Fallout 3 LGC: MTV Multiplayer
- Thread starter Brother None
- Start date
aenemic
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
Pope Viper said:
let me get this straight... they're not staying true to Fallout and don't get what's typical Fallout, and they're ripping off Fallout 1 because they can't come up with anything original themselves?
I'm sorry, but I can't take you seriously from now on. nothing personal.
I think we're talking two difference things.
Changing the core gameplay to something that does not work well, and half-assing the perceived story, plus come up with some of the most ridiculous "weapons", (come on, Fatman? Shooting fucking teddy bears?)
The intro is more a creative aspect, and why not show how you CAN be creative, with something so simple? How is that showing your "advancing" the series, if you can't be creative with your intro?
I think this is a situation where we're going to have to agree to disagree.
Changing the core gameplay to something that does not work well, and half-assing the perceived story, plus come up with some of the most ridiculous "weapons", (come on, Fatman? Shooting fucking teddy bears?)
The intro is more a creative aspect, and why not show how you CAN be creative, with something so simple? How is that showing your "advancing" the series, if you can't be creative with your intro?
I think this is a situation where we're going to have to agree to disagree.
Pope Viper said:
Not really fair.
They stick to the core principle (Ron Perlman + La Jetee-esque stills), but they rewrote Perlman's text and replace the black-and-white stills with pictures that look like yellowed photos.
It's about as much reform as you can do while sticking with the basic design idea behind the intro.
Perhaps not fair, but I think if they are claiming to put their own spin on the series, they could have shown it from the beginning.
I guess I'm making much over nothing, I think the perlman selection was great (as if there were any other choice), I just don't see much innovation, IMO
I guess I'm making much over nothing, I think the perlman selection was great (as if there were any other choice), I just don't see much innovation, IMO
I liked the first teaser, it was ok. I didn't care that they took some ideas from the first Fallouts' intros (hey, they might still be learning!), but then all the bad news about the design got out, it made the teaser look worse. Probably because I thought the game will get better, but it got worse...
BlackIsleMourner
First time out of the vault
Ok,
Apologies for the ranty comment. I was having a bad day at work!
The point I was trying to make though was that some people seemed to be voicing major issues over the fat-man not because of it being a ridiculous idea for inclusion (a point I agree with) but because they said it wasn't possible. I was trying to say that the world of Fallout isn't supposed to be our world after a nuclear war but instead an alternative, but that even with our real world technology if you fast forward to 2077 a weapon like the fat man is theoretically possible...
Apologies for the ranty comment. I was having a bad day at work!
The point I was trying to make though was that some people seemed to be voicing major issues over the fat-man not because of it being a ridiculous idea for inclusion (a point I agree with) but because they said it wasn't possible. I was trying to say that the world of Fallout isn't supposed to be our world after a nuclear war but instead an alternative, but that even with our real world technology if you fast forward to 2077 a weapon like the fat man is theoretically possible...
You cannot circumvent critical mass like that. There are no "mini nukes" in the sense Beth uses them, so it's NOT possible.
Even more important (IMO) is that the concept is not only ridiculous, but also at war with all Fallout is about.
In Fallout nukes equal big explosions that change the world (whether directly as in the intro or indirectly as in the end of the Master). They're not something you toss around in combat.
Even if you disregard all of that it doesn't make sense to have the player survive close-range nuke explosions (or any character -- several previews mention missing with the fatman equals no damage).
It's neither plausible nor sensible nor does it fit the game.
Even more important (IMO) is that the concept is not only ridiculous, but also at war with all Fallout is about.
In Fallout nukes equal big explosions that change the world (whether directly as in the intro or indirectly as in the end of the Master). They're not something you toss around in combat.
Even if you disregard all of that it doesn't make sense to have the player survive close-range nuke explosions (or any character -- several previews mention missing with the fatman equals no damage).
It's neither plausible nor sensible nor does it fit the game.
BlackIsleMourner
First time out of the vault
You have no argument from me on the question of surviving nukes at close range, 'missing' (LOL), fitting in with the setting etc (I agree in fallout nukes are not to be taken lightly)....'tis a rubbish idea that really should either be entirely left out or require a cheat code to unlock.
I do though have an interest in Nuclear Fusion. Unless i'm mistaken a modern Hydrogen Bomb uses a critical mass of Plutonium to cause a nuclear cascade that fuses Hydrogen atoms releasing further energy. The original fallouts contain 'Micro-fusion cells' small enough to use as amunition in a weapon so all i was thinking was that given the availability of that technology there would be nothing stopping a Fallout Weapons engineer from creating a large projectile containing the same mechanism but designed to overload creating a smallish (still probably the size of a city block and totally unsurvivable!!) nuclear explosion. This would avoid the critical mass issue because the cell is already sustaining a viable fusion reaction (perhaps using miniaturised Ion lasers or Z-pinch technology).
In real life of course even the most sophisticated and progressed attempts at creating a fusion power plant are huge....and as of yet they can't keep the plasma stable enough to sustain...
If you search 4th Generation Nuclear weapons online it's sobering reading though.
I do though have an interest in Nuclear Fusion. Unless i'm mistaken a modern Hydrogen Bomb uses a critical mass of Plutonium to cause a nuclear cascade that fuses Hydrogen atoms releasing further energy. The original fallouts contain 'Micro-fusion cells' small enough to use as amunition in a weapon so all i was thinking was that given the availability of that technology there would be nothing stopping a Fallout Weapons engineer from creating a large projectile containing the same mechanism but designed to overload creating a smallish (still probably the size of a city block and totally unsurvivable!!) nuclear explosion. This would avoid the critical mass issue because the cell is already sustaining a viable fusion reaction (perhaps using miniaturised Ion lasers or Z-pinch technology).
In real life of course even the most sophisticated and progressed attempts at creating a fusion power plant are huge....and as of yet they can't keep the plasma stable enough to sustain...
If you search 4th Generation Nuclear weapons online it's sobering reading though.