The karma system has always been a tenet of the Fallout experience; I've always been indifferent towards it but that doesn't make it any less integral, nor do the arguments of it's overall logic.

The karma system is just one particular indictment of Fallout's soul being expunged; there's more systems than I can be bothered naming that have been removed. From traits, karma, faction reputation, skills, the entirety of the combat system and the complexity of the dialogue system.

Are any of the systems integral to the series?

Exactly. Nothing exemplified that more than the ghouls quest in 3. You either killed roy and his followers and got bad karma, let them kill everyone in tenpenny tower and got bad karma, or got the residents to let them in for good karma. Except if you let them in all the residents disappear, either chased off or killed.

Star Wars Prequels? Don't talk crazy, there's no such things. Just like there are only two Terminator and Alien movies

But hey, this is still Fallout. It's in the title: "Borderland: The Fallout"

The karma system was good in any way, you lost karma for taking items eventough nobody was around/they didnt even belong to anyone (like items in trash cans)

Your general karma didnt affect you in any way. If you had good karma someone might come up to you and give you a magazine of 5.56 ammo or a stimpack which you never needed...at all.

Beside that, there was no reason (at least in fallout 3, i dont really know about new vegas) to go for really bad karma since you get way more fingers than ears during the game which then again leads to much more money gain.

nope, it is a fallout game, bethesda calls it a FAllout game, thus it is a fallout game and is just as much as one as Fallout 1 and 2.

All the people saying "bethesda has only made 2", yeah your argument is not only stupid to begin with (since it does not matter how many they have made), but fun fact, Black isle only ever made 2 main series fallout games as well, the other two were Fallout tactics, which was also different game style, and changed A LOT of the lore, and Fallout: BoS, which most people pretend never happened.

Maybe on the box, sure. But certainly not what's inside the box.

You've missed the point, all fallout games are Fallout by name.Bethesda may call it a Fallout game, but that doesn't suggest that it's consistence with the content that previously defined the series.

Edit:

All you've succeed in doing is proving how it's Fallout in name only.

As I have stated previously in other topics in these forums, even though I am actually enjoying Fallout 4, I disagree with many design decisions Bethesda made for Fallout 4. Particularly, I don't like the fact that weapon/armor degradation has been thrown out entirely, that the dialogue/conversation system has been made even more simplified than in Mass Effect, that skills (major and minor) have been thrown out and replaced exclusively with perks, that the Karma system has been thrown out entirely, or that V.A.T.S. has been rendered nearly useless.

While some of these issues can be, and hopefully will be, fixed with mods, I am upset that Bethesda, being a self-publisher, has felt the need to emulate other publishers and streamline to death an established franchise just to increase their market share.

I am growing increasingly weary of witnessing franchises that I love being changed beyond recognition, usually slowly and gradually, simply in an effort to cater to a fanbase that is completely different than the one they started with.

I gotta be honest, I really haven't taken to the voiced protagonist very well. I know some people like it and that's fair enough, but I'd rather have the readable text and know exactly what I'm gunna say before i say it. I also used to like imagining my characters voice in my head, now when I get round to making a evil drug addled raider type I'm stuck with "that" voice. Kills of replayability for me. That's just me though.

Omg this is so true. I cannot possibly agree with this more.

Post-apocalyptic world based on the 50's, power armor, wastelands, ghouls and super mutants, grey moral groups, character with a background based on or related to a vault somehow, variety of weapons....

huh, seems to be pretty following the same thing that the original fallouts were.

Just because YOU do not believe it is following what fallout is about, does not meant it is not.

I have played them all and Fallout 4 is the best one in the series by a massive margin, and so it should be. I'd have to say its probably the best game I have played, period.

IMO it's a massive improvement over it's origins. What doesn't evolve becomes obsolete anyways.

I actually thought this at first. Fallout 3 did a much better job at capturing my attention and making me feel like Bethesda got the franchise early on, but as the game progressed that illusion gradually unraveled. In contrast Fallout 4 takes a while to get interesting, I didn't really care about anything that was going on, but as I got further into the game it started to feel more like Fallout than 3 ever did.

In the end I think Fallout 4 is a better Fallout game than Fallout 3 in many respects. I mean, 4 is not really missing anything vital that wasn't already lacking in 3, and it's more like the first two and New Vegas in ways that 3 wasn't.

Now... is Fallout 4 as good of a Fallout game as Fallout 1, 2 and New Vegas? I don't think so... it's still lacking in many of the aspects that defined those games, and made them great. Clearly though Bethesda learned something from the mistakes they made with Fallout 3, so 4 is a step in the right direction for them if nothing else.

Let me stop you right there.

See, this is one of the worst transgressions in the accidental (my take) or purposeful (Gizmo's take) retconning of the Fallout atmosphere and tone:

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1543646-why-we-cant-get-a-proper-fallout-game/?p=24508610

yeahhhhh, bc NV was really good. (include big old sarcasm) NV was a horrible attempt to do a good Fallout game, the whole setting and quest was pretty pathetic, plus lets be real most fan just love the stupid ending really, but the true was the ending was horrible deliver basing ur final decision on 1 choose on each faction. I really dont see why ppl are so crazy about NV when story and game play wise was really bad.

U are so wrong that i dont know where to star, first any game that Bethesda make is a Fallout game, Karman wasnt just part of fallout as a unique idea, most game have a karma system since NPC reacts to what u do. Fallout 4 present u a karman system to, since u have option that will make ppl angry toward u.

Fallout 3 and 4 have more consistency that any preview fallout game, so yeah im sorry u fans of Obsidian or Black isle, are mad the game isnt a isometric look or a hard-core rpg (when FO1 or 2 never was hard-core RPG) but u guys should thanks Bethesda for reviving the game and keep adding stuff to it.

Since the first Fallout, 4 had add stuff that make u feel more immerse on the world that any other game.

That's a very simplistic look at the series. But hey, it doesn't even follow all of those (grey morals? Good one! Better joke than any of the reddit-tier jokes F4 comes up with).

It would seem you're just confusing the setting with the whole game.

Sure was. Good thing Obsidian were given a chance or we'd have never seen a decent Fallout game in this engine. ˉ\_(ツ)_/ˉ

I love that everyone likes to say that Fallout only feels like Fallout with the original creators and yet the Fallout game they made before NV was so removed from what Fallout is and so bad that most people don't even like remembering that it exists.

Like it or not, Brotherhood of Steel exists.

Brotherhood of Steel wasn't made by Black Isle, it was made by another group at Interplay.

I think most of us will agree that Fallout 3 and Fallout 4 are much better Fallout games than Brotherhood of Steel.

Yes, and it was a spin-off, just like Fallout Tactics, 3 and 4 are

You can keep saying that all you want to, it doesn't make you any less wrong. Bethesda decides what is and isn't a spin off, not you.

except 3 and 4 are part of the main series, unlike the other games.

you can say that all you want, but it just makes you in denial of the truth, and ignorant of common sense.

mind you, not sure what i expected from the official forums, this is the same forum where if you point out Morrowind's flaws you get yelled at for being a troll, but then these same people say Skyrim was ruined thanks to lack of hunger system, even though Morrowind not only did not have that, but the AI stay in on place and their were no AI schedules.

Actually no, that's not how you define a spin-off. Do you know what it means when someone says "The series has spun off too far from its roots"?

see above, Mr Common Sense

fallout 1 & 2 were the fertilizer (in every sense of the word) that help'd fallout become the beautiful flower it is today.