CVG interviews Pete Hines

In fact, frozen moments in time are quite popular in the media, even in shows like Heroes, where Hiro stops time to accomplish his tasks or defeat enemies.........shihonage


Good point.

At some point didn't beth somehow insinuate that the Vats "bullet time" is their "turn base"?

I see, its not that Fallout 1 turn base was bad, it just wasn't L33T enough with matrix style flash and lots of bloom. PS, oh yeah, multiple views of an exploding head.
 
For some of us there's something quite special about that frozen moment in time, with ominous music and winds sweeping in background, as you move your cursor over the different opponents, seeing percentages of hit probability. "Oh shit, this may not end well".

And that is why I like the "pause" in realtime with pause.. it's the "oh crap.. let's get a gameplan."

I like turn-based tactical games, I always have. However I am even starting to lean towards good real-time with pause there too.. I was pleasantly suprised with UFO:Afterlight. it was much improved over it's predicessors. It allows you to get to the "meat" of a combat without the tedium.

I just think that turn-based play in an RPG really is a legacy from PnP that is more a limitation of that medium, not a "feature". Anyone that played "Car Wars" or any of the other early-mid 80's tactical/rpg's will tell you that while it was fun to have a combat last 5 hours, if we could have made it realtime with our cars zipping around the map and be able to pause it when we needed to "think".. you would get a resounding.. YES. It's all because turn-based was really the only way we could play and reliably apply a rules set.
 
What's wrong with PnP gaming?

I still have a hell of a lot of fun playing in the theater of the mind rather than most games, to say that PnP is outdated is like saying that sliced bread shouldn't be used anymore because cubed bread is so much more immersing in the bread experience!

The only limitation for PnP gaming is trying to find a time where everyone can meet and spend several hours on the game...

It's not the technology that's changing, it's the mindset of the developers in this day and age, and the PR is putting a spin on it saying that it's the new sliced bread because the old style was just that, old.

Console kiddies and John Q. Public will buy it up wholesale simply because it's shiny, new, and explodey.

Thankfully I reside in the Peter Q. Public branch of the family, kind of a distant cousin that segregates themselves from the John branch of the family due to varying factors. :D
 
LuckyOasis said:
Have you all ever played the Jagged Alliance games? I think you would like them. Their combat system was leaps and bounds ahead of Fallout.
Yay comparing combat in a tactical combat game to combat in an rpg, that's like comparing the racing in Forza 2 to the racing in Crackdown. The former is a dedicated game with little else to offer so the combat will be superior to a game where it's just one of many things to do. Take the combat out of the JA games and you have nothing worth playing left. Take it out of Fallout and you've still got an adventure full of diplomacy, larceny and exploration.

shihonage said:
In fact, frozen moments in time are quite popular in the media, even in shows like Heroes, where Hiro stops time to accomplish his tasks or defeat enemies.
Indeed, in fact I fail to see the difference in waiting for your turn and waiting for a slowmo death cut scene to finish.

Xenophile said:
I just think that turn-based play in an RPG really is a legacy from PnP that is more a limitation of that medium, not a "feature". Anyone that played "Car Wars" or any of the other early-mid 80's tactical/rpg's will tell you that while it was fun to have a combat last 5 hours, if we could have made it realtime with our cars zipping around the map and be able to pause it when we needed to "think".. you would get a resounding.. YES. It's all because turn-based was really the only way we could play and reliably apply a rules set.
More turnbased is a limitation of Human's than the medium. I'm sure computers could calculate more intense, larger and complex battles, faster and more efficiently if they didn't have to slow down and interface with us meatbags.

Two problems with real time and pause are an rpg should be about your character not you, so even in a rt&p game in comes down to your reflexes (how fast can you hit that pause button?) and in virtually all rt&p games I've played your character tends to have their own ai and will act or react without input from you. Who's meant to be playing the game you or the computer?
 
Brother None said:
Hines:[/b] Our philosophy with Fallout 3 was to make it as if we'd made Fallout one and two. Which obviously we didn't but we couldn't really spend a whole lot of time worrying about what we didn't make or what we didn't have control over.

We approached it the same way we approached Morrowind or Oblivion - we are doing the next game in the series, this is what the series has always been about, what are we going to do with the next one to make it cool and fun and the next big step for this series?

SO if Bethesda had made Fallout 1 and Fallout 2, would they have made a first person shooter with some post-apocalpytic atmosphere, fairly generic monsters and a total disregard for consistency?

Oh yeah, but you didn't.

Rather, the guys who made the original game tried to take CRPG in a totally new direction that looks almost completely different than what Bethesda is doing.

So Pete, that makes you and Bethesda... what?... Delusional?

I have to admit, I'm confused.

Hiven Bethesda's track record are they saying -

Option 1- We are making Fallout 3 as if we made what the gaming world knows as Fallout 1 and 2.

- if so they are lieing to us or complete incompetents.

Or is he saying-

Option 2 - that if Bethesda had made Fallout 1 and Fallout 2 they would have done it so that Fallout 3 actually makes sense?

- In which case they are delusion and have no respect for their predecessors, the fans, consistency, style, etc.

Hmmmm.

So what the fuck are you saying Peter Hines or is this another case of repackaged bullshit that we get from Bethesda?

Looks like option 2.

(Oh.. and what was intended- Maybe see Will Porter's PCZone article of June 2004 to get a clue?)
 
Brother None said:
Hines:[/b] Our philosophy with Fallout 3 was to make it as if we'd made Fallout one and two. Which obviously we didn't but we couldn't really spend a whole lot of time worrying about what we didn't make or what we didn't have control over.

We approached it the same way we approached Morrowind or Oblivion - we are doing the next game in the series, this is what the series has always been about, what are we going to do with the next one to make it cool and fun and the next big step for this series?

I am pretty sure Fallout would not have become such a cult classic if Bethesda actually had started the Fallout series in the way they are making Fallout 3 now.

Perhaps some action/adventure fans but no RPG fans.
 
I think that it would become another Ultima 9 - would be played and quickly forgotten.
 
I say there'd be no decent RPG's nowadays. Either that or bethesda would have gone down for good and we'd have a perfect RPG world :D
 
Heh :) .
I doubt it - Biowhore would do a pretty good job in destroying the cRPG genre anyway :P .
 
Morbus said:
I say there'd be no decent RPG's nowadays. Either that or bethesda would have gone down for good and we'd have a perfect RPG world :D

I am not sure, we probably would still have ended up with a world in which current day gamers still look mostly at the graphics, bloom, how visceral the killing is, and how 'lowbrown yet epic' the storyline is (read; steretype hero taking on evil bad and sometimes getting laid)

I am truly pissed what is happening with games today and the annoying people who keep defending this as 'evolution' of gaming, and I don't mean just the general gamers.

Like many people I also enjoy a good shooter or action game, but come on, a little diversity.

Are there people on this board who have witnessed the earlier game crash back in the eighties?
How did it happen, and are there perhaps comparisons with the game industry today?

To me it seem that the market these days has reached a point that it no longer really cares about its audience anymore, only to make a shitpile of money.
Of course that wasn't that much different years ago but at least there was lot of more different games, not giving you the feeling you were some cornered rat that is being pushed into a particular direction the publishers of today want you to go to.
 
Sorrow said:
Heh :) .
I doubt it - Biowhore would do a pretty good job in destroying the cRPG genre anyway :P .
They are squareenix competitors...

The Dutch Ghost said:
I am not sure, we probably would still have ended up with a world in which current day gamers still look mostly at the graphics, bloom, how visceral the killing is, and how 'lowbrown yet epic' the storyline is (read; steretype hero taking on evil bad and sometimes getting laid)
Had Fallout not existed, maybe that would be the case too... But it would be much worse than now.

The Dutch Ghost said:
I am truly pissed what is happening with games today and the annoying people who keep defending this as 'evolution' of gaming, and I don't mean just the general gamers.

Like many people I also enjoy a good shooter or action game, but come on, a little diversity.
Yeah, that's precisely it. The genres are fading and that's the problem... It erases diversity. Besides, stories are mostly crap, although that particular point has been evolving...

The Dutch Ghost said:
Are there people on this board who have witnessed the earlier game crash back in the eighties?
How did it happen, and are there perhaps comparisons with the game industry today?
There's an article on the wiki for that. I've read it, and yes, there are possible comparisons, but there's not gonna be any crash anytime soon. It's like the 29's crash. There were many other crashes after it, but none like it anymore, because they learned. The gaming industry has learned too, and it won't happen again. There may (and will) be crashes in specific genres (like the yet to come FPS crash, or the RPG crash, of which I'm not very sure about), but not generalized crashes like that one...

The Dutch Ghost said:
To me it seem that the market these days has reached a point that it no longer really cares about its audience anymore, only to make a shitpile of money.
Of course that wasn't that much different years ago but at least there was lot of more different games, not giving you the feeling you were some cornered rat that is being pushed into a particular direction the publishers of today want you to go to.
The problem is that there are fewer companies that actually care about they're games, with each passing year. As long as we don't start seeing game devs caring more about game design and consistency than the money they'll get, we're not getting any better.
 
The presumption that most NMA posters want a pristine reproduction of the game mechanics from Fallout 1 and Fallout 2 is a fallacy. If I made a list of everything wrong with the original Fallout combat system (and Fallout in general, for that matter), it would indeed be a long list; however, the correct way to fix those problems is to rework and improve Fallout's decade-old mechanics, not throw them out for entirely different mechanics. There's no reason every complaint about the old games, both in this thread and elsewhere, could not be rectified by a newly-designed, isometric, turn-based Fallout sequel.

If I bought the rights to Civilization and turned it into a first-person shooter, then tried to peddle it as a sequel called Civilization 5, people would rightly consider me an arrogant buffoon. Civilization fans would undoubtedly wonder how their favorite game had been hijacked and transformed into something unrecognizable. If I then used my slavish media puppets to decry those fans as closed-minded lunatics unwilling to embrace the evolution of Civilization, people would rightly consider me an arrogant, malicious buffoon.
 
Hear, hear UniversalWolf!

Back a bit before that post: I'm getting very bummed out about the video game industry also. It just seems like there's nothing but FPSs, whether standard "Aliens are invading!" or "It's got swords and elves, so it's got to be an RPG" FPSs.

It's not helping that the video game industry is taking a big hint from the movie industry in terms of organization, promotion, funding and *ahem* "cost-benefit analysis." These are essentially the WORST things you can do if you're trying to make an interesting or artistically different game, and it goes a very long way to explaining why the industry is in the toilet.

It's sad when the very best games you can find are at least three or four years old....and even that's stretching it. It gets harder to find these good games too, so now a lot of younger players (damn it's weird to think of myself as an "older player...." I'm 28 years YOUNG, gaddamit!) won't get the chance to even learn about these games, let alone play them.

As a fer instance: Ultima. If you look reaaaaalllly hard you can find some of the older games out there, but outside of a few websites, and the incredibly rare (and on floppy disk besides) Ultima collections, it's damn near impossible to find anything earlier than Ultima Underworld....which is sort of past the series' prime, from what I hear.

There are, of course, other non-RPG examples, but Ultima stands out, especially considering that, despite the fact the games are from between ten to over twenty years old, they still have great gameplay that any developers or programmers could get lessons from. To say nothing of the players themselves.

Ah, but I'm getting on a bit of a rant. I'll head back to my old, cheapie jewel case games and mope some more. :twisted:
 
One of the things that I hate about gaming industry is how it's trying to become something like Hollywood - cheap action and "photorealistic" graphics everywhere.
 
Now imagine how much more it will be like Hollywood when Hollywood writers will be writing the scripts.

Macbeth by Shakespeare

"And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing."
 
That's already happening. I forget what company, but they've begun a development house to make exactly that sort of thing: Hollywood movie style video games. Scary, huh?
 
i take offense at a few things.

i am ADD and i prefer turn-based for my RPGs.

i remember U9 and i own the dragon edition and i have not forgotten about it.

but yes, overall its the wrong people driving production. it needs to be a visonary that creates the ideas and the bean counters job to find out how to make that vision real.

unfortunately it seems its the bean counters who tell the visionary to copy the work other companies do.
 
Mikael Grizzly said:
Sorrow said:
Biowhore?

One word posts bad. NMA good. Please don't post bad.
I know all that but I still can't help but thinking that had he posted something like "Biowhore? I think it was it, but I can't quite remember [/sarcasm]" instead of just "Biowhore?" it would be fine. "Lol" kind of posts are bad, I don't think "Biowhore?" posts are the same, even more when it taught me the english equivalent to the portugues "VaiAoAr" XD

'Nough offtopic.
 
Back
Top