Fallout Tacticts! WOW!

[Prosper]

I decided to install the game again. It been quite a few years. So I start it up and the first thing I notice is the graphics are amazing!

very very nice! Ingame too!


Apparently a good computer really helps! After the fos1.07 patch is done, I am going to get to it

 

[fallout ranger]

My CD drive took a dump, so all I can do is run the editor. Anyone know what files are needed to play without the CD?

 

[Prosper]

My CD drive took a dump, so all I can do is run the editor. Anyone know what files are needed to play without the CD?

I think you need a full install to run without cd.

 

[Sorrow]

I decided to install the game again. It been quite a few years. So I start it up and the first thing I notice is the graphics are amazing!

I agree, even thought they are stylistically incorrect. I imagine ideal F3 graphics as 2d above level of FT.

 

[Tagaziel]

I decided to install the game again. It been quite a few years. So I start it up and the first thing I notice is the graphics are amazing!

I agree, even thought they are stylistically incorrect. I imagine ideal F3 graphics as 2d above level of FT.

2D is obsolete. That's the hard truth.

And before you go haywire, remember that all sprites in FO were first created as 3D models. Consult Sawyer's posts.

 

[fallout ranger]

3D is better, as long as it's done in the fashion of the original fallout games, which you can forget about.

 

[Sorrow]

I decided to install the game again. It been quite a few years. So I start it up and the first thing I notice is the graphics are amazing!

I agree, even thought they are stylistically incorrect. I imagine ideal F3 graphics as 2d above level of FT.

2D is obsolete. That's the hard truth.

And before you go haywire, remember that all sprites in FO were first created as 3D models. Consult Sawyer's posts.

Then 3d, but with terrain quality above 2d FT and without need to manipulate camera.

 

[FeelTheRads]

2D is obsolete. That's the hard truth.

Uhm... only 3D is still far from beating 2D in terms of quality.
2D is obsolete only in terms of marketability, and that's because of dumb-fucks masturbating to cubical tits since day one of 3D graphics.

And before you go haywire, remember that all sprites in FO were first created as 3D models. Consult Sawyer's posts.

And that makes 3D better than 2D, how? Most 2D games use pre-rendered 3D graphics.

 

[Tagaziel]

Interesting concept, but I think 3D is still better for reflecting the terrain deformities. Plus, works faster.

 

[Sander]

And that makes 3D better than 2D, how? Most 2D games use pre-rendered 3D graphics.

Yes, which means that you can get the exact same graphics in a 3D engine, making a 3D engine simply much more versatile and powerful when it comes to manipulating graphics.

The only advantage to 2D is painted landscape, similar to what the Infinity Engine used. Much of Planescape: Torment's look could not have been achieved without a 'free' landscape that the Infinity Engine allowed.

 

[shihonage]

I am using 2D sprite animations from Fallout Tactics in my hobby Fallout-alike project. Tactics' graphics rival Fallout 1/2 in quality and resolution, so they shouldn't forever remain wasted on a game with no depth.

 

[citixensinister]

Graphics is not the game defining playability. Graphics should be build arround the gameplay concept instead. Since Fallout is actually a computer simulated table top game, then the graphics should be build arround it.

To argue over whether 2D or 3D for Fallout is really barking up the wrong tree. whether the game is in 2D or 3D should be based on what the game needs.

Having 2D in Fallout worked just fine because of the lack of 'height' in the game; I do not aim up or down to shoot someone in the balcony, I do not have to zoom in or pan arround an object because of the multitude of descriptions, and game play of Fallout is usually based arround a flat terrain.

However, if 3D is to be implemented, it would work just fine and dandy. However, having no game play to actually take advantage of the '3D-ness' of the game tends to be overkill. It would be like 3D Pong in outer space, but you only can move the paddle horizontally.

Anyone played 3D pacman? I couldn't stand it, I only lasted 10 minutes on that abomination. I had more fun playing good old traditional 2D pacman (I played it 12 non-stop). Neither 2D or 3D is superior or blah blah blah, it is how you implement it that really matters.

 

[Sorrow]

However, if 3D is to be implemented, it would work just fine and dandy. However, having no game play to actually take advantage of the '3D-ness' of the game tends to be overkill. It would be like 3D Pong in outer space, but you only can move the paddle horizontally.

Also, '3D-ness' also has disadvantages, like forcing player to adjust the camera all the time, also, view from the camera tends to look worse when scrolling.
I played Combat Mission III and Silent Storm and I can say that I hate having to adjust the camera and I returned to playing Close Combat and X-Com.
I want to play the damned game, not be a camera operator.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Yes, which means that you can get the exact same graphics in a 3D engine

In theory, yes. In practice, not yet. I'd wager there's still quite some time till 3D engines will be able to handle thousands or hundreds of thousands polygons per object.

making a 3D engine simply much more versatile and powerful when it comes to manipulating graphics.

That is true, a 3D engine is more versatile. And of course, some games can only be 3D, but we were talking about graphics quality and suitability for Fallout. And I still think 2D is best suited for Fallout. There is absolutely no reason (from the player's standpoint) for Fallout to be 3D. Of course, it's easier for developers and modders to work with it.. blah, blah... look how much I care.

And despite Mikael Jackson's yet another post to show the world how much he despises Sorrow, 3D makes Fallout lose much of its style, with blocky buildings, blocky faces, blocky everything.

Also, before some other so-called journalist decides to write an entire article quoting a post and saying NMA does not accept 3D: I do accept 3D. I know 3D sells. I know that's all that matters. I know, master, and I accept it.

 

[monsharen]

The only advantage to 2D is painted landscape, similar to what the Infinity Engine used. Much of Planescape: Torment's look could not have been achieved without a 'free' landscape that the Infinity Engine allowed.

I would just like to say that this is not entirely true. There is nothing preventing painted landscapes in a 3d environment. You could create the very same engine in a 3d environment but still use the behavior of a 2d engine. Of course all the work for making it an actual 3d engine would be obsolete, but nothing prevents you from using the assets in a "3d" space.

as most you already have said, all the assets were rendered by a 3d engine onces. So basicly you could set up the game engine to be at the same camera settings as when you rendered, use the pre rendered assets and levels and still use some of the power a 3d engine has to offer (dynamic shadows, lights, particle effects, bumps, you name it).

this is actually not stranger than the first 3d games we saw, like wolfenstein, which had pre painted stuff instead of the computation expensive models (see, the same thinking can be used again!)

 

[Sander]

Also, '3D-ness' also has disadvantages, like forcing player to adjust the camera all the time,

Bullshit. It's easy enough to use an engine that does not require adjusting the camera, at all.
The ability to adjust the camera, but not the necessity to do so, is actually an advantage over 2D, since it allows you to view the field from multiple angles.

I would just like to say that this is not entirely true. There is nothing preventing painted landscapes in a 3d environment. You could create the very same engine in a 3d environment but still use the behavior of a 2d engine. Of course all the work for making it an actual 3d engine would be obsolete, but nothing prevents you from using the assets in a "3d" space.

It'd just be a flat polygon with a big-ass texture thrown over it. That's not 3D, that's simply 2D. It uses none of the elements of 3D graphics.

In theory, yes. In practice, not yet. I'd wager there's still quite some time till 3D engines will be able to handle thousands or hundreds of thousands polygons per object.

Fallout's graphics did not have hundreds of thousands of polygons per object. Those renderings should be easily rendered in real-time on modern videocards.

And despite Mikael Jackson's yet another post to show the world how much he despises Sorrow, 3D makes Fallout lose much of its style, with blocky buildings, blocky faces, blocky everything

The last time you played a 3D game was in 1990? Please go play Bioshock and then complain about 'blockiness' and 'loss of style'. Bioshock is the perfect example of a stylish game in 3D, a very Fallout-y style at times.

 

[requiem_for_a_starfury]

My CD drive took a dump, so all I can do is run the editor. Anyone know what files are needed to play without the CD?

I think you need a full install to run without cd.

FOT can't be run without a cd, not without something that can't be discussed anyway.

I imagine ideal F3 graphics as 2d above level of FT.

It's the resolution more than anything, plug an old 15" monitor in to your pc and Fallout still looks fabulous. If anyone's played Freedom Force vs The Third Reich, that would of been well suited for 3d FO3.

 

[Tagaziel]

That is true, a 3D engine is more versatile. And of course, some games can only be 3D, but we were talking about graphics quality and suitability for Fallout. And I still think 2D is best suited for Fallout. There is absolutely no reason (from the player's standpoint) for Fallout to be 3D. Of course, it's easier for developers and modders to work with it.. blah, blah... look how much I care.

If you don't give a damn, shut up and don't post.

And despite Mikael Jackson's yet another post to show the world how much he despises Sorrow, 3D makes Fallout lose much of its style, with blocky buildings, blocky faces, blocky everything.

Urgh, what? Silent Storm had fantastic graphics, adequate for Fallout to keep it's style. Same for other modern games.

FDR, like Sander said, when did you last play a 3D game? Was it, by any chance, called Quake?

 

[monsharen]

I would just like to say that this is not entirely true. There is nothing preventing painted landscapes in a 3d environment. You could create the very same engine in a 3d environment but still use the behavior of a 2d engine. Of course all the work for making it an actual 3d engine would be obsolete, but nothing prevents you from using the assets in a "3d" space.

It'd just be a flat polygon with a big-ass texture thrown over it. That's not 3D, that's simply 2D. It uses none of the elements of 3D graphics.

Well, as I said, in a 3d environment, kind of hinting you could still use the 2d prerendered things yet introduce 3d assets without any trouble. A 3d engine using 2d assets in a 3d universe.

 

[Sorrow]

Urgh, what? Silent Storm had fantastic graphics, adequate for Fallout to keep it's style.

I think that I played other Silent Storm than you.