27 Things About Fallout 3... and then some.
- Thread starter Seraphim Pwns U
- Start date
- Status
Seraphim Pwns U
It Wandered In From the Wastes
PhoenixUltima said:
Thank you for stating the obvious.
*Ahem*
"There's many names 'the residents'/the devs could've picked... for example: Nuke, Warhead (a good choice, imho), and Payload, for starters."
Warhead City... Nukeberg... Radtown... Bombton... Payload... They would all be appropriate names for that town.
I mean, other areas I have no qualms about their nomenclature... Ten-Penny Towers (I neither know nor care if there's more than one tower in the town, nor whether they're held up with ten-penny nails), Capitol Wasteland (well, that's what it is), and so on. My quip is simply how weird 'Megaton' is in the usage as a city name. A suffix, or a different choice, would've cleared it right up, though.
I'm guessing that since no one will not misunderstand what it isn't that I'm not trying to say, I really should give up trying to clarify it. (*sounds weird doesn't it? I'm legitimately getting my point across, but in a way that's self-contradictory. 'Megaton' gets it point across, but also, in a self-contradictory way as well*).
PhoenixUltima
First time out of the vault
I don't think the isometric view is actually important at all. It worked well enough back then, sure, but these days we have the power to make massive fully 3D worlds, and in HD no less. One uses the best tools one has, after all.
The switch from true turn-based to psuedo-realtime is more dramatic, I must admit, but I'm not going to declare it the death of Fallout unless it finally proves to suck when we all get to play it.
The switch from true turn-based to psuedo-realtime is more dramatic, I must admit, but I'm not going to declare it the death of Fallout unless it finally proves to suck when we all get to play it.
PhoenixUltima
First time out of the vault
Seraphim: I honestly don't give two wet shits about how town prefixes and suffixes work. All I know is that Megaton is a cool name for a town sitting on a nuke.
Besides, Reno calls itself "the biggest little city on earth", so I don't see why a town can't have a name that means "big small". Maybe that's just me.
Besides, Reno calls itself "the biggest little city on earth", so I don't see why a town can't have a name that means "big small". Maybe that's just me.
Jesus Christ!PhoenixUltima said:
Isometric good then, bad now!
Real-time more fun!
I'm not a doctor but... you're turning into Pete/Todd (like there's any difference)
Now, tell me something.
Isometric games nowadays can't have fully 3d world, hd and other useless shit? Who said so?
You know, it's really cool to have your own opinion but FO1 devs decided that isometric view is important.
PhoenixUltima said:
Not the death of Fallout-the-name-on-the-box, obviously. Some care about things beyond that.
Also, don't double post.
I appreciate the irony in the name Megaton, but we all care about things that others couldn't give two shits about.
But iso... Fallout had a pretty deep combat system. It's not perfect, but I have first person shooters for when I'm in the mood. Way too many of them, in fact. How deep can FPS combat be? Better AI makes it harder, but not deep. And fallout is a RPG. You can bet your ass nobody would try to do this to Final Fantasy 14, simply because the fanbase is bigger. But FO's fanbase is smaller, so we get stepped on. And FF's combat was never as good, it was little more than an annoyance in my opinion.
But iso... Fallout had a pretty deep combat system. It's not perfect, but I have first person shooters for when I'm in the mood. Way too many of them, in fact. How deep can FPS combat be? Better AI makes it harder, but not deep. And fallout is a RPG. You can bet your ass nobody would try to do this to Final Fantasy 14, simply because the fanbase is bigger. But FO's fanbase is smaller, so we get stepped on. And FF's combat was never as good, it was little more than an annoyance in my opinion.
Yes, because the isometric view cannot work in 3D. No sirree.PhoenixUltima said:
What is it with people and this dumbshit argument?
Also, don't double post.
Vault 69er said:
emmm, straw man like whoa?
In any case, I'm not arguing whether your opinion is right or wrong, it's an opinion, I'm only arguing whether it is absolutely tantamount for the continuity of the fallout universe that cars do not explode.
If you can agree that it is purely opinion based and nothing more, we can leave it at that. It was the point of my original argument. The claims made against nuclear exploding cars are numerous and assumptive. You just have a different creative opinion than bethsoft, Nothing more, nothing less. If you or anyone else say one more time that exploding cars have anything to do with the continuity of Fallout, and it is anything more than just a creative difference, than you need to-
A) read up on what continuity means in context of a narrative and/or game
B) read up what canon means in context of a narrative and/or game
C) get back to me
(I strongly suggest reading about comics for the best example, because many comic books have had canon retconned by new writers on accident)
Oh, and just for kicks, how exactly does this effect the other two games?
Sorrow
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Actually, I've seen FPS games with deeper combat (Operation Flashpoint for example). I have a distinct impression that Fallout's combat system lost some (or rather a lot of) depth during the fast switch from GURPS advanced combat to SPECIAL.P-Funk said:
The main problem with FPS games isn't the lack of depth, but that the field of view is painfully limited and the controls suck, so until some kind of neural link is created they will have less control potential than TB iso games.P-Funk said:
Vault 69er
Water Chip? Been There, Done That
xdarkyrex said:
How so?
It is very much part of it.
I don't care what comic books do or don't do. As far as I'm aware they have shitty continuity. Fallout however doesn't. It has good continuity, and I don't like it being twisted by Bethesda.
Junktown would be a crater, for one.
PhoenixUltima
First time out of the vault
Isometric games can't be fully 3D simply because it's a fixed viewpoint. If the camera is rotatable, it ceases to be isometric because you can switch to a non-isometric angle. Get it?
And who says HD is useless? You might not have a TV capable of HD, but I do, and I damn well want to get the most out of it.
Yes, the FO1 devs decided to go for an isometric viewpoint... 10 years ago. That's like an entire era in computer years. The best decision for the game 10 years ago isn't necesarily the best decision now.
I care about more than the name on the box too, damnit. I've played Fallout Tactics before, and hated it, because (1) it didn't feel like fallout, and (2) it sucked harder than a hoover prostitute. And you know why that game didn't feel like Fallout? It wasn't because it lacked isometric perspective (it had that, to the best of my recall - I'm working from memory here). It wasn't because it wasn't turn-based (I seem to recall there was a toggle). No, it was because your ability to explore the wasteland was greatly reduced (I don't think you even got access to the world map until the first mission was completed) and because the game was much less about making choices both with your character and your actions and more about balls-out shooting action. Even if the game had been good (which it wasn't), it wouldn't have been (and wasn't) a good fallout game.
At this point you might be thinking "Hey dipshit, that's what we're saying about Fallout 3!", but I don't think that's the case. They'll definitely get the exploration right - it's been Bethesda's stock and trade for about as long as they've been making games, after all - and although the V.A.T.S. system has yet to be tested by anyone other than the developers and a few gaming rags, I for one have faith that they can make it work. It may not be an exact replica of everything Fallout, and to be perfectly honest I don't want one. I've already played the everloving shit out of 1, 2, and Planescape (which was basically the same system but in a different setting). A departure from the Fallout norm honestly sounds a lot better to me than "Fallout Part 3: This time it takes place on the east coast!"[/quote]
And who says HD is useless? You might not have a TV capable of HD, but I do, and I damn well want to get the most out of it.
Black said:
Yes, the FO1 devs decided to go for an isometric viewpoint... 10 years ago. That's like an entire era in computer years. The best decision for the game 10 years ago isn't necesarily the best decision now.
Per said:
I care about more than the name on the box too, damnit. I've played Fallout Tactics before, and hated it, because (1) it didn't feel like fallout, and (2) it sucked harder than a hoover prostitute. And you know why that game didn't feel like Fallout? It wasn't because it lacked isometric perspective (it had that, to the best of my recall - I'm working from memory here). It wasn't because it wasn't turn-based (I seem to recall there was a toggle). No, it was because your ability to explore the wasteland was greatly reduced (I don't think you even got access to the world map until the first mission was completed) and because the game was much less about making choices both with your character and your actions and more about balls-out shooting action. Even if the game had been good (which it wasn't), it wouldn't have been (and wasn't) a good fallout game.
At this point you might be thinking "Hey dipshit, that's what we're saying about Fallout 3!", but I don't think that's the case. They'll definitely get the exploration right - it's been Bethesda's stock and trade for about as long as they've been making games, after all - and although the V.A.T.S. system has yet to be tested by anyone other than the developers and a few gaming rags, I for one have faith that they can make it work. It may not be an exact replica of everything Fallout, and to be perfectly honest I don't want one. I've already played the everloving shit out of 1, 2, and Planescape (which was basically the same system but in a different setting). A departure from the Fallout norm honestly sounds a lot better to me than "Fallout Part 3: This time it takes place on the east coast!"[/quote]
Vault 69er
Water Chip? Been There, Done That
PhoenixUltima said:
NWN2 disagrees with you.
Hey, guess what was the most popular game format, especially for RPGs back then? FPP. Daggerfall ring any bells?
FeelTheRads
Vault Senior Citizen
Do you even understand what 3D is? Of course it can be full 3D, even if the camera is fixed. It's not about the camera, it's how the world is built.
That's bullshit. If I set the camera in an isometric view, then it's isometric.
The problem is if you play the game this way. And it seems you can't do that in Fallout 3.
Seraphim Pwns U
It Wandered In From the Wastes
PhoenixUltima said:
<sarcasm> I also don't "give two wet shits about" how sentence structure works. All I know is that paradoxes are a cool way to express myself. </sarcasm>
Use logic much?
Regarding Reno... it somewhat ambiguously states what it is: it is a little city (like, say, St. Louis, Louisville, or Anapolis), biggest of the little cities (in its eyes), but as such, not big enough to consider itself a "big city" (the likes of, say, Miami, Los Angeles or New York).
Mega- specifically means 1 million. A town with a population of one million is no longer a town (as once a population reaches in the tens of thousands [depending upon era, locale, and nearby areas] it becomes a city). Unless Megaton has a feel of dense population like New Reno, San Francisco, NCR, or Vault City, I still object that its name is funky.
Vault 69er said:
To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent.
Vault 69er said:
It is very much part of it. And so is everything else about the game. to make another game, they have to make some new things, why is that hard to understand? Just because something wasn't in Fallout 1 and 2 does NOT make it non-canon, unless it undermines the canon of the first games. Thats how canon works.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_(fiction)
Vault 69er said:
No, Fallout is TWO games. T W O. A pattern is not defined by TWO things.
Vault 69er said:
No, not at all. Not all cars are nuclear.
Considering that F:T and PoS aren't canon... 2/2 = 100%xdarkyrex said:
100% isn't enough for a pattern?
Tsk, tsk, even in 200x they decided to go with rotable iso in Van Buren, not with FPP... What a dorks, eh? They can't go with the times, man...
But I was so close to breaking your will!
Wrong. It's about what the game and the interface is designed around. You can have a free-floating camera, and we wouldn't mind, as long as the interface is designed to work well with an isometric(-like) perspective. Go play the Van Buren demo, you'll see what we mean.PhoenixUltima said:
I think 'who says HD is useless' pretty much sums it up. Who, indeed?PhoenixUltima said:
You do realise that the first-person view existed long before the isometric viewpoint did, don't you?PhoenixUltima said:
Also, what the hell do you mean with 'best decision'?
Right, so you've played games you love to death, yet don't want to say their elements again even though those elements have not been used for *years* on end now? What the fuck?PhoenixUltima said:
Here's a hint: we love Fallout, we haven't had a game like it since Arcanum, so we would love to see another game like it. Yet somehow, you feel that you love Fallout, but do *not* want another game like it. How does that make sense? You seem to be advocating very simply Oblivion with Fallout's setting. Which, to put it simply, is retarded because of your own arguments: we've already seen Oblivion. Why do we need another game like it?
Sorrow: I've never played Operation Flashpoint, and the different games we've played may cause our differing opinions. Field of view and controls have not significantly influenced my enjoyment of FPS's, but depth has. What is called Twitch gameplay is fun sometimes, and maybe there are some games that have depth in combat... But contrary to Bethesda's belief, I just cannot get as into a game in the first person as I can a traditional RPG. But maybe its not impossible. Maybe it just hasn't been made yet. Maybe Bethsoft is making it as we speak... but I doubt it. I can get so sucked into an RPG like Fallout, and never feel personal at all in Oblivion. I feel that combat, plot, and freedom of choice are responsible for this, and the third person perspective may even have a part. I don't know for sure.
I'm gonna stop, because I'm starting to think we agree...
I'm gonna stop, because I'm starting to think we agree...
- Status