Fallout 3 Trailer
- Thread starter Sander
- Start date
Hey! I *did* mention the trumpet parts in the very beginning of this thread.
Boring.
Tell you what. I bet that if you win, You Will Be Right. If you lose, You Will Be Wrong.
A76 said:
Boring.
Tell you what. I bet that if you win, You Will Be Right. If you lose, You Will Be Wrong.
I sense ban-bait.
Strike two for trolling.
Strike two for trolling.
quietfanatic
Ancient One
I should have gone to bed earlier to summon the teaser sooner. 
I quite liked it, although it seems like they were using a tick the boxes approach in terms of including trademark elements, which is not reliable evidence for their really understanding Fallout. It makes me fear that they could be screwing up gameplay, assuming that paying lip service to setting will placate mainstream fans if they castrate dialogue etc.
I like the use of the Ink Spots' I Don't Want to Set the World On Fire (1941), but the orchestral music is unimpressive and unsuitable.
The ‘War…War never changes’ is quite different. A little fast in my mind.
The use of Western Brotherhood armour is interesting. Along with comments about ignoring bad sequels, it suggests they are not treating FOT as canon, but do want the BoS to play a significant role. I very much doubt that it would be stolen armour, which would also imply that the BoS had been close by anyway, as well as being very misleading. To further over-analyse, if those background sounds are not just twisted metal in the wind, but gunshots, it implies that he has friends under fire somewhere far off in the city who aren’t responding with loud energy weapon fire. The shoulder pads and blocky breastplate are ugly, but may be a way of making it their own more bulky version, possibly explained by saying it is designed for less sophisticated manufacturing.
Building a large ruined city with real variety must be very difficult. I would hope they allocate a lot more resources to getting real writers rather than designers to pretty up cityscapes.
I quite liked it, although it seems like they were using a tick the boxes approach in terms of including trademark elements, which is not reliable evidence for their really understanding Fallout. It makes me fear that they could be screwing up gameplay, assuming that paying lip service to setting will placate mainstream fans if they castrate dialogue etc.
I like the use of the Ink Spots' I Don't Want to Set the World On Fire (1941), but the orchestral music is unimpressive and unsuitable.
The ‘War…War never changes’ is quite different. A little fast in my mind.
The use of Western Brotherhood armour is interesting. Along with comments about ignoring bad sequels, it suggests they are not treating FOT as canon, but do want the BoS to play a significant role. I very much doubt that it would be stolen armour, which would also imply that the BoS had been close by anyway, as well as being very misleading. To further over-analyse, if those background sounds are not just twisted metal in the wind, but gunshots, it implies that he has friends under fire somewhere far off in the city who aren’t responding with loud energy weapon fire. The shoulder pads and blocky breastplate are ugly, but may be a way of making it their own more bulky version, possibly explained by saying it is designed for less sophisticated manufacturing.
Building a large ruined city with real variety must be very difficult. I would hope they allocate a lot more resources to getting real writers rather than designers to pretty up cityscapes.
Dunedain
First time out of the vault
I think the teaser video is pretty good. I like how the proper atmosphere of Fallout is maintained. 
The real question will be the gameplay. The Fallout series, along with Jagged Alliance 2, probably have the best tactical combat systems ever for detailed individual combat with small arms (plus with solid RPG elements) of any computer games. This is what's most important to be maintained from Fallout. I would prefer a turn-based system, which would work best, but some sort of pauseable real-time combat system could possibly work, too, if it's done right. Maybe we can have an option to play true turn-based or real time?
What we don't want is a FPS/RPG sort of thing that just happens to take place in the setting of Fallout. I'm not against the idea of a Fallout FPS necessarily, if it's in a *separate* different game (Fallout Unleashed?), in addition to Fallout 3, not instead of it. Fallout 3 should be focused on the intricate tactical squad-type isometric combat that has made Fallout so popular with gamers in the first place.
As far as the video goes, it doesn't indicate anything about the combat system one way or the other. Which kind of makes me nervous, since it leaves you wondering if the guys at Bethesda realize how important that tactical combat style is to the Fallout series and to it's many fans. On the other hand, it's just a teaser video, not a full trailer. It's meant to set the general atmosphere and tone of the game, not illustrate details about gameplay. And I think it did a good job of that.
The real question will be the gameplay. The Fallout series, along with Jagged Alliance 2, probably have the best tactical combat systems ever for detailed individual combat with small arms (plus with solid RPG elements) of any computer games. This is what's most important to be maintained from Fallout. I would prefer a turn-based system, which would work best, but some sort of pauseable real-time combat system could possibly work, too, if it's done right. Maybe we can have an option to play true turn-based or real time?
What we don't want is a FPS/RPG sort of thing that just happens to take place in the setting of Fallout. I'm not against the idea of a Fallout FPS necessarily, if it's in a *separate* different game (Fallout Unleashed?), in addition to Fallout 3, not instead of it. Fallout 3 should be focused on the intricate tactical squad-type isometric combat that has made Fallout so popular with gamers in the first place.
As far as the video goes, it doesn't indicate anything about the combat system one way or the other. Which kind of makes me nervous, since it leaves you wondering if the guys at Bethesda realize how important that tactical combat style is to the Fallout series and to it's many fans. On the other hand, it's just a teaser video, not a full trailer. It's meant to set the general atmosphere and tone of the game, not illustrate details about gameplay. And I think it did a good job of that.
BTW anyone else though of this like that:
That guy in power armor isnt a BoS member, in fact this is old power armor prototype(yes i know, this has been mentioned already) stolen by random raider from a BoS member. Imho BoS may not even exist anymore... that would be interesting.
Just my 5 cents.
That guy in power armor isnt a BoS member, in fact this is old power armor prototype(yes i know, this has been mentioned already) stolen by random raider from a BoS member. Imho BoS may not even exist anymore... that would be interesting.
Just my 5 cents.
Dunedain
First time out of the vault
I think some people misunderstand why a turn-based (or at the very least pauseable real-time) isometric system is so important to Fallout fans. It's not just some random feature that would be nice to have. I can't think of any other practical way to give a player the type of commanding view of the battlefield that he needs to be able to control his character (and any NPC helpers that might be on his side) and see exactly where all the enemies that are anywhere in the possible fields of view of his character are at a glance. So the player can then consider the situation and issue orders on how to handle the kind of detailed tactical combat options that Fallout fans love so much about the Fallout games.
Imagine trying to play an RTS without an overhead/isometric view, it would be a disaster. You need that kind of view to be able to quickly and conveniently see everything on the battlefield that you need to see and then give commands. Well, you need the same kind of view to be able to have the intricate tactical combat system that the many fans of Fallout expect from a Fallout game. And you also need the time, either through a turn-based system or a pauseable real-time system, to be able to decide what tactical combat options you want to use against the enemy forces. That's why real-time is no good for a Fallout game. You either are far too rushed when trying to decide which of the many combat tactical options you want to use, or you get a dumbed-down combat model (like a typical RTS) where you have far fewer tactical options than a Fallout game, so that it's easier to hurry up and pick among those few meager combat choices because you have hardly any time to think in a real-time game.
But that wouldn't be a Fallout game. Fallout is not an RTS. Fallout combat is all about the myriad of cool combat moves, options and counter-moves that the player can make in an attempt to outfight and outwit his opponent. It's all about the cool details and subtleties of intense tactical combat.
I don't mind if the camera can optionally be moved by the player if he wants to get a better look at something up-close (like see what's going to happen to that mutant when he opens up on it with a minigun ). But a fixed isometric view that let's you see everything you need to on the battlefield at a glance should be available at all times. Sort of like the camera system in Neverwinter Nights 2.
Imagine trying to play an RTS without an overhead/isometric view, it would be a disaster. You need that kind of view to be able to quickly and conveniently see everything on the battlefield that you need to see and then give commands. Well, you need the same kind of view to be able to have the intricate tactical combat system that the many fans of Fallout expect from a Fallout game. And you also need the time, either through a turn-based system or a pauseable real-time system, to be able to decide what tactical combat options you want to use against the enemy forces. That's why real-time is no good for a Fallout game. You either are far too rushed when trying to decide which of the many combat tactical options you want to use, or you get a dumbed-down combat model (like a typical RTS) where you have far fewer tactical options than a Fallout game, so that it's easier to hurry up and pick among those few meager combat choices because you have hardly any time to think in a real-time game.
But that wouldn't be a Fallout game. Fallout is not an RTS. Fallout combat is all about the myriad of cool combat moves, options and counter-moves that the player can make in an attempt to outfight and outwit his opponent. It's all about the cool details and subtleties of intense tactical combat.
I don't mind if the camera can optionally be moved by the player if he wants to get a better look at something up-close (like see what's going to happen to that mutant when he opens up on it with a minigun
). But a fixed isometric view that let's you see everything you need to on the battlefield at a glance should be available at all times. Sort of like the camera system in Neverwinter Nights 2.
As an old timer.
I dig it. Good feel, and look.
Not to mention Ron Perlman. Glad to have him doing his work for it.
I dig it. Good feel, and look.
Not to mention Ron Perlman. Glad to have him doing his work for it.
Wooz said:
DirtyDreamDesigner said:
Indeed! Well, if being honest (and in a polite way, as I really wanted to say "Ha! You chickened out!", which I could get away with if my post count was higher) gets me banned, if that's what's considered trolling despite the sincere, rational nature of my other posts, then go ahead and do it already. The threat means nothing to me, nor does getting banned. If I want to come here I can just make another account, then another, and so on.
Anyway, I think Autoduel was on the money. If you're so sure he's wrong, then you should accept his wager. We're going to know more by E3. It's standard practice for devs to spill the beans at that time. If I was Beth I'd wait too. What's the use of saying anything now when all you're going to get is endless "Wow -- FO3 is going to rawk/suck!" blather as dashed out by the frustrated, oily fingers of testosterone laden young nerds who spend 6 hours a day on game forums? Besides, the longer they wait, the more the hype and anticipation is going to build. Look how worked up everyone is already. I've never seen so much energy surrounding a game that's yet to be released.
Briosafreak
Lived Through the Heat Death
You should see the mess because of the new SimCity, really crazy. I'm not kidding, really crazy.
philowar said:
Negative word of mouth is the poison of hype. There's no hype or anticipation building, as of right now.
Dracon M'Alkir
Vault Senior Citizen
philowar said:
That was a direct attack at me. Well, screw you my good friend.
(Or troll)
Smoke_Jaguar
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
Ban-bait :roll: said:
Yes great post phil about clearing up the
: does bethesda keeps its mouth shut. Don't forget though, devs aren't far away from how you described the nerds.
You so hard. You Tarzan, me Jane.
Anyone else want a gratuitous ban from the loser, testosterone-laden, acne-ridden, obnoxious moderator with no life? No? Smoke?
Know more, certainly. Get the answers to the questions we've been asking for years, doubtful.
John Uskglass
Venerable Relic of the Wastes
I'm guessing it is set 80 years after FO2, and it is possible that because of the FEV concentration in California that California survived the war a lot better then every other part of the world, and that they are colonizing certain habitable parts of the continent.Ziltoid said:
I'm kind of surprised how negatively this is being viewed here. I mean, yeah, I was skeptical as anybody but this trailers seems to be about as Falloutish as anything could be. I still have my fears but...come on. This seems as good as can be expected.
We applaud you, sir. That was a wise decision. A decison we would have taken a long time ago.Wooz said:You so hard. You Tarzan, me Jane.
Anyone else want a gratuitous ban from the loser, testosterone-laden, acne-ridden, obnoxious moderator with no life? No? Smoke?
Keep up the good work.
FEV didn't really contribute to survival rate, for as far as we know at least.John Uskglass said:
But colonising the rest of the world doesn't feel like Fallout, especially not if the isolationist BoS is doing it.