Pete Hines interviewed by JÃ¶rg Spielt

Post by **Alexander** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:38 am

[ Person -> Interview ] - More info on <a href="#Pete Hines">Person: Pete Hines</a> | More info on <a href="#Bethesda Softworks">Company: Bethesda Softworks</a> | More info on <a href="#Fallout 3">Game: Fallout 3</a>

At this point, Bethesda seems to be telling the same things to everyone — however, in this interview by Jörg Langer, Pete answers some unique and interesting questions. Most notable were answers regarding how Fallout 3 will utilise the SPECIAL system and VATS:<blockquote>Jörg: Although the crosshairs were right on top of
a opponent, you didn’t hit him. Ist that the underlying skills and
role-playing system?
Pete Hines: Where bullets go, is based on a die
roll, combined from what is your skill with the weapon and the weapon’s
condition. That is why improving a weapon’s condition is very
important, it gives you a much higher fire rate and percentage of
hitting. Normally, the better weapons have a pretty low condition when
you find them, so you have to find more weapons of the same type in
order to improve it.Jörg: But will younger players not being used to
old fashioned role playing games understand the concept? Or will they
say, “what the heck, why am I missing my targets all the time”?
Pete Hines: In the tutorial, when you go through
your youth in several steps, we explain about it. You get a BB airgun
on your birthday and learn to use it from your father. Ultimately,
combat is only one part of Fallout 3. Obviously, it is important, but
there are the quests and the skill system and the experience points and
how you use them and trading and all that stuff. All that is a part of
Fallout 3. So if the dialogue is good and the quests are fun, then
you’ll be doing a lot of that stuff, too.
Jörg: The VaultTec Assisted Targeting System — can it be turned on anytime I like
Pete Hines: Yes. Actually, the way we play the
game, we sometimes use it as a pause mode just to see where the enemies
are. Even if we don’t have any action points to use it to fire at
opponents. Because your perception skill determines what other
characters are visible to you. You may see it in the 3D world, but it
is not selectable in V.A.T.S. mode. If your perception skill is really
high, you can even perceive people that are behind a door. So you can
walk up to a door, go into V.A.T.S. mode, and detect somebody standing
behind it.</blockquote>Pete also briefly touches on the subject of karma and "good" and "bad":<blockquote>Jörg: In the demonstration it looked like you would
visit Megaton very early in the game. So you meet Mr. Burke, who gives
you the quest to destroy Megaton. Is that right?
Pete Hines: Yes, it comes fairly early on.
Jörg: So what happens when you choose to destroy it?
Pete Hines: You get the worst karma score that you
could possibly get. That’s the most evil thing you could ever do! That
town’s gone – but it opens up ten penny tower, where Mr. Burke is from,
which is this different, competing town whose characters are more
inclined to people with low karma. You won’t meet them without
destroying Megaton.</blockquote>Read the rest <a href="http://www.joergspielt.de/pete-hines-en/" target="_blank">here</a>.Spotted @ <a href="http://fallout3.wordpress.com/">Briosafreak's Fallout 3 Blog</a>

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:27 pm

Why didn't they just go with a fucking iso view then? That doesn't make any sense; you can shoot on an ennemy but might not hit it even though your crosshair is straight on it and you're 2 feet away from him; you can see ennemies but you can't shoot them, what the hell? What's the point of going FPS if you plan on making up a combat system like that?

That's really terrible. It won't appeal to nobody at all.

Amis · Post by **Amis** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:56 pm

So you have to destroy a town to be a low karma dude?
instead of having the old fallout system of making multiple choices you have two choices?

jetbaby · Post by **jetbaby** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 3:48 pm

Amis wrote:So you have to destroy a town to be a low karma dude?
instead of having the old fallout system of making multiple choices you have two choices?

But after each of those choices you have another two-choice decision! And then you get the good ending or the bad ending.

Koki · Post by **Koki** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:17 pm

S4ur0n27 wrote:Why didn't they just go with a fucking iso view then? That doesn't make any sense; you can shoot on an ennemy but might not hit it even though your crosshair is straight on it and you're 2 feet away from him; you can see ennemies but you can't shoot them, what the hell? What's the point of going FPS if you plan on making up a combat system like that?

That's really terrible. It won't appeal to nobody at all.

Isn't this exactly like Failblivion?

Oh wait. In Failblivion when you aimed right you were always hitting, just that you did 1 damage if your archery sucked even if you hit the dude squarely in the face.

Well, I guess they somehow exceeded my expectations and managed to do the combat system even dumber. I really did not expect that, I thought Failblivion was the low.
Almost impressive.

aries100 · Post by **aries100** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:14 pm

As long as the to hit ratio is built upon, or depended upon, your character's skills, the weapon's condition and a die roll, I'm content. This is what roleplaying is, not being able to hit your opponent everytime, since you don't have high enough perception, agility or some other skills used to determine if your hit or not.

However, VATS is still fuzzy to me...

PsychoSniper2 · Post by **PsychoSniper2** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:14 pm

jetbaby wrote:
Amis wrote:So you have to destroy a town to be a low karma dude?
instead of having the old fallout system of making multiple choices you have two choices?
But after each of those choices you have another two-choice decision! And then you get the good ending or the bad ending.

TWO CHOICES ?

WOW!*

EPAC!*

NEXT GEN!*

WOWZA!*

* Sarcasm

PiP · Post by **PiP** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:23 pm

S4ur0n27 wrote: you can shoot on an ennemy but might not hit it even though your crosshair is straight on it (...) What's the point of going FPS if you plan on making up a combat system like that?

That's really terrible. It won't appeal to nobody at all.

well this sort of approach apeals to quite a few people playing for example America's Army, one of the most popular online multi-FPS games - crosshair is still in this case, but where bulets go is affected by your motion, position, fatigue and stuff like that. So, in essence, bullets don't go exactly where the crosshair is and yet lots of people like it.

LoneGunman · Post by **LoneGunman** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:37 pm

which is the wrong kind of people!

People that belives realism = Ã¼berness deserves to hang by their balls and lowered again in small jerks!!!

FACT!

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 9:20 pm

Koki wrote:
S4ur0n27 wrote:Why didn't they just go with a fucking iso view then? That doesn't make any sense; you can shoot on an ennemy but might not hit it even though your crosshair is straight on it and you're 2 feet away from him; you can see ennemies but you can't shoot them, what the hell? What's the point of going FPS if you plan on making up a combat system like that?

That's really terrible. It won't appeal to nobody at all.
Isn't this exactly like Failblivion?

Actually, this is exactly like Morrowind, which isn't a MUCH better step up.

Que in Psychosniper SKREEEEE picture.

PsychoSniper2 · Post by **PsychoSniper2** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:13 pm

LoneGunman wrote:which is the wrong kind of people!

People that belives realism = Ã¼berness deserves to hang by their balls and lowered again in small jerks!!!

FACT!

Realism in a shooter = nice (Operation Flashpoint, for example)

But then, FO3 claims to be a RPG, which means its teh ghey either way, as it will either be a alleged RPG that plays like a shooter, or a shooter thats made annoying with RPG elements done poorly.

Machiavelli · Post by **Machiavelli** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 2:17 am

The system seems like morrowind which was irritating but still kind of realistic. When you shoot in real life all kinds of things can affect your point of aim, so while you think you're dead on, you'll miss by a mile. But I don't play games to do things I do in real life I play them to relax.

I've always hated when I play a game and I can see all these things, but when I go into combat I can't see any of them anymore. Why let me know they're there? Takes all the tactical consideration out of it. Looks like everyone was right, this is gonna suck.

PsychoSniper2 · Post by **PsychoSniper2** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 5:52 am

Machiavelli wrote:Looks like everyone was right, this is gonna suck.

You only just now figured this out ?

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 6:28 am

The fact that "Caution" is written backwards still bothers me.

Edit: And really, when you put the two armors side by side like that, they...look pretty close, however I think the point is that BoS don't belong on East Coast, so point taken.

Mr. Teatime · Post by **Mr. Teatime** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 9:14 am

The armours look pretty similar.

I guess it was my worry that the BOS will have a prominent role to play in the game, when they've always been guardians in the bakcground, and not really a major part in the game - FO1 especially.

Seeing a badass soldier splashed on all the media stuff concerns me in that way.

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 12:55 pm

The BoS still made the cover on FO1.

Caleb · Post by **Caleb** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 8:18 pm

remember everyone...at pe 11 you can cast psionic spells!

i can't even think of a comparison for the vats crap... and the "cinematic played out death sequences" seems to mean over half the game will be death animations.

having the condition of the weapon and everything like that determine hit percentage would be great..except i don't give a fuck who you are.. point blank with a shotgun you can't miss, and you damned well know that according to them you'll be able to.

Mr. Teatime · Post by **Mr. Teatime** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 9:41 pm

I think you're being overly negative. I dislike the way the PR's being done, but the game itself -the info we've gotten, at least - is equal good and bad, really.

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:37 pm

Which makes it extremely mediocre sounding at best.

Thor Kaufman · Post by **Thor Kaufman** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:47 pm

extremely mediocre? at least it's extreme in a mediocre way, eh?