PCZone and PCGamer Fallout 3 previews

[aronsearle]

It has the oblivion engine, programmers, dialog system, mini games, perspective and play style, but no it's not like oblivion, cus they say so.

 

[Ixyroth]

Can someone explain how houses are going to work? Is it going to be like in Oblivion? Or what?

Didn't you hear? A few buildings will actually be enter-able, and you'll get that cool loading screen every time! I can hear that creaky door noise as I type.

 

[MacsenMifune]

Can someone explain how houses are going to work? Is it going to be like in Oblivion? Or what?

It has been mentioned in passing by the previewers, but they could not try it out in the time allotted. My guess is that since many other things are similar that this to will be like Oblivion housing. I don't know if it has been stated that sleeping will heal damage, I only heard about the eating, drinking and stimpaks, if it isn't then wouldn't a house be purely for show?

In one of the videos he mentioned sleeping (on a bed) as a way to heal damage.

Good to know, now lets hope they got rid of the Oblivion's ability to sleep anywhere you want to, unlike Morrowind were you at least had to have a bed to sleep in town, then maybe a buy able house would have a little more purpose than eye candy.

 

[Tyshalle]

Then one is lying, because those things are mutually exclusive. Fallout and Oblivion are too dissimilar for both statements to be true. .... "It is" and "it is not" are not adaptations in choice of words, they're two completely different factual statements. So "intended meaning" does not cut it to explain this. .... I don't care what Will intended that statement to mean, he is contradicting Todd Howard by saying it.

"It is" and "it is not" are, as you say, completely different factual statements, and mean completely different things which aren't particularly open to (much) interpretation. But I wasn't talking about that part of the statement. I was talking about "Oblivion with Guns" which is utterly open to interpretation, and one person's "Oblivion with Guns" won't necessarily be the same as another person's. That doesn't make one of them wrong, it just means they're thinking about two different things and using the same phrase to define them.

For instance, if you look at Fallout 3 purely as a piece of technology, then you might call it "Oblivion with Guns," as it uses the same engine, except this one has guns. If however, you look at it in terms of the way a story is told, and how your actions influence the world (if at all), then someone might choose to look at this game as having far more in common with Fallout than Oblivion, in which case when they say that it's not Oblivion with Guns, they're not being dishonest nor inaccurate, and I wouldn't say that either person is lying.

I wouldn't say they're contradicting each other either, and I'd even go as far as to say that it's intellectually dishonest to claim otherwise. It's all about who you're talking to, because that statement means different things to different people.

Wow. So you can prove that millions of people actually 'loved' Oblivion rather than just bought it due to hype and inflated (probably paid for) review scores?

No need to be a bag of asses. Proof really isn't necessary, though if you want it do a google search on just how popular Oblivion was, not to mention the Shivering Isles expansion and the downloadable content. If nobody liked Oblivion they wouldn't have bought the expansion or paid for the DLC.

But there's an easier way of proving this, intellectually. Bethesda, whether they can make a quality game or not, definitely know how to market their stuff. A year ago, when they still gave a crap about the hardest of the hardcore Fallout fans, they were denying that this was "Oblivion with Guns," but now their tune has completely changed, and that's how they describe it in a nutshell to people. What would be the point of doing so if nobody actually liked their games?

But in any event, it's not really important. It doesn't matter if we can say definitively that millions of people "loved" Oblivion. All that matters is that we know that Bethesda is calling this game "Oblivion with Guns," and we can say fairly definitively that it's going to sell a few million copies of its own.

 

[gc051360]

I wouldn't say they're contradicting each other either, and I'd even go as far as to say that it's intellectually dishonest to claim otherwise. It's all about who you're talking to, because that statement means different things to different people.

The developers themselves have said the game it most resembles is Oblivion.

All previewers are doing when they defend it as NOT Oblivion with guns, is they are responding to the arguments of the hardcore crowd. They are basically fan boys, and as such...can not take any criticism about their beloved. So, they defend it.

It's why you'll see "This is not oblivion with guns" in the article followed up by "Why is that a bad thing anyway?" type stuff. They just don't like the game being insulted, and they are doing their best to defend it. Even if the insult, is accurate. That's where the confusion comes in. When the insult is accurate.

The game is the spiritual successor to Oblivion. If you can't see that, you just don't want to. That's all it comes down to.

 

[zioburosky13]

The game is the spiritual successor to Oblivion. If you can't see that, you just don't want to. That's all it comes down to.

And Fallout is not part of TES.

 

[K.C. Cool]

While flipping through the pages of PC Gamer, I noted the way the Vault Boy was drawn in the perks and skills. Which brings to question why they changed some while using the same concept(lockpicking), slightly changing anything about them (eyebrows on the weapon skills), to completely overhauling (science and sneak).

But the illustrations such as Swift learner don't match the art style. In contrast to the others, it looks out of place and not that interesting. I wish that they would have either drawn all of them from scratch (different poses and different way of drawing), or kept the originals the saem, or hell, hire Tramell Ray Isaac.

 

[Stiched]

Didn't you hear? A few buildings will actually be enter-able, and you'll get that cool loading screen every time! I can hear that creaky door noise as I type.

It has been mentioned in passing by the previewers, but they could not try it out in the time allotted. My guess is that since many other things are similar that this to will be like Oblivion housing. I don't know if it has been stated that sleeping will heal damage, I only heard about the eating, drinking and stimpaks, if it isn't then wouldn't a house be purely for show?

Woops, I meant owning houses, like the shack the previewer is given. Do you buy stuff from a specialty furniture store, like in oblivion, or do you scavenge for random crap to put in there?

 

[Phil the Nuka-Cola Dude]

Didn't you hear? A few buildings will actually be enter-able, and you'll get that cool loading screen every time! I can hear that creaky door noise as I type.

I don't mind seeing a loading screen every time I enter/exit a building. You'll be able to tweak your cache size just like oblivion (GameBryo again, remember?) which will make those transition times instant.


What we need to worry about is how that is one of the most shitty cpu dependent (but hilariously enough; completely lacking multicore support) engines with awful performance drops whenever any NPCs are on-screen regardless of settings. Hell, even UT3 (console trash that it is) outperforms gamebryo.

 

[Yellow]

the millions of people who loved Oblivion

Wow. So you can prove that millions of people actually 'loved' Oblivion rather than just bought it due to hype and inflated (probably paid for) review scores?

I, for one, bought Oblivion solely on high review scores and I am not afraid to admit it. Didn't even read the review, just read the score and bought it the next day.

 

[K.C. Cool]

So you can prove that millions of people actually 'loved' Oblivion rather than just bought it due to hype and inflated (probably paid for) review scores?

I, for one, bought Oblivion solely on high review scores and I am not afraid to admit it. Didn't even read the review, just read the score and bought it the next day.

I bought the game on the hype as well. The only thing I liked about the game was the Thieves guild quests. I had a friend that did the same thing and gave up on the game half way though due to level scaling.

Cant's say I'll ever do that again...

 

[terebikun]

I don't know if it has been stated that sleeping will heal damage, I only heard about the eating, drinking and stimpaks, if it isn't then wouldn't a house be purely for show?

In one of the videos he mentioned sleeping (on a bed) as a way to heal damage.

 

[Stiched]

I don't know if it has been stated that sleeping will heal damage, I only heard about the eating, drinking and stimpaks, if it isn't then wouldn't a house be purely for show?

In one of the videos he mentioned sleeping (on a bed) as a way to heal damage.

At least it has some use, then.

 

[Grifman]

NMA would like to reminder its readers at this point that whenever one of Fallout 3's previewers says "it's not Oblivion with guns" they are directly contradicting the game's makers. Their call, tho'.

And I would llike to remind NMA when the game's makers asked if the game was "Oblivion with guns", then complete answer given was:

So now when someone asks, 'Is it Oblivion with guns?' my main answer is, 'in all the best ways.'"

It's more than a little misleading to leave that part out, I think. Selective quoting is pretty poor on your part even if you don't like the direction the game is going.

Just thought I'd point that out in fairness

 

[Beelzebud]

NMA would like to reminder its readers at this point that whenever one of Fallout 3's previewers says "it's not Oblivion with guns" they are directly contradicting the game's makers. Their call, tho'.

And I would llike to remind NMA when the game's makers asked if the game was "Oblivion with guns", then complete answer given was:

So now when someone asks, 'Is it Oblivion with guns?' my main answer is, 'in all the best ways.'"

It's more than a little misleading to leave that part out, I think. Selective quoting is pretty poor on your part even if you don't like the direction the game is going.

Just thought I'd point that out in fairness

In all fairness it really doesn't matter because even at its best, Oblivion was a sub-par game when compared to real RPG's like the first two Fallouts. Saying that Fallout 3 is "Like Oblivion in the best ways", isn't saying much at all.

A much better response would be "This is a true sequel to Fallout, we didn't use the Oblivion design docs and just replace everything with Fallout assets."

 

[K.C. Cool]

NMA would like to reminder its readers at this point that whenever one of Fallout 3's previewers says "it's not Oblivion with guns" they are directly contradicting the game's makers. Their call, tho'.

And I would llike to remind NMA when the game's makers asked if the game was "Oblivion with guns", then complete answer given was:

So now when someone asks, 'Is it Oblivion with guns?' my main answer is, 'in all the best ways.'"

It's more than a little misleading to leave that part out, I think. Selective quoting is pretty poor on your part even if you don't like the direction the game is going.

Just thought I'd point that out in fairness

What are you talking about? That quote is in the link, first paragraph.

 

[Grifman]

NMA would like to reminder its readers at this point that whenever one of Fallout 3's previewers says "it's not Oblivion with guns" they are directly contradicting the game's makers. Their call, tho'.

And I would llike to remind NMA when the game's makers asked if the game was "Oblivion with guns", then complete answer given was:

So now when someone asks, 'Is it Oblivion with guns?' my main answer is, 'in all the best ways.'"

It's more than a little misleading to leave that part out, I think. Selective quoting is pretty poor on your part even if you don't like the direction the game is going.

Just thought I'd point that out in fairness

What are you talking about? That quote is in the link, first paragraph.

The implication is that it is simply "Oblivion with guns" for someone that doesn't bother to actually read the link. That's my point.

 

[Black]

But when we started talking to more consumer-oriented magazines, we'd have, like, two seconds...and we'd say, 'it's like post-apocalyptic Oblivion with guns.'

 

[Anani Masu]

In all fairness it really doesn't matter because even at its best, Oblivion was a sub-par game when compared to real RPG's like the first two Fallouts. Saying that Fallout 3 is "Like Oblivion in the best ways", isn't saying much at all.

See here is where the fundamental disconnect happens between NMA and the rest of the fallout fans/world. Some of Oblivion's mechanics are many many times better than the first two Fallouts. The stealth for instance I never really enjoyed all that well in F1/2 but in Oblivion there were missions that I enjoyed almost as well as the Thief games. (Unsuprisingly the ones that Emil was in charge of) There are good elements in Oblivion that can be transferred to a new Fallout and not only fail to diminish it, but actually improve it.

Another thing is that goes into whether someone might think Fallout 3 is/is not Oblivion with guns is what touchstones they are familiar with. A guy who never played the fallouts might walk up and say "Hey it's got stats and skills and I can walk around town and talk or go out and fight and do quests, this is just like Oblivion!" While someone familiar with both might go "Hey its got the SPECIAL system and the skills from Fallout. When I talk to someone it's got the branching dialogue trees and skill/stat based checks like Fallout and when I fight someone I can bring up a new version of the targeting menu from the old games. Ohh and look the quests I'm doing put an emphasis on there being multiple solutions. They sure didn't just do Oblivion with guns." I'm gonna take a guess that when Deus Ex 3 comes out there will be a lot of people who compare it to Fallout 3 because they don't have the touchstone of the original Deus Ex.

 

[Kyuu]

See here is where the fundamental disconnect happens between NMA and the rest of the fallout fans/world. Some of Oblivion's mechanics are many many times better than the first two Fallouts. The stealth for instance I never really enjoyed all that well in F1/2 but in Oblivion there were missions that I enjoyed almost as well as the Thief games.

You seem to be having a fundamental disconnect with reality. No one has ever said that the stealth mechanic from Fallout should be carbon-copied because it was perfect. In fact, I'm quite sure you'd find that most Fallout fans would readily admit that the stealth mechanic was weak and is an aspect that could use improvement. No one (who's rational) is saying that absolutely every element of the original Fallouts was gold and can't be touched in any way.

However, simply reusing the Oblivion stealth mechanic (which wasn't that great at all) is not much of an improvement, and is mostly just a result of Bethesda's approach to Fallout 3 as a reskinning of Oblivion rather than making it its own game. While that's fine-and-dandy for those who absolutely loved Oblivion, there are plenty of people who didn't enjoy it and saw through its shoddy design.

Also, saying that you enjoyed some quests in Oblivion doesn't really have much to do with whether or not the stealth mechanic was well done. In fact, if I remember well, very few, if any, of the assassin quests (that Emil designed) required stealth at all, and the thief ones that did weren't terribly enjoyable.

Basically, what I think most Fallout fans would say they wanted is an evolution of the gameplay from the originals. What Bethesda did was the complete removal of the gameplay from the originals, replacing it with Oblivion's gameplay and merely slapping on couple of heavily bastardized elements from Fallout.

Finally, referring to NMA as though it's one collective being with a single set of opinions just paints you as foolish. NMA is simply a forum where many different people with different views and opinions post. The only thing you could accurately say is that NMA has attracted a fair number of posters who share a critical eye for Fallout 3.

There are good elements in Oblivion that can be transferred to a new Fallout and not only fail to diminish it, but actually improve it.

Seeing as how the Fallouts and Oblivion are totally different kinds of games (hint: just because they're both lumped under the broad RPG genre doesn't mean they're really similar), straight lifting pretty much every element of Oblivion into Fallout 3 isn't an improvement on much, and there are quite a few facets of the original Fallouts that are much, much superior to Oblivion. So, even if we took for granted that Oblivion did one or two things better (which I'm not sure it did), the fact that most everything has been replaced with straight lifts from Oblivion, which are, for the most part, inferior, means that there's definitely a net crapifying there.

A guy who never played the fallouts might walk up and say "Hey it's got stats and skills and I can walk around town and talk or go out and fight and do quests, this is just like Oblivion!" While someone familiar with both might go "Hey its got the SPECIAL system and the skills from Fallout. When I talk to someone it's got the branching dialogue trees and skill/stat based checks like Fallout and when I fight someone I can bring up a new version of the targeting menu from the old games. Ohh and look the quests I'm doing put an emphasis on there being multiple solutions. They sure didn't just do Oblivion with guns."

Really. Funnily enough, I'm quite familiar with both, yet I agree more with your rendering of the person who's only familiar with Oblivion. I would simply add "oh look, they kinda attempted to stick Fallout elements into Oblivion, but it still looks, feels, and plays much more like Oblivion than anything else."