DAC Scores Interview With Todd Howard.

I have to agree with Ratty. Though its not a closed case, it does lead me to be fairly optimistic (perhaps foolishly so). Perhaps he's relying on the Beth fanboys on buying the game regardless of it not being Morrowind with Guns? ;)
 
I loved the TB combat. Reminded me of X-Com. Real-time games reduce their combat down to the Diablo level. Whack-whack-whack it's dead. More often than not you're also facing off against hoardes of the damn things.

Fallout was different. Hell, one bad encounter could end your game and that might've just been against 3 enemes.
 
For Bethesda, there are ups and downs to both sides.

If they make the game Real Time, they will attract many new buyers to the Fallout Franchise.

But probably lose around 2,000+ Fallout Fanatic buyers.

Wish is nothing compared to the new buyers they'll make, by making it Real Time.

But they will get ripped to shreds in every PC Gaming Magazine there is, for not sticking to history of the game.

Their PC Gaming and Gaming Websites Reptuation, will definitely suffer.

If they go Turn Based, they'll easily sell the game to all the Fallout Fanatics... but not lure in potential Real Time plebeians.

The Gaming Mags and Sites, will praise them for listening to the fans though.

and that alone could mean potential buyers for all Bethesda Products in general.

FOBOS, Real Time Fallout. Look at the reviews and editorials in ANY gaming mag or website. Their main focus is degrading the game based on it being REAL TIME and not being true to Fallout.

It's a HUMOUNGOUS decision, I hope they make the right one.
 
I agree with Lost Metal 100%. They honestly could make money either way. If they decide to make the game TB, their going to get great reviews from the big gaming magazines, for sure (assuming everything else is done well).

KOTOR did great, and that had an unconventional combat system, although nothing like Fallouts. They also had the advantage of the Star Wars name though... You could take FO:POS, change nothing but the name, and it'd still turn a profit!

This is a tough decision that, from a marketing standpoint, is hard to base on actual facts. They'll have to go on a hunch. Hopefully, as stated previously, they wont try and have their cake and eat it too, going for TB and RT / RT w/ Pause. It's my official prediction that they'll do this.

It won’t make me not buy the game though. I'm a huge fan of an interesting story, open endedness and great atmosphere. Combat, for me, is secondary.
 
Bethesda need to ask themselves why they bought the license. Was it to make a true Fallout or just to sell more copies of their games? If it's the later, they made the wrong decision.
 
DarkUnderlord said:
Bethesda need to ask themselves why they bought the license. Was it to make a true Fallout or just to sell more copies of their games? If it's the later, they made the wrong decision.
Click to expand...
I'd think you got the answer right there. I'd say you assume too much. And you should either shake off that shroud of paranoia or get yourself burried in it.
 
stargelman said:
I'd think you got the answer right there. I'd say you assume too much. And you should either shake off that shroud of paranoia or get yourself burried in it.
Click to expand...

Uh, yeah...it's paranoid to be concerned over a title, considering the last title was a load of shit that we were lied to and fed, the one before that had little semblence to Fallout's universe and wasn't that good in its genre, and the one before that BIS almost skullfucked with a number of stupid easter eggs.

Then it's also paranoia to be concerned what a new development house will do with a title, considering that almost every title that has switched hands and teams tends to be changed to suit the tastes of the development house and not towards the integrity of the game. This also happens a lot when the marketing dept is allowed to do more than think of clever shit to put on a box, and some utter fuckwit in management gives them design control. You know, kind of like what happened with F:POS.

Oh, and it's also paranoia to be concerned with the direction given what other things they've said in the past and have allowed other media sources to print, only to half clarify it later.

Yep, no reason to be uh, "paranoid", though I do find most of the above to be a little more than worrying if people are to expect a Fallout sequel. That is the operative word here, and either history can get another footnote and Fallout joins Ultima, or the title is treated with respect.

Certainly turn-based combat limits your audience to a small number
Click to expand...

Quite possibly the most stupid comment I've heard this year and last, and I have quite a collection.

No wonder the American development market is primarily shit on consoles (except for sports games, and then take a look at the chumps at EA get abused for that). They try to pretend the Japanese don't exist. Then they also try to insult the intelligence of PC owners by trying to make it sound that actions games are the future of the PC market based upon sales figures. Sorry, but Square managed to become successful after their studio was about to close down. All it took was a game that was brilliant and didn't suffer for fanservice, which is what is hurting the later ones. Oh, and that was with turn-based gameplay, when most of the gameplay on consoles of that time was action games.

I hate it when people use sales figures as some kind of reasoning. Yes, Diablo sold well, mainly because it did cater to the lowest common denominator. Fallout has been fucked over already for the lowest common denominator and we have seen that failure. Lowest common denominator works well for action and simplistic titles, not for games with known complexity and gameplay depth.

What the hell, some people probably DO need to shoot themselves in both foot to know the gun is loaded. When someone else grabs the smoking gun and starts to take aim after the last person handed it off with a hole through both feet, then it tends to paint a fairly clear picture. Apparently, Fallout is a semi-automatic, and a lot of people just can't resist playing Russian Roulette with it.
 
Real Time is fun but changes the gameplay significantly , so they could have it like another game i played where you can change the game to one of the 2. Turnbased or real time which worked for me most of the time. But as long as the damn game has a bloody good story and is as entertaining as the first 2 Fallouts i wont have any problems.

Maybe they need to keep the roots but try and use some new technology in it , this may be a new engine but if its 3d then i cant see people liking it much if they are fallout fanatics.

I personally like their wa of making games but you have to be ready for some upset seeing as its a new company doing the game. That is life im afraid.
 
William J Shimmin said:
Real Time is fun but changes the gameplay significantly , so they could have it like another game i played where you can change the game to one of the 2. Turnbased or real time which worked for me most of the time.
Click to expand...

Thank you for reading the discussion and where people have noted the problems with that kind of thinking.

Hint, it's not acute, it's the other angle. :)
 
hey rosh(or anyone), can you please explain "and the one before that BIS almost skullfucked with a number of stupid easter eggs. " this? or refer me to a discussion which talked about it? how did fallout 2 "almost get fucked"?
 
sunny jim said:
hey rosh(or anyone), can you please explain "and the one before that BIS almost skullfucked with a number of stupid easter eggs. " this? or refer me to a discussion which talked about it? how did fallout 2 "almost get fucked"?
Click to expand...

Basically it was not enough work on what needed to be done, fucking around with too many easter eggs, the bugs, all together, almost made Fallout 2 into a garbage title. Many people got to the car bugs, KERNEL32.dll, and so much more, it became game-killers for them. There was just enough in there that was good that it didn't completely lose sight of the setting (arguably), though the bugs and other issues in the game went into a very nasty feedback session on their forums.

In other words, it became the epitome of the Feargus Brand Slam Dunk!™
 
William J Shimmin said:
this may be a new engine but if its 3d then i cant see people liking it much if they are fallout fanatics.
Click to expand...

while there may be Fallout fans somewhere on this planet who wouldn't like Fallout 3 simply because it has 3D graphics, i've never seen one. i've never heard of another fan who's seen one. i only hear of them from people who know almost nothing about Fallout, and as none of them have produced substantiated evidence of their existence, although i may be talking too soon, i think it's safe to say that there's no such thing as a "fallout fanatic".

William J Shimmin said:
I personally like their wa of making games but you have to be ready for some upset seeing as its a new company doing the game. That is life im afraid.
Click to expand...

if Bethesda makes Fallout 3 the way they make Elder Scrolls games, then life is going to hand them one miserable headache.
 
* i think it's safe to say that there's no such thing as a "fallout fanatic".*

I beg to differ.
Strongly!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top