What Should Fallout 3 Be?
Swiftspear
Custim tital Join Date: 2003-10-29 Member: 22097Members
Custim tital Join Date: 2003-10-29 Member: 22097Members
<div class="IPBDescription">Good old fasion OT discussion.</div> So I was reading up on the <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=75154' target='_blank'>old thread</a> linked by the <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=75464' target='_blank'>new locked thread</a>, and then I got around to reading a good section of <a href='http://www.nma-fallout.com/' target='_blank'>No Mutants Alowed</a> articals and what not, and I can honesty say that the way I'm hearing some of the news has got me really mad. Is it just me or is it a strange practice for fans to be demanding gameplay impliments for a game that would probably in all honesty never be acctually made anyways? People are acting like Bethesda owes them something, because they bought the rights to make a title with the same name as a game that they liked back in the day, when Black Ilse was acctually a decent, existing, company.
As you can probably already tell, I have taken my side in the issue already... but that isn't really what I want this topic to be about, so I'm now a little perturbed that I couldn't help myself starting this thing off with a rant. But as far as I'm concerned, I see a dying title taken over by a company, who hasn't produced a game of the calaber F1&2 were yet, but definately looks like it might have the stuff to make a game that I will have just as much fun playing as I did back in the day shooting up hubolojists and supermutants.
So with that I ask, <i>really</i>, what is an exceptable change that we can allow in a series as golden as the fallouts and what isn't? The modification of the top down gameplay might be a scary thought, but realisticly, isn't there alot you can do in 3rd person or 1st person that you can't do in a fixed top down prespective? On the same level, was the turnbased gameplay really the element that made fallout gameplay, or was it just another way of doing the same thing?
I'm gonna say right off the back, just because alot of people like to forget, I don't want any flaming in this tread. Having a difference of opinion is one thing, but criticizing someone or something based on unfounded claims just revokes an equal response from the other side. Please think through your side of the story and give us good reasons for why you feel the way you do. Hopefully both sides can come out a little more knowlageable, and maby in the end, we'll have something in the way of advice and reasoning that Bethesda might even be able to use...
[edit] added more links, just incase you somehow missed the everything the way I did until I started looking into the more ungodly second and third pages of the forum <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
As you can probably already tell, I have taken my side in the issue already... but that isn't really what I want this topic to be about, so I'm now a little perturbed that I couldn't help myself starting this thing off with a rant. But as far as I'm concerned, I see a dying title taken over by a company, who hasn't produced a game of the calaber F1&2 were yet, but definately looks like it might have the stuff to make a game that I will have just as much fun playing as I did back in the day shooting up hubolojists and supermutants.
So with that I ask, <i>really</i>, what is an exceptable change that we can allow in a series as golden as the fallouts and what isn't? The modification of the top down gameplay might be a scary thought, but realisticly, isn't there alot you can do in 3rd person or 1st person that you can't do in a fixed top down prespective? On the same level, was the turnbased gameplay really the element that made fallout gameplay, or was it just another way of doing the same thing?
I'm gonna say right off the back, just because alot of people like to forget, I don't want any flaming in this tread. Having a difference of opinion is one thing, but criticizing someone or something based on unfounded claims just revokes an equal response from the other side. Please think through your side of the story and give us good reasons for why you feel the way you do. Hopefully both sides can come out a little more knowlageable, and maby in the end, we'll have something in the way of advice and reasoning that Bethesda might even be able to use...
[edit] added more links, just incase you somehow missed the everything the way I did until I started looking into the more ungodly second and third pages of the forum <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Comments
i like the grafic but i didnt understand much (because i only played in like 10-20 minutes)
i was kinda on hurry, but so far. its cool.
another bad game?
Only bad things can come of this.
i like the grafic but i didnt understand much (because i only played in like 10-20 minutes)
i was kinda on hurry, but so far. its cool. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Fallout 3 hasn't acctually started development yet, so this is beyond impossible. Most likely you played Fallout: Tactics, or Fallout: Brother Hood of Steel. Either way, what you played falls somewhat short of what most of us expect from fallout 3 (although tacics wasn't terrible, just a bad use of the fallout universe). Follow one of the links in the first post to find out what I'm talking about.
Only bad things can come of this. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Morrowind wasn't terrible, but it wasn't nearly as great as Fallout (with the possible exeption of BHoS). Seriously, how is top down veiw "great" I personally find it a far inferior method of displaying character and surroundind, for all but the most tactical themed games. Emmersion is way easyer in first person, and to a lesser degree third person...
[edit] sorry double post, I hate adding qoutes to an edit
I was picturing a pausable order menu like Baulders gate or F:T... I don't see how a fallout RPG could work good with first person shooter gameplay... We'll see how things turn out I guess when it comes to that. Personally I agree with you on that point though.
I beat Baulders gate, but after I spent an hour wandering aimlessly with no real sence of mission in the first town, I got too bored of BG2 to continue. I still have it laying around somewhere, but it will most likely go unplayed until the end of time. Oddly enough the same reason is why I gave up morrowind, although I'm, pretty sure I wandered for a couple extra hours more than BG2 before I got sick of the fact that the random string of missions wasn't leading anywhere conclusive... Although fallout 1 and 2 had exactly the same thing, but I couldn't stop playing the games until I had seen every possible outcome every possible way... Maby it was just the walking between towns in morrowind that put me to sleep...
[edit] too is spelled T-O-O, not T-O. I'm obviously too tired to type any more. Cya all tomorrow...
Even though Planescape Torment had a better/more original story <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
But seriously, I just can't imagine it being a 1st-person game, even though it would be quite cool to walk around the desert, or see Vault 13 in 3D <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Yes, thousands of people loved Morrowind - but Testament hates it; so they're all wrong and it sucks.
Fallout 3 might end up looking like Morrowind - stop production, cancel the work. Testament hates Morrowind, so we might as well not continue!
...that about sum it up for you?
I'm not particularily concerned with how they change the battle system; but the core recognizable feature of Fallout was the hexagonal combat board and the overall 2d sprite based graphics. We're in with the 3d now, so it's going to have to change somewhere.
As long as the story telling and character development goes along it definately has the ability to become an awesome game (and as far as I'm concerned, Bethesda has the storytelling part down - character development, not so much).
There was also the whole 'kill who you want and wander around doing it when you want' part, which I'm fairly positive will be in there too.
It might end up as a FPS with RPG based enhancements and quests. I don't see it being too terrible; kind of generic - but very playable. Or some ingenious combat work that would make it work just like the other FOs or something. It's a bit early to blatantly bash a game before it even has screenshots and a basic concept down.
When it comes out, and you kill enemies by dancing around and giving them flowers, all the enemies are evil nazis, and the core location is a cookie factory on Mars - then you can complain.
It took me six tries to get past the first dungeon in BG2 to enjoy it. :o
Anyway...yeah. The first part of BG2 is basically doing a ton of fun quests and missions for various groups and people to earn the money to get into the next chapter. That's when the fun begins.
And Gecko, what's your point? Yeah, they might as well not continue in my mind. Fallout will not work in first person no matter what. Fallout is more than a first-person shooter with RPG "elements".
oh, i misunderstand.
bleh at my mind.
i played another game and thought that was fallout 3, lol.
<span style='color:green'>[Edit]</span>
hmm, it was ground control II, i played. <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif' /><!--endemo-->
The silliest thing I've ever done is solo dungeon siege with a nature mage... you get tired of zap and spark very quickly. Completed it though just so I could say I did it <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
BG2 was amazing, lovely plot, lots of funny bits (anyone play the expansion ToB where you meet the brand new party in those caves... lmao i did, lmao <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->).
My main worry is that Bethesda will listen to the "fans", as the so often do, and turn it into Fallout 2 with better graphics. It would be such a huge waste if that were to happen.
The perspective doesn't really matter to me. The isometric perspective of the first two games was kind of pointless - It fits well with "tactical" combat, but the combat in FO1&2 was boring and mindless, so all it really did was look ugly. If they were to overhaul the combat system it might be worth it. However, Bethesda is experienced in making first person shooters, so that might work as well.
I can see many ways a first person perspective would work. Perhaps they could make it fp turn based like that canned X-Com game was going to be (Dreamland Chronicles or something). Or it could be realtime, think of the aiming system in Deus Ex, with a bit of modification it would fit SPECIAL perfectly, it even emulates action points!
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->No, Morrowind was terrible. I got no enjoyment out of it, and a first person RPG is a dumb idea. Infact, making Fallout a first person RPG would make it a first person shooter with the randomness of CS, but it lowers with skills.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->On a side Baldur's Gate 2 is the best RPG I'll ever play and nothing will ever top its story-telling or gameplay.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I know it's wrong to laugh at other people's opinons, but you're really tempting me right now.
Top-down is how that kind of RPG should be played, or possibly Neverewinter nights style camera.
i just hope they don't screw it up
Like we should do with Fallout instead of trying to ressurect it as a glorified first-person shooter.
Well, at least we agree on one thing.
S.P.E.C.I.A.L, be turn-based, have an isometric view.
but this wont happen as bethesda has said no to isometric :'(
In short, I keep cheering for...
...Mature content. If it is a RPG and you shoot someone with a 1000 inch bazooka, you would expect them to blow up to smithereens -not just neatly fall down, saying "ow, ow, ow, I give up."
...Kamasutra master -trait. Yep, and concurrent romances would be good too, to make good use of that skill. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
...A LOT better party management, perhaps done like in Baldur's Gate -series. Inter-party banter, relationships, and NPC agendas.
...A bit more linear plot. Frankly, I didn't like too much how you could leave straight away from Arroy (in F2) and get the best armor with a bit of luck. Some limitations only.
And everything else already in previous parts! <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> A big bunch to ask, I know, but it is supposed to be a great game too. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
...A bit more linear plot. Frankly, I didn't like too much how you could leave straight away from Arroy (in F2) and get the best armor with a bit of luck. Some limitations only. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree with everything you wrote except that, that had nothing to do with the plot, it's just a small 'bug' on the developer part, because they could have made the speech skill or luck requirement to get the password higher, so you couldn't be a level 1 guy running in there and getting all the juicy stuff from the start.
Don't listen to Stewie, he's high on cheese ^_^.
World, I present to you Harold/ThinG
<img src='http://www.mustangmods.com/data/10108/harold.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
We need the good RPGs again, not "Spin It" RPGs, where they put their little idea into the RPG system and pray it works.
**EDIT**
Why did someone change my post to this?
My main worry is that Bethesda will listen to the "fans", as the so often do, and turn it into Fallout 2 with better graphics. It would be such a huge waste if that were to happen.
The perspective doesn't really matter to me. The isometric perspective of the first two games was kind of pointless - It fits well with "tactical" combat, but the combat in FO1&2 was boring and mindless, so all it really did was look ugly. If they were to overhaul the combat system it might be worth it. However, Bethesda is experienced in making first person shooters, so that might work as well.
I can see many ways a first person perspective would work. Perhaps they could make it fp turn based like that canned X-Com game was going to be (Dreamland Chronicles or something). Or it could be realtime, think of the aiming system in Deus Ex, with a bit of modification it would fit SPECIAL perfectly, it even emulates action points!
[...] <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree with just about every point I quoted here. I enjoyed Fallout: Tactics' combat over F1&2's, and preferred F1&2's roleplaying over FO:T's intentionally lacking NPC reactions (calling them interactions is pushing it). I can see real-time pausable combat working from a 3rd person perspective giving commands as in Freedom Fighters; in fact if it's <i>not</i> like this, I'd very much like to see at least a sequel to FO:T that steals a lot of interface/order ideas from Freedom Fighters.
I not only want, I think it is <i>necessary</i> as a progression of the series for Fallout 3 to take place in the New England/mideast region; F1&F2 covered the west coast, FO:T covered the northern middle US, and nuclear-war-induced-global-warming would flood too much of Florida and the deep South to make a playably large environment.
<!--QuoteBegin-Wirhe+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wirhe)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->In short, I keep cheering for...
Mature content. If it is a RPG and you shoot someone with a 1000 inch bazooka, you would expect them to blow up to smithereens -not just neatly fall down, saying "ow, ow, ow, I give up."
[...]
...A LOT better party management, perhaps done like in Baldur's Gate -series. Inter-party banter, relationships, and NPC agendas.
[...]
...A bit more linear plot. Frankly, I didn't like too much how you could leave straight away from Arroy (in F2) and get the best armor with a bit of luck. Some limitations only.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Mature content: agreed, but only so much as it was used in F1&2. If it smells of overuse as in Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel's press campaign (glowing contraceptive devices, anyone?) then no.
F2 and Planescape: Torment had excellent party member development. F3 should have equal or better.
The ideal linearity has been established well by Wasteland, F1, and F2. Sure, you could go to Arroyo to an army depot with luck, but you'd only go if you knew about it in advance (spoiler reading/cheating, which no developer should try planning around, or previous play). Otherwise you'd only show up before you "should" if you liked exploring, and if you managed to both find it and survive, you deserve the rewards.
A great thing about the Fallout series is that if you felt you could take on anything, you could explore the world. Stuff didn't just unlock other stuff like a path; the world felt like was there and living, and had been since you started your quest or earlier.
"There and living?" I wouldn't call 24/7 in one place sitting, same line repeating NPCs "living." In this sense, it would be better that there was some linearity in this aspect. Exploring, yes; but done in a fashion familiar in series like Metroid -need some specific equipment to proceed, but still enough optional places to rummage through.