Cool! Tesla tanks in Fallout! Cross promotion with Red Alert
- Thread starter Commiered
- Start date
Thay have already made Fallout 3 to be more a popular FPS adventure with RPG elements, than a proper cRPG (and don't tell me I'm wrong, coz then you will be lying only to yourself)
It's a normal business strategy, to make something better than other companies (in this case Blizzard), and Bethesda is well known as a company that likes to make money and does games mostly for money.
Public said:
This is so true as you can see by the lies Beth told before release of the game, how it wasn't Oblivion with guns, how it was revolutionary, immersive, how the AI is so lifelike, how it respects and builds upon Fallout, how there are 200 endings etc. All shitty lies. They couldn't even make a half decent main quest and this from a group with almost 15 or more years of experience with making RPG's! Maybe someone at Beth REALLY wanted to make the game great, but to make the most money they had to release before Xmas, so the game came out half arsed. I don't really like Blizzard's games all that much but at least they wait until they do pretty much all they can with it before releasing a game.
But most of its fans not. And that is the point.jamesmcm said:
Diablo, was a action RPG. It had a fairly descent story for its very light setting. It was never anything that would make your brain sweat. And exactly that is what people (like me) liked so much about the setting. That you can start the game, with friends and have much fun for hours without always thinking about everything or just playing the game. If you want your Dialbo-first-person experience you should play Hellgate London. It might suit that need I dont know it. The game never even looked like it could give that "Diablo feeling".
Dialbo 3, I cant say now how close it will really be to the core concept of Dialbo I + II but it looks like they try it at least (even with a few changes here and there). But we have to wait and see BLizzard seems at least to listen to a few thoughts of the community. Anyway. Diablo just like Fallout, provided a "experience", with its mechanics, gameplay and setting [everything together, just like a cake]. Take something of it away and it doesnt work anymore like intended. Make Diablo first person, and you will see it will be a totally different experience contradicting to the first games. To say that, someone who wants thievery and stealth in Dialbo is playing the game for the wrong reason.
To many games today get changed for the "liking" of a different audience and thus alinating the people who liked the franchise in the first plase. Just as much how it happend with Commandos 1/2/3 from a birds view chess like gameplay to a first person CoD/Moh like experience in Commandos 4 strike force killing the franchise in the process [if someone would just have took his time and telling them that Hidden & Dangerous is already providing a much better experience with much better gameplay ...]
Is it really necessary today to change EVERY well known franchise to a gameplay for "everyone" only cause they love the setting? What happend with the diverstiy, or just the fact that companies [like Bethesda] could once at least come up with a OWN! story/world! I am very glad Blizzard is at least trying with Star Craft 2 and Diablo 3 to somewhat stay close to the past games.
Time will tell if that really happens. But I think on the PC Dialbo 3 will definetly outsell Fallout 3. Just alone for the fact that it at least seems Blizzard is trying to make a game for the ... well you know Diablo fans.Public said:
TheRatKing
Vault Dweller
Nice post Crni Vuk. I like your cake analogy 
.
.
.Bethesda feels "sad" for them
.
Not sure if it will outsell but it will definitely be better received by the fans of Diablo 1 and 2, and perhaps their enthusiasm will convince people who never played the games before to take their FPP glasses off and give it a try.
Diablo 3 will shit all over Fallout 3 in sales. Starcraft 2 will as well. Just in South Korea I bet more people will buy Starcraft 2 than Fallout 3 will sell worldwide. A simple hack and slash and an iconic RTS will garner a much wider worldwide audience than a niche setting like post-apocalypse USA. Yes, it is a niche setting despite the sales that have been mostly on the back of a brilliant marketing strategy.
Yazman
It Wandered In From the Wastes
Ironically this is basically what you are advocating. Without changes or new features, this is what you are left with.
Also, since you're all extolling the virtues of Diablo 3... surely you haven't missed some of the changes Blizz has made to the game, and the massive outpouring of fans of the first two whinging and bitching about it like little fucking retards?
BloodyPuppy
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
Yazman said:
Those whiny bitchy fans of the first two are a small minority of all fans of the first two, and if I may say so they are retarded. There aren't any huge changes to the core game. They've made the interface a little different, and they've improved the use of skills massively. And they've added color to daytime areas. I guess that's what constitutes huge changes.
As a huge fan of Diablo 2 I would like to say that people complaining about Diablo 3 because there are some better lit areas are stupid. If it's daytime I expect some god damn light. Play Act 1 of Diablo 2 again. Look at the day to night changes. They're fucking retarded, daytime looks like it's nighttime, and nighttime is just what daytime looks like with a ring of darkness around the screen.
You missunderstand something. A "homogenous" design within a franchise is not a bad thing and never should stop progress or evolution inside it. What people are talking about is the "monoculture" games tend to become today, most considerably RPGs. You cant tell now seriously that its a buisness with well done evolution when there is no more room for games like Baldurs Gate 2, Arcanum, Fallout 1 or Troikas vampire [we are talking here about gameplay/story and dialogues, not graphic or only visuals!]Yazman said:
Hands down, a game on the level and detail like Planescape Tourment, might be a bit to much away from the usual market. BUT at least in the past companies could get the idea to do such a thing OUTSIDE of the typical box AND even release it! Today such attempts get already stoped even in the idea. Why? Think about it if the same would be applied to all movies, all kinds of art (paintings as well!). Who ever said todays kind of technology could not be used for a birds-view top down turn based gameplay. Think about the evolution in real time strategy games, did they suddenly changed from their birds-view to First Person? Why could a RPG like Fallout 3 not have a Birds view angle with a rotable camera like World in Conflict? Or even better like Silent Storm [try to ignore the graphic here just for a second and ONLY concentrate on gameplay]. Have they suddenly make out of them a "First Person" experience? I dont think so. [Seriusly watch the Videos, and think about it. Why would that have been impossible? and World in Conflict is from 2007 Silent Storm from 2006. Think about it what they could do now. What could have been done with much more focus on the AI and NPCs as well].
Changes and diversity "inside" a franchise and design are very welcome AND desireable. But not a simple "shift". Bethesda did not moved forward, they just made a step to the side. If one takes a look on their history since Morrowind Bethesda has become after Daggerfall a company concentrating on only "one" kind of gameplay, First person with almost no kind of real progression. What are the changes Bethesda has done and are now "new" , which of the features they made is really innovative [in general, not to Fallout]?. They mainly simplified only the gameplay! Particularly their Radiant AI was heavily simplified to make it "work" like it should. The experience in their kind of games is always the same shallow thing. And thats why Morrowind was the last game I bought from Bethesda and anything later I tried to play by lending it from somewhere to see if it is my liking (which it was not and now I am waiting for mods). Most of the real innovation in Bethesdas games today come from the modding community ... like the better faces/animations/close combat mods. Or mods that give the Pc versions a much better graphic.
Obviously, yeah. I cant say I am happy with EVERYTHING in Diablo 3. BUT I am willingly to give Blizzard the benefit of the doubt [considering their past] cause of the fact that they seem at least to aim at the core of Diablo 1/2 and not just "shift" its genere in a direction only to make it more popular and easier accesable to people that for example love First Person/Over-the-sholder above everything. Overall I think they do a good job with it, particularly since its not very likely to see Dialbo 3 before 2009. So a lot of things can still change.Yazman said:
Blizzard also has no reason to change anything now suddenly for the "consolification" (which was uneeded by Bethesda), so we will have a interface optimised for teh PC! Have you known that the PC version of Fallout 3 still has the very annoying auto aim? For christs sake why auto aim in a PC version? Why not make it optional? And what is with this super big fonts? This are things that one can expect from Blizzard not to do. A few changes inside the design are alright. And with some things even if I am skeptical (I hope it will not become to close to Warcraft of WoW ...) I will wait till one can see more about it and in action.
Fallout 3 sadly often enough feels like a "console port" of some sort with its auto aim function and the super big fonts optimised for the TV. That is not evolution, that is degeneration.
Crni Vuk said:
Well The Witcher has a 3rd person camera where you move the character with the keys and an overhead rotatable camera where you point and click where to go and what to attack, so you don't have to look far for a implementation of this idea.
Also Silent Storm is from way back in 2003, so even further shows that a good isometric view with good graphics was possible 5 years ago.
As for the rest of your post, nothing much to add.
I'd rather have had the dialogue/props (books) and quest writing worked on than either of those viewpoints.
If BOS didn't kill the series...believe me, Fallout 3 certainly isn't. The hardcore Fallout 3 haters love to forget that this is a step up from that.
Blizzard's also a company that invests tons more development time and up front cash in games than Bethesda. Few companies have spent the initial 50 mil they spent on WoW. The Diablo series (which I have a great love for) is also about the farthest thing possible from the turn based combat y'all crave.
If BOS didn't kill the series...believe me, Fallout 3 certainly isn't. The hardcore Fallout 3 haters love to forget that this is a step up from that.
Blizzard's also a company that invests tons more development time and up front cash in games than Bethesda. Few companies have spent the initial 50 mil they spent on WoW. The Diablo series (which I have a great love for) is also about the farthest thing possible from the turn based combat y'all crave.
Ausir said:
That would be nice.
I want to see a good space based game (Space Siege doesn't count).
Depends on how you look on it.Corvin said:
Fallout how we have known it IS definetly dead.
The chance to see a game happen true to the core of Fallout and its roots as RPG, its setting and canon. That is very unlikely to happen and thus can indeed be almost said "killed by Fallout 3". And I am here not even talking about the gameplay.
Considering the success Fallout 3 had (how it seems) Bethesda probably will not suddenly with TES 4 and Fallout 4 pop out with awesome dialogues. If anyting graphic and visuals. The size of the world eventualy. Ways to "LARP" a game. Yes that will get better. But story? Dialogues? ... I doubt it.
And this can be already seen in the upcoming DLC. What is the focus mainly? Shoting stuff, chaning the ending. More awesome items ... (we dont know yet what the PIT will be like ... but if it will be like the main quest ... lots of killing)
Crni Vuk said:
I disagree, a new engine would fix a lot of the annoyances (like the leveling! ) and they may hire more writers. The size of the world (and the fact it isn't seamless) and the limited number of NPCs are a direct results of the engine. I really hope Bethesda decide to make Fallout 4, it could be a great improvement on a line of great games.
No it is not. Oblivion was quite biger then Fallout 3. [aprox 1/4 biger I dont remember it anymore]jamesmcm said:
It is a result of time and menpower. They just placed more focus on the visuals then NPCs and writting. Thats my impression anyway. The size of the world definetly was not a "engine limitation" of some sort.
They could have created if they want a much biger space for the player to travel around. But people already now complain about that they have to walk "to much" ...
Crni Vuk said:
Yeah parts of the game feel rushed (lack of any vehicles, can build very few weapons, etc.) but I think Bethesda will do a much better job with Fallout 4 when they have more time and have learnt from Fallout 3.
I think Bethesda are a great games company really.