Game Informer Fallout 3 article scans

Most games tend to have pause, RTwP is usually used to denote being able to give commands to your character/squad when paused. Commands which are then actioned when the game is unpaused. Yes?

In most RTwP games your character tends to have some sort of AI, they'll respond to attacks, even initiate attacks when spotting an enemy. Leading to the accusation they play themselves. But if you directly control your character as in a traditional shooter, or even as in a clickfest the character will not act without any input from you, then why would you need commands?

Either you have direct control and the VATS is basically a bulletime/slowmo mode. Or you have no direct control and click on targets to tell the character to attack, using the tactical mode to make targeted attacks. In the latter case RTwP would be an appropriate description, but in the former it's not the same thing at all.

It's bad enough that there's no clear definition for RPG used, don't let's start muddying the waters about RTwP.
 
requiem_for_a_starfury said:
Either you have direct control and the VATS is basically a bulletime/slowmo mode. Or you have no direct control and click on targets to tell the character to attack, using the tactical mode to make targeted attacks. In the latter case RTwP would be an appropriate description, but in the former it's not the same thing at all.
Click to expand...
It is what I understood about the VATS system too. It sounds like a shooter with pause. That would be consistant with other Beth products as Oblivion was semi twitch based (that is twitch based with a poor combat system), and Morrowind was in between (no tactical combat, but not twitch based either, more like click'n'reclick until he dies).
 
As far as I can tell, Fallout is not the only 1997 game that inspires Fallout 3. Several design elements that we learned about remind me of some classics. For example:

It has been mentioned that close combat nuclear weapon is at best a silly concept. Thankfully, Shadow Warrior is far from a serious game, so it can pass. This bomb kills everything short of bosses, and irradiates the area for some time, while buildings are intact.


Most of us know that water in Duke Nukem 3D has healing properties. It didn't incur radiation poisoning, though, but it could heal you all the way from 1 to 100. One painful point per second.

(We didn't get a picture of sanitary facilities, so I paired it with the next best thing that has "crap" in its description.)

Next reference (Blood) is a bit subtler (headshot is headshot), but I wouldn't say coincidental.


What do these three games have in common except their engine?
They are FPS. They do not attempt to be serious or realistic. Their humor is closely related to their violence. Isn't that the direction Fallout3 is taking?

....

No, I am not really serious about this. If I were, I would mention that the cowboy from the scans is a clear nod to Redneck Rampage. :p
I cannot imagine Todd playing these.
 
I just got the magazine.. Health bars all over the enemy bah I hate it when they do that in a game. It kinda takes away from the game play for me. It was okay for Mech Warrior where you were looking through a computerized windshield. Yech.. I gonna git the game anyway and play it. Because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to call myself a diehard Fallout Fan.
 
Wex said:
snip
Click to expand...


Thats the first thing I thought of when I read this too. They were pretty strange ideas to be tossing out in regards to fallout in my opinion. Shadow Warrior and duke nukem are 2 great examples of interactivity in games by the way, they are alot more innovative than most shooters that come out these days.
 
Bethesda HQ meeting:

Overlord: Toddie, those stupid fans are complaining about the orcs.

Toddie: I'll try to orc it more. How about fur?

Overlord: Just add horns or something.
 
Smoke_Jaguar said:
Bethesda HQ meeting:

Overlord: Toddie, those stupid fans are complaining about the orcs.

Toddie: I'll try to orc it more. How about fur?

Overlord: Just add horns or something.
Click to expand...

:lol:

I won't be buying this "Fallout game", and will probably never play it (even if someone I know get it) either. I'm not into FPS games (the exception being the occasional session of Metroid Prime or Perfect Dark, since I like some of the other aspects of those games), and I don't trust Bethesda to get the story, characters and/or dialogue interesting either, seeing how they've handled the last of their own TES games (I don't know about TES 1 or 2, so no comment about those).
Fallout always had a high quality dialogue, and that was IMO one of it's strong points, the others being the cool graphic style, a combat system that was intuitive and practical, a one-of-a-kind freedom in regards to character building, the always useful isometric view and the humor.
Right now, I think that the thing they have the biggest chance of succeeding with is releasing a game that has as many bugs as the Fallout ones. One would think MW would be pretty stable after a clean installation, plus 2 expansions and maybe some patch on top of that, but nope. :P


EDIT: Forgot to mention that I thought the trailer video was pretty cool and true enough to its heritage, but I really don't like most of the screenies I've seen so far. That "super-mutant" was especially horrible, very LOTR or something like that :o
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top