PDA

View Full Version : Fallout 3 details


SUBMAN1
07-08-08, 10:38 AM
This is the next game I'm waiting for.

-S

After long last, here's the 2nd Fan Interview. Along with it, we hope you all enjoy these three exclusive screenshots, that we took just for you. I just want to say again, thanks for being so patient with us on this one, I know it took awhile. And thanks to everyone on these boards for supporting our games for so long.

http://fallout.bethsoft.com/images/art/fallout3screens/fanscreens/megatonbar.jpg

http://fallout.bethsoft.com/images/art/fallout3screens/fanscreens/shotgunexplode.jpg

http://fallout.bethsoft.com/images/art/fallout3screens/fanscreens/pipboyskills.jpg

1) Which of the following, if any, will be featured in Fallout3; Romance, Sex, Homosexuality, Nudity, Prostitution, Slavery, Cannibalism, Children, Child killings, drugs, addictions? And of the things that won't be featured, can you explain why they won't be included in the game?

It touches on most of those. Slavery, children, drugs and addiction more than the others, as those factor for into the setting more. In regards to nudity and child killings, no, it features neither of those, as they don't really add to the flavor of the game (I'll get into children in the next question more). I think if you look at Fallout 1, and the footprint it has with the topics you ask about, Fallout 3 is pretty much the same, in that it features the types of things you mention at about the same rate, no more, no less. Drugs and drug addiction play a larger role perhaps, as it's a key gameplay device. I think the heart of this question is "has the harshness and maturity of the world of Fallout 3 been tempered from the earlier games?" and I can certainly say "No, it hasn't been."


2) Are children and otherwise non essential or non-quest related NPC's vulnerable or invulnerable to accidental or purposeful (deadly) harm? And how about quest essential people? Please elaborate as much as you can, especially on why you choose to do it that way.

You will not be able to be a child killer. There are several reasons for this, some of them are very basic, like we wouldn't be able to sell the game, anywhere to anyone, if the children could be killed. I'm not using that as a scapegoat. We never wanted the game to offer any incentive or desire to be blowing kids away, so from our initial designs, we didn't know how we were going to handle if you shot them, we just knew it was going to be a big no-no, especially with a system like VATS and the graphic fidelity the gore has. Anyway, when attacked, all children flee and any regular NPCs friendly to the children will instantly attack you, so it feels good in the game, in that there is an appropriate response.

In regards to essential NPCs, it works like Oblivion, in that when they "die" they get knocked "unconscious" and get up a little while later. It worked well in Oblivion, so we kept that system, as you can still attack everyone that you want, and get at least a small benefit (being able to avoid them while they are down). I will say that the number of essential characters is minute compared to Oblivion and we've gone to pretty big lengths to cover a lot of people's deaths, but sometimes that's just not possible.


3) Could you outline your thoughts on the matter of ensuring that choices and consequences provided by the various quests within your game are crafted so as to be more nonlinear than simply the superficial choice between "good, bad and neutral"/"affirmative, negative and nothing?" Also, will there be other aspects to choices in Fallout 3? Political? Philosophical? Exactly how far will you go with the player's moral freedom, the "gray" solutions?

That really depends on the quest, so it's hard to say. There are certainly some that are clearly good/bad, like blowing up Megaton. It's clearly bad to nuke an entire town. It's clearly bad to kill innocent people throughout the game, and your karma is affected. It's also clearly good to help people in need, giving to charity, passing out clean water, and more. Those are specific examples in the game. I think many people want to play "good" and want to play "evil". Both are fun in different ways. The gray area comes into several quests, where the situation is just "bad". Some feel like no-win situations and they come across as "make a hard choice." I think that's where it feels best honestly, but we do need to mix it up between that and simpler good/bad.


4) Are most of the non-human entities in the game of hostile intent, or can some be reasoned with, or even recruited as companions under the right circumstances?

Most are hostile, but not all. Yes, some can be reasoned with and even hired.


5). Will crimes committed in one place automatically be known everywhere and by everyone? Or is this limited to the zone the PC committed the deed in?

It's limited to the faction you did the crime to, and we also put towns into their own faction. So a crime committed in one town will not affect another, but crimes committed to a group will be known to that group (say the Brotherhood of Steel) throughout the world.


6) Would you take us through a hypothetical dialog tree that demonstrates the typical choices made available to the player?

I don't have enough space to really do that. They are big. If you look at Fallout 1, it's deeper than that. To give you the scale, we have over 40,000 lines of dialogue, compared to a few thousand in Fallout 1.

Usually we start a conversation with an NPC with some flavor from the player, kind of the "how do you want to act towards this person?" Are you going to be nice, direct, polite, an ass? We cover it all. Some of my favorite player responses are simply "<Say Nothing>", and playing the silent type. But probably my favorite opening is the first time you talk to a Ghoul, one of the choices is "Gah! What the f*#$ are you?"

Depending on the character, there's usually a list of common questions about him or the town/area you are in. If it's quest related, it can get pretty deep with that character, as most have different paths to how you handle them. You can also use your Speech skill to persuade, and sometimes special dialogue options come up based on other stats, whether that is strength when talking to a tough guy, or options that come from perks you may have.


7) What can you tell us about the way Armor works, will it come as a full set or as parts, and how will it influence perception? Will there be a special HUD when wearing it?

It comes as two parts, the body part and the helmet. So you can mix and match. And then you can also put on things like glasses and other items. Different outfits also come with different stat boosts sometimes, and do more than basic "damage resistance". Like mechanic's coveralls that boost your repair skill, that kind of thing. We wanted a reason that you might wear clothes as well as armor. There's a merchant's outfit that ups your Barter skill for instance. When it comes to armor, and in particular power armor, yes it does affect some stats (Power Armor lowers your Agility). There is not a special HUD when wearing Power Armor.


8) How does the inventory system work? Is it slot based? Or a never ending back pocket like with the original games?

It's based on weight. No fiddling with slots. The Pip-Boy separates your items into categories for you – Weapons, Apparel, Aid, Misc, and Ammo. The "Aid" category is for things like meds, chems, food; anything that you can consume to modify stats. It also contains the books, as like Fallout 1, these are read/consumed and raise a skill (permanently). Also, Ammo has zero weight, as we didn't want the player having to micromanage that aspect.


9) Will the PC version of the game include some sort of SDK or level editor like Elder Scrolls games have? If not, might one become available via download in the future? And how about the console versions, what have you done to give them the same options PC players have?

It will definitely not be included on the disk. If and when one is available, it will be a free download. I wish I could promise that an editor will be coming and when, but I can't. Our focus is first and foremost the game, and it's a major undertaking getting an editor ready for release, and making sure the game plays nice with the data users create. That being said, we'd love to see it happen. We're really proud of our tools and what the community has created for Morrowind and Oblivion, it's really awesome stuff. It's one of those things that even if only a thousand people use it, they create enough great stuff that keeps the larger audience interested and going. I always found it a great "pure" RPG experience, creating your own stuff and sharing it, like a good DM. I still have "Stuart Smith's Adventure Construction Set" for the Apple 2 on my shelf. I have no doubt that Fallout would benefit from such a thing as well, so we'll see what happens, it's not something we can just throw out there.

As far as consoles go, that's not happening for this game and user content. It's something we keep talking about with Microsoft and Sony, but there are a lot of barriers there right now, from delivery to security. We'd love to see that happen. I'd love to see Oblivion content created by PC users available to all platforms, because the data is the same, most of them would pretty much "work" right away.


10) How advanced will the AI of NPC's be this time around? Are they really going to have a life? Speaking to other NPC's in a logical manner, traveling and trading with/in faraway places, Submitting to the player rather than fighting if they know, or think, they're no match for him?

I wish I could answer with a number, like "it will be 17 advanced." AI is difficult to define, the NPCs certainly appear much smarter than our previous stuff, by a lot. Much of that is us giving them better data, massaging what they do so the player gets to see more of it. We added a lot of animations, so people in town are doing more. They "seem" to be interacting with the world in a more realistic manner, but that usually means going up to something and playing an animation. It can be something really simple, like we added "lean against wall". It's funny how something that small can give life to a person. They walk into a space, and just lean against the wall, arms folded. Like Oblivion, we use our Radiant AI system, so most of the NPCs eat, sleep, work, etc. I think we take it for granted now, but it's pretty great to have that level of control. We've also done a lot to the conversation system, which makes them seem a lot smarter, but again, that's better data, not a new system.

On the technical side we spent most of our time doing an all new pathfinding system. Morrowind/Oblivion use nodes for pathing and Fallout uses a navmesh. This is the difference between an NPC having a valid point to stand on (node) versus an area to stand in, or walk around (mesh). You can do much more sophisticated actor movement and behavior with a navmesh, and I think you'll see the results onscreen, especially when the bullets start flying. The actors do a great job of finding cover and using the space well, something we could never have done with pathnodes.

In terms of the NPCs traveling around, many travel around town, and some travel the wasteland. There are a few caravans in the game that go from town to town trading. Radiant AI handles something like that really well.

Lastly, as far as submitting to a more powerful foe, yes they do that, in that they run away. If they're overmatched, they holster their weapon, flee and try to hide. While this sounds cool on paper, it's often not fun at all, and we've ended up really dialing that back, because it gets really annoying really fast, to have people run away all the time. The main faction that still acts like this are the Raiders, the others don't do it so much.


11. How common are the 'Dungeon' areas, and do they play a part in the main story, or are they isolated side quests of their own with little bearing on the outside world. And regarding the creatures inside the dungeons, do they re-spawn or can players clear the area permanently?

They are common, and play a part throughout the game, whether that's the main quest, side quests or just exploring. To even get to downtown DC you're going to have to go through some metro tunnels. And then when you are downtown, the whole thing is like one giant "dungeon". Any structure of size, an office building, destroyed factory, school, hospital, you name it – we use all of these as "dungeons".

Most of these do not respawn, once they are cleaned out, they are clean. Some respawn for specific reasons, and some have a limited number of creatures respawn to keep it interesting if it's a huge area that we don't want to feel "dead" later on.


12) From the four archetypes (Charisma Boy, Stealth Boy, Science Boy and Combat Boy) which of these are carried over into Fallout 3 and to what degree will that change the gaming experience? Will it change our starting equipment? Will the rewards and/or results of quests actually differ depending on the way you play through it or the way you play at all?

Actually, we think of it purely in terms of skills. How useful is the particular skill? As much as possible we want the choice for which skills you are going to use to be even, so "Science" is one skill, but there are many combat skills. I can definitely say that what skills you focus on is the largest element in how the game plays for you. Skill choice does not change your starting equipment. And as far as quest rewards, yes, many, but not all, have different rewards for not only the outcome, but how you achieved it.


13) What will the map travel look like? Is it a dotted line that slowly crawls towards the destination on the map, or Oblivion-type fast travel? And will there be random encounters during said map travel?

It works like Oblivion, it's a system we got great feedback on from that game and while we tossed other ideas around, it works best for us. It has a different flavor than Oblivion, in that when the game starts you don't know any locations, so you have to discover everything on foot, by yourself. The world map only acts to get you back to places you have already been.
There are no random encounters while you fast travel, but there are random encounters while you walk around. We actually have a great system for random encounters in this game that we're really proud of.


14) How much diversity will there be in the factions (and structures of factions) found in Fallout 3? And what can you tell us about those factions and inter-faction politics?

They all have it to some level. Some of that is hard to see as a player unless you really look, we only shove it in your face where it makes sense. I think the Brotherhood of Steel is probably the one players will get a feel for the best. See Emil's dev diary for a taste of what the Brotherhood is going through.


15) How will the real-time combat skills work? Will the chance of missing be larger as the skill is lower, or does it affect the amount of damage done? Or will this be featured in weapons swaying and/or recoil compensation?

The skill affects both how well you aim (your hand wobbles on screen), and how much damage you do with a shot. Over the course of the project, we really dialed back the skill wobble, and dialed up the damage effect. It's really not fun to miss all the time, it just made the game feel terrible. You can also "aim", like many shooters. You use the right mouse button, or left trigger on a console, and your character aims at the target. You can't run while you are aiming, but it negates most of the skill wobble. Not all of it, but enough to compensate for a really bad skill. What you find is, as your skill raises, you don't have to rely on aiming as much, so it's a good balance.

Keep in mind the guns have condition too, which affects how much damage they do as well. The gun condition used to also affect rate-of-fire as well as the spread of bullets, but we took those elements out, it was just too much going on, and you usually started the game with a bad skill and a bad gun and it just felt "broken", with bullets shooting off in all kinds of crazy directions. Now the gun condition affects damage and how much the gun jams when you reload it, which ultimately equates to a rate-of-fire, but feels better when playing.


16) What will be the interaction between two aggressive NPC's (or creatures) in regards to each other? On a scenario where a couple of ghouls and some mutants are at a close distance do they fight among each other? Do they ignore you? Do they both attack you? Will they follow you until you reach the next town?

They don't treat the player any different than anything else. In the case you laid out, they fight each other. One may switch to you for any number of reasons, but you aren't deemed "special." As far as enemies following you, yes, they can follow you for a while, but we eventually have them break it off so you don't train legions of mutants back to other areas.


17) How much can you tell us about the stats, skills, traits and perks featured in the game? And what skills/perks were carried over and which were dropped from previous Fallout games? And why choose the ones you did carry over and why did you not choose the ones that were dropped?

Big question, and I can't discuss all the specific stats yet. I do know the skill list is coming out in a few weeks, perhaps by the time you read this. Perks will not be until much later, as we're still doing some final tweaks on them. I think when you see the skill list, the choices will be obvious, and they're the ones most of you would agree with.

Ok, time for some, perhaps, bad news. Traits have been rolled into Perks. That was a hard decision for us, and one that took, literally, years. We kept coming back to it, and re-discussing it, and once we were playing the game, found that the difference between the two systems was so similar that even half the entries in the community "design a perk" contest were actually traits. Take "Bloody Mess" for example, probably the most famous trait. Is the game really more fun if that can only be taken at the very start? Why can't you pick it at level 6? What's so important about having it only at the start? The perk choice is probably one of the most fun parts of the game, and to relegate certain ones to only be chosen when you first start, before you've even played the game and know how any of it feels, just didn't prove as fun to us. How do you know you want Bloody Mess if you haven't seen how bloody the current mess is? (did I just type that?) Anyway, trust me when I say this one was a debate, a long one, and a decision we're not naive enough to think will be understood or applauded by everyone.

Anyway, many traits from Fallout return, but as perks. And many perks return, as perks. Another change over the last year is that you now pick a perk every time you level, and the perks have been balanced accordingly. Like I said before, we found the level-up-pick-a-perk experience to be so enjoyable, it was actually confusing people why they couldn't do it every level. Perks also still have prerequisites for certain stats, including your level. New perks open up at even levels, so while you still get to pick a perk at the odd levels, you won't see any new ones based on your level, but may see a new one based on say, your Science skill.

The good news is that there are a ton of perks, around 100 if you include the multiple ranks. And with a level cap of 20, you still have only 19 times you get to pick one, so you need at least 5 playthroughs of the game to use them all. It was important to us with all of this, that the choices were hard for the player, no matter what the skills/traits/perks were, and that you couldn't see it all the first time through.


18) How far will physical character creation be able to go? That is can we go so far as to add scars and tattoo's in player selected places? Can we decide the body type, facial appearance etc? And will stat changes or fights or anything else later in the game change that appearance?

You get to create your face, but not your body style. You choose your race (Caucasian, African American, Hispanic, or Asian) and sex (Male or Female). You can manipulate your face any way you want, shaping it to your liking. We also have a number of "preset" faces, so you can start with a decent looking face. You can also pick your hair style and color. There are not scars or tattoos you can pick. But, there are beards. And not just any beards. We have them all. We have the most ridiculous list of beards in any game, ever. One of our artists went crazy with beards and didn't stop. We've joked about making a prerelease video of "the beards of Fallout 3". Anyway, they look great. Lots of cool hairstyles as well, from 50s style normal, to half shaved wasteland Mohawks. There are also some ways to "get a haircut" and change your hairstyle later in the game.


19) Will the PC be able to crouch, kneel, lie down, and climb? And what are the benefits to that overall and in a combat situation?

You can crouch, this is good for taking cover and also acts as "sneaking". When you do so, you get an indication of how well hidden you are as well. You cannot kneel, lie down, or climb.


20) What sort of weather effects will we be seeing and will it effect the game play in some manner (e.g. change the landscape, people get off the street to take cover etc.) or is it more or less just 'eye candy?

Other than different cloud types that come and go, there are no other weather effects. We toyed with rain and windstorms but decided not to do them.


21) What can you tell us about companion NPC's? About their limits, their abilities, how everything works exactly.

There are a very limited number of them and they are hard to get. Not only do you have to find them, your often need significant money, and you also need to have the correct karma for many of them. Some won't come with you if you don't "match" with them.

They are pretty special though, they have great personalities and we've found them great fun to play with. You can also give them stuff, that they will use, so it's fun to give them weapons and armor you aren't using and watch them play dress up and use other weapons. But we're careful not to overpower them, so for them to survive, you need to manage them a bit. You'll want to give them stimpaks to heal, and better weapons, etc.

You can only have one follower at a time, you have to "fire" the one you have to get a new one. Except Dogmeat, he's special, you can always have him with someone else. Lastly you can also give them some basic commands, like how they should fight, whether to wait for you, or to go someplace else.


22) How much will the main storyline tie into the storylines of the previous games? And how have you worked towards making it both accessible to new players and recognizable for veteran players? And do you think it will feel more like a reboot of the series or a continuation from the previous games?

It has the themes of the previous games, but is not a continuation of that specific story and those locations. Events from the previous games are referenced, sometimes subtly, sometimes very specifically, but if you never played the first two, you wouldn't even know, it just feels like good history you'd see in any "first" game, for how the world is the way it is. If you're a fan, I think you'll get it all. At the same time, I've never really viewed Fallout 2 as a direct continuation, since it's not a "here's what the hero did next" sequel, it has a decent sized distance from the first. I think if you look at our Elder Scrolls stuff, and how we keep the timeline and overall world moving forward, but each game is its own thing, that's how we approach this.


23) One of the previews mentioned perception effects when you see enemies on your radar. How does the player's Perception affect the radar's maximum number of targets? Should we think of something along the lines of Counter Strike, or a quest compass like Oblivion had? And if it's the latter, are we able to toggle it?

It's most like the Oblivion compass, and "ticks" appear on it when you "perceive" other NPCs or creatures. If the creature/NPC is hostile, the tick will appear red. If not, it appears green. No, you cannot toggle it off unless you toggle off the entire HUD, which you can do.


24) Will it be possible to finish the game using no weapons but only hand to hand combat? And when you level that skill up, do you just do more damage with the attacks you already have or do you learn different and more moves?

Playing the whole game with only hand-to-hand wasn't a goal of ours. I'm 99% sure you can, but it will be hard. As your Unarmed skill number goes up, you do more damage. There are also weapons you can get to use with this skill, like brass-knuckles. Lastly, there are some perks that give you special things like new moves.


25) How much of a role does morale or fear play for an enemy? And how much difference is there in intelligence and combat tactics found in different enemies?

Like I mentioned before, they have a "confidence" setting that determines when and if they will flee, but we've dialed it down a lot. NPCs, for the most part, are much smarter than creatures, but mostly because they simply can do more. They can use any number of weapons, take cover, and use chems. They'll even pickup weapons lying around. Super Mutants can do the same. You think you've played it great when you take out the arm of one Super Mutant and he drops his mini-gun, only to see another one pick it up and use it on you. We've really tweaked how they play depending on their equipment and the area they are in, and I'm really happy with how that part turned out. I think that ends up being the pure "meat" of the game – exploring a space and using your skills and equipment to deal with the enemies there.http://www.bethsoft.com/bgsforums/index.php?showtopic=856489

Raptor1
07-08-08, 11:11 AM
I...WANT...NOWZ... *grabs Fallout 2 and plays through it again*

Dowly
07-08-08, 11:24 AM
Holy poo! :o

GlobalExplorer
07-08-08, 11:42 AM
Meh

KeptinCranky
07-08-08, 12:22 PM
Oh yes, I will definitely be playing that...:cool:

CaptHawkeye
07-08-08, 04:09 PM
As long as Bethesda stays away from some of Oblivion's gameplay stupids (cardboard NPS, AWFUL leveling/balancing) it will be awesome.

Wolfehunter
07-08-08, 09:29 PM
Bethesda isn't getting a cent from me. I don't like what they did to fallout Series. I will not support they're goals.

GlobalExplorer
07-08-08, 10:12 PM
Bethesda isn't getting a cent from me. I don't like what they did to fallout Series. I will not support they're goals.

+1 for up your **** Bethesda

d@rk51d3
07-08-08, 11:14 PM
Already has been refused classification in Australia because of morpheine use.:roll:

CaptHawkeye
07-09-08, 07:25 AM
I don't get it, people don't like what Bethesda "did" to Fallout? Like transition it to first person and 3D enviornments? That's really so horrible?

Dowly
07-09-08, 09:31 AM
Bah, Bethesda pwnz j00 4ll!!!11

GlobalExplorer
07-09-08, 10:06 AM
I don't get it, people don't like what Bethesda "did" to Fallout? Like transition it to first person and 3D enviornments? That's really so horrible?
In my case it's because lately, Bethesdas games . I don't have a review about Fallout 3 yet, this one's about Oblivion: http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=129

And this whole "we-must-give-stellar-reviews-because-everyone-else-did" thing.

Syxx_Killer
07-09-08, 10:24 AM
I've never followed the Fallout series. I don't really know what they are about. After a few minutes looking up some info, I think I might be interested in it! A future apocalyptic RPG sounds kind of cool. In the shot above, is that suppose to be a zombie shopkeep? That's kind of funny! :lol:

Raptor1
07-09-08, 10:55 AM
Fallout is quite possibly the first (or second) computer game I have ever played (Along with Transport Tycoon)

Don't know why, or how, for that matter...

GlobalExplorer
07-09-08, 10:58 AM
I've never followed the Fallout series. I don't really know what they are about. After a few minutes looking up some info, I think I might be interested in it! A future apocalyptic RPG sounds kind of cool. In the shot above, is that suppose to be a zombie shopkeep? That's kind of funny! :lol:

The two Fallout RPG, especially Fallout 1, excelled in a multitude of ways ( role playing , relevance of stats, choice and consequence, storytelling, (turn based) combat , humour ) and are considered by many to be the pinnacle of CRPG's.

Fallout 3 is a "next-gen" rehash by a company that will makes sure it's oblivion with guns, can be appreciated by console gamers, and it will be a major success!!

I can already see the reviews!! Omg RPG of the millennium, even better than Oblivion!!!

CaptHawkeye
07-09-08, 11:57 AM
I don't get it, people don't like what Bethesda "did" to Fallout? Like transition it to first person and 3D enviornments? That's really so horrible?
In my case it's because lately, Bethesdas games . I don't have a review about Fallout 3 yet, this one's about Oblivion: http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=129 (http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=129)


That stance is perfectly reasonable. My issue is with people like the hardcore NMA guys who are basically angry it isn't going to be EXACTLY like Fallout 1. I hate them so much. They've got lots of arguments but they all usually boil down to "it isn't fallout 1" and that's just stupid.

SUBMAN1
07-09-08, 12:51 PM
I think they are complaining about Fallout Tactics. I have it, but never played it. Fallout Tactics took a lot of what made Fallout and Fallout 2 great. It even went against the original story line, but this was in effort to make it multiplayer.

But wasn't that Interplay back then? Now you have Bethesda on the project. I really have a hard time beleiving that Bethesda is gonna screw this one up! I'm thinking this will be the Game Of The Year for 2009 and I'm probably right!

I'm personally looking forward to it.

-S

PS. And i just want to point out, I look forward to very few games these days (when I used to look forward to many titles in a given year). Most stuff is a rehash now days - like GTA. This looks like something new and fresh! I see an excuse to upgrade my video card already!

Syxx_Killer
07-09-08, 02:34 PM
I was reading on the Fallout 3 forum that if you can run Oblivion you should be able to run Fallout 3. I can run Oblivion pretty well for my computer and if that's the case I might just have to get this game. :cool: There was only one game I was looking forward to: C&C Red Alert 3. Now I got Fallout 3. :D

Raptor1
07-09-08, 02:49 PM
I was reading on the Fallout 3 forum that if you can run Oblivion you should be able to run Fallout 3. I can run Oblivion pretty well for my computer and if that's the case I might just have to get this game. :cool: There was only one game I was looking forward to: C&C Red Alert 3. Now I got Fallout 3. :D
Fallout 3 is one of the 5 games I'm most looking forward to this year:

1. Empire: Total War
2. Spore
3. Fallout 3
4. Can't remember...
5. Can't remember...

Captain Vlad
07-09-08, 06:56 PM
I'm pretty excited about it. It seems like they're paying attention to what really made Fallout the game it was. Whether they'll be able to pull off another masterpiece...well, who can say?

I'm honestly getting tired of the 'but it's first person' crap. Wasteland was Fallout's inspiration...and Fallout ended up a better game despite not being in 16-colors with text-only combat.

CaptHawkeye
07-09-08, 07:40 PM
Let's be honest Vlad, the fanboys won't be pleased until we're all playing Fallout 1 with remastered sound effects and blood sprites.

Syxx_Killer
07-09-08, 08:31 PM
I wouldn't have liked the original Fallout games because, personally, I can't stand turn-based combat. It worked good for old 2D systems like NES (Dragon Warrior rocks! :rock:) and SNES, but it just looks goofy in 3D games. That is the main reason I never got into games like Final Fantasy. When people talk about the "old Fallout" games, how old are we talking? How long has the Fallout series been around? Either way, I still say an apocalyptic free-roam RPG sounds great. :yep:

CaptHawkeye
07-09-08, 09:26 PM
Turn based combat was fine....for the 80s. Why it still has so many fans to this day is beyond me.

Blacklight
07-09-08, 10:04 PM
If you're interested, the guys who made Fallout put out a freebie miniatures wargame a long while back based on Fallout called Fallout Warfare. They now have it up as a free download. It includes the rules, printable miniatures, and even printable, foldable vehicles. It's not a bad game actually. It's hit the table a few times over here.

You can get everything for the game here:
http://fallout-rpg.narod.ru/Warfare.html

Captain Vlad
07-09-08, 10:18 PM
I have to admit I, personally, wouldn't be too unhappy with Fallout 1 with new blood sprites and sounds. But I won't turn down spiffy graphics and a first person interface either.

Turn based is a different experience than real-time, and while to some people it feels slow, I enjoy many turn based games. Sure, the high-speed 'ohmigod' aspect isn't there, but sometimes a slow pace is just as enjoyable as a frantic one.

At least according to my fiancee.:|\\

My big problem is shooting down something you haven't experienced yet.

Wolfehunter
07-09-08, 11:41 PM
I wouldn't have liked the original Fallout games because, personally, I can't stand turn-based combat. It worked good for old 2D systems like NES (Dragon Warrior rocks! :rock:) and SNES, but it just looks goofy in 3D games. That is the main reason I never got into games like Final Fantasy. When people talk about the "old Fallout" games, how old are we talking? How long has the Fallout series been around? Either way, I still say an apocalyptic free-roam RPG sounds great. :yep:

Bethesda could have improved the game engine and used new effect features that todays PCs could have handled like Diablo 3. But they didn't.

They choose the easier the quicker and simpler way. The engine they're people already know how and built. Oblivion game... I have Morrowind and Oblivion. I've played Daggerfall. Oblivion has amazing graphic and amazing sound effects. I'm sure its sequel Oblivion with guns aka Fallout 3 will be even better. BUT its not a sequel to Fallout series. There is no relationship between the two. They destroyed it for there new image of FO world. Anyhow after you get over the special effects from Oblivion its a boring game.

They took out all the best features out that made Fallout fallout. They made it for mainly console world. PC now is being pushed aside for a larger market. Its about money. They're using the name to make money.

Yes I know all companies are in it for money... But Bethesda is greedy. They don't care about there fans.... If you know and have been with them for years you would understand what I'm saying.

Also its the tactics Bethesda does against anyone who discredits there product. There are plenty of forums and post explaining this.

Thats why I will not spend a cent. Its about principles.

Problem is most of the people don't care or just want there next game fix. Even if the game is pathetic or broken.

All I asked them to change there name from Fallout 3 to Fallout ______ whatever. Its not a sequel but it has some elements of Fallout world that is the truth.

Captain Vlad
07-10-08, 12:00 AM
They took out all the best features out that made Fallout fallout.
Really? Did they take out:

A: Post apocalyptic setting?
B: Grim storytelling?
C: Consequences for actions including unforseen ones?
D: The trappings of the Fallout world (Super Mutants, Ghouls, BoS)?
E: Etc.

The answer on some of these is already 'no'. The answer on others...and just as importantly whether they were skillfully executed...won't be known until the full game is seen by the public.

You can growse about the move to FPS and how combat works all day; That is not what made Fallout the game it was, and it's not what'll make or break Fallout 3. The crap you're talking about is just window dressing which, unless there's something just plain wrong with how the system works, will not matter a whit when it comes to making 3 a true 'Fallout' game.

CaptHawkeye
07-10-08, 07:00 AM
They took out all the best features out that made Fallout fallout.

Like what? I hear this claim from every one of the NMA trolls i've ever come by and it always comes down to "I don't like anything not Fallout 1."

Yes I know all companies are in it for money... But Bethesda is greedy.

Black Isle Studio amd Interplay were companies too, albeit companies too stupid to keep their asses out of debt, but you're kidding yourself if you think their goal wasn't the money in your pocket.


They don't care about there fans.... If you know and have been with them for years you would understand what I'm saying.

You know, Bethesda is the very reason that Fallout even exists to this day. You'd figure the fans would be thanking Beth from saving their series from franchise death. But no, the evil Badthesda isn't orthodox enough for the Church of the Fallout Fans.


Thats why I will not spend a cent. Its about principles.

I'm sure your quality as a human being will come under question for giving into Bethesda's will and buying Fallout 3.

Problem is most of the people don't care or just want there next game fix. Even if the game is pathetic or broken.

98% of the time i'd agree with you on this. You know what the problem is this time? The game isn't out yet.


All I asked them to change there name from Fallout 3 to Fallout ______ whatever. Its not a sequel but it has some elements of Fallout world that is the truth. 07-09-2008 11:18 PM

Who cares?

GlobalExplorer
07-10-08, 08:10 AM
Wolfehunter seems to be the only 1 here who understands the difference between Fallout 1-2 and Oblivion :up:

Are you aware of Age of Decadence, in development at http://www.irontowerstudio.com ? Ok it takes places in the roman empire but gameplay-wise it follows the spirit of fallout rpgs (post-apocalyptic, turn based, action points etc). This project is no vaporware and should be out in 1-2 years :)

Captain Vlad
07-10-08, 09:18 AM
You can growse about the move to FPS and how combat works all day; That is not what made Fallout the game it was, and it's not what'll make or break Fallout 3.

I really hate quoting myself, Global Explorer...but...when the message is obviously not getting through...

Isometric view and action points does not a Fallout make.

GlobalExplorer
07-10-08, 11:15 AM
Isometric view and action points does not a Fallout make.

That's entirely your opinion. Bethesda own the license, that's all.

Captain Vlad
07-10-08, 11:52 AM
Isometric view and action points does not a Fallout make.
That's entirely your opinion. Bethesda own the license, that's all.

Here's more of my opinion: It's better to have a dev team that'll take some risks with an interface change than to have a bunch of people aping what came before.

If they think the important things about making a new Fallout game are best served by making the game first person, then that's what they should do.

Wolfehunter
07-10-08, 12:53 PM
You all are also forgetting what Bethesda did to Startrek Legacy....

For Vlad,

A: Post apocalyptic setting?
Bastardization of Fallout Series original self.
B: Grim storytelling?
I'm sure is just as exciting as Oblivion was right? Very spooky..:rotfl: Also it has no relations to the original story line from FO and FO2.
C: Consequences for actions including unforseen ones?
No, You can kill children and more, You can kill all NPCs and reap the consequence. There are too many controls in place that has made FO3 a fraction of the fun FO and FO2 was all about.
D: The trappings of the Fallout world (Super Mutants, Ghouls, BoS)?
Really did you hear about the Feral Ghouls that can shoot nuke blasts from there @$$? :hmm: Ok its exagerated but hey.:nope:
E: Etc.
You have no idea what bethesda has done in the years. I will not waste my hard earned money on there crap.


For CaptHawkeye,

Black Isle Studio amd Interplay were companies too, albeit companies too stupid to keep their asses out of debt, but you're kidding yourself if you think their goal wasn't the money in your pocket.

I don't know what happened to them and why they screwed up? Where you there? I agree someone should have kick them in the jewels so they would wake up. But they screwed up? I wasn't there I don't know why?

You know, Bethesda is the very reason that Fallout even exists to this day. You'd figure the fans would be thanking Beth from saving their series from franchise death. But no, the evil Badthesda isn't orthodox enough for the Church of the Fallout Fans

Bethesda could have done it different or just renamed to Fallout ____ something. It would have still sold fine. And the fans would support it mostly. Lol badthesda isn't evil just greedy. They're is more to the story than just FO3. Do your research if you care. If you don't move on.

I'm sure your quality as a human being will come under question for giving into Bethesda's will and buying Fallout 3.
Lol :rotfl: Never. I'm in control. Anyhow I never buy a game when it comes out. I download it first before I buy it. But FO3 totally disgusts me from Beth. It will never be installed in my systems as long as I live. Someone has to set a precedence.

98% of the time i'd agree with you on this. You know what the problem is this time? The game isn't out yet.
I can't wait to see all the suckers spend there cash on a faulty boring game created by the master of Oblivion...:yep:

I don't have a problem with the new game Bethesda is creating. I have a problem with the name which has no relationship to FALLOUT 1 & 2 as a SEQUEL nothing more.

You guys can suger coat it any which way you want. But my fight is with bethesda to help those possible gamers who do care about Product values can make a better choice. This way gamers don't waste there hard earned cash.

Wolfehunter
07-10-08, 12:58 PM
Isometric view and action points does not a Fallout make.
That's entirely your opinion. Bethesda own the license, that's all.

Here's more of my opinion: It's better to have a dev team that'll take some risks with an interface change than to have a bunch of people aping what came before.

If they think the important things about making a new Fallout game are best served by making the game first person, then that's what they should do.I rather see a great game die and become a classic than be raped by greed to make a quick profit rather than a quality product.

CaptHawkeye
07-10-08, 01:36 PM
[color=yellow][color=white]You all are also forgetting what Bethesda did to Startrek Legacy...
Could you possibly make a more vague statement?

Bethesda could have done it different or just renamed to Fallout ____ something. It would have still sold fine. And the fans would support it mostly.
Translation: It's not a proper Fallout sequel because we say so.

Lol badthesda isn't evil just greedy. They're is more to the story than just FO3. Do your research if you care. If you don't move on.
Get this through your head. Black Isle isn't coming back. Your so called proper sequel will never happen. Go outside and see the sun and leave your masturbation fantasies in your wet dreams.


Lol Never. I'm in control. Anyhow I never buy a game when it comes out. I download it first before I buy it. But FO3 totally disgusts me from Beth. It will never be installed in my systems as long as I live. Someone has to set a precedence.
And i'm sure someone will care about this silent protest from a niche group of ancient fanboys. Whoops, no they won't.

I can't wait to see all the suckers spend there cash on a faulty boring game created by the master of Oblivion...
More "it's not Fallout 1 so it's a bad game" nonsense. Be honest, you don't care that Bethesda is developing it, you care that anyone NOT Black Isle is making it. No one other than they can touch the Fallout name. It's like...sacred....or something.

I don't have a problem with the new game Bethesda is creating. I have a problem with the name which has no relationship to FALLOUT 1 & 2 as a SEQUEL nothing more.
And guess what? No one cares what your "definition" of a sequel is. So quit whining.

You guys can suger coat it any which way you want. But my fight is with bethesda to help those possible gamers who do care about Product values can make a better choice. This way gamers don't waste there hard earned cash.
Fight? Oh my yes, your valiant crusade....begins! I think. You'll need a ship and a peg leg though.

The second people start talking about what a "true" sequel is rational conversation has ceased. I'm going to say something here that the Rabid Church of the Fallout Jihadists simply cannot comprehend. Fallout is a PRODUCT, a BRAND. If direct sequels had to live up to "legacy" and what not, Doom 3 would have been a 2D sprite based shooter.

It's not like there's any way we could ever know what Fallout was. We aren't "orthodox" enough for them. You see, it's not just a product, or a box with 'coming soon' written on it! It's a philosophy, a way of life, a cripplingly limited outlook on game development.

So let me reiterate, 1998 was ten years ago.

ReallyDedPoet
07-10-08, 01:41 PM
Ok lads, lets play nice here please. As we all like to say here, at the end of the day this is just a game we are talking about, no need to get to bent out of
shape about it. Let's keep the posts above bar OK.

Thanks :D


RDP

CaptHawkeye
07-10-08, 01:42 PM
I rather see a great game die and become a classic than be raped by greed to make a quick profit rather than a quality product.

Yeah, nevermind that Fallout 3 is already looking a lot better than plenty of the other stuff that's hit Fallout before. Like the insulting Fallout Tactics. Bethesda even decided to help out the hardcore wankers by wiping FT out of the canon. But nah, no one remember Bethesda actually showing RESPECT for the name.

CaptHawkeye
07-10-08, 01:45 PM
Ok lads, lets play nice here please. As we all like to say here, at the end of the day this is just a game we are talking about, no need to get to bent out of
shape about it. Let's keep the posts above bar OK.

Thanks :D


RDP

But don't you see poet? Fallout *isn't* just a game man! It's a PROPHECY. And as long as anyone who isn't Black Isle is making a game with just the mere name "Fallout", it shalt endure the whines of a thousand geeks for all eternity!

ReallyDedPoet
07-10-08, 01:50 PM
Anyhoo.... let's move on shall we :yep:


RDP

GlobalExplorer
07-10-08, 02:23 PM
Sorry didn't want to insult anyone. But it's a clash of philosophies. I have no problem with people bying these games which are basically fps with rpg flavor. I know what made the original fallouts so special so you can call me a fanatic if you want. It just shows you don't care for the intentions of the original developers. What is depressing is that companies and media that have no respect for RPGs, consider console adaptations as RPGs and hail them like the second coming of christ. The RPG genre has already died some years ago, when the last companies with inspiration dissappeared (Origin, Looking Glass, BlackIsle, Troika) and everyone else replaced storytelling for graphx.

Besides I don't see why such a thread should turn into everyone raving about every new game. Isn't it enough that the media has stopped cultivating subjective taste?

I have no problem with rps that dont slavishly follow tradition. It's just these new games are rubbish compared with the imaginative storytelling and gameplay of Fallout, JA2 etc. Thats why I posted the link to irontowerstudios. After all the vision is maybe not so dead as it seems, just dont expect anything from the $ companies. I dont play games to support capitalism, I want to be inspired and entertained by the work of artists.

Captain Vlad
07-10-08, 03:02 PM
But it's a clash of philosophies. I have no problem with people bying these games which are basically fps with rpg flavor.
You can have two games with the exact same interface style and still have two completely different kinds of games. Look at the original Fallout; combat is handled similarly to another classic game, X-COM, and yet you'd never really mistake X-COM for an RPG or Fallout for a strategic management/tactical shooter. They used a similar setup to accomplish dissimilar ends.

It's the same with modern RPGs. Right now, the first-person view is the overriding trend, and there are good reasons for that. There are, after all, few better ways to put you in the game, and thus, one step closer to that magical 'total immersion' ideal.

You seem to prefer more old-school RPG trappings, and while there are some utterly awesome games that use the Fallout-style interface, the lack of that kind of interface doesn't disqualify them from being called an 'RPG', especially when the choice of viewpoint might very well be to put you more 'in the role'.

I know what made the original fallouts so special so you can call me a fanatic if you want.
So what made Fallout special to you? You haven't yet elaborated on that.

The RPG genre has already died some years ago, when the last companies with inspiration dissappeared (Origin, Looking Glass, BlackIsle, Troika) and everyone else replaced storytelling for graphx.
Mass Effect has no storytelling involved? That's one of the most compelling games I've played in years, and I doubt the objectivity of anyone who doesn't see a great deal of depth to the story, the world, the characters, even if they don't like the game.

The same can be said about earlier Bioware games. Jade Empire had it's flaws, but you can't call it bad storytelling. KoTOR was better than any of the newer Star Wars movies.

Thats why I posted the link to irontowerstudios. After all the vision is maybe not so dead as it seems.
That game does look interesting. I'd play it. But if it's a good game, I'd stake a decent amount of $$$ on the idea that, assuming decent execution, it'd be just as 'artistically satisfying' if it used a first-person view.

GlobalExplorer
07-10-08, 03:40 PM
You can have two games with the exact same interface style and still have two completely different kinds of games. Look at the original Fallout; combat is handled similarly to another classic game, X-COM, and yet you'd never really mistake X-COM for an RPG or Fallout for a strategic management/tactical shooter. They used a similar setup to accomplish dissimilar ends.

I think it's a bit cheap to call a game RPG just because it has stats or has medieval / magic elements in it. And that's the trend. People are about to forget what RPG means after all.

You seem to prefer more old-school RPG trappings, and while there are some utterly awesome games that use the Fallout-style interface, the lack of that kind of interface doesn't disqualify them from being called an 'RPG', especially when the choice of viewpoint might very well be to put you more 'in the role'.

Maybe my problem with is that the "next gen" rpgs have a lot of cliche and hardly any roleplaying. Or do you consider Oblivion rpg system / storywriting felicitous in any respect?

Besides I did enjoy Morrowind in spite of it's shortcomings. Compared with MW it was the console UI in Oblivion that pissed me off more than anything else.

I know what made the original fallouts so special so you can call me a fanatic if you want.
So what made Fallout special to you? You haven't yet elaborated on that.

No, I have ;)

Let me just reiterate that the character system and turn based combat in fallout was simply amazing. It was one of those game where it suddenly made click - hey that is brilliant - ! And besides, the storywriters were extremely gifted, something that I would never say about the dudes at bethesda.

Thats why I posted the link to irontowerstudios. After all the vision is maybe not so dead as it seems.
That game does look interesting. I'd play it. But if it's a good game, I'd stake a decent amount of $$$ on the idea that, assuming decent execution, it'd be just as 'artistically satisfying' if it used a first-person view.

Agreed. There have been great 1st person rpgs far back as I can remember (Ultima Underworld). And except combat Fallout was real time btw.

GlobalExplorer
07-10-08, 04:00 PM
http://www.vintagecomputing.com/wp-content/images/recycled_ideas/uu_view_large.jpg

Ah the memories. It just occured to me that it had already a better interface than Oblivion (you could drag items fine and not move up and down in a listbox). So much for 15 years of progress.

GlobalExplorer
07-10-08, 04:04 PM
Some more comparison shots, then and now ..
http://www.blitzgeschwader.de/upload/fallout-pics.jpg
http://www.tomsgames.com/us/picturegalleries/20070716/fallout4_900.jpg


http://ve3dmedia.ign.com/ve3d/image/article/800/800884/fallout-3-facts-that-could-save-your-life-20070701023902318.jpg

Wolfehunter
07-10-08, 08:17 PM
Lol badthesda isn't evil just greedy. They're is more to the story than just FO3. Do your research if you care. If you don't move on.
Get this through your head. Black Isle isn't coming back. Your so called proper sequel will never happen. Go outside and see the sun and leave your masturbation fantasies in your wet dreams.
HAAHAHAAAHA:rotfl: Good one Hawkeye your a funny guy. I have a wife who handles the equipment. lol...

I know Black Isles & Interplay is dead.. So is Fallout a great classic game. Anyhow I'll move on to a more enjoyable game when I find one worth my time and money. Problem is fewer games today meet my standards of quality entertainment in my book. I'll stick to my leisure suit larry, Ultima, Space Quest, Original Fallouts and all the best classic games including Silent hunter III hehehe. I'm not too concerned about the best graphics or sound effects its only a bonus. I like quality. Something like this comes to mind. http://www.gog.com/en/intro

Happy hunting all:up:

Captain Vlad
07-10-08, 08:19 PM
I think it's a bit cheap to call a game RPG just because it has stats or has medieval / magic elements in it. And that's the trend. People are about to forget what RPG means after all.

To me, it means a game where the emphasis is on playing a role. You get to make the decisions, you get to determine how you react to this, that and the other and experience the consequences those decisions entail. While all games do this to a degree, that whole 'being in the world' aspect is the prime part of an RPG.

Compare to most action games, where if there's any character development at all, it's done in mostly uncontrollable cutscenes.

Therefore, if that's where the emphasis lies, 'RPG' is a fair thing to call it. Oblivion qualifies, even if you're not happy with the execution thereof.

Maybe my problem with is that the "next gen" rpgs have a lot of cliche and hardly any roleplaying. Or do you consider Oblivion rpg system / storywriting felicitous in any respect?

Oblivion could've had a better story. It could've had better mechanics. But there were some very good things about that game. I enjoyed it very much.

Was it on the par with Mass Effect or VtM: Bloodlines? Nope. Was it a Role-playing game? Unquestionably.

Let me just reiterate that the character system and turn based combat in fallout was simply amazing. It was one of those game where it suddenly made click - hey that is brilliant - !

The character system was very well executed. So was the combat. It just...I dunno. Seems to me that playing Fallout and finding that to be your favorite aspect is a little odd. The mechanics are there to let you interact with the game's world, but shouldn't the world itself, the character you're playing, be more compelling than the nuts and bolts?

And besides, the storywriters were extremely gifted, something that I would never say about the dudes at bethesda.

We won't really know how the Fallout 3 dev team does with this aspect till the game is out.

Agreed. There have been great 1st person rpgs far back as I can remember (Ultima Underworld). And except combat Fallout was real time btw.

I've never actually seen a computer RPG where EVERYTHING was turn based. That'd get old quick.:D

Technically speaking, wasn't Bard's Tale 'first person'?

GlobalExplorer
07-11-08, 03:28 AM
To me, it means a game where the emphasis is on playing a role. .. Therefore, if that's where the emphasis lies, 'RPG' is a fair thing to call it. Oblivion qualifies, even if you're not happy with the execution thereof.

But the core of the issue is: if you left out the rpg mechanics out of oblivion, wouldn't it be basically still the same game? Or that people play these "RPGs" without the R actually meaning anything?

Stalker SOC is a story fps without rpg mechanics, does anyone call it an rpg just for the fact that it has dialogs and an inventory?

You must be a bit careful with your definition because in almost any game you play a role (e.g. Super Mario). I think the term RPG was born in the 80s with games like Alter Ego, in which you had to play along the strengths and weaknesses of your character, the new idea behind was some sort of "character sim".

Was it on the par with Mass Effect or VtM: Bloodlines? Nope. Was it a Role-playing game? Unquestionably.

Bloodlines, though the role playing aspect was not very deep, story and voiceacting were superb. It should have been Berthesda that went out of business, and not Troika .. I actually intend to replay it one day, once my memories of the quests have somewhat faded.

We won't really know how the Fallout 3 dev team does with this aspect till the game is out.

C'mon we know that it will be like Oblivion. Just look at the damn screenshots.

Technically speaking, wasn't Bard's Tale 'first person'?

Strange, I was thinking exactly the same thing. Bards Tale III was my first rpg, around 1988. Though I didnt play through it, I understood very little English at the time. But combat was also turn based.

Raptor1
07-11-08, 03:48 AM
This is going absolutely nowhere

You cannot judge Fallout 3 until it comes out, if you don't want to buy it even if it does come out good in the end it's entirely your loss

GlobalExplorer
07-11-08, 05:00 AM
This is going absolutely nowhere

You cannot judge Fallout 3 until it comes out, if you don't want to buy it even if it does come out good in the end it's entirely your loss

Yes, I can.

Captain Vlad
07-11-08, 08:52 AM
But the core of the issue is: if you left out the rpg mechanics out of oblivion, wouldn't it be basically still the same game?
Actually, no, it wouldn't be the same game, as you'd have no choice on what skills to emphasize and how to approach problems.

You must be a bit careful with your definition because in almost any game you play a role (e.g. Super Mario).
Actually, in most games you control a predefined character who's development you have little control over. Lara Croft, Sold Snake, etc. One of the charms of RPGs is that you can create your protagonist from whole cloth (though with some games there is a compromise between the approaches, usually due to voice acting dialogue requirements). The emphasis in Tomb Raider is not playing Lara, but rather getting her through the next trap so you can see what happens next.

I think the term RPG was born in the 80s with games like Alter Ego, in which you had to play along the strengths and weaknesses of your character, the new idea behind was some sort of "character sim".
It was born a long time before that.;)

Bloodlines, though the role playing aspect was not very deep, story and voiceacting were superb. It should have been Berthesda that went out of business, and not Troika .. I actually intend to replay it one day, once my memories of the quests have somewhat faded.
Having a blast with it. Almost to the end, but it seems I've been distracted by Mass Effect on one hand and Race 07 on the other. I WILL get around Monza in 2 minutes flat.:damn:


C'mon we know that it will be like Oblivion. Just look at the damn screenshots.
Interface wise? Certainly. Bethesda will be using what is, to them, a tried and true system. Whether the other, more important, aspects of the game will be like Oblivion remains to be seen.

Strange, I was thinking exactly the same thing. Bards Tale III was my first rpg, around 1988. Though I didnt play through it, I understood very little English at the time. But combat was also turn based.
Ever get around to playing the original Fallout? IE: Wasteland?:D

GlobalExplorer
07-12-08, 05:53 AM
Ever get around to playing the original Fallout? IE: Wasteland?:D

No. But I know it, and I would call myself lucky if I had played it then.

After we both have exchanged our arguments, I simply cannot understand how someone who raises such good points as Captain Vlad feels comfortable when companies like Bethesda control the rpg market. Where are these fine RPGs that we both used to play? Today I see nothing but bloom and oversized shoulder pads and OMG it's Patrick Steward.

kiwi_2005
07-12-08, 07:07 AM
Already has been refused classification in Australia because of morpheine use.:roll:
Yea i heard FO3 will be banned in Aussie:hmm: Hope NZ doesn't follow suite we will end up ordering the game online and the pirates will have a field day with their versions.

d@rk51d3
07-12-08, 07:17 PM
Already has been refused classification in Australia because of morpheine use.:roll:
Yea i heard FO3 will be banned in Aussie:hmm: Hope NZ doesn't follow suite we will end up ordering the game online and the pirates will have a field day with their versions.

Yeah, thank goodness for imports. :D

Captain Vlad
07-12-08, 11:35 PM
No. But I know it, and I would call myself lucky if I had played it then.

It's 'findable' online if you know where to look. It was one of the earliest PC games I played, and I still remember parts of it the way you remember key portions of a favorite movie or novel. Recommended, despite it's age.

After we both have exchanged our arguments, I simply cannot understand how someone who raises such good points as Captain Vlad feels comfortable when companies like Bethesda control the rpg market.

Whatever else you want to say about Bethesda, they've released some high-quality, innovative games over the years. You dislike Oblivion, but many do not and consider it a further evolution of what is, after all, a very rich series.

But even if I awarded them the same lack of regard as you, it wouldn't bother me too much. Companies come and go. Gaming trends come and go. Good games will be produced in spite or because of both.

Where are these fine RPGs that we both used to play?

I'm playing some fine games right now. They may not look or operate like Wasteland or Bard's Tale or Fallout but the game does not have to be like others you've enjoyed to be good. Learn to enjoy things on their own merits.

And get a copy of Mass Effect. It's awesome.

CaptHawkeye
07-13-08, 06:58 AM
I'll stick to my leisure suit larry, Ultima, Space Quest, Original Fallouts and all the best classic games including Silent hunter III hehehe. I'm not too concerned about the best graphics or sound effects its only a bonus. I like quality. Something like this comes to mind. http://www.gog.com/en/intro (http://www.gog.com/en/intro)

To you it's not really about "quality" as much as it is letting go of the past. And for the love of god, will you stop trying to red herring this argument into a "lol modern game quality" discussion? In that area i'd AGREE with you, but that's not the argument we're having is it?

ReallyDedPoet
07-13-08, 08:58 AM
Ok...., there has been some nice discussions here folks, most of it above bar, but really, I think it is time to move on....

I'd like to keep this thread open :yep:


RDP

Wolfehunter
07-14-08, 12:07 PM
I'll stick to my leisure suit larry, Ultima, Space Quest, Original Fallouts and all the best classic games including Silent hunter III hehehe. I'm not too concerned about the best graphics or sound effects its only a bonus. I like quality. Something like this comes to mind. http://www.gog.com/en/intro (http://www.gog.com/en/intro)

To you it's not really about "quality" as much as it is letting go of the past. And for the love of god, will you stop trying to red herring this argument into a "lol modern game quality" discussion? In that area i'd AGREE with you, but that's not the argument we're having is it?Huh? I like modern games? I play witcher and Stalker. I'm also a modder for Stalker? But I like older games even if the graphics are cheezier. I also have a PS3 with COD4, Haze and Wall-E. Great games. Great graphics? Dude I'm totally modern. I just like good stuff. Ideally the best of the best.
AND YES I PLAY WALL-E with my daughter hehehehe. I can't give up the little guy. Too funny.:up:

ReallyDedPoet
07-14-08, 12:15 PM
@ Wolfehunter & CaptHawkeye

Why not do this via PM fellas :yep:


RDP

GlobalExplorer
07-14-08, 12:53 PM
RDP don't get me wrong, but I think this thread brings up some serious underlying issues about the state of RPGs that I find much more interesting than repeating marketing hogwash. It's about RPG philosophy, CRPGs vs ARPGs, the feelings of old school gamers vs people who prefer these new games. And for me, the question whether we are ever going to see again the kind of RPG that a lot of us grew up with.

So besides your valid reminder that it should stay civil, I don't know what's wrong with this discussion.

Just my 2c.

ReallyDedPoet
07-14-08, 01:27 PM
So besides your valid reminder that it should stay civil, I don't know what's wrong with this discussion.



As long as long as the discussion stays civil I am ok with it, just a few friendly reminders :D

The other point I was alluding to was if folks have said their piece and the discussion is going in circles or nowhere for that matter, than it is probably best to move on :yep:


RDP

Wolfehunter
07-14-08, 04:08 PM
@ Wolfehunter & CaptHawkeye

Why not do this via PM fellas :yep:


RDPSorry for putting pressure on you RDP. I have no intension of causing a ruckus. I just don't like FO3 by beth thats all. But Global explorere is right. These are thing that should be debated.

Bethesda is using terms that don't match the traditional sense. Not only are they reinventing Fallout game but they're trying to change the standards we use to describe gaming categories. Anyhow they're going to do what they want regardless what fans or people in general say.

Peace all.

Happy hunting.

ReallyDedPoet
07-14-08, 04:26 PM
These are thing that should be debated.


No worries :), and as I mentioned I have no problems if the discussion is going somewhere and is above bar. Plus it gives me a chance to hear what is going on, my main two games are SH and IL2, and a few others, I wish I had the time to play more.


RDP

Captain Vlad
07-14-08, 04:33 PM
It's about RPG philosophy, CRPGs vs ARPGs, the feelings of old school gamers vs people who prefer these new games.

How best to put the player 'in the world' is something I used to hear batted around a lot. Having grown up on turn based top-down or 3/4 view games like Fallout or, farther back in the day, the SSI Gold Box series, I was a bit leery of the 'first-person' RPG myself. I began to appreciate the possibilities with the first Elder Scrolls game, which was bought for me by my sister as a high-school graduation present.

Thing is, while I was initially resistant, I know plenty of people who simply could not stomach turn-based 'remotely viewed' combat. The usual problems are a lack of being 'there', of 'watching rather than doing'. And I think there is something to that, though it was hard for me to grasp until I played some of the more recent Bioware games (KoTOR, JE, and Mass Effect have similar combat systems in some ways, but dissimilar in others, which combined with playing them relatively close to each other, allowed me to get a 'feel' for what some of my friends were complaining about.)

And for me, the question whether we are ever going to see again the kind of RPG that a lot of us grew up with.


As freeware, if nothing else.

GlobalExplorer
07-15-08, 06:55 AM
It's about RPG philosophy, CRPGs vs ARPGs, the feelings of old school gamers vs people who prefer these new games.
How best to put the player 'in the world' is something I used to hear batted around a lot. Having grown up on turn based top-down or 3/4 view games like Fallout or, farther back in the day, the SSI Gold Box series, I was a bit leery of the 'first-person' RPG myself. I began to appreciate the possibilities with the first Elder Scrolls game, which was bought for me by my sister as a high-school graduation present.

I think I never had such problems getting into 1st person RPGs. I played both System Shocks, as well as the mentioned Ultima Underworld 1-2. You already mentioned VtM Bloodlines, all excellent games. Then there was Deus Ex which unfortunately I didnt notice. They are generally "light" RPGs but deliver on the gameplay and story.

My favourite RPG was probably Ultima VII because it offered all the freedom I want plus a great background story. Morrowind offered no relevant story at all, but at least it gave me the feeling of being in an unlimited RPG world. And it had this great alchemy system, that was also dumbed down for Oblivion. Most of the time I stayed in my house and created potions.

There is a Ultima IX restoration project going on that is based on the Morrowind engine. If it should ever get finished, I would be very interested in playing it. http://www.cfkasper.de/ultima/index.php

I played the mentioned Kotor, but apart from excellent storywriting and voiceacting, it already had a console formula and the gameplay sucked: Phat loot, console UI, completely linear gameplay. I still enjoyed it somewhat.

Thing is, while I was initially resistant, I know plenty of people who simply could not stomach turn-based 'remotely viewed' combat.
I had big problems to get into Fallout, but when I understood the system I realized that it works much better than frantic mouse clicking. That's the reason why I prefer the fallout tb system. It will drag you in and offer real tactical options, once you understand it's like playing chess. In rt it is just about mapping the key for health potions and slashing away.