Joystiq, Kotaku. GameSpy Fallout 3 previews

[PlanHex]

I never played the first two Fallouts

I was able to take a look at Fallout 3 and judge for myself if it has more in common with Oblivion than it does with Fallout. And after three hours with the game, I’ve decided… it’s 50-50.

Wait, what?

 

[M-26-7]

My favorite comments were people defending the game by saying you can't judge it yet. Not only is this a fallacy, but incredibly hipocritical. This was not being said to people who were saying "TH1S GAEM IS TEH WIN!111!!!"

 

[Ausir]

At their best, the quests I played directed you toward sites where interesting things were going on. One started out as a "fed ex" quest from Megaton to a remote settlement built on a ruined overpass overlooking the Potomac. When I got there, I found that the settlers were under siege by a group of vampire people.

Have I missed something here whilst lurking? Vampire people? wtf?

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Blood_Ties

 

[ookami]

I never played the first two Fallouts and have very little sentimental attachment to Pip-boy, Vault 101, or Dogmeat.

Done.

Well, OK, not really.

nothing screams “I’m afraid of evolving” like turn-based fights.

Until recently, I never realized just how many people seem to think that digestion = evolution. Doesn't bother me if a game actually advances through sequels, but being turned into a piece of shit is part of digestion, not evolution. I guess Bethesda are showing soooooo much courage about change by keeping the main TES series in the same format for the last 14 years, with the games actually devolving (except in the most superficial aspects) since just after the second one. I guess this is what will happen to Fallout.

you get a healthy dose of strategy by opening up VATS mode.

Looks more like you get a unhealthy dose of poorly-conceived and even worse-implemented gimmick.

There isn’t a charisma mini-game, alas, but certain dialogue options will open up based on perks or skills.

Yeah, we don't need no In-tel-uh-jents factoring in on our dialog.

 

[Zeld]

I think I recall someone complaining about short dialogue options, where your character would actually say something completely different than what was expected. Is that Mass Effect or some other game?

Well, at least Fahrenheit by Quantic Dream had this problem. There were sometimes choices like "Ask about" and then the character would ask about something, but you would not know what. And yeah, at same time there was a timelimit.

I find it strange/amusing/stupid/brainfart that these people say things like "nothing screams “I’m afraid of evolving” like turn-based fights." And at same time they praise Beth for being innovative, for making Fallout 3 a Oblivion with guns.

And yeah, FPS screams originality....

 

[UncannyGarlic]

'In all the best ways'. Yes but not Oblivion with guns. You don't expect people to listen to you when you miss-quote like that do you?

It was not misquoted or quoted out of context, people constantly say such but that statement was the very core of what he said.

 

[TheGM]

I’m glad they decided to make combat real time, because nothing screams “I’m afraid of evolving” like turn-based fights.

GRR MAKES ME ANGRY!!! O wait...there is more.

You might think, then, that strategy goes out the window and the game devolves into shootouts whenever an enemy is encountered.

O SEE Taking something out of context and makes it look even worse. Now I'm not saying I agree with this dope. But don't go cuting things in half. gotta take it as a whole.

Moving on.

I never played the first two Fallouts

I was able to take a look at Fallout 3 and judge for myself if it has more in common with Oblivion than it does with Fallout. And after three hours with the game, I’ve decided… it’s 50-50.

Wait, what?

Real head scratcher there. Just wow.

 

[Misty]

Well....that isn't quite the same thing now is it. He is saying that it has the best qualities of oblivion, not that it is oblivion with guns.

No he said and I quote, "It's Oblivion with Guns in all of the best ways"

He said plainly that it was Oblivion with guns, but he meant it in a way that excluded all the assumed cons of that type of gameplay.

Also this, "Nothing screams afraid of evolving like turn-based combat"

And I say, "GET A CLUE!" No where besides in the gaming media do you find writers who have such an ignorance towards history. These troglodytes wouldn't last a week in Rolling Stone magazine much less a day in Newsweek. I can just see this idiot writing a political analysis on how a depression might affect China...oh wait he's already failed at that...

"so, yeah um; yesterday the stock market tumbld: and went down liek 40,00 points oh lol i mean 4,00-- stupid typos lulz
in my opinion i think our nation needs to take control of the stock market or else well have a depression, like in 19 something i cant remember i dont read and stuff this effects china because were the strongest country in the world and without, us they would die and stuff"

Needless to say, he didn't graduate the online class he took from the University of Pheonix.

 

[EnglishMuffin]

Here again is a place where Fallout 3 blends its Fallout roots with the best of Oblivion: the dialogue exchanges.

Whoosie whatie now?

Well I do like pie. There wasn't enough pie in fallout I guess. Is that what he meant? Oh maybe he's being sarcastic.

 

[PaladinHeart]

So how do you create branching contextual dialogues of which the player will be aware, if the player can't see exactly what's going to be said before saying it? Your system only seems to work if your interaction with an NPC has only one goal/context.

I was mostly curious (as to how much players would mind), considering the limitations of some game editing tools like those of Fallout Tactics and Warcraft 3.

I figure some limited and yet obscure choice is better than not having any choice at all.

I also like the idea of small seemingly insignificant events having an effect on the game in the future. For example if you get in a fight with a particular NPC and don't kill him, then he could turn up later on in the game. Depending on the player's view, this could be bad (stronger enemy) or good (better equipment on said stronger enemy).

Err.. my apologies for going way off topic with my musings.

 

[sai | GLYPH]

I figure some limited and yet obscure choice is better than not having any choice at all.

I don't think that's the issue.

Indicating dialogue choices by demeanor alone limits choice because it means every dialogue tree has to concern a single topic.

Bullying someone to give you money instead of complimenting them is no help if you're trying to find out from them where they live.

A dialogue tree consisting of options such as "bully, compliment, etc" do nothing to distinguish or indicate to the player where they could take the conversation contextually.

In cases in which fallout's dialogue options were unclear as to tone, there was usually an indicator such as "[sarcastic]" at the end of it. I think this system is most rewarding.

Err.. my apologies for going way off topic with my musings. ops

No need to apologize. Musing is fun!

 

[TheGM]

I thought it was kinda obvious in the OGs since you tell what would happed by the words used.

 

[DarkPhilly]

At their best, the quests I played directed you toward sites where interesting things were going on. One started out as a "fed ex" quest from Megaton to a remote settlement built on a ruined overpass overlooking the Potomac. When I got there, I found that the settlers were under siege by a group of vampire people.

Have I missed something here whilst lurking? Vampire people? wtf?

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Blood_Ties

Thanks Ausir! If in doubt check The Vault.

I never played the first two Fallouts

I was able to take a look at Fallout 3 and judge for myself if it has more in common with Oblivion than it does with Fallout. And after three hours with the game, I’ve decided… it’s 50-50.

Wait, what?

I'm glad to see the awesome powers of spin at work.

 

[Kilus]

I really didn't like Kotaku review because nothing screams “I’m afraid of evolving” like having a text based review. Where are the funny pictures and fast pace voice-over? It just seems the reviewer wants to reject the notion of “evolution” in reviewing.

 

[pkt-zer0]

Well....that isn't quite the same thing now is it. He is saying that it has the best qualities of oblivion, not that it is oblivion with guns.

So, how are you going to twist "The game it's closest to is Oblivion." into meaning that it's actually not like Oblivion? Shouldn't the game Fallout (N) is closest to be Fallout (M, where 0 < M < N)?

 

[Unkillable Cat]

I never played the first two Fallouts

I was able to take a look at Fallout 3 and judge for myself if it has more in common with Oblivion than it does with Fallout. And after three hours with the game, I’ve decided… it’s 50-50.

Wait, what?

To put this into context:

After being filled in by Manfriend

So he had someone tell him what the original Fallout game are about. It's never mentioned or implied just how reliable a source the other guy is, so take it as it is.

 

[aronsearle]

I was going to post in the comments section about how daft/stupid/ignorant it was to say "because nothing screams “I’m afraid of evolving” like turn-based fights."

But then i read the kind of people that where leaving comments, and saw how pointless it would be.

 

[Daimyo]

I think I recall someone complaining about short dialogue options, where your character would actually say something completely different than what was expected. Is that Mass Effect or some other game?

Yes, Mass Effect did that to a certain degree.

It was quite annoying.

 

[PaladinHeart]

I was going to post in the comments section about how daft/stupid/ignorant it was to say "because nothing screams “I’m afraid of evolving” like turn-based fights."

But then i read the kind of people that where leaving comments, and saw how pointless it would be.

Yeah. There's a big difference between insulting the style of gameplay, and simply saying, "I don't like this style of gameplay. I'd rather do all the actual shooting, etc.. myself."

About dialogue. Which would be more interesting in a game engine with limited dialogue features?
A. The short options during dialogue.
B. You define your character at the start of the game, and after that point, all of their decisions are made automatically based on the personality you gave them.

I kinda like B, because you could essentially make a basic good guy, bad guy, or even a completely chaotic person who'd make completely random decisions. Kinda like the system used to generate your MERC in Jagged Alliance 2, except it would define your character's actual personality rather than their skills and combat expertise.

Also, you couldn't save at the end and choose option A, reload, and then do option B, C, D, etc.. I hate end-game options. I've always felt the end game should be based on every choice you've made throughout the game.

Of course there's nothing to prevent the player from making a good guy and then having them randomly shoot civilians. This could possibly shut off certain quests that would normally allow you to finish the game, but then again, what kind of psycho would be interested in also finishing the main quest? I doubt an evil person would be interested in saving the world from Super Mutants, the Enclave, or finding Dad.

 

[radnan]

Gamespy offers the complete media package - complete with side-stories on the frontpage undug from 2000 to support your design choices -> http://www.gamespy.com/articles/915/915169p5.html GO TEAM !

offcourse this could also be a coincidence