Bethesda dev speaks

[Divinepain]

Why dont Bethesda give a option to realt time and turn based like in tactics?..............make everyone happy..... :

 

[Sander]

Why dont Bethesda give a option to realt time and turn based like in tactics?..............make everyone happy..... :

Er...maybe they will. We don't know yet. We can only guess, although they're very educated guesses.

 

[Angrim]

I believe that has been discussed here like dozens of times, Divinepain... And we don't even know how it is going to be.

Really, I would not be worried about what this dev guy is saying. He's just a working man. He does what he is told, and I really do hope that the people who give him orders have a better view on how Fallout should be.

Well, actually... Of course I am worried about how Fallout 3 is going to be. I am worried a lot. But what this dev is saying, does not cause more worrying for me.

 

[Sorrow]

Does this mean that the only weapons that fit your vision of the canon are the Ripper, Power Fist and energy weapons? If so, you may be happier playing Ratchet and Clank.

Strawman argument. I'm talking about Fallout canon, where the Fallout universe has it's own (sometimes pop-culture inspired) fictional weapons like a Colt 6520 10mm Pistol, H&K MP9 10mm Submachinegun, Sig-Sauer 14mm Pistol, AK-112 5mm Assault Rifle, Colt Rangemaster Hunting Rifle and Winchester City-Killer Combat Shotgun - most of them made by real manufacturers and all of them being part of Fallout's style, not about limiting the weapon choices to ultra-tech weapons .
Educate yourself before trying to be funny.

The FN Fal is justified as it was developed in the 50s.

Maybe it's justified, but shouldn't be anything more than a Mouser-like unique item. It's retrofuture after all.

 

[SuAside]

Why dont Bethesda give a option to realt time and turn based like in tactics?..............make everyone happy..... :

well, balancing such an effort is troublesome at best. Arcanum tried and utterly failed. it would've been a near-perfect game if the combat had been better balanced.

 

[aries369]

eh ' I'm a bit confused right now ?

It seems to me that all of your, or most of you, (or us?) here at NMA wants a game that walks, talks and looks exactly like a) the Van Buren project as shown in the video presented by Kharn or b) a game that walks, talks, and looks slightly better than the 1997 original Fallout, aka FO1.

From what I've seen on the this forum as well as on Beth's forums, at least, to me, it seems and looks that way: that the fans (NMA etc.) only is happy if the game is sort of a rehash of the old FO1+2 games. And has TB combat, top-down isometric view and so on & so forth.
I know you want this because this way you get to emulate the PnP feel in a crpg game.

To me, however, as a fan of the Fallout series as well, the Fallout feeling doesn't lie in the combat system, in the game mechanics or in the tb combat system, nor does it lie in the isometric third person view or the realtime first person view.

The Fallout feeling does lie in the fact that you can go anywhere, do any quest in any order, or choose not to do some quests, but you so at your own risk. And that every choice you take has a consequence or two. It lies also buried in the fact that you're alone in the world, striving through vast deserts, trying to find a save yourself , or the world, or just getting by another day in harsh, real world.

I also think you shouldn't just Bethesda on its former merits. It is just like an author who all his (or her) life has written romance novels of the Barbara Cartland type. Then, one day, he or she decides that he, or she, really wants to
make a gritty dark novel about deceit in the family. A decent novel about this that actually could be released a hardbacj edition, not just a paperback edition. And that's where Bethesda is right now, I think.

They'll want to prove to the world, they can do something else besised the TES series. And, from a financial standpoint, probably add a different franchise, Fallout, to the Bethsoft Family . That way, Bethesda will have two game franchises to help generate income for them. And that's woth a lot these day...

 

[Sander]

eh ' I'm a bit confused right now ?

It seems to me that all of your, or most of you, (or us?) here at NMA wants a game that walks, talks and looks exactly like a) the Van Buren project as shown in the video presented by Kharn or b) a game that walks, talks, and looks slightly better than the 1997 original Fallout, aka FO1.

From what I've seen on the this forum as well as on Beth's forums, at least, to me, it seems and looks that way: that the fans (NMA etc.) only is happy if the game is sort of a rehash of the old FO1+2 games. And has TB combat, top-down isometric view and so on & so forth.
I know you want this because this way you get to emulate the PnP feel in a crpg game.

Don't you get tired of repeating the same bullshit fallacy in every single argument you encounter?
We want a *Fallout* game. Which means turn-based combat, an isometric *standard* viewpoint, SPECIAL and choices and consequences. This does not mean the game needs to be a re-hash of Fallout 1&2.
Yeesh.

To me, however, as a fan of the Fallout series as well, the Fallout feeling doesn't lie in the combat system, in the game mechanics or in the tb combat system, nor does it lie in the isometric third person view or the realtime first person view.

It's good to see that you've picked up absolutely nothing from the 'debates' you've participated in. You still use the 'but *I* want' argument, as opposed to factual references to the game's actual *design*.

The Fallout feeling does lie in the fact that you can go anywhere, do any quest in any order, or choose not to do some quests, but you so at your own risk. And that every choice you take has a consequence or two. It lies also buried in the fact that you're alone in the world, striving through vast deserts, trying to find a save yourself , or the world, or just getting by another day in harsh, real world.

Your *opinion* is that that's a fact. The *facts* speak against you.

I also think you shouldn't just Bethesda on its former merits. It is just like an author who all his (or her) life has written romance novels of the Barbara Cartland type. Then, one day, he or she decides that he, or she, really wants to
make a gritty dark novel about deceit in the family. A decent novel about this that actually could be released a hardbacj edition, not just a paperback edition. And that's where Bethesda is right now, I think.

Then what, pray tell, do we judge them on? We judge them on their creations, their self-proclaimed opinions on what an RPG constitutes (ie. Oblivion) and the interviews. Unless they prove they've changed from those things, that's pretty damned fair.

They'll want to prove to the world, they can do something else besised the TES series. And, from a financial standpoint, probably add a different franchise, Fallout, to the Bethsoft Family . That way, Bethesda will have two game franchises to help generate income for them. And that's woth a lot these day...

That's neat. We're judging them on what we see and know, you're judging them on pure speculation.

Oh gee, guess who's got a better case.

 

[xu]

Why dont Bethesda give a option to realt time and turn based like in tactics?..............make everyone happy..... :

Did you actually try to play Tactics in TB mode? It's more as an option with no use at all, because it would take you ages to finish the game, so thats not the best example to compare to.

 

[Sander]

Did you actually try to play Tactics in TB mode? It's more as an option with no use at all, because it would take you ages to finish the game, so thats not the best example to compare to.

Wait, it was? 'Cause I played through most of the game like that just fine. Except for the ghoul town, which probably had the best setting of the game but the most annoying turn-based combat.

 

[Brother None]

My concerns are real. I have been waiting for someone to take up the challenge to make a true successor for 8 years. But if I was with Bethesda, and every comment I made was met with replies of "Bethesda Suxx!", "Bethesda is nothing but a bunch of fucking idiot whores!" and "My donkey's dick is stuck in Bethesda's ass" by a particular community, I belive I would find myself increasingly less open to real suggestions from same.

Don't worry too much, Bluto (go beat up Popeye instead, grrrlol!).

I think NMA, and its users, are kind of balancing between being supportive of Bethesda and getting ready to make a big push against them should the game turn out to suck. The fact that despite all surmising, rumours and doubts don't add up to a whole lot of facts. As you've probably seen, when we see something we like, we're positive about it (like the E3 poster last year, or Emil being the lead dev), when we see something we dislike, well...we're typing glittering gems, I guess.

NMA is in no position to be sidelined either by the devs or the media, considering the fact that we're still breaking new news that even Gamespot credits us for and considering we're still linked to as the premium source of Fallout info (together with the Fallout Vault, but they have less fame, as of now) and considering we do have some lines of contact with the devs.

It's all going to depend on what they reveal soon. The ball's really not in our park, it's in theirs.

 

[Bluto]

Well, I'm glad I sparked a little bit of debate, some of it thoughtful.

1. As for turn based, I would prefer it to even a stop action realtime turned based game. In endgame sequences like meeting a group of floaters or in the final base, it was invaluable to be able to plan your attacks. But in some areas it was very slow, as Mr. Teatime pointed out. If you read my post, I specifically mentioned Reno and the Hub, not the rat cave as one poster that claimed to know my gaming experience and knowledge. The casino fights in Reno particulary come to mind. While 15 minutes may have been an exxageration, waiting through 40 character moves per turn, which over 50% were non aggravated or fleeing NPCs got quite tiresome. My suggestion would be a modification that excluded non agrivatted combatants.

2. As for the weapons, I apologize for misreading Sorrows preferences. Ratchet and Clank would be inappropriate for you. Medal of Honor, Company of Heros or a re-inactment of the Civil war would suit your tastes far better. As for me, the weapons selected by the accutal creators and Avellone that were in the game will be my guideline for what I believe is Fallout canon. I prefer their concept to yours.

It's sad that the best rebuttal to my comments some could come up with fell in the line of "You're stupid!", "you don't know the game" and "drama whore". Yes, I am a drama whore, but in this context it seems that I'm the high priced, articulate and witty drama whore compared to the $5 blowjob drama whores assaulting me.

Edit: Well stated Brother None!

 

[Brother None]

My suggestion would be a modification that excluded non agrivatted combatants.

I don't think anyone will argue there. The aweful way turnbased combat ran in places like New Reno *was* one of the things caused by technical limitations.

It's sad that the best rebuttal to my comments some could come up with fell in the line of "You're stupid!", "you don't know the game" and "drama whore". Yes, I am a drama whore, but in this context it seems that I'm the high priced, articulate and witty drama whore compared to the $5 blowjob drama whores assaulting me.

Please don't aggrevate the trolling. People wear their hearts on their sleeves here, and while I don't necessarily agree with them, I'm not going to restrain their right to say people are idiots. You're allowed to call them drama whores in return, I'll give you that, but let's drop it at that, because if this turns into a further flame-fest, it's going to the vats.

 

[Bluto]

I concede and concur. I apologize for my overly aggressive stance, but I too am passionate about this game, and passion often overrides my reason and sense of decorum.....You guys do have decorum here, right? I know I saw it around here somewhere....there it is! Right next to those tasty kabobs!

 

[Sorrow]

Ratchet and Clank would be inappropriate for you. Medal of Honor, Company of Heros or a re-inactment of the Civil war would suit your tastes far better.

Please tell me, what original Fallout weapons have to do with reenactment of Civil War or Medal of Honour?
Fallout is a retrofuturistic world, not WWII reenactment or Counterstrike.

As for me, the weapons selected by the accutal creators and Avellone that were in the game will be my guideline for what I believe is Fallout canon. I prefer their concept to yours.

What actual creators? Main designers of Fallout and it's universe left the F2 team long before it was finished. A lot of things after Fallout is an interpretation done by different people and is prone to mistakes in portraying the Fallout setting.

BTW.
I wish Roshambo was here...

 

[Section8]

Anyone up for a translation?

First off I would like to quickly say that I am an artist at Bethesda. I worked on environmental art for Oblivion and I have now moved on more to effects and such for Fallout. For this reason, I will not be able to answer any questions about the gameplay mechanics or story of Fallout 3. This is simply because my view/opinion of the current state of these things would be incomplete, inaccurate and/or irrelevant.

I'm not allowed to say anything worthwhile, because I may not put the right PR spin on it.

Now that that is out of the way, I would like to say something about working here. We are not in the business of making games solely for other people. We do not make our decisions based of market research, trends, polls or other such nonsense; and our business folks, while very good at their jobs, stay almost completely out of the development process. (Hey, they sign the checks, so we have to at least tell them what we’re doing.)

As Drone #327, I can safely say that marketing folks have never told me what to do. I'm blissfully unaware of the fact that the project leads, especially the executive producer are firmly entrenched in marketing roles. I'm also unaware of the fact that you don't need market research to determine what sort of base idiocy has mass-appeal.

We simply try to make games that we think will be fun to play. We want to play these games and enjoy them, and we want other people to like playing these games as well. If we were only in the business of making money we would be selling WWII football games for the DS. (And I wouldn’t really want to work here anymore.)

I haven't been in the industry long enough to be jaded. I still believe I'm fighting the good fight and doing the right thing, and I'm definitely naive enough to believe my superiors when they give me the same lip service. Again I show a low perception stat in thinking that massive, Tolkienesque, open-world RPGs aren't the wet dream of hardcore and casual gamers alike.

There are a lot of people here who are very passionate about Fallout and want to stay true to what made the first games great.

...unfortunately, these people have little creative control, and their passion and ideas are like tears in rain...

Personally, I have only played a few hours of the first Fallout and very recently at that, so it would be wrong for me to claim any great fandom. (Before your head explodes please refer to the disclaimer about me not being in charge of story or gameplay design!) However, I have enjoyed what I have played for the most part. I like the setting and dialogue and I like how your skills affect you ability to communicate with people a lot.

[waffle]

I don’t, however, agree with you on the combat system. To me, it feels like an excruciatingly slow Diablo. I don’t see it as being particularly more involving, just much, much slower. To each there own I suppose.

I've killed the rats outside Vault 13, but haven't actually experienced the drama and tension of an even match-up, or the joy of overcoming overwhelming odds.

I’m sorry if you hated Oblivion. I will not preach that every facet of the game was perfect. I could, along with the 60 or so others immediately around me, offer a laundry list of things I wish were different about the game, but I know we are proud of it as a whole.

I have no qualms selling inferior products to people who don't know any better, and don't value my soul enough to be disappointed with a disappointing game.

And I also know that by any impartial measure (i.e., not my Mom and not the people on these forums) the game is enjoyed by the vast majority of people who play it.

There are more ignorant, easy-to-please people out there than vocal critics. I choose you, rampant idiocy!

It is ok to have on opinion on the game and no one here is going to attack anyone who does not like it, but don’t assume that because you know five, ten, or even a hundred people who hate everything about Oblivion, you should get an apology from us.

My idiot mind is so overrun by capitalist ideals that I can't see the reason why people criticise Oblivion and Bethesda. I'm unable to see that the vocal critics want better games and not an apology for taking their money in exchange for a substandard product.

Fallout will be very different from Oblivion and it will be a game that I guarantee we will not release until we are happy with it. Will you like everything about it? No, of course not. Will you like anything about it? I have no way to guarantee that for you, but that’s ok, because as stated earlier, we are not in the business of making games solely for other people.

I'm already attempting to justify the mystifying tactic of making a Fallout game that conflicts with the desires of the existing fanbase. When I get confused, I take refuge in the self-delusion that our games are as good as <s>our PR people</s> the gaming media says.

--

God, I'm cynical. Mind you, I seem to remember making almost identical posts back when I was this green and working on certain Fallout spinoff that failed to hit the mark with fans.

 

[Darwyn]

Man Am I glad at least one of the devs thinks the combat engine needs to change.

For the reasons he stated? If thats the case... Both of you need a reality check.

Let us know what you think needs to change and why... I'm curious.

No, different reasons.


One of them being It's just not FUN.

Would you buy Starcraft 3 the MMORPG?

Yeah..I'm a sucker for MMOs

Would you buy Diablo3 the space adventure RTS set on the planet Vulcan with the ultra cool plot line that the planet is really P-382X6 where SG1 encounters the Furlings??!?

I'd hope not. I'd hope you would purchase and enjoy another installment of the game in question that lives up to it's predecessor(s).

See I think you're over exaggerating here..if they make a few gameplay changes here and there it's not going to make fallout not fallout(or at least I'd hope not).I just think there needs to be some changes , I've thought it over and IMO I don't think bethesda can screw fallout THAT much, I mean they themselves are fans of the series....right? they wouldn't just pick up a dying IP for the hell of it would they?

 

[Wooz]

Please, don't overuse the "quote" function.

Quote only what's necessary.

 

[Sorrow]

I mean they themselves are fans of the series....right? they wouldn't just pick up a dying IP for the hell of it would they?

Well, fans are the worsest type - they imagine that, because they are fans they can add anything they *want*.

 

[Bluto]

Thank you Sorrow for refining your position. I now perceive it as being that only Fallout 1 and the possible inclusion of Wasteland are the sole purveyors of Fallout canon. On that I will respectfully agree to disagree. I feel that Fallout 2, while not perfect (neither was Fallout 1), was a fine successor to Fallout 1 and brought logical developments of original gameplay and enviroment, both cultural and physical, to the canon.

Section8, I was ready to discount your comments until I read the last few lines. After reading that, I can see that your qualifications are quite in order. Your direct involvement does give you unique insight into this information vacuum we are creating our castles in.

I will continue to cling to the hope that Bethesda, while they might not produce the game of my dreams, produces a game that entertains and progresses the Fallout universe. The worst that could happen is that they don't, in which case we are in the same boat we have have occupied for years. But I would rather have someone attempt and fail than have no attempt at all in the horizon.

 

[FeelTheRads]

was a fine successor to Fallout 1 and brought logical developments of original gameplay and enviroment, both cultural and physical, to the canon.

The canon is an alternate timeline, inspired from fifties pulp fiction.

Do tell me how, for example, adding weapons that not only aren't from fifties, but they also have real names brings a LOGICAL development to the canon? Care to explain with anything else than "I think!"?

Because it's not YOU that "thinks" the canon. The canon was already thought by the original developers.