Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Yeah, I'd be more cool with the Institute if it weren't for the very heavily unanswered question of what they do with all the people they're having synths replace.

Except we do sort of know, because there's a randomly generated scene of a guy being attacked by a synth that's there to replace him. Meaning that the Institute quite happily programs and orders synths to kill people in order to impersonate them.

Mass murder for minor spying/influence gains (some of these people are literally wasteland traders) is a severely ethically questionable activitiy, and one that the game never really addressed. It's one thing to be cool with controlling the synths, another to say, 'Hey, we should kill that dude and have a robot replace him. I bet his family won't notice'.

 Ketara wrote:
Yeah, I'd be more cool with the Institute if it weren't for the very heavily unanswered question of what they do with all the people they're having synths replace.

Except we do sort of know, because there's a randomly generated scene of a guy being attacked by a synth that's there to replace him. Meaning that the Institute quite happily programs and orders synths to kill people in order to impersonate them.

Mass murder for minor spying/influence gains (some of these people are literally wasteland traders) is a severely ethically questionable activitiy, and one that the game never really addressed. It's one thing to be cool with controlling the synths, another to say, 'Hey, we should kill that dude and have a robot replace him. I bet his family won't notice'.

Roger Warwick's family didn't notice (in a way), and now the Institute has a testing ground for new crops on the surface. That's what I mean. You say it's minor because conventionally it's held that a person's life is worth more than anything else. With the more clinical approach of the Institute, what's one guy's life compared to healthier food that will feed any number of people for years and centuries to come?

Poor Arty doesn't have any background or function beyond you seeing a Synth replace a wastelander, or the wastelander successfully defending against it. There's no way of telling whether there's a minor or major gain involved, but considering how clear it is made that the Institute works based on efficiency rather than ethics, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the gain for the Institute. Severely ethically questionable activity is pretty accurate, though.

 Geifer wrote:

Poor Arty doesn't have any background or function beyond you seeing a Synth replace a wastelander, or the wastelander successfully defending against it. There's no way of telling whether there's a minor or major gain involved, but considering how clear it is made that the Institute works based on efficiency rather than ethics, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the gain for the Institute. Severely ethically questionable activity is pretty accurate, though.

I believe that when we see the list of people we know are synths, you have the likes of the roving traders showing up. Sturges is another. In effect, they're replacing people who aren't important players in the Wasteland by any stretch of the imagination. Certainly not worth enough that any kind of argument involving any form of serious moral factor would equate the value gained to a human life.

The conclusion has to be that morality is completely beside the point and absent from the calculations. The Institute, like any other instigator of mass murder and genocide, must have abstracted and depersonalised the inhabitants of the Wasteland into being sub-human; on account of the fact that they are able to commit these acts without the slightest empathetic pang. They show more concern over the free will over synths than they do the people they have murdered.

Once you clock their ethical shortcomings on that front, Maxson's BoS are virtually nice in comparison. The struggle of the enslaved synths is nothing compared to the struggle of the Wastelanders to remove those who can assassinate them with no crime, plea, or recourse.

 Ketara wrote:
I believe that when we see the list of people we know are synths, you have the likes of the roving traders showing up. Sturges is another. In effect, they're replacing people who aren't important players in the Wasteland by any stretch of the imagination. Certainly not worth enough that any kind of argument involving any form of serious moral factor would equate the value gained to a human life.

Now you're just making me want to murder Sturges to see if he has plastic in his head.

 Ketara wrote:
The conclusion has to be that morality is completely beside the point and absent from the calculations. The Institute, like any other instigator of mass murder and genocide, must have abstracted and depersonalised the inhabitants of the Wasteland into being sub-human; on account of the fact that they are able to commit these acts without the slightest empathetic pang. They show more concern over the free will over synths than they do the people they have murdered.

Uh, yes?

The only thing I wrote that isn't in line with that is that the Institute cares about the welfare of wastelanders if it doesn't cost them anything. If any such thought got in the way of operations, it'd be discarded quickly. As I said, the Institute is ethically challenged.

 Ketara wrote:
Once you clock their ethical shortcomings on that front, Maxson's BoS are virtually nice in comparison. The struggle of the enslaved synths is nothing compared to the struggle of the Wastelanders to remove those who can assassinate them with no crime, plea, or recourse.

I think that's actually a strong point of the faction writing of Fallout 4. Each faction has both a noble and a questionable side that are somewhat balanced against each other and that you can easily get behind or marginalize depending on how you want to feel about the matter. It's much smoother and invites thoughtless pledges of allegiance easier than New Vegas's NCR capitalist lackeys versus Caesar's rape horde.

Sorry but what do the synths do better than one of the existing robots in the Fallout universe? Need a workforce to perform manual labor that doesn't eat? Mr. Handy has you covered.

The Synths were specifically made to replace humans, the reason being...ummm..hrm...uhhhhh... yeah I can't think of a good reason and no one I have ever talked to about it can come up with a good reason either.

Testing crops? Seriously? 99% of humanity is dead and you have a magical teleporter, how about just claiming some unused land somewhere and having some robots take care of it? Why did they need to replace anyone they wanted to kidnap? They were utterly inaccessible with access to their teleport so why care what some wastelanders think of them kidnapping people? The synth silliness compromised their security in the end because it attracted the attention of the Railroad and BoS. It could not be less nonsensical and it basically ruins the entire FO4 story because it revolves around the synths.

Underpants gnomes of Fallout. I really wish someone could prove me wrong but it hasn't happened yet.

 Geifer wrote:

Now you're just making me want to murder Sturges to see if he has plastic in his head.

He does actually drop a synth component if you kill him.

Uh, yes?
The only thing I wrote that isn't in line with that is that the Institute cares about the welfare of wastelanders if it doesn't cost them anything. If any such thought got in the way of operations, it'd be discarded quickly. As I said, the Institute is ethically challenged.

Ah, I misunderstood you then. I thought you were arguing that they try and look at the 'greater good' as a way of mentally justifying their actions; whereas I'm of the opinion that they simply don't feel the need to justify their actions to themselves, as they've mentally dehumanised the wastelanders.

New Vegas's NCR capitalist lackeys versus Caesar's rape horde.

That's a remarkably eloquent way of putting half the plot for NV. I like it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vonjankmon wrote:
Sorry but what do the synths do better than one of the existing robots in the Fallout universe? Need a workforce to perform manual labor that doesn't eat? Mr. Handy has you covered.

The Synths were specifically made to replace humans, the reason being...ummm..hrm...uhhhhh... yeah I can't think of a good reason and no one I have ever talked to about it can come up with a good reason either.

Testing crops? Seriously? 99% of humanity is dead and you have a magical teleporter, how about just claiming some unused land somewhere and having some robots take care of it? Why did they need to replace anyone they wanted to kidnap? They were utterly inaccessible with access to their teleport so why care what some wastelanders think of them kidnapping people? The synth silliness compromised their security in the end because it attracted the attention of the Railroad and BoS. It could not be less nonsensical and it basically ruins the entire FO4 story because it revolves around the synths.

Underpants gnomes of Fallout. I really wish someone could prove me wrong but it hasn't happened yet.

I could probably devise several reasons which are just about plausible if I really cared enough to; but you're right. It is a bit of a plothole, and one the game should have answered for us. Rather than making us grope for vague explanations.

 vonjankmon wrote:
Sorry but what do the synths do better than one of the existing robots in the Fallout universe? Need a workforce to perform manual labor that doesn't eat? Mr. Handy has you covered.

The Synths were specifically made to replace humans, the reason being...ummm..hrm...uhhhhh... yeah I can't think of a good reason and no one I have ever talked to about it can come up with a good reason either.

Testing crops? Seriously? 99% of humanity is dead and you have a magical teleporter, how about just claiming some unused land somewhere and having some robots take care of it? Why did they need to replace anyone they wanted to kidnap? They were utterly inaccessible with access to their teleport so why care what some wastelanders think of them kidnapping people? The synth silliness compromised their security in the end because it attracted the attention of the Railroad and BoS. It could not be less nonsensical and it basically ruins the entire FO4 story because it revolves around the synths.

Underpants gnomes of Fallout. I really wish someone could prove me wrong but it hasn't happened yet.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I'm not convinced that you wish that at all. You seem to have made up your mind. However, if I'm wrong and you haven't, here are a few ideas to consider:

Ignoring for a moment how ludicrous Mr. Handy design is (especially if you have a carpet), if you look for a general robot design that is made to operate in an environment made for and shaped by humans, a human frame has more utility than any other design unless you build a robot for very specific tasks. Human design makes everything in an environment equally usable by humans and robots alike, which makes interaction easier and more intuitive. If you need a ladder to reach something and your robot needs a ladder to reach that thing, you'll keep a ladder around. If your Mr.Handy can just fly up, do you keep a ladder around in case you don't have a Mr. Handy available and need to do it yourself? Or do you limit yourself to dragging in, repairing or building a new Mr. Handy and leave the thing you actually need done alone? There's no right answer to this because both systems have merits, but there's no reason to dismiss one just because the other exists. It's about what you want from your robot, and Synths have enough merits that they are a viable option.

You seem to have made up your mind that Synths have been specifically made to replace humans. Got any proof of that? Because nothing I have encountered in Fallout 4 supports that, except anti-Institute propaganda.

While it probably fails in terms of realism like many other things in Fallout where 200 years is such a long time that nothing from before the war should be left, if you go with it Warwick homestead is the most fertile spot in the Commonwealth because it was a waste treatment plant and already settled. If you don't mind killing some random wastelander, why settle for a worse spot when you have: a good spot, an established community to till the land and the ability to replace the head honcho reliably?

The Institute's lore is quite clear that scavenging operations on the surface were necessary to build the Institute of 2287. Power and raw materials don't grow on trees and at the end of the day the Institute was a hole in the ground that wanted to be self-sufficient, but didn't start out that way. They sealed themselves off only after being able to access the surface by molecular relay. They had a nuclear test reactor for 210 years that they couldn't get to work as intended, occasionally relying on power from the surface. A surface with all manner of mutants, monsters and wastelanders with an attitude. At no point was the Institute safely stashed away and out of reach from outside forces that sought to harm it. Having Synth spies and military capabilities is the solution to a problem, as well as the cause of a much greater problem. That's just realism at work and a lesson worth learning. No place or fortress is ever utterly inaccessible, and often only as safe as its guardians can make it.

How downfall as a consequence of one's own decisions is supposed to be nonsensical and ruins the story is beyond me. That's a common literary theme and the core of tragedy.

 Ketara wrote:

 Geifer wrote:
Now you're just making me want to murder Sturges to see if he has plastic in his head.

He does actually drop a synth component if you kill him.

That's exactly what a Synth would say. Better to be sure and check for myself.

 Ketara wrote:

Uh, yes?

The only thing I wrote that isn't in line with that is that the Institute cares about the welfare of wastelanders if it doesn't cost them anything. If any such thought got in the way of operations, it'd be discarded quickly. As I said, the Institute is ethically challenged.

Ah, I misunderstood you then. I thought you were arguing that they try and look at the 'greater good' as a way of mentally justifying their actions; whereas I'm of the opinion that they simply don't feel the need to justify their actions to themselves, as they've mentally dehumanised the wastelanders.

No, I think we're on the same page here.There's a range of opinions about wastelanders, but the top level that shapes doctrine seems to be pretty unified about how terrible the surface is and how corrupted, violent and inhuman its inhabitants are. And it seems like everyone else is happy to defer to them so they don't actually have to ask questions and justify anything. I think Father calls wastelanders vermin or some such on his visit to the surface. It's pretty overt and I don't think there's much ground to put a positive twist on that aspect of the Institute. It's part of their identity as an intellectual society that always knows best what to do and considers itself superior, naturally or otherwise.

 Ketara wrote:
[

New Vegas's NCR capitalist lackeys versus Caesar's rape horde.

That's a remarkably eloquent way of putting half the plot for NV. I like it.

 Geifer wrote:
Just watched a fun documentary on Fallout 76 that has some gameplay information (skip to 18 minutes if you want just that):

 Lone Cat wrote:
I don't understand why Beth prefers to focus each Fallout Games in JUST ONE city (and a handful of complexes/settlements around it) rather than a free-roaming like the Black Isle era? yet the FPS combat still suits me better.

I think you'll have a hard time combining what seems to be the most popular thing these days, an ongoing and cohesive world, with the large maps with points of interest like you had twenty years ago in Fallout and Baldur's Gate. They actually insert some of the latter into their games with DLCs. Far Harbor is quite a distance from Boston, Nuka World is just across the mountains. Fallout 3 had the Pitt and Point Lookout. Skyrim had Solstheim. All of these are maps in their own right outside the main map, with a means of traveling from one map to the other like in the old Fallouts (without red lines and Indiana Jones music, though).

But these go against the feel of the game where you get a cohesive world. You climb up on the roof of Red Rocket and see Mass Fusion tower in the distance, and you can actually walk there. In Fallout you would have exited the local map, got your world map out and traveled from, say, Vault 13 to Junktown, get there and open that local map. That's an entirely different experience. The closest to that that you get in modern Bethesda games is fast travel, which strikes me more as a convenience than a deliberate callback to the old mechanic.

The limit is that the cohesive world they apparently want (which I approve of, by the way) is limited is size because of the limits of development. They can only make such a big landscape, so many different textures, quests, landmarks, etc. before the game gets too expensive and unwieldy. If they want all parts to smoothly blend into each other, it's necessarily limited in size.

I can only speculate why they prefer this, but I can tell you why I prefer it. There's just something about remaining in the same view mode, especially if it's first person, that immerses you in the game. You don't get taken out by gamey elements. I found Fallout 1 pretty disjointed in that regard. You have to make it to the edge of the map, then you're safe. Then you get your world map and you can click anywhere, but you only have the big landmarks that do anything. There's no mountain cabin halfway between here and there that might be fin to explore. There's no Raider camp that you need to walk around if you don't want to get into a fight. There are random encounters, with exactly one map per terrain type with you always starting in the middle and getting ambushed by whatever you encounter. No way to sneak up on them instead. Simply put, interaction is severely limited. Modern Bethesda games are a lot more immersive and better games for it, if you ask me. If the price for that is a somewhat smallish map, I'll happily take it.

And that makes the gameplay more continious than the Black Isle era ones?
And this system does come with yet another tradeoffs..... scalings.
the Mojave wasteland in Fallout New Vegas looks quite smaller than the actual Mojave that surrounds real life Vegas. You still need downscaling for gameplay reasons which means the places like Primm and Goodsprings (look at its cemetry shown in the folliwing link) in game are smaller than those in real life. there are many sections of former Santa Fe/Union Pacific rail lines that runs parrallel to I15 or something that comes much closer than those in real life. http://www.falloutnewvegastour.com/2011/04/location-03-goodsprings-cemetery.html

And what happened to Obsidian?
And why Beth chose not to do Westcoast story. did Beth (Through Obsidian) actually concluded Westcoast story arc in favor of Eastcoats?

Other than the new official game, there are a few fan made projects in the works; some of which have been years in the development. All are full games built on the Bethesda engines. If any of them come to fruition, they'll be well worth it with luck.

For Fallout 4:-

Fallout Cascadia
http://www.falloutcascadia.com/



Fallout Miami
https://falloutmiami.blogspot.com/



For New Vegas:-

Fallout: New California
https://www.moddb.com/mods/falloutprojectbrazil



Fallout New Vegas:- The Frontier
http://www.falloutthefrontier.com/

Bethesda and Obsidian chose to do areas of the country they were more familiar with. It's a relatively weak excuse given how easy location research is in the age of google maps, especially for the modern games, but it made sense for FO 1 & 2.

Bethesda basically centered the FO3 map on their office building. I'd be very surprised if the 76 map doesn't feature areas their staff members go camping in. They can wander up to i70 and drive straight into the heart of West Virginia.

 Lone Cat wrote:
And that makes the gameplay more continious than the Black Isle era ones?

To me? Yes. To anybody else? I couldn't possibly answer that. It does seem to be popular enough either among Bethesda's customers or Bethesda's decision makers, seeing as how it's retained from game to game.

 Lone Cat wrote:
And this system does come with yet another tradeoffs..... scalings.
the Mojave wasteland in Fallout New Vegas looks quite smaller than the actual Mojave that surrounds real life Vegas. You still need downscaling for gameplay reasons which means the places like Primm and Goodsprings (look at its cemetry shown in the folliwing link) in game are smaller than those in real life. there are many sections of former Santa Fe/Union Pacific rail lines that runs parrallel to I15 or something that comes much closer than those in real life. http://www.falloutnewvegastour.com/2011/04/location-03-goodsprings-cemetery.html

You're not going to get around that. Even if processing power was unlimited, Bethesda's funds are not. Also, we play a game, not a simulation. If they could have a life sized version of the USA, they would still use some form of abstraction because walking in a straight line for three weeks, that's real time in case you're wondering, is not good fun.

I'm not really sure that the old system is so much better about scaling. For instance, Boneyard takes up a substantial part of the very large world map. Because, you know, Los Angeles is kind of big in real life, too. But what do you get out of it? Four, five local maps? How does that reflect the actual size of the city and its many, many possible landmarks?

Voss wrote:
Bethesda and Obsidian chose to do areas of the country they were more familiar with. It's a relatively weak excuse given how easy location research is in the age of google maps, especially for the modern games, but it made sense for FO 1 & 2.

Bethesda basically centered the FO3 map on their office building. I'd be very surprised if the 76 map doesn't feature areas their staff members go camping in. They can wander up to i70 and drive straight into the heart of West Virginia.

That or someone went, "hey, wouldn't that 'Virginia' song sound cool over a slo mo montage of wasteland shenanigans?"

 vonjankmon wrote:
Sorry but what do the synths do better than one of the existing robots in the Fallout universe? Need a workforce to perform manual labor that doesn't eat? Mr. Handy has you covered.

The Synths were specifically made to replace humans, the reason being...ummm..hrm...uhhhhh... yeah I can't think of a good reason and no one I have ever talked to about it can come up with a good reason either.

Testing crops? Seriously? 99% of humanity is dead and you have a magical teleporter, how about just claiming some unused land somewhere and having some robots take care of it? Why did they need to replace anyone they wanted to kidnap? They were utterly inaccessible with access to their teleport so why care what some wastelanders think of them kidnapping people? The synth silliness compromised their security in the end because it attracted the attention of the Railroad and BoS. It could not be less nonsensical and it basically ruins the entire FO4 story because it revolves around the synths.

Underpants gnomes of Fallout. I really wish someone could prove me wrong but it hasn't happened yet.

It's even worse than that. Every single super mutant in the Commonwealth was created by the Institute. Every. Single. One. They kidnapped people, replaced them with synths, then subjected them to FEV to learn... nothing at all. The *only* reason the Institute stops making super mutants is because one of the researchers, upon realizing that the FEV experiments were pointless and inhumane and that the leadership of the Institute was going to continue carrying them out despite knowing that they were pointless, blew up his own laboratory. The Institute is worse than the Underpants Gnomes... at least step 3 for them is "profit". The Institute hasn't even got a proper step 3. For them it's: Step 1, Mad Science! Step 2 *shrug*, Step 3 *shrug harder*.

 Geifer wrote:

 Lone Cat wrote:
And that makes the gameplay more continious than the Black Isle era ones?

To me? Yes. To anybody else? I couldn't possibly answer that. It does seem to be popular enough either among Bethesda's customers or Bethesda's decision makers, seeing as how it's retained from game to game.

 Lone Cat wrote:
And this system does come with yet another tradeoffs..... scalings.
the Mojave wasteland in Fallout New Vegas looks quite smaller than the actual Mojave that surrounds real life Vegas. You still need downscaling for gameplay reasons which means the places like Primm and Goodsprings (look at its cemetry shown in the folliwing link) in game are smaller than those in real life. there are many sections of former Santa Fe/Union Pacific rail lines that runs parrallel to I15 or something that comes much closer than those in real life. http://www.falloutnewvegastour.com/2011/04/location-03-goodsprings-cemetery.html

You're not going to get around that. Even if processing power was unlimited, Bethesda's funds are not. Also, we play a game, not a simulation. If they could have a life sized version of the USA, they would still use some form of abstraction because walking in a straight line for three weeks, that's real time in case you're wondering, is not good fun.

I'm not really sure that the old system is so much better about scaling. For instance, Boneyard takes up a substantial part of the very large world map. Because, you know, Los Angeles is kind of big in real life, too. But what do you get out of it? Four, five local maps? How does that reflect the actual size of the city and its many, many possible landmarks?

And with this. is this why in Fallout 1, there's no Hollywood (including its steel iconic sign) in Boneyard?
So what is a scale ratio of New Vegas Mojave Wasteland to Real Vegas with respective Mojave surroundings?

squidhills wrote:

 vonjankmon wrote:
Sorry but what do the synths do better than one of the existing robots in the Fallout universe? Need a workforce to perform manual labor that doesn't eat? Mr. Handy has you covered.

The Synths were specifically made to replace humans, the reason being...ummm..hrm...uhhhhh... yeah I can't think of a good reason and no one I have ever talked to about it can come up with a good reason either.

Testing crops? Seriously? 99% of humanity is dead and you have a magical teleporter, how about just claiming some unused land somewhere and having some robots take care of it? Why did they need to replace anyone they wanted to kidnap? They were utterly inaccessible with access to their teleport so why care what some wastelanders think of them kidnapping people? The synth silliness compromised their security in the end because it attracted the attention of the Railroad and BoS. It could not be less nonsensical and it basically ruins the entire FO4 story because it revolves around the synths.

Underpants gnomes of Fallout. I really wish someone could prove me wrong but it hasn't happened yet.

It's even worse than that. Every single super mutant in the Commonwealth was created by the Institute. Every. Single. One. They kidnapped people, replaced them with synths, then subjected them to FEV to learn... nothing at all. The *only* reason the Institute stops making super mutants is because one of the researchers, upon realizing that the FEV experiments were pointless and inhumane and that the leadership of the Institute was going to continue carrying them out despite knowing that they were pointless, blew up his own laboratory. The Institute is worse than the Underpants Gnomes... at least step 3 for them is "profit". The Institute hasn't even got a proper step 3. For them it's: Step 1, Mad Science! Step 2 *shrug*, Step 3 *shrug harder*.

Mad Science is it's own reward.

 Lone Cat wrote:

Spoiler:

 Geifer wrote:

 Lone Cat wrote:
And that makes the gameplay more continious than the Black Isle era ones?

To me? Yes. To anybody else? I couldn't possibly answer that. It does seem to be popular enough either among Bethesda's customers or Bethesda's decision makers, seeing as how it's retained from game to game.

 Lone Cat wrote:
And this system does come with yet another tradeoffs..... scalings.
the Mojave wasteland in Fallout New Vegas looks quite smaller than the actual Mojave that surrounds real life Vegas. You still need downscaling for gameplay reasons which means the places like Primm and Goodsprings (look at its cemetry shown in the folliwing link) in game are smaller than those in real life. there are many sections of former Santa Fe/Union Pacific rail lines that runs parrallel to I15 or something that comes much closer than those in real life. http://www.falloutnewvegastour.com/2011/04/location-03-goodsprings-cemetery.html

You're not going to get around that. Even if processing power was unlimited, Bethesda's funds are not. Also, we play a game, not a simulation. If they could have a life sized version of the USA, they would still use some form of abstraction because walking in a straight line for three weeks, that's real time in case you're wondering, is not good fun.

I'm not really sure that the old system is so much better about scaling. For instance, Boneyard takes up a substantial part of the very large world map. Because, you know, Los Angeles is kind of big in real life, too. But what do you get out of it? Four, five local maps? How does that reflect the actual size of the city and its many, many possible landmarks?

And with this. is this why in Fallout 1, there's no Hollywood (including its steel iconic sign) in Boneyard?
So what is a scale ratio of New Vegas Mojave Wasteland to Real Vegas with respective Mojave surroundings?

Who knows? I found New Vegas (the town) disappointing. Just a couple of casinos sitting on top of each other with little else there. I was pretty happy with Washington and Boston, though. Landmarks were spaced out with urban environments in between to make it appear more like the real deal.

I'm pretty happy with the size of the maps in Fallout 3 and 4 (and Skyrim, Oblivion and Morrowind for that matter). Getting an even bigger map in Fallout 76 is bound to be even better. As far as I'm concerned anyway.

 feeder wrote:

Spoiler:

squidhills wrote:

 vonjankmon wrote:
Sorry but what do the synths do better than one of the existing robots in the Fallout universe? Need a workforce to perform manual labor that doesn't eat? Mr. Handy has you covered.

The Synths were specifically made to replace humans, the reason being...ummm..hrm...uhhhhh... yeah I can't think of a good reason and no one I have ever talked to about it can come up with a good reason either.

Testing crops? Seriously? 99% of humanity is dead and you have a magical teleporter, how about just claiming some unused land somewhere and having some robots take care of it? Why did they need to replace anyone they wanted to kidnap? They were utterly inaccessible with access to their teleport so why care what some wastelanders think of them kidnapping people? The synth silliness compromised their security in the end because it attracted the attention of the Railroad and BoS. It could not be less nonsensical and it basically ruins the entire FO4 story because it revolves around the synths.

Underpants gnomes of Fallout. I really wish someone could prove me wrong but it hasn't happened yet.

It's even worse than that. Every single super mutant in the Commonwealth was created by the Institute. Every. Single. One. They kidnapped people, replaced them with synths, then subjected them to FEV to learn... nothing at all. The *only* reason the Institute stops making super mutants is because one of the researchers, upon realizing that the FEV experiments were pointless and inhumane and that the leadership of the Institute was going to continue carrying them out despite knowing that they were pointless, blew up his own laboratory. The Institute is worse than the Underpants Gnomes... at least step 3 for them is "profit". The Institute hasn't even got a proper step 3. For them it's: Step 1, Mad Science! Step 2 *shrug*, Step 3 *shrug harder*.

Mad Science is it's own reward.

Ever since Vault-Tec's experiments entered canon, that right there is a pillar of the setting.

I liked the setting better when Vault 13's water chip problem was the result of a far too typical bureacratic screw-up, and not a deliberate science experiment by individuals who are likely long gone.

It does make Vault Tec into kind of a cartoon villain, but since we are talking about a darkly humorous retro-50s nuclear future gone to hell it doesn't annoy me too much. But I started the series with Fallout 3.

I watched the documentary and I have decided that if my PC can run this I will likely try and get it. I would like to know about stuff like Cross Play and so on though. My brother plays on PS4 and so far Sony have been absolute gits when it comes to Cross Play. I would absolutely love to play Fallout with my brother, because both of us really love the series.

Still curious to what extent the multiplayer platform will eat into scripted quests and npcs. The trailer really made me want to play Fallout, but its not very representative this time around.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Still curious to what extent the multiplayer platform will eat into scripted quests and npcs. The trailer really made me want to play Fallout, but its not very representative this time around.

IIRC, there are no friendly human NPCs.

 Wolfblade wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Still curious to what extent the multiplayer platform will eat into scripted quests and npcs. The trailer really made me want to play Fallout, but its not very representative this time around.

IIRC, there are no friendly human NPCs.

o

Yeah, I can't get around that. As far as I can tell, they took the wrong lessons from FO4: people complained about the minimal dialogue wheel, so remove it. Had a wonky base building system- focus on that.

Fallout: guns and picking up garbage just doesn't seem like an interesting premise.

Voss wrote:

 Wolfblade wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Still curious to what extent the multiplayer platform will eat into scripted quests and npcs. The trailer really made me want to play Fallout, but its not very representative this time around.

IIRC, there are no friendly human NPCs.

o

Yeah, I can't get around that. As far as I can tell, they took the wrong lessons from FO4: people complained about the minimal dialogue wheel, so remove it. Had a wonky base building system- focus on that.

Fallout: guns and picking up garbage just doesn't seem like an interesting premise.

Fallout: Pick Up Garbage! For a cleaner, brighter, post-apocalyptic future!

The game looks like it will be mostly devoid of RPG elements in the classic single player RPG sense. Depending on how communication is done and what there is to do in the world, a more pen and paper approach of RPGing with friends should be possible. If you care for such a thing.

While there have been statements from Bethesda that you can go it solo and there will be questing of some sort, I'd think hard about buying the game simply because you liked previous Fallouts. I pre-ordered, but I'm pretty happy with just the exploration and base building aspects where the incentive for going out is mostly tied to survival (need food and water) and gathering resources (want to murder Deathclaws by the dozen? You need a bigger gun). The average ARPG has less substance than that, and I play those, too. Plus I have a couple of friends who'll be playing and got invited to join.

But it doesn't look like if you approach this just from a single player RPGer's angle, you'll find anything worth playing.

Not sure if I will like this.
I hope the MMO aspect of this is players banding together to survive the world they are in.
Not sure how the base building will be handled, that in itself will have huge impact on gameplay.
Like the idea of wilderness and monsters.
If they put in a Slenderman it would have to be hunted down with extreme prejudice.
So we have the "Scorched" as our versions of the raiders for the generic enemies.
Good to see the supermutants still show, would hate to not find a good enough opponent to squish me to paste in the right circumstance.

I guess it is early yet, hope they take their lessons learned from 4, it had much good in it but missed the mark for character that Vegas and 3 seemed to have in spades.

Funny how mentioned earlier, Fallout would be incredible as a Diablo / Path of Exile type game.
It would lend itself very well, the early games were and isometric view game back then anyway.

 Geifer wrote:

 vonjankmon wrote:
Sorry but what do the synths do better than one of the existing robots in the Fallout universe? Need a workforce to perform manual labor that doesn't eat? Mr. Handy has you covered.

The Synths were specifically made to replace humans, the reason being...ummm..hrm...uhhhhh... yeah I can't think of a good reason and no one I have ever talked to about it can come up with a good reason either.

Testing crops? Seriously? 99% of humanity is dead and you have a magical teleporter, how about just claiming some unused land somewhere and having some robots take care of it? Why did they need to replace anyone they wanted to kidnap? They were utterly inaccessible with access to their teleport so why care what some wastelanders think of them kidnapping people? The synth silliness compromised their security in the end because it attracted the attention of the Railroad and BoS. It could not be less nonsensical and it basically ruins the entire FO4 story because it revolves around the synths.

Underpants gnomes of Fallout. I really wish someone could prove me wrong but it hasn't happened yet.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I'm not convinced that you wish that at all. You seem to have made up your mind. However, if I'm wrong and you haven't, here are a few ideas to consider:

Ignoring for a moment how ludicrous Mr. Handy design is (especially if you have a carpet), if you look for a general robot design that is made to operate in an environment made for and shaped by humans, a human frame has more utility than any other design unless you build a robot for very specific tasks. Human design makes everything in an environment equally usable by humans and robots alike, which makes interaction easier and more intuitive. If you need a ladder to reach something and your robot needs a ladder to reach that thing, you'll keep a ladder around. If your Mr.Handy can just fly up, do you keep a ladder around in case you don't have a Mr. Handy available and need to do it yourself? Or do you limit yourself to dragging in, repairing or building a new Mr. Handy and leave the thing you actually need done alone? There's no right answer to this because both systems have merits, but there's no reason to dismiss one just because the other exists. It's about what you want from your robot, and Synths have enough merits that they are a viable option.

You seem to have made up your mind that Synths have been specifically made to replace humans. Got any proof of that? Because nothing I have encountered in Fallout 4 supports that, except anti-Institute propaganda.

While it probably fails in terms of realism like many other things in Fallout where 200 years is such a long time that nothing from before the war should be left, if you go with it Warwick homestead is the most fertile spot in the Commonwealth because it was a waste treatment plant and already settled. If you don't mind killing some random wastelander, why settle for a worse spot when you have: a good spot, an established community to till the land and the ability to replace the head honcho reliably?

The Institute's lore is quite clear that scavenging operations on the surface were necessary to build the Institute of 2287. Power and raw materials don't grow on trees and at the end of the day the Institute was a hole in the ground that wanted to be self-sufficient, but didn't start out that way. They sealed themselves off only after being able to access the surface by molecular relay. They had a nuclear test reactor for 210 years that they couldn't get to work as intended, occasionally relying on power from the surface. A surface with all manner of mutants, monsters and wastelanders with an attitude. At no point was the Institute safely stashed away and out of reach from outside forces that sought to harm it. Having Synth spies and military capabilities is the solution to a problem, as well as the cause of a much greater problem. That's just realism at work and a lesson worth learning. No place or fortress is ever utterly inaccessible, and often only as safe as its guardians can make it.

How downfall as a consequence of one's own decisions is supposed to be nonsensical and ruins the story is beyond me. That's a common literary theme and the core of tragedy.

So if the Synths were not meant to replace humans, why did the Institute literally do that a few times after kidnapping the original people? Not entirely sure how you played FO4 without picking that up, yes the general populace was way more paranoid about the act than they needed to be but the institute actually did it. Heck one of your companions was a shining example of this: http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Danse

Your comments about Mr. Handy is spot on but that is why the Gen 1 and Gen 2 synths existed. What was the reason for making the 3's beyond...well reasons I guess. As someone stated above with their FEV example, the Institute did science for reasons...not sure how else to describe it. The Gen 1 and 2's could do the scavenging, enforcing, and protecting that the Institute needed, so I ask again, why make the Gen 3's that just ran away, made the local populace paranoid, etc? What was the goal? Safety? Because it did the exact opposite of that and despite being hit in the face repeatedly with that fact they just kept doing it, again for...reasons.

So again, you are free to disagree with me but as stated above, no one has been able to provide a reason for the Synths to exist beyond the basic Gen 1's, which were just robots with a humanoid form.

The late model synths are easily explained:intelligence on the surface and for getting things done.
They cannot operate completely in isolation, supplies and research need to be conducted or at the very least excavation of "lost tech".
They can also be used as talent scouts since they want to have the top of the line tech.
I could think of any number of means at the very least as spies to make sure the world does not become overrun by any one faction.
By their very nature they make a wonderful "boogie-man" in the world, the hidden threat.
I think I would have enjoyed them more if they were cyborgs: humans converted into machine and their core-thoughts behavior governed by a an institute CPU.
Easier to make use of the organic machine at-hand than to grow/build a new person.
A machine version of the "pod-people" is what makes it work.

I was excited about a new Fallout game, but I've always enjoyed Fallout games for the combination of universe, RPG factors, and single player exploration experience.

I like the idea of the setting super soon after the bombs, but I have literally zero interest in playing this multiplayer, nothing about that sounds like it will provide any value I have interest in.

If I wanted to play a persistent world post apocalyptic multiplayer game, replete with griefing and PvP, there are other games that already do that, and thats not anything I have any interest in for a Fallout game. Also, I still play many old Fallout games, decades after release, an online only game will have a limited shelf life.

Also, it sounds like settlement building and crafting are going to be huge, and that was my least favorite part of FO4, and what ultimately led me to drop the game.

I think I'll be giving this one a pass. I'd open my wallet for another New Vegas in a heartbeat however.

 vonjankmon wrote:

Your comments about Mr. Handy is spot on but that is why the Gen 1 and Gen 2 synths existed. What was the reason for making the 3's beyond...well reasons I guess.

Science isn't about why! Science is about 'Why not?'

 Vaktathi wrote:
I was excited about a new Fallout game, but I've always enjoyed Fallout games for the combination of universe, RPG factors, and single player exploration experience.

I like the idea of the setting super soon after the bombs, but I have literally zero interest in playing this multiplayer, nothing about that sounds like it will provide any value I have interest in.

If I wanted to play a persistent world post apocalyptic multiplayer game, replete with griefing and PvP, there are other games that already do that, and thats not anything I have any interest in for a Fallout game. Also, I still play many old Fallout games, decades after release, an online only game will have a limited shelf life.

Also, it sounds like settlement building and crafting are going to be huge, and that was my least favorite part of FO4, and what ultimately led me to drop the game.

I think I'll be giving this one a pass. I'd open my wallet for another New Vegas in a heartbeat however.

If you had watched any of the other videos that came out where they talked with the Bethesda guys you would know that they specifically said you would not be able to be griefed and that pvp was going to be dueles. There were at least 2-3 videos where it was asked and the devs said it was a concern of theirs and wanted to eliminate any issues, they also mentioned that part of the BETA is to see how players interact with each other.

I also think that from the videos shown base building is going to be similar to FO4 minus the whole settler babysitting. I think this is going to be like any other survival game like Ark or Rust where the player gathers resources on their own or teams up.

 Ketara wrote:

 vonjankmon wrote:

Your comments about Mr. Handy is spot on but that is why the Gen 1 and Gen 2 synths existed. What was the reason for making the 3's beyond...well reasons I guess.

Science isn't about why! Science is about 'Why not?'

Take your Exalt sir and congratulations on providing the one decent possible reason for the Institute maybe making sense.

I already have the Fallout skin for Minecraft. Unless something radically changes, it looks like I'll be giving 76 a pass.