If you could expand Fallout...

[gonzo13]

I believed this thread was more centered on the plot of the two games and the items not the fucking light meters and next generation game "bells and whistles" that we expect to find today.
If you want to tell us what kind of new shit Bethesda should, or could pack into FO3 then go to the FO3 forum.

For their day those games were advanced, and that included gameplay.

A zoom out to be a able to use the sniper rifle would have been cool, I admit, but I really do not know how that could have been implemented since it already took your enemies a long time to close in on you anyway and you could kill them long before they got to you without being able to shoot them from a thousand yards away. Still, I must admit I often thought of that myself.

I really would have liked to be able to have some idea where Sulik's sister went. Also it would have been cool if that tribal in the mercenaries' cave would have been developed. I heard that originally he was supposed to be a major character like Sulik. In fact he was supposed to be Sulik's nemesis, like an evil counterpart. I guess you could have recruited him instead of Sulik if you were evil.

I would also have liked to be able to somehow depose Lynette in VC so that councilman McLure would have been able to take over maybe. That way if you optimised the Gecko reactor then maybe they could cooperate with VC instead of getting taken over.

I really would have liked to have a talking head for Cassidy which was my favorite NPC, and maybe some sort of Mutant armor for Marcus so that he wouldn't get ripped apart so easily.

that is for FO2, I'll post for FO1 later if I feel like it.

 

[fallout_expert105]

Excuse me but this thread is about expanding Fallout which obviously includes Fallout 3 as well as the previous games. And also light and sound were going to have quite a depth based impact on the stealth/deceptive play styles and sneaking/stealing skills of Van Buren. I thought we all wanted Fallout 3 by Bethesda to be quite close to Van Buren, well guess what I do. Oh and don't forget the deceptive play style of Fallout is incredibly under done for one of the major play styles of the game. It was pretty much useless, almost everyone used diplomacy and combat, if deception was more advanced and had more options/focus it would be a more interesting play experience. Also I'm really hoping FO3 will include the amazingly detailed item creation system that Van Buren had, down to the last detail.

As for mentioning Bethesda's new technology, it has a hell of a lot to do with Fallout 3. It impacts what features, advancements to gameplay we can expect. It also impacts what Bethesda will do with it, if they have an incredibly powerful game engine it'll be easier to make FO3 and you can expect it to have the depth and things we want from it. They'll be able to release it faster with more options, gameplay dynamics, and make it logical, realistic, and incredible stunning visually. The new tech Bethesda will use on there next gen games is very strongly linked to FO3's development, performance, and the question of "will it be awesome?".

 

[Ozrat]

Also I'm really hoping FO3 will include the amazingly detailed item creation system that Van Buren had, down to the last detail.

Are you talking about the same thing below?

One of the big "new things" intended for a Fallout sequel is the creation of a viable Science Boy path through the game. Item assembly is a significant component of that gameplay path. The idea is that items can be made at certain "labs" (conventional weapons and armor at a Mechanics Lab, ammunition and energy weapons at a Science Lab, drugs and medkits at a Medical Lab, etc.) with a high enough skill and the right found inventory items.

If so, you apparently know a lot more about Van Buren than our Van Buren archives do. Where are you getting this stuff from?

 

[fallout_expert105]

Yeah, I am talking about the item creation system you mentioned. I'm not getting my information from anyone but you guys, I've been spending a lot of time researching your Fallout 3 section called "Fallout 3 history". And I found information about the science character path, that seemed like an incredible idea. The science dynamics, and lab systems mentioned in those history elements were such as awesome idea. I hope Bethesda isn't stupid enough not to include everything Van Buren was going to have, or at least take them into consideration.

 

[GFree]

Howdy.

I'd really like Fallout to expand on the fate of the rest of the world. What happened to Australia, my home country? How bad was the damage in China, or even Europe? It's be cool to find ways to travel to places outside the US in FO3.

 

[fallout_expert105]

Not a bad idea but I think the Fallout community wants to stay in the United States of America. Maybe they can at least give a more detailed break down of what the hell is happening in those parts of the world.

 

[Nocturne]

Excuse me but this thread is about expanding Fallout which obviously includes Fallout 3 as well as the previous games. And also light and sound were going to have quite a depth based impact on the stealth/deceptive play styles and sneaking/stealing skills of Van Buren. I thought we all wanted Fallout 3 by Bethesda to be quite close to Van Buren, well guess what I do. Oh and don't forget the deceptive play style of Fallout is incredibly under done for one of the major play styles of the game. It was pretty much useless, almost everyone used diplomacy and combat, if deception was more advanced and had more options/focus it would be a more interesting play experience. Also I'm really hoping FO3 will include the amazingly detailed item creation system that Van Buren had, down to the last detail.

As for mentioning Bethesda's new technology, it has a hell of a lot to do with Fallout 3. It impacts what features, advancements to gameplay we can expect. It also impacts what Bethesda will do with it, if they have an incredibly powerful game engine it'll be easier to make FO3 and you can expect it to have the depth and things we want from it. They'll be able to release it faster with more options, gameplay dynamics, and make it logical, realistic, and incredible stunning visually. The new tech Bethesda will use on there next gen games is very strongly linked to FO3's development, performance, and the question of "will it be awesome?".

Simmerdown a bit there.....
I can agree that the stealth/deception is a bit of an underdog in FO, but sound/light meters would be just a tad to stupid for me.... Then everything will be sneaking and killing ala Splinter Cell, why buy when you can sneak in, kill the owner of a object, and take it....
It sounds more like you want to overpower sneaking infavor of all the others, or do you think that every stereotype shuld be granted something that aid their playstyle....??
The beauty of fallout is that you can play it the way you want... without classes... (or light meters)

 

[GFree]

Not a bad idea but I think the Fallout community wants to stay in the United States of America. Maybe they can at least give a more detailed break down of what the hell is happening in those parts of the world.

Fair enough. I'm new here so I didn't know what the general consensus on such matters was already. I wouldn't mind it if there were computers connected to networks in other parts of the world, so that even if one cannot travel outside the "world" map, we could at least talk to an NPC on the other side of the globe about how life it like there and more juicy info.

 

[fallout_expert105]

Oh yeah sure, don't get me wrong I'd love to know what was going on in other parts of the world. The thing you mentioned about multiple connections to other world computer grids for info, is a hell of an idea, we need more things like that.

 

[Kahgan]

well, I agree with that, except that Dogmeat is a male

 

[DrömmarnasStig]

Fallout 2 is practically more linear than it seems.

You have to save mankind by destroying the Enclave within 13 years. Otherwise game over.

Within this timeframe you have to aquire as much experience as possible (in order to be able to defeat Horrigan).
There are basically two ways to aquire exp.:
1. solving quests (which are very repetitive after the first run)
2. killing critters (random encounters, exterminating cities)

What makes Fallout replayable is the character system.
You have multiple ways of developing your character.

__________________________

I would love Fallout to enhance the first point.
Solving the same quests over and over again in every new Fallout-session is sooooo boring.

I would create a more lively environment. Living cities, where you can take a regular job, changing critters, developing cities (maybe a little tycoon feature, establishing your own business and having competitors).
The feeling that you play in a real environment, not a static one that is predictable (as you know the exact effects of your actions).

Let me explain the tycoon feature a bit.
Once you aquire sufficient funds (by working or stealing or solving quests...) you can buy a shop or found a company whatever.
Without being too detailled you can invest money into improving your company, can kill your competitors or be honest and outwit them.
You leave town and return several months later.
The town has completely changed in your absence. Competing business have taken over the industry, hired guards and your company is almost out of business.
People won't respect you as much as they did before.
You see gang wars between the rivaling companies.

Now you can either get back to work, destroy your opponents, leave town for good or start a new business (like pimping, drug dealing, or taking over the local porn studio).

 

[Duckman]

Fallout 2 is practically more linear than it seems.

I tend to disagree on this, but after reading how your plan of a similar tycoon thing works, it could be a whole lot more non-linear. Take for example, our infamous game of Fable. There was a terribly linear game where pretty much every quest avaiable lead to another which solved the game in less than 5 hrs. I know that you are probably not saying that its that linear, but as far as 1997-8 RPGs go, its pretty deep and non-linear.

You have to save mankind by destroying the Enclave within 13 years. Otherwise game over.

13 years?? Its easy to complete the game in less than 2 years, then after the enclave is destroyed spend the next 11 wasting away on the towns you don't like.

What makes Fallout replayable is the character system.
You have multiple ways of developing your character.

So very true, still is one of the deepest, humorous character development sheets I have seen.

With the tycoon features, they are all pretty awesome ideas, but it would create a depth that may overwhelm some players of the game. Don't get me wrong, it can be somewhat repetitive playing over and over, but with tycoon features, too much depth will push away the players who just want to play as the Fallout game does, ie minus the tycoon stuff...

new business (like pimping, drug dealing, or taking over the local porn studio

I like your idea/s. But too much depth will scare off those who just want to play a faster based game without the micromanagement of the tycoon series.

And btw, didn't someone create a fallout tycoon??

 

[DrömmarnasStig]

The Fallout tycoon mini game is boring. It's just a simple, ugly tycoon game in the Fallout setting. Very admirable effort by some fans, but still no fun.

Like I said before, I was more thinking about using your money to invest in something.
The company, shop or whatever would be run automatically (maybe you could make several slider adjustments). So no depth, no micromanagement.

I mean, killing the Bishop family for example, you have a nice little casino of your own. You should be able to make use of it.
Hire merchants to guard it, or even to attack other families or cities (little strategy feature of leading an army, not in regular combat mode).
Or if you take over New Reno Arms, why not run a gun store?
Being able to import any weapons you like (granted you have the money). There are gamey shortcuts anyway to get any weapon you wish, you might as well do it this way.

Your karma and reputation in a city would be affected much more directly.
Bad rep and your business will suffer, if you instead take over a shop in an honest way (diplomacy, buying it), you will benefit in the long run.

 

[Duckman]

Don't get me wrong, I like your ideas!!

But see, if you were to leave the store, say New Reno Arms, would there be no sales/profits, or would you have to hire NPCs or townsfolk to fill in your place?? And thinking about that, they themselves could rip off your store, if they were aligned to a certain karma "score"...

The Fallout tycoon mini game is boring. It's just a simple, ugly tycoon game in the Fallout setting. Very admirable effort by some fans, but still no fun.

Fair enough, I downloaded it but didn't work...I thought it may have been what you were saying, however, that was not the case.

Bad rep and your business will suffer, if you instead take over a shop in an honest way (diplomacy, buying it), you will benefit in the long run.

But that leaves no point to become a criminal mastermind! If you take over a business, take again the example of New Reno Arms, and have a bad rep, you may attract the lowlifes of the city, rather than the gun-toting do-gooders like your hero may be. And if you had a bad rep/karma and took over the casino, you may receive certain quests, that develop due to your reputation.

Otherwise, there would be no point to be a low-life criminal/evil person, and to own shops and to run them efficiently, would be too linear, as you would need to be the 'good' person, as such...

 

[DrömmarnasStig]

But see, if you were to leave the store, say New Reno Arms, would there be no sales/profits, or would you have to hire NPCs or townsfolk to fill in your place?? And thinking about that, they themselves could rip off your store, if they were aligned to a certain karma "score"...

You know, I have absolutely no idea. It was not thought through in any way.
Your proposal sounds nice. It could be a constant source of money, as long as the business is good.
The more guards you hire, the less your profit, but the more safety for your shop.
The a.i. should be able to loot your unguarded stores or launch attacks against guarded ones.

But that leaves no point to become a criminal mastermind! If you take over a business, take again the example of New Reno Arms, and have a bad rep, you may attract the lowlifes of the city, rather than the gun-toting do-gooders like your hero may be. And if you had a bad rep/karma and took over the casino, you may receive certain quests, that develop due to your reputation.

Of course, in places like New Reno you could actually benefit from being a villain because most citizens are crooks.
In other places where honest citizens dominate, you would do better with obeying the law.

Think about it this way: In order to be able to buy a shop, you would have to have a huge amount of money.
Taking it by force is the easy way, so it should be penalized.
You should suffer from taking the easiest way.
For instance 50-80 % less profit in cities like Broken Hills or Klamath. In the Den or NR however, crime rules.
You would however have a harder time staying in business because of permanent danger of attacks.
In Vault City you wouldn't be threatened by thieves at all. On the flipside, shops would be much more expensive to buy than anywhere else.

____________________

Now, what I really would love:

Being able to found your own town.
There a countless free spots on the map.
You need to hire some people for the construction work.
Management would be completely automatical (we don't want another Sim City here).
Just a couple of buildings: your residence, maybe a police station (which you have to pay the salary for), some shops.
The rest is absolutely out of your control.
New citizens will come, build their own houses automatically.
You will attract honest people and crooks as well.

If done correctly, your town flourishes and will generate money, which translates into power.

---------

I am thinking especially about multiplayer.
Hundreds of players from all around the globe could start of with nothing and interact. Form alliances, start gangwars.
Some people would play roaming hordes of gangsters who just want to destroy the work of others.
Then you would have the business people who found cities and ally themselves to fend of the gangs.

 

[Duckman]

I am thinking especially about multiplayer

Don't...Many people on this website find that if Fallout wwent online, it may just become another generic online game with thousands of people just destroying the true nature of the Fallout world. It may sound excellent in theory, but I personally think it may destroy what is Fallout. I can see what you mean, however, by having multiplayer, it can ultimately work, with people buying/selling/bartering between different shops across the continent or however you see the map being...

But have you also considered that if you start this as multiplayer, it may need to expand the size of the maps and all?? Take FO1. To travel across the map it took a fair while, and it was much smaller than the FO2 map. But seeing we are placed in a post-apoc world, we cannot have transport like, trains, planes or readily available vehicles, which would make travelling a real time waste...

For instance 50-80 % less profit in cities like Broken Hills or Klamath. In the Den or NR however, crime rules.

But even still, evil people would just go to the relatively easy cities, where crime rules, ie New Reno and The Den. If you used the influence (evil influence) in say, Broken Hills from a drug running company in New Reno, the ability to open an 'honest' shop and then once bought, turning it into a drug store and crippling the town through crime and drug abuse...There needs to be some advantage to an evil person's doings as well...By this I mean, seeing as you would probably be the only drug store in Broken Hills, your profit will skyrocket, once the townspeople are addicts...

In Vault City you wouldn't be threatened by thieves at all. On the flipside, shops would be much more expensive to buy than anywhere else.

But there may also be internal corruption within the council, as you may have seen in the NCR with that Feargus guy, who was helping the raiders. Councilmen will try to shutdown your shop if the business you bring is undesirable (ie drugs/booze) business to the city. But of course, there would need to be strict regulations on the imports you bring into the city, as they scan people with day passes for drugs and the like, and traders often find vault city repulsive, so to get them to trade with you, imports would need to be more expensive to compensate.

However, if ran a repair shop or general merchandise store, was to be constructed or taken over, imports would not be more expensive as they are 'legal' products.

Being able to found your own town.
There a countless free spots on the map.
You need to hire some people for the construction work.

Founding your own towns would be fun/exciting. But how much control would the player have on it's development?? Like the placement of buildings? Or would it be up to the disgression of the AI?
The spots on the map are mostly mountain or desert however, so scanning for natural resources (uranium etc) would be essential.
Construction work would be expensive. So by this do you mean all amenities/utilities, like water/electricity/parks?? Or the buildings that the incoming citizens need help building??

Hundreds of players from all around the globe could start of with nothing and interact. Form alliances, start gangwars.
Some people would play roaming hordes of gangsters who just want to destroy the work of others.
Then you would have the business people who found cities and ally themselves to fend of the gangs.

But as fallout is easily hacked, little munchkins will hack their characters and have lumbering giants of Powered Armour attacking and looting all businesses. And to defeat these giants who have 50 action points and the like, the entire Enclave is needed to defeat them.

DrömmarnasStig, I like your ideas, but from them comes many external factors. I enjoy hearing what you have to say, though!! Keep the ideas flowing...

 

[Roshambo]

Fallout 2 is practically more linear than it seems.

You have to save mankind by destroying the Enclave within 13 years. Otherwise game over.

Within this timeframe you have to aquire as much experience as possible (in order to be able to defeat Horrigan).
There are basically two ways to aquire exp.:
1. solving quests (which are very repetitive after the first run)
2. killing critters (random encounters, exterminating cities)

What makes Fallout replayable is the character system.
You have multiple ways of developing your character.

I would love Fallout to enhance the first point.
Solving the same quests over and over again in every new Fallout-session is sooooo boring.

This part doesn't diverge from Fallout's design style much, but it's basically just repeating the initial post of this thread.

I would create a more lively environment. Living cities, where you can take a regular job, changing critters, developing cities (maybe a little tycoon feature, establishing your own business and having competitors).
The feeling that you play in a real environment, not a static one that is predictable (as you know the exact effects of your actions).

Let me explain the tycoon feature a bit.
Once you aquire sufficient funds (by working or stealing or solving quests...) you can buy a shop or found a company whatever.
Without being too detailled you can invest money into improving your company, can kill your competitors or be honest and outwit them.
You leave town and return several months later.
The town has completely changed in your absence. Competing business have taken over the industry, hired guards and your company is almost out of business.
People won't respect you as much as they did before.
You see gang wars between the rivaling companies.

Now you can either get back to work, destroy your opponents, leave town for good or start a new business (like pimping, drug dealing, or taking over the local porn studio).

This is nothing really imaginative, really. You have turned it from a lost man in a lost world setting, into a micromanaged tycoon scheme that has little to do with the point that you are a drifter no matter where you go. Maybe because it would be "kewL" in your eyes, but there isn't much to validate it being put into a Fallout game. So you might want to explain yourself a bit better than that crap.

Too late:

I am thinking especially about multiplayer.
Hundreds of players from all around the globe could start of with nothing and interact. Form alliances, start gangwars.
Some people would play roaming hordes of gangsters who just want to destroy the work of others.
Then you would have the business people who found cities and ally themselves to fend of the gangs.

Now you just went for unbelievably retarded. Take your piddling about FOOL elsewere, please. New Reno didn't git into the setting, as MCA admitted and how it has been proven for quite a long time, and your MMOG idea is about the lamest way I've seen Fallout Online being described besides the general single-line posts of idiocy that depict the author has having done lines of another sort.

When will newbies learn to lurk and read the forums apropos to netiquette before they post this kind of crap? But don't worry. Herve Caen loves your kind of people, as your idea is simple enough for him to understand and further validate production of a Fallout Online because apparently someone wants it. Too bad he's not that intelligent to read the posts with big words.

What's your excuse?

 

[DrömmarnasStig]

So you might want to explain yourself a bit better than that crap.

Now you just went for unbelievably retarded. Take your piddling about FOOL elsewere, please.

When will newbies learn to lurk and read the forums apropos to netiquette before they post this kind of crap?

What's your excuse?

What's my excuse?

I seriously hope the admins take their job seriously here.
I don't think there should be any tolerance towards insults like that.

 

[Silencer]

I seriously hope the admins take their job seriously here.

Priceless. And yes, I and Rosh take the job of protecting the ideals of Fallout seriously.

I don't think there should be any tolerance towards insults like that.

You better develop a high level of tolerance, if you intend to continue posting such bollocks, sonny.

By the way, where was it that you *personally* were insulted? Because I only see your jack-shittarded idea of FOOL getting insulted, and although it may pain you greatly, I'm not in the habit of giving reprimands for calling a spade a spade. Or a shit a shit, for that matter.

 

[DrömmarnasStig]

You better develop a high level of tolerance, if you intend to continue posting such bollocks, sonny.

By the way, where was it that you *personally* were insulted? Because I only see your jack-shittarded idea of FOOL getting insulted, and although it may pain you greatly, I'm not in the habit of giving reprimands for calling a spade a spade. Or a shit a shit, for that matter.

Being called a "retard" is no insult, okay...
What you are doing is about the same.

I thought "Fallout" was a game for adults and well-mannered ones as well.
Interesting policy of a forum to have rude admins insulting people.

I don't know how old you two are and what your educational background is, but I am used to more niveau than this forum obviously provides.

PS: The only pain is the waste of time