PC Gamer podcasts covers Fallout 3

[Brother None]

PC gamer's podcast covers Fallout 3 (and the death of Auto Assault) in #90, at 16:40. They talk about Interplay's MMO a bit (calling Interplay's website a "1995 webpage"), then move on to Fallout 3:<blockquote>British Dude: My first reaction when I saw it was "This is Oblivion, but with a post-apocaltyptic wrapper on it."

Less British Dude: It's not though, which is one of the things I was happiest to see. I was expecting an Oblivion mod, but it was really more than that. They've really taken all the Fallout elements and roleplaying style, the SPECIAL system, the perks and traits and the experience-based thing (...). It's really all the Fallout roleplaying experience, but in the Oblivion graphic engine. That's pretty much the only thing that's the same as Oblivion.

British Dude: How's the fanbase reacted (...) because they obviously don't like the idea of Fallout being screwed up by someone else, not even a developer with the prowess of [Bethesda].

Less British Dude: [disjointed sentence fragments] never be satisfied by anything other than the third-person view isometric, exactly the same gameplay, y'know, just with better graphics and more substance. That's not what Bethesda wants to do. And there's part of me that's purest fanboy, I would still love to see that kind of game, that direct continuation, but what they've done with this new one is really impressive in that it really immerses you in to the Fallout universe, in that the interactivity of Oblivion, really brought you in to the world (...)</blockquote>They note that you can still zoom out into:<blockquote>Almost, almost isometric view. You couldn't do combat in that, but it looks like Fallout that way.</blockquote>They note it'll be on the upcoming E3 and that they're looking forward to seeing Fallout there.

PC Gamer podcast #90, at 16:40.

Thanks The Preacher.

 

[Brother None]

I am so frikkin' fed up with transcribing PodCast.

Honestly, it's so typical of the modern communication age. Any halfwit (no offense, PC Gamer guys) can pick up a mike and talk into it. Ever heard of vocalism schools? Rhetoric? They all talk like a bunch of frikkin' school kids on their first show and tell.

And these guys aren't even bad and they have good speaking voices, they just fail to form coherent sentences. Pete Hines and Todd Howard, those guys are horrible!

Ahrgh! Lookin' for volunteers to transcribe PodCats, please! (the preceding is a joke)

That said; so not really isometric, but close, and you can't do combat in it.

And we should be happy that this is not a pure sequel because it's "immersive." Oh, for Inlè's sake, this is 2007, who the Frith falls for that line anymore?

 

[Joe Kremlin]

In 2007 everything is immersive because everything is in first person.

And I still don't get the point of the SPECIAL system in an FPS. Will they add a little stamina bar that won't let you jump or run when it runs out? Will your aiming be hampered intentionally?

 

[Placid]

Regarding isometric viewpoint, a quote from Desslock, that you posted about in this thread, he says :


Other general impressions -- while calling it "Oblivion with guns" is an oversimplication given some of the differences I've described above (and without also getting into the combat differences, etc.), I also think it's a superficially apt description because it definitely looks like Oblivion, not like Fallout, because of the perspective. Sure, they've doled out the carrot of being able to view the game from an isometric perspective, but I'm skeptical that it'll be in any way practical to do so. But the graphics look great - far better than I think they come across in still screenshots.

The entire post can be found at the QTT forums

 

[neopl]

Regarding isometric viewpoint, a quote from Desslock, that you posted about in this thread, he says :


Other general impressions -- while calling it "Oblivion with guns" is an oversimplication given some of the differences I've described above (and without also getting into the combat differences, etc.), I also think it's a superficially apt description because it definitely looks like Oblivion, not like Fallout, because of the perspective. Sure, they've doled out the carrot of being able to view the game from an isometric perspective, but I'm skeptical that it'll be in any way practical to do so. But the graphics look great - far better than I think they come across in still screenshots.

The entire post can be found at the QTT forums

Of course it is not going to be practical. And it will lag your computer out to hell to render everything (zoomed so far out) rather then what is close infront of you (first person) While yo are inside .... dungeons... you will be forced to play in FP anyway... Or over the shoulder...

 

[sanyok21]

Pretty much amusing that fallout 1 and 2, which are labeled by the industry as absolete and non-immersive games, were the most immersive and memorable games i've ever played. I remember rosh once saying that the word "immersive" in reference to the gaming industry was stripped and raped of it's meaning so many times, that you could might as well stroke the keyboard randomly instead of that word.

 

[Stag]

Hey, we didn't get insulted. That's cool. I really like podcasts and the PCG podcast, so not being insulted is pretty right on. Also, pretty funny that Gary Whetta (the British one) raised the question of whether or not it was Oblivion With Guns.

Judging from all the news about the combat and POV, I guess one could run Fallout 3 in a TB-like mode, if you keep your finger on the pause button...

In 2007 everything is immersive because everything is in first person.

And I still don't get the point of the SPECIAL system in an FPS. Will they add a little stamina bar that won't let you jump or run when it runs out? Will your aiming be hampered intentionally?

Your aiming isn't hampered, whether or not you hit is. Afaik, the RT combat in F3 has rolls and everything; e.g., you target the head and do a roll rather just scoring a headshot automatically.

 

[OG Loc]

Ok I´m betting u can mod the isometric view (and fighting with it) and many other things into it, like endless VATS time.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Yes, because Bethesda are so famous for offering these excellent modding tools which allow you to mod pretty much everything, right?
Well, maybe you should inform yourself better, not only from Bethesda's lap dogs, m'kay?

Plus, what the fuck does it matter if modding can be done? The game itself would still be shit. I will not judge a game based on mods made for it.

 

[Wooz]

Oh, the immortal "Immershun" argument.

 

[lisac2k]

And there's part of me that's purest fanboy, I would still love to see that kind of game, that direct continuation, ...

Regret for a single moment that there will be no real sequel?

...but what they've done with this new one is really impressive in that it really immerses you in to the Fallout universe, in that the interactivity of Oblivion, really brought you in to the world

Nope, no regret. Brown-nosing Bethesda seems to be of life and death importance. Also, overusing of that "immer-schon" term, always, everywhere.

 

[Madbringer]

I would still love to see that kind of game, that direct continuation, but what they've done with this new one is really impressive in that it really immerses you in to the Fallout universe, in that the interactivity of Oblivion, really brought you in to the world (...)

I saw a fish the other day.

 

[ManiO]

...like endless VATS time.

VATS is nowhere near TB, since VATS seems to only work for you. It's not TB if you can move while your enemies and allies are taking their "turn."

And on the note that VATS is throwing us TB fans a bone, FUCK YOU. It's more of a slap in the face really, a stupid gimmick to try and include S.P.E.C.I.A.L. to "maintain" a core element of Fallout.

Betsoft, I hate you, with a passion. This doesn't mean that I'd like to see them harmed in anyway, just drop the stupid 3 after Fallout, and preferably Fallout as well.

 

[Ausir]

Watch out, they might drop the stupid 3 after Fallout and just call it.. Fallout.

 

[Odin]

We've always said a prequel would be fun as a story, everything leading up to ze bombs..

 

[Nim82]

Ok I´m betting u can mod the isometric view (and fighting with it) and many other things into it, like endless VATS time.

Err no, you won't be able to. Bethesda don't release SDK's, just a map tool/item editor, they haven't even committed to releasing that for FO3... guess they are still weighing up if they can sell more plug-ins by not!

The camera mode they are on about is just a vanity mode, you won't be able to aim with it, how the hell can you aim the Z axis from a top down view? You'd need the SDK (Bethesda aren't licensed to release the gamebyro SDK, so it won't happen). Also you'd still have to control your character with WSAD, no point and click movement. Here's some screen shots of Oblivion in ISO mode Screen1, Screen2. Totally unplayable with anything but melee weapons, and even then you hit the ground half the time

Modifying VATS may be possible in any CS, it really depends though on how affected by stats it is - you could (for example) possibly create a drug that boosts the relevant stats, permanently. But that would break the mechanics on so many levels.. making the game ridiculously easy. It also isn't turnbased despite what some ill educated journos say, so your just replacing one silly system with another.

 

[Crowfoot]

I love the way that all the essential Fallout gameplay elements (such as the perspective, turn-based combat etc) are all implemented as 'options' and 'compromises' to be used by a small minority of retro wierdos. It's almost as if these were thrown as an afterthought in order to keep the fanboys happy.

At any rate, when discussing the perspective issue, i think that a lot of people (NMA haters and Bethesda, particularly) dismissed it as a purely aesthetic argument where two opinions clashed and that was it. In my opinion, far more of the unique feeling we players got from the setting was due to the isometric perspective than, i think, from any other thing. Take for example, the exaggerated square-shouldered super-hero stance of the Vault Dweller model when you first saw him standing outside the Vault Door, the generally rounded and well-proportioned look that comes with pre-rendered characters, that dinky comic-book feeling, the violence. Essentially, i just think that the role of the isometric perspective has been underestimated and dismissed as a purely aesthetic thing, whereas in reality i think it is inextricable from the Fallout experience but I guess we'll find out how much truth there is in this when the game comes out.

Anyway, sorry for being long-winded, i'm still getting used to posting on forums.

 

[yevinorion]

We've always said a prequel would be fun as a story, everything leading up to ze bombs..

Now there's a game I would love to play. Shame Beth didn't think of that, as we'd probably all be a bit more accepting of this game as a prequel spinoff as opposed to the direct sequel they're making it out to be.

Here's some screen shots of Oblivion in ISO mode Screen1, Screen2. Totally unplayable with anything but melee weapons, and even then you hit the ground half the time

Well, reports are that the 3rd person camera is miles better than Oblivion, so lets hope that while Iso view will still be pretty much unplayable, that at least an over the shoulder view won't be as dreadful as it was in Oblivion, where it's only use was being able to look at your character's outfit.

 

[The Duke]

I love the way that all the essential Fallout gameplay elements (such as the perspective, turn-based combat etc) are all implemented as 'options' and 'compromises' to be used by a small minority of retro wierdos. It's almost as if these were thrown as an afterthought in order to keep the fanboys happy.

There's still the argument from many (including Bethesda) that fallout is all about the setting ,feel of the game and roleplaying elements(with the classic gameplay beng unimportant ). If Beth got that right it would be a decent fallout spin-off/ fps version for me, but my god, did they got it wrong...super zombies and nuclear catapults

 

[Forhekset]

There's that word again - "immersive". God knows a game can't be either "immersive" or "interactive" unless it's in first person!

The FP point of view wouldn't piss me off so much if people, both the media and Beth alike, wouldn't keep throwing these garbage arguments at me as to why FP is better. Stop telling me it's more immersive. Interactive? WTF does that mean? By definition, any video game is "interactive", isn't it?

Regarding the iso camera view and the fact that combat won't be possible while using it, that's pretty much what I expected. Just another scrap seemingly thrown to old-school Fallout fans so that Bethesda/Oblivion fanboys can say "see, you got your iso camera and semi-turn-based combat, so STFU." Except that VATS sounds stupid and clunky, and the iso camera view is practically worthless. I don't mind the rest of the game being first person or third person so much as I dislike what I've seen and heard of the combat system.