Emil comments on V.A.T.S.

Brother None

This ghoul has seen it all
Orderite
Emil tells of the genesis of V.A.T.S. over on the BGSF. A bit:<blockquote>With V.A.T.S., whether you love it or hate it, the fact remains that the system in the shipping game is one we played, and played, and played, and tweaked and tweaked and tweaked, until we found what we felt was the right balance between tactical combat and exciting gameplay. And that includes additional ideas and work by many, many people that go far beyond the original paper design. A big part of this, of course, is combat balance. I've seen some comments where people think Fallout 3 is too easy because of V.A.T.S -- I honestly don't think they'll get that impression after they've played the game, for a few reasons:

1.) We designed the combat balance with V.A.T.S. use in mind. Trust me, those who say they won't use it will. If there's one thing we learned throughout development it's that people use V.A.T.S. It just feels natural, and the camera playbacks are a kind of visual crack. So V.A.T.S. is one part tactical, one part pure visceral entertainment. Chances are at least one of those elements will appeal to you, and you'll end up using V.A.T.S.

2.) Don't forget, at any time, you can change the difficulty of the game. So Fallout 3 being too hard or two easy is really a non-issue. So if you DON'T want to use V.A.T.S. at all, there's a difficulty setting you'll be comfortable with.

3.) If you're not careful, you'd be surprised how completely torn apart you can get in those moments when your AP bar is recharging. When you're almost dead, and you're out of AP, you've got to play really smart or you WILL die. So believe me, V.A.T.S. is not some kind of endless "get out of jail free" card.

And there you have it. At the end of the day... screw the math, screw the numbers, screw what looked brilliant in a Word doc -- games are about sitting down with your hands on a controller or mouse, and playing. At the end of the day, that's how we designed V.A.T.S., and that's what we feel is the only way systems like that should be designed.</blockquote>
 
Nothing about old ladies?

Edit: Actually, to make this post relevant to the topic at hand, I would have liked to see VATS with the option to turn off the slo-mo.
 
Sorry Emil, but having a difficulty slider does not make a system less broken. Now, I don't know wether it is unbalanced or not, but this is a pretty lame excuse coming from one of the devs themselves, akin to "if you don't like it, ignore it".

Emil Pagliarulo said:
At the end of the day... screw the math, screw the numbers, screw what looked brilliant in a Word doc -- games are about sitting down with your hands on a controller or mouse, and playing. At the end of the day, that's how we designed V.A.T.S., and that's what we feel is the only way systems like that should be designed.

Were that not the very same MO that spawned level scaling, I might be able to appreciate it.
 
Brother None said:
With V.A.T.S., whether you love it or hate it, the fact remains that the system in the shipping game
Translation: Suck it up - this is the best you're getting from us. Look to the modding community to follow through for us once again.

is one we played, and played, and played, and tweaked and tweaked and tweaked, until we found what we felt was the right balance between tactical combat and exciting gameplay.
Since when are tactical gameplay and excitement mutually exclusive concepts?

and the camera playbacks are a kind of visual crack.
Good to know you not pandering the game design down to appeal to the base.



Where the fuck is Rosh when you need him? I could really go for one of his bush league game developer rants right about now.
 
Huh, interesting that CanardPC seems to think that you failed with the whole balance thing... That said, his first point is confirmation that yes, VATS is more powerful than regular combat, hence, it's unbalanced.
 
I suppose the difference in opinion I have is that Emil describes about achieving a balance between tactical combat and exciting gameplay, whereas I would say that good tactical combat would make for exciting gameplay.

I've come to find out that I don't much like games that always tries to balance... "Will we have to much of this, or to much of that? We must find the absolute balance in our hybrid system". This is not appealing to me at all, but a lot of people seems to love it.

I'd rather have them focus on one aspect and make that really good.
 
Where the fuck is Rosh when you need him? I could really go for one of his bush league game developer rants right about now.

Well couldn't we make something ourselves?
I have enough bile about Fallout 3 and Bethesda's design philosophy, I just don't know how to write it down in a convincing but non fanboy rant. :(
 
The Dutch Ghost said:
I just don't know how to write it down in a convincing but non fanboy rant. :(
Then write it down as a convincing but fanboyish rant. Just include a disclaimer if you must. :mrgreen:
 
Brother None said:
1.) We designed the combat balance with V.A.T.S. use in mind. Trust me
Uh-huh, we've heard that before. Earlier it was called oblivion. Fool me once etc.

At the end of the day... screw the math, screw the numbers, screw what looked brilliant in a Word doc -- games are about sitting down with your hands on a controller or mouse, and playing

Tsk, tsk. Whether you like it Emil, games like Fallout, Jagged Alliance or Heroes of Might and Magic are about playing and numbers are pretty damn important in them. But maybe you just don't *get it*.
 
Hey, in a combat engine, I like the design philosophy he is espousing.

I think his idea about VATs and difficulty wasn't that you use the levels to fix it from being broken, but that if you don't want to use VATs, you can lower the difficulty level to a more forgiving setting for the FPS use. IT isn't a new idea.

I am actually kind of surprised about the fact that they designed it around vats, considering early on many thought it would be a pure FPS with VATS as a weak attempt to placate people.
 
Brother None said:
And there you have it. At the end of the day... screw the math, screw the numbers, screw what looked brilliant in a Word doc -- games are about sitting down with your hands on a controller or mouse, and playing.
This must be the logic that lead to results such as a low-level character killing multiple Super Mutants with a pistol.
 
UncannyGarlic said:
Huh, interesting that CanardPC seems to think that you failed with the whole balance thing... That said, his first point is confirmation that yes, VATS is more powerful than regular combat, hence, it's unbalanced.

Once you play the game you will realize that real time is 'underpowered' by comparison. Sure, it's great for mopping up trivial enemies but when the shit hits the fan VATS will save your ass. I'd think of it more like going from realtime to turnbased in Tactics. When shit's easy you can go realtime and not really worry but when it's time to handle business then turnbased will be vital.

Note: I'm not comparing VATS to turnbased in anyway, just showing the way it may be 'balanced'.
 
betamonkey said:
Once you play the game you will realize that real time is 'underpowered' by comparison. Sure, it's great for mopping up trivial enemies but when the shit hits the fan VATS will save your ass. I'd think of it more like going from realtime to turnbased in Tactics. When shit's easy you can go realtime and not really worry but when it's time to handle business then turnbased will be vital.

Note: I'm not comparing VATS to turnbased in anyway, just showing the way it may be 'balanced'.

And this is exactly the way I've always intedned to play it, using VATS as the difficulty slider itself. If I can't FPS it, then I'll VATS it...
 
is he basically pretty much confirming that the numbers you see when you use VATS is actually pure bull? like we've been told from a few sources now?

man oh man, they're really losing ground quickly with me.
 
aenemic said:
is he basically pretty much confirming that the numbers you see when you use VATS is actually pure bull? like we've been told from a few sources now?

man oh man, they're really losing ground quickly with me.

The numbers you pull up in VATS mean just as much as the numbers you pull up in Aimed Shot mode in Fallout 1/2.
 
Emil and Todd are just so excited about this one little original thing that they thought up all by themselves. Yay an original thought without having to copy-paste from Oblivion!
 
aenemic said:
is he basically pretty much confirming that the numbers you see when you use VATS is actually pure bull? like we've been told from a few sources now?

What bit are you getting that from?

betamonkey said:
The numbers you pull up in VATS mean just as much as the numbers you pull up in Aimed Shot mode in Fallout 1/2.

In Fallout 1/2 they mean "chance to hit". Straight up, nothing less, nothing more. CanardPC complained about getting two crits in a row with 5% chance to hit, and there have been mumblings before that VATS may also be tied to damage not just to-hit. You're saying this is not the case, mr Hines?
 
betamonkey said:
aenemic said:
is he basically pretty much confirming that the numbers you see when you use VATS is actually pure bull? like we've been told from a few sources now?

man oh man, they're really losing ground quickly with me.

The numbers you pull up in VATS mean just as much as the numbers you pull up in Aimed Shot mode in Fallout 1/2.

really? I've read on at least 2-3 occasions that someone who played the game got the impression that the numbers weren't quiet right and you seemed to hit a lot more often than you should. now I know the numbers might not be completely right in FO 1/2, but if you had like a 3% chance of hitting you simply didn't take the shot. according to the recent french review, the shot might still be worth it here because you will most likely score a critical either way.
 
Ad Astra said:
Brother None said:
And there you have it. At the end of the day... screw the math, screw the numbers, screw what looked brilliant in a Word doc -- games are about sitting down with your hands on a controller or mouse, and playing.
This must be the logic that lead to results such as a low-level character killing multiple Super Mutants with a pistol.

You mean low level characters killing multiple Super Mutants in their tighty whities ... we dared someone on a live stream to do it and he did. :D
 
Back
Top