Corvin said:
Then ask your self would Bethesda or Bioware ever start making a game of the level like Planescape Tourment?
Bioware
made Baldur's Gate.
Your point is ?
Corvin said:
Or is it just simply a different design, target audience and thus totally different experience
One of those things I try to get people to realize... but they insist on making Fallout 1 and 2 to Fallout 3 comparisons.
And why should "we" not compare it? Its a sequel to the first 2 games. And when it comes to Fallout and 3 the case here is
Nomen est omen. Would you not compare Da Vincis art with the art of someone that claims to make paintings of the same quality like Da Vinci and wants to continue his work with his spirit in mind and see if it has the same quality and distinctive design? I dont see why even if it would be art (And Bethesdas Fallout 3 is not art, its a "product") can not be compared in its quality or design with past games. Fallouts success and mechanics can be in most aspects demonstrated in logic tracts just as with any other known game (it has a reason why people liked and still like GTA, Metal Gear, Final Fantasy and as well Fallout 1/2).
Corvin said:
It gets down to high art/low art arguments. Art is art. They're all games... no matter what people assert. If people play them they have to be good to some extent. Fallout 3 is not Daikatana.
Again Fallout 3 is not Daikatana. Its Fallout 3. That they are games makes it even easier to compare it with past Fallout titles. Though who has said games can not be art? Of course games can be art. Fallout 3 is just not art. Its a product. It has been developed like a product, it has been market like a product and of capital importance their own creators treat it like a 'product'. When ever a controversial situation shows up, any sign of 'hurted sales' Bethesda is steping 2 steps back when there is not even a reason to move. Like the Japanese version of Bethesdas Fallout that has been cencored cause Bethesda is afraid to many nuclear references to the Fatman and destroying Megaton 'might' hurt sales in Japan when I never found any evidence that the Japanese autorities ever demanded or mentioned to Bethesda any necessity for a censorship. No artist would criple or cencor his own art when he has no reason for it.
Corvin said:
...the RPG purists will also claim 'there've been no turnbased RPGs since pre 2000' and ignore anything on a portable system... 'there is no story!' and ignore things like GTA4.
I can not give any comments about GTA4 since I have not played the game. But the last thing I heard about the game was that its a action game and not a "RPG". So ... I dont even know what the point here is. By the way even if I have not played the game I somewhat doubt the Story has the same kind of depth like a few very good old RPGs I know. Of course a story driven game can as well have good or at least enjoyable gameplay.
The thing about Turn Based combat and Real Time is ... most of the time we only say that Turn Based combat more or less coexisted with Real Time and First Person gameplay. Both are design. Used to achieve a special unquire experience. You can not use Turn Based to get a Real Time experience and vise versa. As said. Take your time to read carefully what people mean. A Ford Courier and Ferrari Testarossa are BOTH cars. But you would not use them for the same experience. Would you use a Rolls Royce for plowing your field? [Thats what Bethesda did when they
butchered SPECIAL for a REAL TIME FIRST PERSON experience and why it feels so extremley watered-down hence the argument of twitch-gaming and fast pased combat].
The devs of Fallout 1 chose Turn Based combat for their game before they have thought about the setting in the first place so It was as well not just a "technical limitation" to say it that way, many games used at the same time real time and first person. They used TB combat to achieve a unique experience.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfOVLdmEHkg[/youtube]
Notice the first game was even designed in medival setting with swords and armor.
*Thx to Gizmo who uploaded it on his account!
And still quite many cant understand it and just babble the same stuff all the time that its "old", "antiquated" and "un-immersive". As said I can here as well only point again to
Vince and the excelent interview i stubled across recently. You should realy take your time and read it before posting or saying anything about Turn Based combat. For those that LIKE! Turn Based combat it IS INDEED IMMERSIVE. One can realy understand it and why some people are angry when he takes his time to deconstruct the arguments of the "other side". Seriusly it is not that hard. Most common people have usualy the necessary brainpower to do that.