JE's obsession

[Puuk]

(snip) Can you make sure QA do a good job? With the recent release of the Lionheart demo, I can't help but think the QA department missed something. More importantly, make sure you listen to those boys and girls in there and make DAMN SURE they're giving you all the feedback they can.

I think there is a bit of confusion between dumbing down a game and what Josh "et al" are trying to do with Van Buren. Our goal is not to dumb it down, but create more gameplay by giving players different options for getting through the game. Instead of making the optimal path Rambo-style, we're trying to make the game fun and rewarding if the player wants to be stealth boy, science boy, a combo of both, diplomacy boy, etc. A CRPG is not really fun if there is one optimal way to get through the game, and there is no need to dumb down the game in order to create more play style options and choices. There's quite a bit of diversity between players on how they enjoy going through a CRPG, and we're trying to add and create rules, scenarios, and quests that reward the different play styles and make the overall game fun. I know I don't want to play a game that is not fun, nor do I want to make such a game. I don't need to ask this group if they want to play a fun game; I already know the answer.

As for our QA, they’re a great bunch of folks who work insane hours and generally do a bang-up job. Communication between us and QA has always been good, so if they think something sucks, they'll let us know without reservation.

 

[JJ86]

If what you guys say is true, it sounds promising and I don't have to wait for the good reviews to be published to go out and buy it.

 

[TekkamanBlade]

The entire reason we're all arguing with him is that it doesn't sound like like same system.

But does it really sound so different? All the changes are really just on the surface. Are perks, skills, and traits going to have different relationships to each other through JE's changes?

 

[Gwydion]

But does it really sound so different? All the changes are really just on the surface. Are perks, skills, and traits going to have different relationships to each other through JE's changes?

YES! For example, there is now only one firearms skill. Players become proficient with different types of firearms via perks. That's completely different.

 

[Montez]

But does it really sound so different? All the changes are really just on the surface. Are perks, skills, and traits going to have different relationships to each other through JE's changes?

From the sounds of things, yes. Several skills are either getting the axe or getting condensed into one skill. Starting skills seemingly have nothing to do with attributes. Several traits are being reworked or possibly dropped. The only thing I haven't heard much talk about are perks, but those are also being reworked, at least as far as the requirements for getting them.

To me it seems like the only thing unchanged is the surface, while everything beneath the surface is gradually being morphed into an entirely different game system. Maybe this will work work out for the best, maybe it won't, but many of these changes seem arbitrary and not much of an improvement.

 

[TekkamanBlade]

YES! For example, there is now only one firearms skill. Players become proficient with different types of firearms via perks. That's completely different.

I too don't agree with that, but it doesn't change how the system works.

From the sounds of things, yes. Several skills are either getting the axe or getting condensed into one skill. Starting skills seemingly have nothing to do with attributes. Several traits are being reworked or possibly dropped. The only thing I haven't heard much talk about perks, but those are also being reworked, at least as far as the requirements for getting them.

To me it seems like the only thing unchanged is the surface, while everything beneath the surface is gradually being morphed into an entirely different game system. Maybe this will work work out for the best, maybe it won't, but many of these changes seem arbitrary and not much of an improvement.

Aside from attributes not affecting starting skills, it's all on the surface.

This is all more along the lines of changing 3E to 3.5E of DnD instead of 2E to 3E.

 

[Gwydion]

Both examples fit the definition of change that you outlined in your earlier post.

 

[Old School Role-Player]

Aside from attributes not affecting starting skills, it's all on the surface.

This is all more along the lines of changing 3E to 3.5E of DnD instead of 2E to 3E.

I have to disagree with you there. I can assure you that by having only one marksmanship skill, there is a fundamental difference already between Fallout 3 and it's predecessors. Basically, JE Sawyer--being dead-set against a gun-based game--has either a) forced a combat player to be an unarmed, Mortal Kombat guru or b) made the game far too easy for a gun-toting combat-oriented character. I have never once seen a game or a player who thought that violence was simply the "easier" or "safer" path in *any* role-playing game. For the most part, combat was a necessary evil meant to be avoided unless you wanted to take an extra risk.

That alone makes Fallout 3 a different game already. Add to that, Combat Boy improves his fighting abilities through perks while Charisma Boy, Stealth Boy and Science Boy all improve their specialties through skills, and suddenly you have a class-based system. Suddenly, a "classless" class-based system becomes something far removed from it's original feel.

 

[Montez]

Aside from attributes not affecting starting skills, it's all on the surface.

This is all more along the lines of changing 3E to 3.5E of DnD instead of 2E to 3E.

I have to disagree with you as well. The post-apoc setting and the concept of skills, traits, and perks are the surface of Fallout, and this is about the only thing that isn't being changed. What Fallout 1 and 2 did with this surface is being changed, and I don't think even the BIS team would dispute that.

I haven't played 2E D&D for about 13 years, and I've never played 3 or 3.5 outside of computer RPG's, so I don't know how apt your comparison is as far as changes go. I do know that there is a lot of debate and arguing in the community over the change from 3 to 3.5, and whether it was needed or justified or just done to make WOTSC more money, and in that sense it's comparable.