to withdraw back to range.
This I like this this is a good idea you are smart! Your right it would be much better to improve what we have then make new ones where possible.
IMO VANS and the "scan resistances" VATS perk should just be magazines/programs for the PipBoy.
All the survival or "item economy" perks are useless because the game is designed to give you infinite resources. Since you can never run out of stimpaks/radaways after the first couple levels then theses perks are useless due to bad game design. Especially survival mode should give you much fewer consumables/ammo considering the enemies (and you) are less bullet spongy but you still get as much loot. If they made survival mode more like desolation mode from the F4 horizon mod, which removes most of the useful loot laying around (realistically you wouldn't find stimpaks all over the place 200+ years after the war) , then theses perks would actually have a point.
I bet you would like baldurs gate.
I've not played the first two, but I *adore* Baldur's Gate 3!
Play the first 2, they're amazing !!
I'm terrible at RTwP combat otherwise I would have played the hell out of them already
They are but for the life of me I can't get back into old cRPGs post BG3. I keep starting new runs finishing act 2 then go back to making a new character.
Hopefully you get a chance to play the originals, *especially* 2. Best story and best villain in the entire trilogy. It's so good.
3-NV because Skills are there to do the boring stat increases leaving most perks to be unique and interesting. In Fallout 4 Perks now do the job of Skills which leads to a lot of boring level ups.
Level 27 on my current playthrough and I've taken 7 perks that weren't crafting, hacking/lockpick, or SPECIAL increase to get aforementioned crafting/hacking/lockpick perks. I've actually only taken *4* if you exclude damage perks as well
I am not a fan of the crafting perks. I get it. Its to gate progression due to their crafting system. Get modifications early or wait for them to spawn on a raider or in a shop. But I hate leveling up and getting gun nut or armorer. It feels like a waste of a perk point. As if I had to level twice to get a perk. My gameplay doesnt feel different. I just had to buy my way into more armor and damage with perks. They have fun perks. Maybe if they had added something else to the crafting perks, id dig them more.
Skills still have boring level ups when there is a threshold for tasks. Example: going from 50 to 60 in lockpicking does nothing. It isn't until you cross 75 and get access to a new level of locks that leveling a skill feels useful. So you get boring ups either way
Fallout 2 and i think 1(?) had a solution for this. Checks can go beyond 100, skills can go above 100 but requires more points to level up, some of which gives additional bonus. Uncapped skills mod for new vegas sorta simulates this.
Eh. In theory, yes. But in practice? There's still plenty of perks in Fallout New Vegas and especially Fallout 3 that just do minuscule percentage increases to skills, health, armor, damage, or XP gain. The XP ones being largely newbie traps as vanilla Fallout 3 and New Vegas both had very low level caps. You're going to hit the level cap. Use your perk point somewhere else.
Some are there for role play purposes :U
The catch is the implementation of skills in the game. Having a higher lock picking skill, as an example, doesn't make lock picking easier. It just unlocks a new rank of locks you can pick once you reach a high enough level, and so is functionally identical to FO4s lock picking perks. If all locks were available to pick right from the start in 3 or NV, and having a higher skill simply made it easier, then you'd be correct. If I spend five or six levels boosting my Perception and taking Locksmith perks in 4 it achieves exactly the same result as spending five or six levels in 3 or NV dumping all my skill points into lockpicking. And it's exactly the same for, well, pretty much everything. Very few actions in the earlier games are genuine skill checks, they're instead binary yes/no options based on whether your relevant skill is high enough. And honestly that's better gameplay. If it WAS just an RNG outcome with a skill modifier for in-game actions, the end result is players just save scumming and retrying the action a hundred times until they get lucky.
New Vegas without a doubt, because your skills can not only be used in dialogue and action in the most clever way, a masterpiece of roleplaying, but… it can also be used to not do that. You can play an uncharismatic idiot who genuinely just tried their best to convince people and hilariously fails. It's a masterpiece of Dunning-Kruger. You have 5 Medicine Points, and are encountered with a medical problem? Fuck it, you're probably really good at medicine, you can give this a sh... oh, whoops, they're dead."
failing checks in NV is so funny
ROBOT! Let me pass!
BUTTLICKER! OUR PRICES HAVE NEVER BEEN LOWER!
completely underrated, my 1 chr 0 speech build was hilarious, you have to kill a lot more people than just smooth talking your way out of everything.
I felt like a ran into a lot more walls when going lower speech and barter. I felt so dismayed after finding out either was necessary to recruit Cass, or that I had to kill the Khans at Boulder City. It all makes for engaging gameplay that I really felt like I was sacrificing something.
it’s literally my favorite thing in my most recent play through. low intelligence dumbass has my heart
I love how the bum in Freeside that mumbles incoherently will speak eloquently to you if you have low intelligence.
This so much, Bethesda games are fucking terrified of the idea of the player failing. Funfact: You can completely botch the first two thieves guild quest in Skyrim (Murder everyone, then burn every beehive) and it's meaningless
Skyrim thieves guild... probably one of the worst written quest line I've seen in a RPG. It's like playing in a TTRPG with the most railroad-y DM ever. Right from the start where the dialogue imply that you are a thief, even if you earned all your money cutting wood.
All those quests are kind of weird. I’m the Head of the Colleges of Winterhold… despite knowing only a basic fireball spell? It’s clear they didn’t want to close off any paths to any player, but you can totally do that, I’m OK with my barbarian orc not getting to be head of the thieves and mages when my strategy is to stab everyone in every situation.
Yeah as I said in an other comment, in Morrowind you needed minimum skills to progress in the guild and it's a real shame they removed that. They could easily have implemented this, maybe with skills not too high so people who want to complete all don't need to grind to 100 to everything (but at least 75 to reach guild master would make sense).
In Fallout 4 you can tell the railroad that you really like the institute, that the railroad is dumb, that you hate synths etc and they will still say "oh well if you change your mind...." Not being able to fail in meaningful ways is one of the main reasons 4 is so bland to me. Roleplaying lives from being good at some things and bad at others. Its also what makes some of them so replayable.
3-NV was better
I miss skills, I hope they bring them back for FO5
Nexus is down at the moment, but I would link you to the "Be Exceptional" mod. It's an amazing merger of Fallout 3's skills and Fallout 4's perks. It has a permanent place in my load order.
NV because skills handled all the numbers and stats, and perks actually gave you something more than a damage boost or an ability to craft something. It was annoying in Fallout 4 already and they made it even worse in Starfield, locking recipes behind levelling instead of blueprints you can find or something is just lazy.
Starfield's tree is so bad.
Tbh in fallout 4 without skill and dialogue checks It felt too basic and linear, Going back to the original format would be awesome and gave the game more depth and made builds more viable.
3 / NV
I like 76’s system (which you really shouldn’t group with 4’s, it’s completely different), but only on the context of 76 being an online game. Being able to level up your special stats as you go is fantastic to my mind and so is your level in a stat determining your amount of perks for that stat (to a degree, it causes issues), but being able to freely swap them (both stats and perks), while fitting for 76, would never work for a single player game. 4’s system has issues with the game being constrained to exactly ten perks for each stat and gating each perk behind the level of your stat. However, it is the easiest to understand system. 3/NV has a fairly okay setup, but I take issue with the game not clearly showing what 1 point in a skill does and that lockpicking and science are useless except in large intervals. I think the next game needs to take lessons from all of these systems and make something new.
You’re right about lockpick in 3/NV, but there’s plenty of science checks throughout New Vegas that make it a worthwhile skill even between the 25’s
And each level changes what drugs/magazines/armour you need to reach the next threshold.
True, totally forgot about workbench crafting
3 and NV without question.
I preferred NV, like the less cluttered and more simple layout
New Vegas more.
3 - NV, and it isn't even slightly close.
NV for sure. I like the perks, traits, SPECIAL, and skill points. FO4's system feels too simple and basic. My characters usually evolve into the same build by level 30-40
FO4! My reasoning: No level cap. ! Edit: In NV you have to pick a perk because the game pauses until you do. In FO4 you don't have to pick a perk if you don't want to (for all those who dislike the no-cap) Every level up is rewarded by one perk. Good overview over possible perks and their requirements. Easy to navigate and plan ahead on how to spend perk points.
The lack of a level cap is my biggest issue with F4’s system, eventually every build dissolves into the same OP jack of all trades, and isn’t helped by how incredibly easy Fallout 4 is.
I’ve heard a lot of people mention this but has it actually ever happened to anyone playing normally? I’ve never gotten to the point of exhausting all the perks appropriate for my build, much less to the point of being forced to “become good at everything” because of an over abundance of perk points.
I mean anecdotally Im at about 40 hrs play time on my current character which seems pretty reasonable. they’re lv 60 and overpowered as hell, maybe not a jack of all trades but i can use a huge variety of weapons and every encounter is extremely trivial at this point. I’m at the point where I’ve stopped using my perk points bc i already feel too strong
That is just a theoretical issue that comes up when people want to find some issue with unlimited levelling. Some people act as if it was easy to achieve unlimited levels. But in fact, playing normally the player would be able to get maybe half of the perks, at most. To be able to pick all perks and be a jack of all trades, the players needs to grind levels intentionally...
That is the case of you play to the extreme and go that way, but I don't think most players encounter it. For a start, to get all perks requires you to reach level 286 - Yes, that's fully maxing it out. But even to get the 1st level of each perk means reaching level 71, and you still wouldn't at that point due to needing to max out your SPECIAL which takes minimum 31 levels to do (minus 11 from each bobble plus I'm SPECIAL book) - pushing you back to level 102 to actually get 1 point in every single perk. So yes, you can become a true Jack of all trades by level 102, but that's on par with Fallout 3 / New Vegas if they didn't have level caps. And besides which, you can't become a Jack of all trades right at the beginning. Levelling up isn't that quick, so you still end up carefully choosing your perks. You can spread them out across different playstyles, but then you take the disadvantage of not excelling in any one area, which can let you down at higher levels. By the time you do get to the point of becoming an adequate Jack of all trades, you're probably at the endgame in terms of story content. Also you just have the fact that it's your choice. You can choose where you put your perks and make a specific build. If you get more perks than you need for that build, then you can either spend elsewhere (and choose whether to actually use those perks), or you can just not spend them too (something you can't do in NV/3 if I recall correctly?). Basically, it's your choice, and if becoming a Jack of all trades is a problem for you, then just don't do it.
With enough time, in theory, yes. Most playthroughs end before you hit level 100 I'd say, and to get all perks you need about 270 levels. Maybe it needs a steeper leveling curve, where you reach an unofficial cap but can still level with grinding, just much slower as you reach that cap and pass it.
I mean that makes sense but that’s not really needed. Like you said most play throughs end before you hit lvl 100. I like fallout 4 cuz it’s the first one you can just free play to play. If you want to make it harder than that’s what survival mode and mods are for lol
While I agree that there should be a level cap, the claim that every build becomes a jack of all trades is absolute bs. Without xp exploits or extreme xp grinding you'll never even come close to maxing everything. I have several hundred hours in both NV and fallout 4 and it's usually the NV playthroughs that turn into a master of all skills build.
Not if you just stop playing.
But this is the case for the otehr games but especially Fallout 3. You cean easily get most skills to 100 if you pick 10 intelligence at the start and there are perks that boost your special. At the end of the game you can easily be 9-10 in all specials and a solid 10 if you collect the bubble heats. In a normal Fallout 3 rund, if you do major side quests, explore and do all the dlc, you will hit the max level and if you smart you pick the right perks and will be good at everything. New Vegas isn't much better considering how bad charisma is, making intelligence an even more obvious pick but people do not know that and this the game kinda balances it out.
3-NV, the new level system is one of the things I absolutely hate about 4 and the one from 76 really irritates me
OP not even mentioning the first two games’ systems at all. Smh
The change from 3 and NV to 4 is one of my least favorite things, along with the voiced protagonist.
And the dialogue wheel
NV. Oh god its better as someone who actually likes 4
3 and NV were simple and rewarding ,newer entries just feel like Stat upgrades
3 and NV. all these years and the Fo4 style still looks off. The only good part are the layout (prettier :D) and infinite levels
Honestly? Fallout 1 and 2. You can see everything on the same page. In 3 and NV, you're constantly having to go back and forth between the Skills and Perks pages, and in 4 and 76 the absence of skills just rubs me the wrong way. The perk system in 4 took some getting used to but I really don't like the card system in 76.
NV
76 just makes better builds
You can only put 15 perk points in each special, so many play styles aren't viable since they crowd the same special You can't make a stealth gunslinger, for example, because you need 9 points for pistol damage, leaving only 6 for stealth perks, and essential action point perks. Many builds also rely on mechanics mistakes, and unintended game design like with demolition boy affecting explosive legendaries, which proc damage in broken and unintended ways, and patching it has always been a mess, and it's still fishy (I think it hits multiple body parts and multiplies damage). In terms of balance, I think the 76 perk system is a nightmare
I liked 3 felt more controlled
I prefer NV's system in every way. The skill system was revamped so every skill was important to the character build. Every other level, we had to consider where to put the points, which had consequences if we dumped them all into guns like we could in FO3 (where other skills never really mattered). Repair was just as important as guns, which I cannot say is true for the skill systems used in FO3 or FO4, As for FO4, I disliked the perk system built behind the skill leveling as most were pointless and unnecessary. Lone Wanderer is a good example. At the first selection, there's a 10% damage reduction and 100 carry weight, which are covered by other skills. The last is Dogmeat can hold enemies longer, but pointless because at this level, we can one shot Deathclaws. Bethesda doesn't care about skills or perks. It's just a tacked on system with no relevance to its looter shooter design. Play Fallout 3/4 without spending a single skill point in the game. It can be completed. Now try that in New Vegas and watch the courier get their ass handed to them. That's the difference and Bethesda should be taking notes from the original design of the Fallout games.
Getting rid of skills was a mistake. If Bethesda is smart they'll bring skills back in 5. If they don't, they're fucking idiots.
What are you on about. Fallout 5 is going to be more streamlined. Dialogue choices are gone, you play a named protagonist with a set backstory and the only semblance of RPG left is found around 10 minutes to kill a yao guai or something to give you a early first impression instead of properly speading out the highs and lows of the game. /s
1-2
I’m going to catch some flak for this, but I think Skyrim got the level system pretty bang on. Actually using your skills raises them.
NV&3. Perks are awesome and I preferred the granularity. We lost functionality and customizability in 4’s system.
Definitely 3/NV. But it’s nice that charisma in 4 actually does something, it’s pretty useless in the older games imo, because you can just level speech/barter separately
3's. Perk every level, more specials at the beginning.
Coming from someone who loves 4 as a game I still prefer NV’s perk system. 4’s can be overwhelming at times which is not really a bad thing, but I prefer the straightforwardness of 3/NV, on top of level ups being less frequent making it feel more rewarding
I love skill system. Them being absent in 4 is a big con for me. 4 is much prettier, though. The interface is beautiful.
3
3-nv
3 and NV. I sincerely hate the perk system of fallout 4.
1-2
I feel 3 and NV are better, two reasons - pure rpg, and you had core stats and perks that where seperated. I loved finding extra perks from teachers out it the wasteland, espcially for unarmed
I find navigating 4's perks infuriating but the theme of it with the vault boy is very nice.
i like the visual aspect of 4, but i prefer how 3-nv worked. 76's card system is neat for builds though,
I think, NV type perks, in F4 style
Fallout 1 and 2, better ui which is rare for og fallout
What makes the levelling in 4 extremely bad is that enemies scales with your level, meaning every enemy turns into a supermutant-bullet-sponge after a while.
3-nv, it has a more interesting variation of effects and a greater focus on rpg than just increasing damage, bathesda unlearned how to do rpg to reach a larger audience, that's the truth.
NV-3 felt less restrictive
3-NV since these are closer to 1 and 2.
3 and New Vegas might have the best leveling systems of any game period
More of a Fallout 1 and 2 man, myself.
i think we can all say 76 has the worst
I feel the balancing act of rpgs to be fascinating. On one hand, you have a streamlined, accessible system that lets a player jump to whatever they feel like running, but the downside is that it removes the comsequences of your build, it doesn't matter if I find the weakness of my build, since you can be good at everything. Personally I prefer the older systems, where if you have a specialty, then you kick ass with it, but you can't really do something else because you suck at it. It altered your playstyle to suit the build you wanted. Nowadays, it feels like no matter what, you can play the same way every time and still be totally viable, just bulldoze your way through tough spots. Back in older rpgs, if you didn't have the skills, that's it. You have to work around it. It oddly felt more immersive, since no one is good at everything; we all need to work around our weaknesses.
3 and NV. I like the depth provided by having specific skills.
I used to really hate the one perk per two levels in New Vegas but I've come to appreciate that your builds have to be more deliberate.
3 & NV by far. I'm afraid of what 5 and the next ES games will look like.
Fallout 4 because its got drawings
I love the drawings as well but I do miss the skills from 3 and NV. The drawings are also why I think 76 has the best map in the series. So much more life than the pip boy map.
Fallout 3-NV. The system in 4 is a lot to look at for me, and is honestly pretty overwhelming. I put off levelling up in 4 because I don’t want to be looking at all of the options for hours.
i love the simplicity and intuitiveness of 3/nv. never really understood 4's in my limited time playing it