GamingExcellence previews Fallout 3

[4rekl]

There's super mutant, super mutant brutes, super mutant masters (not to be confused with the Master) and the super mutant Behemoth, yes, so different types, though the first three don't seem to differ much in appearance

I didn't like this in Oblivion, where you had different types of the same creature (eg. Goblins) that all looked the same but were a different toughness.

 

[Ausir]

In Fallout 2, there were also "tough" versions of creatures.

 

[TheRatKing]

I don't really remember many different baddies that changes toughness. Humans of course, the small and large versions of various rats and radscorpions, sure. However, there isn't a fluid progression of the same animal, i.e. baby radscorpion, giant radscorpion, humungous radcorpion, BEHEMOTH RADSCORPION!!

Instead, in Fallout, you encounter DIFFERENT species that are progressively harder and tougher. Instead of a behemoth radscorpion, you have a centaur or floater. Having just a single baddie progress from very easy to very hard is unrealistic and it much less creative than many different species.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

All body armor has weak points and the eye and groin areas are usually the weakest parts of armor, if there is even any armor there at all.

I don't think the groin is about being less protected than the rest of the body, I think it's about...uhm...exacerbated impact damage. If you know what I mean.

Well it's a combination of both. With the exception of heavy armor (plate mail and bomb squad armor), the best way to protect the groin and to minimize impeding movement (why it is a hard place to protect) was to make a skirt but most modern armor do not have skirts (most don't try to protect the groin in any manner) nor did any in Fallout. Then again, Fallout's graphics weren't supposed to show exactly where your character was and was not protected.

I don't really remember many different baddies that changes toughness. Humans of course, the small and large versions of various rats and radscorpions, sure. However, there isn't a fluid progression of the same animal, i.e. baby radscorpion, giant radscorpion, humungous radcorpion, BEHEMOTH RADSCORPION!!

Instead, in Fallout, you encounter DIFFERENT species that are progressively harder and tougher. Instead of a behemoth radscorpion, you have a centaur or floater. Having just a single baddie progress from very easy to very hard is unrealistic and it much less creative than many different species.

Right. There is a certain amount that is reasonable (leader forms are a universal one which I think are fine), usually if it's a limited number of forms for a limited number of creatures, and there are certain enemies that it makes sense that they are of different strengths (sentient enemies such as humans, ghouls, and super mutants) but there is a certain point where you just reach absurdity. There probably shouldn't need to be four different types of super mutants because they were always late game enemies anyway but now there seems to be a version for all different parts of the game including early game.

 

[Texas Renegade]

HMM:
Tough Gecko, Big Guns Raider, Melee Raider, Tough Rat... I think that is the basic ways I can remember them being in the game.

Not to the same degree that Beth has chosen to implement them. But as always Ausir is right, they are there.

 

[Brother None]

In Fallout 2, yeah

And I vaguely recall the super mutant types in Fallout 3 actually having slightly different weapons, so it might be more than just a toughness scale.

After all, nobody had problems with regular supermutants moving up to nightkin moving up to Lou.

 

[TF]

Still, while there were monster copies in FO2, there was no Glass Jaw Supermutant to duke it out with in Klamath.

 

[grapedog]

im ok with some upgrading, there is going to be a pecking order for everything...but too much can be a bad thing, and beating up super mutants at low levels would be a bad thing...

One more thing to mod...

 

[Ausir]

I don't really remember many different baddies that changes toughness. Humans of course, the small and large versions of various rats and radscorpions, sure. However, there isn't a fluid progression of the same animal, i.e. baby radscorpion, giant radscorpion, humungous radcorpion, BEHEMOTH RADSCORPION!!

In FO2, all creature types had at least 2 versions (with some having up to 4).
{8000}{}{Little Gecko}
{8100}{}{Tough Lil Gecko}
{8300}{}{Golden Gecko}
{8600}{}{Tough Golden Gecko}
{11000}{}{Mole Rat}
{11100}{}{Greater Mole Rat}
{11200}{}{Pig Rat}
{11300}{}{Tough Pig Rat}
{11700}{}{Mutated Mole Rat}
{11800}{}{Mutated Pig Rat}
{11900}{}{Super Mutant}
{12000}{}{Powerful Mutant}
{11400}{}{Weak Brahmin}
{700}{}{Deathclaw}
{24500}{}{Tough Deathclaw}
{24600}{}{Floater}
{24700}{}{Nasty Floater}
{24800}{}{Centaur}
{24900}{}{Mean Centaur}
{25600}{}{Nightkin}
{25700}{}{Tough Nightkin}
{38200}{}{Giant Ant}
{38300}{}{Tough Giant Ant}
{24200}{}{Alien}
{24300}{}{Tough Alien}

There probably shouldn't need to be four different types of super mutants because they were always late game enemies anyway but now there seems to be a version for all different parts of the game including early game.

Fallout 2 had:
Super Mutant
Powerful Mutant
Nightkin
Tough Nightkin
And even Super Duper Mutant (WTF?)

 

[whirlingdervish]

I think the super duper mutants were located amongst the reglar ones in mariposa..

IOW trapped in with the FEV for a long time.

 

[Ausir]

Actually, looks like even Fallout 1 had:

{2500}{}{Nightkin}
{10700}{}{Nightkin Guard}
{10800}{}{Tough Super Mutant}
{4300}{}{Lesser Centaur}
{15900}{}{Tough Rat}
{16000}{}{Radiated Rat}
{16100}{}{Tough Radiated Rat}
{16200}{}{Lesser Mole Rat}
{16400}{}{Large Brahma}
{16500}{}{Deathclaw Spawn}
{16600}{}{Nasty Radscorpion}
{16700}{}{Bloody Floater}
{16800}{}{Greater Centaur}
{17700}{}{Mean Pig Rat}
{18700}{}{Mean Super Mutant}
{18800}{}{Mad Super Mutant}
{18900}{}{Deadly Super Mutant}
{19000}{}{Tough Nightkin}
{19100}{}{Deadly Nightkin}
{19200}{}{Super Nightkin}
{19300}{}{Master Nighkin}

More imaginative than the "tough" versions in Fallout 2, but still pretty much the same.

 

[Fade]

You laugh at audio cues, but subconsciously sounds link us to experiences. While the new Star Wars movies might have sucked, when you hear that opening theme song you get the shivers right(I'm hoping you are a Star Wars fan)? Or Indiana Jones, Superman...hell, even the Jaws "about to die" sound effects. Subconsciously you hear those sounds, and it feels comfortable. When the little end turn box opens or closes, the sound of Ians SMG tearing you apart, you remember those little sounds, they connect you to the game.

I agree that the senses are an easy way to tie into the past, but it's also a cheap way. The audio cues can & should support the rest of the game instead of being the primary link to the orginals.

I'm not saying you are wrong, but I can't find fault in SOME of the things that he says helped him connect this game with the older games. I'm in your boat, I'm going to be looking long and hard at the actual meat of the game too. But if those things are missing, the little things that may not rate on anyone's top 10 of most important features list, it will feel a little less like fallout and a little more like a generic PA game.

I would have preferred they get the meat of the game correct and left out the audio cues and other little things. That way I get a good generic PA game instead of one that I have to apply a ton of mods to even play.

It seems at times that the gaming companies are trying to sell games by hyping the little things while leaving in a massive amount of bugs.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

Huh. Fair enough. Personally my biggest pet peeve with having more powerful versions of the same creature is that they need to be visually distinguishable (what graphics are for IMO) and I'm not sure I'm seeing that in Fallout 3. I did see it with the two types of Feral Ghouls that I've seen but I didn't notice it with the Super Mutants other than the Behemoth (who really is a different creature from what I can see [all use the same weapons which are different than Super Mutants]).

As far as a Fallout game is concerned there are other requirements such as a minimum power for Super Mutants. If they really want crappy mutants then they could always create a new type which are less powerful (ideally they wouldn't look like the Hulk from the comics, could look like the Hulk from the old TV show though) and explain it by it being a different strain of FEV.

 

[Fade]

Huh. Fair enough. Personally my biggest pet peeve with having more powerful versions of the same creature is that they need to be visually distinguishable (what graphics are for IMO) and I'm not sure I'm seeing that in Fallout 3. I did see it with the two types of Feral Ghouls that I've seen but I didn't notice it with the Super Mutants other than the Behemoth (who really is a different creature from what I can see [all use the same weapons which are different than Super Mutants]).

I can see that fitting some world design, but not all of them. Don't you want to be surprised sometimes?

Personally I see it as part of the problem with computer games because in movies & novels you don't always know who is strong/weak/good/bad. An RPG is suppose to be about the character instead of the player... so why have recent games given visual clues that the player has to notice instead of having the character's skill determine it? Bloodlines came the closest with the Inspection Feat affecting whether you spotted objects tho I don't know of any that FP ARPGs that applied it to enemies.

On the other hand... the mechanic did exist in Fallout as the Perk Awareness. Anyone know if that perk is in for Fallout 3?

 

[TF]

Speaking of supermutants, why the hell are they wielding puny assault rifles with their washing machine fists anyway? It's either an oversight or a very purposeful oversight to make the "Weak" supermutants that show up early easier to deal with as well as not drop weapons that are too strong.
You'd think they'd figure out the easier solution and instead of breaking things like that just not place the supermutants early.

 

[WpnX]

Hey all - I was actually the author of the preview.

I'd like to thank everyone for reading the article, and thanks for the positive comments as well as the criticisms.

Just to elaborate on some of my comments:

First off, I want you guys to know I was a HUGE Fallout fan, particularly Fallout 2. My biggest disappointment with the new game is the ability (and necessity) to walk across the entire map, thus making random encounters a difficult prospect to re-implement. You may come across a trader looking to sell some stuff, but I doubt you'll find that Monty Python-esque bridge or an exploded whale. I think that sort of stuff died with Van Buren. RIP.

That being said, the world feels totally in-line with Fallout 1 & 2 in terms of art direction. These people did a superb job of translating the 2D world built by Black Isle. The UI and wrist-mounted Pip Boy was done faithfully, considering the context, and I think most of the skeptics will at least agree with that.

It was hard to really judge the dark humor and overall "personality" of the game, considering I started off outside of the vault, and didn't want to bother with Megaton. I can tell you that dialogue was cut down in terms of word-count, but that's because it's ALL voiced, not just the main characters. I would agree this was one of the largest factors of what made FO so great. I mention at the beginning of the article that pip boy and power armor is not all that's required to be a successful iteration of fallout.

The switch to 3D I feel also made the game more combat oriented. Again, I missed the towns completely, but FO 1 & 2 had plenty of missions you were able to complete without firing a bullet, but I don't as many of these quests in FO3.

Still, there were several items I really thought they got just right. You can read about them in the article.

The focus of my article was to go over the items I didn't see covered in a meaningful way. VATS is a good concept which felt very weird. Why not treat them as REAL action points? Why is it only currency for targeted shots? These are the logistics that game designers tackle every day, and I respect Bethesda for making a firm decision, and sticking to it.

To sum it all up, I think this game will rank as way better than Fallout Tactics, but still not as good as we remember FO1 & 2. To a large degree this is a function of "rose coloured glasses", but a fair criticism of a sequel.

What we have to realize is that this is the new fallout. Your choices are either to play Fallout 1 and 2 for the rest of you life, or accept Fallout 3 as the not-exactly-terrible future. For better or for worse, Fallout is now 3D, and is a shooter. I would have preferred the game to skip the numbering scheme in lieu of a subtitle, but what are you going to do?

In terms of my "this is fallout" spiel, I just wanted to make it clear that the game really feels like fallout. It has that je ne ces't qui (sp?) about it. I didn't get a sample of the humor, but I only had 45 minutes, so sue me. I'm sure many will regard it as the worst Fallout, but Fallout none-the-less. Let me know if you have any Q's.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

Thanks for stopping by! I always appreciate authors who interact with the community.

Now for some questions (sorry, I'm asking a lot of them for a 45 minute preview ):
Do you plan on reviewing Fallout 3 after it's released?
Did you ever use the "aim" function (right click on the computer)? If so, is it the standard use of the iron sights or scope and did you notice any increased accuracy from using it?
Do weapons have multiple fire modes (singe, burst, full auto)?
You talk about drugs being useful for forcing one's way through hard fights, do you think that drugs are over powered?
What do you think about drugs no longer having negative effects (upon use, not talking withdrawal)?
Did you ever try out melee?
Did you like VATS?
You talked about treating AP as real AP, do you mean make VATS into a real TB mode or just adding movement to it?
Was there any part of VATS which you think could have been improved?
There has been concern about the menu options being spread out in too many tabs and that each screen doesn't show as much as it could/should because the menu is designed for low resolutions. Was the PIP Boy menu convenient and well designed from a function standpoint?
How did the violent deaths of enemies compare to games that do similar things, for example the Soldier of Fortune franchise?
What was your favorite part of the game?
What was your least favorite part of the game?

 

[WpnX]

Thanks for the questions UncannyGarlic. You were certainly one of the more complimentary posters in this thread.

I do not plan on reviewing Fallout 3 in any official capacity. I post a lot on Evil Avatar under the same screen name, so you can likely find my impressions there. If GamingExcellence asks me to post something, however, I'd be happy to oblige. I'm looking forward to the title and want to enjoy it on my own time.

I didn't notice increased accuracy by using the iron sights, although the demo guy said it was more accurate. However, I think he may have meant "easier to aim", which will certainly be the case for people coming from the Call of Duty 4 side of things. I found the pistol, overall, to be quite accurate even when shooting from the hip. However, I was never further than maybe 30 feet from those I was fighting. Longer distances made it very difficult indeed to hit someone, iron sites or not.

Having only played with the pistol, I can't say whether or not weapons still had multiple firing modes. That would have been a good question, but I obviously didn't think of it at the time.

Yes, I thought the drugs were a bit over powered for the demo. That being said, I was only playing for a short time, and didn't get to experience withdrawl, or any of the other effects. It could also be that the basic super mutant was underpowered in this instance. From my previous fallout experiences, however, I found it highly suspect that my character, as a level 3, was able to kill ANY super mutant with a pistol, regardless of the jet.

I think the drugs are necessary as an equalizer for players who made bad choices and need to power through a combat heavy zone. That being said, I never used drugs in fallout 1 or 2, and don't expect to start now.

I did not try out melee, but I saw some other people mess with it, and it seemed ineffective unless you had that powered gauntlet, which I think ran off of microfusion cells.

VATS is a mixed bag. It stops the game from becoming a full-fledged FPS, and you'd be stupid not to use it. At the same time, it also makes the game considerably easier.

In terms AP management, it just seems like VATS is there to make a nod to the game's roots, but at the same time, change everything. I would have preferred they maybe did something more like Full Spectrum Warrior and went full turn-based, but I'm not Bethesda. It seems pointless to call them Action Points when all they govern is VATS. Why not call them VATS points then?

I still would have liked to be able to hit some one square in the balls via VATS, but I guess that would entail a whole new set of death animations.

The menu system via Pip Boy was indeed a bit convoluted. It's no worse, however, than most Bioware games. Simple scroll up and scroll down sort of stuff. This could have used a bit of innovation, but You guys will do fine.

The violent deaths were a real crowd pleaser. Lots of "woahs" from the crowd, like in a bad sitcom. The blood effects were pixelated up close, but did their job aptly otherwise.

My favorite part of the game was simply exploring the wastes. I felt much more powerful even at low level than I did in previous games, which would at least allow for a safe retreat from more powerful enemies.

Oddly enough, I found the mole rats amongst the harder enemies to kill, because they usually came about in packs, and were very difficult to hit without taking damage or using VATS. Supermutants, however, need to stop and swing to cause melee damage. Go figure.

My least favorite part of the game is hard to pin down. I didn't like playing the game without getting the full backstory. I wanted to grow up and escape the vault. I wanted to do the megaton quests before starting anything else. However, I also wanted to brag to my friends about playing Fallout 3, so there goes backstory.

I'm still not convinced that starting off strong is a good thing. One great thing about Fallout was how it crafted the quest structure so as to take 'baby steps', so that before you know it, you have an H&K CAWS and you're back in the Den to show Metzger what you think of the slave trade. God, what a great game.

While I doubt there will be exactly those sorts of experiences in Fallout 3, I have no doubt that there will be several surprises in store for us on Tuesday.

Thanks again!

 

[UncannyGarlic]

I didn't notice increased accuracy by using the iron sights, although the demo guy said it was more accurate. However, I think he may have meant "easier to aim", which will certainly be the case for people coming from the Call of Duty 4 side of things. I found the pistol, overall, to be quite accurate even when shooting from the hip. However, I was never further than maybe 30 feet from those I was fighting. Longer distances made it very difficult indeed to hit someone, iron sites or not.

That's pretty much what I figured and it seems like half the games with "aiming" make it more accurate and half don't, even if they claim it does.

I did not try out melee, but I saw some other people mess with it, and it seemed ineffective unless you had that powered gauntlet, which I think ran off of microfusion cells.

That's what I've generally heard before. Did you notice whether or not blocking is effective against ranged attacks? The instruction manual (Steam has generously uploaded it) says that it isn't but I thought I'd ask to double check. Also, did the person you watch do a lot of power hits (charged up attacks), if so, how useful were they?

The menu system via Pip Boy was indeed a bit convoluted. It's no worse, however, than most Bioware games. Simple scroll up and scroll down sort of stuff. This could have used a bit of innovation, but You guys will do fine.

Gotcha, thanks for the comparison, it's good for clarity.

Oddly enough, I found the mole rats amongst the harder enemies to kill, because they usually came about in packs, and were very difficult to hit without taking damage or using VATS. Supermutants, however, need to stop and swing to cause melee damage. Go figure.

That's interesting.

I'm still not convinced that starting off strong is a good thing. One great thing about Fallout was how it crafted the quest structure so as to take 'baby steps', so that before you know it, you have an H&K CAWS and you're back in the Den to show Metzger what you think of the slave trade. God, what a great game.

While I doubt there will be exactly those sorts of experiences in Fallout 3, I have no doubt that there will be several surprises in store for us on Tuesday.

Yeah. My guess is that they didn't want the player to feel like they got eased into the game and then thrown into a brick wall by having the difficulty curve jump up right when you get out of the vault or have the player feel like they are super restricted. I understand why they would want to avoid the former but the latter bothers me, it's one of the reasons they implimented level scaling in Oblivion and it's a bummer. Hopefully there are adequettely difficult areas.

Thanks again!

Thank you, I always appreciate answers.