Doesn't seem to me you guys are saying "if you are going to do it, you should incorporate it in such a way it actually makes sense and adds to the gameplay, and exploration, instead of just being tedious busywork." could you please cite who said that or anything remotely like that? Tuco might be implying it, but that's about it. I wouldn't disagree with that statement, frankly. It should be more meaningful than it was in New Vegas, where it was just an extra feature tacked on to help make the immersion a tiny fraction of a bit more realistic.
What it seems like to me is people thinking having the option to make food and drink the tiniest fraction of a percent meaningful in the game, like you could in New Vegas, is somehow "turning Fallout into yet another survival sim".
The feature was one of the most popular changes from F3 to New Vegas, along with the gun modding (which is in and expanded upon in F4). Certainly it could be expanded upon, foods could also give more buffs and the like, meals could be cooked in the cooking station requiring multiple food types, giving better and more prolific buffs, etc. I would agree with that. But I don't want to see it stripped out completely, because it wasn't tedious in the least, if anything it was barely even noticable.
It was also a feature that you had to CHOOSE to turn on in the first place. So people that didn't like it never had to bother with it. Without it, though, food was basically meaningless in the game.
So when I asked "Has anyone heard if that feature will be in for the new game" and I start getting responses like "But the game is not actually a survival sim. The gameplay doesn't revolve around it in any real way. I mean, maybe someone could mod it to be...
Mobile basecamps. A firepit, tent. water, etc...upgrade to brahmin, attendants, etc..
While YOU can only carry what you can carry. Limits on water, rads determine how far from camp you can travel on any given day."
What I'm seeing a severe overreaction to the actual question asked.