Todd Howard on Fallout 3. It's not good.

Mr. Teatime · Post by **Mr. Teatime** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 9:45 pm

[ -> Interview]

Straight into it:<blockquote>[Todd Howard] We always talked about doing another RPG, something different then The Elder Scrolls, that held the same things true that we love - player choice, open-endedness, great characters and such. So we would always talk about doing something like Fallout because we liked it so much"
 
 The game is being developed alongside the next Elder Scrolls game, and will be available on PCs and consoles as well. There is not much to reveal yet about the game's storyline, but its SPECIAL character system, and it's gritty drug-and-prostitute-speckled irreverence is still at the core: "I don't plan on tempering it. I think we're looking at a hard M (rating). The biggest challenge is "to create something for today's market that has the same impact that Fallout had on gaming in 1997."
 
 "I'd say the impact the original had in its day was about so much more then the angle you viewed it at, or how combat was executed.</blockquote>This is taken from the October issue of Computer Games.
 
 I don't even need to point out what's horribly depressing in that quote (hint: it involves the word consoles, the PR damage control when talking about the viewpoint and combat, and everything else) and I don't have the will to even rant. All I will say is: fuck. Someone kill the Fallout license dead. Stop fucking it up, and just let it die.
 Spotted at: <A HREF="http://www.rpgcodex.com">RPG Codex</A>

Ernesto · Post by **Ernesto** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 9:50 pm

It's gritty drug-and-prostitute-speckled irreverence is still at the core.

Heroin + herpes = kewl game? What the fuck? All that "grittyness" is what made Fallout 2 worse than the first.

T-900 · Post by **T-900** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 9:56 pm

Nyargh...

They need to base the game entirely off the style of Fallout 1, you can't base a game of a game that was based off a game, it'll continually dilute the better points. (it makes sense in my skull.)

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 9:58 pm

It was too good to be true... Bethesda was going to rape Fallout, no matter what. Let's kill the optimists, it would make me feel better.

Araanor · Post by **Araanor** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 10:03 pm

Todd Howard wrote:"I'd say the impact the original had in its day was about so much more then the angle you viewed it at, or how combat was executed.

He's damn right it's much more - IT'S THE GAME AS A WHOLE.

The above quote is pretty much him admitting they're going to make some first-person/third-person romp out of it.

jiujitsu · Post by **jiujitsu** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 10:05 pm

Well, we won't truly know what it will be like until it comes out. Maybe they will ditch all that console SHIT.

*cries* Just give it to troika you fucking HUNS!

brillo · Post by **brillo** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 10:19 pm

jiujitsu wrote: *cries* Just give it to troika you fucking HUNS!

Didn't Troika say flat out they would've done it realtime? No publisher would touch it turnbased, and such?

Araanor · Post by **Araanor** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 10:22 pm

No, they said that in relation to the other IPs they've been shopping around to publishers.

brillo · Post by **brillo** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 10:27 pm

Araanor wrote:No, they said that in relation to the other IPs they've been shopping around to publishers.

Oh, the other PA RPG.

So you think the Fallout name, and the series past history would be enough for a publisher to consider the possibility of a TB FO3?

Araanor · Post by **Araanor** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 10:32 pm

Consider it, yeah. Dunno how large chance it would have, some publishers are likely more open than others.

brillo · Post by **brillo** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 10:38 pm

Araanor wrote:Consider it, yeah. Dunno how large chance it would have, some publishers are likely more open than others.

Okay, I can see that. Don't think they'd have a great chance either.

But either way, I can't for a moment imagine them turning it (the license, or FO3's developement) over to someone else at this point...

Briosafreak · Post by **Briosafreak** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 10:38 pm

brillo wrote:
Araanor wrote:No, they said that in relation to the other IPs they've been shopping around to publishers.
Oh, the other PA RPG. So you think the Fallout name, and the series past history would be enough for a publisher to consider the possibility of a TB FO3?

Yep, you could bet on it, even FOBOS loving Interplay would go for it, and a few others. Then again others wouldn`t, like Silver Style.

Tank · Post by **Tank** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 10:41 pm

Some publishers would probably, seeing as the first two games were fairly succesful, and all they'd need to do was check dAc or NMA for 5 minutes and they'd realize, that there's still a market out here for these things, especially since there's a fanbase for games that're 6 and 7 years old by now, a fanbase that pretty much DEMANDS the return of TB combat to our beloved game...

Briosafreak · Post by **Briosafreak** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 10:51 pm

Make a first person survival horror action adventure game to the X-Box2 and PS3, and a nice Fallout3 with a Silent Storm view and the artwork based on 50s pulp and a tweaked TB combat and you`ll get everyone happy. The console kids will get happy, the PC crowd will call the console game fobos2 and hate you for that buy will buy the pc game in droves, together with many people from the press i`ve been talking to. Hey a few might even buy both, doubling the earnings of Beth.

Well if not itÃƒâ€šÃ‚Â´s a shame, iÃƒâ€šÃ‚Â´ve already helped containing the rawr about one game, can`t do it again, i`m old now, and frankly will be probably even more pissed than everyone else.

Please don`t make a Fergus/Molitor thing on us ok Beth guys?

brillo · Post by **brillo** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 10:58 pm

Briosafreak wrote:Yep, you could bet on it, even FOBOS loving Interplay would go for it, and a few others. Then again others wouldn`t, like Silver Style.

Interplay publishing a Troika made FO3 with TB combat is not gonna happen.

Tank wrote:Some publishers would probably, seeing as the first two games were fairly succesful, and all they'd need to do was check dAc or NMA for 5 minutes and they'd realize, that there's still a market out here for these things, especially since there's a fanbase for games that're 6 and 7 years old by now, a fanbase that pretty much DEMANDS the return of TB combat to our beloved game...

There's a market for shit fetish vids and midget porn too. The presence of a market doesn't mean a publisher is going to sink millions or tens of millions of dollars into publishing something if they don't think the market is large enough for them to recoup that money and then provide them with a profit....

Insult them for it, argue with them about it, rant about the end of videogames as we know them even, but that's still how they do shit.

PsychoSniper · Post by **PsychoSniper** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:04 pm

Todd Howard wrote:"I'd say the impact the original had in its day was about so much more then the angle you viewed it at, or how combat was executed.

What a fucking dumbass.

Mismatch · Post by **Mismatch** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:13 pm

wtf, whywhywgt did they get the license if theyre planning to make something that's not fallout?
If they thought they'd get a bucha easy sales, they are indeed fooling fooling themselves...
If everything is is done right easy sales would have come to them.

But the way this is evolving I get the feeling than only serious cock-gobblers will buy the game.
I hope I will be proven wrong though.

Briosafreak · Post by **Briosafreak** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:21 pm

It wasn`t Interplay, that would be suicide Brillo

Sovy Kurosei · Post by **Sovy Kurosei** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:30 pm

What is the point in having SPECIAL in the first place if the game is not turnbased? That is like saying you gain experience points for killing a big bad monster, but you don't level up.

There is a synergistic mechanism that ties the SPECIAL, turnbased and overhead viewing perspective together in one, nice package. You remove one aspect, you are just shooting yourself in the foot.

PsychoSniper · Post by **PsychoSniper** » Sat Sep 18, 2004 3:32 am

Sovy Kurosei wrote: There is a synergistic mechanism that ties the SPECIAL, turnbased and overhead viewing perspective together in one, nice package. You remove one aspect, you are just shooting yourself in the foot.

EXACTLY!

Duck and Cover

Todd Howard on Fallout 3. It's not good.

Todd Howard on Fallout 3. It's not good.

Re: Todd Howard on Fallout 3. It's not good.

Re: Todd Howard on Fallout 3. It's not good.