This is a Game?

[RJLbwb]

So I goes to build the radio becon for the Minuteman and these are the insturctions someone kindly posted

 

Quote

You then get a new GUI from which you select what to build.
You'll need a generator to generate power, the small one is enough for the beacon.
Its found under "Power" (lightbulb) -> Generators.
Then you want power->miscelaneous.

When bot are built you'll need to drag a wire from the generator to the beacon. You do this by aiming at the generator ( whilest still in building-mode ) and press 'space', then aim at beacon and 'space' again.

Whenever you want to move something that has already been build simply aim and press 'E'. The powercables cant reach too far.

And, my god, That is pretty description of my job. I bitterly do something like this forty hours a week, and people consider this fun...? I suppose without the risk of electrocution, smashed toes, slipped disc, hernias, getting cut or just going home battered sore it's fun, kind of.  I mean they only pay people to this for a reason.  I knew things were getting out of touch with these games with lock picking min-game with is so much like the tedious, annoying parts of building things in the real world, but damn,  a industrial assembly simulator, for real? 

[Dallas-Arbiter]

you'll also have to plant crops for the settlers that will come to the settlement, you'll need to build some sort of water pump or purifier, you'll need to set up defenses too, oh and the settlers don't like if it they don't have a roof over their heads or a place to sleep.

 

 

[AWP3RATOR]

Sim Settlements - Rise of the Commonwealth, for all your settlement automation needs!  Why dig ditches and build ramshackle buildings when you can let your sims do the hard work for you? 

 

I actually find the settlement building part of the game a nice distraction from questing and shooting raiders in the face.

[dharvinia]

But, sometimes your knowledge of the outside world comes in handy when building settlements.

I am a student of history, and this knowledge allows me to build settlements that cannot be destroyed by anything out there in the wasteland (except nukes)

Once I build my settlements, and setup their defences, when they are attacked(and if I should show up) I am just a spectator to the slaughter of the attacking force.

This includes once when my settlement was attacked by a combined force of raiders and supermutants.

 

Look at all the things we do not have to build with respect to infrastructure of an emerging (recovering) civilization.

[Phelps1247]

No, that wasn't fun at all and I haven't even touched settlements or building things outside of that.

[phillout]

On 2/12/2018 at 8:02 AM, AWP3RATOR said:

Sim Settlements - Rise of the Commonwealth, for all your settlement automation needs!  Why dig ditches and build ramshackle buildings when you can let your sims do the hard work for you? 

 

 

You know, I'm kinda irked each time someone says "just use Sim Settlements!". SS does not automate settlement building stuff, it only allows you to set up tiles for future construction and upgrades. It doesn't actually make your life any easier - and it's insanely script-heavy and consumes tons of resources, BTW. I had quite a few crashes thanks to it. You still have to build fences, power generators, set up defenses etc. You still have to manually wire the power lines (including those for SS tiles), and so on. You can't just let SS manage your settlements and go your merry way. In fact I just find it easier to build a shack from prefab and put 5 beds in there as opposed to building and wiring 5 SS tiles. It takes much less space as well.

 

OP, I too find FO4 settlement building being totally out of place in Fallout games. Instead of Fallout they gave us Rage + Minecraft combo. Oh, no - Rage has cars and bikes. I wish FO4 had, BTW. Would make Survival mode much less frustrating without extra mods for fast travel.

[AWP3RATOR]

33 minutes ago, phillout said:

SS does not automate settlement building stuff, it only allows you to set up tiles for future construction and upgrades.

In point of fact, RoTC does provide this capability, through the leader assignment system.  The settlement can automate itself, to whatever degree the player chooses, building it's own items based on the needs of the settlement.  While it's not perfect by any means, it is a lot more 'fire and forget' than pre-RoTC Sim Settlements was.

[phillout]

7 hours ago, AWP3RATOR said:

In point of fact, RoTC does provide this capability, through the leader assignment system.  The settlement can automate itself, to whatever degree the player chooses, building it's own items based on the needs of the settlement.  While it's not perfect by any means, it is a lot more 'fire and forget' than pre-RoTC Sim Settlements was.

Gee. You seem to miss the point completely.

 

For those who have a strong dislike for any settlement building, SS is not a solution. You still build tons of shit and you have to dedicate a lot of time into learning SS itself and its extensions. Some of us would be perfectly find just having a "player home" similar to those in FNV and Skyrim, so we could have just explore and have adventures. And some of us think that if Bethesda would drop this building BS from the game, they could dedicate more resources into making the game itself more interesting. 

[Jazzman]

2 hours ago, phillout said:

Gee. You seem to miss the point completely.

 

For those who have a strong dislike for any settlement building, SS is not a solution. You still build tons of shit and you have to dedicate a lot of time into learning SS itself and its extensions. Some of us would be perfectly find just having a "player home" similar to those in FNV and Skyrim, so we could have just explore and have adventures. And some of us think that if Bethesda would drop this building BS from the game, they could dedicate more resources into making the game itself more interesting. 

Guess you haven't yet understood the potential behind RoTc as part of SS. For now only the settlements are almost self-sufficient and b/c the settlers are part of the Minuteman faction, we have the very first autonomous acting faction in game. What should stop us from transferring these new capabilities to evolve to all factions in game, pushing the frontiers, hmm? Right, at the end of the day you'd get a kind of Age of Empires with the ultimate consequence that when you just use the grid for pose shots or running around looking for adventures and that for too long, you'd easily get the final line on screen that states: Game over!

[phillout]

1 hour ago, Jazzman said:

Guess you haven't yet understood the potential behind RoTc as part of SS. For now only the settlements are almost self-sufficient and b/c the settlers are part of the Minuteman faction, we have the very first autonomous acting faction in game. What should stop us from transferring these new capabilities to evolve to all factions in game, pushing the frontiers, hmm? Right, at the end of the day you'd get a kind of Age of Empires with the ultimate consequence that when you just use the grid for pose shots or running around looking for adventures and that for too long, you'd easily get the final line on screen that states: Game over!

If I wanted to play something like that, I would just play Civilization series of games which are far ahead of what Bethesda did by hundreds of miles already. I don't see why it's better having a half-assed version of AoE in first person instead of RPG they used to make but, apparently, threw that experience out of the window. In the end they're going to end up having a crippled strategy game coupled with crippled first-person shooter. If Bethesda end up turning Fallout in "capture the flag and set up your settlement there"  type of game - this is not a "potential" for me, because I won't buy this game. As if it isn't enough of those already.

 

Though they can do this, they probably will, and probably they will make an MMO version with players competing for territories and building settlements to defend. I'm not holding my breath, though. This is simply not the kind of game I would play - FPS MMO with "capture the territory"with 500 flavors of Nuka-Cola and microtransactions. I'm sure it will make Beth tons of money though.

[Jazzman]

4 minutes ago, phillout said:

If I wanted to play something like that, I would just play Civilization series of games which are far ahead of what Bethesda did by hundreds of miles already. I don't see why it's better having a half-assed version of AoE in first person instead of RPG they used to make but, apparently, threw that experience out of the window. In the end they're going to end up having a crippled strategy game coupled with crippled first-person shooter. If Bethesda end up turning Fallout in "capture the flag and set up your settlement there"  type of game - this is not a "potential" for me, because I won't buy this game. As if it isn't enough of those already.

 

Though they can do this, they probably will, and probably they will make an MMO version with players competing for territories and building settlements to defend. I'm not holding my breath, though. This is simply not the kind of game I would play.

May I remind you that Bethesda's RPGs had always been messianic 'half-assed' with the player as demigod. Don't get fooled by a romanticizing understanding of earlier releases which is all-too human and yet total bs. The sole key to get the most out of a Bethesda game is to use the own inspiration, your personal fantasy, with or without the help of community mods. But if you want everything perfectly scripted - no longer role-playing but acting acc. to a prefab script in the lead as in a movie - you'd get a linear do-this-and-then-do-that game that is to be played with the cerebellum alone tho.

[Fakenet]

The whole premise of this topic is stupid.

Pretty much every videogame can be attached to a job.

 

Did you know that war is not fun at all?

 

 

That said; the settlements are only annoying. I had three and I am already counting the Red Rocket Motherbase.

[phillout]

1 hour ago, Jazzman said:

May I remind you that Bethesda's RPGs had always been messianic 'half-assed' with the player as demigod. Don't get fooled by a romanticizing understanding of earlier releases which is all-too human and yet total bs. The sole key to get the most out of a Bethesda game is to use the own inspiration, your personal fantasy, with or without the help of community mods. But if you want everything perfectly scripted - no longer role-playing but acting acc. to a prefab script in the lead as in a movie - you'd get a linear do-this-and-then-do-that game that is to be played with the cerebellum alone tho.

You could just help this person in this topic with your RP ideas instead. Because so far no one has any.

[Jazzman]

4 hours ago, phillout said:

You could just help this person in this topic with your RP ideas instead. Because so far no one has any.

It doesn't work that way. Personal fantasies are transferable to others only in scripted form, as in Lord of the Rings et al. There is, however, a basic rule one might keep in mind to avoid the MQ trap when the game starts to play with the player, and not vice versa as one might expect, sth. Bethesda is infamous for. So, where is the point-of-no-return in Fallout 4, the last chance to step out of the MQ (which, essentially, introduces you into the environment and the who's who in game) to play on your own terms?

 

It's this junction. The next talk to a quest giver and the deal is done, the end with a somewhat confused pc hitting the road again already written on the wall.

 

 

Question is, what to do when the pc is free for the very first time since the bombs fell and the factions in game are in a stalemate, hopelessly paralyzed? Well, you just do what you always wanted to do but could not due to the bondage of the MQ. I for one did what I most likely would do should I survive the war and the fallout (even just for a brief moment in time). I chose the scavver (that's what DC townsfolk calls the pc anyway), got me a pack of six, a force to be reckon with not just in Bartertown, and went on tour like a rock star, mostly looking what's below the said rock. I had to become an apostate on survival tho, giving the holy supply ghost in the console the finger, once and for all. It's a tough life in the Commonwealth when you run out of ammunition, food, antibiotics and clean water and grim-faced guys marked with a skull at level 300 or more have blocked the road in a bottleneck, let alone yao guais in hibernation in the only hideout far and wide during a heavy rad storm.

 

Needless to say that we got somewhat soft over the years. In 2015 and 2016 we still lived in the rubble, in 2017 already in tents like backpackers of today and this year we have pooled our bottle caps and bought us a home in Diamond City, a real one, one with kitchen, beds and... uh... you wouldn't believe it, a hot shower. Now, unlike earlier, we don't look like shit anymore, at least not all the time. Civilization, here we come, don't mess with us, ey!

 

Waypoint Echo, in the Ides of March 2292

[KoolHndLuke]

I am a machinist and looking at how modifications to weapons/armor are done in the game makes me laugh. Duct tape and Wonderglue? That said, I just overlook it and play the game. It is meant to be fun, not instructive or anything. My brother is an electrician and would laugh his ass off when seeing how this shit works in game compared to reality.

You can skip most or maybe all of the settlement building crap by just never talking to Preston. Of course, you will miss some other stuff.

[phillout]

1 hour ago, Jazzman said:

It doesn't work that way. Personal fantasies are transferable to others only in scripted form, as in Lord of the Rings et al.

That's called a story. Story you can tell to others. Unless you have a story, there is no RP. 

 

A quote:

 

Quote

 

A role-playing game (sometimes spelled roleplaying game[1][2] and abbreviated to RPG) is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development.[3] Actions taken within many games succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines.[4]

 

 

If you take a look at any good role-play LP on YT performed by good players (such as Gopher or Sorcerer Dave) you'll notice that they cut various quests in small chunks and then stitch them together to make a story - a story of a character and the character's development. All decisions, victories and failures. You can use mods to increase the arsenal of those stitches (with Skyrim, for example, I used Hunterborn a lot, so you can spend quite a lot of time to shape your character into a skilled hunter), but those are simply stitches for the story. If I would spend the whole game just killing deers, there wound't be a story to tell. You can also use mods to add more pieces to the puzzle - quest mods. And this is the problem with FO4 - you can't cut its content and combine in any way other than one provided by Bethesda. You can't, for example, RP an Institute courser. You can't RP BoS soldier because you can only join the recon team and unless you follow the MQ, BoS never arrives. And so on. By contrast in Skyrim you can write a story of a hunter starting in Falskaar (some young fella or girl native to Amber Creek), then following a quest of Hircine to Skyrim, meeting Companions there and joining, becoming the Harbinger, then going to defeat Harkon. Everything is character-made decisions, everything w/o ever touching the MQ, you can also insert a lot of small quests anywhere you want. You can spend weeks in the game not following any line, but it's your choice. The choice of pace and the choice of the branch within the story you build. This approach provides for incredible flexibility and allows you to make almost infinite amount of unique stories of unique characters - after all, you need only 26 letters of alphabet to write anything in English.

 

But if you're just running around killing stuff, collecting bobbleheads and reading terminals, fantasizing that your actions make any sense - this is not RP. It's called "content consumption". No story you could tell to others to make them interested - no RP. It's as simple as that. That's why people on RP forums share ideas, or you could just take a look at /r/skyrimrequiem how much time people spend there planning their characters. If you have nothing to share as a suggestion for RP - you've got nothing to say. This is how it works.

 

[Dallas-Arbiter]

Anyway, to get this thread back on track, I've been using Transfer Settlements for about a week. I really like it. Yes, you can download "blueprints" of other people's work, but it's really nice when you don't want to have to build settlements each and every time you start up a new game, You just scrap a settlement, and then import it.

 

https://www.nexusmods.com/fallout4/mods/22442

[Jazzman]

2 hours ago, phillout said:

That's called a story. Story you can tell to others. Unless you have a story, there is no RP. 

 

Oh, once you have a story, it's no longer role playing but acting according to a story script, becoming an actor as in a Shakespearean drama.

And precisely that is your problem, I guess - you simply can't role play w/o a given script. Improvisation, however, requires imagination, fantasy.

It's absence is what frustrates you when you replay the prefab script, for sure. You realize how deficient these scripts are and yet you can't do

anything about it. That's how things go. You have to live with it or quit your restrictive actor role as Julia at a certain point in the story, leaving

Romeo below the balcony behind with nothing but a pale moon above. That's what I always do, for me the MQ is just a spring board into the game,

a game I usually play for years in its first run, a never-ending and yet evolving story. Evolving by what? Community mods and my mood, what else.

 

So, have a good one. May the stimpaks be with you and never run out of ammunition, don't let that ever happen to you!

[AWP3RATOR]

36 minutes ago, Dallas-Arbiter said:

I've been using Transfer Settlements for about a week.

That's another great one.  For the most part, it depends on what I want to do in a playthrough - as to how much time I spend on settlement building.  Like I mentioned earlier though - it's a mechanic I do enjoy as it is something different from the standard RPG - go someplace, get/kill something, return formula.  So much so in fact, that I find myself wishing Skyrim had something like this - but then I do personally enjoy those types of "sim" games as well.

[phillout]

1 hour ago, Jazzman said:

Oh, once you have a story, it's no longer role playing but acting according to a story script, becoming an actor as in a Shakespearean drama.

And precisely that is your problem, I guess - you simply can't role play w/o a given script. Improvisation, however, requires imagination, fantasy.

It's absence is what frustrates you when you replay the prefab script, for sure. You realize how deficient these scripts are and yet you can't do

anything about it. That's how things go. You have to live with it or quit your restrictive actor role as Julia at a certain point in the story, leaving

Romeo below the balcony behind with nothing but a pale moon above. That's what I always do, for me the MQ is just a spring board into the game,

a game I usually play for years in its first run, a never-ending and yet evolving story. Evolving by what? Community mods and my mood, what else.

 

So, have a good one. May the stimpaks be with you and never run out of ammunition, don't let that ever happen to you!

 

No, I write a script. You don't need to invent an alphabet to compose a story. The alphabet is already there.

 

But if you don't use an alphabet, you're just making sounds. Not making a story. My "job" in the game is to be a dungeon master. Rings a bell, eh? I guess it doesn't. The one who directs the story. Now go and tell any DM that he just should sit there and watch players fantasizing things in their heads, never saying a word.

 

 

[Jazzman]

10 hours ago, phillout said:

 

No, I write a script. You don't need to invent an alphabet to compose a story. The alphabet is already there.

 

But if you don't use an alphabet, you're just making sounds. Not making a story. My "job" in the game is to be a dungeon master. Rings a bell, eh? I guess it doesn't. The one who directs the story. Now go and tell any DM that he just should sit there and watch players fantasizing things in their heads, never saying a word.

 

 

Guess we're talking past each other, 'dungeon master'. A commonly agreed upon alphabet doesn't necessarily lead to a universal language, the opposite is most likely the case. And I'm far too long in the single player business we're talking about to challenge someone with a handout for multiple players, I just leave it at that. They tend to come and go, you know, 'cause that's probably their sad destiny. Players simply don't share the same likes and dislikes, the same in-game language to give voice to their individual game experience, and that's no strange mystery but a brutal fact, something I had to learn the hard way first in my years as AI modder a long time ago.

 

Whatever, thanks for the convo and yow ho!

[phillout]

1 hour ago, Jazzman said:

Players simply don't share the same likes and dislikes, the same in-game language to give voice to their individual game experience, and that's no strange mystery but a brutal fact, something I had to learn the hard way first in my years as AI modder a long time ago.

 

 

 

That's why people have such thing as "definition". I've cited a definition of a role-playing  game above. If you had yours - you could have cited it, this would surely prevent us from talking past each other. This is how people use logic in arguments, as opposed to fantasies. They use facts, definitions and formal rules of logic to reveal the truth . Something objective.

 

BTW, role-play is a formal process as well. If you just feel like you're role-playing - it doesn't mean you do. It also has rules. It's a creative process, after all - in the same way as writing a book or making a movie is a creative process. The one creating a story.

 

And I absolutely don't mean that everyone must play in some particular way. But one shouldn't lecture others "how they should RP by using fantasy and nothing else" if he can't give a mere definition of it.

[Jazzman]

1 hour ago, phillout said:

But one shouldn't lecture others "how they should RP by using fantasy and nothing else" if he can't give a mere definition of it.

Now you are trying to interpret my words to your liking. Less impressive. Lo, I have defined my way to play the game already, now try to understand what I wrote, it would be nice. And it should be clear tho who's trying to lecture who here in Don Quixote fashion. Don't even think of me as a kind of still resisting Sancho Panza, think of Dulcinea instead, out of reach for your windmill axiom, definitions and rules one kindly has to agree upon or else, you know.

 

We really should leave it at that before it starts to hurt...

Godspeed!

[phillout]

28 minutes ago, Jazzman said:

Now you are trying to interpret my words to your liking. Less impressive. Lo, I have defined my way to play the game already, now try to understand what I wrote, it would be nice. And it should be clear tho who's trying to lecture who here in Don Quixote fashion. Don't even think of me as a kind of still resisting Sancho Panza, think of Dulcinea instead, out of reach for your windmill axiom, definitions and rules one kindly has to agree upon or else, you know.

 

Look, this is definition.

 

Once again:

 

A role-playing game (sometimes spelled roleplaying game[1][2] and abbreviated to RPG) is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development.[3] Actions taken within many games succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines.[4]

 

This is how you define something - in a clear, concise matter, so it can be understood by everyone involved, multiple interpretations should not exist. 

 

If you participate in discussion, it's up to you to formulate your definitions so others could understand. 

 

I merely asked you to share your RP ideas for Fallout 4 in another topic, since you've been claiming yourself to be someone knowing more about it then others (me in particular). In fact I would gladly learn about some FO4 RP opportunities I didn't happen to know. You refused once again, claiming that I didn't understand RP at all and wrong on all accounts. I asked you to clarify what RP means for you, giving you a definition of it. And I didn't hear it. End of story.