Multiple Ideas for FO3

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jaco_Nut
  • Start date Start date
J

Jaco_Nut

Guest
I'd been playing FO2 again (IMO it never gets old,) when i thought of some ideas for Fallout 3.

-Keep Fallout 3 like 1 and 2, not like FT, but add some features, such as:
-full control of NPCs, like Baldurs Gate.
-add an NPC action menu with options like "Put weapons away" and "Stay Close to me"
-shows NPCs health, weapon, and armor.
 
>I'd been playing FO2 again (IMO
>it never gets old,) when
>i thought of some ideas
>for Fallout 3.
>
>-Keep Fallout 3 like 1 and
>2, not like FT,

Amen to that

but
>add some features, such as:
>
> -full control
>of NPCs, like Baldurs Gate.
>

I'm not opposed to this, allthough it makes your second point a bit mute because if you have full control, you can control where they go and what they do so telling them to stay close isn't need anymore. And i hope you don't mean the BG combat system (ie real time but pausable). I like to keep the turn based system.


> -add an
>NPC action menu with options
>like "Put weapons away" and
>"Stay Close to me"

Implemented in Fallout 2. Combat control.

> -shows NPCs
>health, weapon, and armor.

Allready exists. Allthough you need awarness.

JR

Nunc ut nunquam
 
I definately think Fallout 3 should be turn based. What i meant on the NPC menu was that have those options more accessible, so you don't have to talk to each NPC, just press a button and they do that. I would just want full control in combat situations. I think a little box in the corner that shows the weapon/health/armor/etc. My basic idea for FO3 is to have FO2 with a different plot and more features.
 
> -full control
>of NPCs, like Baldurs Gate.

I don't think we need full control of NPC's. Really, how exactly are you supposed to command your friends during a firefight with limited time to tell them what to do...and IMO it would get annoying after a while too.

I think they should just improve the AI for your friends so that they don't burst with the mp5 while standing right next to you.
 
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-22-01 AT 09:57PM (GMT)[p]well... IMHO applying the full controll of NPC's system would somehow kill the individuality of them. What I mean is that little thrill before i.e. Marcus' minigun fire - "will he aim at the guy I am thinking about ?".
Non-controllable characters are somehow "unique" to me... BG's NPC's didn't have that - they did whatever you wanted them to do (weehee - even kill each other).

"You can get more with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone." - Al Capone (1899-1947)
 
> -full control of NPCs, like Baldurs Gate.
> -add an NPC action menu with options like "Put weapons away"
> and "Stay Close to me"

These two kinda contradict each other, don't you think? I'd prefer the second one, though, but leave them as suggestions to the NPCs instead of direct commands that are impossible not to obey.



 
Good points, aside from:

"-full control of NPCs, like Baldurs Gate."

Then, they aren't NPCs anymore. They become Player Characters. They might have been called "NPCs" in Baldur's Gate, but that's a load of wash. BG took severe liberties with numerous things, including defining party Player Characters that way.
 
hmm no way , baldurs gate was the worse game ever created, it was the worse bday present i got , i sat there for about a good hour playing it before i just dumped it , it was soooo gay , i have no quarrels against fallouts interface so , one thing i wouldnt want to see happen to fallout though, it hasssssss to keep the 50's atmosphere its the only thing that truly keeps the game together ....
 
Well, I feel that Baldur's Gate is one of the best games ever along with Fallout. However, I prefer FO's way of dealing with joinable npcs. It's much more interesting. Now, they just need more developed persoanlites, and improved AI than it has reached platinum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top