Gamespot's Fallout: New Vegas Demo at E3
- Thread starter 13pm
- Start date
I thought the cathedral served mainly as camouflage ? Also New Reno wasnt really something that fits to Fallout ~ despite having good quests and NPCs. So I am with BN in this. Not that I would mind a big prospering community. But still the way of how the whole Vegas theme is used it doesnt really screams "wasteland" to me.
But who knows maybe with every new game they (Bethesda and such) will move more and more away from the wasteland theme towards modern comunities and high technology. Or such things. Not sure. We will see.
But who knows maybe with every new game they (Bethesda and such) will move more and more away from the wasteland theme towards modern comunities and high technology. Or such things. Not sure. We will see.
Crni Vuk said:
So if we use the evolution of man as an example, eventually Fallout will be a game set in a beautifully restored landscape, with picturesque streets with the white picket fences, very 1950’s…sounds like the setting for the Sims.
Ausir said:
Truthfully I've always seen Fallout games to be based on stereotypes as opposed to what can and cannot logically fit. In Fallout 1 we saw raiders that looked like Mel Gibson from Lethal Weapon, giant rats (Because every RPG apparently needs one), ghouls themselves fill a stereotypical role as well. Fallout 2 continued this theme: Tribals, mafia, more mulleted raiders, etc. What sticks out to me more than the mafia was the tribals. Because they decided to leave the Vault they now have to cover themselves with bones, tatoos, and very revealing articles of clothing? And also, what the heck is up with the giant statue temple?
As for the video - more news that makes me happy. Ish. 220 Characters? Wow, and apparently one is immortal. Also, I'm curious how you play a pacifist in a first person oriented game? XD
Tribals have been in Fallout 1 as well. They just didn't took a main role. Still you could meet them in encounters. (Cannibals or fisherman or something like this)
Well, I played a Pacifist run of Fallout 3. It would of been hard if Stimpaks weren't so readily available. All you have to do is sell any weapons and ammo you find, buy stimpaks, run from enemies if they shoot you, and overdose on them when you get shot.nemetoad said:
the problem isnt so much that you can play Fallout 3 peacefully. The reall problem is that you cant play it as psycho (even though I have the feeling that was a big selling point ... ASPLODING HEADS, BODIES! THEEEDDDYYYY BEEEAAARSSSSS!!!1 alasrthbarrgh!! *heavy metal music*).
You could not kill kidz. And what was really bad you could not kill many other characters. The Paladin chick and her father. Or your own father. And probably a few other characters I missed.
You could not kill kidz. And what was really bad you could not kill many other characters. The Paladin chick and her father. Or your own father. And probably a few other characters I missed.
Eh, I'm fine with the lack of killing children - You just need to make it so the suckers run away as quick as possible if you go nuts.... Little Lamplight is different.
Seriously, if they released the game with the ability to be a child killer, they'd end up not being able to release it, get sued, etc. etc. Overall it would be bad hype just because of people's opinions. It isn't like Fallout 1 and 2, where the children are little sprites with no faces.
Seriously, if they released the game with the ability to be a child killer, they'd end up not being able to release it, get sued, etc. etc. Overall it would be bad hype just because of people's opinions. It isn't like Fallout 1 and 2, where the children are little sprites with no faces.
Hey who are you calling a little sprite…
Crni Vuk said:
What I don't like at this post: You say that beeing a psycho in games means that you kill everything (even children). This leads me to my next point: Why the fuck means beeing evil in a game always kill everything and everyone? IMO, this is a very cheap way of doing "evil" characters. "Good" helps everyone and "evil" kills everyone. Bleh, how boring.
As evil character, I still don't want to kill everyone. I just want to be an asshole: Do as much things as possible in a way, that as much people as possible will hate you. This - to me - doesn't implies to kill everyone you meet.
Some example, out of the box: A guy wants you to bring him some super important item back. He really needs it, else he is fucked. So you accept this task and move on to search this super important item. If you have found it, you go back to him and destroy it in front of his eyes.
Not the best example, but you get the idea. The dude and probably others around him will hate you now, because you are evil- And you didn't even killed him or other for this (how heretic).
Tagaziel said:
What? Why? Or do I really have to go over all of the problems I had with that previous contraption? Seriously? The FO franchise is fucked. And for all I care it's fucked for good 'cause I sure as hell won't be waiting for it to happen when I'm an octogenerian. You think I like that? You think should like that because you think I should? FO3 made no sense to me en neithet does New Vegas. It's gone. The FO magic is forever gone for me. Excuse me if I do not like that.
Lexx said:
its has nothing to do with being bad, mostly its about freedom and flavor just as everyone like some crazy combo animation taking the target with scissors in the eye or using a cat as a silencer or some other crazy stuff to do.
its the same about kids, i want to be able to hack a kid into pieces, its has nothing to do with being bad, just as blow dolls and kitty paw mag's and giving a head to the producer has anything to do with maturity.
on the contrarily as long as i recall myself, i have never played the "bad" path, so if i kill a child by mistake i'll reload the last save...
the game is mostly about the plot and the story but with the way games today there is less left to imagination, so all those little mechanics just add flavor and help to create immersive gameplay
its also not about violence, there is hundred other thing that works but in our case its part of the FO universe.
I know that it's about "freedom and flavor" and stuff, but then nobody should call it "evil character-way". Better description might be "freedom character-way" or "senseless character-way" or whatever. "Evil" really has to be better and smarter than this silly stuff.
Killing everything that has a heartbeat, might be the "dumb evil" path, but I want the "smart evil" path.
Killing everything that has a heartbeat, might be the "dumb evil" path, but I want the "smart evil" path.
Yeah, too many games rely on the "No, I'm evil so I'll KILL YOU INSTEAD OF BANDITS" route.
Tagaziel said:
Right. Building a Cathedral on top of a Vault to hide what you're doing and fool the nearby populated areas is equal to flashing your wealth and thus just inviting raiders to try and take your shit. Thanks for the lesson.
I don't think tourism as such is a bad idea for the game. Societies (fairly advanced in some cases) have already started to form in F2, and this is 40 years later afaik. Of course it's a post-apoc wasteland we're dealing with, but I'd think that many people *would* evolve survival skills, figure out the best way to travel and so forth. And I think people are easily crazy enough to "adapt", face the dangers of the wasteland in search for entertainment.
It's been a long time since the bombs dropped (whether it fits thematically is of course another discussion).
Mr House seems to run a tight ship and seems to keep things organized. We don't know what the defenses of Vegas are either aside from the robots. Given House's rather extreme influence (having made it so that Vegas didn't get hit by nukes) it would seem to he's the type of guy who'd plan ahead.
What I'm more intrigued in finding out is how Vegas survived initially. How did the city fare in the early days of the post-apocalypse when tourism must've been scarce. What happened in those days? What happened to the populace of Vegas? Did House stockpile a large amount of resources somewhere?
I hope those things will be answered.
It's been a long time since the bombs dropped (whether it fits thematically is of course another discussion).
Mr House seems to run a tight ship and seems to keep things organized. We don't know what the defenses of Vegas are either aside from the robots. Given House's rather extreme influence (having made it so that Vegas didn't get hit by nukes) it would seem to he's the type of guy who'd plan ahead.
What I'm more intrigued in finding out is how Vegas survived initially. How did the city fare in the early days of the post-apocalypse when tourism must've been scarce. What happened in those days? What happened to the populace of Vegas? Did House stockpile a large amount of resources somewhere?
I hope those things will be answered.