Armour ideas

FireWolf · Post by **FireWolf** » Fri Aug 02, 2002 3:59 am

Not if you model it like they are lionheart. As I understand it they have a 2d background with 3d created sprites, the sprites are then used to make each animation allowing details to be changed without lengthy re-draw or whatever the problem was.

I think, given the development time and capital that fallout 3 deserves a 3d engine could be developed which captured the flare of the previous fallout titles. It can be done, of this I am sure. Just look at the 3d engines of today and you'll see there is enough detail in them to allow the character of the fallout world to be captured well.

While I love 2d RPGs you have to look at the competition. Pretty much every RPG is going to be 3d from now on. This may mean they're going to look crap or whatever but its simply marketability. If yours is the only game in 2d in a 3d market your title looks dated on release.

The Shrike · Post by **The Shrike** » Fri Aug 02, 2002 5:21 am

I dont believe that we are to the point where every CRPG is going to be in 3d. No matter what most of the game industry is trying to make us believe. There will be a point in which this does happen but 3d is not quite far enough to where it looks better than the 2d backgrounds we have had in most CRPG's to this point.

FireWolf · Post by **FireWolf** » Fri Aug 02, 2002 5:31 am

It's really not what we think that matters. It's what the marketing department thinks we think or want. 3D is moving into all genres. more RTS are moving or have moved to 3D, RPGs are going the same way. It's the way the market is flowing and if you choose not to follow the market trend you get left behind.

The Shrike · Post by **The Shrike** » Fri Aug 02, 2002 5:44 am

what I am trying to say is that we are getting close but we are not there yet. Lionheart is an example of this. It has a 2d background

Constipated BladeRunner · Fri Aug 02, 2002 5:49 am

Those who think that 3D cannot look good have never heard of "Doom 3".
Remeber that FO3 will not be out tommorow, and therefore can use next-gen technology.

FireWolf · Post by **FireWolf** » Fri Aug 02, 2002 5:50 am

Lionheart would be a good example but the technology is really only in use because they can't afford to build a full 3d engine. This is, afterall, interplay. They have tight budgets.

The Shrike · Post by **The Shrike** » Fri Aug 02, 2002 12:13 pm

That verry well may be the case but I would like to point to TORN once again and how ugly the graphics were. What I am saying is that BIS does not have people that know 3d engines that well at this point. and ugly graphics can sink a game. Part of the reason TORN was canned was because of the problems BIS was having with the 3d engine.

Those who think that 3D cannot look good have never heard of "Doom 3".Remeber that FO3 will not be out tommorow, and therefore can use next-gen technology.

To get the use of a top of the line 3d engine developed by somone else costs money, and lots of it. IPLY does not have that luxury right now. If they decide to make the game(Fallout 3) in the imediate future they would have to either go 2d or end up with a cheaper 3d engine which would most likely turn out like shit.

VasikkA · Post by **VasikkA** » Fri Aug 02, 2002 4:38 pm

Shrike, remember we are talking about the future, it's hard to predict when Fallout 3 gets done but it's going to be several years in the future. 2d engines are very detailed, you're right about that. But just look at the textures in NWN, if you own a copy, 3d engines nowadays are not far away from the detail level in 2d engines, maybe they even already have exceeded that level. I guess talks about Fallout 3 going 3d are not so wrong as they used to be a while ago. 3d games will slowly kill the 2d market, believe me. And BIS can't just satisfy a bunch of 2d fanatics, they have to reach a broader market.

FireWolf · Post by **FireWolf** » Fri Aug 02, 2002 6:28 pm

Civilisation isnt 3d and doesnt look like its going to switch to 3d anytime soon. games in 2d can work as well as 3d games. The RPG market may split into 2 groups, 2d and 3d. the thing is there is a limit on 2d games. There's no change in perspective which may be a blessing or a curse and there is the limit on what can be happening in a 2d game. 3d games can have greatly interactive environments and moving set pieces, flashy light effects and a rotatable camera. while there are always going to be gamers who prefer 2d and stay loyal to them 3d is going to be the way into the future.

Many games which are up and comming are getting to look very good. The textures are very detailed and models can be very complicated allowing a game to have all the charm of a 2d game.

If fallout 3 was to be released tomorrow the best form for it to be released in would be 2d in the lionheart way. But, fallout 3 (it will come) is not going to be released for a long time at least 3 years. In that time graphical quality will continue to increase in leaps and bounds.

GooChunks · Post by **GooChunks** » Fri Aug 16, 2002 1:30 am

Yesterday I read this thread and saw in the early posts that people wanted to see PA with guns on it and letting it be able to turn into a vehicle, what the hell, in the fallout series PA isnt that tecnically advanced to turn into a vechicle and plus no offense put thats dumb idea, PA is suppose to be bulky and bit rusted and its not suppose to have special properties like a transformer. Plus the shoulder lamp idea was great because it would seem very true to the game, night vision want around in the 50's, I also think the damaged armour was a good idea because in reality not every armour would be brand new looking and well keep.

OnTheBounce · Post by **OnTheBounce** » Fri Aug 16, 2002 2:12 am

GooChunks wrote:...night vision wan[s']t around in the 50's...

That depends on whether you're talking about active or passive night vision. The former uses something to penetrate darkness with, such as a beam of infrared; while passive night vision amplifies ambient light until it is perceptible by the human eye, or senses heat.

The former was around during the 1940s, as the Germans had both IR sight-equipped rifles as well as combat vehicles. However the latter wasn't invented until much later.

Basically, there is room for night-vision in the FO universe, but has to look the part. Just as the night-vision equipment of WWII was bulky beyond belief by today's standards, so should the NV equipment of the FO universe be. Also, not every suit of PA should come equipped with it. It should be an add-on item, or an independent item like the Motion Sensor. It should also have a limited battery life and be suseptible to damage in combat. This in addition to having its positive combat effects balanced out by negative ones.

OTB

Blarg · Post by **Blarg** » Fri Aug 16, 2002 10:15 pm

More info: http://seussbeta.tripod.com/imaging.html Scroll to Near-Infrared Imaging.

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/ir.htm scroll down for infantry details.

http://www.howstuffworks.com/nightvision.htm (overview)http://www.howstuffworks.com/nightvision3.htm (a bit on active IR)
http://www.arctic-1.com/works2.htm

OnTheBounce · Post by **OnTheBounce** » Sat Aug 17, 2002 2:24 am

Blarg wrote:http://www.achtungpanzer.com/ir.htm scroll down for infantry details.

*hehe* Achtung, Panzer! I haven't been there in quite some time. Good ol' George Parada. I remember him from my days on the feldgrau.com board.

OTB

Strap · Post by **Strap** » Sat Aug 17, 2002 7:06 am

lol, that would be hilarious to have that huge thing on your gun-- that could break.

you should be able to get only 1 or 2, and have to interchange them from 1 weapon to another , but that would require an hour of your time. and only some weapons could be fitted with it.

lol, the FN FAL night site was soo small

Meths · Post by **Meths** » Mon Sep 16, 2002 11:05 pm

Just got idea: What if the power armor required some very costy operation to wear it? Anyway, your brain would have to be connected with it somehow, otherwise you wouldn't be able to use it without losing a few points of agility. It would also prevent player from getting the armor very early in the game.

what do you say?

VasikkA · Post by **VasikkA** » Mon Sep 16, 2002 11:15 pm

Meths wrote:Just got idea: What if the power armor required some very costy operation to wear it? Anyway, your brain would have to be connected with it somehow, otherwise you wouldn't be able to use it without losing a few points of agility. It would also prevent player from getting the armor very early in the game.

what do you say?

I say: You wouldn't lose a few points of agility because it's powered. It's easing your movement. To prevent the player getting the armor early is to not put it in a place where you can get it early from, for example making it a quest item. We've previously had an armour thread somewhere.. with some pretty good ideas and suggestions, such as a kick-ass shoulderlamp.

Also, if armors in Fallout 3 would consist of 'parts', like different helmets or boots, power armor would be one whole piece. If the PA needs to be balanced more into the game, then maybe a CHR penalty might be appropriate. :roll:

Meths · Post by **Meths** » Mon Sep 16, 2002 11:25 pm

VasikkA wrote:I say: You wouldn't lose a few points of agility because it's powered. It's easing your movement.

Sure as hell you would. Unless it's controlled directly from your brain. Then this armor would be actually your second body. With the manual control of it, you'd become extremely clumsy.

The operation would form a kinda port somewhere in the upper parts of your spine, that you can connect your nerves with with the central computer that controls the armor.

Dan · Post by **Dan** » Mon Sep 16, 2002 11:57 pm

I don't see why the power armor can't just have extremly advanced sensors that detect your movment and order the armor motivators to move.

Meths · Post by **Meths** » Tue Sep 17, 2002 1:11 am

That's exacly what i'm calling "manual". I don't think it would be practical - you'd certainly lose on coordination. It would be even easier solution to intercept singals from your nerves, and direct them into the armor motivators. It should prevent some uncontrolled moves.

Actually none of us really knows how it works. We can only speculate and try to choose the easiest solution.

I'm just trying to maka PA as hard to get as it's possible, think about the satisfaction, when you finally get able to wear it. It would be kind of trophy.

VasikkA · Post by **VasikkA** » Tue Sep 17, 2002 5:40 pm

Meths wrote:I'm just trying to maka PA as hard to get as it's possible, think about the satisfaction, when you finally get able to wear it. It would be kind of trophy.

I felt like that when I first found it in the original Fallout.

On the agility subject, you're right, we can only speculate. But in all Fallouts, you've been able to run wearing the armor. If it would be a 12th century knight armor, I'm sure the US wouldn't have used it in the great war. Using pistols, daggers, pressing buttons etc. suffers no penalty wearing the PA in Fallout, so I guess the movement sensors and automation are pretty well done in the Power Armor, despite its size.