Fallout 3, who is this for?

[Brother None]

Most of the comments i read here are way off.

Both the article and most comments in this thread are based on the GI article and Q&A, the previews were not yet available.

I'll edit that into the article, tho'. Thanks for the reminder.

 

[generalissimofurioso]

One of my burning questions is.

If they are any kind of worried about fallout fans or making the fallout anything like the originals.... why not bring the original creators in at least as consultants... not like they dont have enough money.

Because THEY want the game to be THEIR game, if any of the original developers were to be there, Bethesda wouldn't have any Nuclear Catapaults or EVIL LAND BARONS in their game...

 

[jasonj86]

Here here

 

[UnderLord]

Because THEY want the game to be THEIR game, if any of the original developers were to be there, Bethesda wouldn't have any Nuclear Catapaults or EVIL LAND BARONS in their game...

Well was the laser gattling gun a little over the top? Bad ass mind you but a little over the top.

HEY YOU GUYS FORGOT THE MENTION THAT THEY WILL HAVE A BB GUN IN THE GAME THATS FALL-OUTY!

Besides I'd rather have a established developer make the game then some half assed one who knows nothing of the fall out universe, even if they do butcher it. One way or another it's going to be the next fall out title.

Besides you have to remember that Beth. studio's are not the original developer so anyways its inetivible that most of what made fall out: fall out will be gone. Sure they'll keep the retro 50's car look and some of the retro looking items, but i think they are shooting for a retro 50's futuristic look onto it. More like how they think the original probably "should" have been, but thats only in there minds.

Transition from 2D to 3D is going to be hard, they have nothing to go with except old 'movies'. But you also have to remember we are talking just about 10 years difference in technology too. Just not computer technology but also game development technology, 10 years ago the photo realistic look only existed in mist...(myth? whatever it was....was that 10 years ago?)


But anyhow im waiting for more screen shots of REAL ingame play so i can make a good judgement of my own, either way i'll probably buy it, play it, and leave it laying on my counter like i do everything else

 

[Sander]

Well was the laser gattling gun a little over the top? Bad ass mind you but a little over the top.

Verisimilitude.
A nuclear catapult does not fit Fallout's setting, mostly because of the ridiculousness of such a weapon and the *fear* of nuclear weapons that a lot of the setting is based on.

HEY YOU GUYS FORGOT THE MENTION THAT THEY WILL HAVE A BB GUN IN THE GAME THATS FALL-OUTY!

Besides I'd rather have a established developer make the game then some half assed one who knows nothing of the fall out universe, even if they do butcher it. One way or another it's going to be the next fall out title.

Yes, we know that. Which is more or less the reason everybody is pissed. Most people would rather not have a

Besides you have to remember that Beth. studio's are not the original developer so anyways its inetivible that most of what made fall out: fall out will be gone. Sure they'll keep the retro 50's car look and some of the retro looking items, but i think they are shooting for a retro 50's futuristic look onto it. More like how they think the original probably "should" have been, but thats only in there minds.

Transition from 2D to 3D is going to be hard, they have nothing to go with except old 'movies'. But you also have to remember we are talking just about 10 years difference in technology too. Just not computer technology but also game development technology, 10 years ago the photo realistic look only existed in mist...(myth? whatever it was....was that 10 years ago?)

The realistic approach existed long before that, really. And Half-life was, for instance, released only a year after Fallout was. Fallout's artistic style wasn't created because of technological limitations.

 

[UnderLord]

Do you think fall-out back 10 years ago would have been better 3d or 2d? consider the time change, technology gained, the abilitys of programmers. Im not saying they made fall out 2d because of technological limitations, im saying they made it 2d because at the time 2d was the shit. 2D sold. Then 3d took over and 2d was slowly phased out. Now 2d is near dead (unless its indie developers). Now consider todays changes. Would "Fall Out 3" look better in 2d then 3d? Or is it simply just a new age of fall out. 3D sells.
I know why most people are pissed fall out is losings it original charm, something that cannot be regained. but when another company takes over, shit changes. Its the sad truth i wish they'd throw in the original concept artist from fallout 1 but, you know Beth. studio's is "going to do it there way".

Yes, we know that. Which is more or less the reason everybody is pissed. Most people would rather not have a

A?

 

[Sander]

Do you think fall-out back 10 years ago would have been better 3d or 2d? consider the time change, technology gained, the abilitys of programmers. Im not saying they made fall out 2d because of technological limitations, im saying they made it 2d because at the time 2d was the shit. 2D sold.

Bullshite. First-person view was on the rise big time. Quake had been released, Half-Life hit the market a year later.

Then 3d took over and 2d was slowly phased out. Now 2d is near dead (unless its indie developers). Now consider todays changes. Would "Fall Out 3" look better in 2d then 3d? Or is it simply just a new age of fall out. 3D sells.

It's not about 3d, actually. Very few people would mind a 3d Fallout 3, it's about the perspective. There's nothing preventing a 3d isometric view.

I know why most people are pissed fall out is losings it original charm, something that cannot be regained. but when another company takes over, shit changes. Its the sad truth i wish they'd throw in the original concept artist from fallout 1 but, you know Beth. studio's is "going to do it there way".

Yes, we know it's going to change. But that doesn't mean we have to conform to that.

Yes, we know that. Which is more or less the reason everybody is pissed. Most people would rather not have a

A?

Heh. Odd. I meant to say "Most people would rather not have a 3rd Fallout, than an unfaithful Fallout 3."

EDIT: Whoops. When quoting I accidentally edited your post, so quite a bit of it got lost. My apologies.

 

[Sorrow]

Then 3d took over and 2d was slowly phased out. Now 2d is near dead (unless its indie developers). Now consider todays changes. Would "Fall Out 3" look better in 2d then 3d? Or is it simply just a new age of fall out. 3D sells.

It's not about 3d, actually. Very few people would mind a 3d Fallout 3, it's about the perspective. There's nothing preventing a 3d isometric view.

Heh .
I would mind an isometric 3d. There's something fake in 3d...

2D
3D

Actually, it's pretty sad - a lot of people seem to have an obsession on 3D nowadays.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Also. It's Fallout.
Not Fall Out, not Fall-out, not whatever shit people decide to turn the name into.
Get it already that it's only one word. It's not about any falling out. Grab a dictionary, I heard they do good to people.

I'd say this is a good reason why you shouldn't have any right to talk about the game - not even being able to type its name properly.

either way i'll probably buy it, play it, and leave it laying on my counter like i do everything else

And, does that make it a good game? We're talking about having a good game, not just another, forgettable game like there are thousands nowadays.

 

[Sander]

Also. It's Fallout.
Not Fall Out, not Fall-out, not whatever shit people decide to turn the name into.
Get it already that it's only one word. It's not about any falling out. Grab a dictionary, I heard they do good to people.

I'd say this is a good reason why you shouldn't have any right to talk about the game - not even being able to type its name properly.

Bad FTR. No reason to behave like this, he's not trolling nor uninformed.

I would mind an isometric 3d. There's something fake in 3d...

No there isn't. 3D can be just as atmospheric as Fallout was, if done right. STALKER had a great atmosphere, for instance, and it looked at least as realistic as Fallout did.

Also note that lots of Fallout graphics were created in a 3D rendering program before being transformed to sprites.

 

[Sorrow]

Can the detail level of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. graphics be kept in zoomed out isometric view?

 

[Sander]

Can the detail level of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. graphics be kept in zoomed out isometric view?

Of course they can. In fact, an isometric viewpoint can be a lot less technologically demanding because of the very easy and strict view-distance. It effectively automatically limits the number of objects that are going to be on screen.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Bad FTR. No reason to behave like this, he's not trolling nor uninformed.

Fair enough, although he doesn't sounds very informed.

Just this butchering of the Fallout name is pissing me off even more now after Bethesda's own butchering of everything Fallout.

 

[UnderLord]

No there isn't. 3D can be just as atmospheric as Fallout was, if done right. STALKER had a great atmosphere, for instance, and it looked at least as realistic as Fallout did.

I did like the STALKER atmosphere it seemed so real, lighting,rain everything...the fact that it has true directional lighting helped alot.

And, does that make it a good game? We're talking about having a good game, not just another, forgettable game like there are thousands nowadays.

Can't comment as i have not played a demo or seen one played first hand.

Bullshite. First-person view was on the rise big time. Quake had been released, Half-Life hit the market a year later.

Exactly on the rise, it hadnt taken over yet 2d games where still in abundance. But the 2d view suited the game very well. Made it more playable. IMO if it where 3d at the time it probably would not have been as good.

It's not about 3d, actually. Very few people would mind a 3d Fallout 3, it's about the perspective. There's nothing preventing a 3d isometric view.

Im one of those...been waiting for a FPS version for ever. But the GI article does say that there is the possibility of moving the camera around in 3rd person to get a "almost" 3d isometric view...almost...

Yes, we know it's going to change. But that doesn't mean we have to conform to that.

I know. [joke] CONFORM OR DIE IN THE WASTE [/joke]

Heh. Odd. I meant to say "Most people would rather not have a 3rd Fallout, than an unfaithful Fallout 3."

EDIT: Whoops. When quoting I accidentally edited your post, so quite a bit of it got lost. My apologies.

Figured as much


Anyways when a tech demo or a ingame trailer comes out i shall return to debate some more, good day gentlemen and ladies (if any troll the forums )

 

[UnderLord]

Fair enough, although he doesn't sounds very informed.

True it has been some time since i'v played the originals but i still remember the days of finding the spare parts to that car and driving it around.

I tried to play the original fallout a couple of days ago but something odd happens i think the game does not like my 7950gt. As it runs fine on a fx5500 (or so me thinks) the screen will go black and as i move the mouse the mosue makes a trail though the blackness and shows the images under the black screen then the screen will refresh and it happens all over again. =\

 

[Sander]

True it has been some time since i'v played the originals but i still remember the days of finding the spare parts to that car and driving it around.

I tried to play the original fallout a couple of days ago but something odd happens i think the game does not like my 7950gt. As it runs fine on a fx5500 (or so me thinks) the screen will go black and as i move the mouse the mosue makes a trail though the blackness and shows the images under the black screen then the screen will refresh and it happens all over again. =\

Please don't double post.

Anyway, to fix this, read the stickies in the Gameplay & Tech forum. They've got a load of fixes for this, which may work.

 

[jasonj86]

Another reason that Fallout 3 will not be a great game is , in my opinion...

I truly believe..

Is that the Bethesda developers do not have near as much talent as the original fallout developers. They also just don't care as much , they're just looking for a cash cow.

If anyone can also confirm or deny that the original devs had a bid in, and bethesda outbid them on purpose, I would really like to know the source and validity of that rumor.

Getting to the Point.

Please tell me if I'm wrong about this,

Didn't the fallout guys program the game completely from scratch? their own engine, mechanics, physics,artwork,CG, etc?

I know Bethesda mainly uses the Gamebryo engine, created by someone else and just kind of plugs pieces and parts in , which doesn't take as much effort as creating an entire gaming system from scratch. All the devs are doing, in my opinion, are programming a few aspects here and there, but mainly modding something someone else already created and calling it "fallout 3" Thats why the architecture, etc wont have any kind of fallout look to it in my opinion, only signs, billboards, doodads, etc that the developers actually put in themselves MAY have that look.

 

[Sander]

I know Bethesda mainly uses the Gamebryo engine, created by someone else and just kind of plugs pieces and parts in , which doesn't take as much effort as creating an entire gaming system from scratch. All the devs are doing, in my opinion, are programming a few aspects here and there, but mainly modding something someone else already created and calling it "fallout 3" Thats why the architecture, etc wont have any kind of fallout look to it in my opinion, only signs, billboards, doodads, etc that the developers actually put in themselves MAY have that look.

That's just silly. Using an externally made graphics engine is solely that: using an externally made graphics engine. Gamebryo is heavily changed by Bethesda; they aren't just modding an entire existing game.

 

[The Dude]

Both Obsidian and Troika were looking at purchasing the rights for Fallout, Bethesda simply had the deepest pockets.

Troika? The ones that had a hand in Vangers: One for the Road? That would have been massive. At least that game showed a great spirit. Too bad it was so crazy little people understood it...

... This is the second use of the engine and now that its more comfortably in use I believe that they can succeed in bringing the Fallout Universe to the next generation, even through the amount of contempt that it has recieved so far. =]

-FuBi0

Let's indeed hope they fixed all that was wrong in Oblivion. The only silver lining for me is that Oblivion was released and hence can be referenced to as what should definitely be different...

snap

So, if you've never even played Fallout what the hell are you doing here?

Also, how can you presume to speak on the subject of setting if you haven't even tasted the setting of the original games?

Everyone to his own opinion, informed or not. And anyway, we shouldn't close off to outside opinions since this community is allready somewhat isolated... I do recognize myself as being a whiner sometimes, outside opinions might give that 'back down to earth'-effect. I found the article a tad pessimistic and indeed biased (still nice to read though). It does illustrate some of the the thoughts in our community, but it's not really constructive. If we kick it too much, Bethesda will definitely not lend an ear (if they ever would).

Also. It's Fallout.
Not Fall Out, not Fall-out, not whatever shit people decide to turn the name into.
Get it already that it's only one word. It's not about any falling out. Grab a dictionary, I heard they do good to people.

I'd say this is a good reason why you shouldn't have any right to talk about the game - not even being able to type its name properly.

And this kinda shit definitely has to stop. This whole holier than thou crap. It's too fucking Orwellian to say that some have a right to say something and others not. Who's gonna say you're an expert and who not? Fuck that. Anyone can decide for himself if a comment is well informed or not. This is just scaring off people and only leads to more isolation and polarisation of ideas.

..snap..

That's just silly. Using an externally made graphics engine is solely that: using an externally made graphics engine. Gamebryo is heavily changed by Bethesda; they aren't just modding an entire existing game.

I really hope you're right...

 

[Sander]

Troika? The ones that had a hand in Vangers: One for the Road?

..
No. That's not them. Troika was the company created by the original creators of Fallout. They released Arcanum, Temple of Elemental Evil and Vampire: Bloodlines.

Everyone to his own opinion, informed or not. And anyway, we shouldn't close off to outside opinions since this community is allready somewhat isolated... I do recognize myself as being a whiner sometimes, outside opinions might give that 'back down to earth'-effect. I found the article a tad pessimistic and indeed biased (still nice to read though). It does illustrate some of the the thoughts in our community, but it's not really constructive. If we kick it too much, Bethesda will definitely not lend an ear (if they ever would).

Yeah, because they sure have listened over the past three *years*.
Oh snap, they completely haven't listened.

And this kinda shit definitely has to stop. This whole holier than thou crap. It's too fucking Orwellian to say that some have a right to say something and others not. Who's gonna say you're an expert and who not? Fuck that. Anyone can decide for himself if a comment is well informed or not. This is just scaring off people and only leads to more isolation and polarisation of ideas.

Wait, so now we can't comment on stupid ideas or uninformed opinions either?
Hah! This isn't happy-happy-fun-land where everyone can say whatever they want and never get reminded that they're full of shit.