Fallout Online: Impossible to keep the wasteland feeling?

Dead Guy

Dead Guy

Senate Board Director oTO
Moderator
Board Cop oTO
Orderite
Will it be possible for an online fallout to maintain the feeling of living in a scarcely populated wasteland?

Or will it become a monster where you constantly run into WoW-kids screaming elite abbreviations, selling phat lewt and looking for an xp farming group?

I fear that especially now with all the attention from the mouthbreathing horde of head-exploding nitwits Bethesda has brought upon the name of Fallout, the latter is a looming possibility.

I'm fine with people not being "in charachter", but do you think it's possible to make a Fallout game out of an online game? It would have to be fundamentally different from any MMO I've seen...

What are your thoughts? Can it be done well? Can it resemble fallout? Or will it be the inevitable power-gamer with "unique" armour, twinking and instances we've seen a hundred times before?

"-What are you doing tonight?"
"-Raiding Mariposa again, guildie needs that über minigun."
 
I don't know how much people have played MMO's but:

In FFXI, there's that looting and you could also do "story lines" from quests and such. It's seriously not too bad, it all just has to be well implemented.

I can see things like having "good" aligned characters running into a guild of "bad" characters and gun fight ensues, kind of like random encounters worked in FO1/2.

Just because it's an MMO it doesn't have to suck. It has to be well done though, and I agree that I hope that you don't get many retards who just want to do "l33t" lewt quest. Or if you don't want to do that, you don't necessarily have to.
 
True. My experience (mainly from Anarchy Online) is that after a while people figure out where it's worth to go and where it's not, and like any normal society I guess, they start to cluster in various spaces to team up, trade etc. Randomly meeting people in that game was pretty rare, except in the beginning when leveling on monsters in the wilderness was the method of choice for reasons I'm not going to go into now :p. Some cities/towns end up deserted, others full of people.

Maybe some of that was caused by Anarchys traveling system, where you could teleport all over the place and seldom had to travel physically from one place to another.

Perhaps it will be up to the player base to make what they want of the game.
 
Chris Taylor himself said:

Chris Taylor said:
I've seen some discussion here and there about how many players is anti-Fallout (or, more generically, anti-post-apocalyptic). I'd disagree, of course, otherwise I wouldn't be involved in V13. There are plenty of precedents for grouping and social organizations. Even the Road Warrior had allies during his cinematic adventures. In Fallout, NPCs were always available to join your group and there were plenty of social organizations that had a number of members.

My vision includes the lone wanderer, erm, wandering through the wastes and a team of individuals working together for a common goal (like getting a truckload of fuel past some raiders). In any MMO, there will be times and places that have more people than others (social centers vs. instances, for example). It won't be all of one at all times.
Click to expand...
 
You have a choice:
Either write the game so that munchins will pay to play it, or not generate enough revenue to run the game.

A "better, more fallout-y" game could be made... but would it have enough players?

EDIT: another thought. You could cut down the impact of OOC speak if you didn't show the words "on screen" - only in a chat window. Or give XP or whatever for people staying in character (req' heavy handed GM)
 
Perhaps a server split to allow a more in charachter world for those that wish it
 
Well the purpose of having Roleplaying,PVP,and normal servers is to give the option to stay in character or not.

Role playing servers would be IN character so as to avoid "LFG V13 need 1 more TANK" bullshit. Sorry if my wording does not make sense. I'm on meds right now. Cheers.
 
Well, Fallout 2 had a post-apocalyptic feel with still putting emphasis on society development. I don't need an almost barren world - it;s about how society deals with the aftermath of near-extinction. I am looking forward on how this will be dealt with. Too early to tell, really.
 
I wouldn't like playing a game where some asshole will just randomly attack me because he want's my loot or pvp XP or something dumb like that.

The risk of beeing attacked because of ones possessions are something that's probably very fitting, but I feel that; because all the players know that "they are in a game" and "it's not real", it makes them to carefree assholes who do stuff before they think and do not really fear the possibility of a consequence.

If V13 doesn't get a really good consequence system integrated I'm not even going to consider playing it.

But for all I know you can't attack other players unless in special areas...

Edit: Oh, and btw. The layout of the game will probably be along the lines of WoW, seeing as most try to imitate WoW in order to gain success.
 
A freeform MMO of fallout would be tres-awesum.

As long as game mechanic-driven consequences and FFA pvp are implemented, i will definately play this.

Why?
This is why;
Player 1 has just found his first firearm, and is testing it out on some poor brahimn
Player 2, being much higher level, sees player 1, and has a weapon to test of his own; his newly aquired Gauss rifle!
Player 2 proceeds to "pwn" player 1, but since player1 is a much lower level, and therefor considered a "civilian" or a "murder victim" the 2nd player is chastised(through game mechanics), and gets the flag of "murderer, and can now no longer trade with NPC's of the "good" factions, and the evil factions are crazy shoot on sight feckers anyway.
 
I was wondering if it would be interesting to put in a roleplaying element into character creation. Champions and GURPS (pnp games) would do this with "Disadvantages" - i.e., things about you that GIVE you character points but hurt you.

Classic example: Blindness, worth lots of points. Or "Dependent NPC" (i.e, your aunt may always gets kidnapped).

An example that might work would be something like:
"Code of Honor" - you will not shoot first, betray an employer, or break a deal. This could give a character lots of points, but you would lose bunches of experience if you "broke the rules" (maybe 10x the bonus).

I think systems like this could work as long as the punishment was harsh enough, and you don't let PCs get so powerful that they can rule the world with impunity (you get near godlike powers in FO2 at about 20th level, although you can still die to a critical attack).

Being an outlaw, while fun (in a game) should actually suck.
 
F1 and F2 both put a good amount of focus on the advances made since the war. I would like to see some aspect of that implemented.

SW Galaxies allowed players the ability to form their own townships, it would be great to see somethin like that implemented in FOOL.

The Pc's background could determine what kind of starting area they would begin from. Vault dwellers start in a vault, tribals in a village, etc. The background would help determine starting stats (vault dwellers have higher intelligence and science/med skills, tribals better outdoorsman/sneak skills and higher strength. etc)

Upon reaching a certain level the player could choose to make their own home or make another wherever they wanted. Once enough players reside in an area they could have the option of forming a township. The towns would offer special perks to resident, perhaps a homefield advantage perk in combat, or better outdoorsman skills in the immediate area around the town. The town will also offer perks to each job. Scouts can patrol for resources, diplomats can create alliances with other player city states, guards are needed for any merchant or diplomat etc.

Towns could maybe invest in infrastructure for a better power grid (laser turrets would come next of course), or water purification plants or perhaps farm supplies.

If all towns were run by players, being "bad" really could be made difficult. If theres a warrant for you in a town, or even a region that is allied, you could be targeted by anybody, making your life rather complicated.

Im wodnering if there would be a need to police people from getting too powerful. Eventually enough players would be able to form together to stop any group that has taken power. And if all else fails, perhaps a computer controlled BoS could step in and level the playing field? Or maybe even have some obscure pre war device send out a robot army against a town that is too powerful to help even things out?

I would really like to see the speech and charisma used. Perhaps alliances between towns or groups or factions whatever, could only be brought up by players with a high enough speech and charisma. Positions in the town will need a person to have higher charisma and speech to get assigned the position, like Mayor. But this also allows for a so charismatic warlord to gather raiders to take on the local power,

But I might be over thinking this
 
Your fears are not irrational. BUT!

Fallout Online would need only a few game play mechanics to keep the series apocalyptic.

A persistent story line featuring join-able factions, hostile factions and neutral/friendly factions.

The enclave, brotherhood, supermutant scourge and freedom loving americans would make up the waste land.

Between the raiders, and other monsters out there large parts of the fallout world would remain large inhospitable and uninhabited. With the on going conflict between the enclave, brotherhood and supermutants the storyline could be persistent and progress at the developers choosing.

Territories and towns could become annexed and liberated with the help of their faction, or could become neutral liberated by casual non-factionist gamers who band together to defend the wasteland.

Through patches and good story progression new settlements could pop up, old settlements of significant importance could be utterly obliterated by the developers as part of the story. Imagine being in Big Town trading haven when the developers decide they want it to disappear because too many wastelanders are gathering there, getting too comfortable with their "community". All of a sudden super mutants pour into the streets opening fire on everyone and everything. Those in the city at the time, either flee or try to stay and fight an obviously losing battle. but they stay, get some kills, grab some loot and get a little XP for their troubles before getting shot up by the mutants or whatever.

And blam, all of a sudden people who would try and go to that spot for the "community" would be met with an infested super mutant stronghold. This place could now become considered "contestable" territory, allowing the enclave, brotherhood or neutral party factions to attack the territory and secure it for their own faction.

Once secured NPC vendors and quest givers from the related faction will take their places and the territory becomes uncontestable for the period of one to two weeks.

Anyways thatsmy wish list basically. But to answer your immediate question.

No. It is not impossible to keep the wasteland feeling in an online Fallout game, just the opposite, you make things seem EVEN MORE DEPRESSINGLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR WASTELANDERS.
 
On the subject of the OP, I think it to be of note that the original Fallouts themselves only managed to maintain their feel of emptiness through the cunning use of illusion. It's pretty widely known that the number of skags and shopkeepers in any given town was only a minor fraction of the overall population-- in reality, a city like The Hub, or even a settlement like Junktown, would be far larger and more populous. It just doesn't do to spend 45 minutes running through squalid sprawls full of random nosepick NPCs to sell your load of Radscorp tails down at the local Five and Dime.

I'm more than a little uneasy concerning FOOL, so maybe I'm just playing Devil's Advocate here, but it seems to me that a more populous wasteland could actually be MORE realistic in a lot of ways.

(Just so long as things are a little better spaced-out than they are around D.C. :roll: )

(And of course, the above IS entirely disregarding the fact that no one is going to want to play Smitty or Iguana Bob-- it's going to take a real stretch of the imagination to justify a wasteland peopled entirely by raiders, lone wolf heroes, and scavs.)
 
I don't think towns with some measly hundreds or thousands are unrealistic in Fallout, as long as they are far away from each other. I think you need a certain population to be able to keep raiders and other malcontents away. Most of DC's towns are ridiculously devoid of people, Arefu and Canterbury Commons would't be able to live in the DC hellhole full of bloodthisty Super Mutants wrecking things around and capturing, eating and killing people. Hell, Canterbury ins't even walled, for god sake! If the AntAgonizer was smarter, she could slaughter the whole town at night. Five raiders would easily kill anyone except for The Mechanist. Those ultra-desert towns would only work if everyone was armed to the teeth with heavy weaponry, or the desert town was isolated somewhat. The scavengers of Denvers in Van Buren were a example: They were few, but somewhat armed. And no raider attacked them because they would have to either go though the claims or though the dogs that infested the city.

And if they do FOOL, I would like to see a MMORPG that reacts to what you do. This would be well-acomplished with multiple factions that the players can join and do quests for. One faction may step on another's toes, resulting in some threats or even conflicts. There should be more worth fighting between players than mere loot. Bases and shipments (FOnline) are a good idea. And if there's ressurection, try to make it part of the history.
 
On the subject of the OP, I think it to be of note that the original Fallouts themselves only managed to maintain their feel of emptiness through the cunning use of illusion.
Click to expand...

Actually, I thought they did a meh job, although there are obvious reasons why they made the cities small. Or maybe I'm just bitter that "San Francisco" was so nothing like actual San Francisco (although they use a real map for the world map spash screen).

People might play Iguana Bob or Smitty part time... especially if they made money doing it. I think the big "bore" of playing characters like this in an OLG is that they are stationary. Maybe a character like Smitty would would if you could study/build/practice stuff in your shop while you were waiting for customers.

I don't see why you couldn't have a "class" of player who were like pseudo-GMs, running around playing a bunch of typical-NPC types. You would just have to restict them from giving each other "bargains" some how.
 
zenbitz said:
I don't see why you couldn't have a "class" of player who were like pseudo-GMs, running around playing a bunch of typical-NPC types. You would just have to restict them from giving each other "bargains" some how.
Click to expand...

I would sign up for that "job" in a heartbeat, adding more flavour to the game on for instance roleplaying or core servers;
The only reason Private servers are superior to alot of "official servers' on some of the older MMO's is because the GM's are very actively engaged with the community, hosting events and such(which is, with GM powers, an awesome thing to do)

The trouble is that Most modern MMO's dont have time for non-global events, because it would not be giving an equal treatment to everyone; it sucks if you can't attend events because your timeschedule is different.

I think playing on a roleplaying server should solve most of the immerziun breaking issues though.

TL;DR: Active GM's/events FTW
 
bah, where will the feel of desolate PA world where thousands of other players roaming the area ?

It'd lose that "feel"
 
There is a really easy way to keep those Wowtards away:

High XP-limits to gain new levels.
Not a lot of hostile creatures/people everywhere.
No XP from killing.
:clap:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top