MCA on the Fallout editors

VasikkA · Post by **VasikkA** » Mon Sep 16, 2002 9:35 pm

Well, D&D system definitely sets some limits, no doubt about that. But, it has an original gameworld to CRPGs and a dark hellish atmosphere. Although there's linearity in gameplay, you have choices to make and possibility to play the game differently depending on your character. Multiple endings also exist, well almost, they depend on your conversation with the endboss. But the ah, so versatile and endless lines of dialogue... A good buy, I suggest you try it out Red.

OnTheBounce · Post by **OnTheBounce** » Mon Sep 16, 2002 10:11 pm

VasikkA wrote:Remember, Chris Avellone is not Tim Cain...

Are you saying that he doesn't bear the "Mark of Cain"? :mrgreen:

VasikkA wrote:So we can make a better bible...[emphasis added]

I don't know if you meant it the way I'm taking it, VasikkA, but one of the things that you can say about MCA is that he's willing to debate a subject and will back off and apologize if he's wrong. So, in effect, it is "we/us" making the FoB.

I hope we can get everything ironed out w/the FoB and then someone should redact it and put it in encyclopedia form. (I know, that would be a huge project.)

OTB

VasikkA · Post by **VasikkA** » Mon Sep 16, 2002 10:24 pm

OnTheBounce wrote:I don't know if you meant it the way I'm taking it, VasikkA, but one of the things that you can say about MCA is that he's willing to debate a subject and will back off and apologize if he's wrong. So, in effect, it is "we/us" making the FoB.

Yes, he will correct things if he's wrong, but certain game universe issues he has stated, have not been discussed thoroughly and generally accepted as fallout facts by the community and this has caused a small feud sometimes. As an example, I give you NCR and it's 300:1 people:car ratio.

OnTheBounce · Post by **OnTheBounce** » Mon Sep 16, 2002 10:37 pm

VasikkA wrote:Yes, he will correct things if he's wrong, but certain game universe issues he has stated, have not been discussed thoroughly and generally accepted as fallout facts by the community and this has caused a small feud sometimes. As an example, I give you NCR and it's 300:1 people:car ratio.

Yes, there have undoubtedly been feuds over some of the issues. ("Civil wars" might be a more applicable term.

) But like I said, he's willing to debate and since FO3 hasn't even gone into development yet - at least as far as we know - the day is not yet lost.

(BTW, it's a 200:1 ratio of people to vehicles.

)

OTB

VasikkA · Post by **VasikkA** » Mon Sep 16, 2002 10:52 pm

OnTheBounce wrote:(BTW, it's a 200:1 ratio of people to vehicles. )

It is? Geez, even worse.

Thanks for clearing that one out.

Saint_Proverbius · Post by **Saint_Proverbius** » Tue Sep 17, 2002 1:05 am

Dan wrote:But the FOB have some up sides. I like the idea of putting design documantien and concept art in it.
If he would limit the FOB to that, I think it would have been much better.

So, basically, what you're saying is the Fallout Bible would be better if it didn't include anything that MCA has done on his own?

TESTIFY!

Red · Post by **Red** » Tue Sep 17, 2002 1:32 am

I will envetually try it, when I have some spare change left (and that the game costs spare change, which it should about now).

My biggest fear about it is my disdain of the IE engine and the D&D rules though. I couldn't finish BG1. But hopefully with a better story and atmosphere I'll forget about it.

Constipated BladeRunner · Tue Sep 17, 2002 4:00 am

Red wrote:My biggest fear about it is my disdain of the IE engine and the D&D rules though. I couldn't finish BG1. But hopefully with a better story and atmosphere I'll forget about it.

You will.
Those who say the game is leniar in every aspect does not have any idea as to what they are talking about.
Hhhmmm, that guy at the gate, do I try to convince him that I have permission to go through or do I attempt to strangle him until he lets me through?
Playing PS:T with a 20IN, 20WIS and 20Char is completley diffirent than playing it with 20DX, 20ST and 20CON. And I dont mean on a macro level-(the story is the same (though great))- on a micro level.

OnTheBounce · Post by **OnTheBounce** » Tue Sep 17, 2002 4:36 am

Constipated BladeRunner wrote:...I dont mean on a macro level-(the story is the same (though great))- on a micro level.

But CBR, that's what people are talking about when they speak of linearity. If you're talking about "on a micro-level" you could also argue that FoT isn't linear, since you can use vastly different tactics depending on what squad you take. The point isn't that you can take different approaches to getting through the gate, but rather that you will have to get through the gate each and every time you play.

BTW, I'm neither attacking nor defending PS:T as I've never played it. I'm simply commenting on the linear/non-linear issue. (I have to say that if the stats that CRB quoted are any indicator I smell munchkins...)

OTB

Spazmo · Post by **Spazmo** » Tue Sep 17, 2002 4:42 am

That's just because PS:T gives you one extra stat point to give to your character at every level.

I think linearity is getting a bum rap here. Admittedly, non-linear games are good, especially when it works properly, like Fallout. But regardless of whether or not PS:T is linear, it's still a great game. Linearity is the only way for the game to convey its excellent story and make it work. Sure, we all like to have freedom to choose our actions in games, but just because it's linear doesn't mean it sucks.

Vikjunk · Post by **Vikjunk** » Tue Sep 17, 2002 5:04 am

Spazmo wrote:Sure, we all like to have freedom to choose our actions in games, but just because it's linear doesn't mean it sucks.

No, it's just an indicator that it has a greater chance to suck...

To be quite honest I've never seen a linear RPG done right. Most of the in-depth story people talk about in linear games have always seemed shallow and done to death to me. I haven't played PS:T so it might have a well done story, but I personally enjoyed the chance to explore the world of the game over the main story aspects they have. Even though I thought Fallouts story was pretty good though.

OnTheBounce · Post by **OnTheBounce** » Tue Sep 17, 2002 5:17 am

Spazmo wrote:Sure, we all like to have freedom to choose our actions in games, but just because it's linear doesn't mean it sucks.

Yes, another example of people assuming a value judgement when they read a description.

I'd say that a lot of people actually want to go too far overboard w/the non-linear aspects of FO. I actually get pretty irritated when people start going on and on about how time limits suck because they want the freedom to explore in a non-linear fashion (read: wander around "leveling up" by slaughtering hordes of critters in random encounters).

I'm no champion of non-linearity. It's a good feature of a game, but what I think is far more important is that I get to interact with the game and that my actions have impact. Here's an example of what I mean: I'm not really pissed off that FoT forces me to go through the same sequence of missions every time I play the game. (I will, however, say that this will lead to me getting tired of a game much more quickly.) I am pissed off that whether win at Gravestone (Kansas City) or not; whether I recover the arming device at Osceola or not; Plutonius will still be there at the end of the game to lend his strength in breaching Vault 0's door.

On a largely unrelated note, I think it would have been better if FoT focused on a squad rather than a main character whose death would end the game. I know that goes against the heroic aspects of the FO games to a certain extent, but then again it was a squad-based tactical game...

OTB

Red · Post by **Red** » Tue Sep 17, 2002 6:32 am

It's true.. there are pro's and Cons about linearity... For example, in FO1, a lot of people who tried it went up to Vault 15 and just stoped playing there since they didn't really know what to do next.

And well, a game is it's story really, and including too many options can be very tedious (and there are quite a few bugs left in both Fallouts that show this), thus giving too many options ins't necessarely the best answer. Some games are meant to be played as movies... But you play that game once (or maybe twice if you lreally like the story), but basically you get the same story every time. It's not a bad thing, it's just that it was designed to be a story you play out, not a game that you tailour to yourself.

Personally open-ended games more or less suck (ie: diablo, Black and White). It's A LOT of fun for a few weeks (some a few days, or even minutes...), but then the lack of any depth gets to you bored and you stop playing.

So you need a mix of both I guess, to make a "perfect" game, and well, Fallout is really a mix of both... There's the main plot, and a whole world to explore. Albeit the game should always be careful to make sure the character's current quest is clear - and VERY clear.

Rosh · Post by **Rosh** » Tue Sep 17, 2002 12:35 pm

Constipated BladeRunner wrote: See where I come from, PS: T came out BEFORE.I was talking about SinCity, dumbass.

Were you?

Yeah, but I mean, wouldnt you buy a Corvega at a steal after a Nuclear attack, regardless of patriotisim before the nuke raining.
I used the word could, and CA has grown up sense then-look at PS:T.

Survey says: what the hell are you smoking, kid? No mention of SinCity made, unless it was in your vacuous cranium.

Compared to the FOB and other things, PS:T was BETTER. It actually FIT into the Planescape setting without being a comparative hatchet job like Fallout 2 or the Fallout Bible (well, what it could have been if people didn't correct him at every turn - even then there's no hope). Hell, PS:T was far better than most of the bullshit and hot air that BIS has been squeezing out their cheeks for the last couple of years. If anything, they have been regressing so far.

Try again, Sparky.

As for linearity/non-linearity, linearity tends to severely cripple the play value. Just look at Gothic. Great game...until you get to Chapter 2 and it turns into Ultima IX Part II: In Prison. What was potentially a game where you could decide the outcome of the game in either good or bad means depending on who you joined was pissed on as it ripped away whatever decision making ability of yours away and left you with a by-mission storyline to follow like a shopping list. Much like most linear games. The replay in them is so tremendously limited.

A game that was non-linear in other means, but still a bit linear in story and was fun to play, is Arcanum. You can decide how to go through the different missions in a LOT of ways. It allows for good and bad methods, and allowing you to...well, ROLE-PLAY the damn game instead of ROLL-PLAY it. Even in a non-linear game, there should be an end goal - and if there's multiple end goals, then it spreads out the non-linearity even more into discernable plot paths and individual resolutions, much like Fallout's city endings. Since you're being pulled like a fish on a line in a linear game, there's really no more variation to those games than say...your average adventure game from Sierra.

Replay value = *yawn* Been there, done that.

Oh, sorry if I spoiled Gothic for anyone. :twisted:

Dan · Post by **Dan** » Tue Sep 17, 2002 4:03 pm

Constipated BladeRunner wrote:Playing PS:T with a 20IN, 20WIS and 20Char is completley diffirent than playing it with 20DX, 20ST and 20CON. And I dont mean on a macro level-(the story is the same (though great))- on a micro level.

Maybe, but you can play a 20 DX, 20 ST and 20 CON fighter and use items to boost your other skills to 20.

When I played I had 20 on the fighter stats and 20 Wis and Int, and that is a very bad thing.

VasikkA · Post by **VasikkA** » Tue Sep 17, 2002 6:21 pm

Dan wrote:Maybe, but you can play a 20 DX, 20 ST and 20 CON fighter and use items to boost your other skills to 20.

When I played I had 20 on the fighter stats and 20 Wis and Int, and that is a very bad thing.

True, blame D&D. :twisted: