Duck and Cover

Mad Max wrote:So really Fo:3 is going to be totally fucked, and now hear me through, it might have same kind of plot, same history, and same item/weapons or something, but in the way of the classic Isometric, third person, and turned based are totally going to be thrown out the door, "thats shit!!" that really upsets me, It upsets me enough where I will not be buying Fallout 3 till like 3 weeks after its release because I will have to ponder over reviews and watch previews to make the right desicion. I really hope someone see it alittle my way because if I am the only one then there is no hope.

OK, I'm kinda new hear, so forgive me if what I say is idiotic.

Who says going to 3d will ruin the game? I mean it is possible to keep the look of the original. 3d at this point is realy good and acesable. I'd love to see some of the shinyness on the slick disgusting surfaces that are featured so heavily in fallout. And good looking 3d is also readily acessable now a days too. Half life 2 runs wonderfly on low end machines, even with afew of the shaders turned on, and it looks great too. And thats in real time, I'd love to see how far you could take the graphics in a turn based system like FO. Also 3d means moveable camera, and multileveled maps. There are things you can do with 3d alot better than 2d, and a movable camera would make getting my character to move through allyways much easier.

And bethsada never said they'd make FO real time, they just said that they are good at making real time games. They would have to be insane to bring FO into real time. You should remember the folks at Bethsada bought FO for a reason, because they're fallout fans.

Cuthbert Allgood wrote:Yeah but making a game with "low end specs" like fallout 1 would not cost very much at all. infact if i had the time and a few more fallout editors i could make a new fallout game myself<with maybe a little help>

If I knew how to program a little better, and understood how the language of the game engines worked and shit, I would be on hand and foot to help.

I liked the original and sequel's graphics very much, but I think having the new game in 3D can only make it better (excluding a serious fuck up).

Whatever graphics engine Bethesda decides to use, top-down games suck. Even worse than just seeing characters from one angle is just seeing the tops of their heads. An adjustable camera would be nice.

Making the game pure 2D would be a death sentence.

Thoth wrote:Making the game pure 2D would be a death sentence.

You know that from experience, or from dumbass intuition. Otherwise don't down 2D gameplay, that is what FO:1-2 were made with.

I think he meant it would be death sentence from commercial point of view.

yes, it would, because it's so much more work than making it 3d, and it also would not apply to that much people since a lot would think omg 2D?? wot a crappy game lol!111!!

Kahgan wrote:yes, it would, because it's so much more work than making it 3d, and it also would not apply to that much people since a lot would think omg 2D?? wot a crappy game lol!111!!

So, so true...sadly to say.

Call me old fashioned but i certainly wouldent want Fallout 3 to be in 3D! Its more crap to think about while your playing the game...'adjust camera, move oh wait someones shooting me! Adjust camera.' Just stick with the good old locked view and put as much energy into the textures of the scene etc with that!

I know at the end of the day the game has to apeall to other people besides the fans like us to put the cash in there pockets, but seriously its like changing the view of Half Life Games suddenly. Half Life 1 : FPS!, Half Life 2 : Fuckin FPS!!! Dont bloody change it ya money hungry gits!!

End Of Messege.
BEEEEEEEEEP!

I still think BG2 looks better than NWN.

We already had this discussion(and a lot more) in another thread.

link

Too bad the topic starter couldn't stand the heat. Happy reading.

VasikkA wrote:I still think BG2 looks better than NWN.

It does.

This poll makes god kill kittens.

VasikkA wrote:I still think BG2 looks better than NWN.

It does,

anyone who sais otherwise has there head shoved up there ass.

Hey, 3D has it's merits. Like physics system. And it takes gazillion less space*

* - ok so not anymore but it used to

The only thing wholesome ever created in 3D is Lara Crofts ass.

I have nothing against Fo3 being 3D I just worry about the point of view and combat system...and even more about hairy deathclaws/etc.

Kahgan wrote:hairy deathclaws

Yeah, why would any creature need body hair in a hot desert environment? Unless they're of Italian origin. But in 3D you could watch as the hair sways in the wind.

What hair shall be swaying in the wind in FO3? Deathclaws, or Italians?

Fuck physics. Games that are built on BUY ME MY PHYSICS ARE THE ROX are like Halflife2, which had a piece of shit physics engine.

2d is nice, but will never happen. 3d With the top down perspective it must be. God help Bethesda if they make it first person. Deux Ex Invisible Fallout, no thanks.

I doubt Bethesda will need any help from God if they ever make a first person Fallout3. They will sell millions of copies no-mattter what happens because, hey, the game is made by the MORROWIND DEVELOPPERS. All the Bethesda fanboys will buy the game, and I'd say the Fallout fans, compared to the mass of Morrowind fans, are nothing.

S4ur0n27 wrote: and I'd say the Fallout fans, compared to the mass of Morrowind fans, are nothing.

But aren't Fallout fans teh most notorious fanz on the Interwebs? It's our sacred duty to hunt down and destroy the Bethesda infidels!