Duck and Cover

The Oblivion Engine for Fallout3 is bound to be highly capable, and the machines that it will run on could be twice as fast as the machine sitting on your desk at this time. This gives the developers a lot of options provided that the graphics guys don’t bogart all the compute cycles.

Although I prefer a game view that is an axonometric projection of the oblique parallel type or isometric (Muhahahah!! I just learned that term) for RPG’s I don’t think that perspective is going to appear in Fallout3. So its more than likely going to be a first person perspective game and that will be a bit of a downer to some. Of course the perspective not withstanding there is the dire possibility that some of us nattering nabobs of negativity are wrong and Fallout3 might just turn out to be a mega blast to play and visually stunning to boot.

Imagine walking up to the yawing pit made by a ten megaton blast and finding a character like that irritating tribal clown Sulik from Fallout 2 scratching around in its bottom. With your trusty scoped bolt action Winchester model 70 tactical rifle you zoom in and pop him in the grape and watch him drop in a shower of blood. You run down the slope through a beautifully rendered scene and loot his vile headless corpse all in the splendor of 3D. (how in the hell did a Jamaican tribal get to northern California anyway? did he have a green card?)

A game that uses a 3D engine has some monster advantages over a game that plays on a tile based world. One big advantage is that it is more flexible and can present the scene from different perspectives or camera angles with the click of a mouse button. With that being the case I would like to see three viewing modes. In Fallout3 that any good engine could provide.

View Mode 1= the traditional 1st person perspective (Morrowind)
View Mode 2= 3rd person perspective (Tomb Raider, Pirates Of The Caribbean) This would seem to be easy
View Mode 3= Wide angle 3rd person where the field of view is doubled or tripled.

OK enough about the perspective.


For the combat system I would like to see two options bound together with one rock hard concept, and that concept is that Character Skill not the players skill at manipulating controls and pulling the trigger is the determining factor in combat resolution. Some people have said that 1st person ‘real time’ combat destroys the whole concept of a skill based system and I am sorry I just don’t get that at all.

Target Designate Mode:

It occurs to me that you could use any stats/skill system to feed the game algorithm a characters 'current' performance data and that sure isn’t anything new or earth shaking. What if the targeting cursor were really a target designation cursor and not something that you had to fine tune the lay of to launch an effective attack. The program is going to check the position of the targeting cursor every cycle anyway and also if the fire/designate button has been pressed. At that point if the characters current performance data has changed have the program refresh the ‘current’ skills/perks/stats values before performing the calculation to determine what the result of the attack is. Is this real time combat? No, but it would be damn near as fast and its complexities would be transparent to the user but again this is nothing new.

Now consider that once a target has been designated the character will stay locked on and continue to engage it until it has been destroyed without further input from the user. That gives the payer time to see to the actions of the rest of the party and designate targets for them or let the default system take over that dictates that the NPC’s in your party fire at the closest most dangerous target in their field of view. That also gives the player time to move his little band of travelers around a bit to get into better firing positions , stim-up, change weapons or loot a corpse. Unlike true real time combat the task of the player is not to aim and fire It is to manage the battle and the stat/skill/perk system is still in place.

It has been said by ‘Flaser’ in his excellent post on another thread that such an automated system won’t work for long range weapons. I disagree, it would just be another opportunity for the stats skill system to influence the outcome. Since there would be a calculation based on the characters ‘current performance data’ and the environmental factors (smoke dust wind rain etc) to determine what perceived threat needs servicing immediately. The system could make a sort of perception roll to determine if the character defaults to the closest threat target or perceives a greater existing threat at a longer range. The outcome of that calculation could even force a weapon change if the current weapon doesn’t have the range to reach the long range target. It just depends on how well the program is coded to simulates real life action.

Even though the default system is a bit automated you the player still have control because nothing in a system like this prevents the player from re-designating his fire at a target and overriding the system. Once the manually designated target has been death with the target acquisition system defaults back to the automated system. The fire of the entire party could also be directed at a particularly nasty critter ….do it all the time in FOT while in CTB mode.

Real Time Mode:

This would be for the folks that like to stay real busy and pit themselves against the computer. Obviously there are some that like taking a more direct roll in the combat so that should be included as well. Of course the characters stats would still be part of the combat resolution function and contribute to the outcome.

Real time mode in first person makes the most sense for melee combat. I would think that an automated system like the one I mentioned would be very difficult to implement for melee. Again stats/skills have to play into this since no matter how good the guy with the keyboard and mouse is that wont change a character the size of Peewee Herman into Conan the Barbarian . Perks like “Bonus Hit Damage� would still have their effect.

In any case my point is that Bethesda is completely capable of coming up with something that scratches most if not all of our collective Fallout itches and producing a game that knocks our socks off. Actually as good as the old Fallout games are concerned I love them, but I really didn’t care for the nearly static turn based combat. That’s why I like Fallout Tactics so much, it is more dynamic when it comes to the combat. too bad interplay didnt have the depth of thought to put the FOT combat system into an RPG.

Now, before someone tells me that I should be playing tactical games and that turn based combat is the real deal all I can say is MF please I love CRPG’s.

...

No offense here, but are you retarded? This line screams yes: "Real time mode in first person makes the most sense for melee combat. "

First off, your whole target-designate mode idea would makit it "Fallout: The Single Player MMORPG." Auto attacking and then skill management = basis for most MMORPG combat. Auto attacking and then TEAM management is just taking FFXII's combat system. Which sounds like shit.

Oh, and PS, CTB is the worst idea ever implimented. It's the "Well, we spent all our time on a real-time game, half-assed a turn based mode in thirty minutes, and then decided that we should make a 'CTB' title that somehow makes this game more 'Fallouty'."

As for the "Real time mode in first person" for melee, all there really is to say is "Go play Morrowwind." First person melee is ugly. Gruesome. Horrible. Essentially: crap. It's ugly, doesn't play well, and should never be implimented. Ever. Into anything.

The object in making a game is not to scratch everyone's wants and desires. Hell, the object in making ANYTHING is not to scratch everyones wants and desires. It is to gouge huge chunks of one. FOT proved that. Shitty real time-esque combat + bad plotlines + bad voice acting + pointless addition of vehicles = bad game. FOBOS proved that. Giant rats + Fallout's name + Baldurs Gate Dark Alliance = shit. If you take just a little bit from everything you're left with a whole lot of nothing.

Oh and final note, FOT was made by MicroForte, not Interplay.

jetbaby wrote:Oh, and PS, CTB is the worst idea ever implimented.

Yes it is

JETBABY wrote:No offense here, but are you retarded? This line screams yes: "Real time mode in first person makes the most sense for melee combat. "

No offense but rather than argue with a moron I think I will just say, why don't you stick to playing tea party with your lil friends! It is clear that you don't have a clue.

edit: Removed the dog dick comment.

Haha, argue with a moron? And then you spew insults? Nice. How about you come up with a response that somehow defends your position on gaming instead of OMG U SUXX responses?

Clue 1 for jetbaby. if you start a dialog with an insult don't whine like a little girl when you get one back fool.

Auto attacking and then skill management = basis for most MMORPG combat.

So CTB and sentry mode and the ability to move a bit in a fire fight in FOT makes it a MMORPG? ya right, get a clue I dont remember saying that after attacking you had to manage the characters skills.

CTB is the worst idea ever implimented

That is your opinion and nothing more. Plenty of people play FOT in CTB that way and like it. perhaps you should stick to pong.

First person melee is ugly. Gruesome. Horrible. Essentially: crap.

Again just your opinion. I suppose that the slow 'I hit you and then you hit me' in turn based combat is all your little heart can take.

bad plotlines + bad voice acting + pointless addition of vehicles

Was the highwayman in FO2 usless? None of that has anything to do with the combat system it has everything to do with the stupidity and egos of the jack asses that foisted FOT on the Fallout community when they could have used the phoenix engine to make a new Fallout RPG.

Now that you have shot your little mouth off Jetbaby do tell us your spin on a combat system for Fallout3, stun the board with your valuable insights.

Yes, actually, the highwayman was a piece of shit because the devs never decided to make it work right. Having it disappear 50% of the time and never come back seems like making it pretty useless.

And yes. My little heart can only take that puny I hit you you hit me melee. I suppose that's not nearly as good as OMG I PREAZZ TEH FIER BUTTAN AGAIN AND AGAIN AN HE DOES TO!!1 is pretty cool. I like it because it works. And because real time combat is boring unless it's a shooter, and most of those are shit. Making Fallout into a FPS is about as low as it can go.

Now that I have shot my mouth, I'll shoot it like I always have: Fallout is dead. Anything made will not please me because whatever they make will not be good. It's rather simple. Almost everyone makes games to make lots of money nowadays. Not too many make games to make good games. Tits, ass, and dual wielding. That's a seller. But not a good game.

I have no clue what you're talking about with CTB and sentry modes. You made no mention of them in your original post about a realtime auto attack combat system. I see a lot of talk of making an auto attack system. And since skill management is apperantly not important to you, combat would consist of auto attacking. Then waiting. Then winning or losing. Oh, use some stims, too. That'd be even worse. Stats effecting your auto attacking combat. IE how it's done it most every MMORPG.



Oh, and the idea that first person destroys the skill system is this: It does. In first person, if you're close and you press the "attack" button, you hit. No skills effect it. If you MAKE skills effect it, I.e. you swing "right" and hit graphically but statistics say you MISS, that just makes for an annoying and aggrivating combat gameplay.

jetbaby wrote:yes, actually, the highwayman was a piece of shit because the devs never decided to make it work right. Having it disappear 50% of the time and never come back seems like making it pretty useless.

The old bomb only went byby once on me in years of playing and replaying FO2. Useless ??It was a handy mobile storage system for your accumulated junk.

jebaby wrote:Fallout is dead. Anything made will not please me because whatever they make will not be good. It's rather simple. Almost everyone makes games to make lots of money nowadays. Not too many make games to make good games. Tits, ass, and dual wielding. That's a seller. But not a good game.

I have the same feeling dude the moment has been lost. While Fallout may be dead perhaps Bethesda will produce something interesting in its own right but I wont see it as a real Fallout game. I go into a store now and look at the rows and rows of games I won't fucking like. I spent a couple of hundred bucks on games last year and they are sitting on the shelf rotting away while I play fallout, fallout2, FOT, 688I, and a few other games. pathetic just pathetic.

jetbaby wrote:since skill management is apparently not important to you, combat would consist of auto attacking. Then waiting. Then winning or losing. Oh, use some stims, too. That'd be even worse. Stats effecting your auto attacking combat. IE how it's done it most every MMORPG.

WTF does this mean?

xbow wrote:For the combat system I would like to see two options bound together with one rock hard concept, and that concept is that Character Skill not the players skill at manipulating controls and pulling the trigger is the determining factor in combat resolution.

I think it is pretty clear that character development is a critical function to me. Unlike Fallout 1&2 that auto bumps your NPC's up when you level up FOT allows you to develop every member of your party in exactly the same way you develop your character I like that. What waiting? a system that I described would play as fast as you could take it and refreshing a characters current performance data would happen instantly at the end of a game cycle no waiting there. don't you think that someone that just took a rock in the face should have his temporary stats knocked down a bit?

You know as well as I do that FO3 or whatever it will be called will be 1st person, perhaps with a 3rd person option and that turn based combat is history. I am not happy about all of that perhaps I am just deluding myself that the Fallout moment is not lost completely. To be honest I haven’t found a 1st person RPG that I like a whole bunch.

BY the way CTB and its sentry modes are not much different than what I was suggesting. in CTB mode you have 2 sentry modes aggressive and defensive in each mode you can select when a character starts shooting by
adjusting its percent to hit. of course in CTB you can always select a character and manually designate its target just like fallout 1 & 2 if you want. on thing though in FOT the enemy doesn't just stand there at attention and wait to get shot. Turn based might have been fun in FOT but it was implemented by a chimp that wrote the code by beating a keyboard with a banana.

How much have you played FOT in CTB?

xbow wrote:You know as well as I do that FO3 or whatever it will be called will be 1st person, perhaps with a 3rd person option and that turn based combat is history. I am not happy about all of that perhaps I am just deluding myself that the Fallout moment is not lost completely. To be honest I haven’t found a 1st person RPG that I like a whole bunch.

You are deluding yourself. First person RPGs are as stupid as turn based combat is apperantly out of date.

And yes. The car was useless. I used it for stupid tasks such as holding accumulated flares and the many many unused suits of Powered Armor that I bought.

As for NPCs, I'd rather they auto levelup, or levelup based on a chosen template. They are called non-playable characters for a reason. The less interaction directly controlling them, the better.

I can't be arset to write comments for all of this, so I'll keep it short.
I'm with jetbaby on this issue.

Edid:
He did say it should be turnbased in 3rd person, in he didn't then I disagree with him.
the FO1/2 targeting sys should be as is also.

Why not keep the same fucking system as in FO.

You sound rather bitter about the whole thing Jetbaby, I have my moments as well.

I don't know what it is about fallout 1 & 2 that hooked me so completely. Perhaps its the freedom to take on the game in a variety of ways. I have completed the games and left nothing but smoking wreckage in my path and completed the game with an emphasis on limiting combat to the absolute minimum. To make sure I will never be without Fallout 1+ 2 I even took the precaution of purchasing four Dual Jewels when they were on sale for 10 bucks at Wal-Mart last year.

It sure would have been nice to play Fallout 3 on the phoenix engine instead of FOT. I will never understand why FOT was released as it was, unless they simply wanted to milk the title and get over to the big fat ass. As much as I enjoy making new missions and shit for FOT I have only managed to endure playing the game from start to finish once.

Suits! Imagine a pack of car company executives looking at their sales data and finding that the sale of small fuel efficient cars was way up and then deciding in a moment of utter idiocy to discontinue the manufacture of small cars and focus on massive gas guzzlers. That's just about what was done with respect to Fallout.

Yes the Fallout moment is dead but I will still buy Fallout3 down the road because I love the post APOC theme. I can only hope that whatever Bethesda does with it is a good game in its own right that just happens to share the Fallout title.

S4urOn27 wrote:Why not keep the same fucking system as in FO.

I would buy such a retro game in a heartbeat but who would make it?

EDIT: What I mean is I would buy a game based on the old fallout engine with very little change (the less the bette) not a turn based ist person game.

The reality is that they are going to make a 1st person 3D game out of it so how could turn based combat be implemented?

xbow wrote:

S4urOn27 wrote:Why not keep the same fucking system as in FO.

I would buy such a retro game in a heartbeat but who would make it?

The reality is that they are going to make a 1st person 3D game out of it so how could turn based combat be implemented?

why would they do that?
that would just be stupid, if they make a FP game of it, then they have wasted million on the fallout license for no real reason.
and that would be stupidity at its peak

Mismatch wrote: why would they do that?
that would just be stupid, if they make a FP game of it, then they have wasted million on the fallout license for no real reason.
and that would be stupidity at its peak

It wouldn't be at all stupid. Forsake the original fans of the series by making it first person, real-time and cranking up the drugs and hookers and weapon selection. As long as it doesn't play terrible and isn't as sophmoric as FOBOS, they've guaranteed themselves sales of a couple million copies, maybe more. That would be more than the sales of the two original Fallouts, with all their thought-provoking themes and rich atmosphere, combined.

Hell, George Lucas is selling out his original fans with the new Star Wars trilogy, and he's making an assload of money. There's no reason for Bethesda not to do the same thing. Of course, one could argue that they would do it out of the goodness of their hearts, but no responsible business will sink millions into a product they know won't return much, if any, profit.

So much for artistic integrity...

Not that this has anything to do with the topic, but this is the first time I've seen a picture of Herve Caen (if thats him) and I have to ask why isn't he fixing plumbing somewhere?

FP Melee combat does indeed suck because you can't add any features to it, and because you can't allow your character to go move around beyond running. Mobility is essential for melee combat, which you can't really achieve in FP.

Ideas for melee: parrying should certainly be implemented somehow. And, if the game is RT, some effort should be made from letting the player run up to an enemy, attacking, and then instantly stepping back before the enemy can attack (a la Half-Life), which makes for boring, unbalanced combat. An attack speed or something would be nice, plus if you charge foreward there should be some momentum involved (to keep you from springing back so suddenly).

And, Jesus Christ, no vehicle combat. I'm all for cars showing up in the game, but we're not talking about cars capable of actually performing in a combat situation. We're talking about rusted and ruined pieces of shit.

Edit: fixed trailing off.

The fact remains: A first person fallout can go to hell and burn there until the apocalypse and then just keep on burning. A first person fallout is like a good star trek game. It doesn't fucking happen.


And for the record I stand by... was it MMRW? I forget. MMRW or the Saint. That being: I am a fan of RPGs. I never remember demanding that they be post apocalyptic.


Let fallout stay dead for christs sake. Buy the license, store it somewhere deep and dark. Make a new series. God forbid come up with an original idea. Try to make it third person. Try to make it ::gasp:: turn based. Strategery over teh 1337y grafixxxxxx