Fallout 4: The Ugly - Voiced Protagonist

This topic is one of the defining parts of Fallout 4, and it is the movement from the silent protagonist, in which lines of dialog from the protagonist are chosen by the player for the Player Character (PC) to say, but that have no voice acting for it.  The silent protagonist comes in two varieties: the truly silent protagonist and the unvoiced silent protagonist.  That first type, the protagonist who never actually has a line of dialog is rare in gaming for at least the last 15 years, but it is a well known type of play style.  The Fallout franchise, up to Fallout 4 used the other sort of silent protagonist, which allowed for a variety of dialog options with NPCs so that the player could get to know a bit about them, what their circumstances were and if anything of interest could be revealed by them.  The NPCs are voice acted, the PC is not.  This is a vital part of role playing as no voice acted protagonist can cover the wide array of options and choices for character design and the type of person and personality the player was trying to achieve with their PC.

The Player Character is the avatar of the player in the game world, the one doing the actual activities guided by the player, and by giving a wide set of character design options the voice of the PC has to be one that is imagined by the player.  By choosing lines of dialog that are appropriate to that design and outlook for the PC, the player has a form of freedom in thinking just how the lines are spoken.  By giving a variety of choices of what to say there is also the intention that each PC will say them differently, which means that while certain dialog might yield better results, they may not actually fit with the type of person the PC is and thus yield different results in speech options.

A voice acted character is expected for times when known PCs are the point of a game.  A game out of The Witcher series gives the voice of Geralt of Rivia, while one out of Mass Effect gives a male or female Commander Shepard.  The basic role and situation is already created for the player, and while some cosmetic changes can happen before the game starts and within the game, the voice of the PC is set and all the lines of dialogue fully voiced.  That then requires a system for figuring out how to give the player agency in the world, and that can come out as a result of the different decisions the player makes throughout game play.  With that said you don't get to play anyone else in those franchises.  A game like Bioshock Infinite and its DLCs does offer a single voiced protagonist, but in the DLCs you play the companion who has an interesting set of stories of her own.  Thus you play through the main game as Booker DeWitt and then switch over to Elizabeth for some of the DLC content.  You don't get to play a resident of Columbia, say, just as you can't start out as a peasant in The Witcher series or a different species and job in the Mass Effect franchise.  That voice acted protagonist deal means that the freedom of the player is limited to the choices of the game design team, and if they did a great job then the leeway and types of decisions a player gets to make will then allow for a form of immersion in that PC.  Everyone has a different view of Shepard, Geralt, Booker and Elizabeth, and that is only constrained by how well the design team created a meaningful and in-depth experience for the player.

That single choice at the very start of the design process then starts to constrain and limit what can be done with the depth of the overall story, the world and interactions between the PC and NPCs.  Constraints are in no way a bad thing in game design terms, and can actually require a creative response and better look at the content that will be provided in the game itself.  Voice acting is only one, and a rather minor part, of immersion and allowing a game world to have a sense of internal reality for the player.  Fallout 3 and Fallout: New Vegas both offered a good sense of how the in-game world and situation worked without a voice acted protagonist, and The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim by Bethesda Game Studios also didn't need a voice acted protagonist and may have actually found that if they wanted to budget for all the different races that could be played that they wouldn't even be able to make the game if they did so.

For an Open World RPG in which there is not a set background for the PC, then comes a problem of having to create a setting in which voicing the PC becomes a problem due to character types and styles that players will create.  With too much background set, the player must either abide by the decisions the game designers made or decide to chuck them, imagine some different sort of background and then put up with voice acted lines that don't fit their character very well.  By making a story line imminent, that is to say pressing at all times, upon the PC if the route of following what the game designers want the player to do is chucked out the window, then the main story becomes a burden to the player as it will be brought up and nudged at them from various sources including NPCs, quests, and running across locations intended to show something to the player about that main story.  Putting up with that sort of pushing and nudging is an irritation and breaks immersion into the game world as no one will see your character as you have made them but only as the game designers intended for the main story of the game.

Voicing the protagonist and then doing a quick cut to get the main part of the game, means that there is no chance to get a solid grounding in the character type the game designers intend for the player to use.  The choice of male/soldier or female/lawyer isn't even given an hour of game play so that they can go looking for a job, figure out how to tend to their finances and put up with that pesky guy from Vault Tec trying to sign them up for the local Vault.  Why don't we get that?  Too much voice acting work.  If more attention is paid to the start, then the actual game will start to lose some of its structure due to budgetary constraints and timing.  Yet that sort of time would allow players to begin the process of building their character, to get some initial perks that reflect their pre-war lives.  If a voiced protagonist for an Open World game without a set type of protagonist must be done, and the game is broken into an intro/get to know you part and then a transition to the main game, then what is required is actually getting to know some of the life and background of that protagonist before the change-over.

A longer lead-in would allow the player to establish some of what that PC was before the bombs dropped.  Perhaps visiting the local garage to get a perk there, or going to the local range to pick up a perk or two there...fixing some stuff or reprogramming a basic routine into the robot could add in perk points.  Singular, yes, but a foundation and a beginning of a couple of extra points to go with a few they got from their lives before they were married.  Was the male interested in anything before getting drafted?  Did the female try to pursue some necessary training for the slowly decaying society around her while still getting a night school law degree?  Was the equivalent of an ROTC program available?  Were there vocational schools either could attend?  Perhaps part-timing as a model or waiting on tables was something they did to get by?  Anything?  These individuals did have a pre-war life, and were in their late 20's to early 30's, which is a point in which most normal individuals actually have some real life skills behind them and that should be reflected in their perk trees.

It wouldn't take much in the way of story of game assets to do this, save for getting some spruced up buildings in the pre-war era, maybe a short bus ride to go past a few places...but the interactions with anyone would require some plotting out and voicing.  Game mechanics for some perks getting assigned would be relatively easy.  Yet for an hour of time spent in the pre-war era the player could get to know their spouse, their neighborhood and truly realize what a horror was going to happen when the bombs dropped.  That would, of course, force the Far Harbor DLC to not take the coward's way out with the sudden lack of pre-war memories on the part of the protagonist...but that is a plot hole or deceit on the part of the game designers depending on how you look at it.  If the player is supposed to care about their spouse, their neighborhood and have deep and heartfelt reactions about losing them, then that isn't done in a short intro inside a single home and then running past people who are panicking when the alarm comes.  Caring takes time, and the game designers did not allot enough to actually get that across to the player via interactions of the Player Character.

More problematical is the way the game unfolds in the Vault and the ever so smart Institute sending a harsh wasteland operative with a penchant for violence in to lead a team of scientists and medical personnel to do a baby snatching.  The man would lead the security end of things, but not the actual kidnapping part as the medical team would be ready with sedatives to inject the parent holding the child so that the child wouldn't come to any harm.  Then close the chamber, turn on the cryo system and leave.  Murdering all but the Sole Survivor is insane for the Institute as each of the individuals in the Vault represent fresh, uncontaminated pre-war genetic material.  There were children scheduled for cryso sleep as well as young adults.  If the worry is getting flashed by the distant nuclear bomb disturbing genetic material, then the infant was exposed to that as well.  The only reason that would be set aside is if the distance meant that exposure was minor beyond the flash of the light, and that those who got in before the shockwave carrying debris hit was the only worry for fallout contamination.  It's a shame that Bethesda decided on voice acting as it would have been fun and interesting to play someone else from the neighborhood in the Vault.  The opportunities for play in that are large and could change the very nature of the post-war world and its recovery.

Fallout 4: The Good - Companions

What back to this topic?

Why yes, yes indeed.  The complaints about companions getting in your way, stepping in front of you just as you're lining up a long range shot or just, generally, not having a good combat AI must be factored in with the actual attempt to make sure the companions were not just generic followers.  In The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, the main complaint for companions was that they were generic.  Do a quest, do a mission or become a Thane and you got a free companion/follower.  That changed with the Dawnguard DLC and Serana, who came packed with her own mental model that ran in the background which kept track of what you had talked about, how you presented yourself and what your goals were, as well as how you felt about her as an individual.  That was an impressive feat to attempt at that point, and when it worked it was very impressive compared to the more generic followers in the game.  Skyrim was the project between Fallout: New Vegas (FNV) and Fallout 4 (FO4), done by Bethesda Game Studios.

Obsidian was hired to create FNV and they took a different approach to companions than Bethesda did, in that they wanted their affiliation towards the player character (PC) to happen in stages.  Thus every time you talked to someone who was old and important around Raul, he would want to have a bit of a chat with you.   When going with Veronica, there were places which would trigger her personal quest line and affiliation and get more information about her.  Mostly these were exposition dumps of the 'I need to get this out in the open' sort of deal, and were monologues.  This is a form of storytelling about the individual and the wider wasteland and how events happened outside of the immediate setting, thus were an RPG game element that required some game mechanics as well.  Cassidy didn't really like it if you have been stealing everything that hasn't been nailed down, and trying to talk with her if your Karma was negative turned out to be a no-go.  Cassidy had a built-in system of judging you by your general presentation based on what you had done: she could judge the PC by Karma.  Fallout 3 featured this to an extent with Talon Company and The Regulators, who would go after you if your Karma was too high or too low, respectively.  But those are groups making decisions based on contracts or what you have done, not individuals and not companions.  Still if you worked well with the slavers in FO3 you could get a slave follower, so points to Bethesda on that.  The changeover from Karma to personal review of an individual happened with Serana in Skyrim, and she was a very lore friendly and quite appealing companion, as well and that helped immensely.  There was still a theft and bounty system in Skyrim, so stealing what wasn't nailed down was still possible, of course, as was getting a bounty on your head if you did so.

Those game mechanics were removed from FO4 which had no Karma system, no Bounty system and, in general, if you stole something when no one was looking it wouldn't be pinned on you.  Bethesda did not go the complete route on that, however, and still marked items as STOLEN, which makes no sense at all for generic items or even some unique items.  That power armor set you stole from Raiders?  Yeah, some of your companions don't like it overmuch that you stole it and every time you get into it their favor can drop a bit.  How they know that is beyond anything the game mechanics actually want to cover as there is no Karma to give you an aura of sorts and if there is no witness, then identifying it as stolen when the owner didn't see it to pin it on you is absurd.  Steal something half-way across the Commonwealth and, somehow, it will still be known as STOLEN.

Without the proper game mechanics to explain this, the game element of something being stolen is detached from a framework to use it for particular situations.  You can't buy/sell some items to traders if it was stolen...how and why they know an item was stolen is not explained.  Karma gets your PC an aura or air about them, and some people can tell that right off the bat.  Stealing something in a system with a bounty attached can make some sense if you are the only one it can be pinned on or someone else who wasn't an owner saw you steal it.  Neither system is implemented and only the trade and use portions show up for companion and vendors, which, given the conditions of the wasteland, how are either to know that this wasn't yours to start with?  Remember most of the Raiders you see can't read or write, so they don't have a nametag on them...just the tag from the game engine marking it as STOLEN.

Outside of that, how you generally act towards others can gain you like/dislike with companions, and each have their own subset of activities to trigger that sort of event.  All Companions, indeed everything that can react to the PC or to each other in the game has AI behind it.  Simply put it is a script with variables that can change over time and circumstances.  Simple AI is put in place for everything else, with variations based on internal faction variables, so that Raiders just don't go shooting each other on sight.  Indeed removing that temporarily and putting a  high combat status on that individual will allow them to go berserk against the nearest person or creature, which has an entertainment value and has been part of how Bethesda codes NPCs that you can't recruit.  It is also possible to add the PC's faction to a list of allied factions for an NPC, so that they won't attack you, as well.  As a combat game mechanic it functions pretty well, but without proper RPG elements and scripts to back it up outside of combat, it isn't so useful.

In Skyrim the nature of Serana's script and background tracking were quite complex for the game and script engine, and there were a number of failure states that she could get stuck in, like saying she was going to leave to get cured and then just standing there.  To a degree this is true of all the recruitable NPCs in that game, and points to some basic limitations of script implementation in a complex game in the 32-bit era.  Going further afield in the shooter category of games, there are those with goals that the player must achieve for the plot to move forward and companion characters will have that as a reference so that they don't stray far from the path to that objective.  They can be given a large number of other routines, poses, dialogue and such to help them blend in with their surroundings and craft a personality for them.  Open World games where goals can be done in any order or totally ignored makes that sort of AI impossible save on a very limited basis, like someone looking to move through a dungeon or building with enemies in it and asking for the PC's help.

Interpersonal AI takes a lot of work and overhead, plus voice acting to make an NPC truly stand out and be believable.  With a voiced protagonist, usually at higher pay than NPC voiced lines,  that means that every line spoken by the protagonist is taking at least one or two lines out from NPCs.  That is why the NPC voice acting tends to have a limited response set in games with a voiced protagonist: money.  All that interaction costs money up front, and the type and style of game will dictate just how much time and money is to be spent on voicing of the various characters.  Getting a single good voice actor for an NPC like Laura Bailey as Serana costs a fair amount, and having two voiced protagonists for the entire game plus all DLCs means a lot of the money that could be spent for going in-depth on a few more NPCs or even adding in new NPCs is spent on the protagonist.  Of course it isn't that simple as the AI, story, backstory, and all the necessary elements to place an NPC in the game world need to be worked in as well, and that also takes a lot of money per character, though it is easier to add in different elements like was done in prior entries to the Fallout franchise.  In both Fallout 3 and New Vegas the choice of perks that were chosen for the PC would open up new dialogue options with some NPCs.  Stuff like Animal Friend, Child at Heart, Confirmed Bachelor/Cherchez la Femme, Black Widow....these weren't just about changing combat results and getting a slightly better chance at convincing someone at a speech check, but could open up brand new speech options that weren't available without them.  This is a way to add depth and traits to NPCs, and even put in alternative game choices to move forward in making decisions: these are key role playing elements that depend on RPG game mechanics.  It does require extra coding and forethought on the part of the game design team, of course, and that is something decided based on the type and style of game that is being designed.  A combat heavy game won't include them, while an RPG has such elements and mechanics as a viable game option so that the player is given Agency over how to make their decisions or to even find alternatives that free them of the prior constraints presented to them in different storylines.

FO4 is a combat heavy game, and the NPCs that are enemies tend to have pretty simple AI based on their abilities, attributes and equipment.  NPCs that recognize they are vulnerable and seek cover tend to do so for a limited period of time before they finally give the bum's rush forward, tossing their life away by doing so.  Combat AI for companions isn't much better and there are rare circumstances where the shooting gallery (be it mine, building, tunnel complex, what have you) allows for cover fire advancement.  That is to say if a Companion is in cover against an opponent, the PC can then open up from their position to cover the advancement of their Companion.  And then the reverse can happen to allow the PC to move forward while the Companion gives cover fire from their position.  Thus the two can leap-frog into better range going from cover to cover seeking to flank a set of opponents from one or both sides.  The chances of this actually happening is sheer and utter luck and not something that you prepare for since there is no game mechanic in the combat side of things for the Companion AI to comprehend advancing under cover fire.  Dumb luck will get you the few situations this happen, not devising a set of tactics that the NPC understands and will then seek to enact: there is no yelling 'cover me' and then getting a thumbs-up or equivalent so that you can then advance under cover fire.  That is one reason why I classify FO4 as an action game: it is action centered not shooter centered.

If these elements, the background accessible via specialized perks and getting a good fighting relationship, are mixed together, then this thing called 'immersion' starts to appear.  Letting a Companion know that you tend towards melee combat and will ask them to give you cover fire to advance, would be something you talk about before ever getting into a fight.  If only the Companions would recognize that there IS a fight going on before asking if you have time to talk to them about personal matters.  In my very first playthrough of FO4 I had been working with Cait and getting into some rather nasty fights, and getting to understand her background, all to the well and good.  Then, in the middle of a fight where a group of advancing synths were firing at us, she decided she wanted to have the old heart-to-heart.  Yeah, we stood up, got out of cover and had it...while the blue lasers were hitting all around us.  There is no magic shield of 'I want to talk to you' protection in FO4...hell there is no concept of 'personal space' when others are talking, either.  NPC AI is decidedly lacking in something known as Situational Awareness.  Still we had that chat, survived, won the day and proceeded on to the end of her major quest.  That is the first, only and last time I will ever accept such dialogue in the middle of a firefight, and even choosing the 'Not Right Now' sort of option still means I have to stand up and get out of cover in a fight and that is usually a lethal situation.

What is Situational Awareness?  Bethesda doesn't go that far in implementing it, beyond putting in some generic trigger points for NPC monolog and remarks.  That just isn't all that well done, truth be told.  SA goes far beyond that on both the combat and non-combat side of things.  The combat list should include things like: don't step in front of someone aiming down a scope, don't use area effect weapons when friendlies are in the range of the effect, keep your distance in combat, seek cover and cover fire opportunities against entrenched or protected areas, utilize non-combat skills when appropriate to take care of situations and problems during a fight (like going to the side of the PC who is gravely wounded and using a stimpak).  Stuff like that.  Get out of the way of the PC, don't block doors, and give people who are talking to each other a wide berth can start to cover non-combat SA, as well.  That and the game engine deciding to spawn people and creatures on the roofs of buildings or inside locked rooms that they don't have a means to escape from....that is game engine SA for placement of NPCs, and it doesn't really exist in FO4, either.  If you've ever been blocked from getting into a house because a caravan brahmin was spawned inside of it with no real way out, and thus no real way in, you get the idea.  Sometimes it is comical, but mostly it is just non-sense and frustrating beyond belief.

With all that said the additional and interactive 'getting to know you' for Companions is a good step forward and beats the exposition dumps of FNV.  It could use some refinement by adding in actual meal game mechanics so that the PC and NPCs can share a meal, go to a bar and have drinks together, and generally unwind in a friendly environment and talk things over.  Talking things over in the field isn't really the best of all possible solutions, especially if it involves a major activity that the PC will have to do with the NPC so as to advance the storyline of the NPC.  Better game mechanics or at least subsidiary elements to existing ones in the AI would be necessary for this.  It is a bit more to keep track of, yes, and requires some forethought by the game designers, but once set up as a mechanic, then it can just be used and places set up appropriate for such dialogue (or made by the PC) so that when the PC and NPC are in that place they can then have different dialogue options and opportunities.

The best of the modded in Companions from prior games in the TES and Fallout franchises can vary from very simplistic to revising a known NPC by adding in other options that have some voiced (or even unvoiced) options to finding a voice actor (friend, amateur or professional) to speak the lines for a unique Companion.  Quests for those companions can range from non-existent to incredibly in-depth and detailed, with multiple friendship and affection waypoints that are only garnered by working with the Companion, helping them and showing that you, as the PC, are willing to do a lot of little things to build up their trust.  That takes a lot of time, effort and sometimes actual money so that the Companion will get special clothes, special weapons, other items not found normally in the game and yet lore friendly...modders do this because they love the idea of having a Companion that isn't JUST a Companion but someone that is seeking a long-term relationship and that your PC may just be that individual.  A ghoul or super mutant companion may think nothing of the Cannibalism perk, while a human companion may detest you whenever you do it when they can see you doing it.  Which means you have to adjust how you play to their likes and dislikes as well as your own method of play, all while attempting to achieve some larger goals and quests.  A Companion should be more than just a squadmate or combat buddy, and romantically they should also have preferences, likes, dislikes and such so that doing some activities is just not possible no matter how much they like you.

Are those limitations to Companions?  Yup, they are.  And they make a game more immersive, and lets the player know that no matter how good they are that there will be things they just can't do in the play through they are on.  Player Agency will have limits, but will also have the hints at expanded opportunities if different choices are made.  FO4 is a step in the right direction for Companions by lengthening the 'getting to know you' phase, breaking it up a bit, and making the Companions seem to fit in well as a friend you can travel the wasteland with.  And if you just want to chuck all of them out, well, Dogmeat will always love you.  And get in the way of your next shot.Basically the realm of AI in the Fallout and TES franchises are lacking.  The game industry, as a whole, gives some unique NPC Companions (used generically here) that attempt to blend in with the game world, move stories forward and offer opportunities for player agency, which is the breadth and scope of decisions the player is faced with and can allow an ingenious player to find new ways to play the game and come to different or better ends than just using brute-force techniques.  The real place to watch for advances in AI are not in the big technology companies, but in the gaming realm as actual humans who are seeking to advance games can have a competitive advantage by offering better NPC AI, particularly in Companion AI, that seeks to adapt the Companion to the the player and vice-versa.  Want to get human relationships from computers?  Why look at big companies that don't make that a goal in the first place?  Why not start with those who have a real monetary reason to advance the state of the art, and can prosper by doing so?  Don't expect the big boys to solve this one.  The first game company that begins to crack this nut open in a limited environment will have a real money maker on their hands as the people and the game world begin to adapt to the changes the PC brings about...some for the good, some for the bad and some will just be changes.  How to make, track and implement those changes while giving it a realistic propagation rate...that is a minor challenge compared to actually cracking that larger nut open.  Games are the prefect playgrounds for AI development.  Now if we could only convince the game developers of this.

Fallout 4: The Bad - Factions

I've introduced the topic of factions and factional games in prior posts, so now it is time to look at factions in Fallout 4.  There are 4 of them, in this go-around: The Minutemen, The Railroad (RR), The Institute and The Brotherhood of Steel (BoS).  Each of them has lore and background story material that can be found relating to them and how they view each other.  Of them the Player Character (PC) can become the leader of two factions: The Minutemen and The Institute.  There is cut content in the game files relating to a quest line that would have either Paladin Danse or the PC end up as Elder of the Brotherhood, but since it was cut the point is moot.  Thus the PC can be a leader of a faction or a leading operative of a faction (BoS and RR), which is garnered by doing some jobs for each faction to gain their favor.  This is not abnormal for the two major series that Bethesda Game Studios has in their stables: The Elder Scrolls and Fallout franchises.

Taking a look at The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, gives a view into how faction leadership turns out to be more of a fancy title rather than an actual job.  Take the quest line that puts the PC in charge of the Mages College of Winterhold, so that at the end of it the PC becomes the Arch-Mage of the College.  Now in this leadership position do you get to, say, set tuition costs?  Or to determine something other than the test the PC had to go through to get into the College in the first place?  Can you set a policy up so that a prospective student must have the Jarl of their Hold's recommendation or at least approval?  How about a maintenance budget, does the Arch-Mage get to, say, repair the walkway to the College which features broken railings and sheer, lethal drops to the icy waters and boulder strewn area where the City of Winterhold used to be?  The answer to all of these, and much more is: NO.  And this same problem comes up Fallout 4 and, to a lesser extent taking the DIY/Yes Man option, in Fallout New Vegas (FNV), and isn't a large Fallout 3 where siding with the BoS is more or less how the script goes.

Perhaps the fine game designers at Bethesda Game Studios have never played a factional game or a transitional RPG/factional game and don't know how to design an actual job system and game mechanics that a PC gets to inherit when getting to be a faction leader.  Back in the old tabletop board gaming era (its a category and paper maps are also in it) there were many factional games that saw the player in the role of the faction leader and having to manage resources, recruitment, high visibility members/leaders within their ranks, and even such stuff as maintaining infrastructure (which begins to border into strategy type games, but there is a major overlap between them).  These games included: Kingmaker, Dune, Down with the King, Pax Brittanica, Outreach and many others.  In the computerized era there are games like Civilization, Sim City, Warcraft I & II, and just about the entire Total War franchise as examples of this category of game.  As a player you have the role of faction leader that is relatively abstract but does put under the player's control the actual mechanisms of making sure the faction has resources, addresses overhead costs and even sets policy on how other factions are treated.

Bethesda Game Studios fails to set up the mechanics for faction leadership in two major areas in FO4.  The first is being able to have multiple decision paths on, well, anything, involving a faction.  By using a voiced protagonist, the time and money that would be necessary to voice all the lines of a faction leader are just out of the question.  Those branching decision paths must also be reflected in the game world, and the only such game mechanic in FO4 is the Provisioner system to link up settlement resources.  That's it, and if you are in charge of The Institute, you don't even need that as The Institute doesn't want any outside 'help', and that is a decision you are stuck with as a faction leader.  The second part, and it is also constrained by the voice acting decision, is implementing policy changes of a faction towards other factions.  In this regard the lack of underlying mechanics for policy means that the underlying antipathy that factions show towards each other leads to the scenario where only two of the four factions survive at the end of the game, with the exception of The Minutemen that can be at relative peace with BoS and RR after removing The Institute so that three can survive.  The Minutemen, being grassroots, can't be removed as a faction, although you can ignore them, not help them and never build them up so they never become a factor in the game.  They still survive in spirit, however, as you can't get rid of the last member of them for game purposes.  In theory it is possible to have the Minutemen as the sole surviving faction by taking out the Institute, BoS and RR.

Yet this state of affairs is one that is part and parcel of the game and makes the current leadership (save Minutemen) seem incredibly brittle and lacking in actual ability to put long-term thinking into play.  There is no opportunity for cooperation between factions, no ability to get a temporary truce to work against a common foe, and no real way to broker a peace.  That is just insane as that is what faction leaders are supposed to do.  They must not only have the short-term goals of their organization at heart, but must view those in their organization as not being expendable like ammunition.  Playing the game may try to impress the heartless cruelty of these factions on the player, but even cruel or evil factions in factional games are willing to make short-term deals if they feel it helps their long-term goals.

At the other end of the policy spectrum is recruitment, training, provisioning, and assigning missions to individuals or groups.  That sort of thing is done through a command structure in most cases, though in small groups using cell based organization, the overhead of secrecy puts in a mandatory distribution of power if any cell in an organization is breached...and those are for games that take some time to figure out how to run something like an insurgency or secret-based group that cannot sacrifice security in the name of more members and usually have along 'getting to know you' period.  Beyond that are the basics: gathering resources (either materials, funds or negotiable goods), maintaining the organization in a physical way for buildings and such, keeping up morale, ensuring safety and security, and generally figuring out who will do well at assigned jobs or missions.

In a faction based game where the player is a leader, a sub-set of these mechanisms will be decided upon by the game designer and built into the game.  In an RPG based game, some of these mechanics are hinted at early on and, upon joining a faction, then getting some minor taste of what a leader goes through becomes an essential part of game play.  Starting at the lowest rungs of an organization and working your way up via missions, means that as the player rises through the ranks they will get more overhead duties to keep track of and people to actually command.  This sort of thing is damned rare in the gaming world, and designing a hybrid that stays true to role playing and offers expanded opportunities for it while being a true faction leader is difficult.  And as the faction leader you would also have to decide the risk factor of each mission and which were the ones only you could address.

At that point you would also have enough personal skills and abilities to address these problems, and be able to choose people you interacted with on the way up if you wanted a specialized group to go with you on the mission.  Perhaps the earliest people who helped you out and went with you when you were low level have stuck by you and are reliable in some command roles.  Or maybe some of the people that would be more generic need a personal field test, and that means going out on a mission with them, not to supervise but to watch how they command others.  All of this and more is a prime role-playing set of opportunities and a way to stifle busy work by delegating it while you are away.  That won't last long, and you will, as the leader, have a maximum time available for the mission or missions, after which you must return as part of the role taken up as leader of a faction.

Instead, of being truly innovative in game design, Bethesda Game Studios failed to take an expansive view of factional game play which is a prime place where the industry sadly needs good examples to show how it is done from an RPG to faction game route.  None of the elements of faction leadership even show up, not even a base budget and how to spend it via a meeting with department heads.  Nor does the player get to make personnel decisions, hire and fire people, and generally be the leader of an organization.  What you DO get are assignments handed to YOU by underlings.  Wait a moment, when these underlings are capable of dealing with them, then all they should be doing is notifying you of the problem and letting you know they are getting a few people together to deal with it and just need your approval.  Faction leaders don't get assignments from underlings, they HAND THEM OUT as a delegation of authority and responsibility to trusted sub-leaders in the faction.  Other problems will filter up to the leader via that route, particularly if the player can assign someone in the public interface type of role, to meet, greet and get to know public leaders, civic leaders and business leaders.  That will depend upon the type of organization, but any that require a modicum of good will amongst the larger population will have this as an actual job to be handed out...one that the player might have actually taken up on their way up the ladder. Those aren't just jobs on the way up: that is a way to familiarize the player with the organization, how it runs, how it works, and why it works that way.  Of course in FO4 only the Minutemen have that sort of public PR deal going on once The Castle is retaken which points out just what the other factions think about the individuals making up the Commonwealth.

Not to intrude much on the lore topic, but it must be brought up with regards to FO4 as the premise for it was set in Fallout 3 and The Pitt DLC for it.  What we knew from that game was that the Commonwealth had an organization known as The Institute that appeared to be in charge or in some superior position inside of it, and that they were high tech and creating humanoid androids.  These humanoid androids (later 'synths', in particular Gen 3 Synths) could demonstrate more than a modicum of free will and seek their liberty.  Even though they were created in a lab, their utilization of human organs, including a newly grown brain augmented with a synth component for organization of thoughts,  and demonstrating that they had a concept of what freedom meant puts them into the 'human' category.  They can't reproduce, don't need a balanced diet and generally handle radiation in a superior way to humans, but beyond that they look, act, talk, think and feel the same as humans do.  The picture this paints of the Commonwealth is that of a rather overbearing organization with an extensive secret police system that sends out skilled individuals or even a department head to track down these rogue creations.  The RR is an underground operation that seeks to free synths, and often mind wipes them and gives them false memories and backgrounds so that they won't accidentally betray themselves to Institute agents.  What we garner from The Pitt DLC is that the Institute also does trade with the outside world as they are cited as having purchase agreements for Pitt materials and goods.  What one of the leaders in the Pitt wants to do is created and do something that even the Institute can't do so as to show their superiority in biotechnology over the Institute: a cure for the Troglodyte Degeneration Contamination.

The actual Institute we get in FO4 does not trade with the outside world and only sends the head of the Synth Retention Bureau, Dr. Zimmer, out on high profile synth retrieval.  Justin Ayo is put in charge as the acting Director of the SRB as the sort of 'spare tire' for when Dr. Zimmer is out.  As an interesting side light, the Institute properly uses the concept of 'acting director' in the case of Justin Ayo but not in the case of Father who ALSO refers to himself as the acting Director of the Institute.  Organizations do not screw up with this sort of thing and 'acting' in the stead of someone who is gone has a limited number of meanings.  First is that the actual person in charge is away and this individual is acting on their behalf.  The second is that the individual is a stop-gap, usually a deputy or assistant, that has been elevated temporarily to the role of Director but that the actual person who will be taking that place has yet to be determined.  While that second in command spot can lead to permanent leadership of an organization, the reason that a senior individual is in that position is that they are put into a dead-end but useful job because they lack certain necessary skills to actually be a long-term director.  But I digress from the main topic of the picture that is painted of The Commonwealth.

What we had gotten from FO3 is that The Commonwealth, in whole or major part, was under the sway or influence of the Institute.  It could be a shadowy organization, yes, but when actual communication and trade of any sort takes place between an organization and the outside world, then some of the shadow begins to get burned away.  They did, for a short time, work with the Commonwealth Provisional Government, but the Institute found the actual idea of governing to be one they couldn't cope with as it involved setting a level playing field on the needs of people on the surface with those of the Institute.  There was some push-back against the move to end the CPG by the Institute as can be found on a couple of holotapes inside it, but the final verdict was written in the deaths of the community and settlement leaders by Institute Synths.  Even with that taking place before FO3, the way individuals speak of the Institute and their connections in FO3 is in the present tense and, while undercover to an extent, known about and having actual contacts with the outside world.  Even with teleportation technology, the types of materials being moved would require getting them within range of that system, which means crossing overland between the Commonwealth to the Capitol Wasteland and The Pitt.

A total sub-surface, secluded and sequestered organization with a top-down dictatorship and disdain for the surface world is what we got and that does not meet up with the expectations set in FO3.  As a faction the Institute has demonstrated that it lacks raw materials, it lacks reliable power and even has to get some power sources from the surface for their own use.  They are so primitive in moving rock that they have resorted to explosives and synths clearing away debris via manual labor with a couple of small front loaders.  Where the rock goes is anyone's guess.  If they were advanced they would have had the workstation system as seen in the Vault Tec DLC, which allows for the removal of preselected and charted areas at a single go and all of that is translated into useful materials stored in the workbench system.  Mind you that was a pre-war system, and should be something the students and faculty at the Commonwealth Institute of Technology knew about.  Of course that was available, you would have a large sub-surface city or Vault extending for miles with an actual, sustainable population.  While not exactly what you would expect from FO3, it would be something much closer to it than what is actually seen.

The surface world of the Commonwealth was portrayed as a place that was under watch of the Institute which used a secret police of androids or synths, as they became known, to keep the surface dwellers under the thumb of the Institute.  That doesn't need to be a police state, mind you, but what we see in FO4 doesn't really get it right, either.  The Mayor of Diamond City being surreptitiously replaced by a Gen 3 Synth doesn't do much for the policy of the Institute, which, by the way, is never clearly stated anywhere.  Basically if the surface world has been written off as just full of people with bad genes, then, as a faction, why even give a damn about it?  Why waste resources that could be better utilized on the infrastructure of the Institute itself?  As a faction the Institute is sadly unable to decide if the surface world is to be ignored, is an omnipresent threat or just a place to pillage and loot at will.  Mostly it is the latter, of course, yet there is some communication and trade with The Pitt, and that is worse off than the Commonwealth is in regards to being contaminated.  What is it with that, anyway?  Just in the realm of overall goals, policy and objectives the Institute isn't all that coherent in FO4.  From FO3 it may be seen as small, but very effective, capable and goal driven organization, with enough security to open itself enough to the outside world to seek resources from it in a non-destructive fashion.  It basically ruled over the Commonwealth directly and indirectly, willing to use open agents and trade with the outside.  That isn't the Institute we got.

As the RR is out to free the synths, you got the idea from FO3 that they are a small organization, which is what we got in FO4.  Kudos on that, at least.  And as it operates like an actual organization set on moving individuals via a network of trusted friends and associates, it also has to deal with being compromised.  The problem of the RR as seen is when the PC is asked if they would risk their life for their fellow man even if that man is a synth?

The counter question you do not get to ask is: would you risk your life for your fellow man even if he was a human?

If the RR is against the slavery of synths, then what about the slavery of humans as seen in Nuka World?  Or Super Mutants rounding up individuals as a food source?  That doesn't cause a single twitch of their moral fiber.  Are a large number of people anti-synth?  Yes.  Yet, if Gen 3 synths are seen as human, the enslavement or consumption of humans should be of equal status since being human is the touchstone.  If you can't be bothered about human slavery or becoming a simple food stuff, then it is hard to see why these individuals would be upset by synth slavery.  Is there a real difference between enslavement of created beings via a machine versus those people captured by force in the wasteland (or submitting to it to care for other slaves)?  Are a number of Raiders sadistic towards synths?  Yes.  They are outweighed by the number that are sadistic towards humans.  Plus if you get rid of the Institute the long-term problem of synth hatred will go down over time as there is no longer a source for those synths.  At that point you are no longer freeing synths, but extracting revenge.  If the RR survives and the Institute goes down, then the RR become vindictive and seeks to be a controlling force in the Commonwealth.

Speaking of its destruction, Imagine leading the Institute and finding out that it has been infiltrated, and now being destroyed right under your nose.  A faction leader would have known that catastrophic failure is possible, and designed an escape system that doesn't rely on huge power consumption and have a back-up area for emergencies in case everything went wrong.  That is something ALL organizations must have on their agenda, particularly those that can and do suffer problems that can cascade to total failure.  Failure is an option, success is not guaranteed.  The RR suffered such catastrophe and recovered.  The Minutemen were able to recover (if you bothered to do so) from total failure and collapse.  Two factions aren't prepared for that: BoS and the Institute.  The former has seen total failure (or at least heard about it) when chapters go silent.  The latter is depending on a quick technological fix to save the Institute from power shortages, and yet those aren't the only problems the place faces in the way of logistics or even viable human gene pool.  If they did, then they would NOT have ordered the deaths of those frozen in Vault 111, but would have sought to bring them into the Institute with uncontaminated genetic material.  While not a long-term solution, it would have offered the Institute a longer lease on life...and the problems of an expanding population...which means growth, the need for more resources, more power...

If the Minutemen and RR can get a hand-waving pass, the BoS can't.  As depicted theirs in an expeditionary force centered around the Prydwen airship.  That airship has a limited capacity for holding troops, vertibirds and, as is found out later, powering itself for the long haul due to the need for specialized coolant.  What we are handed is a force that has limited resources, limited manpower, and while willing to pick up a few new recruits along the way, are basically a self-contained force there to do one, and only one, job: remove the Institute.

Bethesda Game Studios decided to give them infinite supplies of everything, including manpower and vertibirds.  This makes no in-game sense nor any sense for a military force that requires a logistics supply chain.  To be clear, to have a force like the player is shown in-game would require a constant resupply of soldiers, power armor, weapons, generators and vertibirds.  Presumably, since overland caravans can't handle that, the BoS would need to set up supply depots in the wasteland between the Capitol region and the Commonwealth.  Vertibird replacements would be required to be flown in, and the safest route for the last leg of the journey is either at very high altitudes or over the sea.  A supply chain avoiding the hazards of the Glowing Sea, the irradiated landscape where a major bomb cluster fell in and around nuclear power plants and near a military storage depot that held nuclear devices, would be the wiser route as isolated islands could be found for staging men and equipment while then setting up a set of radio comms back to the Capitol district.  Barring that, since the Prydwen comes in from the western portion of the map, near the Nuka World station, they may have decided to set up a supply system going from The Pitt and then north-east through Appalachia and the Adirondacks, and then looping around The Glowing Sea.  In-game this would mean that vertibirds would be seen ferrying supplies in on a daily or multiple times a day basis to keep the expedition resupplied.

Sadly that is lacking.  In the Nuka World DLC there was a grand opportunity to show a major BoS supply depot that was under constant harassment from the Raiders and other sorts there.  That would have given the BoS access to the X-01 Power Armor suits, advanced technology and possibly even trying to get a group together to figure out just what was going on there.  This is a missed opportunity to attempt to paper over a badly implemented set of decisions on game design.  Without that sort of resupply the BoS would have no business expending resources, aircraft and members on the sorts of things that are seen in-game.

Elder Arthur Maxson (it is a title, only, since he is in his early 20s) is supposedly a military genius, though bloodthirsty, it is to be admitted, he is supposed to know the nuts and bolts of keeping a military running.  He inherited a mess after the last member of the Lyons family (the Elder and his daughter who was a Sentinel and took command after he died) died in combat.  Arthur Maxson would need to successfully reunite the Brotherhood Outcasts with the main contingent, ensure that the recruitment of qualified wastelanders continued, and take over the distribution network of Project Purity that the Brotherhood under Elder Lyons had worked to set up.  After that he would need to firm up some sort of production agreement with The Pitt, build an airship from scratch, find a reactor good enough to power the thing, and then, and only then, create a cache of supplies, consumables, spare parts and such to mount the expedition to the Commonwealth.  He is supposed to KNOW logistics as that is a prime requirement of any high-level military leader and a firm requirement of the BoS.  The way he is portrayed with the expenditure of men and equipment makes him look incompetent in the extreme, and no matter how good his field leadership may be, he would not be qualified to be an Elder of the Brotherhood.

Well that is how it would be in an RPG, at least.  An action-based game requires plenty of action, and even action that makes no sense in any way, shape or form is better than lack of it.  So after the BoS arrive you can see enough vertibird crashes that would represent the entire contingent of vertibirds the BoS showed up with in their opening scene after the close of Act I.  This game mechanic, and it is a game mechanic, is made to give the player a sense of urgency or just lots of firefight opportunities.  Militarily these missions, expending such equipment in no way related to the main and primary mission, nor useful in garnering local supplies or securing local production, makes no sense.

Bethesda Game Studios could have made this an important part of the storyline and game mechanic by having the BoS start to show up in force at places like the Corvega Assembly Plant or Saugus Iron Works, and then bring in NPC staff from The Pitt or elsewhere to start getting these sites up and functioning to create new supplies for the BoS operations, locally.  The BoS would have a different agenda in doing so, and be utilizing the Prydwen not just as a source of getting an initial strike group in place, but then have pre-planned, tactical missions that would then allow for local resources and manufacturing to bolster the long-term aims of the BoS.  Why extort crops from local farmers when there is Graygarden available?  It is fully roboticized and would be a prime place for the BoS to set up a supply base, extending and reinforcing the robots used there by deploying a few of its own.  And with that technology under their belts, putting up a greenhouse at the Boston Airport would be child's play.  Suddenly the entire 'feeding the troops' bit gets removed from the radiant quest 'opportunities' and turned into a solid understanding of what it takes to keep the entire BoS campaign going.  Throw in taking over a local mine and the entire raw materials to refined resources to final product production system is complete and the BoS is then relieved of a lot of supply worries and might even open up a recruiting center in the aircraft graveyard section of the airport.  With precisely 4 missions, all of this would then help to give a background to the BoS, demonstrate competent leadership, and add in story elements of the BoS actually NOT extorting crops from locals and maybe even opening a market for exchange to help the BoS in the stuff they can't easily get or make.

At that point the BoS wouldn't be there just to take out the Institute, but to become a functioning part of the Commonwealth with an entirely new Chapter or perhaps even self-sustaining Division as a result.  Why the PC, if they joined the BoS, could even take part in those exact operations which would range from pure combat missions to diplomacy with robots that have rather advanced AI and personalities.  Perhaps even setting up the robot Supervisor Green with its own trading stand or equivalent to act as a secondary shop for the BoS.  By utilizing the overpass at Graygardens, the BoS could create a new vertibird landing area, rather well protected space for creating living room and quarters for troops, and then an entire ground area inside exterior fortifications for training, R&R, feeding, etc.  A multi-story greenhouse with robots running it, a true outpost with externally protected trading area and a well fortified landing zone above it all with look-down, shoot-down capability.  That would be a major part of an RPG storyline for the BoS, and by the time any showdown with them came, the Prydwen would no longer be the sole point of failure for the mission...which it is as presented.

That is it for the major factions, though probably not the last on the topic.