Game Informer Fallout 3 article scans

Sander said:
Innuendo said:
It has a IX in a titles doesn't it? So it's a valid sequel. Not my problem they raped it...
Click to expand...
So your point is that any game made as an official sequel is automatically a *worthy* sequel?
What a bunch of horseshit.
Click to expand...
It supposed to be a crown achievement of the whole series, so it's valid. I don't know if it worthy, rather not, but personally I like it.
Sander said:
Innuendo said:
I'm talking about Jedi Knight and Jeci Academy
Click to expand...
Oh, you mean Jedi Academy, that *spin-off*.
Click to expand...
a sequel of a spin off is still a legal sequel...
Sander said:
Innuendo said:
How about that? Just like us regarding Fallout 3?
Click to expand...
The point was that it was a very disputed move.
Click to expand...
Of course it was. They changed the whole system that was used for years. But generally people liked it.
Sander said:
Innuendo said:
]since when you are an oracle of saying what is the core design and what is not? From 2d to 3d with a change of perspective, just like in our case...
Click to expand...
GTA was designed around the idea of running amok in cars, around a town. The perspective was not essential to that design, which it is in the case of Fallout which was designed around the emulation of pen and paper gameplay.
Click to expand...
hmm it's interesting that for you the core element in fallout is the "emulation of pen and paper gameplay". Always thought it was the apocalyptic world/climate of the 50s/dark humor/gameplay mechanisms etc.
Sander said:
Innuendo said:
And bethesda is doing what? Making Fallout a racing game? :shock:
Click to expand...
Making Fallout an action-RPG. Again: not what Fallout's core design is.
Click to expand...
I refuse to accept this. Fuck I hope it's a typo, but if it's not then were are truly screwed here by bethesda.

PS. Crap, I feel like i stired up the hive:/
 
Innuendo said:
It supposed to be a crown achievement of the whole series, so it's valid. I don't know if it worthy, rather not, but personally I like it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, 'supposed to be'. Unfortunately it is absolutely unworthy of the Ultima name.
Innuendo said:
a sequel of a spin off is still a legal sequel...
Click to expand...
Yes, to that spin-off. Which is the point. If Bethesda were to name this game Fallout: FPS we'd be a lot less pissed.
Have you even read anything anyone wrote in this thread?
Innuendo said:
hmm it's interesting that for you the core element in fallout is the "emulation of pen and paper gameplay". Always thought it was the apocalyptic world/climate of the 50s/dark humor/gameplay mechanisms etc.
Click to expand...
You really have not been reading anything, anyone has been saying have they?
For now the ten-millionth time: Fallout was design as a pen-and-paper emulation. This has nothing to do with 'for me', but what the original designers designed the game to be.
Innuendo said:
I refuse to accept this. Fuck I hope it's a typo, but if it's not then were are truly screwed here by bethesda.
Click to expand...
What the fuck did you think everyone was pissed about?
 
Sander said:
What the fuck did you think everyone was pissed about?
Click to expand...
fps/tpp?
nuclear catapult?
drinking out of toilets?
orc supermutant?
glowing hammer?
...

something like that
 
Innuendo said:
Sander said:
What the fuck did you think everyone was pissed about?
Click to expand...
fps/tpp?
nuclear catapult?
drinking out of toilets?
orc supermutant?
glowing hammer?
...

something like that
Click to expand...

err... i think you just said it

edit: just realised that my main point was badly phrased as i was referring to the bit i bolded about the concern that Fallout 3 was looking more akin to a "fps" ie what sander was talking about
 
Add to that

Pretty much lack of understanding about background (BoS are not mutant hunters or police force)
Cars in Fallout are not powered by nuclear bombs
And to be honest, I haven't seen anything that indicates parodies of things of the fifties including nuclear scare.
 
I'm picturing the idea of a poster made of a blurred shiny car differential floating in the sky with the written words below " I WANT TO BELIEVE " ...
 
Brother None said:
The same applies to you, Daedelos, as did to concerned. We never claim to have some special knowledge that makes our opinion more important. What we do is structure our arguments from solid examples, and go from there. "You, but I think you're wrong" is never a good reply. Go to NMA's frontpage, read the History of Fallout, read the Troika PA interview. You'll see the original design intent, you'll see Boyarsky noting he would've made Fallout 3 turn-based and isometric.
Click to expand...
First off, I agree with that history and interview 100%; they are solid, proven facts.

Sander said:
Let me say this once more: this will be a full sequel. Hence, as a full sequel, it should share the core design of the original game. Otherwise, it should be a spin-off.
Understand that?
Click to expand...

If the original developers had a list of features/traits defined in their design, you bet your ass that a true sequel (in the mind of the designer at that time) would include the same features. However, that does not imply that a designer can change her/his artistic vision and pursue a different route. I'm not agreeing that they should, I'm just saying they have the right to change their own opinion of their own game, regardless of what fans say. Although great designers (and teams) should ALWAYS, ALWAYS listen to to their fans....

Edit: I'm not defending Bethesda with this statement...

Sander said:
And again you miss the point, proving that you indeed have not read much of this thread.
For the umpteen-and-twentieth time in this thread: Fallout's actual base design has been *objectively defined*. It isn't about what you liked better about the game and hence think is disposable, or what anyone else thinks is disposable: it's about what Fallout's actual design is. Creating a game without keeping Fallout's core design would, by definition, make it not a full Fallout game.

The point that it could be a fun game, or that it could capture Fallout's setting is not what any of this discussion is about. It's about whether or not it would be a worthy Fallout sequel. And indeed, objectively speaking it would not without Fallout's design.
Click to expand...
The title of this thread topic is:

Code: 
topic.setTitle("Game Informer Fallout 3 article scans");

There exists no phrase in the title that says this discussion is about the original design of Fallout or "whether or not it would be a worthy Fallout sequel." But you might get a couple words from your phrase if this was an anagram thread.

Edit: This thread is for open discussion on the scans not what F3 has to be...
 
Tannhauser said:
"The Vault of the Future" against "Vault Secure!" which do you prefer?

image5vy5.png
Click to expand...

Yeah, that picture comparison perfectly sums it up for me. You can see that FO1 and FO2 had this colorful, only-slightly-worn whimsical style that was spot-on to the 50's era, while FO3 tries to make some badass "cool" version of the 50's, very "realistically" worn down and dark, and just comes up with another gloomy and anonymous FPS.

It doesn't look like Fallout, it's just another Quake or Doom or S.T.A.L.K.E.R. or Half Life. And we don't need another one of those. Basically the game needs more color and less gloom. The 50's happened on a sunny day in California, not a rainy day in D.C.!
 
stooge4444 said:
Sander said:
Let me say this once more: this will be a full sequel. Hence, as a full sequel, it should share the core design of the original game. Otherwise, it should be a spin-off.
Understand that?
Click to expand...

If the original developers had a list of features/traits defined in their design, you bet your ass that a true sequel (in the mind of the designer at that time) would include the same features. However, that does not imply that a designer can change her/his artistic vision and pursue a different route. I'm not agreeing that they should, I'm just saying they have the right to change their own opinion of their own game, regardless of what fans say. Although great designers (and teams) should ALWAYS, ALWAYS listen to to their fanss....
Click to expand...

sorry if i'm a bit confused here but it seems to me that you're saying that it's not beth's own people doing Fallout 3 but rather that it's the original team who have suddenly changed their mind as to what Fallout is. in which case err... what?!?


stooge4444 said:
Sander said:
And again you miss the point, proving that you indeed have not read much of this thread.
For the umpteen-and-twentieth time in this thread: Fallout's actual base design has been *objectively defined*. It isn't about what you liked better about the game and hence think is disposable, or what anyone else thinks is disposable: it's about what Fallout's actual design is. Creating a game without keeping Fallout's core design would, by definition, make it not a full Fallout game.

The point that it could be a fun game, or that it could capture Fallout's setting is not what any of this discussion is about. It's about whether or not it would be a worthy Fallout sequel. And indeed, objectively speaking it would not without Fallout's design.
Click to expand...
The title of this thread topic is:

Code: 
topic.setTitle("Game Informer Fallout 3 article scans");

There exists no phrase in the title that says this discussion is about the original design of Fallout or "whether or not it would be a worthy Fallout sequel." But you might get a couple words from your phrase if this was an anagram thread.
Click to expand...

are you perhaps suggesting that every post in this thread is directly linked to the title and that none have been about "the original design of Fallout" or "whether or not it would be a worthy Fallout sequel" ?
 
Dutch Ghost, that was Brother None, wait a few minutes and he will explain.

By the way, created a better copy of the Vault image, and something else I noticed as well:

vaultkn7.png
carqw5.png
 
Aye, what happened to the scans, guys? Bethesda demanded them to be removed in order not to blacklist NMA or smt?

edit: Just read Kharn's post.. this sucks. :/ But well, no harm done, we all know everything there is to know from those scans by now, anyway. :salute:
 
stooge said:
There exists no phrase in the title that says this discussion is about the original design of Fallout or "whether or not it would be a worthy Fallout sequel." But you might get a couple words from your phrase if this was an anagram thread.

Edit: This thread is for open discussion on the scans not what F3 has to be...
Click to expand...
*sigh*
Someone butted into an ongoing discussion, stooge.
 
Innuendo said:
Why are you so reluctant towards first person view?

Did you forget Deus Ex and System Shock?

It's just a perspective, the way we see the world. It doesn't have to define a game as a shooter...
Click to expand...

Why? The same reason I would have been pissed if command and conquer 3 was released as a first person shooter.

Hell I'd be pissed if system shock 2 turned out to be an iso game, the point is that its a total turn around on the genre'
 
stooge4444 said:
I'm just saying they have the right to change their own opinion of their own game, regardless of what fans say.
Click to expand...
But now it feels that Bethesda forces their opinions on someone else's game (and hopefully there's more to owning (in this context) a game than owning the license to it).

I'm only saying this because I personally would be much less provoked if the original team decided to mutilate Fallout into a Wasteland Volleyball with boobs.
 
 
Punter X said:
sorry if i'm a bit confused here but it seems to me that you're saying that it's not beth's own people doing Fallout 3 but rather that it's the original team who have suddenly changed their mind as to what Fallout is. in which case err... what?!?
Click to expand...
The original team have not changed their mind but, however unfortunate, Beth has their own. A designer, whether original or not, has the right to do whatever they want. Again, I don't agree with some of their choices; this thread (and community reaction) should be a testament that they ought to re-look at some of their design decisions.

are you perhaps suggesting that every post in this thread is directly linked to the title and that none have been about "the original design of Fallout" or "whether or not it would be a worthy Fallout sequel" ?
Click to expand...
No, but no one (not even our moms) has the right to say exactly what we should be discussing...
 
stooge4444 said:
No, but no one (not even our moms) has the right to say exactly what we should be discussing...
Click to expand...
Actually, considering the fact that I'm an administrator, I *do* have that right.

But also note that I didn't force anyone to talk about one thing or another. I was pointing out that someone was warping an already ongoing discussion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top