Ashley Cheng: nobody's talking

[Brother None]

Bethesda producer Ashley Cheng had this to say in a reply to a query on his blog:<blockquote>Sorry, but no one should be commenting on the article or any specifics about the game. Don’t worry - by the time the game comes out, you’ll have all the information you need to decide if you want to play it or not</blockquote>Bethesda is still treating the PR surrounding the game as if this were TES V. A shame, because one of the biggest points of confusion on the GI article is "what the hell is V.A.T.S."? From the description given, it sounds like a nerfed RealTime with Pause system (please don't confuse it with a turn-based system, the term "turn-based" is not mentioned anywhere in the GI article) and since nobody is going to clarify it further, we can only assume for now that that's exactly what it is.

Link: VATS summary on Briosafreak's blog

 

[Brother None]

For all clarity, this is one of the dumbest PR moves I've ever seen.

Ever.

Not even a mail, one post to clarify, to show some stick figures explaining how combat would work? It's one of the biggest doubts about the game as described, even on the more positive forums, yet Bethesda is again pretending their nose bleeds, the hype's going fine and they can just continue.

They've never been good at adapting to a different situation, right from the announcement of the Fallout deal onwards.

PR disaster.

 

[Starwars]

Posted this on Briosafreaks blog as well.

I find it very strange that they’re not able to speak about things that have been revealed already in the GI article. It seems clear to me that they wanted people to know how the combat system works for example, but since people are still somewhat confused on how it will actually play in game, then why not just update us with that info?
Like you say though, they will have to put up with people making all kinds of assumptions now, instead of discussing the actual facts.

It doesn't make any sense to reveal this information to a magazine, and then not clarify how it will play when people don't understand it.

Like you said, it seems to be some kind RTwP thing, but how fast will these AP regenerate? Is it really feasible to play through the game strictly as a FPS (like the article says)? How much actual impact will VATS have on the game? Will it only be a "superpower" to make certain situations easier?

 

[Brother None]

I guess it's the exclusivity deal that does them in. Which isn't surprising, but it is stupid

 

[KavonRa]

Well it seems that Cheng clearly wants us, us being those who are displeased by the GI article, to STFU. Seems they clearly hoped the game would be welcomed with more praise.

Funny how "play" is used instead of "buy".

Also what strikes me is that eventho the launch is still a year away, the responce of Cheng indicates they wont be adjusting anything.

The message can be translated into a short sentence: STFU and wait for launch!

 

[trustno1]

Posted this on Briosafreaks blog as well.
Will it only be a "superpower" to make certain situations easier?

That's how it sounds to me. There's no mention of AP playing a role outside of VATS, so it's probably their attempt of throwing something that the TB crowd might consider a TB substitute - you use VATS, then wait till' the AP replenish, while enemies give it to ya - technically this is what happens after you end your turn - and then turn VATS again.

There are two problems with this - apparently the only thing to do in VATS (if the name is acurate) is aimed shots so that's not really what the player turn looks like. And secondly in order for this to work enemy behaviour would have to be balanced enough no to sloughter you while you wait - and that's pretty much impossible to balance if the full RT mode is supposed to work and be challenging.

Se eventually it'll work as a special move limited by Agillity to shoot'em in the head for a critical or in the limbs to slow them down.

That's how I see it. But indeed throwing this vague description and then shuting up is pretty silly. Looks like the pre-production interviews with the "we're not going to do this and that" and then going "it's too early to say really"...

 

[Brother None]

I vaguely suspect Bethesda wasn't ready yet. I see a lot of posts on other forums, like SomethingAwful, saying "you can't judge how supermutants look, it's more than one year until release."

True.

But then why is Bethesda showing us this? A company that prides itself in showing only a finished product, why are they showing off something which a lot of people can only hope is a very, very unfinished product?

 

[trustno1]

It seams like the best thing so far is the teaser, and that's what they keep on doing - teasing. They throw some info out so that people won't say their completely ignoring the consumers, but it's vague enough and not backed up by any solid examples so that you can't really judge it to a 100%.

You'll see that there's somewhat a similar, minor amount of people completely thrown away as people completely satisfied - most are still unsure. I guess that's how it works - feed the hype-machine with just enough to make some noise, draw the attention of newcomers, but not enough to paint a whole picture.

I don't know, it doesn't seem like this will be any more effective than just keeping quiet, releasing the final product with magazine covers filled with "Fallout 3 by the creators of Oblivion" and a flashy screenshot. At least this way they wouldn't have a whole bunch of pissed of, vocal communities "teased" for almost 4 years ... bah, maybe they're just sadists.

 

[JR Jansen]

I guess it's the exclusivity deal that does them in. Which isn't surprising, but it is stupid

Probably, but they even refuse to talk about even small gameplay issues. Just go read the 'Meet the devs' thread on their forum. In that thread, you will find some gameplay questions, who are not big gameplay issues but they still have the abilety to make 'witty' comments that say nothing.

 

[Grotesque]

"Sorry, but no one should be commenting on the article or any specifics about the game. Don’t worry - by the time the game comes out, you’ll have all the information you need to decide if you want to play it or not"

dear Mr. Cheng, the issue here is not that if I decide to play it or not, the problem is that you people whored Fallout into a FPS and we have alot of promises that dont reflect in that article.

 

[sai | GLYPH]

I think we're going to see alot of...

"Stop complaining you have nothing to worry about"

...turning into...

"Stop complaining we told you all along"

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Meanwhile at the Beth F3 development lab....

Ok guys heres what we will do. If they praise the game we will plaster those qoutes all over our web blogs and web pages. We shall let the world know what a master piece we have made. They shall bask in our glory.

If they attempt to slander our glorious creation however with questions like "How does it work" or "Why does it look that way?" we shall show the world that they are just rabid fan boys who hate change and are out to maim and ruin our great and glorious creation. We shall ban them from the internet and send our troops to their homes at night to ensure their putrid evil does not taint others with the concept of questioning. All we want is them to buy our superior product and acknowldge our glory!

We know our product is simply the best Obliv err Fallout ever created! No one should ever question us or our genius!

 

[Maphusio]

Meanwhile at the Beth F3 development lab....

Ok guys heres what we will do. If they praise the game we will plaster those qoutes all over our web blogs and web pages. We shall let the world know what a master piece we have made. They shall bask in our glory.

If they attempt to slander our glorious creation however with questions like "How does it work" or "Why does it look that way?" we shall show the world that they are just rabid fan boys who hate change and are out to maim and ruin our great and glorious creation. We shall ban them from the internet and send our troops to their homes at night to ensure their putrid evil does not taint others with the concept of questioning. All we want is them to buy our superior product and acknowldge our glory!

We know our product is simply the best Obliv err Fallout ever created! No one should ever question us or our genius!

Wow, reading the first line of your post the idea to film a short Frankenstein style film with (of course) Bethesda as Dr. Frankenstein popped into mind. I could see that being fairly amusing if done well.

 

[neopl]

What an arrogant asshole. Enough said.

 

[Morbus]

Looks like someone is surprised...

 

[Wooz]

Allright, newbies, please refrain from posts that go "Lawl, Bethesda sux its dum and is evilzors".

If you have something to complain about, explain your motives. Back up your rant with arguments. One-liner posts like the one mentioned above doesn't only make you look stupid, it makes the rest of the community look exactly like we've being painted as: rabid fanboys.

So please, kind sirs. If you don't to look like a troll that's joined two days ago just to denigrate the community by spouting this kind of blabber, put some thought into your posts. It doesn't hurt.

Needless to say, we've been having a lot of gimmick accounts lately, and my patience grows extremely thin whenever I read "u guyz jus give a chance, stoopid fanbois" or "bethe$da is satan".

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Excuse my french, but it's hard to talk anyway when you've got Todd Howard's dick in your mouth.

edit: In light of Wooz' post which was submitted while I was typing mine, I'd like to add the disclaimer that the opinions expressed in this post are neither endorsed by, nor is it reflective of NMA.

 

[drakesteele]

To quote the article: "The Vault-Tec Assisted Targeting System (V.A.T.S.) is what assures that this FIRST-PERSON game so chock full of guns doesn't become an FPS. "We don't want to be rewarding twitch play," Howard says. "It's not an action game. It's a role-playing game." While you'll certainly be able to tackle enemies in real-time first-person shooting, V.A.T.S. lets players pause time and select a target at their leisure. Once targeted, a zoomed-in view of that enemy will show all the places you could aim to hit the creature, and the percentage chance you'll succeed."

Sounds/looks much like selecting the target mode on a weapon in FO1/2 to me, and it sounds like the only real way to do it in a First-Person view-based Fallout, and still keep a degree of realism. Continuing the article:

"This percentage is based on distance, enemy defense, his cover, as well as your ability with the weapon at hand, among other factors. JUST LIKE IN THE ORIGINAL FALLOUT, you'll have a set number of Action Points, largely based on your Agility score. Every combat move you make will deplete this supply, at which point those AP will begin to regenerate in real time at a rate that also corresponds with your agility. Once you complete all your actions in V.A.T.S. you can continue to attack in real time, but this will DRAMATICALLY SLOW THE RECHARGE OF YOUR ACTION POINTS, THEREBY ENCOURAGING TACTICAL TARGETING OVER CONSTANT TWITCH SHOOTING. As for those specific targets, which area you aim for will have a profound effect on your foe..."

Again - sounds like a pretty good first-person alternative to full turn-based combat... makes it stay in the tactical realm unless you just feel a real need to target the critter manually to get out your agression or whatever. Seems very much like the "I'll run up and whack this critter. Ok their turn. Ok I whack it again, and run to the next critter. Oof they hit me!" turn-based combat in the original games. I'm damned excited to see how well it works - to me it sounds great, and I've been a fan of the series since the day they were released.

If you are against it from the get-go because it's first person, get over it - tech moves on, and first person is more immersive - hence the reason that most RPGs have gone that route now. When VR comes of age, most RPGs will use that, and there you'll be, complaining that you can't see yourself without having to go find a mirror because there's no third-person isometric view mode! Let it GO already!

And I loved the turn-based combat, it made perfect sense in that overhead, tactical view. It makes less sense in first person, especially since an immersive life experience as they're trying to capture by being in first person, wouldn't GIVE you time to analyze every option to attack your opponents like FO1/2 did. I think they're doing a great job trying to integrate that concept as much as possible into this from all indications, while keeping it realistic. Imagine if real life worked like that - man, there are so many mistakes I never would have made, because I would've had time to think about exactly what I'd say in advance, or how I'd deal with a situation before it actually came... that doesn't happen in reality, and they're trying to create an "alternate reality" with a feel as realistic as the one you're in. Hard to do, if the whole world just pauses when something gets ready to hit you. lol

Anyway, that's my two cents. Be well, all, and just enjoy the game for what it is.

- Drake Steele
MVE, MusicWorld3D.com

 

[requiem_for_a_starfury]

If you are against it from the get-go because it's first person, get over it - tech moves on, and first person is more immersive - hence the reason that most RPGs have gone that route now.

First person is not automatically more immersive! Immersion is subjective.

And going first person is regressing not moving forward, something you'd know if you'd read anything here before posting.

 

[Sander]

Again - sounds like a pretty good first-person alternative to full turn-based combat... makes it stay in the tactical realm unless you just feel a real need to target the critter manually to get out your agression or whatever. Seems very much like the "I'll run up and whack this critter. Ok their turn. Ok I whack it again, and run to the next critter. Oof they hit me!" turn-based combat in the original games. I'm damned excited to see how well it works - to me it sounds great, and I've been a fan of the series since the day they were released.

...
Are you fucking kidding me? If that's what 'turn-based' sounds like to you, you have no clue whatsoever what turn-based combat really is.
Here's a hint: being able to pause and select a target is not the same as turn-based combat in, well, any way whatsoever. All it is is exactly that: being able to pause and select a target.

If you are against it from the get-go because it's first person, get over it - tech moves on,

Here's a hint: first-person view existed long before Fallout did and even before the isometric viewpoint existed. It was also used in a variety of RPGs before Fallout. Fallout's viewpoint was consciously chosen as a solid design decision, and even their most advanced, extremely high-budget approach would have been isometric.

The choice for the viewpoint had absolutely nothing to do with the technology.

and first person is more immersive

Bullshite. Immersion is not defined by the viewpoint, but by a believable and consistently modelled world. There is nothing inherently more immersive about a first-person view.

- hence the reason that most RPGs have gone that route now.

Since when is 'Oblivion' the same as 'most RPGs'?
Most RPGs, in fact, do not (and never have) used the first-person view.

When VR comes of age, most RPGs will use that, and there you'll be, complaining that you can't see yourself without having to go find a mirror because there's no third-person isometric view mode! Let it GO already!

No, we'll be complaining because it heavily alters gameplay into something that it was never meant to be. The viewpoint itself isn't the problem, but everything that comes along with it is. Most notably, the combination of interface and *turn-based combat*.

So if VR comes of age, we'll be complaining that, yes, the turn-based combat would be absolutely ridiculous. Just because a technology exists does not mean you have to use it.

And I loved the turn-based combat, it made perfect sense in that overhead, tactical view. It makes less sense in first person, especially since an immersive life experience as they're trying to capture by being in first person, wouldn't GIVE you time to analyze every option to attack your opponents like FO1/2 did. I think they're doing a great job trying to integrate that concept as much as possible into this from all indications, while keeping it realistic. Imagine if real life worked like that - man, there are so many mistakes I never would have made, because I would've had time to think about exactly what I'd say in advance, or how I'd deal with a situation before it actually came... that doesn't happen in reality, and they're trying to create an "alternate reality" with a feel as realistic as the one you're in. Hard to do, if the whole world just pauses when something gets ready to hit you. lol

Anyway, that's my two cents. Be well, all, and just enjoy the game for what it is.

- Drake Steele
MVE, MusicWorld3D.com

Don't be an idiot. Fallout isn't about emulating real-life as closely as possible, it's about emulating the P&P feeling as closely as possible. You're now arguing from the assumption that there will be first-person view, and then advocating from that assumption that there must be real-time perspective. Which is a ridiculous line of logic to take.