Briosafreak
Lived Through the Heat Death
The Part2 of the J.E. Sawyer interview starts with a couple of questions about himself:
<blockquote>What are your favourite computer games of all time?
<blockquote>Darklands, Pool of Radiance, Fallout.</blockquote>
What one of those games would you most like to work on given all the financing and time you want and why?
<blockquote>Darklands. Unlike the Fallout series, Darklands has been totally and completely abandoned, but the game was terrific. If money were no object, I'd love to make a new Darklands game set in either "Greater Germany" or another part of 15th century Europe.</blockquote>
Then NCR_Ranger asked J.E. Sawyer to comment on Chris Avellone (MCA) -the author of the Fallout Bible that has now left Black Isle Studios- ideas about Fallout3 and the Fallout world:
MCA: I would prefer TB combat. And no multiplayer.<blockquote>Sawyer: So would I, but I don't get to decide that, unfortunately. It will probably be TB with a RT component, and it's likely that there will be a co-op multiplayer mode.</blockquote>
MCA: 80s Sci-Fi is bad. The point of Fallout is that the world functions much the way people of the 50s believed a sci-fi/post-holocaust world would be. And it obeys the same physics, to boot.<blockquote>Sawyer: I don't know if 80s sci-fi is automatically bad, but yes, a lot of Fallout's pseudo-science is based in 50s pop culture or nuclear war beliefs among the public.</blockquote>
MCA: Weapons and automobiles (if any) should be rare. I do not think there should be real-world weapons.<blockquote>Sawyer: Mechanized weapons should be rare, but simple ones/improvised ones should still be common. There should not be any NAMED real-world weapons.
Someone may look at a weapon and think "Huh, that looks sort of like an M-16" but it shouldn't be called an M-16.</blockquote>MCA: For continuity purposes, I would prefer that all Fallout PC RPG titles have their own continuity outside of other platforms and game genres (FOT), and that other platforms and game genres be regarded as "What if" universes, not canon.
I do not know if that is my decision, however.
<blockquote>Sawyer: Sure.</blockquote>
MCA: I think there are many things that make Fallout what it is: The SPECIAL system. The choices in solving quests. The non-linearity. The ambiance. Hard moral choices. Role-playing, including stupid dialogue and Karma-based responses. A world where locations have rational explanations and reasons for being, as well as economic reasons for how they have survived.
(...)among others. There are some things I think were done poorly in FO2, and they are:
Easter eggs.
Too many jokes, which only undermines the plot.
Lack of a satisfying finale.
Lack of choice in finale.
Not enough choice in some areas.
Real-world weapons.
Super Technology.
Too much sex. I don't think you need an excess of prostitutes to make a game serious and gritty.
The presence of aliens and the supernatural. While I can support the presence of aliens in a Fallout 50's ambiance, I think they distract from the human-centric themes in the game.<blockquote>Sawyer: Sure.</blockquote>MCA: There are some things I would want to bring from Planescape, however:
- A strong central theme or multiple ones, preferably sparked by your character.
- Deep NPC relationships that are not about romance.
- Richer NPCs whose lives you can affect dramatically.
- Get XP rewards for exploration, learning things, teaching things, and not just killing.
- Even more importance and focus on the central character; rather than seeking a water chip or a GECK, I'd rather the player tell me what he's looking for as a character, then have the game react accordingly.<blockquote>Sawyer: I'm not so keen on having deep CNPC relationships, because I think Fallout should be focused on the PC.
That said, they could be a little more involved than they were in the first two games in terms of interaction, personality, and overall goals.The last goal is admirable, but typically leads to players getting a very vague sense of what any driving plot in the story is.</blockquote>MCA: I would prefer a Fallout that takes a step back from the world in FO2, in a frontier-like area, more in keeping with FO1. I would also like to see certain civilizations' advancement reversed dramatically and violently, as well as perhaps do some general clean-up on the world.
If Black Isle did a Fallout 3, we'd definitely stick with a 50s music feel. No modern day bands.<blockquote>Sawyer: Yep.</blockquote>
Sawyer also has some news about means of locomotion:
<blockquote>I would like to see another car in a Fallout sequel. The car was useful and not crazy OMG powerful or "unrealistic", even within the setting. However, there probably should be only one car or possibly two (big and slow vs. small and fast).
However, Fallout 3 will probably have other... alternate means of transportation.</blockquote></blockquote>Again we thank J.E. Sawyer, Lead Designer on project Van Buren for taking the time to answer this questions, and NCR_Ranger for the good work.
Word goes for your comments now, what do you boys and girls think?
<blockquote>What are your favourite computer games of all time?
<blockquote>Darklands, Pool of Radiance, Fallout.</blockquote>
What one of those games would you most like to work on given all the financing and time you want and why?
<blockquote>Darklands. Unlike the Fallout series, Darklands has been totally and completely abandoned, but the game was terrific. If money were no object, I'd love to make a new Darklands game set in either "Greater Germany" or another part of 15th century Europe.</blockquote>
Then NCR_Ranger asked J.E. Sawyer to comment on Chris Avellone (MCA) -the author of the Fallout Bible that has now left Black Isle Studios- ideas about Fallout3 and the Fallout world:
MCA: I would prefer TB combat. And no multiplayer.<blockquote>Sawyer: So would I, but I don't get to decide that, unfortunately. It will probably be TB with a RT component, and it's likely that there will be a co-op multiplayer mode.</blockquote>
MCA: 80s Sci-Fi is bad. The point of Fallout is that the world functions much the way people of the 50s believed a sci-fi/post-holocaust world would be. And it obeys the same physics, to boot.<blockquote>Sawyer: I don't know if 80s sci-fi is automatically bad, but yes, a lot of Fallout's pseudo-science is based in 50s pop culture or nuclear war beliefs among the public.</blockquote>
MCA: Weapons and automobiles (if any) should be rare. I do not think there should be real-world weapons.<blockquote>Sawyer: Mechanized weapons should be rare, but simple ones/improvised ones should still be common. There should not be any NAMED real-world weapons.
Someone may look at a weapon and think "Huh, that looks sort of like an M-16" but it shouldn't be called an M-16.</blockquote>MCA: For continuity purposes, I would prefer that all Fallout PC RPG titles have their own continuity outside of other platforms and game genres (FOT), and that other platforms and game genres be regarded as "What if" universes, not canon.
I do not know if that is my decision, however.
<blockquote>Sawyer: Sure.</blockquote>
MCA: I think there are many things that make Fallout what it is: The SPECIAL system. The choices in solving quests. The non-linearity. The ambiance. Hard moral choices. Role-playing, including stupid dialogue and Karma-based responses. A world where locations have rational explanations and reasons for being, as well as economic reasons for how they have survived.
(...)among others. There are some things I think were done poorly in FO2, and they are:
Easter eggs.
Too many jokes, which only undermines the plot.
Lack of a satisfying finale.
Lack of choice in finale.
Not enough choice in some areas.
Real-world weapons.
Super Technology.
Too much sex. I don't think you need an excess of prostitutes to make a game serious and gritty.
The presence of aliens and the supernatural. While I can support the presence of aliens in a Fallout 50's ambiance, I think they distract from the human-centric themes in the game.<blockquote>Sawyer: Sure.</blockquote>MCA: There are some things I would want to bring from Planescape, however:
- A strong central theme or multiple ones, preferably sparked by your character.
- Deep NPC relationships that are not about romance.
- Richer NPCs whose lives you can affect dramatically.
- Get XP rewards for exploration, learning things, teaching things, and not just killing.
- Even more importance and focus on the central character; rather than seeking a water chip or a GECK, I'd rather the player tell me what he's looking for as a character, then have the game react accordingly.<blockquote>Sawyer: I'm not so keen on having deep CNPC relationships, because I think Fallout should be focused on the PC.
That said, they could be a little more involved than they were in the first two games in terms of interaction, personality, and overall goals.The last goal is admirable, but typically leads to players getting a very vague sense of what any driving plot in the story is.</blockquote>MCA: I would prefer a Fallout that takes a step back from the world in FO2, in a frontier-like area, more in keeping with FO1. I would also like to see certain civilizations' advancement reversed dramatically and violently, as well as perhaps do some general clean-up on the world.
If Black Isle did a Fallout 3, we'd definitely stick with a 50s music feel. No modern day bands.<blockquote>Sawyer: Yep.</blockquote>
Sawyer also has some news about means of locomotion:
<blockquote>I would like to see another car in a Fallout sequel. The car was useful and not crazy OMG powerful or "unrealistic", even within the setting. However, there probably should be only one car or possibly two (big and slow vs. small and fast).
However, Fallout 3 will probably have other... alternate means of transportation.</blockquote></blockquote>Again we thank J.E. Sawyer, Lead Designer on project Van Buren for taking the time to answer this questions, and NCR_Ranger for the good work.
Word goes for your comments now, what do you boys and girls think?
