Current Events > Do you want settlement building in Fallout 5?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Settlement building seems like a love/hate thing for most.

The 'settlements' were populated by soulless non interactive NPCs and anyway, RPGs should be about experiencing interesting settings, not having to build them yourself.

Their focus on building is what ruined fallout 4 so no. Fuck off with that

If it's done like Fallout 4, as to where you don't really have to do it but you can whenever you feel like doing it. I put like 250+ hours into Fallout 4 and the whole time Id randomly just start playing around with it. The "settlement defending" stuff was overblown too. Cause just like building, you could just not pay attention to it and go on with playing. I pretty much never answered those calls after the first 10 or so hours. What did it even effect? I still don't know.

To me it was all extra stuff. Cause the game was still huge outside it.

Ya

Axiom posted...

Their focus on building is what ruined fallout 4 so no. Fuck off with that

You can pretty much ignore settlement building in the game.

I enjoyed doing it in Fallout 4, but I really didn't like the reliance on it, and it felt like 4 lacked settlements because "you'll be building your own!". I loved designing towns on my first playthrough, but on subsequent ones I just could not be bothered with it and the game felt emptier because of it.

GeraldDarko posted...

You can pretty much ignore settlement building in the game.

And the rest of the game was shit because of their focus on the building

I don't get what the point of even joining a conversation is when all you have to say is "it's shit". Are you one the NPCs from the settlement? You don't seem like a well written character. All one liners. You'd think you'd enjoy they put more of your people in this one. People you can really relate to

I want the ability to build up some bases, but not with the amount of micromanagement that Fallout 4 had. There's a mod for Fallout 4 called Sim Settlements 2 and it makes it so much better. You can choose to have settlers build up the base completely on their own. They meet all the settlement needs and even set up shops.

Axiom posted...

And the rest of the game was shit because of their focus on the building

I think a lot of it was Zenimax just wanting to put out a palatable game for everyone, which leads to lack of depth. Still a fun game, but could have been way better.

Yes, as long as this time they concentrate on quality not quantity of settlements.

Not really

FurryPhilosifer posted...

I enjoyed doing it in Fallout 4, but I really didn't like the reliance on it, and it felt like 4 lacked settlements because "you'll be building your own!". I loved designing towns on my first playthrough, but on subsequent ones I just could not be bothered with it and the game felt emptier because of it.

It was exactly that. The rest of the game was an afterthought

Not just the settlement building but I didn't like building in general. Too bad some story quests forced you to do it

I won't even bother with FO5 if it doesn't have settlement building. But I'd like to see fewer settlements overall, better building options, and better npc options.

WorsCaseOntario posted...

Not just the settlement building but I didn't like building in general. Too bad some story quests forced you to do it

Aside from the beginning, if you blinked you'd miss them. Hell, even in the beginning you just plop a few things down and leave the second time around. I can only think of one other one. I think the place near the bridge had you do something that took 2 minutes. I dunno. Maybe Im misremembering, since it didn't bother me as much.

Fucking no

Axiom posted...

It was exactly that. The rest of the game was an afterthought

That could be part of it, but the quests could have easily been more diverse, and you don't have to do the settlement stuff. Still think is more because generic games are easier to sell. Hopefully, Microsoft is better about that.

Axiom posted...

It was exactly that. The rest of the game was an afterthought

I actually really liked what was there. It's just that if I wanted to do something other than the main story there was this kind of "huh, so what can I do?".

Bethesda Fallout feel like the bombs just dropped yesterday and not 200 years ago

On an unrelated note I'm still bitter that they never explained how the Institute built that giant underground base with all that amazing tech other than to say they kept digging underground after the bombs fell and that they were smart. Why wouldn't they at least have gone to the trouble to come up with better lore than that? In my head I thought it would have been better if they tied the Institutes ancestors with vault tec. It would have explained how they had the means to survive and expand their base after the bombs dropped. I was so sure there was a connection and I was going to find a terminal confirming this during my first play through. I just couldn't accept that they made an underground bunker better (after the nuclear apocalypse mind you!) than vault tecs without any outside assitance. Because they were super duper smart scientists :/

FurryPhilosifer posted...

I actually really liked what was there. It's just that if I wanted to do something other than the main story there was this kind of "huh, so what can I do?".

There's a lot of side stories. Id spend like 30-50 hours in-between main story missions at times. The main story wasn't interesting to me, but some the side one's were. The vaults are always fun. The main difference between previous titles seemed more so down to how shitty your dialogue options were in comparison. I don't feel like it's because the side stuff just wasn't there at all. That's far from the truth

no

go play the sims

I thought it was great, gives you a reason to loot materials for scrap. The people that complain will always bitch about something. If you wanted to build a community you could, if not you didn't have to.

TheOtherMike posted...

I won't even bother with FO5 if it doesn't have settlement building. But I'd like to see fewer settlements overall, better building options, and better npc options.

Same. I would love to see a remake of FO3 with settlement building added, which Bethesda should do if they were smart.

Lost_All_Senses posted...

There's a lot of side stories. Id spend like 30-50 hours in-between main story missions at times. The main story wasn't interesting to me, but some the side one's were. The vaults are always fun. The main difference between previous titles seemed more so down to how s***ty your dialogue options were in comparison. I don't feel like it's because the side stuff just wasn't there at all. That's far from the truth

No matter how much I tried to play my character differently, he always felt like the exact same guy because of that damned voice. I often go with a female character now just to not have hear the same guy anymore.

FurryPhilosifer posted...

No matter how much I tried to play my character differently, he always felt like the exact same guy because of that damned voice. I often go with a female character now just to not have hear the same guy anymore.

Yeah. He's not really giving us much to care to hear again. I kind of just accepted it and it fades to the background. The pros outweigh the cons for me.

FurryPhilosifer posted...

No matter how much I tried to play my character differently, he always felt like the exact same guy because of that damned voice. I often go with a female character now just to not have hear the same guy anymore.

Yeah, they need a no voice option for the player character.

Yes, I loved settlement building. What I didn't like was the limitations of the engine that led to a lot of floating and interesting placement.

However many settlements that you could build up in FO4, divide by like, I dont know, four or five? Thats how many settlements should be able to be developed in FO5. And have it be totally optional. Otherwise, cut it out entirely.

GeraldDarko posted...

Yeah, they need a no voice option for the player character.

See this I'm totally onboard with. No voice being an option, is great for those that really want to get into roleplaying, but I definitely don't want it to be the default. I like my character having a voice.

NeoShadowhen posted...

However many settlements that you could build up in FO4, divide by like, I dont know, four or five? Thats how many settlements should be able to be developed in FO5. And have it be totally optional. Otherwise, cut it out entirely.

But you only ever need to build as many settlements as you want to. I don't think having less options is preferable.

Saints row had a voice pitch shifter and more deep customizing of the face and body than FO4. Come on Bethesda step up your game.

FurryPhilosifer posted...

But you only ever need to build as many settlements as you want to. I don't think having less options is preferable.

Eh. If the argument is to put something else there accessible instead, I kind of get it. Plus, some the spots were really dumb and not practical anyway.

i'm not going to be pleased if xbox takes away fallout completely. i enjoyed that series though i haven't played all of the games yet.

Hell no. Way too much focus on it in 4. Now, if they had say one or two settlements that you could help build or rebuild, fine, but not fucking 30 of the damn things.