Fallout 3 FAQ at NMA

[Mr. Teatime]

<strong>[Game -> Update]</strong>

There's a <a href="http://www.nma-fallout.com/content.php? ... q">Fallout 3 FAQ</a> at <a href="http://www.nma-fallout.com">NMA</a>. It's all the developer responses so far collected into one document, I just scanned it and I feel like I've wasted five minutes of my life. How is it possible to say so much stuff without giving out any information?
<br>
<br>So for people who don't want to read it through, I'll summarise it.
<br>
<br><blockquote><b>Can you tell us anything about Fallout 3?</b>
<br>No.
<br>
<br><b>Can YOU tell us anything about Fallout 3?</b>
<br>No.
<br>
<br><b>Can you tell US anything about Fallout 3?</b>
<br>No.
<br>
<br><b>Can YOU tell US anything about Fallout 3?</b>
<br>No.
<br>
<br><b>Anything about Fallout 3, can you tell us?</b>
<br>No.
<br>
<br><b>Please tell us about Fallout 3.</b>
<br>No.
<br>
<br><b>Please.</b>
<br>No.
<br>
<br><b>Please?</b>
<br>No.
<br>
<br><b>Rubbing my electric penis?</b>
<br>Go away.
<br>
<br><b>Cool.</b></blockquote>
<br>
<br><b>Odin</b> might want to put this up as a short version of his <a href="http://www.nma-fallout.com/content.php? ... aq">FAQ</a>, I dunno.
<br><BR>Spotted at: <A HREF="http://www.nma-fallout.com">NMA</A>

[Jimmyjay86]

I sense the foreshadowing of a great vaporware game.

[Janus Matchell]

Console vs Personal Computer (PC):
Most of Bethesda’s games are released on PC and X-box. We’ve already seen that a complex RPG is possible on a console (cfr. Morrowind). Do you think an old-school RPG with lots of text and turn-based action like Fallout is going to appeal to, for instance, the average PS2 gamer?
Pete Hines:Well, Morrowind had over a million words of text in the game, and given the great success of that game on a console, I don't think text is something that will make or break a game. And obviously turn-based combat has worked well on consoles, since KOTOR blew people away last year and FF has a very large and loyal following. I think what we're finding out is that the stereotype of what a console gamer is, or what they want, isn't necessarily what it used to be. You can't define a game just by what features it has, you really have to define the experience. Some stuff works well on any platform because it's so brilliantly done, and some stuff won't work on any platform because it's the right features with the wrong implementation.

I think what they mean to say is that dialogue in Fo3 is going to be severly lacking. Also Why the hell should the release Fo3 on console because that will just ruin it. The things that made Fo good were the SPECIAL system, Turn Based, and Character Interaction with other Characters (i.e. Dialogue and such.) EDIT: KoToR was good but it sucks in comparison to Fallout 1 and 2. Also in Fo you weren't confined to just one place, you could do whatever you wanted and only have to worry about the consequences of your actions. I hate it when people try justify shitty games with bullshit.

Fallout 2 was rated 15+ (not for immature audience) - will this trend continue with Fallout 3?
Pete Hines: It's going to be a mature game, that's always been the plan.

What I think Hines means to say it will be like Fo:POS. Violence is irrelevant to making a game good but sometimes it helps.

How much input will Interplay have in the development of Fallout 3? Can they say "yes" or "no" to things like game design, story, etc?
Pete Hines - We have complete creative control over the development of the game.

That about does it for me. Stop the press I think we will have an absolute shit fest if we as Fo fans don't do something. Call me crazy but I think that Fanout will be a greater game. Hines is yet to impress me except with his ability to weave a complex web of bullshit. I could go and waste your time with things and useless superflous uneeded Bullshit opinions but I think I'll stop here. I rather take a bath in acid seems to be a better idea than waiting for them to annonce that they have officially lobotomized Fo for all that is good and holy.

[Mr. Teatime]

We have no information at all to judge bethsoft on. I am suspicious, only because their initial interviews were not too good (no top down view, etc), but I think they're probably reevaluating that stuff as they think harder about the franchise and the game.
when or if they announce the game's real time combat, then I'll be just as pissed off as the hardest of hardcore fans. Oh, wait, I probably am a hardcore fan.

[jiujitsu]

Todd Howard: We're in the "messing with stuff" phase. Nothing is pinned down until we play it. And then we always change it.

Hines: "Simply put, we think we can make a great Fallout 3 that lots and lots of people will want to buy."

Ok. So, they are messing with the original FO games and they are going to make a game that a LOT OF PEOPLE will buy, but not necessarily what WE will buy because we are crazy and cannot be pleased EVER.

That's what I've gathered from what I read.

Weeee hooray.

[Retlaw83]

What I think Hines means to say it will be like Fo:POS. Violence is irrelevant to making a game good but sometimes it helps.

Violence is highly relevant to Fallout. The ultimate violence, in the form of nukes, created the gameworld.

[Franz Schubert]

I thought you were exaggerating with your summary, Teatime. Then I read the FAQ. If anything, you understated it.

[jetbaby]

I saw this last night and was going to post a very similar thing but I passed out instead.

[Janus Matchell]

What I think Hines means to say it will be like Fo:POS. Violence is irrelevant to making a game good but sometimes it helps.

Violence is highly relevant to Fallout. The ultimate violence, in the form of nukes, created the gameworld.

I mean the Fo:POS not Fo:1 and 2 the violence was fine in fact I encourage it the only 2 good Fo games FO 1 and 2. Fo:POS was horrible and the RT violence in it sucked because it wasn't nearly as detailed or cool because the bodies didn't stay there and they dropped items like in Diablo or some shitty knock off.