Pete Hines doesn't say much about Fallout 3

Mr. Teatime · Post by **Mr. Teatime** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 9:53 pm

[ Game -> Interview ] - More info on <a href="http://wikipocalypse.duckandcover.cx/in ... title=Pete Hines">Person: Pete Hines</a> | More info on <a href="http://wikipocalypse.duckandcover.cx/in ... le=Fallout 3">Game: Fallout 3</a>

<a target="_self" href="http://theconsolewars.blogspot.com/2005 ... .html">The Console Wars have gotten themselves an interview</a> with Pete
Hines of <a href="http://www.bethsoft.com" target="_self">Bethsoft</a>, mainly about <a href="http://www.elderscrolls.com" target="_self">Oblivion</a>, but there are two mentions of Fallout 3:
<blockquote>
TCW:
"Are you going to keep making open ended RPG's or are you getting into
some other genres? If so which ones and do you have any details?"

Pete Hines: "In
addition to Oblivion we’re in the very early stages of development on
Fallout 3, a post-apocalyptic role-playing game. But it will be a long,
long time until we’re ready to talk about what we’re up to on Fallout
3. The teams here in Rockville will definitely continue to focus on The
Elder Scrolls and Fallout franchises.

...
TCW: Any news on Fallout 3?

Pete Hines: "As
I’ve said before, we believe in taking the requisite amount of time to
do a game right. Oblivion is a good example of that – it’s already
three years in the making and wasn’t even announced until it was more
than two years in development.

All
we really announced last year was that we had acquired the rights to
develop and publish Fallout 3. So, for us, it’s still very early in the
process and we don’t like to talk about our projects or show anything
on them until we are much further along the road to completion and
actually have things to show.

We
believe that great games are played, not designed, and until you take
all those ideas and implement them and see if they work, you really
don’t know what you have, so why bother talking about them? For
example, we designed three complete combat systems for Oblivion before
we finally found the one we liked, so as a result it would have been
really pointless to talk about the first two at the time, when it turns
out they ended up getting completely redone."

</blockquote>
Interesting
that he mentions the combat system in a question about Fallout 3. Maybe
they haven't decided how combat will work in the game?Now for the bit that worries me:
<blockquote>TCW: "Will the 360 version of Oblivion be equal or superior to the PC version?"

</blockquote>
<blockquote>Pete Hines: "That’s
a tough question because “PC” can mean an almost infinite number of
things. What video card? Sound card? How much RAM? Are the right
drivers installed? The list goes on and on. All these things determine
performance on a PC. The advantage of the Xbox 360 is that it’s
designed to run our game, period. You know if you have a 360 it will
look as good as it can possibly look. If you have the latest, greatest
PC with the best video card, etc., it will probably look the same as
the Xbox 360 version. Anything else will probably lag behind. 

</blockquote>
<blockquote>
When people ask us
whether or not to do a major PC upgrade or get the console version of
one of our games, we always recommend the console version. Our games
tend to push the limits of technology pretty hard, so it’s much easier
to predict performance on a closed box than one with thousands of
possible configurations." </blockquote>
"Fallout 3 - it works best on a console!" doesn't make me feel right.


<blockquote>
</blockquote>
Thanks for the news tip, Pete!

Mismatch · Post by **Mismatch** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:19 pm

and we all know what todd howard said

Aonaran · Post by **Aonaran** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:42 pm

I believe what he was saying is that the technology of the console will have a better chance of running the software at tip top at the time of the 360/Oblivion launch. Not that when Fallout 3 is released it will be a console first, PC second game as your stated fears indicate.

Bethsoft releases their games for console and PC, the controls/gameplay being better on PC, obviously. If you want it on PC get it on PC, I think it is as simple as that. It isn't like they are making a console game and porting it to PC, it is the other way around.

Also from what I understand launch games like Oblivion will only be running on something pathetic like 20% of the 360's capability. So if you are a console enthusiast there is an outside chance the port of F3 won't suck when they finally do release it. But then again who in their right minds is gunning for a F3 console port? Hopefully computer technology will have caught up plenty by then and it won't cost an arm and a leg for the additional control and gameplay of running it on your own box.

Aonaran · Post by **Aonaran** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:46 pm

At least "Morrowind with guns" fears have evolved into "Oblivion with guns" fears. Still I don't get it since one of Bethsofts key goals in making a new game is "reinvention" even within a game series, such as the Eldar Scrolls.

Hopefully these fears will be relieved when Oblivion finally hits the shelves, especially for those whose only forray into the Eldar Scrolls universe was with Morrowind.

A_M · Post by **A_M** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:59 pm

Yeah, its nice to know that Bsoft (B class soft ?

) is doing something with F3. Still nothin serious though :/

Mr. Teatime · Post by **Mr. Teatime** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 11:38 pm

Yeah, I guess I overreacted a bit. I just don't like the whole console idea, but I guess that's old fashioned or something.

Blargh · Post by **Blargh** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 11:43 pm

Not old fashioned, Teatime. Rational.

Redeye · Post by **Redeye** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 11:44 pm

I used to be concerned about consoles, but I'm not anymore.
Really, how much computing capacity does it take to handle
dialogue trees, complex AI, etc.?
Even a 486 could handle that stuff if it were implemented correctly.
Consoles can do that. The problem I see is if the stereotypical
"console mentality" is allowed to kill the substance. Imagine, if two or
three years from now the gaming situation is so desperate that virtually
everything has to follow the "dual shock" paradigm in order to get funded.
Fo3 could have the niche-edge enough to dodge that- especially if it
can be funded from the success of Oblivion. (Suck or not, I'm certain
Oblivion will sell just fine.)
Or, just for fun, the console version of F3 could be a dumbed-down
version for the tards- just throw in some boobies and lingerie and
lots of pwetty,pwetty colors and boom-booms. Give the minigun away
very early on so the fucktards can use their dualshocks as a vibrator.
Then use that to pay for developing the PC version.

ApTyp · Post by **ApTyp** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 12:02 am

Redeye wrote:I used to be concerned about consoles, but I'm not anymore.

...or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb.

POOPERSCOOPER · Post by **POOPERSCOOPER** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 12:40 am

I would get it on console if it ran better and wasn't buggy. I got a new computer in AGP when PCI express was just comming out. If the graphics card people don't release the new cards in AGP then fuck da police. Unless some stellar PC exclusive games come out I will masturabte into console flury.

St. Toxic · Post by **St. Toxic** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 1:05 am

I always felt that tweaking games to fit my individual configuration was a big part of the gaming itself. Its the handy-man gene, I bet most of us got it anyway, and running at medium-low hardly discourages me if it's "the best I could do", while a screw-up on console ( which, from what I have seen of them, does happen ) is plainly a kick in the teeth situation.

Spazmo · Post by **Spazmo** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 6:38 am

The syndrome St. Toxic describes is why I built my own PC. Because I am a dumbass and also cursed, my self built PC constantly gives me all kinds of shit, which keeps me busy fixing it. This, to me, is half the fun of PC ownership. If I had a console, well, all I could do would be to turn it on and off. You can't even blow the dust out of the cartridges anymore because there's no more cartridges! How terribly dull.

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 7:37 am

Now while I'm not saying Oblivion will be like this, but simply saying that it runs best because it's designed for X-Box doesn't mean much. I have plenty of games that were made SOLELY for a game system and are laggy when theres too much action, so I don't want to hear "It runs better because it's designed for the console" ever. I can always upgrade my computer with more shit, I can't really do with with my PSwhateverbnumber.

Snake · Post by **Snake** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 8:40 am

Well the main difference between the xbox 360 and other consoles is that its so much better in every department
Its not like they are porting a playstation game to the PC and not optimising it
At least I hope not

Look at the trailer for Quake 4, also there is the XNA platform
XNA means you can make games for the PC and xbox 360 at the same time with little or no modifying to run on both
I'm not saying F3 will be as good as the first two games but the potential is there now, only time will tell
Whether or not mods are portable too is unclear

Fable was an ok RPG on the xbox, only let down majorly by the fact it only lasts two days before you beat it

Mismatch · Post by **Mismatch** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 9:28 am

Well the main difference between the xbox 360 and other consoles is that its so much better in every department

and yet the games will still suck donkey cock. Big time you git.
For some peculiar reason, games that are primarily developed for consoles are chit.
It could be related to the fact that console gamers are fucking retards.
I should agree though that them fighting games can be amusing when drunk.

Fable was an ok RPG on the xbox

Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¨
you fucking wanker.

Its not like they are porting a playstation game to the PC and not optimising it

Chit should be ported the other way around, from PC to consoles.

PiP · Post by **PiP** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 9:45 am

Snake wrote:Fable was an ok RPG on the xbox

I thought it was a colourful hack n' slash?

Smiley · Post by **Smiley** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 10:23 am

The new Xbox and PS3 are going to be consoles with implemented physics rules etc...

I have every confidence that they'll be far more advanced than most of our PC's..

besides, they're basically PC's anyway, just with inferior controls...

I have confidence in Bethsoft, so far they've indicated that they want to do a good job of it, and thatthey're taking their time is a good thing.

Sometimes I wonder if all people think of is getting Fo3 ASAP, so that they can whine over it.
Just like Fo2. The only good thing mentioned about it was how much more the community knew about the Fo-world, and how it should've been *their* way of doing it...

Kick back and relax, the console isn't even mentioned yet in regards to Fo3.
And even if it is, then so fucking what?
It can still be a decent game.

Besides, with the console hype, you'd be an asshole company trying to avoid the console...
It has a much better market.

vx trauma · Post by **vx trauma** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 11:11 am

Fallout 3 should be the gamingexperience of the century with amount of time taken to develope it. If it even remotely fails, I will bring fallout to everyone's doorstep. Blast, heat and radiation to the developing team.

Mismatch · Post by **Mismatch** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 11:20 am

besides, they're basically PC's anyway, just with inferior controls...

aye they're developing the right way, and yet companies making console games insist to make them suck ass.
Console devs tend to impose strange limitations in games, like you can only save at 'checkpoints' and very limited options in video settings.
The biggest drawback I've seen is in FPS's primarily developed for consoles. Aside from poor graphics they usually suffer from a really weird Fieds of view and sluggish controls.
This one game I tried(name forgotten) had such a fucked up viewpoint which made everything look too close or too big. So, just to play it I had to change the FOV rilly much, resulting in dizzyness.
And, I tried Area51, which sucked. When using the sniper and zooming, one noticed that they did no 'new' calculations and drawing for it, the zoom was just a zoom... so, when you tried movin the scope the minimum you could movie it was about 1" in any direction making aiming almost impossible.
The main drawbacks with console FPS's though tend to be that there is no 'feel' in the controls ot weapons... I sppose it has to do with poos feedback, when moving or fireing you dont feel like you do it, weapons lack recoil and sound like sloppy blowjobs.
Luckily FO3 should NOT be an FPS.

Besides, with the console hype, you'd be an asshole company trying to avoid the console...
It has a much better market.

I must agree. However, bethsoft should make sure to develop for PC FIRST, and then port to console.
Otherwise chit tend to get messed up with more dynamic hardware settings and different hardware configuration and chit.
Games made for consoles never run as good or as bugfree as they should on PC.
Making FO3 primarily for consoles would be like bethsoft pissing themself. First they'll feel rather good about it, but as the urine cools, leaving this stench and wet sticky feeling in their groins and down their legs, they'll regret their descision.

VasikkA · Post by **VasikkA** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 11:29 am

It's no use worrying about whether Fallout 3 will go console or not, as the answer is pretty obvious. Also, there is no reason to doubt that the game will suffer because of technical limitations. It's more probable that many PCs will experience running problems, just like the Bethsoft guy said. But that's not the issue here.

As we all know, consoles have limitations when it comes to gameplay and controls. Without a mouse, isometric view and therefore turn-based combat becomes very hard to do or at least it must be heavily simplified. Turn-based combat is very rare and exceptional in CRPGs nowadays and I'd be sad to see it die out completely. I wouldn't want the combat in Fallouts change from tactic-based to skill-based as combat in RPGs in general is a combination of character stats and tactics. Gamepad isn't an ideal control system for first/third person ranged combat, assuming the game will have one of those views or both. Dialogue and bartering on the other hand shouldn't be a problem.

I wont be buying a console just for Fallout 3. I'd rather buy a new PC, as I do a lot more with a computer than just play. I haven't played actively in a few years now and the few games I've bought have been PC only.