Ashley Cheng: nobody's talking

[SuAside]

ironic though... Troika was pushed to release ASAP by Activision, but then Valve halted the release because it wanted HL2 to be released first (as V:tM-B sported an earlier version of the source engine).

only frustrating for Troika, i bet. pushed to release an unfinished buggy game, yet forced to stall distribution until 16 november, the releasedate of HL2.

 

[Sorrow]

What's astounding is that the system is rewarding developers for making more retarded games.

What amuses me, are people who complain, but buy the game anyway, or wait with judging a game until they buy it.
Which is funny, because the first is rewarding devs for making wrong design decisions and the second is similar - rewarding the devs before knowing if they did a good job or not.

 

[pnutz]

I understand V.A.T.S. this way:

Most RTwP systems limit the unbalancing effect of pausing by keeping the turns from their parent turn based system, but having everyone's turns occur simultaneously, at regular intervals. When you pause and choose an action, that action waits in a queue until the next turn.

Fallout 3 ditches the turns and gives you a continuously refilling store of action points. You wait until the bar gets high enough, and then you pause and choose your action, which occurs immediately. All NPCs are acting in real time.

This makes sense for a single-character game with a focus on ranged combat, because it allows you to choose exactly when and where to attack. It would be impossible to use cover sensibly if you couldn't predict when your gun would go off. The system would be fiddly and irritating if you had to keep track of six people's AP bars and explicitly order all of their attacks, but that's not an issue here.

But! You can also attack while unpaused, if you aim the gun yourself. I suppose this would serve as the equivalent of X-Com's interrupt shots or DND's attacks of opportunity. It has the side-effect of "dramatically" slowing your AP recharge rate.

I can only think of one reason to have one combat mode impede the other: to force the player to focus on one or the other. If I'm right, that means it's possible to focus on V.A.T.S. and use it more or less exclusively. You move around in real time, but you can let die rolls decide the outcome of your attacks; aiming is optional. If someone happens to wander into your crosshairs, you can choose to take the shot, but it means a longer wait until your next AP attack.

On the other hand, you could just run and gun, occasionally pausing to go into your inventory or try out a disarm shot.

Sounds plausible, right? I wish someone would confirm it.

All VATS does is shoehorn SPECIAL into TES's continuous combat system. TES has no underlying round-based mechanic it builds its real-time combat from. Your stats in TES determine how quickly you can make your next attack.

It looks to me like all the did for F3 is replace the TES stats with SPECIAL and add a meter to their little attack speed system from Oblivion. Instead of your skills determining how quickly you make your next attack, now your AP score determines this. It also "stores" this potential in your AP bar so in case you miss the click on the exact moment you are allowed another attack, you don't lose some attack time like in TES.

You don't just go clickityclickityclickclickclick like in Oblivion; you can leisurely click..click..click for some real-time FPS action and not have to worry about missing any attack time. Or you can wait until you get some extra AP and do a called shot or burst (I assume you'll be able to burst, think of the slow mo). Or, if you wait until your AP recharges completely, the game pauses and allows you to burn through all of your AP at once. That's as "turn-based" as it will get.

That's all I can conjecture. I can't see Beth implementing this any other way. Unless, of course, they'd care to explain otherwise.

 

[Dracon M'Alkir]

What's astounding is that the system is rewarding developers for making more retarded games.

What amuses me, are people who complain, but buy the game anyway, or wait with judging a game until they buy it.
Which is funny, because the first is rewarding devs for making wrong design decisions and the second is similar - rewarding the devs before knowing if they did a good job or not.

True, but what choice do they really have in the second option, if say the developer doesn't release a tech demo or otherwise regular demo of the game?

Software companies are doing this less frequently as time progresses.

The only other 'alternative' to demoing a game, would be to borrow a friend's purchased copy (which already, rewards the developer not knowing wheter the game is good or not yet) and testing it out.

In all scenarios aside from outright piracy, it always ends with the developer being rewarded for creating shitty products. Funny how they all blame software piracy for their finanical downfall, and never themselves for the crapterpieces that they produce.

 

[KavonRa]

What's astounding is that the system is rewarding developers for making more retarded games.

What amuses me, are people who complain, but buy the game anyway, or wait with judging a game until they buy it.
Which is funny, because the first is rewarding devs for making wrong design decisions and the second is similar - rewarding the devs before knowing if they did a good job or not.

Somehow most people dont understand what it means to live in a capitalistic system, believe it or not as a customer one has limited power over the course of a company.
People that have a problem with a game believe buying the game makes the Devs/Publisher listen to them next time or that somehow the developer cares that you support him.
The more people buy their games= the more the shareholders demand they keep going that way. More games sales= more profit= The way to go.

 

[Tora]

The argument that most RPGs nowadays are FP is flawed anyway.
Not even one good RPG of these days is(or will be) FP.
I challenge people to actually FIND a RPG other than Oblivion that was or will be FP.
FPP limits the options for RPGs and supports a more twitch-based gameplay. I'd say simply that there's no way ever that FP RPGs are going to be as "role playing" as iso or top-down. They have failed anyway already.

I think its a result of the current masses confusing Action games with ARPG -> RPG as well as the current slew of MMORPGs (Which aren't really RPGS!) that allow for FP.

 

[Autoduel76]

What amuses me, are people who complain, but buy the game anyway, or wait with judging a game until they buy it.
Which is funny, because the first is rewarding devs for making wrong design decisions and the second is similar - rewarding the devs before knowing if they did a good job or not.

Well, I really don't see all that many people who dislike a game and buy it anyway. They might complain about parts vocally, but still think more good about it than bad, in which case it makes sense to buy the game. If you don't buy games you thought would be fun just because of one aspect you don't agree with you are really only hurting yourself.

You'd have to only buy games in which you agreed with every single decision if you were going to stick to those principles.

I mean, the issue for games like Oblivion, which I never played, doesn't seem to be that people are supporting games they dislike. If you go to sites like gamefaq or gamerankings or mobygames, or anywhere, Oblivion gets rated high. And not just by the media, but by all the user-reviews too.

The issue isn't people supporting games they dislike, the issue is that the community of people who don't like the games they are making is tiny compared to the numbers of people that do.

 

[Sorrow]

True, but what choice do they really have in the second option, if say the developer doesn't release a tech demo or otherwise regular demo of the game?

Well, that's their problem - if they don't release the demo, it means that they have something to hide, doesn't it?
Actually, I don't rewarding developers for selling Schrodinger's Cats either - it clearly shows that the developer is relying on hype, not on quality of their product.
I think that reading a good review from an unbiased site like RPG Codex is enough for me .

In all scenarios aside from outright piracy, it always ends with the developer being rewarded for creating shitty products. Funny how they all blame software piracy for their finanical downfall, and never themselves for the crapterpieces that they produce.

I've recently returned a game to a store because it had a "Starforce" malware DRM. It installed it's own drivers and some kind of virtual device without my knowledge or consent - I was pretty shocked, because games usually ask if they want me to installe even drivers that they need like Direct-X for example. I've read that it can damage the computer if one tries to make a backup copy of it (from the internet, not from manual). I bought a book instead.

Well, I really don't see all that many people who dislike a game and buy it anyway. They might complain about parts vocally, but still think more good about it than bad, in which case it makes sense to buy the game. If you don't buy games you thought would be fun just because of one aspect you don't agree with you are really only hurting yourself.

Actually no, because I may buy something that I really like instead. I stopped buying games whose design decisions I disagree with after the Baldur's Gate series in which I had to use a character editor to actually enjoy the game (because of depleted AD&D which didn't have any interesting character development), which made me start modding games. The point is that I discovered that by buying the games with design decisions that I don't like I'm not only hurting my self by spending resources that could be spent on something more satisfying and less frustrating but also I'm actually rewarding people for making those bad design decisions.

 

[Vault 69er]

The argument that most RPGs nowadays are FP is flawed anyway.
Not even one good RPG of these days is(or will be) FP.
I challenge people to actually FIND a RPG other than Oblivion that was or will be FP.
FPP limits the options for RPGs and supports a more twitch-based gameplay. I'd say simply that there's no way ever that FP RPGs are going to be as "role playing" as iso or top-down. They have failed anyway already.

Gothic 3 and Two Worlds come to mind.
Unless you mean good RPGs, in which case you'd be right since they're also crap.

 

[Autoduel76]

Actually no, because I may buy something that I really like instead. I stopped buying games whose design decisions I disagree with after the Baldur's Gate series in which I had to use a character editor to actually enjoy the game (because of depleted AD&D which didn't have any interesting character development), which made me start modding games.

Well, then you don't fall into the category that I mentioned. If you couldn't enjoy Baldur's Gate, then you didn't like it more than you hated it.

I only said that if the positive in a game outweighs the negative, you should buy it.

 

[Jimmious]

The argument that most RPGs nowadays are FP is flawed anyway.
Not even one good RPG of these days is(or will be) FP.
I challenge people to actually FIND a RPG other than Oblivion that was or will be FP.
FPP limits the options for RPGs and supports a more twitch-based gameplay. I'd say simply that there's no way ever that FP RPGs are going to be as "role playing" as iso or top-down. They have failed anyway already.

Gothic 3 and Two Worlds come to mind.
Unless you mean good RPGs, in which case you'd be right since they're also crap.

I haven't played either and haven't even heard of Two Worlds. However from the reviews I thought Gothic 3 is a 3rd person perspective game(with a Tomb Raider-like camera), not an FPP one.

Anyway, even if there are some, they are a minority.

 

[Per]

I only said that if the positive in a game outweighs the negative, you should buy it.

This is not necessarily true. Would you say that every book which is better than "50%" should be read, even when there are more excellent books in the world than one can read in a lifetime? It's true only if one is obsessed with PA computer games and other things cannot even begin to compete for one's time and money. If the game industry as a whole produces crap, nothing says we have to buy the best crap.

 

[Pope Viper]

This is not necessarily true. Would you say that every book which is better than "50%" should be read, even when there are more excellent books in the world than one can read in a lifetime? It's true only if one is obsessed with PA computer games and other things cannot even begin to compete for one's time and money. If the game industry as a whole produces crap, nothing says we have to buy the best crap.

I'll also say that who is going to "settle" for a half-assed Fallout, other then those who really don't know what a real FO is?

 

[Makagulfazel]

Fallout 3: rated M for Mouse-shit.

It's small and smells of shit? What's not going to be liked about it?

 

[13pm]

Gstaff has just confirmed that they won't tell anything concerning GI article:

 

[scypior]

Gstaff has just confirmed that they won't tell anything concerning GI article:

Maybe ask Game Informer then? Or this guy who want to ask question via the mail or something, I do not remember who he was...

 

[KavonRa]

The argument that most RPGs nowadays are FP is flawed anyway.
Not even one good RPG of these days is(or will be) FP.
I challenge people to actually FIND a RPG other than Oblivion that was or will be FP.
FPP limits the options for RPGs and supports a more twitch-based gameplay. I'd say simply that there's no way ever that FP RPGs are going to be as "role playing" as iso or top-down. They have failed anyway already.

Gothic 3 and Two Worlds come to mind.
Unless you mean good RPGs, in which case you'd be right since they're also crap.

How about Wizardry, strife, Might and magic(not the heroes of...series), lands of lore, an underwater rpg where you are a minisub (kinda like aquanox but less action and more story) and several more but i cant recall anynames at this time. 15-+ years of gaming makes it hard to remember specific names.

 

[Goweigus]

Fallout 3: rated M for Mouse-shit.

LoL best quote of the day right there!

Ya that is pretty lame that the PR guy tells everyone, or at least the gamers who actually care/know better, to just wait and try the game before they learn anything knew. Seems like the very opposite of what PR is supposed to do... Why need a PR if they will just tell everyone to STFU!!!?

 

[jfreund]

Re: LOL!

I just wish people would let them make the game and see how it is before you judge it. You have not played it, and the trailer, screenshots, and such have, to my eye, caught the FEEL of the original games very well.

Give it a chance before you all pile on and tear it down!

Sheesh!

- Drake

Yes, let Francis the Super Mutant rape you before you judge the experience. Let Bethesda rape the corpse of Fallout before we judge them.

Sheesh!

Fallout is NOT an "action RPG". It is a reproduction of the PEN & PAPER role playing experience using a computer to allow a single player to enjoy it. In my own experience I was always interested in PnP games, but I never had friends who were, so I never got to play a PnP game.

In a role playing game, the stats of your player CHARACTER determine the outcome of a given situation. In an action game, the ability of the player to push buttons in the correct sequence determines the outcome of the game. Chimpanzees can be trained to press buttons in sequence. NASA did it in the 50's.

When I want an experience where my own reflexes and abilities determine the outcome of a challenge, I participate in a karate tournament. When I want a role playing experience where I can live in a fictional world and do things I cannot do in reality, I play a computer RPG, and I put a lot of thought into the development of my character.

Oblivion is a FPS with "roleplaying elements". Bethesda is making Fallout as Oblivion with Nukes. Bethesda's "Fallout" is not a PnP experience using a computer. It is the cynical, shameless exploitation and desecration of a revered franchise. Bethesda did not need the Fallout intellectual property to make this game.

 

[quietfanatic]

Maybe ask Game Informer then? Or this guy who want to ask question via the mail or something, I do not remember who he was...

Fat chance of that, as exclusive video interviews and answers to his questions are available on the GI site, to subscribers only. Unfortunately many of us aren't subscribers. Bethsoft doesn't like releasing information much, and GI is unlikely to want to do so for free.