Fallout 3 mentioned by Pete Hines

Sander said:
And hey, he said that they'd lean towards the technology they're developing. First person isn't a 'technology', it's just a camera position, as is every other perspective.

No, first person isn't a technology. But he WAS talking about the perspesctive in that answer..



will Fallout 3 be from a first- or third-person perspective like the Morrowind series, or isometric, like its predecessors?

Again, this was the question asked, to which he answered that they would be using the technology they are developing.

Is he talking about the perspective or the "technology". If he was answering the question, he was talking about the perspective and it doesn't take a big assumption to realize what he means.
 
Sander said:
True, Roshambo, the info that we have received has not been very hope-giving. And Bethesda has a far from decent record in making games and treating license. Yet I maintain that, while there has been no positive from their side, pointing out their ignorance and being certain that nothing good will come from this is not going to do any good whatsoever.

It would light a fire under their ass, point out the obvious mistakes in the past, and also result in them looking like idiots if they manage to fuck up. Kind of like the MicroForte folks, who I both called in their spin and then later about calling them out about their lies. Tony Oakden only had the balls to say they both liked and loathed me, because I put it both honestly and blunt, and to a point where they publicly couldn't ignore it. I didn't let them get away with anything, really.

If Bethesda decides to take the same negligent approach towards game design while skullfucking the design for trendy reasons and laziness, then that is similarly their problem and I see no reason why we should happily take it. AGAIN, for the third load of bullshit PR-speek.

Interplay had FAR better PR around Fallout 2, but that's because even their marketing guys at the time had a clue.

It's possibly good to try to educate them with a harsh hand. Or get other people to realise what they've said so far. It's not a road I like to travel, though.

Let's try some roleplaying, shall we? :D

Bethesda PR, and some developers, dump a fresh shovelful of steaming bullshit right onto your head. What do you do?

1. Sit there with your best shit-eating grin and nicely give them suggestions on how to not dump shit on your head.
2. Sit there and take it like a cheap whore.
3. Grab the shovel from their hands, beat them over the head with it, and then feed them back their own bullshit.

History says that the Fallout fanbase are not too fond of being fed bullshit, so I know which one most people picked. It was particularly obvious from the initial reaction to much of the bullshit they shoveled in the past.
 
Rosh said:
1. Sit there with your best shit-eating grin and nicely give them suggestions on how to not dump shit on your head.
2. Sit there and take it like a cheap whore.
3. Grab the shovel from their hands, beat them over the head with it, and then feed them back their own bullshit.
My choice is number 3, although I do prefer rusty rake or maybe sharp pieces of the shattered CDs with their games
 
Roshambo said:
It would light a fire under their ass, point out the obvious mistakes in the past, and also result in them looking like idiots if they manage to fuck up. Kind of like the MicroForte folks, who I both called in their spin and then later about calling them out about their lies. Tony Oakden only had the balls to say they both liked and loathed me, because I put it both honestly and blunt, and to a point where they publicly couldn't ignore it. I didn't let them get away with anything, really.

The problem is that Bethesda Software is way...WAY...much more powerfull as a company than microforte.They already have a fanbase of million blind-folded Elder Scrolls followers and Oblivion will not only expand that fanbase but also place a bunch of millions in Beth's piggy bank.I haven't seen a game that is hyped as much as oblivion for a long time.
I don't think that after the millions of sales and the multiple game of the decade awards oblivion and fo3 will win,Todd Howard will come out and say "Oh sorry fallout fans,i skullfucked your game and i lied to you,I should have been honest from the first moment"
Seriously,we're fucked.There's nothing we can do.I personally consider fallout 3,y'know,dead meat.
 
It frustrates me no end to see fans complaining about how their favourite game is going to hell. There is so much energy here. Why don't you use it to take control?

You could create a fund where fans can donate small amounts over a long period of time. This fund could eventually be used to buy the Fallout licence and make it the way it should be made. I know it sounds like pie in the sky, but anything can be done given the will and enough time.
 
That idea has been idealistically raised and pragmatically shot down many, many times before.
 
What, you mean the same "idea" cooked up by BIS' old resident attention whore, who knows absolutely jack shit about developing games?

Read the links I provided in that thread, and read all of those threads.

$100,000 is play money compared to what Bethesda paid for it. $100,000 might pay a YEAR of salary for two programmers and a commissioned art guy, THAT'S IT.

So, if you're suggesting that we raise over what Bethesda has spent and apparently have wasted time on in the last year in educating themselves about the game, you're insane and quite possibly mentally retarded. Penny-Arcade charity raises half a million, and that's because it's grown through word of mouth.

You would hope to raise over a million in what timeframe? That might happen, when Bethesda decides to "refine" Fallout down again for Sellout 4, which would be apropos if they whored out with Fallout 3, as it would be the fourth sell-out in the franchise.

I know it sounds like crack pipe in the high, but anything can be done given the will and enough time.

Such as waiting for a so-called "developer" to get a clue about developing games and the background surrounding said license?

Sure, I'll wait. Not for too long.
 
You would hope to raise over a million in what timeframe?

A million is chump change. You need 10 million to make and market the type of game you guys want now. As for the time frame, try taking 10 years to raise the money. Just keep taking donations and put them into an account. If you ever reach your goal, you can hire a AAA developer to do it properly. Even if you don't make it, its better to do something, rather than nothing and wait 8-10 years to get shafted.


Such as waiting for a so-called "developer" to get a clue about developing games and the background surrounding said license?

As for waiting for that. I wouldn't bother. :) Fallout was a fluke, an abberation. How a game of that quality got made and slipped through the corporate cracks I don't know.

I take a look at those links you mentioned.
 
No it isn't, Davaris. It's in no way a practical idea because while the group of Fallout fans isn't small, the fanatical group willing to donate any time or money to such a project is minute. The timeframe and amount of money just make it more discouraging and impractical. And even in the end, how would we know we'd get a good game. "We" are not a unified monster-head. We're agreed on the rough points, but not on the details.

Like said above, it's been thought of and mentioned multiple times and never came up as a realistic idea.

The fan-made projects are the closest thing we go.
 
Yes. Dropping money into a PayPal account is simplistic. You would need to create an electable board of directors and manage the money properly. Also you would need to create a charter as to how the game should be made and let donating members vote on each point.

I know its an insane amount of work and there's a big possibility it will fail. But who cares if it does?

You guys have given very good reasons why it can't be done. But if I want something, I go after it and don't worry about whether its possible or not. I may not reach the exact goal I had in mind, but I always end up a lot closer than I was before, learn a lot and have a lot of fun on the way.
 
Davaris said:
Yes. Dropping money into a PayPal account is simplistic.

So no wonder why it's advocated by simple minds that don't understand legality.

You would need to create an electable board of directors and manage the money properly. Also you would need to create a charter as to how the game should be made and let donating members vote on each point.

This isn't nearly anywhere the real amount of complexity or work involved in taking that many donations for a commercial purchase, as you apparently missed Saint Proverbius' post about how it would have to be managed. Therefore, it isn't a personal account, nor is it a charity, so money-pooling isn't that simple.

Get a clue or...

stfu.jpg


I know its an insane amount of work and there's a big possibility it will fail. But who cares if it does?

Those having to do the work, as well as those who wouldn't get all of their money back when said deal isn't agreed to by whomever might hold the rights in 10 years or whenever there might be enough money. Really, anyone who isn't an idiot would care and NOT donate to such a questionable money pit.

There have been people around the Wasteland franchise for some time, wanting a proper sequel, but they arern't holding their breath because when one developer dies, another comes along with "Remember Wasteland?". Considering you just fell into the same logic holes that Saint Proverbious and others have pointed out, I guess that would make you a liar about having read the threads I posted. So how should I respond to that?

You guys have given very good reasons why it can't be done.

Apparently not good enough for you to understand.

Oh, wait, even those who were fools around FOT's release could understand how BLOODY STUPID this crap is. Even ScottE said it was quite foolhardy at length, so does that qualify enough as "someone with a clue" for you?

But if I want something, I go after it and don't worry about whether its possible or not.

Spoken like a true fool or someone who hasn't really developed anything, because without planning, hard work goes to waste. Then it ISN'T fun for those whose time and money you have wasted. Nice "idea", but too bad there's little substantial thought behind it, hence the pragmatism.

I may not reach the exact goal I had in mind, but I always end up a lot closer than I was before, learn a lot and have a lot of fun on the way.

So how does giving money to Interplay, despite however the deal might get screwed out, and given the fact that there's really no developer around that we would trust completely (Troika's gone), or that Interplay would even entertain this idea to begin with, exactly what part of your moronic idea seems "fun"?

Hey, if giving away money to a questionable cause is your thing, please go to the main NMA site and feel free to donate the cash you're obviously rolling in. :D
 
Spoken like a true fool or someone who hasn't really developed anything, because without planning, hard work goes to waste. Then it ISN'T fun for those whose time and money you have wasted. Nice "idea", but too bad there's little substantial thought behind it, hence the pragmatism.

Click on my link if you think I haven't made anything. Lots of Indie developers told me not to make it, because it was too hard (and they were right), but I went ahead and did it anyway (because I'm a stubborn fool).

I don't know what you should do if you can't go the donations route, because the AAA industry is changing for the worse. Console's are seen as the only profitable route and that means targeting the lowest common denominator.

I'll have a look for that Saint Proverbius post you mentioned, I didn't see that one, but I did read the one from the Black Isle employee.

Edit:

getting $10 a piece from 250,000 people. That's 250,000 circulated legal statements and possibly contracts, 250,000 names and addresses to keep track of, and since the odds are that it won't work - 250,000 checks to send back or online transactions to make.

This would be a problem, so I just wouldn't do it. I'd take the donations without the statements. If the fans want a real Fallout, they'd have to pay double or whatever it takes.

What a lot of players don't get is RPGs are harder to make than any other type of computer game. I don't know how developers get funding for them, when its so much easier and more profitable to make a mindless shooter.

Anyway I'll shut up about this now, its not going anywhere. :)
 
I just took a look at your site, Davaris. While the game itself looks interesting, you should really work on your writing style on the 'articles' you have on your page. Each and every one reads like an annoying advert that's incredibly one-sided. Using a flashy header like 'Turn Based RPGs are relaxing to play and isn't that what your leisure time should be about? ' reads like 'I have an opinion and you can't possibly disagree, right?'
Plus, y'know, good RPG downloads don't have both real-time and turn-based combat because that seriously fucks up a lot of balance, for as far as I know, it's never been done properly.
And stating that Fallout should be third-person is either misquided or misleading.
 
Just took a look at the site myself and I'll definitely give credit for doing something I've always wanted to see more of: Good old fashioned Pulp Sci-fi. My favourite era for sci-fi is 1930's - 1950's. Visually, I think you've done a good job of capturing that era/feel.
 
I just took a look at your site, Davaris. While the game itself looks interesting, you should really work on your writing style on the 'articles' you have on your page. Each and every one reads like an annoying advert that's incredibly one-sided. Using a flashy header like 'Turn Based RPGs are relaxing to play and isn't that what your leisure time should be about? ' reads like 'I have an opinion and you can't possibly disagree, right?'

Yes those articles are optimised to rank high on search engines. Thats why they look so wierd with the repeating phrases and the number of words. I've been reluctant to get rid of them because they actually work and get me traffic. However I've just shelled out to get my first press release written and released, so when that goes out I'll get rid of them.


Plus, y'know, good RPG downloads don't have both real-time and turn-based combat because that seriously fucks up a lot of balance, for as far as I know, it's never been done properly.

Check out my demo and see if you think the rtc/tbc is done properly. You can flip between turn based and real time by hitting 'w'. My engine was originally a clone of the Baldurs Gate engine, so the combat was in real time. But a lot of people requsted turn based combat so I put that in as well.


And stating that Fallout should be third-person is either misquided or misleading.

Ah that's just what I think. :) I like top down view because it looks better and the navigation is easy. I don't like first person view, because it gives me a splitting headache and I find it disorienting.


Just took a look at the site myself and I'll definitely give credit for doing something I've always wanted to see more of: Good old fashioned Pulp Sci-fi. My favourite era for sci-fi is 1930's - 1950's. Visually, I think you've done a good job of capturing that era/feel.

Thank you. I love everything from that era. The buildings, the cars, the clothes, the movies (sci-fi and noir) and the ladies. I have Fallout to thank, for educating me in this respect. :)
 
Davaris said:
Ah that's just what I think. :) I like top down view because it looks better and the navigation is easy. I don't like first person view, because it gives me a splitting headache and I find it disorienting.
Misguided, then. Third-person view isn't the same as top-down view, third-person is the term used to denote a style in which the camera is behind the character, but not from a more zoomed-out, top-down view. Tomb Raider and Max Payne use third-person, many first person games have the option to go third-person, yet Fallout and Planescape: Torment aren't third-person at all.
 
Davaris said:
Click on my link if you think I haven't made anything. Lots of Indie developers told me not to make it, because it was too hard (and they were right), but I went ahead and did it anyway (because I'm a stubborn fool).

Really. You think I am so unobservant, that I didn't notice that? ;)
I do admire the pulpish tone to them, and for having that style you have my respect.

I was just saying that your argument around the PayPal idea are indicative of someone who doesn't have much of an idea of how complicated it is to financially bring something to light in a commercial sense, and the legal nightmare it would be for a number of fans to get together and buy a commercial property or to fund it while someone else develops. You also seem to have missed the point of planning beforehand, as you cannot tell me you developed your game without planning beforehand.

Those who discouraged you did it for the wrong reasons, as they are probably not indie developers, or are in the wrong sense of the word. We know that people have outlandish ideas that surpass the commercial whores, not many others know this better than myself.

To put it lightly, some of us hold Arthur O’Shaughnessy's Ode as fighting words, because we know that is the true measure of success. It isn't by cheaply copying something else; it can easily start with one man with a vision.

I don't know what you should do if you can't go the donations route, because the AAA industry is changing for the worse. Console's are seen as the only profitable route and that means targeting the lowest common denominator.

Here's an idea. You're not the only indie developer on this forum. :D

There's also a reason why "Remember Wasteland?" was printed on the inside flap of the Fallout box. It means that if one cherished title is whored out, another great one can take its place in the future. Fallout doesn't have to be the last one of its kind, and I see no need to do something that risky if the title is going to be killed off or whored out like Ultima or other series.

I'll have a look for that Saint Proverbius post you mentioned, I didn't see that one, but I did read the one from the Black Isle employee.

Saint goes into depth about how it would be quite a legal nightmare. And without statements or other paperwork, people are NOT going to donate substantial amounts of money. The first few thousand will end up going to a lawyer and accountant for retainer fees.

What a lot of players don't get is RPGs are harder to make than any other type of computer game. I don't know how developers get funding for them, when its so much easier and more profitable to make a mindless shooter.

I know this quite well. Trust me. :D

Anyway I'll shut up about this now, its not going anywhere. :)

Well, about the donations idea, that doesn't fly and will never fly. It's about as hopeful as wishing Herve would get a clue or that Bethesda's PR would suddenly become competent. The indie market is growing again, as it surged previously in the mid-90's, again in response to how the AAA market was becoming quite stagnant with copycat fantasy crap.

Then BioWare dumbs it down and calls it innovation, and there you have the industry today. If we're going to see anything more in the CRPG genre with brilliance and imagination that doesn't revolve around stupid amnesia/Godhood/munchkinfest plots, it will be from the indie developers.

Again. Then some stupid, spineless, corporate exec in a few years will take a look at how an indie game is received, and actually fund a commercial product based upon the great gameplay that would seem unique to the other games being released, and we'll have our next Fallout.

Even if it doesn't have the Fallout name.
 
I heard from inside sources that Bethesda is courting the no talent hack, Raph Koster.

Raph was lead designer for Star Wars Galaxies, and his ideas were so bad, so down right horrible that today college game design classes point to his concepts of what NOT to do.

For those that don't know, or refuse to believe, this is the biggest moron that ever walked the earth, and is such an arrogant bozo he makes Herve look not only hyper-intelligent by comparison, but downright humble.

Raph (yes, Raph not Ralph) is the loser who thought his own designs were so wonderful, so awe-inspiring, that people would fawn over them to such a degree that they couldn't wait to play each and every concept that spewed forth from his twisted mind.

Let us all hope that this is only a rumor, for I have met the man and shudder to think he might again corrupt a wonderful franchise with his arrogance and lack of true understanding of core game design concepts.
 
Back
Top