Inside the Vault - Alan Nanes

<Edit>
Now, as for the interview:

I really liked reading this:
One of the things I always admired about Fallout, especially the first one, was that choices really meant something.
<snip>
Your actions shaped the world and yet you still remained in sight of your final goal
<snip>
I hope to bring this same feeling to Fallout 3.
Click to expand...

You and me both, buddy... you and me both.

This was my favorite (non-Fallout) part, being a Star Trek (sorry, I cannot be considered a real Trekkie, as I have never worn Vulcan ears :lol:) & RPG fan, mind you...

Pitch me your dream game in a sentence or less. Go.

My dream game would be a serious Star Trek RPG complete with an entire universe to explore. Ask questions first and shoot later style!
Click to expand...

I really like this idea. Someone, make this game, NOW! :wink:
 
Brother None said:
I'm getting curious, Sorrow. Do you have a source in which a designer explicitly states the reason for going isometric was related to tabletop gaming or that Fallout's design was related to tabletop miniature gaming as well as tabletop pen and paper gaming (yes, both are tabletop)? If not, what are you basing this on?
Click to expand...
No. I'm basing it on what I see. For some reason, the perspective and the size of objects doesn't remind me what I see with my eyes when I go for a walk, nor what I see when I read comics book, or when I watch a movie, but reminds me of tabletop combat with miniatures.
 
Sorrow said:
No. I'm basing it on what I see. For some reason, the perspective and the size of objects doesn't remind me what I see with my eyes when I go for a walk, nor what I see when I read comics book, or when I watch a movie, but reminds me of tabletop combat with miniatures.
Click to expand...

So it's an assumption. Why do you insist on presenting it as fact when it's an assumption? With no reason to back it up other than that it "seems to be that way" to you.

Isometric was originally a logical viewpoint because of how it was used to represent 3D in drawings. It turned out ideal for strategy and RPG games. Fallout was one of them. To assign some special meaning to that without anything to back it up is borderline preposterous.
 
Brother None said:
Isometric was originally a logical viewpoint because of how it was used to represent 3D in drawings. It turned out ideal for strategy and RPG games.
Click to expand...
Both of which originate from tabletop games with miniatures used in combat (in opposition to those that use a flat map with icons and FPP ones).
 
What? Strategy tabletop games use miniatures, tabletop RPGs, to my knowledge, tend to use pieces of paper and dice.
 
Brother None said:
What? Strategy tabletop games use miniatures, tabletop RPGs, to my knowledge, tend to use pieces of paper and dice.
Click to expand...

Well, when last I played a P&P RPG (cir. 1995) miniatures were all the rage. In fact, the comic shop where I played my games had more of them than comics. It got to the point where I had a hard time finding a game that didn't require you to bring your own miniatures.

Of course, that is purely anecdotal evidence.

Personally, I never got into it, as I much rather use my own imagination.
 
Brother None said:
What? Strategy tabletop games use miniatures, tabletop RPGs, to my knowledge, tend to use pieces of paper and dice.
Click to expand...
D&D originated from tabletop miniature wargames and used/can use miniatures. Other systems (including GURPS which uses hexagonal map - the manual suggests using 25mm miniatures [which incidentially would be a right scale - a human in Fallout displayed on 14" screen would have about 25-30mm]) often have miniature combat too.
 
That's nice, but that means it's optional, not requisite. So this is a lot of circumstantial evidence to back up something you've been declaring as fact.

Curious. Or am I missing something an does your reasoning go beyond a blunt cum hoc ergo propter hoc?
 
Brother None said:
That's nice, but that means it's optional, not requisite.
Click to expand...
Err...
No.
1. Miniatures are default in the advanced combat (according to Tim Cain GURPS: Fallout used advanced combat rules). The whole advanced combat section starts with telling MG to "pick an appropriate map, or just draw one" and "choose a miniature figure to represent each character", then it proceeds explains the scale " Each hex represents one yard. Since the hexes are an inch across, this is a 50mm scale and suggests "For ease of handling, though, we suggest using 25mm figures."
Creatures in are sometimes referred to as figures.
While basic combat rules don't include miniatures and map and are purely abstract (The presentation is more like Wasteland combat), advanced ones used by GURPS: Fallout use them.
2. Miniatures are more visually representative than pure imagination and as such make a better basis for computer game view.

Brother None said:
Curious. Or am I missing something an does your reasoning go beyond a blunt cum hoc ergo propter hoc?
Click to expand...
Actually, the whole tabletop and miniatures idea isn't mine - it came from Rosh. I adopted it because it's logical and provides a proper ideology to back-up wanting isometric view and turn based combat.
As for the developers thing...
Rosh claims that Tim Cain and Leonard Boyarsky explained the Fallout design to him:

Roshambo said:
The design, as explained to me by both messieurs Timothy Cain and Leonard Boyardsky, encompasses each element more deeply than "well, let's just use x". Therefore, also symbolic to the retro nature of the character system/combat being from the roots of role-playing games (P&P), the silicon semi-conductor aka transistor, was never discovered or developed. As if ignoring the development of the transistor, the design of Fallout was ignoring the current trend of RPGs to become more "action-based" (often in truth just being hack and slash in a stat system), and returning to a more solid, endurable design, yet progressing upon it. Fallout was notable because it was a trend-breaker, and has deep design put behind it (though, party NPC and the combat could have been better). This design also included the viewpoint, making the characters upon the combat field look more like tabletop RPG figurines.
Click to expand...
Source
 
I have to agree with Brother None on this issue. I played quite a bit of pen and paper RPGs about 8-10 years ago - I even worked as a profesional GM for schoolkids for a year. Never once did I, or anyone I knew, use miniatures when playing RPGs.

Miniatures can be used when playing RPGs, but I have never encountered a game system which required - or even encouraged - the use of miniatures. Usually there would be half a page in the rulebook saying something along the lines of "If you want, you can use miniatures to represent your characters and NPC's in combat situations". Pen and Paper RPG's are supposed to be just that - pen and paper based, not miniature based. Any good GM can describe and execute good combat scenes without miniatures.

I played a lot of miniature games as well, like Warhammer and Necromunda (the latter has a slight fallouty vibe to it - just google it!), but those are strategic wargames and have nothing in comon with RPGs. The only hybrid I can think of at the moment is a game called Inquisitor, which is basically a strategic miniature game with a GM. There is no immidiate connection between PnP RPGs - on which Fallout is based - and miniatures.
 
Sorrow said:
Miniatures are default in the advanced combat (according to Tim Cain GURPS: Fallout used advanced combat rules). The whole advanced combat section starts with telling MG to "pick an appropriate map, or just draw one" and "choose a miniature figure to represent each character"
Click to expand...

Not to nitpick, but advanced combat mode in GURPS, as far as I know, only requires a map. The use of miniatures for the map is something for, well, the unimaginative.

Sorrow said:
Miniatures are more visually representative than pure imagination and as such make a better basis for computer game view.
Click to expand...

And more speculation! Don't forget, first person view is better than imagination too! Besides, this has nothing to do with your argument...

Sorrow said:
Actually, the whole tabletop and miniatures idea isn't mine - it came from Rosh.
Click to expand...

Aaaaaand failure!

Explain to me how, exactly, in an age where isometric view was predominant enough to be used in hack-n-slasher Diablo, I'm supposed to take your (or Rosh in his crazy insane period) word for it that Fallout's isometric view comes from tabletop roots, and Diablo's isometric...doesn't?
 
Brother None said:
Not to nitpick, but advanced combat mode in GURPS, as far as I know, only requires a map. The use of miniatures for the map is something for, well, the unimaginative.
Click to expand...
Err...
Actually, the advanced combat section GURPS manual is the first RPG game manual that I've seen that actually tells player to use miniatures, says what miniatures are advised and then assumes that players use miniatures. (I also have manuals for Cyberpunk 2020, AD&D 2nd ed., The Riddle of Steel, Mechwarrior and D&D 3rd ed and none of them tells players to prepare his miniatures as a part of standard combat or assumes that players use them.).

Brother None said:
Sorrow said:
Actually, the whole tabletop and miniatures idea isn't mine - it came from Rosh.
Click to expand...

Aaaaaand failure!
Click to expand...
So, you assume that he lied about Tim Cain and Leonard Boyarsky explaining the design to him?
 
Sorrow said:
So, you assume that he lied about Tim Cain and Leonard Boyarsky explaining the design to him?
Click to expand...
He's not saying that Cain and Boyarsky personally explained the design to him nor that Cain and Boyarsky claimed that the viewpoint was chosen for the similarity to tabletop gaming. Cain, Boyarsky and several other big names have explained the design very clearly, but through all of the quotes and interviews available there is no mention whatsoever of the isometric perspective being derived from tabletop gaming. All we have on that, is Rosh's explanation. Which could very well have been extrapolation.

The top-down perspective is almost a necessity to have in a turn-based system, and the most logical choice.
 
Sorrow said:
Actually, the advanced combat section GURPS manual is the first RPG game manual that I've seen that actually tells player to use miniatures, says what miniatures are advised and then assumes that players use miniatures.
Click to expand...

That's nice. Now please read my statement again, and try and think about how your statement doesn't relate to it in any way.

The difference between require and advise. Think.

Sorrow said:
So, you assume that he lied about Tim Cain and Leonard Boyarsky explaining the design to him?
Click to expand...

I dunno, should I ask Boyarsky or Cain? Heh. The density of truths in all of Rosh's statements on the Codex in that drama period was very, very low. So yes, if all you have is one quote from a period when Rosh was very upset when one line of his indicates that Cain/Boyarsky once told him the design comes from tabletop figurines, I'm not convinced.

I'm waiting for a direct quote. So far, all I see is speculation. Some more valid than others. But it's still just speculation, where you have been stating it as fact. Without any direct developer quotes or proof.
 
Hmm, I've never used a miniature in any tabletop rpg I have ever played. I find them boring and restrictive.

I've said it before and I'll say it again,

When I play tabletop rpgs, I visualize the game from a first/third person perspective, because in my mind that is the most artistic and dramatic portrayal of the experience of BEING my character. I am not some disembodied omniscient, I AM my character. Period.

It's called *gasp* immersion!
 
xdarkyrex said:
When I play tabletop rpgs, I visualize the game from a first/third person perspective, because in my mind that is the most artistic and dramatic portrayal of the experience of BEING my character. I am not some disembodied omniscient, I AM my character. Period.
Click to expand...

*points* LARPer!!!!

/flee
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top