NMA: indirect Fallout 3 Q&A

[Vault 69er]

I liked XCom Apocalypse. I can understand what they were trying to do, because Terror from the Deep was - while being appreciated as a good game - criticised as being a clone of Enemy Unknown/UFO Defense. And aside from a few features, it was just that.
So Apocalypse tried a totally different style, while trying to stay true to it's predecessors.

What killed off XCom for good were Interceptor and Enforcer, which completely and totally ignored what made XCom what it was in favor of mass-market appeal. Sound familiar?

 

[whirlingdervish]

Yea, I wish I were getting paid for this stuff, and you seem to wish for the game to suck.

ROFL. you asked for a conspiracy theory.
I provided one.

I meant no offense buddy, and I'd really love for Fallout 3 to not suck.

Unfortunately, from what I've seen so far, it will suck to anyone who had a preconceived image of what Fallout 3 should have been had it actually adhered to the style of gameplay of the series and contained recognizeable imagery that wasn't just yanked from fallout 2 and photoshopped up by a team of hacks to look as "gritty and dirty" as the rest of the game that Bethesda made out of Oblivion and added guns to.


alas, I don't have any of the concept art for Fo1 and 2 anymore..
I'll see If I can scrounge some up..

 

[Briosafreak]

here's one:
In reality, the game sucked and they paid you a pretty penny to describe it, in a good light..

Yea, I wish I were getting paid for this stuff, and you seem to wish for the game to suck.

On a different note, the one about X-com's and Fallout 3's concept art. Does anyone know where I can see the concept art for Fallout 1/2? I've found some for tactics and BoS but none for the originals.

Er here and here

 

[Brother None]

Yea, I wish I were getting paid for this stuff, and you seem to wish for the game to suck.

Oh. Were you one of the previewers who paid his own way, per this?

 

[Bartoneus]

Oh. Were you one of the previewers who paid his own way, per this?

I actually skipped out on the dinner and the after events, mainly because I had to get back to my real day job. I wish I'd gone so I could have seen those cakes in person though.

Unfortunately, from what I've seen so far, it will suck to anyone who had a preconceived image of what Fallout 3 should have been had it actually adhered to the style of gameplay of the series and contained recognizeable imagery that wasn't just yanked from fallout 2 and photoshopped up by a team of hacks to look as "gritty and dirty" as the rest of the game that Bethesda made out of Oblivion and added guns to.

Perhaps you should rid yourself of some of your preconcieved notions of Fallout 3?

Thanks Briosa for the concept art links!

 

[Brother None]

I actually skipped out on the dinner and the after events, mainly because I had to get back to my real day job. I wish I'd gone so I could have seen those cakes in person though.

Aha! So maybe, during the dinner Pete took out his mind-control ray, and zapped everyone with it, only you having escaped!

 

[Sander]

"Several times"? Who is selective reading here? That's not even slective reading, that's incorrectly reading.

No it isn't. Perhaps you need learn the difference between plural and singular.
Seriously, are you blind or something? You bolded it yourself: 'only a few times'. How is this not 'several times'?

I simply said that the combat was mostly played in VATS. I don't see anything there to refute that.

Strike one for trolling. I've had it with your lying right to my face:
"In fact it sounds like you can play F3 pretty much exclusively in VATS if you want"

But, I never said there was infinite pausing. That is beside the point. If I don't have to play every combat, entirely, in real time then it isn't "the most twitch", at all, since there are many games in which I do have to play entirely in real time and physically aim all of my attacks.

The description that the article gave is one with much more play in VATS, paused time, than in real time. Even if it was the other way around, it still wouldn't be "the most twitch". But, the way its described is not much more than a real time with pause game.

I have yet to see a full RPG that does the FPS thing, except if you count Morrowind and Oblivion under the 'full RPG' flag, which is dubious at best.

 

[Autoduel76]

I have yet to see a full RPG that does the FPS thing, except if you count Morrowind and Oblivion under the 'full RPG' flag, which is dubious at best.

Well, I've only ever seen Oblivion and MOrrowind listed as RPGs.

The game in my sig, as well, is fully real time combat that would use more player skill than Fallout 3 and that was even a representation of a Steve Jackson table-top game, ironically.

 

[Sorrow]

I liked XCom Apocalypse. I can understand what they were trying to do, because Terror from the Deep was - while being appreciated as a good game - criticised as being a clone of Enemy Unknown/UFO Defense. And aside from a few features, it was just that.
So Apocalypse tried a totally different style, while trying to stay true to it's predecessors.

I like X-Com 3: Apocalypse too . The only things that I don't like were:
-RTwP mode - it made it more an action game and gave too much control over events to the player - together with decreased weapon damages, it killed a good part of suspense that was Ufo's trademark.
-Gameplay was optimalised towards RTwP mod... err.. wait, it wasn't optimalised towards neither mode.
-The game was released unfinished.
-Lack of lighting effects on battlescape made the graphics more candy.

On the other hand I like graphics, retrofuturistic style, dark atmosphere, dystopic city together with abusive government and armed corporations.

What killed off XCom for good were Interceptor and Enforcer, which completely and totally ignored what made XCom what it was in favor of mass-market appeal. Sound familiar?

Err...
The story of X-Com is very similar to the story of Fallout. Hasbro has usurped the rights to X-Com and started producing weird spinoffs.

 

[Bartoneus]

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

This is a few days late, I realize, but I also noticed I'd forgotten to answer it at all! (sorry Mick!)

Just to clarify one thing, I'm not really a "reviewer" in the sense that I've never EVER recieved a free copy of any game to write anything about it. I wish I did, because free games would be sweet but I would never take them with the understanding that I was to lie about the product. I'm a fan, I just happen to write reviews of things online. As far as direct pressure my answer is no, because nothing was ever said about it at all it was 100% a show and tell on Bethesda's end. That being said, yes certainly there is the fear that if I go and slam everything they've shown me I most likely wouldn't get invited back, but that's a fact of life and business.

Every game company wants to make a good product, consequently they want everyone to know/think they have a good product, even if they don't. What needs to happen is people need to review a game based on the product, and if they recieve free copies of it or free stuff then it becomes much more about the reviewER then the person reading the review. That's not why I review games, I do it BECAUSE there are crappy reviews out there. My friends and I started doing it because of games like Supreme Commander that get 9.0 and higher scores from every site and magazine when there are a slew of problems with the game that cause a lot of people to not like it.

The issue with Half-Life 2 Episode 1 is one of opinion. I didn't review it, but I loved it aside from the length. We did review Oblivion (albeit very early in our days) simply based on our opinions after buying it and while they were mostly positive we pointed out a lot of the issues present in it. The media has influence over consumers, and thus the producers are going to want influence over the media. What I try to do is provide a view FROM the consumer side of things, and that is what I will continue to do.

With regards to that and my preview of Fallout 3, I'm simply very optimistic based on what I've seen. Certainly the game could turn out to be crap, but at this stage of the game I posted the Q&A just as straight facts, and then my reactions I let some of my own opinion come into play, but still tried to describe what I saw as accurately as posisble.

 

[quietfanatic]

Good job Bartoneus and thanks for talking to us.

If you are still around, I have some more obscure questions.

Was there any ambient music in the demo? Did it change with the situation at hand? What did it remind you of/sound like if there was some?

Did they show you real character creation? If so, did you notice which skills were dropped and what the starting numbers were for S.P.E.C.I.A.L. statistics? Did you see G.O.A.T.?

 

[lisac2k]

What I try to do is provide a view FROM the consumer side of things, and that is what I will continue to do.

Isn't it a bit hard to cover the span of the consumers and their interests, simply put "all of the views?" Quot capita, tot sententiae. Furthermore, generalising an issue to find a compromise which will satisfy the majority of the consumers at the price of destroying a successful franchise, a "niche" game(s) is justified, I guess?

Because, that's what's happening around here. Pure speculation: What part of the market for the upcoming game called Fallout 3 covers the XBox users? 26,7%? OK, simple math - we have to have something in the game to satisfy them and it'll be ~27% of the features. What's the average age of the XboX users? 18,6 years? OK, make a poll among 18 to 19-year old subjects what weapon in a post-nuclear-war world they would like to see? A nuclear launcher? Good job guys, put it in the game! etc... (I know, it sounds ridiculous, but I couldn't resist it)

I know they can't make the game just for me or for us here at NMA. I understand they have to earn on their new title, OK. They had to make horrible compromises and they destroyed the franchise for the sake of money, good (not so good, but anyway). A few years ago they got the money, they bought the IP and destroyed it.

But what I friggin' don't understand, why it has to be entitled as Fallout 3? If they destroyed it, why do they keep putting another title under my carpet, saying it's THE sequel to the Fallout 1/2, when it isn't?!?

I know they'll earn more if it's "Fallout 3", rather than "Fallout: Return of the BoS", but it's not Fallout 3 they're selling!

 

[yevinorion]

The story of X-Com is very similar to the story of Fallout. Hasbro has usurped the rights to X-Com and started producing weird spinoffs.

If you're a big X-Com fan, check out UFO: Extraterrestrials. It's the most faithful game I've seen to the original formula, while updating the graphics and such. Slight differences, but overall, it's pretty solid.

 

[Vault 69er]

The story of X-Com is very similar to the story of Fallout. Hasbro has usurped the rights to X-Com and started producing weird spinoffs.

If you're a big X-Com fan, check out UFO: Extraterrestrials. It's the most faithful game I've seen to the original formula, while updating the graphics and such. Slight differences, but overall, it's pretty solid.

Boo! They don't even have female sprites! Come on, even the original UFO: Enemy Unknown had female sprites!
And the whole immortal soldiers thing is retarded. Mods can take care of that, yeah. But still.
And there's the whole only-have-one-base-that's-worth-anything thing. The others being purely for interceptors.

 

[yevinorion]

Yeah the base thing was my biggest gripe with it, but still, I think it's not a bad game overall. I know I personally have not come across another game that has gotten the X-Com feel (especially on missions) so well.

And the soldiers being immortal is actually a curse, rather than a boon, as if they just died, you ordered more to replace them. Here, they spend ages in recovery, which in my opinion makes it even more vital that you take care of your soldiers.

Naturally it's not going to be as good as the original, but for a spiritual successor it's not that far off the mark. Which is more than can be said for FINO 3.

 

[Extremist]

BoS. Was any explanation offered for their presence?

When Todd finally entered the city, he encountered a group of super mutants and was quickly saved by a unit of them (i believe that's who they were). I didn't catch if it mentioned exactly why they were there, but they help protect the player through what would otherwise be a tougher part of the city. Short answer: Not that I know of, no explanation yet.

I'm one of those who doesn't care if BoS will be in FO3 or not. However if it's true that we'll see those...

I'd like to know if Bethesda will use original BoS logo:

or the lame one with pistols made for the worst game ever:

 

[whirlingdervish]

I'll bet five dollars that there will be a "Rhombus" bobblehead that you can "acquire" thru your dealings with the BOS!

 

[Makagulfazel]

or the lame one with pistols made for the worst game ever:

I hope they choose the lame one. They'll probably choose the lame one out of stupidity, because the only Fallout they've ever really played is POS.

 

[Sorrow]

The story of X-Com is very similar to the story of Fallout. Hasbro has usurped the rights to X-Com and started producing weird spinoffs.

If you're a big X-Com fan, check out UFO: Extraterrestrials. It's the most faithful game I've seen to the original formula, while updating the graphics and such. Slight differences, but overall, it's pretty solid.

I boycott it because of immortal soldiers and other weird design decisions.

Naturally it's not going to be as good as the original, but for a spiritual successor it's not that far off the mark.

If I understand correctly it's almost a carbon copy of the original with updated graphics and added new flaws?
It kinda kills the idea.

 

[SuAside]

I'd like to know if Bethesda will use original BoS logo:

the armor pictured in the teaser had the old logo on it.