3D for Fallout 3!

[GhostWhoTalks]

The only way I wouldn't mind seeing something 3d in the fallout world is in the character models. If for some reason there were objects that were meant to be manipulated (read rotated), those might need to be 3d as well, but aside from that I think the game pretty much has to stay grounded in 2d.

The world quite simply can't be 3d due to time constraints. You would need both condense both the spatial and the temporal distances for a map on the scale of several hundred miles. Even if you got a car during the course of the game I still would be loathe to travel 300 miles even in game time (I already travel 400 by car often enough to know how it feels, and even simulated I have no interest in it).

You might argue that the towns could be 3d and do so safely, but this would take up unnecessary file space and (according to what I have read here) would decrease the over all graphical quality of the game.

3d character models might be nice because it would afford seemless graphical transition between the game's characters and those of cutscenes (which I am assuming would be 3d because they are prerendered). It would be nice to be able to see just how gritty my character is (both in game and in the cut scenes), and having it set against a 2d world would not detract from the quality of the 3d character much if at all.

As for the objects I'm not sure making some objects 3d and others not makes any sense, and even then if the game required serious manipulation for graphical effect (like a character working with a scalpel for doctor, or using pliers for repair), then it might just be best to leave those as a cut scene that can be played while using the skill.

All in all the game should remain predominantly if not completely 2d.

 

[Jarno Mikkola]

they should have it if you start killing people in like for example vault city that you can't leave until you've killed all the nearby guards-hostiles unless they are quest giving-completing NPC's and you can somehow..win their acceptance back

I meant that the city boarders would be far from the "city boarders" so you would have to go out from the city gate and the little desert that surrounds the city to exit the city's 3D map, then it changes to 2D map via exit ground. So I realise that the cities are going to be a little large but that's the way "they have to build" it.

 

[TheWesDude]

err... i have a question... why couldnt the game be rendered in 3d graphics and displayed in an isometric or top-down view?

if they are going to be using the oblivion engine, it is most likely going to require a 3d rendering as its pretty hard to convert a 3d engine to 2d sprite based.

3d is not a POV, its a way of drawing graphics.

2d is not a POV, its a way of drawing graphics

1st Person is a POV.

3rd Person is a POV ( usually called a shoulder-cam )

isometric is a POV ( off-set top-down )

 

[Zelius]

Hi everyone, I finally decided to join this forum. Been a long-time Fallout fan since FO 1, so there ya have my history..

Anyway, I saw a few people in this thread mention that a 2D game would be much smaller in size than a 3D game and has the potential to look even better, as long as the camera doesn't have to be moved.

Well, guess again. In order for the game to look acceptable by today's standards and still have a 2D engine similar to that of the previous FO games, we're gonna need massive background images of very high detail. Count how many locations FO3 will most likely have, compared to the previous games, and you'll get a rough estimate on how big the game will actually be. Whereas a 3D engine can deal with universal map files and recycled objects and textures, a 2D engine will need pre-rendered individual images with a resolution of over 1280x960 for it to look acceptable. If you don't believe me, compare Myst 4 (2D engine) with Myst 5 (3D engine) in size and tell me what you think.

I didn't mean to sound like a know-it-all or anything, I just felt I needed to get that off my chest.

By the way, why does it seem everybody here is so bent on playing Fallout 3 in a 2D isometric view anyway? I mean, even if it'll be a 3D first-person RPG similar to Morrowind, wouldn't that have the same atmosphere and be equally as fun as the original games, if done correctly? Shouldn't we be happy there is gonna be a sequel to the series in the first place and just enjoy it? I know I will.

My 2 cents.. end rant.

 

[Briosafreak]

By the way, why does it seem everybody here is so bent on playing Fallout 3 in a 2D isometric view anyway?

Why do you think the view is 2d? If It´s a full 3d game, with a camera on the same perspective as the previousFallout games, with zoom and rotations Silent Storm style we would be happy. And that has nothing to do with 2d/3d, when we call it "isometric" we`re talking perspective, the "iso is made to give the impression of 3d" idea is something with over 10 years, things have changed. We`ve talked about this already many times.

I mean, even if it'll be a 3D first-person RPG similar to Morrowind, wouldn't that have the same atmosphere and be equally as fun as the original games, if done correctly?

You`re dwelling on a small mistake here, this is not the Morrowind with Guns forum, it`s a Fallout3 forum. Common mistake, no biggie.

Shouldn't we be happy there is gonna be a sequel to the series in the first place and just enjoy it?

Well no. You take the Sims for instance, and let`s just for a sec think you are a great fan of that series. Now i show up, tell you i`m the lead designer of Sims3 and that it is going to be an FPS where you control your character through a pre Victorian maze filled with crunchy bars and Mutant ninjas, and your objective is to get alive to the other side while picking up moustache shaped candybars and dress up as a young nubile japanese girl, for wich you had to pick crack power ups and receive mystery tips from Martha Stewart.

Then i would tell you "hey, it´s not what you expected but at least it´s called Sims3, right? You should be happy and shut up now, ok, while i take my hourly dose of LSD". Now you wouldn`t really be that happy about it, would you, in hypothetical terms of course...

 

[RPGenius]

Zelius.
Say no to those buffouts, take some mentats and realize that you're saying we should enjoy a Third dimension, Second Rate, First Person, Zero Enjoyment game.

Come back and post again when you've played Fallout more than a drunk half-hour at a friends house.

 

[Roshambo]

Hi everyone, I finally decided to join this forum. Been a long-time Fallout fan since FO 1, so there ya have my history..

Too bad it didn't involve reading the forum before posting.

Anyway, I saw a few people in this thread mention that a 2D game would be much smaller in size than a 3D game and has the potential to look even better, as long as the camera doesn't have to be moved.

Well, guess again. In order for the game to look acceptable by today's standards and still have a 2D engine similar to that of the previous FO games, we're gonna need massive background images of very high detail.

And this varies from having to process a shitload of useless polygons in order to compensate for the poor method of modern polygonal 3d construction systems? I would rather that the world look good and have it suit the setting, than have it resemble the vacant hellhole that comprises....oh, JUST ABOUT EVERY FUCKING 3D GAME OUT THERE, ESPECIALLY MORRONWIND. I don't give a shit how shiny Oblivion's engine is, I can already tell that the level design will SUCK ASS. Half-Life 2. DOOM 3. Vampire: Bloodlines. The level design all sucked ass. EVERY 3d game has level designs that intrinsically suck ass or are limited by the low-end user.

Why? Polygons! We don't fucking need them, as they are hurting development of games. Yes, stupid children like you keep gushing about graphics. That doesn't mean shit when the developer has to design every level so that a wider amount of people can play the game on their hardware. You can't scale down level design, moron. You can't suddenly decide to not render half of the room's objects. You can only make them look simpler, and that really only has effect for squared, low-overhead constructs that can then skimp on the skin graphics of the object in order to represent a large object. Fallout is full of rubble. It has lots of small, bent objects, and quite a few large rounded objects with ROUNDED SURFACE DETAIL - DEATH to any 3d game engine known to man.

Another problem, your ignorance of Fallout's art style. Fallout was not meant to be photo-realistic like every rendering engine out there. The art style doesn't really allow for it. You would end up with shit like the glaring example you chose to ignore, Fallout Enforcer. 3d polygon construction is preferable for a squarish, civilized design style, where nature nor destruction have place. Care to guess what a post-apocalyptic wasteland is filled with, genius?

Count how many locations FO3 will most likely have, compared to the previous games, and you'll get a rough estimate on how big the game will actually be. Whereas a 3D engine can deal with universal map files and recycled objects and textures, a 2D engine will need pre-rendered individual images with a resolution of over 1280x960 for it to look acceptable.

This is so uneducated, it is tragic.

If you don't believe me, compare Myst 4 (2D engine) with Myst 5 (3D engine) in size and tell me what you think.

When it doubt, compare two shitty games with a development that is entirely graphics.

I didn't mean to sound like a know-it-all or anything, I just felt I needed to get that off my chest.

Please keep further uneducated remarks to yourself, please.

By the way, why does it seem everybody here is so bent on playing Fallout 3 in a 2D isometric view anyway?

DUH...because that is the style of the game. I realize that you are too vapid to otherwise enjoy a game, or probably haven't figured out why Fallout has a sci-fi setting as if a 50's writer wrote it, but please try to make an effort otherwise. The game was created, even down to the hexes, for a REASON. Every part of it had a PURPOSE. It wasn't designed to be every other faceless steaming pile of shit with interchangeable combat systems and presentation styles. That is BioWare/Obsidian's style of development.

I mean, even if it'll be a 3D first-person RPG similar to Morrowind, wouldn't that have the same atmosphere and be equally as fun as the original games, if done correctly?

No, McMoron, Fallout was intended to be a CRPG, NOT an action game. A CRPG is defined by being a P&P style RPG on the computer. Morronwind certainly lacks more than a few of those aspects, and I notice that you decided to carelessly make comments about the design of the game, about it being converted so easily to RT gameplay, that you ignore or miss the obvious problems that we have talked about for years here. Now decide to get a clue or I will decide to ban your trolling idiocy.

Your idiocy seriously would fuck over everything that made Fallout fun, instead turning it into a generic flavored clone of everything else out there.

...

Damn, weren't people just bitching about the RTS genre being stagnant and unimaginative (until BioWare "reinvented" it), the FPS genre becoming stagnant and clone-ish with every release (until Halo 2 added absolutely nothing to the genre and the media joygasmed at "how innovative it is"), and how other game genres were starting to shallowly copy each other?

IRONY!

Shouldn't we be happy there is gonna be a sequel to the series in the first place and just enjoy it? I know I will.

Given the first axe job of FOT, then FOS, I think it's safe to say that you're either someone's toadie, or simply unbelievably "DEE! DEE! DEE!"

My 2 cents.. end rant.

End troll, as well. Do not bother trying it again until you have spent a bit more on your education.

 

[Zelius]

Ok, first of all, the Morrowind thing was just an example.

Second, I've played Fallout 1 and 2 long enough to enjoy those games and finish them both. If I cared even half about you people believing me, I would've photographed both CDs in their original retail boxes, dating back from sometime in the stone age... Except I don't care.

And Roshambo, I really hope those few minutes of your time to tell me how much of an uneducated moron I am were worth it. Seriously what kind of person would base someone's education off an opinion about a VIDEOGAME? I study economics, but I really don't see how that has anything to do with this. In the future, please keep childish uneducated attacks like that to yourself, so we can have an adult discussion about this. You're frankly just sounding like a hypocritical bastard right now.

 

[Jarno Mikkola]

The education remark wasn't because you, Zelius are uneducated in other parts in life, but maybe like me just in the fallout community, and the things we find in it interesting.

In most 3D games, there is about 2000-10000 objects that are repeated in the same game over and over again, all the maps have a 2D map that you can't really escape and there are no places wich you can crawl under, jump over, and walk across, fly through, to blow wide-open etc. which isn't realistic, so why to try. And as long as the resolution isn't enough to give every visible cell in the body even one pixel, it won't be enough in 3D. In 2D it doesn't have to be realistic, just close enough.

And sorry Roshambo, if I stepped on your toes, but I'm just trying to help.

 

[Roshambo]

Ok, first of all, the Morrowind thing was just an example.

Just like you are an example of most of the simple idiots we regularly get around here, who decide to berate people, while at the same time know jack shit of what they are trying to talk about.

Second, I've played Fallout 1 and 2 long enough to enjoy those games and finish them both. If I cared even half about you people believing me, I would've photographed both CDs in their original retail boxes, dating back from sometime in the stone age... Except I don't care.

You obviously haven't played them long enough with an operational brain to know the style, why the games were developed the way they were, etc. I don't give a shit if you have beaten the games, I rather implied that you didn't play them. Being wholly ignorant about the game setting, design, and structure while playing it...is kind of impossible unless you're just stupid.

And since you seem to not care about actually knowing what you are talking about, then I will have to agree that it is indeed trolling at this point, and soon to be banned. Just because you played the games, that doesn't mean that suddenly you know the setting, the style, why the game was made the way it was - and now you can suddenly make uneducated posts about how the game can easily be skullfucked into a certain way that would most definitely change the style of Fallout, just because your ignorance says that it MUST be in 3d.

I don't think so.

And Roshambo, I really hope those few minutes of your time to tell me how much of an uneducated moron I am were worth it.

Obviously not, because you just replied with even more idiocy, irrelevant to the topic at hand, and without bothering to post anything else that could lend your mindless drivel any credit.

Seriously what kind of person would base someone's education off an opinion about a VIDEOGAME? I study economics, but I really don't see how that has anything to do with this.

It's called "observation skills", kid. Even a banking major can understand why Fallout's design was made the way it was, and here you're trying to tell the fans that they should believe you for the really stupid reasons you have given?

It is a topic we are discussing, one you decided to foolishly open your uneducated mouth about using foolish arguments that really couldn't be considered to be credible by anyone familiar with the material. So, in your application of your intelligence towards, I find you most lacking. Hence, you are what is known as "retarded", as most people can take their schoolyear learning experiences, say like Signeon and library sciences for teaching research, and put it to use in Real World applications. Most people figure out somewhere in college that high school and earlier was just to show you where and how to find things for yourself and educate yourself; I can tell that you are not at that point yet, nor probably will ever be to the point of resembling someone who has successfully passed education courses to be capable of researching on your own. Your sniveling attitude and lack of background understanding when someone challenges your knowledge of the subject just makes it even more clear.

So until then, and until you can manage to resemble a sentient adult human being, just shut up and observe those who are obviously a little bit more educated and wise in the subject than you.

In the future, please keep childish uneducated attacks like that to yourself, so we can have an adult discussion about this.

Funny that you want to claim "uneducated", when I have not only torn your ignorance apart, but I have linked to another thread that describes how to bypass the flaws of a conventional 3d polygon engine. Instead, you just wanted to gush over 3d and then snivel when someone kicks you up your backside with a size 13 when you don't bother to observe netiquette and read the forum to see where similar uneducated tripe like yours has been heavily debunked.

You're frankly just sounding like a hypocritical bastard right now.

And you're still a moron.

That is why I call you uneducated, because you really know nothing in lieu of posting garbage and whining. If you had a clue, you would still be discussing the topic like I was in the concepts I was and you so foolishly decided to stumble into. The difference between you and me is that I know what I am talking about, and have proven so. Nothing about that says "hypocrite" at all.

Nice try, kid, but enjoy the new avatar.

Jarno Mikkola: Bah, don't worry about it. Stupidity should be punished.

 

[RPGenius]

Zelius...
Poor Naive Uneducated Zelius...

If I cared even half about you people believing me, I would've photographed both CDs in their original retail boxes, dating back from sometime in the stone age... Except I don't care.

If you don't care, don't post, please don't post, I finally joined because the forums seem intelligent. Don't ruin that.

Seriously what kind of person would base someone's education off an opinion about a VIDEOGAME?

Dude, It's a site about the CRPG Fallout, please do not confuse it with a videgame. Of course posting stupid stuff about it makes people angry.

You're frankly just sounding like a hypocritical bastard right now.

No, Roshambo's not, you see a hipocrite uses something that they are as an insult ie. you calling people uneducated is hipocritical, since I have to go with Roshambo on this one. He on the other hand, seems intelligent, so him calling you uneducated wasn't hipocritical. Also, rather than use Roshambo's insult of "uneducated", think of your own.

 

[monsharen]

Just one thing about 3D engines..

You can't scale down level design, moron. You can't suddenly decide to not render half of the room's objects.

That is possible. Used widely in every(or atleast many) mmorpg today.

 

[Roshambo]

Just one thing about 3D engines..

You can't scale down level design, moron. You can't suddenly decide to not render half of the room's objects.

That is possible. Used widely in every(or atleast many) mmorpg today.

I'm not talking about the grass or trees, or other useless items. I am talking about in-game objects that serve more purpose than the typical MMORPG. You know, like a desk, a table, a chair, lockers, and much more that not only add to the room's composition, but they also serve a purpose in the game. Even so, in modern MMORPGs, I have seen the typical scaling system. It makes the objects cruder and fuglier, but still doesn't remove them. Mainly because it would be hard to explain that long, rectangular bit of room that you can't walk through, or why Sir Dumass appears to be squatting in mid-air like a dog.

So, in essence, no, you still can't suddenly decide to not render half of the room's objects, if they are objects of value to the room (which was rather the implied point). Eliminating a few decorative items/effects is one thing, but when it starts to take away from the composition of the room, or the fact that the room is designed to be something other than a Standard Dungeon Square Room, then you lose your level design. Again, you simply just can't do that, due to a design coherency standpoint, which is the greatest limitation of the current polygonal 3d engine designs.

 

[Ashmo]

other than a Standard Dungeon Square Room

Heresy! Everybody knows there is no other kind of room than the Standard Dungeon Square Room!

 

[Ratty Sr.]

Heresy! Everybody knows there is no other kind of room than the Standard Dungeon Square Room!

If NWN is any indication, there is also a Standard Forrest Square Room.

 

[zioburosky13]

I actually want to see F3 in 3D first-person. If you have seen the Oblivion gameplay movie, u know how powerful the 3D-engine can be. Photo-realistic (well, almost) enviroment especially the jungle scene.

Now imagine the same except it's a desert outhere with city ruins, the wind is howling. You see some bones laying on the sand. A cactus which will let you replenish your water-supply. Suddenly something's moving at the edge of that mountain and Bam! A deathclaw! Enter combat mode.

There are 2 types to combat, 1 is turn-based combat (Classic Fallout) while the other is real-time (It SHOULD be like vampire:Bloodline. Hit somewhere and let the computer calculate the damage. Not like Morrowind ).

After you butcher the deathclaw, you skin its hide and take it back to the nearest town. Enter exit-grid. Now you are on a map. Click the nearest civilization settlement and begin your travel.

Now you are in the town. It's a simple farming community. Peoples are busy with their work. You head to a shop and the shopkeeper notice you and starts to greet you. You can interact with the stuff in his shop. You pick-up a bottle of nuka-cola. The shopkeeper says it's only 10 bottlecaps (or 100 caps if your barter skill is low). You throw it away and the shopkeeper is not happy. He will shoot you or warn you depending on your karma.

OR, You decided not to buy it but instead try to steal it. Enter sneak mode. You succesfully snag the nuka-cola. And suddenly the shopkeeper realise he lost something. As-long-as you don't show it to him he will not know you stole it. You exit the shop. And begin to wondering around the town. You meet a beautiful farmer's daughter and begin to chat with her. If you have the 'gigalo' perk, you can sleep with her, in 3D. (Bring on the AO rating! )

These are just my thoughts. Surely you can play the game in 2D mode. But 3D gives you more immersion of the game. I want to see the waste in 3D first-person mode..

 

[FeelTheRads]

I actually want to see F3 in 3D first-person. If you have seen the Oblivion gameplay movie, u know how powerful the 3D-engine can be. Photo-realistic (well, almost) enviroment especially the jungle scene.

And if you read this forum, you know we don't give a fuck about that.

kthxbye

 

[zioburosky13]

I actually want to see F3 in 3D first-person. If you have seen the Oblivion gameplay movie, u know how powerful the 3D-engine can be. Photo-realistic (well, almost) enviroment especially the jungle scene.

And if you read this forum, you know we don't give a fuck about that.

kthxbye

If everyone is like you who prefer 'the old-way', better go back to the stone age then. There will be no airplane (Man can't fly so STFU!), no TV (a box with moving image? How craptastic is that!), no cellphone (I can use my pigeon to send my love letter!)...

Innovation is what driven us to achieve our dream. To be the character of a game is why everyone wants to do. To feel the enviroment, the gameplay, the dialog. You don't need to join the army to drive that F-22. Falcon 4.0 can do that. You don't need to wait till nuclear war happen (let us hope it will never happen) just to survive in the waste as Mad max clone. Admit it, who doesn't want the holodeck to become a reality? :

Look, I know what makes FALLOUT so special. It's not the graphic or the music. But it's the gameplay itself and story which seperate most CRPG game in the market. If 3D graphic (which might make it better) is available, why don't use it?

 

[FeelTheRads]

One thing are 3d graphics and another thing is first person.
Obviously Fallout 3 will be 3d, there is no doubt about that (I can't say I agree, but let's say that I accept it), but it should NEVER be first person. This thing and the reasons for it have been discussed dozens or times around here so check it... you might also try looking in the Vats because many people claiming that OMG FALOT BEST FIRS PERSON LOLOLZ!!1 got there.

Edit: Also don't come talking about how 3d graphics are better than 2d (generally speaking, not only related to Fallout) if you have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Ratty Sr.]

Great, another newbie has decided to post his uneducated brainturd on this forum, despite the fact that such brainturd was discussed and debunked so many times even the roaches on my desk understand it by now.

I will reiterate what others have been saying for years now - Fallout cannot be a first person game. The challenges of such a transition are simply impossible to overcome.

From the mechanical standpoint, it is extremely difficult to implement a proper turn-based combat system in a first person game (and contrary to what you seem to be proposing, you can't have real-time combat in Fallout without seriously fucking up the ruleset). For example, how would you as the player be able to accurately see how many hexes lie between you and the enemy? How would the movement work? Do you rotate your view in discrete 60° segments or do you have freelook? If it's the latter, how do you move into an adjacent hex without constantly staring at the ground and aligning your view with your hex of choice?

From the artistic standpoint, Fallout would lose much of its special atmosphere and "feel". You can't have first person view in pencil & paper roleplaying, now can you, genius? For that matter, I'm not aware of any first person '50s SF comics.

I actually want to see F3 in 3D first-person. If you have seen the Oblivion gameplay movie, u know how powerful the 3D-engine can be. Photo-realistic (well, almost) enviroment especially the jungle scene.

Oblivion looks very impressive for a 3D game, but your claim about "photo-realism" is abject nonsense. An average scene in the Oblivion engine - a pinnacle in 3D technology - is still visually inferior to an equivalent prerendered 2D scene. Curves still don't look quite like curves, and architecture is still relatively simple compared to what can be achieved through prerendering. But "u" don't really care about artistic aspects of games, do you? All sheep like you require in order to be content are simplistic models bungled together out of a handful of polygons and a few shaders to make them shiny.

There are 2 types to combat, 1 is turn-based combat (Classic Fallout) while the other is real-time (It SHOULD be like vampire:Bloodline. Hit somewhere and let the computer calculate the damage. Not like Morrowind ).

Ironically, combat was without doubt the worst aspect of VtM: Bloodlines. But hey, that's what you want, isn't it? You want to remove those solutions that made Fallout good and replace them with mediocre or downright crappy solutions from other, inferior games.

You head to a shop and the shopkeeper notice you and starts to greet you. You can interact with the stuff in his shop. You pick-up a bottle of nuka-cola. The shopkeeper says it's only 10 bottlecaps (or 100 caps if your barter skill is low). You throw it away and the shopkeeper is not happy. He will shoot you or warn you depending on your karma.

So if I don't place the bottle on the exact same spot where it was before, the shopkeeper will shoot me? Sounds really fun.

OR, You decided not to buy it but instead try to steal it. Enter sneak mode. You succesfully snag the nuka-cola.

The steal skill is gone then? Great, so that's another aspect of the SPECIAL ruleset you want to fuck with.

If you have the 'gigalo' perk, you can sleep with her, in 3D. (Bring on the AO rating! )

So that's why you want 3D first-person Fallout. Because you crave jagged pixelated sex. Whoop-dee-doo. Get a life.

These are just my thoughts. Surely you can play the game in 2D mode. But 3D gives you more immersion of the game. I want to see the waste in 3D first-person mode.

Seeing as Fallout had more immersion that just about any first person game, I would surmise you are a stupid market sheep who either hasn't played Fallout or hasn't really understood what constitutes the game.

If everyone is like you who prefer 'the old-way', better go back to the stone age then. There will be no airplane (Man can't fly so STFU!), no TV (a box with moving image? How craptastic is that!), no cellphone (I can use my pigeon to send my love letter!)...


Innovation is what driven us to achieve our dream. To be the character of a game is why everyone wants to do. To feel the enviroment, the gameplay, the dialog. You don't need to join the army to drive that F-22. Falcon 4.0 can do that. You don't need to wait till nuclear war happen (let us hope it will never happen) just to survive in the waste as Mad max clone. Admit it, who doesn't want the holodeck to become a reality? Question

Look, I know what makes FALLOUT so special. It's not the graphic or the music. But it's the gameplay itself and story which seperate most CRPG game in the market. If 3D graphic (which might make it better) is available, why don't use it?

So you think Fallout should be a first person 3D game because first person 3D is "wave of the future", is that it? Good God, your mental incapacity makes my brain shrivel. Here's a clue: first person games with full 360° field of view first appeared fifteen years ago. First person view in general was invented almost three decades ago and is as old as gaming. RPGs have been using it since early 1980's. Isometric view in CRPGs, on the other hand, came much later as an improvement over the classic top-down view. Isometric view arrived as an *innovation*, as opposed to classic first person and top down view. Do you *now* understand the extent of your idiocy? You want to replace Fallout's isometric perspective - which represents an improvement over classic first person and top-down view - with first person perspective, because - in your blissful ignorance - you think first person in "innovative". Great move, genius.