PCGamer Fallout 3 Predictions

[rilom]

Vasikka - That's pretty much exactly what I was trying to say. Bitch about stuff that matters. First Person vs. Iso-metric does not matter. Real-time vs. turn-based does not matter (so long as real-time does not equal twitch. There are other versions of real-time combat that can work fine in an rpg). The real problem is the PR. Making blanket statements to placate the community is not fair. If they really plan on letting the game speak for itself then no one's going to get a non-biased view of what the game will be until it's released. That's a problem. Making a big squabble about it potentially being "Oblivion with guns" just seems to be forum filler which is what annoys me. But to each their own I spose.

[Mr. Teatime]

Lol I just quoted Teatime on my blogpost about this

I demand royalties!

But it's an interesting thought that all this stuff has brought up. What if the fan reaction is bad, and the game turns out to be the real time, first person vend-a-quest RPG we fear it might? It's certainly possible Bethesda could just say, screw the licence, and drop the Fallout name and just run with a post-apoc game that's been 'inspired' by Fallout. After all, I can't see how attaching the FO name to a game that doesn't have that much in common will bring much positive reaction - I suspect people that know what Fallout is about would know what to look for in a Fallout sequel. And Bethesda can certainly make loads by just relying on their name and a 'we did Oblivion' tagline.

[Brother None]

First Person vs. Iso-metric does not matter. Real-time vs. turn-based does not matter (so long as real-time does not equal twitch.

Yes they do. Fallout as a translation of table top gaming to cRPGs can not be executed as a real-time game, and a turn-based game plays like shit in first person.

Argue that you don't care about it all you want, but there are people that care, so don't say it does not matter.

[VasikkA]

I've played many enjoyable RPGs with an unrewarding or downright horrible combat(Baldur's Gate, Planescape: Torment, Arcanum and Bloodlines, for example). You can to some extent forgive sub par combat if the RPG excels in other areas.

However, we all want enjoyable combat in Fallout 3, right? In my opinion, we already had that in the original Fallout. Call me archaic or whatever, but it would be foolish to replace this with a system comparable to FPS's without compromising the practical adaptation of Fallout's skill system not to mention the unique sense of 'mastering the battlefield' a turn-based system conveys.

Unlike popular belief, there's still so much to improve in the field of turn-based, isometric combat. It seems like the innovations in real-time combat are limited to gimmicks like bullet-time and image distortions.

[Bradylama]

Also rilom, the research suggests that Bethesda (especially Pete) aren't to be trusted. They have to demonstrate that they can be, and it's foolish to take their word for it.

[Dogmeatlives]

Haters always wanna hate. Fallout rules and that's it. Fuck the guy that wrote this article. You can tell he's a bitch.

[rilom]

For the sake of argument I'll point out that mechwarrior was a successful table-top to real-time translation, but I know that Mechwarrior and Fallout are completely different so I'm not gonna push the issue. The issue is what made fallout fallout, and combat was not it. Quests, setting, dialogue trees and the ability to pimp your spouse. Those are all things that I'll agree cannot be left behind, but the combat engine is not something that needs to be there in order for it to be considered Fallout. I'll concede that maybe I went a bit too far in saying that it's not important. Some people may hold it dear, however, you've got to pick your battles. Battling against twitch-based combat is a valiant cause. But battling for iso-metric turnbased may be taking it a bit too far. If you're arguing for something that there's little chance of convincing them of doing, they aren't going to pay attention to you when you talk about stuff that they might change if they heard the reasonings.

And saying that Pete Hines can't be trusted is different than saying the Bethsoft developers and designers can't be trusted. With Oblivion they set uot to make a game like Morrowind but prettier, and they acheived that with flying colours. If they're putting effort into quests and dialogue trees now then there's a fair chance that they'll succeed there too. Again, I'm not trying to say that I expect them to do a good job with it. I'm trying to say that there's nothing for me to base that judgement on, and what's important about that is that it's Bethesda's fault that I have nothing to base that opinion on, which makes me think less and less of Bethesda by the day.

[Wolfman Walt]

Well Mechwarrior was a succesful translation of Battletech - A table top wargame. It wasn't a translation of "Mechwarrior" the rpg, cause I'd have been really dissapointed at not being able to be an angry elemental in game and then try to terrorize some Kuritian soldiers.

Edit: Well it wasn't even a translation. You're confusing a game set within the Battletech universe to a translation of battletech. So in all honestly, I'm gonna say you're wrong here on that it was a succesful translation of battletech. Mech Commander was slightly better though, maybe use that as the example?

And saying that Pete Hines can't be trusted is different than saying the Bethsoft developers and designers can't be trusted.

In before someone digs up that Codex thread of the various non-truths, half truths, and lies that the Oblivion developers told.

and they acheived that with flying colours

I seem to remember alot of really hard core morrowind fans being dissapointed with Oblivion actually. Maybe I'm making that up? I dunno, they seemed to be really angry at the level scaling if I remember right.

[AnneGwish]

I know there are people who are going to disagree with me, but first turn RP combat can be done without the twitch (for those that don't want it). Deus Ex (the original) handled character skill to player skill quite admirably. Just because you're aiming at the guys head, doesn't mean the bullet's going there unless you've mastered that specific skill..

Hell, I just replayed the game and, save for the two forced combat scenes (You know those two), I didn't have to kill a single combatant. That was actually pretty intense (hadn't done it before).

I really don't mind if it's going to be first person, as long as they don't fuck it up.

[Frater Perdurabo]

I seem to remember alot of really hard core morrowind fans being dissapointed with Oblivion actually. Maybe I'm making that up? I dunno, they seemed to be really angry at the level scaling if I remember right.

I'm not a hardcore Morrowind fan, but I used to play it quite a bit. Oblivion, on the other hand, I couldn't play for more than 20 minutes. It's just so fucking boring.

Even though this sounds impossible, Oblivion is Morrowind dumbed down.
a) fucked up conversations (in Morrowind they were linear, but thorough). Oblivion's conversations are just an exchange of 1-liners.
b) fucked up travel system. I hated the fact that you could just click anywhere on the map and instantly arrive there. In Morrowind, travel was far more sophisticated (silt striders, boats, divine/almsivi intervention, mark/recall)
c) level scaling

and more. Cannot be bothered to rant excessively.

Anyway, another major fuckup point in Oblivion, and what I am mostly afraid of in Fallout is the XboX conversion. Fuck, it was one of the reasons for why I really hated Oblivion. Fucked up inventories (inventory was awesome in Morrowind and an utter cockup in Oblivion). Seeing only 5 items on your screen at once (yes, I know there's a mod for that, however even then it doesn't come anywhere close to Morrowind's system).

That entire consoly feeling did a big part to ruin Oblivion for me.

That's what I'm afraid of. I don't have a console for a reason. Even if they do get the setting, etc right, I'm not going to play it if it feels like a fucking console.

For the sake of argument I'll point out that mechwarrior was a successful table-top to real-time translation, but I know that Mechwarrior and Fallout are completely different so I'm not gonna push the issue. The issue is what made fallout fallout, and combat was not it. Quests, setting, dialogue trees and the ability to pimp your spouse. Those are all things that I'll agree cannot be left behind, but the combat engine is not something that needs to be there in order for it to be considered Fallout. I'll concede that maybe I went a bit too far in saying that it's not important. Some people may hold it dear, however, you've got to pick your battles. Battling against twitch-based combat is a valiant cause. But battling for iso-metric turnbased may be taking it a bit too far. If you're arguing for something that there's little chance of convincing them of doing, they aren't going to pay attention to you when you talk about stuff that they might change if they heard the reasonings.

Had a similar rant a while ago.

[Blargh]

forced

False. Both can be avoided, not necessarily through exploitation of A.I limitations either.

[POOPERSCOOPER]

Is it just me or did the writer completely miss the fact that ELDER SCROLLS 3 was the first time an elder scrolls game went onto consoles? That totally scared off the customers, but not as much as ELDER SCROLLS 4 did. It's even in the official title, despite them focusing on the world after it.

[AnneGwish]

Guess I'll have to try that some time to see what happens Blargh

[Mr. Teatime]

I know there are people who are going to disagree with me, but first turn RP combat can be done without the twitch (for those that don't want it). Deus Ex (the original) handled character skill to player skill quite admirably. Just because you're aiming at the guys head, doesn't mean the bullet's going there unless you've mastered that specific skill..

Hell, I just replayed the game and, save for the two forced combat scenes (You know those two), I didn't have to kill a single combatant. That was actually pretty intense (hadn't done it before).

I really don't mind if it's going to be first person, as long as they don't fuck it up.

I'll give you that Deus Ex did action-RPG combat well. THe wizardry series did turn based FP combat.
First person can work, no doubt. Even real time can work, again. The question is - is it Fallout?
If we get a game with PS:T level of depth, story and character, all translated into a gritty post-apoc setting, I'd join others in hailing it as a classic (like PS:T was). Again, would it be Fallout? That depends on other factors as well. Would it matter if it wasn't Fallout? I don't know. I'd like a Fallout sequel, but years ago we'd all resigned to there never being one anyway.

[DaC-Sniper]

Deus Ex would make melee combat almost useless, and in Fallout you could even bash somebody with a power armor by the power of your pure fist. I mean the view in Fallout 3 could be third person or free adjustable or even with an button, where you can switch to egoview, just to take a closer look at the Zomgs-graphics, but turnbased combat is in every viewport a must.

Also Deus Ex is a game, where the skill of yourself counts more than the skill, which you put in your character stats, Fallout is exactly the opposite of that.

[Smiley]

I'll give you that Deus Ex did action-RPG combat well. THe wizardry series did turn based FP combat.
First person can work, no doubt. Even real time can work, again. The question is - is it Fallout?
If we get a game with PS:T level of depth, story and character, all translated into a gritty post-apoc setting, I'd join others in hailing it as a classic (like PS:T was). Again, would it be Fallout? That depends on other factors as well. Would it matter if it wasn't Fallout? I don't know. I'd like a Fallout sequel, but years ago we'd all resigned to there never being one anyway.

I've come to terms with the fact that any Fallout sequal created will not be like the prior ones.

The questions for me are now, what would I consider good or fun enough to carry on Fallout?

If it has to come to an FPS, then Deus Ex is without a doubt the winner of a rolemodel..

Someone stated that melee is a problem, I agree. The only way I see this fixed is like in the starwars games, where you went to third person whenever you engaged in melee. Of course, characters should not move as fast as there..
The worst thing I see about this, is that it reeks of console controls...

[Tarnopol]

Unlike popular belief, there's still so much to improve in the field of turn-based, isometric combat.

If you look at games like Jagged Alliance 2, Silent Storm or XCOM, you'll find a good turnbased isometric combat, too.
Question is, are too much tactical combat options a good thing for a RolePlayingGame ?
Their usage depends on player's intelligence more than on char's abilities.

[SuperH]

And real-time reflex based gameplay does NOT require a player's abilities?

What the hell is this? Fallout always has had tactical combat and it has been one of its great features, why is this even a point of argument?

[Frater Perdurabo]

Deus Ex would make melee combat almost useless, and in Fallout you could even bash somebody with a power armor by the power of your pure fist. I mean the view in Fallout 3 could be third person or free adjustable or even with an button, where you can switch to egoview, just to take a closer look at the Zomgs-graphics, but turnbased combat is in every viewport a must.

Also Deus Ex is a game, where the skill of yourself counts more than the skill, which you put in your character stats, Fallout is exactly the opposite of that.

Wrong. Melee combat was a viable and very fun option in Deus Ex. One of the most fun ways of playing the game that I tried was playing the first half without killing anyone, and when the shit really hit the fan, just used grenades, melee weapons, rocket launchers, etc to kill them. Just not guns.

[AnneGwish]

I'm not saying Deus Ex is the be all end all of FP combat but it is at the very least a decent starting point. Hell, it doesn't even necessarily have to be FP, it could be third person adjustable (think of most racing games, even -those- have a somewhat adjustable camera), all I'm saying is that it can be instituted that character skill over player skill in something other than top-down can be instituted. Strategy doesn't require an isometric viewpoint and there are plenty of examples of games that prove that.