scruffpuff said:
well I think we should all assume that SPECIAL will be changed. In my mind I see KOTOR when I think about how Bethesda might approach this game. I think everyone should be open to this scenario.
I think most people here aren't "open" to this scenario, because this scenario is pretty much a goddamned nightmare.
scruffpuff said:
The fact that somehow the grace of god has come down and taken this game which we all love and handed it to a capable studio should, in itself, be enough to satisfy everyone on this board.
That's a dumb argument, and it has been beaten to death in this and in other threads by trolls and dumb people alike.
Let me just clarify our standing with a simple example: I really like blizzard, still play diablo 2 and Warcraft 3, they never released a single game that was below great in my opinion, and still, i would never want them to touch the fallout license even with a 15 foot pole.
scruffpuff said:
Bethesda is not a crap company and they're going to want to put their mark on this title. Expect changes. HOWEVER. You should also expect the finest Fallout game you've seen since Fallout 2. This game WILL be an improvement over Tactics and Brotherhood of Steel.
Well, they could release the best first person action rpg ever, and I still would hate it being called fallout 3.
scruffpuff said:
Yep, and I'd be willing to bet that the people at Bethesda feel the exact same way. They wouldn't go out of their way to buy a failing title unless they felt very passionate about the game itself and what they believe they can do for the franchise.
What makes you think that? they said so in the interviews? well, besides the fact that they said a lot of other crap in those interviews , there's also the Historic record of companies inheriting licenses saying they're big fans, and then screwing everything up.
scruffpuff said:
And seriously think about what they can do for the franchise.
Polygon counts are quickly becoming a thing of the past.
This means a vivid, 3d Wasteland.
and it'll be a BIG wasteland!
Well, now we can see you have some really deep knowledge of the inner workings of games, huh? Also, having "a vivid, 3d Wasteland" probably means the game will be as taxing on the hardware as morrowind was on launch, unless bethesda suddenly learns how to make a decent graphical engine.
scruffpuff said:
Consider, if you will, travelling on foot (much like in Morrowind) through the wasteland. Am I the only one who thinks that shit seems really fucking cool? The possibility for innovation in a world like that is limitless!
WOW, just imagine the possibility of holding the W key for 4 hours straight to walk across an empty wasteland from the hub to the hole! Either that, or they make the locations closer together, and fill the wastelands with life and interesting locations, and i guess even you can see how that would be bad.
scruffpuff said:
The most important thing in the video game industry, as in any entertainment industry, is innovation. Without Bethesda our game would be either dead or quite possibly in the hands of some less qualified studio.
Well, it would've gone to troika (they were leading the bids until bethesda placed an unbeatable offer), and well, i think your ignorance really shows here
scruffpuff said:
Now they're going to take their shot at dusting it off, and overhauling the entire thing. I'm fucking excited!
No further analysis of this post is needed, i recon. Now for the next one:
NeVeRLiFt said:
Early on this thread some people mentioned Neverwinter Night and how Fallout 3 could work with a 3D view like it uses.
I think Neverwinter Night is ugly compared to most 2D games. It is a good and I like it, but its different and not something I want for Fallout 3. People wanting this should move on and be happy with Stalker. You want pretty 3D graphics and FPS view then get Doom 3
Fallout 3 needs made the right way and Temple of Elemental Evil proves 2D and Turn-based can look great and kickass!
First thing, temple of elemental evil wasn't 2D, only the backgrounds were, all the moving objects were 3D.
Second, people who mentioned neverwinter nights weren't wishing FO3 looked just like it, it was just an example of a camera setting that could work for a 3D fallout game. I too tought the game was ugly (besides being a bad rpg for any standards) but it worked well as an example to clarify the whole 3D/2D - Isometric/first-person/third-person argument, seeing as some people had wrong ideas about what one or the other of this things encompassed (a better example would be Silent storm, but that's not a widely known game outside the hardcore community, and since some people who were arguing seemed rather... unknowledgeable about games...)
Last one, tough i doubt anyone is still reading:
scruffpuff said:
recently I picked it up for the Xbox when I got a new TV and couldn't find any good RPGs to play. Yeah I guess that's retarded but whatever, it's fun to play on a big tv sitting on my couch where the load times can be spent napping.
This could be interpreted in three ways:
1- You wouldn't care if fallout 3 was crap, just as long as you could play it on a big TV
while sitting on your couch (see that while? it's important because it's not the tv that's sitting on the couch, right?)
2- You thought morrowind was a rather mediocre game, but after you bought an xbox and couldn't find any good rpgs to play (surprise surprise) you just overlooked it's rather obvious flaws so you had something to play on your console. That you'll be pretty happy with fallout 3 being a half-assed PC rpg as long as it gets ported to your favorite console so.
3- You're a moron.
I'm guessing all 3
(and yes i do know the first two kinda overlap, but you seem so intent on driving that point home i tried to help you)
scruffpuff said:
I only really love 3 rpgs, Fallout 1 & 2 and then Sega's version of Shadowrun for the Genesis.
I've played alot in between but I like those because they are gritty and violent and full of guns etc.
Wow, now we actually see you understand what was important about fallout! it had so many guns (there's a game called quake wich has a lot of guns too)! It's SOOOO gritty huh? I'd say why that's a dumb statement, but, well, someone already put it better than me:
Roshambo said:
I would also advise that Bethesda's PR and anyone who is a dev to refrain from using "gritty" as much as possible. Every other game that claimed the same didn't quite deliver, and it was used by Interplay as a buzz-word for the Fallout universe. Frankly, "gritty" is starting to sound more like we should expect Gritty Kitty with the chewy surprises buried inside.
Well, Big friggin post huh?
