NMA: indirect Fallout 3 Q&A

[Bartoneus]

He meant a system where you can choose between Real-time and Turn-based.

A hybrid is not a choice between one or the other, it is both at the same time, but I get what you're saying. What are some examples of games with that choice? (I can't think of any)

Fallout 1 is a hybrid realtime / turnbased game where you don't get to choose.

And it will probably be one of the MOST twitch-based RPGs games that have been made.
Fallout wasn't an FPS, it was a RPG.

Fallout 3 is an RPG that is in first person. If you're going to get into semantics it's not an FPS, because it's not a shooter. (it involves shooting but so does every Fallout game)

The hybrid system is still not anywhere near an actual, proper turn-based system.

Correct, if you demand a proper turn-based system for a game to be Fallout at all then you'll need to prepare for even bigger disappointments in life. Just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it won't happen in the future.

True, but it's exemplary of the attitude Bethesda has taken towards this game so far.

I'm telling you it's not that exemplary of how the rest of the game is.

 

[Mick1965]

Keep in mind that we have only seen less then 10% of the game, so anything you talk about being a "majority of parts" is hardly accurate.

and yet...

And for the love of god, the bobbleheads are such a small part of the overall game you guys really need to drop it.

If we've only seen less than 10% of the game then how do you know for sure that bobbleheads are only a small part of it?

Mick

 

[lisac2k]

Also, people, for the love of god, please stop using 'cTRPG'.

Point taken. Lack of proper terms is sometimes misleading.

Keep in mind that we have only seen less then 10% of the game, so anything you talk about being a "majority of parts" is hardly accurate.

It was pointed to the previews and its most proclamated features, which makes most of what the editors have played.

Considering bobbleheads first became widespread in the 50's and 60's, how do you figure they don't fit into the idea of a post-apocalyptic 50's future?

Stop putting words in my mouth. I never said they don't fit in there. What I was talking about was:

Steve Butts, IGN: Your basic stats aren't going to change much during the game (except as a result of radiation poisoning), but you can collect bobble heads found throughout the game to bump them up a bit.

 

[Bartoneus]

*Standard Beth fanboy dribble*


Oh god, another one has escaped and come over to NMA.

Hey, I'm just trying to bring you guys information since I've seen the whole demo and talked with the developers of the game. If you don't want the information I'll stop.

 

[Ausir]

He meant a system where you can choose between Real-time and Turn-based.

A hybrid is not a choice between one or the other, it is both at the same time, but I get what you're saying. What are some examples of games with that choice? (I can't think of any)

Fallout Tactics, Arcanum. Van Buren and Troika's PA game were also going to have a choice between RT and TB.

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

Considering bobbleheads first became widespread in the 50's and 60's, how do you figure they don't fit into the idea of a post-apocalyptic 50's future?

* sigh * It is not the bobbleheads themselves that are such a problem, they may have made a nice easter egg, opening some content like an art menu.

It is the fact they apparently improve stats, something only experience should do. (sort of like real life)
Collecting crap that improve your skills sounds more consolish and less RPG.

Edit: hmm, okay books did this too but at least I can understand how a book improves knowledge.

 

[Bartoneus]

Lisac:

It's such a small part among other small parts which altogether make majority of parts and are stupid inventions, which shouldn't be in a Fallout universe/game.

I put no more words in your mouth then come out of it.

 

[JR Jansen]

It's such a small part among other small parts which altogether make majority of parts and are stupid inventions, which shouldn't be in a Fallout universe/game.

Keep in mind that we have only seen less then 10% of the game, so anything you talk about being a "majority of parts" is hardly accurate.

Considering bobbleheads first became widespread in the 50's and 60's, how do you figure they don't fit into the idea of a post-apocalyptic 50's future?

I don't think we have anything against them being in the game. It's when they start having 'special powers' when we get concerned. And as much was said in orher previews.

 

[lisac2k]

Lisac:

It's such a small part among other small parts which altogether make majority of parts and are stupid inventions, which shouldn't be in a Fallout universe/game.

I put no more words in your mouth then come out of it.

Again, quoting a misunderstood sentence. What are you doing man?

Hey, I'm just trying to bring you guys information since I've seen the whole demo and talked with the developers of the game. If you don't want the information I'll stop.

Instead of trying to start the sparkle in a building full of gas, you should try to write something about it objectively and send it to the admins. I'm sure it'd be a hot material.

Edited: typos, bald.

 

[Bartoneus]

It is the fact they apparently improve stats, something only experience should do. (sort of like real life)
Collecting crap that improve your skills sounds more consolish and less RPG.

Edit: hmm, okay books did this too but at least I can understand how a book improves knowledge.

So the entire issue is (now) that it makes little sense for a bobblehead to improve a player's stats?

Now I understand, that's all you had to say from the beginning.

 

[Mick1965]

Hey, I'm just trying to bring you guys information since I've seen the whole demo and talked with the developers of the game. If you don't want the information I'll stop.

Heh, go figure, I didn't put 2 and 2 together and realise you were the guy who wrote the article. Nonetheless, I was replying because your post didn't seem very objective, but instead seemed more defensive towards Bethesda.

You have to understand that we're just throwing ideas around and trying to come to terms with what this game may be all about... and as fans of Fallout we have been waiting for 10 years to see some kind of decent sequel. Then when it finially does happen, in our eyes it's gone and missed the mark, completely. After all, Fallout was more than just atmosphere and gun fights. Unfortunately we only have snippets of info to go on at this stage.

Mick

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

Look, I know stuff like medicines, drugs, and books improve skills and such too, but I think the worry is that the whole bobblehead thing will unbalance the gameplay.

Dammit, I wrote myself in a corner.

 

[Mick1965]

Look, I know stuff like medicines, drugs, and books improve skills and such too, but I think the worry is that the whole bobblehead thing will unbalance the gameplay.

Dammit, I wrote myself in a corner.

No, what you're saying makes perfect sense. The books increase your skills through study, and drugs alter you physically. Bobbleheads don't make sense, and seem more like the power ups that you'd find in Super Mario Bros.

Mick

 

[Bartoneus]

Lisac:

Again, quoting a misunderstood sentence. What are you doing man?

I was trying to get an answer or explanation out of you, but others have explained it clearly now so don't worry about it.

Instead of trying to start the sparkle in a building full of gas, you should try to write something about it objectively and send it to the admins. I'm sure it'd be a hot material.

I've already written plenty of objective material about this game. Brother None asked me some more questions and encouraged me to get involved on the forums so here I am.

Edit: Thanks Mick, glad we got to some non-defensive conversation. I'm not so much defending Bethesda as I am defending what I've seen of this game and what we were told is in the works for the whole product.

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

I've already written plenty of objective material about this game. Brother None asked me some more questions and encouraged me to get involved on the forums so here I am.

Edit: Thanks Mick, glad we got to some non-defensive conversation. I'm not so much defending Bethesda as I am defending what I've seen of this game and what we were told is in the works for the whole product.

Okay, wasn't questioning you as a gamer or writer, just trying to make an opinion and trying to back it up.

Welcome to the forums.

 

[lisac2k]

You overlooked my clear answer before (3rd and 4th quote):
http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=37366&start=42
Nevermind, it can happen to anyone.

I doubt any of the reviews was written objectively, but if I'm wrong, please... Show me the way.

Edited: link... man, I'm tired...

 

[Mick1965]

Edit: Thanks Mick, glad we got to some non-defensive conversation. I'm not so much defending Bethesda as I am defending what I've seen of this game and what we were told is in the works for the whole product.

And I'm sorry I jumped on you at the start. We've been getting a few trolls around here that are defensive towards Bethesda and attacking towards our point of view. It gets a bit tiring after a while.

Thanks for stopping by and sharing the info with us.

Mick

 

[Bartoneus]

Okay, wasn't questioning you as a gamer or writer, just trying to make an opinion and trying to back it up.

Welcome to the forums.

Thanks Dutchy, that was actually a reply to what Lisac was saying, but we've worked all that out now.

Lisac & Mick: No harm no foul, glad we worked that out.

 

[JR Jansen]

Brother None asked me some more questions and encouraged me to get involved on the forums so here I am.

And we are glad to have you. It's always good to have more information and now we can ask questions about the informaion given. Something that was sorely lacking up to this point.

 

[Mick1965]

Bartoneus, maybe you can help clear something up for us. As a reviewer invited along to the Fallout exclusive by Bethesda, did you feel any pressure (direct or indirect) to write a positive review for the game demo? Is there ever any concerns in this situation that game companies will stop inviting you to these exclusives if you give them an ordinary review?

Why I ask this is that so many reviews for games seem very postive nowadays, and often there is no mention of a game's negative points. A good example is Half-Life 2 Episode 1. I loved Half-Life 2, but thought the expansion sucked and couldn't understand how all the reviews could be so positive. And it's odd that suddenly now some people can see flaws in Oblivion whereas they couldn't find any before.

Mick