new graphics, etc? who wants them?

Sander said:
Because they haven't shown anything at all flaming them for making an inferior product you don't know anything about will only lead to them ignoring the rational and well-thought out points that don't involve flaming them.
Actually, they have shown a lot of ignorance in regard to Fallout and CRPGs in general - enough to make me feel very, very concerned for the prospects of Fallout 3.
 
making an inferior product you don't know anything about

Are you referring to Fallout 3, whose progress I've been following for a while now, and it's safe to say I know roughly as much as you do about?
Or TES, which I was addicted to for 3 months or so, left, played some real RPG's, came back to and realized how flawed it was in comparison?

but just shouting 'Bethsoft sucks, they can't do anything right'

Bethsoft aren't good at making Classic RPG's, which TES was cited as. Thus it dissapointed those who were expecting one. It's a game that had alot of potential, but drew in people expecting something different, causing the dissapointment.
They made TES as a good game, to those not expecting another Baldur's Gate.

create graphics for the engine that have the seem feel to them.

Which they won't do because "That's not what we do best.", and "We will do what we do best."
 
RPGenius said:
Are you referring to Fallout 3, whose progress I've been following for a while now, and it's safe to say I know roughly as much as you do about?
Or TES, which I was addicted to for 3 months or so, left, played some real RPG's, came back to and realized how flawed it was in comparison?
I'm talking about Fallout 3, obviously. And if you know more about it than me, you know about three quotes and which engine they're going to use. Jeez, now that's a lot.

RPGenius said:
Bethsoft aren't good at making Classic RPG's, which TES was cited as. Thus it dissapointed those who were expecting one. It's a game that had alot of potential, but drew in people expecting something different, causing the dissapointment.
They made TES as a good game, to those not expecting another Baldur's Gate.
No, TES sucked as well. Just as Baldur's Gate did. But this has little to do with what they're going to do with Fallout 3. For all we know, they want to really recreate a truly great RPG.

RPGenius said:
Which they won't do because "That's not what we do best.", and "We will do what we do best."
See, that's all you have to go about and that's all you're basing every single insult on. That one Todd Hines quote.
See, 'what they do best' is a very ambiguous and interpretable quote. And not a definite one either.
For instance, the whole bullshit 'dialogues' in TES3 have supposedly been replaced by a much better system in Oblivion.
 
I think we should try to be positive since some is actually making Fallout 3. The people at Betsheda are most likely gamlers like us and you can probably bet they spent their sweet time beeing shot by Ian in the back too.

We should court them with good suggestions instead of verbal abuse like some tend to do here.

Hopefully they make a great game that we can mod for generations to come loosing our sleep and spouses over.
 
Sander said:
No, TES sucked as well. Just as Baldur's Gate did. But this has little to do with what they're going to do with Fallout 3. For all we know, they want to really recreate a truly great RPG.
"TES" is three games, not one. Two of those are great, while the third one sucks.

See, that's all you have to go about and that's all you're basing every single insult on. That one Todd Hines quote.
See, 'what they do best' is a very ambiguous and interpretable quote. And not a definite one either.
For instance, the whole bullshit 'dialogues' in TES3 have supposedly been replaced by a much better system in Oblivion.
I don't know about RPGenius, but my distrust of Bethesda stems from the plethora of clueless statements their devs made. Here's a small collection:

The campy humor, the grotesque action, and the integrated pop culture, as well as Pip Boy (can't leave THAT out!) are what allow FO to stand out from other titles.
Yeah, action, pop culture references and shitty parodies are what defines Fallout.

We're not going to go away from what it is that we do best. We're not going to suddenly do a top-down isometric Baldur's Gate-style game, because that's not what we do well.
Translation: Fallout 3 will be a first person game.

I think people can look at how we've treated the Elder Scrolls and know that we'll give the same care to Fallout.
Having played Morrowind and followed the coverage of Oblivion, I can say this statement frightens me greatly.

Imagine a survival horror-esque version of the Fallout world.
No comment.

I'd say the impact the original had in its day was about so much more then the angle you viewed it at, or how combat was executed
Translation: Fallout 3 will be a first person game.

Certainly turn-based combat limits your audience to a small number, but I do find that audiences will come if your game is good enough and the presentation is superb. Ultimately we'll do what we think will be the most fun.
Yeah, it's not like turn-based games like Civilization and Final Fantasy are successful or anything. Oh, wait...

Let's not also forget the idiot who tried to convince us he was a Fallout fan, but his lies were debunked when he claimed Fallout had a combo RT/TB system.

Worst of all, those are the most concrete things they said in regard to Fallout 3 in the past two years! What more reason for concern do we need?
 
Ratty said:
"TES" is three games, not one. Two of those are great, while the third one sucks.
If you would've payed attention to any form of context you would've noticed that we were talking about the third installment, Morrowind. Please, Ratty, if you're going to argue, don't just bring in irrelevant arguments like this.

Ratboy said:
I don't know about RPGenius, but my distrust of Bethesda stems from the plethora of clueless statements their devs made. Here's a small collection:

The campy humor, the grotesque action, and the integrated pop culture, as well as Pip Boy (can't leave THAT out!) are what allow FO to stand out from other titles.
Yeah, action, pop culture references and shitty parodies are what defines Fallout.

We're not going to go away from what it is that we do best. We're not going to suddenly do a top-down isometric Baldur's Gate-style game, because that's not what we do well.
Translation: Fallout 3 will be a first person game.

I think people can look at how we've treated the Elder Scrolls and know that we'll give the same care to Fallout.
Having played Morrowind and followed the coverage of Oblivion, I can say this statement frightens me greatly.

Imagine a survival horror-esque version of the Fallout world.
No comment.

I'd say the impact the original had in its day was about so much more then the angle you viewed it at, or how combat was executed
Translation: Fallout 3 will be a first person game.

Certainly turn-based combat limits your audience to a small number, but I do find that audiences will come if your game is good enough and the presentation is superb. Ultimately we'll do what we think will be the most fun.
Yeah, it's not like turn-based games like Civilization and Final Fantasy are successful or anything. Oh, wait...
Two words: Todd Hines. Summed up in one word: marketing.
Never trust marketing. Ever. As a sales person, that's one thing I've learned over the past couple of months.
See, what Todd Hines says is just another example of trying to stay as general as possible. Fallout 3 is in some state of pre-pre-production of whatever. We don't know anything about what they will do with the license other thana couple of marketing quotes. That's it. And that's really nothing to base any claims on the final product on.


Ratso said:
Let's not also forget the idiot who tried to convince us he was a Fallout fan, but his lies were debunked when he claimed Fallout had a combo RT/TB system.

Worst of all, those are the most concrete things they said in regard to Fallout 3 in the past two years! What more reason for concern do we need?
Concern is good. Blatant flaming of Bethesda is useless and will, in the best case, not change anything. In the worst case, it'll make them not listen to us.
 
Someone should invent a Fallout 3 Suggestions and Ideas drinking game.

For every time someone starts a 3D vs 2D debate, empty the bottle.

Wohksh fow meee....
 
Sander said:
If you would've payed attention to any form of context you would've noticed that we were talking about the third installment, Morrowind. Please, Ratty, if you're going to argue, don't just bring in irrelevant arguments like this.

RPGenius said:
Bethsoft aren't good at making Classic RPG's, which TES was cited as.
Sounds to me like he is referring to the entire series. Thus your response seemed to imply the whole series sucked, when it was in fact a rather mixed bag of brilliant accomplishments and spectacular failures.

Sander said:
Two words: Todd Hines. Summed up in one word: marketing.
Never trust marketing. Ever. As a sales person, that's one thing I've learned over the past couple of months.
See, what Todd Hines says is just another example of trying to stay as general as possible. Fallout 3 is in some state of pre-pre-production of whatever. We don't know anything about what they will do with the license other thana couple of marketing quotes. That's it. And that's really nothing to base any claims on the final product on.
Todd Hines? Is that a bizzare hybrid you get when you dip Pete Hines (the PR guy) and Todd Howard (the executive producer of Fallout 3 and Oblivion) into a powerful radioactive mutagen? Also, it strikes me that you are the one who needs to pay a bit more attention to the context, because only one of those citations is by PR Pete. The remainder are mental turd of BethSoft developers, and they all indicate a fundamental unfamiliarity with the Fallout series, game market and CRPG design.

Concern is good. Blatant flaming of Bethesda is useless and will, in the best case, not change anything. In the worst case, it'll make them not listen to us.
I agree, but when I spot idiocy, I won't refrain from calling it such. Frankly, if BethSoft stops listening to us because some of their more clueless devs can't handle a bit of sledgehammer education, then it will make them as dumb as Chuck Cuevas and his imbecilling one-trick pony crew.
 
Arquebus said:
I think we should try to be positive since some is actually making Fallout 3.

Moron.

The people at Betsheda are most likely gamlers like us and you can probably bet they spent their sweet time beeing shot by Ian in the back too.

Oh, yes, because they said they were Fallout fans. There's a sucker born every minute, and that is you, chump.

We should court them with good suggestions instead of verbal abuse like some tend to do here.

No, those of us with a clue and who HAVE seen what they have said If you're not going to bother lurking on the forum, then just get the fuck off of it right now. Feel free to leave with your mentality that excused both FOT and F:POS.

Hopefully they make a great game that we can mod for generations to come loosing our sleep and spouses over.

Snort another line, kid, and go back to your own reality.

why are the moderators the least moderat?

Because they have seen stupidity like yours for years, none of which is that impressive. Kind words do not work on whores, whether media, marketing, or trend whores..

Whore.
 
I'm talking about Fallout 3, obviously. And if you know more about it than me, you know about three quotes and which engine they're going to use. Jeez, now that's a lot.

Sander. Read. "Roughly as much." Not more than, I don't assume to know more than someone unless they've made more unintelligent posts than useful ones.
 
Ratty said:
Sounds to me like he is referring to the entire series. Thus your response seemed to imply the whole series sucked, when it was in fact a rather mixed bag of brilliant accomplishments and spectacular failures.
Context, Ratty. Context is more than just two lines from the post:
RPGenius said:
Are you referring to Fallout 3, whose progress I've been following for a while now, and it's safe to say I know roughly as much as you do about?
Or TES, which I was addicted to for 3 months or so, left, played some real RPG's, came back to and realized how flawed it was in comparison?
And that obviously refers to Morrowind.


Ratty said:
Todd Hines? Is that a bizzare hybrid you get when you dip Pete Hines (the PR guy) and Todd Howard (the executive producer of Fallout 3 and Oblivion) into a powerful radioactive mutagen? Also, it strikes me that you are the one who needs to pay a bit more attention to the context, because only one of those citations is by PR Pete. The remainder are mental turd of BethSoft developers, and they all indicate a fundamental unfamiliarity with the Fallout series, game market and CRPG design.
Hmm...well, that must be my bad memory then.
Still, my point stands. It's by and large marketing crap and developers shouting out random ideas. As has been said over and over again, they're still in pre-production, and I'm not willing to start giving up all hope on Bethesda when all we have to go on are only a few quotes.


Ratty said:
I agree, but when I spot idiocy, I won't refrain from calling it such. Frankly, if BethSoft stops listening to us because some of their more clueless devs can't handle a bit of sledgehammer education, then it will make them as dumb as Chuck Cuevas and his imbecilling one-trick pony crew.
No they're not. That would make them human. If people start calling you idiots and morons at the mention of your name (see RPGenius), how likely are you going to be to listen to them?
And calling out idiocy is fine, but there really isn't much idiocy to call out at all.

RPGenius said:
Sander. Read. "Roughly as much." Not more than, I don't assume to know more than someone unless they've made more unintelligent posts than useful ones.
Eh, typo. It should've said 'Roughly as much'.
 
Sander said:
As has been said over and over again, they're still in pre-production, and I'm not willing to start giving up all hope on Bethesda when all we have to go on are only a few quotes.
They are pretty stupid quotes, though, and indicative of their grasp of Fallout and CRPG design. Somehow I doubt this ignorance is restricted to their public statements.
 
We've seen the same from MicroForté and Chuck when they went through their spiel, in fact we still have an archive of MicroForté employees "cleverly" trying to come onto the forum to spin and lie about this shit. It really isn't that hard to see who does and who doesn't have a clue about a license, especially when they said they were going to do what they do best, and that Fallout's design is not what they do best.

And that's from the supposed Producer, the same one that made Morrowind into ass from Daggerfall.
 
I just check bethesda softs' list of games and notice something:
most of they 'not good enough and suck' games are license-based (Terminator Future Shock anyone?). The only good game they have is their TES series...

Now I know why you guys think bethesda will jeopadise F3. :shock:

link
 
zioburosky13 said:
I just check bethesda softs' list of games and notice something:
most of they 'not good enough and suck' games are license-based (Terminator Future Shock anyone?). The only good game they have is their TES series...

Which they have also "licensed out" for a couple of suck games. Redguard and Battlespire.

And I fully agree about the Turdinator games. While Bethesda DID create those axe jobs before DOOM came out, DOOM wasn't a cheaply licensed game.

Hey, I see a trend.
 
zioburosky13 said:
I just check bethesda softs' list of games and notice something:
most of they 'not good enough and suck' games are license-based (Terminator Future Shock anyone?). The only good game they have is their TES series...

Now I know why you guys think bethesda will jeopadise F3. :shock:

link

Nice list.

I defy anyone to name a better maker of bowling games than Bethesda. I never heard any griping from the discerning Pro Bowling/PC game crowd. What audacity to question their qualifications for making FO3. They're fans of Fallout is that not enough?
 
Cimmerian Nights said:
I defy anyone to name a better maker of bowling games than Bethesda. I never heard any griping from the discerning Pro Bowling/PC game crowd. What audacity to question their qualifications for making FO3. They're fans of Fallout is that not enough?

Are you kidding me? Saying that they're Fallout fans doesn't neccesarily make them so, they're just playing to the crowds. I don't think that making good bowling games qualifies them to make a decent CRPG.
 
Are you implying that the Pro Bowling game crowd has low standards? They are an audience that demends only the best, in a word: discriminating.

Betheda've already said they're going to do what they do best. When I heard that, all my fears were allayed. :roll:
 
I agree with RPGenius. It's bizarre confronting a CRPG with a bowling game. Even if they did damn best sport games it doesn't imply that they will do a great RPG. Think of F3 made by EA ...
 
Back
Top