NMA Op-ed: Fallout 3 PAX Impressions

[Public]

on a side note: i did enjoy pen and paper combat from the first two games but that was a decade ago. Game requirements did quiet change during this time and niche games dont sell quiet well nowdays. I know hardcore fans would love it but those are a minority in the end numbers make the final call

If they were just "minorities", people wouldn't be argueing about it all the time...

 

[beverageleverage]

i dont think a change in gameplay and engine is a bad thing by default as long the core concept and the spirit of the frenchise endures.

The core concept of any game IS the gameplay

Futhermore this will open the Fallout saga to a broader audiance, altrough some might see the so called casual playerbase in contempt its quiet obvious thy net the biggest market share. And console games sell in far bigger numbers that pc ones, no news here.

Using this tired excuse for why Fallout has been lobotomized, so that it can pander to the lowest of the low and theoretically sell more, why then did beth use Fallout, a PC franchise?

I dont really dare to speculate about the quality of the game till i dont get the box myself but im quiet sure it will be a market hit, most likely surpasing F1 / F2 combined numbers wise.
On the long turn this guarantees future Fallout producs and as long thy are fun and entertaining beth. can name them whatever thy wish

You wouldn't dare to do anything except buy Fallout 3 on a whim, because none of the previews available could possibly tell you what type of game Fallout 3 is, and you will buy it simply because it might sell well?

on a side note: i did enjoy pen and paper combat from the first two games but that was a decade ago. Game requirements did quiet change during this time and niche games dont sell quiet well nowdays. I know hardcore fans would love it but those are a minority in the end numbers make the final call

First person view and real time have zero impact on "game requirements," and don't presume that the majority of gamers will only play fps games, they will play whatever the hype tells them to play.

 

[aenemic]

Tactics wasn't very faithful to the setting, but it is kind of harsh to equate it with FO:BOS. IMHO, with a few retcons, Tactics could be easily incorporated into the canon.

I really liked Tactics, even though it didn't feel very Fallout-y. the idea and gameplay is great. unfortunately the missions are a bit uninteresting and I always seem to get bored before I complete the game.

 

[alec]

JA2>Tactics

But yeah: Tactics wasn't too shabby. There were some fun missions in there.

After reading the first post in this thread, I was like: "Damn, maybe I should pre-order anyway."

I'm still not gonna do that, though. In fact, I'm getting rid of all my games except for my copies of FO, FO2 and Arcanum. No more games for me.

 

[Pipboy2000]

Tactics was too linear for me. I still enjoyed it... the first time.

 

[Blackfyre]

If they were just "minorities", people wouldn't be argueing about it all the time...

"people" beeing the group of fans that whant another copy of the old games; Fallout 3 was well recieved with the most of the mainstream game community, hyped even.

The core concept of any game IS the gameplay

For me at least and im pretty sure many more, Fallout is more that turn based isometric combat. Who said sequels arent evolving due to gaming needs and dont have core game changes?

more, why then did beth use Fallout, a PC franchise?

becouse its a well established name in the gaming industry and the setting beth whants ? Hence all the numerious sequels nowdays that dwarf the number of new named relises
Its kinda the same story as with Bioshock and Oblivion when some fans where crying havock and the dogs of war yet the games where an market sucess and fun actualy

and you will buy it simply because it might sell well?

not really altrough the box success does point to a relative quality of the product.
Personaly i will buy it becouse it is a spiritual and named sucessor of the series, and if its entertaining and fun as most of the previews claim it is my reasons will be the same as buying any other game

First person view and real time have zero impact on "game requirements,"

oh and turn based pen & paper combat rpgs are so popular nowdays ? since there are so many of them out there... And if my memory serves right even with Van Buren thy planned to add real time next to turn based

Beth, just followed the market trends, fps aspect does sell, niche doesnt, rest are simple maths. As long the game entertainiment value doesnt decrease i couldnt care less and im sure it will be the same with the majority of gammers

 

[Public]

If they were just "minorities", people wouldn't be argueing about it all the time...

"people" beeing the group of fans that whant another copy of the old games; Fallout 3 was well recieved with the most of the mainstream game community, hyped even.

I don't want another copy of the game, I want improvements. bethesda are making changes not improvements.

Game comunity- those people who naver played previous Fallouts, mostly

 

[thefalloutfan]

Beth, just followed the market trends, fps aspect does sell, niche doesnt, rest are simple maths. As long the game entertainiment value doesnt decrease i couldnt care less and im sure it will be the same with the majority of gammers

Yes and that's not a good thing, is it? It's like you like this fact. As customers, we should like the niche market, since it caters for our needs. It's like the advantages and disadvantages of local butcher with a world wide supermarket. The former usually has better quality meat, while the latter usually has lower prices, or maybe enough branches to cater for the majority of the people.

I mean IMO we shouldn't defend the developers, we should defend our interests.

And I'm someone who is looking forward to play FO3.

 

[EnglishMuffin]

Beth, just followed the market trends, fps aspect does sell, niche doesnt, rest are simple maths. As long the game entertainiment value doesnt decrease i couldnt care less and im sure it will be the same with the majority of gammers

WoW is the highest selling game and it is NOT a first person shooter. The market is not forcing anyone to make first person shooters. If it were every RTS and RPG would change and include that type of gameplay. One is not better or worse they are just different. Company of Heroes is probably one of the most beautiful games out there and it is an RTS so don't tell me they couldn't have made an isometric game.

Also please do some spellchecking in the future.

 

[Blackfyre]

I don't want another copy of the game, I want improvements. bethesda are making changes not improvements.

yeah since changes are such a bad thing in game development ?

Game comunity- those people who naver played previous Fallouts, mostly

yes since knowing and playing previous titles should be a game requirement to enjoy it. Thats kinda elitist attitude common to some hardcore aspects of communitys. Since the casual players or zomg the ones with consoles dont know what thy are talking about right?

Yes and that's not a good thing, is it?

rarely enough since it does impact the quality of the product mostly with simplifying the content in a attempt to offer the product to a large market base
Fact is tho Beth, did resurect a dead franchise as for that im damm gratefull , altrough im aware quiet a few would rather see the game dead that in their hands i think stance like that is quiet selfish since a large amount of players might actualy enjoy it

Not that i like everything about this project. The energy and resources beth put into PR is quiet frightening and i rather see thy put it in the game itself. Nor do i like the similarities with Oblivion.
Game is far from perfect but then Fallout 1/2 whasnt eather

WoW is the highest selling game and it is NOT a first person shooter.

its a game set in a specific fantasy environment, curious tho thy didnt make an RTS game

 

[Ixyroth]

JA2>Tactics

But yeah: Tactics wasn't too shabby. There were some fun missions in there.

After reading the first post in this thread, I was like: "Damn, maybe I should pre-order anyway."

I'm still not gonna do that, though. In fact, I'm getting rid of all my games except for my copies of FO, FO2 and Arcanum. No more games for me.

My experience with recent games is that most of them are little more than mind-numbing timesinks, at best. Over-the-top DRM schemes are icing on the cake.

 

[Seymour the spore plant]

yes since knowing and playing previous titles should be a game requirement to enjoy it. Thats kinda elitist attitude common to some hardcore aspects of communitys.

It seems to me that these people would enjoy Fallout 3 no matter how it was called. The fact that whatever number of gamers would like something does not justify whatever changes are made to a franchise. This is simply an ad populum.

I don't think I'll ever get this "elitist" argument. Is there a "democratic" approach to game design which is inherently better than the others? Is leaving every aspect of a game up to the market (or the suits' perception of it and what sells better) somehow morally superior to leaving them up to the vision of a few professionals who should actually know about developing in the first place? You usually want engineers to make a building, not a committee of laymen voting on how to build it.

Now, I won't bring up the "art" debate here (since BN would likely kill me), but think of it like this: McDonald's is hugely popular. Does this make it better than haute cuisine, or preclude the latter's validity or existance? There are lots of niches to this market, and I don't see why only the larger ones need tending to; democracy is not about crushing minorities in favor or majorities, you know.

Fact is tho Beth, did resurect a dead franchise as for that im damm gratefull

I'm curious, were you grateful for PoS as well? Not any ressurection is for the best, as Pet Sematary taught us.

 

[Aero]

Re: thanks

That is EXACTLY what a spinoff is, same world with different gameplay. If "The 'World'" wasn't there it wouldn't be anything.

I'll give you that in theory. And I do understand where some of you consider 3 a spinoff rather than a sequel.

With how games have developed in the last 10 years I see 3 as a sequel. IF BI would have gone on with VB then Fallout 4 would probally have ended up closer to what Beth's Fallout 3 is. Companies do tend to follow consumer purchasing. I don't think BI's Fallout 3 would have made as much as Beth's is going to. So if BI ever contemplated doing a 4th in the series they more than likely would have incorporated many of the elements that Beth has in their version.

What with SPECIAL, skills and perks effecting game play much like older PnP elements your stats DO effect gameplay. Instead of someone sitting behind a couple of proped up books or screens rolling dice and telling you where you are and whats going on we have coding and graphics. Yes I am stretching the idea here, but I do not see how everyone says "its not PnP" It is not a straight FPS either. It is a heavily adapted version.

If they were just "minorities", people wouldn't be argueing about it all the time...

Really? Some people are arguing about it. The ,diehard, if its not Iso, made by BI, and not Turn Based crowd here and a few other sites? Not really a majority. So minority does fit the bill. It may just seem like the majority when you post to a site like this. The Loud and "vocal" Minority on these sights dose not take into account the Silent Majority. Then again you have guys like me that Are part of that Majority. Hehe. I'm not trying to put anyone down for stating their feelings on the subject either.

The core concept of any game IS the gameplay

hmmm I don't agree. I think its the setting and the story.

Using this tired excuse for why Fallout has been lobotomized, so that it can pander to the lowest of the low and theoretically sell more, why then did beth use Fallout, a PC franchise?

Wow. Really? Back when fallout was originally released not many games were multi-platform. Some of that was due to the way the PC worked over other platforms. Actually some of the more popular console games in the past would eventually make it's way to PC. Tech and demand make it fairly profitable for companies to go Multi-platform now than they would have in the past. I do agree that dumbing down the game for all the tweens and M2s out there does erk me but the fact that we will see a new fallout game overrides my ire.

I dont really dare to speculate about the quality of the game till i dont get the box myself but im quiet sure it will be a market hit, most likely surpasing F1 / F2 combined numbers wise.
On the long turn this guarantees future Fallout producs and as long thy are fun and entertaining beth. can name them whatever thy wish

You wouldn't dare to do anything except buy Fallout 3 on a whim, because none of the previews available could possibly tell you what type of game Fallout 3 is, and you will buy it simply because it might sell well?

Your kidding right? Arguing just to argue? I do not like FPS games. From what I have seen in the previews its not just a FPS there are rpg elements. I have liked what I have seen. I was worried before the videos came out but knowing how Demo videos work, Knowing Bethesda Games, and having read just about everything there is to find on the net about FO3 It isn't a whim determining my purchase.

 

[MrBumble]

This more or less confirms my last impressions about Fallout 3 :

-Not really Fallout ( but fallout-ish )
-Cool spin-off, better than Tactics
-Decent game

Since I don't exactly HATE Bethesda's games ( hell I was even a fan of theirs before Oblivion ), I think that I'll pre-order this one anyway. If I played Tactics and POS, I can't possibly avoid this one I guess.

 

[Per]

Re: thanks

Who said sequels arent evolving due to gaming needs

Why do people keep using the word "evolve" in this context? Hasn't this been explained a dozen times? To evolve Fallout would be to explore and refine its game elements. Genre bleeding in order to appease the target audience (brought up all the time as a justification for Bethesda's design decisions, in case someone wanted to say this isn't what's going on) is de-evolving the franchise. That doesn't necessarily have anything to do with quality (except if, as RPG fans on an RPG forum might, you use the term as shorthand for "RPG quality"), but in any case streamlining isn't evolution. Presentation doesn't enter into it.

The core concept of any game IS the gameplay

hmmm I don't agree. I think its the setting and the story.

Interesting.

 

[PaladinHeart]

Tactics was very interesting on the hardest difficulty, and hardcore mode (no saving during outside of BoS bunkers). I had to lobotomize my character just to get past the first mission (changing stats and such that Small Guns was at the highest possible value at level 1). After that point, it's pretty much a struggle to get hold of any psycho drugs that you can lay your hands on, and hoping that those super mutants don't get a critical on your one-man-army front line character/s. They do, eventually, which is how my main character ended up making it to the end... alone.

Also, as for the Fallout 3 thing.. it's been discussed time and time again. The discussion never changes. Bottom line? If you don't care, that's fine but there are people who DO care that Fallout 3's gameplay isn't Iso TB. It's a completely legitimate concern. If Fallout 3 doesn't bother you and you'll like it... fine, but don't go telling other people that it doesn't matter and they should buy it anyway. How would you like it if they told you to NOT like Fallout 3? Pretty stupid when you turn it around isn't it? It goes both ways. Hey maybe you should like HOTDOGS with DEAD FISH instead of a wiener. You know why you should like it? Because wieners are just you living in the past and dead fish is SO much more immersive.

 

[FeelTheRads]

hmmm I don't agree. I think its the setting and the story.

Gameplay. Gameplay. GAMEplay. GAMEplay. Does that tell you something?

Gameplay is the way a game is played, it's what makes the game. Setting and story could make up for a book, a movie etc.

This is absolutely hilarious.

 

[PaladinHeart]

Setting and story are fine and dandy, but I would not play Fallout the football game, or Fallout the racing game, or even Fallout the skateboarding game. None of those games would interesting me even if they had the most epic story of all time and were completely faithful to the Fallout setting and retro.. stuffs. Whatever.

If you like Fallout the Football Game then that's fine for you, but I think it sucks.

 

[JESUS]

yes since knowing and playing previous titles should be a game requirement to enjoy it. Thats kinda elitist attitude common to some hardcore aspects of communitys. Since the casual players or zomg the ones with consoles dont know what thy are talking about right?

What i do know, and i don't know if thats your case, is that being grateful to Bethesda for "resurrecting" a dead IP without ever playing any previous Fallouts is stupid. Those console casual fans of yours tend to do that, and they go on defending whatever shit BS does just because they had fun with their previous games.

And if you thing only Bethesda was in the line to buy the Fallout IP you should check your sources, because they outbid people who would do a much better job in my opinion.

 

[PaladinHeart]

People who are now out of business...

But is it possible that Troika might have stayed afloat had they gotten the Fallout license? Would they have finished the game before they went belly up?

Orrr.. would it have ended up like their post apoc game they had started working on... which didn't get finished.

Of course I'm guessing it's entirely possible they would have simply finished and polished up van buren and been able to release it soon enough to save Troika.