IGN interviews Pete Hines

Per

Vault Consort
Staff member
Admin
IGN has put up an interview with the vam... with well-known Bethesda frontman Pete Hines. You'll recognize a lot of it from previous interviews, "At the time, no one was doing anything with the licence", "our approach to Fallout 3 is as if we'd made Fallout 1 and 2", etc.<blockquote>IGN: What are biggest differences between the original Fallouts and Fallout 3?

Pete Hines: It's really hard to say because those games are done and this one isn't. From a design philosophy standpoint we're still trying to stay true to a lot of thing that those did, in terms of the kind of moral choices you have to make, the kind of characters you interact with, the memorable locations… All the things that you experienced in the game, whether it was the people or the places or the things that you did and the decisions you made. Those are all things we're trying to capture again in Fallout 3.

There's probably nit-picky, little stuff that may be different but at the end of the day there are an awful lot of similarities. When you play the game, the intent is that you feel like you did when you played Fallout 1. Y'know, it's going to be a bit different because we're using the next iteration of our Radiant AI, so we've got people moving around more and doing stuff, plus there's Havoc, so the gameplay experience changes because you're introducing all these different things, but from a design standpoint it's all about that gameplay experience - what is the player doing, what is the player feeling, how are you developing your character and what are the consequences of all that.

IGN: When can we expect to see new stuff on Fallout 3?

Pete Hines: We're planning to show some new stuff off early next year. I'm not really sure what we'll show but it'll be something new but I'm not sure what.</blockquote>Read! What could possibly go wrong.

Link: Fallout 3 Interview at IGN
 
IGN's journalism is the highlight de jour:

Indeed, many branded it game of the show at this year's E3 and, since then, the demo has been universally lauded by anyone fortunate enough to see.

Oh really? Are you sure?

IGN: It's well known that a lot of people at Bethesda are big Fallout fans, which is great because they know the franchise inside out. But is there concern that you're making a game aimed squarely at Fallout purists?

Worst. Journalism. Ever.

1. Sucking up in a typical "Mr Burns, your campaign seems to have the momentum of a run-away freight train. Why are you so popular?"

2. Bad research. "aimed at Fallout purists"?
 
IGN: It's well known that a lot of people at Bethesda are big Fallout fans, which is great because they know the franchise inside out.

And that's why every instalment of the Bethblog says how they've all been playing Fallout for a long time.
 
A pity ignorance is not a virtue, 'cause the journalist in question would certainly be the saint of ignorance at this point!

I honestly wish that Beth would actually listen to those that care for the game as more than just a money grubbing lot of gits who can't tell a good game from a Super Mutant's arse!

But these are the days of Electronic Antipathy, Lamespy, and Oblivious, not for real game designers anymore, ingenuity is frowned upon and instead the brick rules all with it's blinking green lighted fist, empowered by the sheer evil of the Microsoftian empire...


(Ok maybe that was a little dramatic, but you get my point :D )
 
IGN: What are biggest differences between the original Fallouts and Fallout 3?

The fact that Fallout was created as a return to PnP roots in a time of hacky-slashy pseudo-RPGs, while Fallout 3 will most likely be a hacky-slashy (shooty-maimy?) pseudo-RPG?
If it wasn't because this had happened already with Tactics and BOS, I would swear the universe would collapse because of the sheer irony.

Petey: We're not just going to reiterate off of the last thing we've done, we're going to stop and look at what we've done to work out what we're going to change and what's going to stay the same.

You could try evolving instead of just changing everything, you know.

edit:
Petey answers the "Fallout purists" question in a very peculiar manner...
He starts talking about making games that you are passionate about and not doing it just to please some target audience.
Some random on-looker who knows nothing about Fallout might just fall for that.
Pete clearly aced Deceptive Spin 101
 
Brother None said:
...

Worst. Journalism. Ever.

1. Sucking up in a typical "Mr Burns, your campaign seems to have the momentum of a run-away freight train. Why are you so popular?"

2. Bad research. "aimed at Fallout purists"?

All we need to do is wait for Bethesda to actually taste the three-eyed fish...

Then we make our move.
 
Hello all,

Well I faced the consequences of this dribble on another forum, I think Todd Howards and Pete Hines claims are of an infectious nature.
They get into the minds of people quickly but when you talk about why you not agree that the whole change in gameplay is not really any evolution, they find it very hard to understand you.

You're considered a hard core gamer who apparently will only be satisfied with exactly the same material as in the original while Bethesda is making the game more 'open' for new gamers.

Getting more people interested in Fallout can only be for the good because that means that expansion packs might come and other sequels.
But selling them the idea that this is what a Fallout game in 2007 should be like, a weird cross of Gears of War, Oblivion and a pauze action setup....

What kind of fan is Todd Howard exactly?
 
The Dutch Ghost said:
...

What kind of fan is Todd Howard exactly?

The kind of fan that probably said to himself...

"Why can't I get my hands on a nuclear catapault? That'd be fucking awesome. Why is all of this humor so dark? It's depressing. Why aren't there more famous people in this game? It'd be awesome to have Liam Neeson as my Dad or something!"
 
generalissimofurioso said:
The kind of fan that probably said to himself...

"Why can't I get my hands on a nuclear catapault? That'd be fucking awesome. Why is all of this humor so dark? It's depressing. Why aren't there more famous people in this game? It'd be awesome to have Liam Neeson as my Dad or something!"

I sometimes get the feeling that Bethesda's tactic of 'silencing the old guard' is by tiring them out constantly with all the points they know the people who prefer a more 'pure' RPG can't stand.

And I have to say, it is rather effective as I find it quite difficult these days to explain to other people what is so wrong about this 'sequel' to a classic game.
Bethesda has already won most of these people's hearts with the pretty, dark but generic style ruined city graphics and the promise of all kinds of 'crrrrazy' Post Apocalypse self made and overkill weapons.
 
It is true though that lots of Fallout fans, not exactly the purists, but the other kind, could care less about the engine.

They just want a post apocalyptic role playing game in the vein of Fallout.

In the end, the people who buy this game don't really give a shit about the ethics behind the statement of its creation, and the table top role playing experience. They just want a fun game, and it's likely it will deliver on that singular accomplishment for most people.


That being said... this journalism really is terrible, lol.
 
Pete Hines: We're planning to show some new stuff off early next year. I'm not really sure what we'll show but it'll be something new but I'm not sure what.


wow. to me this guy just comes off like he's saying "hi guise! maek fun of me kthxbai!"
 
When I buy a game, I pick up a game that I know I will want to play more than 3 weeks from now, I honestly don't think I'll want to play Fallout 3 for more than a week, not due to any real fault in the game, but simply due to two facts, the insulting treatment towards any gamer who liked the first two games, and also due to the fact that although it says fallout, it will only deliver the package, the contents will simply be the next Oblivion mod, re-packaged with Oblivion pre-built in.

Here's one hell of an experiment, I wonder if you took a raw Oblivion mod and applied it to Fallout, would it actually work, although I am sure the effects would muddle up the game beyond belief, if it actually added the items or critters that would honestly speak volumes on the actual coding work involved in the game.

Heck, who doesn't want giant mudcrabs chasing them down amidst super mutants that look like they just stepped out of a badly drawn DnD handbook image, chalk that up beside the plausibility for the nuclear bloom and we got ourselves a real, Grade A, Beth winner!
 
The Dutch Ghost said:
generalissimofurioso said:
The kind of fan that probably said to himself...

"Why can't I get my hands on a nuclear catapault? That'd be fucking awesome. Why is all of this humor so dark? It's depressing. Why aren't there more famous people in this game? It'd be awesome to have Liam Neeson as my Dad or something!"

I sometimes get the feeling that Bethesda's tactic of 'silencing the old guard' is by tiring them out constantly with all the points they know the people who prefer a more 'pure' RPG can't stand.

And I have to say, it is rather effective as I find it quite difficult these days to explain to other people what is so wrong about this 'sequel' to a classic game.
Bethesda has already won most of these people's hearts with the pretty, dark but generic style ruined city graphics and the promise of all kinds of 'crrrrazy' Post Apocalypse self made and overkill weapons.
Exactly my sentiments. Although they probably do not do this deliberately, it just works so flawlessly well. Me and some other familiar folk, who share the common opinion on the state of gaming industry as me are in this aphatic state too nowdays. Although stupidity can never be underrestimated, I never thought, that computer gaming will turn to this kind of cheap, mindless entertainment, that forsakes any involvement of challenge, brain usage and even mild sophistication in game mechanics.
 
Brother None said:
IGN: It's well known that a lot of people at Bethesda are big Fallout fans, which is great because they know the franchise inside out. But is there concern that you're making a game aimed squarely at Fallout purists?
Worst. Journalism. Ever.
1. Sucking up in a typical "Mr Burns, your campaign seems to have the momentum of a run-away freight train. Why are you so popular?"
2. Bad research. "aimed at Fallout purists"?
haha, oho, wow.

Beth, the next generation of fallout purists!
 
The Dutch Ghost said:
What kind of fan is Todd Howard exactly?

Todd?

Well, if I had to venture a guess, I'd say...

1. Todd is a big fan of post-apocalyptic fiction in general, at least movies that portray the grit of post-apocalyptica graphically, like Mad Max or the Silent City. When he played Fallout, originally, he was impressed by their take on post-apocalyptica, as a setting.

2. Todd was probably impressed by the open nature in Fallout, but obviously he felt it was a flawed take on how to do a sandbox, in a way because of the "tyranny of choices" that limits player freedom. Morrowind/Oblivion are obviously better takes, hence his switch to those.

It's not that relevant, because it's not like he purchased the license. ZeniMax wanted a new title for their moneycow, they needed an RPG license with a past, a ready-to-order following and a good name amongst journalists. Bad research led them to Fallout, and that's that.
 
Ironically, the CRPG that went back to simple p-n-p setting and feel get its sequel brutalize into hack-and-slash title. :?
 
Brother None said:
It's not that relevant, because it's not like he purchased the license. ZeniMax wanted a new title for their moneycow, they needed an RPG license with a past, a ready-to-order following and a good name amongst journalists. Bad research led them to Fallout, and that's that.

You're correct.
I made the statement as if Todd himself choose to purchase the Fallout franchise which of course isn't the case.

Still I do take it he and other people in the development team did come up with suggestions of what existing franchise Zenimax could have purchased.

From a marketing point of view I can't say that the Fallout franchise was that attractive on the moment, Tactics didn't exactly storm the market and chart lists, and Brotherhood of Steel was a pretty obscure title.
 
todd hines said:
big, open-ended RPGs with lots of player choice.

and instead you make a post-apoc FPS.

todd hines said:
It definitely has more of vibe of 'this world is really f**ked up' and things aren't going well.

its not so fucked up with invulnerable or non-visible children!

todd hines said:
There's probably nit-picky, little stuff that may be different but at the end of the day there are an awful lot of similarities.

oh yea, that small, itty bitty thing thats not important called POV.. its such a small thing!

todd hines said:
Y'know, it's going to be a bit different because we're using the next iteration of our Radiant AI, so we've got people moving around more and doing stuff, plus there's Havoc, so the gameplay experience changes because you're introducing all these different things, but from a design standpoint it's all about that gameplay experience

Radiant AI: the thing that brought us city guards killing each other.

Havoc: the physics engine that says a dead body hit by a door will jerk around incessantly and even even slide upwards on the door without any npc/player doing anything to door or body.

great ideas :)

todd hines said:
The big thing for us is that we've got to finish the main game before we spend any time working on additional content.

wasnt this said during oblivion? and then it came out like 2-3 months later that 2-3 of the "pay downloads" were actually done as part of the game but removed later on for the pay system?



PS: yes i know it was pete hines, but really is there any difference between the 2?
 
Y'know, it's going to be a bit different because we're using the next iteration of our Radiant AI, so we've got people moving around more and doing stuff

The whole "people doing stuff" angle really sold me on FO3..

God, how did we ever play games where people didn't do "stuff" and move around?

all humor aside, this quote speaks volumes about the last "iteration" of their "radiant AI" system which they used in oblivion.

You know.. the one where people barely moved around, had static facial expressions and did nothing of consequence except for gossip about mudcrabs and get in your way.

If I were Pete, I'd stay as far away from THAT topic as possible when trying to hype a new product with sugarcoated lies and blatantly ridiculous statements..
 
Back
Top