Outside 'the box'

[Skynet Brain Bot]

Well most debates on Fallout 3 seem to be focused around, keepign the game the same / making some worthwhile changes.

What about a compromise - as in X-Com Apocalypse how about the choice between playing in different modes:
Fallout Classic: same angled, 2d, isometric view, turn based combat, simplied command and interface
Fallout advanced: fully rotational, 3d, isometric view, real time combat and gameplay, more complex interface rather than simply point'n'nclick

This doesnt have to be an inbattle choice, simply a toggle switch in options, it will allow the player to decide how they expereince the game

[Doyle]

this is an arguement?

You bet it is. People discussing differing opinions sure sounds like an argument to me.

i think you have trouble reading doyle.

I think you have trouble thinking.

How have i been shown that i am wrong, i am simply trying to share my ideas... some people have a very disruptive nature.

Well, you made the statement that unarmed and melee aren't useful skills, which is utterly ludicrous. My experience with the games is enough to tell me that's wrong.

Furthermore, you made the statement that having the option to play a melee character damaged the role-playing aspects of the game. This is so fundamentally flawed that I'm surprised to even bothered to type it, and people have made as much clear.

It sure looks to me like people have provided good arguments against your statements, but all you've done is claim we're afraid to change. Unfortunately for you, disagreeing with someone who is wrong is not the same thing as being afraid of change.

[Skynet Brain Bot]

Doyle, understand that you are not making yourself seem intelligent nor mature. If you want to tell me i am wrong or just want to belittle me please do so in a private message, save your comments and respond about how to make Fallout 3 a better game.

The 'brute' character is severly inhibiting to either of the Fallout games, to be sucessful as a melee character you require lots!!! of skill point in melee and unarmed twice that most would need in ranged weapons. Because you are using these point in only 2 categories you are losing out on skills in other categories such as social skills (speech, barter) practical skills (science, lockpicking, steal)
Then of course you must put point into strength, endurance and agility... although agiligty does add to most skills, by leaving out intelligence and charisma you miss many quests.

[Doyle]

Doyle, understand that you are not making yourself seem intelligent nor mature. If you want to tell me i am wrong or just want to belittle me please do so in a private message, save your comments and respond about how to make Fallout 3 a better game.

Uh huh. Listen, anything you say in a public forum is open to debate. If you say something questionable, especially in this forum, expect to get called on it. If you can't understand that, then you have a lot to learn about forums.

The 'brute' character is severly inhibiting to either of the Fallout games, to be sucessful as a melee character you require lots!!! of skill point in melee and unarmed twice that most would need in ranged weapons. Because you are using these point in only 2 categories you are losing out on skills in other categories such as social skills (speech, barter) practical skills (science, lockpicking, steal)
Then of course you must put point into strength, endurance and agility... although agiligty does add to most skills, by leaving out intelligence and charisma you miss many quests.

Disregarding all skills and stats that aren't directly related to unarmed/melee isn't necessary. Remember, we've all played the games here so you can't bullshit about stuff like that. However, if you want to play like that, that's up to you. If you do choose to play like that, it's just another role-playing option available to you. It does not in any way limit your ability to play a role. If you want to get every quest regardless of your stats and skills, go play Baldur's Gate, because that isn't going to happen in Fallout.

[Skynet Brain Bot]

doyle, this is a forum, people debate and discuss. you are not debating, you are turning this into an arguement and a chidlish one at that. You comment that i am trying to bullshit people or claim my opinion as fact, then you have a lot to learn about the english language and the subtlties of conversation.

1) i didn't say that i did or a person had to downgrade all their non melee stats in order to be a good fighter merely that a bi product of being a brute character is reduced stats in areas that are somewhat important.
2) my original point was that there should always be was to gain and finish 7 out of 10 quests without having to dabble in all skills. Instead of there being just a logical way to solve a problem there could also be a lucky solution or be able to destroy (literally) the problem.
If you dont have access to many of the quests then what are you doing in the game?? walking around killing all foes, mindlessly wandering till you get a quests and re-emerge into the story. Without multi solution quests then we might aswell be playing a simple hack n slash such as Baldurs Gate.
3) melee npcs, especially sulik. cannot compare to those with ranged weapons. Although they have greater hit point and action point they suffer from poor scripts, and the intelligence to run into the enemies line of fire and many times to remove them from yours.

[Spazmo]

What about a compromise - as in X-Com Apocalypse how about the choice between playing in different modes:
Fallout Classic: same angled, 2d, isometric view, turn based combat, simplied command and interface
Fallout advanced: fully rotational, 3d, isometric view, real time combat and gameplay, more complex interface rather than simply point'n'nclick

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, NO!

The bulk of the combat in Fallout involves ranged weapons, and ranged weapons in real time DOES NOT WORK, as has been proved by Arcanum and Another War. And having an option between turn-based and real-time willl only lead to two quite unsatisfactory modes. See, again, Arcanum. Having to fuck around with a camera is just a pain in the ass and detracts from gameplay. And here's a free game design tip: COMPEX INTERFACE = BAD. Fallout's interface had all the depth and power it needed for the player to do all he needed to do.

[The Shrike]

1) i didn't say that i did or a person had to downgrade all their non melee stats in order to be a good fighter merely that a bi product of being a brute character is reduced stats in areas that are somewhat important.

Did you even read other people's posts? I ask because you keep bringing this back up. Being a brute has no serious negative effects to where you can't complete the game or get a majority of the quests. What stats are reduced to severly limit your role playing options?

I am another person who has not had trouble beeing a brute character. I had plenty of quests available to me. Not every quest should be available to every type of character. I somtimes wonder if you have even played the origional Fallout as you seem to give more examples from Fallout 2.

2) my original point was that there should always be was to gain and finish 7 out of 10 quests without having to dabble in all skills. Instead of there being just a logical way to solve a problem there could also be a lucky solution or be able to destroy (literally) the problem.
If you dont have access to many of the quests then what are you doing in the game?? walking around killing all foes, mindlessly wandering till you get a quests and re-emerge into the story. Without multi solution quests then we might aswell be playing a simple hack n slash such as Baldurs Gate.

This really makes me wonder if you played the origional. I was able to play through the game without firing a shot. Quests could be completed by diplomat characters, sneaky characters and fighter type characters. I played as all these characters and had no trouble completing the game. some quests were easier with certain characters.

3) melee npcs, especially sulik. cannot compare to those with ranged weapons. Although they have greater hit point and action point they suffer from poor scripts, and the intelligence to run into the enemies line of fire and many times to remove them from yours.

Yeah he could. He could plow through raiders and most foes with his sledge and eventualy super sledge with no problem. Why do you seem to be the only one who has a problem with Sulik?

[Skynet Brain Bot]

Its not that i am having a problem with playing as these characters it is that you inevitably need certain skills in order to suceed.

Although i can complete the game with my melee charcters there is so little too it. Without enough intelligence or speech i cant give the right responses or get the good quests, although eventually i can gain the skills and do the quests, it takes longer and is less fulfilling. you need in game brains to get far, and even if your character is a complete moron you can still get through the game because there are permenant quests that you can always do.

Less than bright characters are unfulfilling to role play as, you miss the
quests and some of the story simply because you put too much into the 'wrong' stats. i use a 'brute' melee charcter as an example because you sacrifice brains for power and this never seems worthwhile.

sulik= vastly over rated, and a good example of a poor melee character

I am playing fallout 2 again after several years so it is at the forefront of my mind and therefore i use it to make examples.

I do read others posts, but i have the right to disagree with them and they have the right to disagree with me. no insulting though **coughs** that means you doyle and kashluk**coughs**

[Spazmo]

YOU DON'T HAVE TO SACRIFICE INTELLIGENCE AND SPEECH TO MAKE A GOOD MELEE/UNARMED CHARACTER!

You can do so if you want to, but you don't have to. My last FO2 game was a melee/unarmed guy with a high speech skill who got by just fine. Not all melee chars necessarily have 10 ST, AG, and EN.

[atoga]

sbb > are you forgetting about a little trait called 'gifted'? Also, Sulik was fine.

[Insane-Lark]

There are some excellent uses for drug cocktails, when you need that little extra speed. strength & damage resistance. I've taken out Enclave patrols with mele characters & yet had no problem talking my way through situations.

A mele or HtH character is a viable roleplaying option. While it is true that sometimes you get fried with an unlucky critical, you can't really say that gun toting RPers don't run into the same problem.

As for ompanions shooting you in the back, yeah they DO tend to do that but it can easily be controlled by taking care what you leave in their inventory. Don't want Marcus to let you have it with a minigun? Don't give him one & opt for a nice lazer rifle etc.

[Radoteur]

I like the idea of crippling someone or getting them really weak and having them beg for mercy or something. Perhaps they can plead for their life, saying they have some vital information.

I think the designers did a pretty good job making melee/diplomat/sniper/thief characters all pretty fun. Of course, some "classes" limit options, but that's understandable. Perhaps a way to balance, if it's needed, would be to give the ability to beat information out of people in some cases, where a diplomat would be able to talk it out of someone or trick them into giving the info.

Some tougher NPC's wouldn't give up easily, like a sheriff or soldier, whereas a doctor or civilian type character would give up easily.

[Duc]

Yes, beating the information out of someone would be neat in Fallout. Perhaps a combination of speech, and unarmed would be even better for tougher cases, such as how the Lieutenant uses against you.

Talking, and explaining things, then beating the person when they mock, or disagree.

I liked how they added in the Lieutenants interrogation.

However based on the combat system it could not be done, so....like the Lieutenants, the skill would have to be an out of combat one, which does damage to people, but does not kill them, and gets reactions from them.

[Rad_Man]

To reply to the original post:

1) be focused on the 'vault dweller' and his descendants.
2) be have to be a prequal/sequal.
3) be set in california.
4) be about a hero going on a vital quest.
5) involve a human PC.
6) be focused on a single PC (i want to control my npc's and send them on quests that i wouldnt touch with a 20ft pole)
7) a clone of Fallout (and you know it will be!!!)

1) I completely agree with you I thought the descendent of the vault dweller thing in FO2 was stupid. The whole inheriting the pip boy was like something out of a fantasy game inheriting a magic sword or something stupid. If they do the whole decent of the village dweller or some thing in FO3 it will just cut off there options.
2) Yeah I agree but it is very likely it will be a sequel :(
3) Personally I think the more they use California the fewer options the game developers have and it is likely to cause more contradictions they will create like the NCR vault in FO2 ( the layout some how had changed!). I think FO3 should be set in the eastern seaboard of USA. It could still retain much of its atmosphere but give the developers much more room to expand.
4) I think it could be base solely on survival it first and than later in the game expanded. Like it first your only goal is to survive as long as possible to you find out about the super-baddie and you need to wipe out/join super-baddie in order to survive, but unlike FO1 & FO2 it could be about personal survival. Not helping vault/village. (But you could help towns if u were nice)
5) I disagree the non-human aspect in FOT, it was the worst. (Not only was very inappropriate or thee brotherhood, one of the reasons I stopped playing it half way through) Almost every other RPG (fantasy ones) have other races you can play, and it is over used.
6) Umm... Non-player-characters. But if you mean having multiply player characters I think it is against the lonely feeling or fallout.
7) But fallout was sooooooooooo good. I could live with a clone but that’s no going to happen.
Well thats my 2 cents worth.

[Fang_Teng]

Yes, beating the information out of someone would be neat in Fallout. Perhaps a combination of speech, and unarmed would be even better for tougher cases, such as how the Lieutenant uses against you.

I like the idea of crippling someone or getting them really weak and having them beg for mercy or something. Perhaps they can plead for their life, saying they have some vital information.

Okay, you guys just TWISTED my non-lethal takedown into a sadist interrogation. Haha, I guess that's how Fallout good/evil works then.

I also remembered in Fallout 1, I ran around using a Combat Armored Baton twirling person that crippled caravaners and repeatedly kept using the 'steal' option with impunity (people couldn't attack back if I failed).


I mean, if it's possible, there's a lot of possibility of adding a non-lethal takedown character.

[Skynet Brain Bot]

Non-lethal takedowns? what are we talking here tranq guns, stun batons, pepper spray, cs gas grenades? i could see quests where these might be useful.... gaining acess to buildings quickly and quietly, making battles easier by putting a number of the enemy to sleep. defusing a dangerous situation.
But this has an obvious down side they wouldnt work immediatly, or at least most wouldnt.. as we saw in Deus Ex, a silent take down attempt may result in the alarm being rasied or the other enemies being shown of your presence. a factor in whether a s-t (silent takedown, abbreviating for the sake of it) is sucessful would be weapon used, species of enemy, enemy hitpoints, enemy line of sight & time of day.
There is of course the added bonus of playing a pacifist charcter, not afraid to fight but doesn't want to harm another living creature. So are we thinking a spy character (sneak, non-lethal) here? a simple adaptation from the ever popular assassin (sneak and small guns:rifles). The only problem i see here is that.... would non-lethal weapons be a seperate skill category or a series of weapons that fit into many (tranq gun: small guns, stun baton: melee)

I don't know why but the idea of interrogation sounds like alot of fun.... in the various organisations you join with in your quest it wouldnt be unfair fo them to ask you to get some information from a prisoner, i believe they slightly had that in f2 with you beating a prisoner in ncr. Maybe you could slowly break their fingers till you get the information you want but if you don't do enough they lie, and if you do it too much they become incoherant and lie. All this would of course lower your karma and ruin reputation in some places but thats the price for information.

There should be a player balance system where less emphasis is put on intelligence, charisma and agility. I am willing to concede that a melee pc may be as effective as a ranged one, but it simply limits my options because unarmed and melee require so many skill points to be effective... but i guess thats just my experience. If anything melee skills should require less skill points because, how well trained do you have to be to swing a hammer or punch a person in the face? not very!!

[Megatron]

Non-lethal takedowns? what are we talking here tranq guns, stun batons, pepper spray, cs gas grenades? i could see quests where these might be useful.... gaining acess to buildings quickly and quietly, making battles easier by putting a number of the enemy to sleep. defusing a dangerous situation. bla bla bla

i'd be happy if blunt melee weapons put enemys to sleep after hitting them around the head, or knives to the back didn't get everyone in the town after you.

The other stuff about the danger of raising the alarm-wouldn't this be the same if you went in shooting everyone?

I don't know why but the idea of interrogation sounds like alot of fun.... in the various organisations you join with in your quest it wouldnt be unfair fo them to ask you to get some information from a prisoner,

Interrogation/kidnapping would be intresting. The higher endurance npcs could take more of a beating etc.

Fallout imo needs to add more stuff to do in your spare time to get exp besiudes quests, like kidnapping someone and then getting ransom, getting really secret information about a town from a normal towns-person etc.

There should be a player balance system where less emphasis is put on intelligence, charisma and agility.

I think it doesn't need balancing, it's just how you play. Players can choose the tough walking tanks, and get exp from fights and be able to survive going into a deathclaw nest and picking up items. Players who choose the smart guy can get information easier, but pure 'talkers' are usually horrible at combat.

[VasikkA]

Skynet, your arguments and wacky ideas are just plain wrong.

a bi product of being a brute character is reduced stats in areas that are somewhat important.

What?? Just take the skill points away from one of the ranged weapon skills. No other sacrifice needed.

Fallout advanced: fully rotational, 3d, isometric view, real time combat and gameplay, more complex interface rather than simply point'n'nclick

Well, I've got something for you righthere, baby!

melee npcs, especially sulik. cannot compare to those with ranged weapons. Although they have greater hit point and action point they suffer from poor scripts, and the intelligence to run into the enemies line of fire and many times to remove them from yours.

Umm, then why don't you suggest that NPC control or AI needs to be improved, rather than blaming the melee-ness? If you don't like Sulik, fine, then don't pick him up. NPCs need variety, in my opinion.

[requiem_for_a_starfury]

Hasn't the use of force been done already, if not if FO 1&2 then there's at least one RPG where if you have a low intelligence but high strength you can threaten people into telling you information.

The only danger in Deus Ex or the Thief games when using a non-lethal weapon is that if you fumble your attack you can find yourself facing a hostile opponent trying to kill you with swords/guns while you've still got a sap or baton equipped. I'd like the npcs to react to sound, not just sight or having the combat mode initiated once you make an attack.

Personally I'd like the next game to be set mainly in one location, wandering around the wasteland looking for random/special encounters gets a little boring, and doesn't really fit with the role we had been playing.

I've found the games pretty well balanced, I've not tried every type of character, but I'd reckon most of the quests in FO2 where there for the lower intelligence characters. If you are playing a highly intelligent character you go to Klamath find out that Vic is in the Den. Go to the Den and arrange Vic's release, Vic tells you about Vault City and you think either it's your ancestors vault or will maybe have a GECK or at least info on where to find one. You go to VC and find out it's not the right vault and doesn't have a spare GECK, you take the citizens test and if you have the right stats you gain access to the vault. Once in the vault you check the computers for info, you get the location of V15 and decide to check it out and head straight there. At V15 you learn the location of V13 and travel straight there, in V13 you need the speech module and once you have found one (assuning here that you are playing a goody two-shoes) you get the GECK. Now with your quest near completion you head back to Arroyo, where you find your village gone. With a new quest you head south following the coastline until you reach Navarro and San Fran. Once the tanker is repaired you go to the Oil rig, sneak in wearing your APA, rescue your people and blow up the rig and have a happy ending.

All the other towns and quests are there for the less intelligent, lucky and perceptive characters, for the ones who can't get the location of V15 or V13 from the computers, cause if you are Role Playing the game your character will want to get the GECK or water chip as fast as possible so they can return to their people triumphant.

[Skynet Brain Bot]

Vasikka in your opinion my ideas are wrong. I have suggested better ai scripts for npcs or the ability to control them outright (which has been booed down so lets forget i said that) being able to shout orders at them in battle would also be a worthwhile idea, perhaps you need radios to keep in constant contact. Anything to stop them from being a burden.

requiem made a good point that most of the quests are for lower intelligence characters, although this contradicts what i said earlier it does higlight that the game is too linear. Very little of what you do has a profound effect on the outcome of the game, you can murder everything with a pulse and still blunder your way through the game and save the world. and if all else fails wander the map till you find the right places. Good, evil, size, shape, clothing, reputation, should all affect what kind of game you play, in fallout and to a greater extent in f2 all this meant nothing, all that mattered in the end was completign the main quest.

If we Fallout 3 were to adopt a Deus Ex style system of combat then factors such as line of sight, darkness and sound level would all need to be considered. How could you move silently when wearing clunky power armour, or walk through a room full of people in borad daylight without being noticed.

Fallout 3 in a single location? are we talking a humungous city with multiple levels and many sectors (eg a city with many multistoryed buildings, sewers, basements all next to a vault) or a chain of locations close together like the NCR Empire