Fallout 3 at E3 - Gaming Trend

[Sander]

If NMA wanted to go to E3 they probably could have gotten a day pass to check out Fallout 3 on their own dime.

This site is run by volunteers who receive no form of pay whatsoever. Any income from adverts goes straight to our host, and Odin pays for the domain name. None of the admins live even near E3, and sadly most of us don't have cash to spare to jump on a plane over to E3 to have a chance at maybe looking at some Fallout 3 footage.

What's even more ironic is that Bethesda has invited a lot of sites to either E3 and their big Fallout 3 preview weekend that don't even receive a quarter of our traffic. The question *is* a valid one: why didn't they invite us?
There's only one viable answer: they don't see us, the biggest Fallout fansite, as their target audience. That's pretty worrying.

I still disagree that this is the case. Just 50 years for us hasn't been so kind. We have "OMGWTFBBQROFLYCOPTER HI 2 UU!!!111!" text, kids who can't complete a sentence without swearing, and far worse. 200 years living in a wasteland has to have an effect.

It will have an effect in the real world, but it shouldn't have an effect in Fallout's set cultural environment.

I find it interesting, though, that you insist that we cannot draw negative conclusions from everything we've seen because the game isn't even near finished, yet every single preview so far (including yours) has drawn massively positive conclusions from everything they've seen. Isn't that a pretty weird situation?

As for Troika, I think people here are blinded by their love for Troika's games. It's silly to say that Troika's bugs were not Troika's fault because they simply are. Their publisher did not throw in those bugs, and deadlines were set in advance.
However, it is also unfair to lay all the blame with Troika.
There are essentially only a few complaints people have about Troika's three games, and the bugs are the most prominent one. Their publishers simply did not give them more time or budget to work on those bugs, preferring to release an unfinished game. If they had been given time it's very probable that most of those bugs would've been squashed.
Then there's also the important note that Troika did get screwed over by Activision surrounding the release of Bloodlines. Originally Bloodlines was going to be released a lot later than Half-Life 2, but this concurrent release essentially killed much of the chances it had.
However, blindly defending Troika as the masters of gaming is ridiculous.

 

[Sorrow]

I didn't like the character creation and development system and weird hybrid combat in Arcanum. I didn't buy ToEE when Troika was alive, because buying hack & slash games isn't my priority and I didn't play Bloodlines, because I dislike FPP and RT combat in cRPGs.

Yet, I see no other people who could get Fallout 3 right.

 

[FeelTheRads]

because buying hack & slash games isn't my priority

ToEE is hardly a hack&slash game. Sure, its focus is on combat, but it's not hack&slash combat, it's very well done tactical turn-based combat.

I didn't play Bloodlines, because I dislike FPP and RT combat in cRPGs.

Because of this preconception you're losing on some great gameplay. There is no real reason to disregard Bloodlines for what it is, since it never tried to be something that it's not, like in Fallout 3's case.

 

[Sander]

Because of this preconception you're losing on some great gameplay. There is no real reason to disregard Bloodlines for what it is, since it never tried to be something that it's not, like in Fallout 3's case.

Que?
Bloodlines does have a couple of serious problems for an RPG. The combat is frantic and not really balanced (and also forced on you too many times). The storyline is linear as hell, and you have no effect on it whatsoever. This linearity is largely caused by them working with White Wolf and Bloodlines being an official introduction to the Time of Gehenna final storyline for Vampire: The Masquerade.
The quests surrounding the storyline are excellent, though.

 

[lisac2k]

I just thought to step out for a bit, but the demons in my head don't let me...

Show me a quote. The one I read said it was "up in the air" because every minute spent on modding tools is one less on the final product.

Don't think so. But hey, that's my mind playing tricks with me again!

I guess you don't need quotes about "they screwed up scientific base upon which the game universe was build"(Fat Man etc.) and "put in some rather controversial plot and gameplay designs"(Enclave, BoS, RTwP system being sold as TB), although I admit - something of the later still has to be seen.

You've already made up your mind. Why bother.

Again, it's my mind. Nothing else seems to be mutilated.

Fine. You'll get only facts I can back concretely from now on. I can't imagine why you are trying to make this difficult for me since I'm the one trying to answer questions for you....

I don't have problems with your answers, I have a problem with the way they deviate to deny the obvious mistakes of the game concept. Or the tries to pack them with a cream and cherry on-top, even though they stink worse than brahmin crap.

The remark about the scepticism was only explaining my feeling about the upcoming game, it's not meant to make you answering these questions any more difficult.

Now I'm outta here for some time definitely... Gotta take care of my mind.

 

[GamingTrend]

This site is run by volunteers who receive no form of pay whatsoever. Any income from adverts goes straight to our host, and Odin pays for the domain name. None of the admins live even near E3, and sadly most of us don't have cash to spare to jump on a plane over to E3 to have a chance at maybe looking at some Fallout 3 footage.

That is the tough thing. Gaming Trend is run the same way, and the income is used the same way. I save up every year and go to E3. It's just part of what I do. Now, I'm covering multiple products, I can see why it'd be hard to justify for just one.

What's even more ironic is that Bethesda has invited a lot of sites to either E3 and their big Fallout 3 preview weekend that don't even receive a quarter of our traffic. The question *is* a valid one: why didn't they invite us?
There's only one viable answer: they don't see us, the biggest Fallout fansite, as their target audience. That's pretty worrying.

That is worrying. I really don't have an answer here.

It will have an effect in the real world, but it shouldn't have an effect in Fallout's set cultural environment.

I see your point. I just disagree.

I find it interesting, though, that you insist that we cannot draw negative conclusions from everything we've seen because the game isn't even near finished, yet every single preview so far (including yours) has drawn massively positive conclusions from everything they've seen. Isn't that a pretty weird situation?

Again, I see your point. I try to be optimistic about things rather than focusing on the negative. I don't see it as a character flaw. I didn't dwell on what was wrong, I tried to see what was right. That said, you have my word that when the final product is released, if it is all jacked to hell you'll see a nice low score to go with it.

As for Troika, I think people here are blinded by their love for Troika's games. It's silly to say that Troika's bugs were not Troika's fault because they simply are. Their publisher did not throw in those bugs, and deadlines were set in advance.

Exactly my point.

However, it is also unfair to lay all the blame with Troika.
There are essentially only a few complaints people have about Troika's three games, and the bugs are the most prominent one. Their publishers simply did not give them more time or budget to work on those bugs, preferring to release an unfinished game. If they had been given time it's very probable that most of those bugs would've been squashed.

Its hard to know what situation they were in with their publishers. I just know that other companies under the same deadlines can release pretty clean products. Every company has their challenges. Will Wright can't stop dreaming to ship a product in a timely fashion, but we let him because his products rock (see Spore). Peter Molyneux lives on a different cloud than the rest of us and its hard to pry him back down to earth and prune down his lofty goals into a real product (see Fable) Troika (from the outside looking in) seems to have code standard issues. EA has issues coming up with something beyond roster updates.

Then there's also the important note that Troika did get screwed over by Activision surrounding the release of Bloodlines. Originally Bloodlines was going to be released a lot later than Half-Life 2, but this concurrent release essentially killed much of the chances it had.

True, Half-Life 2 was a behemoth. It was impossible to put the two on the shelf at the same time and have any level of success.

However, blindly defending Troika as the masters of gaming is ridiculous.

Agreed - they had some great ideas and I enjoyed their games (hell, I have Vampire in my desk drawer next to me - swear to the Overseer) but in the end they had some practices that caused their downfall.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Que?

He's saying he doesn't wants to play Bloodlines because it mixes RT, FPP with RPG.
Is that reason enough to disregard the game?
I don't think so... I also don't think Troika tried to create the ultimate RPG experience with Bloodlines, nor did they market it so.

Indeed, as an RPG, Bloodlines is poor, but I only said the gameplay is excellent. And I stand by that.

 

[Sorrow]

because buying hack & slash games isn't my priority

ToEE is hardly a hack&slash game. Sure, its focus is on combat, but it's not hack&slash combat, it's very well done tactical turn-based combat.

I played the demo and I see that it's a pretty good tabletop miniature game style cRPG. I love how they implemented the D&D rules - too bad that Bioware didn't do the same with Baldur's Gate.

Que?

He's saying he doesn't wants to play Bloodlines because it mixes RT, FPP with RPG.
Is that reason enough to disregard the game?

Games aren't free.

 

[DirtyDreamDesigner]

Here's a question, tho':

What does the interface look like outside of the combat? Is it the same as we can see on the resident evil mutant screenshot?

Yes

That is indeed very bad news. The interface looks like an even worse version of Oblivions. I hope it's just placeholder.

Indeed, as an RPG, Bloodlines is poor,

Why? It's more of an RPG than any other game released after Arcanum.

 

[GamingTrend]

That is indeed very bad news. The interface looks like an even worse version of Oblivions. I hope it's just placeholder.

And that may be. I don't know.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Why? It's more of an RPG than any other game released after Arcanum.

True. That doesn't make it a better RPG on its own, though.


Also, GamingTrend, you seem a bit more reasonable now, even though you still refuse to answer Vault 69er's questions (which are valid questions). I'm sorry I insulted you.
As for a low score for Fallout 3, we shall see. I don't think I've seen low scores for any big-budget games lately. It's usually "lots of money invested + hype = very good scores".

 

[Vault 69er]

As for Troika, I think people here are blinded by their love for Troika's games. It's silly to say that Troika's bugs were not Troika's fault because they simply are.

Just to be clear, I for one don't consider Troika above criticism.
However I am sick and tired of Troika being bashed for it's bugs, as if other games by other companies never had any!
*All* games have bugs. For various reasons. To say "Troika wouldn't do Fallout 3 well because they make buggy games!!" is stupid and hypocritical.

 

[DirtyDreamDesigner]

GamingTrend, I just noticed you rated Halo 2 Vista more than 35%.

That would have immediately invalidated all your opinions had you not rated Bloodlines at 94%

 

[aries369]

I don't how much money you make, Ron, from your dayjob . But that's not the point here. The point here is many of this site's admins live in Europe where plane tickets to the US cost a great deal of money, (I think?). And then, there's the hotel accomodation etc. And I know that the US officials ask you what your purpose are in the US, and if you're European and say, you're going to E3, my best qualified guess is that you will get pulled aside and drilled for several hours, especially if you begin talking about Fallout 3 and
nuclear weapons. That is perhaps my own prejudicism against the US customs officers, but I don't think this is far fetched from reality?

I remember when I was in the US 25 years ago, living with an American family for a year, that plane tickets in the US were a lot cheaper than plane tickets in the US were (and are) even today.
(unless you fly with a low budget airline, that is). I understand that you save up to go to E3 every day, and I think it is nice that you're able to do this. As I understand it, this year's E3 was for game developers, the press and special invites only which means that even if an Admin from this site went, he couldn't be sure to be let into E3, or even to Bethesda Fallout 3 (demo) showing??

As Sander said, Bethesda did hold their own private viewing ceremony for selected members of the press and especially picked gaming sites, it seems. (this is more of a general comment, so I'm NOT picking on your site in any way, shape or form). As Sander explained, even to Beth's own viewing of Fallout 3, sites with maybe 1/4 or even 1/6 of the traffic and members were invited.
And this makes us just wonder: 'hmmm - why didn't they invite anyone from NMA ' This tends to make us (nma) very suspicious as to the whole GI article incident in which NMA (so far) IS the only website that had been asked to take down the scans of the article. Possibly since the members here very indeed very critical of the info in the article. And still are.

Even me And that's a very big step for me . As I've said in the other posts, I'm still cautiosly optimistic, but my optimism seems to be fading every day, when I hear of things like

*Drinking water out of toilets bowl or cisterns
*Supermutants on the East Coast
* Enclave Station
* Brotherhood of Steel on the East Coast
* Supermutants looking like Orcs or Uruk-Hais from LOTR
* VATS combat system which anyone doesn't seem to grasp (yet)
* A Father disappearing
* Your character being the detective, looking for your Father
* A launcher, which launches nuclear grenades
* Obsessive swearing in the game
* Exploding heads (fits in well with Todd's comment about Fallout 3 being the most violent game ever).
* A city, built around an unexploded nuclear bomb, called Megaton.
* Megaton can be destroyed by your character, and unlike the other games, this doesn't end the game, it actually starts the game (sort of)
* A main quest which seems to be a cross between the plots of BG1, Oblivion and Star Wars.
and what's up with the
* Corpses eaten stat??

I can live with the game not being isometric and turnbased, but being mostly 1st/3rd person, and the combat being realtime with pause, (sort of) in which you can take aimed shots when you pause the game. I can maybe live with some of the other stuff, but I cannot live with something that breaks what Brother None calls *verisimilitude'. And I do feel that the obsessive swearing and the Fatman and the Megaton City breaks verisimilitude as does having the BoS and the Supermutants on the East Coast. (of the USA).

Also, I remember the promises made to the TES fans, promises that all seem to be broken by now. And yes, it may be that Oblivion got 90-98% in reviews when it was first released, but many game sites now look with more critical eyes on Oblivion. I have played Oblivion, and I like it - as good game, just not a good rpg game.
And I would give it around 80%, if I wrote a review for it.

Finally, I remain cautiously optimistic. However, as I've explained, my optimism seems to be dwindling when I hear something from one source. (and then it goes up a little again when I hear someting from another source, like how Fallout 3 will handle dialogue in the game).

Finally, to come back to my first statement, I don't wish to know hoe much money Ron makes from his day job. It was just a way of pointing out that some people have a little farther to go than others, if they want to go to E3.

/aries369

 

[Elros]

---

 

[Bad_Karma]

And another 'round'

If you distort what I say and write, and then fill in the blanks yourself, I can't help you. I said that THEY said that they were fixing it. I didn't follow it with "And here is proof!" or anything of the sort.

Okay, then i got this wrong, sorry for that.

See the above. I was quoting somebody else, that is all. I reserve my conclusions for the final product. It is a lot like tasting a drink - the first sip may be great, but when you get half way through and your mouth feels like it is coated with wax from all the sugar, you may change your mind. I'm done defending this.

Okay, i still tend to fell that you did that, but when you're telling me you not doing it or not doing it 'itentionally' i'm fine with it, and sorry for saying you did 'intentionally'.

Room was silent minus Todd and the demo, and I was right next to the speaker and Todd.

Okay. But i hope you understood why i was sceptical about it?

Honestly? They said "Uhh...so we are being faithful to the original Jagged Alliance games, but honestly I'm the only one who has played the other two so I was chosen to demo it for E3." ( I think I have the audio at the office...) and then pretty much given the reigns to play it. Having played JA1 and 2, I can draw some pretty quick initial impressions based on what I saw. It has nothing to do with anything but the product in front of me....

Uhh... that's really terrible :/
Guess i would have been happier not knowing it *laughs*, thanks for clearing that up.
I can just hope that this 'Jazz - HiredGuns' will be okay and some wonder happens to JA3

Honestly, how much fun would it be to have a bag full of gun parts that you constantly have to juggle just to find the right cotterpin? It this REALLY a feature you want? It isn't "Gun Simulator 2007".

No *laughs*... I was just pointing toward this 'interchangeable parts'... okay forget what i wrote, okay?
I was a bit off with this (as with a few others).

You clearly haven't been to a press event. I can think of countless E3 demos of products that had DRASTICALLY changed before launch. This was meant as an INTRO to the product, and in no way was fully representative of the balance that'll be in the final product. Developers balance their games throughout the development process, so everything is subject to change. Why would you expect any different for a game that is a year+ off? Ever look at the early pictures of the Starcraft Alpha?

Thats true, i don't remember the Starcraft Alpha, maybe i should go and search some screens of it again.
As i said, it's a bit odd, that one very remarkable detail seems to be much to week, when thinking about what it is. I mean, if the Rifle would have been to weak or a bit to hard, okay, but so it seemed odd to me.
If you say, that's not unusual, i will now believe you.

I suspect that Todd ran the same demo the same way near every time. It was likely rehearsed and chosen as a good time-fitting representation of the product concept. I doubt they'd be fooling around with dialog options that might lead to content that wasn't built yet. Again, you can't judge the dialog merely by this tiny demo.

Yes, i think we are agreeing here.
And because some journalists (not you) wrote how great and so on the dialogues will get, i'm sceptical about the articles and 'conclusions' (opinions) of what we get frome some articles.

My point is that my articles would never get finished if I just sat around and tried to nitpick anything I could find on a product that isn't finished. A preview is a preview - going on and on and on and on about balance that'll be vastly different in the end with a critical eye doesn't do anyone any good.

Sure, but don't you think putting some more time into a article may improve it? You're article is more or less good, from my feelings. So don't take this now as an big critique. I just say sometimes it might be worth the time (See how the reactions toward other articles were).

Don't lump me in with them. My point that this is all run out of my pocket is that I am not beholden to anyone to be nice about anything. I just try to give my honest opinion. Other sites you'll see banners for a game right next to their Editor's Choice award, but not mine. I just try to deliver my honest opinon.

Okay, i'm very sorry about throwing you in the same bucket with them, especially in my first post.

Nope, just speculating. Perhaps next time I'll just come in and ignore any question that I can't answer with fact. That seems to be what so many of you want. I guess as a journalist I'm not allowed to have my own opinion or be able to speculate on why something is the way it is. Silly me.

Okay, that shouldn't be the case either. As i think i said earlier, it would be easier if you clearly differntiate between 'Facts' and 'speculation', wich is a lot more work, and i can understand that this isn't allways worthy and so on...
But on the other hand, i would be cautios when speaking toward the press when i'm a PR-manager of some nuke-plant, after some 'small accident'

It is an example. You clearly don't agree. You'll have to just ignore everything until the product is released if you can't see that an example just *might* represent the effort on the whole product.

You see, that's another problem, i would love to believe Beth putting such effort in the game. I would love being able to believe that companies would put all the features they once showed/announced into the end-product, but over years i learnt to become somehwat cautios about what they tell us and what we get in the end.
See RadiantAI - for Oblivion again
So yes, i've clearly to wait for the released product, but i would also like to see gaming journalists being a bit more cautios believing what people like Molyneaux and other tell them, and now and then pointing out that they claimed such things before...
But okay, i think we won't disagree on the last part

So i've to repeat myself, i'm sorry that i was that negative and harsh about you and your post and your article in my first posts.
Sorry.

So just a few questions, wich migth be a bit more enjoyable for you.

1. Would you say, that NMA is a bit like surfing, at first you will be overrun by the waves, but after a while you learn how to surf on the waves? - Okay, not that enjoyable i think, so please skipt it even if you would feel slightly uncomfortable.

2. What do you personally think about the PipBoy3000?
We just saw some pic of it, and i think it can't capture how i might really look.

3. Did you discuss with other journalists about the Fallout 3 Demo? If you get into some discussion:
Did you get into some discussion about Fallout1/2?
Did you get the feeling that the other journalists were big Fallout 1/2 fans? - A lot of journalists claimed that in the last weeks and some of them seemed to became fans just after they saw the demo. (No need to answer the second part, as it might not to cool about being critical about colleagues).

4. Did you think, there was some major trend on the E3?
How was this years atmosphere?

5. As mentioned here earlier, what do you think about Beth not being to fond to being in contact with NMA?
Especially as it seems as they wasn't even before the Ranting about the articles and so on?

6. What was the trigger for you coming here? Any special reason? I mean it's somewhat brave to come here

And again thanks for another Q&A and discussion round to you

---
To Troika, it's surely a fault of the management of Troika (the 3 leading heads), that Bloodlines got that buggy (and also the other games), but again, they had problems with their publishers. And even more for Bloodlines, it seems as if they got some problems with valve having to rewrite some parts of their source code (no?).
So i like to think that it was a 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 thing when talking about responsibility for the bugs.

 

[quietfanatic]

That is indeed very bad news. The interface looks like an even worse version of Oblivions. I hope it's just placeholder.

And that may be. I don't know.

Thanks for talking with us and writing one of the best previews. It makes some things look less bad (such as a more accurate transcription of the mediocre, teenage intro text), but raises new problems.

Sorry if I'm getting you to repeat yourself, but I'm more interested in your attention to detail than your opinions on unrelated issues. Many people read these forums without posting.

Could you see the markers on the quest compass move, maybe pointing to the bomb when it had to be armed, or to the Galaxy News building?

Was the non-radio music merely orchestral, more ambient, or only present sometimes? Was it again "epic" or similar to Fallout: Tactics (I think the composer is Inon Zur)?

 

[Brother None]

Since the composer of Fallout 3 is rumoured to be Inon Zur (the poor man's Jeremy Soule!), Tactics-like sounds probable

 

[quietfanatic]

I don't think Bethesda would actually like that particular style, but I can't think of a better diagnostic game soundtrack for comparison. The latest Dawn of War games?

 

[jmarquiso]

So I'm new here, actually I've lurked quite awhile, but I've been paid handsomely by Bethesda just to let you know how great their version of Fallout 3 will be. It'll be fuckin' awesome! No motherfuckin' way are we going to fuckin' mess it up!

Seriously, I ain't affiliated.

I love Fallout 1 and 2. I've read the Fallout bible thoroughly. So far, what I'm hearing, doesn't sound too bad. It was always better, back in the day. Rarely do we look forward to the 'coming thing'.

I'm optimistic, toilet drinking be damned. I'm sorry, fucked. That's what I meant.

The problem with sequels is that every one has a different sequel already in mind. And it's even worse that the original creators are not even near this project. I'm not optimistic about that. Star Control 3 is one of my least favorite games for that very same reason. Still, there's little here that takes away from what I would expect from fallout outside of nitpicking continuity (a fanboy trait I always had a problem with), and so-called physics.

Fallout 1 and 2 didn't follow any such "laws" and was all the better for it. The laws applied were only 1950's Cold War nuke science - when "duck and cover" meant something.

Man, I can go into a new experience cynically any time I want, but I won't get the full experience if I close my mind to it.

There was plenty of swearing and gore in the original fallout 1 and 2. There was even a flaw (perk?) that allowed for greater bloody messes. A body outside a vault perfectly recalls that first moment, and indicates your survival level. Finding your father? Far better and more interesting than an errand boy who's primary quest for the McGuffin inadvertantly lands him into trouble. There's more of an emotional connection there, I'd say.

I'll wait and see.