Pete Hines affirms that he can say nothing

Brother None

This ghoul has seen it all
Orderite
Disempowering earlier rumours, Pete Hines let DaC know the following:<blockquote>Suffice it to say that we have been adding people to the project over the last few months and will continue to do so going forward. Beyond that, we aren't ready to talk about what we're up to or what stage we're in or when we'll be ready to talk. The game is being worked on, that's for sure.</blockquote>Essentially nothing new whatsoever.

Link: newspost on DaC
 
MrBumble said:
That may mean something...or maybe I'm too optimistic... :?:

Doesn't mean anything, just that developers in BethSoft are slowly trickling from Oblivion to Fallout 3.

Kahgan said:
this is starting to get ridiculous Laughing

Poor Pete has no time to do his job either. We should invent a Hinesbot for these people.

"Beep, boop, we can't talk about that yet. Boop, kccch, innovative gameplay, beeep, shiny horse armor, boop boop kching, next-gen graphics."
 
To be fair, we can't blame this recent drizzle of non-news on Pete Hines.

I say we BLAME IT ON SUFFER
 
You know, you may think that I'm to optimistic but i have a feeling that Beth gonna make good sequel to fallout 2, I know it's just a feeling, but they are normal people, and if they would like to create PA FPS they would do it in another setting. 99.9% of Fallout community want to see fallout 3 which has TB combat Iso view etc. and these people are the main money source from fallout 3 for bethesda. Falout 3 is being created for us, so I don't think Beth gonna make somekind of FP piece of shit after seeing our reactions to this possibility.
 
No, Fallout 3 isn't being created for us, it's being created for the mass market, and face it, people who enjoy TRUE RPG's are not part of the mass market.

You're looking at your konsole kids, and FPS crowds.
 
By the way they should be wraping up their concept demo by now, don't we know some flies to spy how is it? Atomic flies, of course :)
 
Dagon said:
You know, you may think that I'm to optimistic ...
Naive is a better word.

but i have a feeling that Beth gonna make good sequel to <s>fallout 2</s> FOBOS
Fixed

I know it's just a feeling, but they are normal people...
What's that gotta do with anything?

...and if they would like to create PA FPS they would do it in another setting.
It's like saying "why take a car when you can ride a scooter?!"

99.9% of Fallout community want to see fallout 3 which has TB combat Iso view etc. and these people are the main money source from fallout 3 for bethesda.
Several Bethesda developers have privately stated that FO3 is neither isometric nor turn-based. Shocking, isn't it?
 
VDweller said:
Several Bethesda developers have privately stated that FO3 is neither isometric nor turn-based. Any questions?
Yes. Source please.

Seriously, VDweller, you're intelligent enough to know that to anyone who hasn't talked to a Beth dev that this isn't terribly convincing.
 
Pete 'Trying for both legs' Hines said:
Beyond that, we aren't ready to talk about what we're up to or what stage we're in or when we'll be ready to talk.

Well, except for the stupid remarks made by you, Todd, Brian, the dumbfuck "designer" who mistook FOT for Fallout while claiming to be a "fan"...

Bethesda certainly could use some good PR at this point, but I suppose a forthright developer is unheard of these days, when they need to rely on people finding out what garbage they have bought AFTER they've paid the money for it.
 
Sander said:
VDweller said:
Several Bethesda developers have privately stated that FO3 is neither isometric nor turn-based. Any questions?
Yes. Source please.
It says privately, doesn't it?

Seriously, VDweller, you're intelligent enough to know that to anyone who hasn't talked to a Beth dev that this isn't terribly convincing.
Heh. I'm not trying to be "terribly convincing". (Neither is Bethesda :wink:). I posted a comment. Take it as you will.

I believe I'm not known for making shit up or spreading rumors.
 
VDweller said:
It says privately, doesn't it?
Of course. I was hoping you had a new source. ;)

Heh. I'm not trying to be "terribly convincing". (Neither is Bethesda :wink:). I posted a comment. Take it as you will.

I believe I'm not known for making shit up or spreading rumors.
No, you are not. Your words carry some weight. But regardless, I've taken the stance that I'm not drawing any conclusion until I see something that is actually conclusive. And hey, this isn't all that conclusive. For all I know you were tricked into believing he was a Beth dev, or he was just fucking around.
 
Hell, I could make a load of people cringe by saying the inside flap should easily read:

Remember F:POS?

Time to tip my hand.

Much of the early proposed designs were worrysome, I can truthfully say that one of them was simply going to be TES with guns. Another seemed to go in the direction of ripping off BioWare, which is ironic since BioWare initially ripped off Fallout in order to skullfuck D&D rules into an RTS. It is the reaction from the community, akin to the bullshit flag being waved at FOT that led to it being given an overworld map and more before it was released, that is making them re-evaluate and re-think their decision to milk a license with minimal effort. Now is not the time to stop.

Yes, this is why we tell you to be forthright, Petey. Once the suspicions and private channels make certain bits known, then it becomes a PR nightmare when it makes it clear that you're a liar.

"We're approaching Fallout 3 as if we developed the first and second games - we're developing it just like we developed Oblivion.* Fallout 3 is our baby, we want to stay true to what it is and we want to deliver something that all the fans think is worthwhile.** We're trying to move the series forward, keeping it fresh and cool while staying true to its roots.***"

Now, if the PR buzzwords don't make you cringe, then you deserve to have your wallet raped.

* - Given the initial concepts, this was a total lie. Or the truth, depending upon which part of the sentence is correct, because they can't both be true.
** - For a given value of "what is true to the series" given Chuck and MicroForté's treatment of the title, who also claimed the same and were still pretty damn clueless. Given that they butchered their own franchise for the sake of consoles, Bethesda doesn't really give a shit about their real fans, only how much money they can get. That means they only have one kind of "fan" in mind, the one stupid enough to keep throwing money at them for their laughable mods. TES IV's development was designed around a moneymaking scheme, so I guess by Pete's own words, we can enjoy Fallout getting raped the same way. Plan on having an optional buyable download for brahmin armor.
*** - "Move the series forward" is a given with the "3". In development terms, it means to make the game trendy so console morons can enjoy it. "Keeping it fresh and cool" also says the same thing, when Fallout had a specific setting that wasn't "fresh and cool", it was a darkly ironic retrofuture setting, and Fallout admittedly was a game in the CRPG niche. "Staying true to its roots" also assumes that Bethesda has a clue of what the roots are (which means I can publicly brand Pete a liar when Fallout 3 doesn't have P&P style gameplay - WHICH IS FALLOUT'S ROOTS). Again, given the initial concepts thrown around Bethesda, and those seriously entertained for some time, Pete's so full of shit he could attract more flies than Feargus.

EDIT:

And here's the real truth. Exactly how many mouse-driven games are there for the consoles? The X-Box? Does anyone really believe that they could do a proper sequel with console controls and then NOT half-ass port it over to the PC? Does anyone expect that they could offer the Fallout gameplay with a console controller, or intend on trying to? They already said they intend Fallout 3 to be on consoles, and we've seen how they care to develop their own title.

Again, Remember F:POS?
 
Sander said:
For all I know you were tricked into believing he was a Beth dev, or he was just fucking around.
The former is impossible (too many reasons), the latter is possible, but another developer said pretty much the same thing last week. An overly elaborate joke? Everything's possible. I'm sure these practical jokers would even release a RT FP game just to mess with us.

But regardless, I've taken the stance that I'm not drawing any conclusion until I see something that is actually conclusive. And hey, this isn't all that conclusive.
Fair enough. What about these:
...
GameSpy: Finally, will Fallout 3 be from a first- or third-person perspective like the Morrowind series, or isometric, like its predecessors?

Pete Hines: Too early to say, but I imagine it'll probably lean towards using technology that we're developing. (Note that the question was about the view, not tech - VD)
...
IGNPC: Can we expect something similar to the work done on Morrowind, in terms of that style of game experience?

Pete Hines: Again, it's early to say, but it wouldn't be a leap of faith to say that we plan to use technologies in development otherwise. You could make some fairly safe leaps of faith that it would be similar in style. We're not going to go away from what it is that we do best. We're not going to suddenly do a top-down isometric Baldur's Gate-style game, because that's not what we do well.
...
Rob: Oh and Fallout Tactics was my favorite out of the bunch. I know they don't directly tie in but I loved Fallout 1 and 2 because of the story. I absolutely hated the combat because real-time was a little too frantic and turn-based was a little too slow. Tactics took the worst part of Fallout (to me anyway) and turned it into a really great experience and a great game to play.
...
Todd: I'd say the impact the original had in its day was about so much more then the angle you viewed it at, or how combat was executed.
...
Executive Producer Todd Howard wouldn’t confirm whether the franchise’s traditional isometric view and turn-based combat will be abandoned, but he did point out that the strategy spin-off Fallout Tactics retained those elements and still didn’t resonate with series fans.
...
This game however, will be decidedly darker. Imagine a survival horror-esque version of the Fallout world, with all the things you expect out of the series still intact, but with deeper, more immersive gameplay.
...
Todd Howard claims that Fallout 3 will be one of the most original and violent titles ever and will be set in a familiar US city.
................................................
And here is another quote to deal with all the "nothing has been decided yet" bs:

Pete: We've got a lot of folks working on that game now, and what I've seen of it so far is looking really good and has me very excited - I'm a big fan.
 
VDweller said:
Fair enough. What about these:
...
GameSpy: Finally, will Fallout 3 be from a first- or third-person perspective like the Morrowind series, or isometric, like its predecessors?

Pete Hines: Too early to say, but I imagine it'll probably lean towards using technology that we're developing. (Note that the question was about the view, not tech - VD)
...
Note that I'm all too familiar on what has been said already.
Also take note of the fact that Pete Hines is speaking speculatively here. It's about the same as me saying to one of my prospective clients 'Gee, I don't know exactly what we'll do with our new product, but I imagine we'll use technology that we've developed.'
Which is meaningless shite, but still pretends to sell a point.

Most of the other quotes can be dismissed along the same lines, although that doesn't mean there isn't some truth to them. One of them is a single dev professing his preference, another is Todd preparing the public for the possibility that there may not be an isometric view. It's PR spin, and trust me when I say I know PR spin.

There are two quotes that are definite. The one about 'survival horror-esque' and the one about a familiar setting.
Why? Because this suggests setting Fallout 3 in a city, where you need to kill zombies. And to make this interesting, they're much more probable to use the first-person view (a la the still not seen S.T.A.L.K.E.R.), knowing their development style.

EDIT: Note that I'm not saying what they will or will not do. I'm saying that it's impossible to come to a definite conclusion based on the information we have now. Your unique 'I talked to two devs' situation excluded. ;)
 
How about designing a new "LIAR"-stamp to put in people's forehead?

EDIT: urgh, this thread get replies fast :?
 
Back
Top