Fallout3 or Fallout:D&D?

Briosafreak

Lived Through the Heat Death
J.E Sawyer clarified what he sees as the way to go when dealing with NPCs that tag along with our character on Fallout3:
<blockquote>The way it is likely to be:

1) By default, CNPCs (companion NPCs) are controlled by the computer.

2) CNPCs have an options screen similar to the one in FO2 that allows the player to define broad behavior patterns for the CNPC.

3) Outside of combat, the player always has access to the inventory of a CNPC. Their inventory screen looks like the main character's inventory screen.

4) The CNPCs have scripts that, among other things, define idiosyncratic behavior for those characters. E.g.: Sulik hates slavers, so when he sees characters marked as slavers, he gets LUDACRIS and ACTS A FOOL, possibly attacking them and definitely devoting all attention to them in combat. Battery gets angry at robots and machines, and being around them makes him generally belligerent, likely to beat people with a huge wrench rather than evaluate the situation sensibly.

5) When CNPCs are in the party, they get their own selection buttons on the interface as in FO:T. Selecting them allows the player to have basic movement, inventory, and skill use control over them. ONE AT A TIME. CNPCS not under current control out of combat follow the leader as usual.

6) Also, one button appears next to the CNPC tabs that is a toggle: AUTOMATIC/MANUAL. It can be clicked at any time, though its effects only come into play when it's a CNPC's turn to act. If the toggle is set to MANUAL, the CNPC's script and the current situations are then compared to a PC's speech skill in a check. If the CNPC is generally easygoing and is not flipping out due to wounds/intense hatred for current enemies/being high on psycho, the level of the speech skill required to exercise control is relatively low. Otherwise, the requirements get pretty high. At any time, the player can attempt to control his or her CNPCs manually as individuals, but they aren't required to, and they simply may not be able to due to their own shortcomings as a leader or the inherently independent/crazy nature of their allies.
</blockquote>

So that leaves us with what?
<blockquote> I'm not suggesting BG2, PS:T, or (heavens to Betsy) Jefferson levels of CNPC interactions. CNPCs are, generally speaking, along for the ride in Fallout. They are your pals, you are the Man/Woman.</blockquote>

If you have any ideas on this just post them here on NMA or go to the Black Isle Studios feedback forum.
 
He's going mad with options. Options for TB and RT, options for controllable NPCs and non-controllable NPCs.

What's that saying about trying to please everybody?

JE Sawyer said:
5) When CNPCs are in the party, they get their own selection buttons on the interface as in FO:T. Selecting them allows the player to have basic movement, inventory, and skill use control over them. ONE AT A TIME. CNPCS not under current control out of combat follow the leader as usual.
So outside of combat, I can move my NPCs around and use their skills. Or in other words, Fallout is a team based game and I can use my character for combat fodder as I use the thief NPC to steal stuff, the lockpick NPC to open doors, the speech NPC to talk to people (or is that going too far...? In which case, my own character becomes Mr. Speech).

There'll be an NPC for every eventuality and as a result, instead of someone saying "Hey, I went here with my character and got this quest because I had XYZ skill" and everyone else wanting to replay the game so they can get that same experience too... Instead, every Tom, Dick and Harry will be able to complete every aspect of the game and get every quest. The replay value is diminishing.

Now, when I'm controlling my NPC, who's controlling my character? If I start controlling an NPC, is the AI likely to get my character killed in which case, is it game-over (just like FOT)?
 
Eh, doesn't sound so bad to me. For a few levels, Vic's better repair skill was useful, and I always wanted a thief NPC.

As for having more specialized NPCs ruining replay value; I don't think so. Not assuming they make enough useful NPCs, and the NPCs have limited fields (like thief, repair/science guy, doctor, etc). Then, at the very least, it'll be worth replaying to see the interections among different NPCs and such. Alternately there could be a handful of things that will always be beyond the capabilities of the specialist NPCs. In FO2, there was a doctor you could pick up, and he was useful as a doctor, but he couldn't get you Skynet.

In further regard to replay value, I actually liked FO2 better for that, there were less good guys and bad guys, you had plenty of somewhat gray folks like Vault City and NCR. Conflicts between people, not clear good and evil groups. Even the Enclave, I could see their motivations and understand them. Whereas the Master was just a jerk who needed shooting. So there was more replay value, after all, I might actually side with Vault City and help them with those idiot freak ghouls who are irresponsibly running a nuke plant. On another trip through the game, I might level Vault City for their racism. *shrugs* Fallout will always have replay value as long as they give you multiple paths to take in interacting with the various groups out in the wasteland.

Specialist NPCs won't ruin replay value, if anything they'll make replaying the game better. In Fallout 2 you built your party purely for combat. In Fallout I didn't bulid a party at all, Ian trapped me too many times and then wouldn't move. As for Fallout not being a "team-based game" sure, but even The Chosen One has to have friends. The Seven Samurai makes a better game than Yojimbo.
 
SEC. 6. And be it further enacted, That all the duties which, by virtue of the act, intitled “An act for laying a duty on goods, wares and merchandises imported into the United States, ” accrued between the time specified in the said act for the commencement of the said duties, and the respective times when the collectors entered upon the duties of their respective offices in the several districts, be, and they are hereby remitted and discharged, and that in any case in which they may have been paid to the United States, restitution thereof shall be made.
SEC. 7. And be it further enacted, That the several duties imposed by this act shall continue to be collected and paid, until the debts and purposes for which they are pledged and appropriated, shall be fully discharged: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be construed to prevent the legislation of the United States from substituting other duties or taxes of equal value to any or all of the said duties and imposts.
 
Last edited:
Chairface said:
As for having more specialized NPCs ruining replay value; I don't think so. Not assuming they make enough useful NPCs, and the NPCs have limited fields (like thief, repair/science guy, doctor, etc). Then, at the very least, it'll be worth replaying to see the interections among different NPCs and such.

The reason it lessens the replay value is because you'll be able to do any quest any way you want the first time through if you have a balanced party.

Personally, I hate the idea of controlling NPCs at any point in the game. Sounds to me like he's going ahead and making BG3 with the Fallout license than actually making Fallout 3, since he sounds hell bent and determined to wipe out the LONE WANDERER aspect.
 
Sounds to me like he's going ahead and making BG3 with the Fallout license than actually making Fallout 3, since he sounds hell bent and determined to wipe out the LONE WANDERER aspect.

Am I the only one who wouldn't really be crying so hard if this was the worst thing wrong with Fallout 3? It'd certainly be better than the painful puns, cameos and easter eggs in Fallout 2. It'd certainly be better than the non-existant NPC interface in Fallout 1.

I honestly think some of you wear rose-colored glasses when looking back at the Fallout games. Were they really good games? Sure. Did they have hideous, glaring flaws? Definitely. If they do turn it into a party game, that wouldn't be so bad. But I don't hear interplay saying they're going to turn it into
 
J.E Sawyer said:
Battery gets angry

Who the bloody hell is Battery?

Am I the only one who wouldn't really be crying so hard if this was the worst thing wrong with Fallout 3? It'd certainly be better than the painful puns, cameos and easter eggs in Fallout 2. It'd certainly be better than the non-existant NPC interface in Fallout 1.

As a rule, it's always a good idea to press higher expectations on the makers of a product. The higher the expectations, the better the product, even though it never reaches the expectations.

On a side-note; in some ways, I would almost rather have a well-worked out RT and controlled-NPCs Fallout (hey, BOS!), than one that is RT/TB/controlled/uncontrolled and really sucks at all four of those systems. As DarkUnderlord justly mentioned, it's really a bad idea to try and include to many systems.[/i]
 
Chairface said:
I honestly think some of you wear rose-colored glasses when looking back at the Fallout games. Were they really good games? Sure. Did they have hideous, glaring flaws? Definitely.

While there were flaws, I don't think the fixes for those flaws would be make the game more like the Infinity Engine games which were flawed beyond belief.

I'd be happier with no NPC party members than controllable ones, since Fallout and Fallout 2 are games where the protag is supposed to complete on his own. You either have to leave your party members behind to complete the games or watch them die. That's the whole point. Both the Vault Dweller and the Chosen One both have a place in the plot where they must walk alone.
 
Chairface said:
I honestly think some of you wear rose-colored glasses when looking back at the Fallout games. Were they really good games? Sure. Did they have hideous, glaring flaws? Definitely.
If I'm wearing rose-coloured glasses, J.E. and some of the folks at Interplay must be wearing pitch black glasses of doom and gloom. The way they're suggesting changes to the system indicates that to them, the system is hideously flawed beyond belief. Small Guns is apparently a skill that is worthless (how many really played Fallout through without tagging it 99% of the time?), Energy Weapons are super powerful (I always thought the only Energy Weapon worth getting was the Plasma Rifle, the rest could be easily outdone with a decent Small Guns skill) and the game is so confusing, that first timers get frustrated, confused and give up.

Chairface said:
If they do turn it into a party game, that wouldn't be so bad. But I don't hear interplay saying they're going to turn it into one.
To me, Fallout has always been the "odd one out". There are plenty of party-based games out there. There are plenty of real-time games out there. There are plenty of pure-action or action/rpg hybrid games out there. Fallout isn't one of those, it appeals to a different audience.
 
Back
Top