Funny and Stark Example of Beth's Laziness...

[Tage]

Just because something doesn't make sense, doesn't mean the creators got lazy.

Did the art team get lazy? No. Fallout 3 is probably one of the most beautifully designed games ever, visually speaking. It stays true to the concept throughout the game. I would say there are some things which don't work (i.e. the raider's love of gore), but overall it's the graphics and art are a solid A.


Did the people responsible for game mechanics get lazy? That's debatable. I'm not sure if I think it was poorly done or if it just doesn't jive with my play-style. At the very least it was designed with consoles rather than PCs in mind, which is fine for a console game but not for a PC game. I played through on Very Hard and it was a cake-walk.

Did the team responsible for making this game compelling and interesting beyond a visual level get lazy? Hell yes they did.
- Shallow story;
- Shallow NPCs;
- Shallow quests;
- Shallow fluff.

Did the people responsible for quality control get lazy? They sure did. The PC version has more bugs than a rust-belt motel.

So yes, the creators got lazy. When an enterprise fails the people in charge should be the ones held accountable. The Star Wars prequels didn't suck because Hayden Christensen was a bad actor, they sucked because George Lucas was a bad writer/director. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac didn't fail because they had bad employees, they failed because they had bad executives.

I give Bethesda credit for the work that obviously went in to this game but it doesn't exempt them from the fact that they put out a mediocre product.

 

[Erny]

Star Wars follows the basic Hero of a Thousand Faces concept that has been used by many stories and was identified by author Joseph Cambell. I know it has been copied many times over but by no means did Star Wars or LOTR invent the sequence of events that computer games or console games follow. It seems to me that the concept that Star Wars in particular follows has been ingrained into our psyches .

The particular concepts like the Call to Adventure, Grizzled Mentor, and The Hero Enduring the Ordeal are all mentioned in the book. It has been repeated over and over,but is added to and taken away with each repetition.
You are right though. Games should stimulate the player. I never disputed that.

Good post TorontRayne. Furthermore Fo1/2 story falls pretty much under the same kind of 'epic adventure' even using a similar - dare I say - template. And they are among the best games story-wise.
And it creates a perfect frame for this kind of game: free exploration of an open world full of possibilities. And then you have many small sidestories that can be even unrelated to the main quest, but they create the world and make fallout what it is.

But Foo3? it doesnt come even close - the main quest is quite weak.
And the side quests ... a mixed bag to me with many failures. Istead thought-provoking grey-area moral descisions they come out as limited-variants idiocy. Enjoy karma bonuses for helping murderous assholes and letting people die...

I really dont know what to think of Todd Howard and Emil Pagliarulo. Todd being the father of Elder Scroll series and Emil having worked on Thief games ... but In those dev-feature videos Emil sounds like a douche.
And the resulting action-focused game with weak writing, shallow RPG side and limited ways to play speaks for itself.


As far as books/movies/games - dont forget that video game is a very different medium, where narrative takes a back seat to the player interraction with the game world and challenge at the basic gameplay.
And thats what our dear Emil doesnt seem to understand. Thats why we have unkillable NPC - only because they are to play some role in the later part of the story. Which to me is unacceptable for a Fallout game. Seriously, fuck your NPC-driven story, I want to play it my way. If you cant come up with a way to progress a story if an NPC dies - your design sucks.
And there is another unwritten rule of gamedesign: bloody consistency. If you make 10 charachters killable, but suddenly some are immortal - your design sucks. (sorry, venting a bit)



Lishe wrote

I'm just stoked I got to play anoher Fallout game. I don't care about it's stupid flaws, because I'm too busy blowing shit up.

*facepalm*

 

[TorontoReign]

Star Wars follows the basic Hero of a Thousand Faces concept that has been used by many stories and was identified by author Joseph Cambell. I know it has been copied many times over but by no means did Star Wars or LOTR invent the sequence of events that computer games or console games follow. It seems to me that the concept that Star Wars in particular follows has been ingrained into our psyches .

The particular concepts like the Call to Adventure, Grizzled Mentor, and The Hero Enduring the Ordeal are all mentioned in the book. It has been repeated over and over,but is added to and taken away with each repetition.
You are right though. Games should stimulate the player. I never disputed that.

Good post TorontRayne. Furthermore Fo1/2 story falls pretty much under the same kind of 'epic adventure' even using a similar - dare I say - template. And they are among the best games story-wise.
And it creates a perfect frame for this kind of game: free exploration of an open world full of possibilities. And then you have many small sidestories that can be even unrelated to the main quest, but they create the world and make fallout what it is.

But Foo3? it doesnt come even close - the main quest is quite weak.
And the side quests ... a mixed bag to me with many failures. Istead thought-provoking grey-area moral descisions they come out as limited-variants idiocy. Enjoy karma bonuses for helping murderous assholes and letting people die...

I really dont know what to think of Todd Howard and Emil Pagliarulo. Todd being the father of Elder Scroll series and Emil having worked on Thief games ... but In those dev-feature videos Emil sounds like a douche.
And the resulting action-focused game with weak writing, shallow RPG side and limited ways to play speaks for itself.


As far as books/movies/games - dont forget that video game is a very different medium, where narrative takes a back seat to the player interraction with the game world and challenge at the basic gameplay.
And thats what our dear Emil doesnt seem to understand. Thats why we have unkillable NPC - only because they are to play some role in the later part of the story. Which to me is unacceptable for a Fallout game. Seriously, fuck your NPC-driven story, I want to play it my way. If you cant come up with a way to progress a story if an NPC dies - your design sucks.
And there is another unwritten rule of gamedesign: bloody consistency. If you make 10 charachters killable, but suddenly some are immortal - your design sucks. (sorry, venting a bit)



Lishe wrote

I'm just stoked I got to play anoher Fallout game. I don't care about it's stupid flaws, because I'm too busy blowing shit up.

*facepalm*

Thanks.
Well I didn't think I was the only one that thought they were excellent movies. At least the first three were pretty awesome. I liked how in Morrowind if you killed a main NPC a message would pop up saying you severed the threads of prophecy or something like that. It is a better way of handling it than making the NPC unkillable.

 

[TheLastOutlaw]

I thought it had been earlier established that Todd was far from the "father of Elder Scrolls" If I recall he was more along the lines of the "coffee bitch".

And back to the subject once again of unkillable NPCs I'm reminded of the last great TES game, Morrowind. You could kill whoever you wanted, and the game would give you a courtesy warning if you had just "broken the game" but it also gave you the option to go on and keep playing if you really didn't care.

And it WAS POSSIBLE to still complete the main quest even if you had "broken the game." It was very difficult and chances were slim if you weren't metagaming but it could be done.

Why couldn't FO3 do that? I hadn't really started playing the main quest until the last day or two because I was honestly enjoying the exploring and sidequests but I seem to have run out of stuff to do. (Screw the Nuka Cola challenge, I need Quantam for my grenades bitch).

The railroad tracks I suddenly find myself on are frustrating. I have to agree that unkillable NPCs are a symptom of bad design. There has to be some sort of flag they could give an important NPC so they don't die from the enviroment or get aggroed by other NPCs but the PC should always be given the option to deal them however they want. That's immersion and further it's good game design. Killing NPC "x" might make the game much more difficult, maybe even nigh impossible. But it should never fully break the game.

Just my two cents.

 

[DeadEye001]

That doesn't make sense to me. Let's assume you hate your father on sight and want to kill him. Now, technically, as soon as he hands you the BB gun, you could shoot him until he dies. But then you've got no plot. I mean, that would be the end of the game, right there. How is it an enhancement to the game if some trigger-happy player is allowed to pop their father from the word go, and as a result doesn't even have an impetus to leave the Vault in the first place?

At some point, utter, utter freedom has to take a backseat to providing a means by which to tell a story.

 

[Tage]

At some point, utter, utter freedom has to take a backseat to providing a means by which to tell a story.

Simple solution: You kill your dad as a child in the vault, it cuts to a cutscene explaining you spent the rest of your life in a holding cell and the game ends. Not only is it doable, it makes sense, and it would be hilarious.

That's immersion and further it's good game design. Killing NPC "x" might make the game much more difficult, maybe even nigh impossible. But it should never fully break the game.

Good point, but let's not forget that - short of killing your father or Dr. Li - it's impossible to derail the main quest. And if you spend enough time wandering around you'll find your father without doing any questing. Hell, you could find him five minutes after exiting the vault if you know where you're going.

On my first play-through I completely skipped the GNR quests and didn't realize I missed anything until after I started browsing the forums. That's how integral unkillable NPCs like Three Dog are.

 

[Dry]

I think the "Paralyzing Palm"-perk is another example If you hit an enemy with it, it goes completly stiff and falls over like a broken toy. Hard to explain, but it looks completly unnatural, even funny (like a deathclaw or those giant orc..i mean super mutants rolling on their back with their arms still extended).

Try it

 

[Lishe]

*facepalm*

Omg, you cannot tell me you don't enjoy blowing things up in FO .

Expecting FO3 to be exactly how you want it to be is kind of silly. I pretty much learned the hard way when Capcom released RE4 which to alot of diehard fans, was like murdering their baby. It's a great game, but it's not a great RE game. They pretty much slapped the RE title on a game, added some familiar names from the series in, but it wasn't at all like the series. But, theres not alot you can do about it. You can hate it all you want, talk shit about it, bitch, moan and cry about it. Doesn't change a thing. The old FO series has been done with for a long time, and it wont be comming back the way you want it to. Specially with a new company taking over. It's not the same people, so of course it's not going to be the same FO you got hooked on.

I guess I became more open minded when my series got screwed over. But that's life. Full of little disappointments. You get over it.

 

[ferrety]

*facepalm*

Omg, you cannot tell me you don't enjoy blowing things up in FO .

I don't enjoy blowing things up in FO3.

1. Too often, this results in an enemy failing physics class and getting stuck on the ceiling, stuck in 'hyper spasm' mode, or otherwise flopping around
2. I don't destroy cars because I hate that they have mini-nuclear explosions.

Honestly, i've only played with small guns. I haven't built a single weapon from schematics (not even to test drive it) because I find the concept stupid.

But hey, I'm playing a game where I cleanly decapitate about 90% of my enemies via headshots with a shotgun.

 

[Ausir]

I can't remember what you say to her. If it's specific to being her, then yes, it's weird.

I mean the option to ask Harkness about Doctor Li when you first come to Rivet City, even if you have never heard about her.

 

[Lishe]

*facepalm*

Omg, you cannot tell me you don't enjoy blowing things up in FO .

I don't enjoy blowing things up in FO3.

1. Too often, this results in an enemy failing physics class and getting stuck on the ceiling, stuck in 'hyper spasm' mode, or otherwise flopping around
2. I don't destroy cars because I hate that they have mini-nuclear explosions.

Honestly, i've only played with small guns. I haven't built a single weapon from schematics (not even to test drive it) because I find the concept stupid.

But hey, I'm playing a game where I cleanly decapitate about 90% of my enemies via headshots with a shotgun.

I love making cars explode. Once I experienced my first death by exploding vehicle, I was determined to get my revenge...

I've experienced the physic's-spasms. I've played Oblivion and anyone who has knows all about it. It's not even close to being as bad in FO3. I've only experienced it once so far (I have the 360 version)... but it's not a huge deal to me because I save often enough it's kind of ridiculous lol. But I'm also thankful I do.

Well if you have the PC version Im sure there will be a mod that will be created to enchance the game for players that want more of a challenge and less of the annoyance. Thats one of the perks to having the PC version, is all the nifty fan created Custom Content.

 

[Ausir]

On my first play-through I completely skipped the GNR quests and didn't realize I missed anything until after I started browsing the forums. That's how integral unkillable NPCs like Three Dog are.

Three Dog is killable.

 

[DeadEye001]

At some point, utter, utter freedom has to take a backseat to providing a means by which to tell a story.

Simple solution: You kill your dad as a child in the vault, it cuts to a cutscene explaining you spent the rest of your life in a holding cell and the game ends. Not only is it doable, it makes sense, and it would be hilarious.

I don't know... seems kind of railroaded to me. And boring.

 

[Erny]

At some point, utter, utter freedom has to take a backseat to providing a means by which to tell a story.

Simple solution: You kill your dad as a child in the vault, it cuts to a cutscene explaining you spent the rest of your life in a holding cell and the game ends. Not only is it doable, it makes sense, and it would be hilarious.
...
Good point, but let's not forget that - short of killing your father or Dr. Li - it's impossible to derail the main quest.
...

Exactly! Do something bad - and face the consequences. Just like in Fo2 you`d be told you failed your people and its gameover if you started to kill the villagers in Arroyo.



Lishe you are on the forum where people want a complex RPG with depth and freedom to play anyway they want, not just another FPS. If you only care about blowing things up - there are many other games for you.

 

[Roflcore]

At some point, utter, utter freedom has to take a backseat to providing a means by which to tell a story.

Simple solution: You kill your dad as a child in the vault, it cuts to a cutscene explaining you spent the rest of your life in a holding cell and the game ends. Not only is it doable, it makes sense, and it would be hilarious.

I don't know... seems kind of railroaded to me. And boring.

At least it has the one thing f3 lacks: immersion.

 

[TheLastOutlaw]

That's immersion and further it's good game design. Killing NPC "x" might make the game much more difficult, maybe even nigh impossible. But it should never fully break the game.

Good point, but let's not forget that - short of killing your father or Dr. Li - it's impossible to derail the main quest. And if you spend enough time wandering around you'll find your father without doing any questing. Hell, you could find him five minutes after exiting the vault if you know where you're going.

On my first play-through I completely skipped the GNR quests and didn't realize I missed anything until after I started browsing the forums. That's how integral unkillable NPCs like Three Dog are.

First off, what if I wanted to kill my father for abandoning me?

And secondly,

I wasn't reffering so much to that you couldn't skip parts of the main quest, I've been doing it all sorts of out of order. I'm just reffering to the fact that certain aspects of it CAN'T be done differently no matter what.

In FO1 I once wiped out the entire BoS because I wanted more plasma grenades and one of Interplay's developers had pointed out on the old forum that most of the plasma grenades in the game were in the BoS armory.

In FO3 I don't seem to have the option of exterminating the Brotherhood and finding another way to complete the game.

If I'm wrong and you can actually exterminate the entire BoS then please let me know.

Game play isn't truly open ended unless the world is built to allow paths around player actions like killing main characters. Not saying that every game needs to be a psychopathic killer simulator but keeping the players on such obvious rails is an abrupt break in the immersion. It's a cheap designer trick similar to the way a film maker will use a phone number starting with 555. It's an easy out and it's jarring to the audience.

Since I've already used Morrowind for an example let me use another. In Wizardry gold (which I think was the CD version of Wizardy 7 if I recall correctly.) I once killed the Umpani shopkeeper. I got caught thieving, he attacked my party and we killed him. I played the rest of the game not having access to one of the best shopkeepers because he was killable. It made the game harder but not impossible.

If I'm playing a wasteland wanderer with no moral compunction I should be able to slaughter the BoS if my initial contact with them goes poorly. In the real world it could easily go that way.

FO3 does some things very well but making you feel as though you are actually "ROLE PLAYING" in a realistic environment isn't one of them. It's fun, I like the exploration, but they keep slapping me in the face with things I CAN'T do and frankly it boils down to poor design decisions.

I haven't finished the main quest yet but the feeling I keep having is that Bethesda had a story they wanted to tell and they railroad the player into playing it how Bethesda wants it played.

 

[DeadEye001]

At least it has the one thing f3 lacks: immersion.

It's immersion? You're not playing the game anymore. Because it's over. How immersed would you feel?

 

[Erny]

At least it has the one thing f3 lacks: immersion.

It's immersion? You're not playing the game anymore. Because it's over. How immersed would you feel?

serves you right for acting like a little maniac jerk!

or just have your daddy kick your ass and take away your bb-gun
- that would be even funnier. afterall you are just a little kid at that point on the game

 

[TheRatKing]

When you shoot your dad, he grabs the gun out of your hand and scolds you. "You could have shot my eye out dear!".

An even simpler way of dealing with it is to have the father leave the room or something to watch you behind protected glass.

 

[Per]

When you shoot your dad, he stares at you coldly and says, "I'll pay you back for that. Some day."

And then when you meet him later in the game he stabs you in the eye with a fork.