fallout ranger
Vault Dweller
True, just look how hard it is to play even Goldeneye. Iso is capable of more refinement than 3d.
Pete Hines fires back
- Thread starter Brother None
- Start date
Vault Dweller
Sorrow
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Did anyone care about that? When they wanted to make an FPP game, they simply made it.Kyuu said:Fallout, in 2D isometric, looks rather better than the graphics of the Quake engine at that time. I never really thought any of the 3D engines looked very good up until recently. Even Unreal, which was absolutely gorgeous for its time, still didn't match a good 2D engine for visuals.Sorrow said:Of course not, it wouldn't be 2d isometric.
An isometric 3d would be a different case though...
whirlingdervish
Brahmin Cavalry Commander
DaiShiva said:
I'm saying that it COULD have been made at the time using the Quake engine, not that it SHOULD have been.
I do not think it would have stood the test of time as well as it has, if it had been made to use a 3D engine, because of the incredible depth of the game's NPC interactions.
The storyline and atmosphere that Interplay managed to accomplish with a handful of talking heads and some combat-taunt-style speech were truly amazing and in my opinion could not have been done as effectively in a 1st generation 3d engine. (and cannot be done WELL today, even with "next-gen" 3d engines like oblivion's, or the CS source engine..)
I don't care how many rendered eyelashes an NPC has, they aren't adding to the value of the game if their dialogue is ridiculous or counter-intuitive, and their facial expressions are weak caricatures of real emotion.
I have never seen a FPP game manage to relate such a complex and interconnected story through the deft application of 3D rendered graphix. Oblivion is a good example of how hard they try and yet still fail horribly at this, using the newest of the new technologies.
It's sorta like using nuclear power for things that don't need it.
Yes it's a great discovery, but using it to power a toaster is stupid and a big fat waste of everyone's time. Not to mention dangerous to the future of toaster production.
If the technology doesn't mesh efficiently with what you are trying to do (no matter how new and shiny it is), don't use it.
TheWesDude
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
Sorrow said:Of course not, it wouldn't be 2d isometricDaiShiva said:
1) you could do a 3d iso game in the original quake engine.
and i made a post on the beth boards raising a few points:
http://www.bethsoft.com/bgsforums/index.php?showtopic=756307&st=100&gopid=10962355&#
thenightgaunt
First time out of the vault
Wow, you know, this one interview has done more to kill my denial mojo than anything else so far. (I refer to that "It's going to be ok" denial)
My "favorite" parts
"If you're really interested in a fallout game and you want another one and you know, you have an open mind about what that might include or not include then hopefully so far you might like what we're doing."
So it's all good as long as we have a flexible definition of what a "fallout game" is...
On criticism from unhappy fans over oblivion and now fallout "we're used to hearing that kind of stuff..."
"fan reaction's been a bit all over the map."
Yeah, who need the fans anyway.
On humor in the game.
"we don't like the winking at the camera stuff...and the montey python references, that kind of stuff goes over the line..."
...swing and a miss.
Wait...if they didn't find the outright silly stuff in Fallout 1 and 2 that funny, nor any of the silly sexual situations...what the hell do they think was funny in the games, and what kind of humor are they bringing back in 3??
My "favorite" parts
"If you're really interested in a fallout game and you want another one and you know, you have an open mind about what that might include or not include then hopefully so far you might like what we're doing."
So it's all good as long as we have a flexible definition of what a "fallout game" is...
On criticism from unhappy fans over oblivion and now fallout "we're used to hearing that kind of stuff..."
"fan reaction's been a bit all over the map."
Yeah, who need the fans anyway.
On humor in the game.
"we don't like the winking at the camera stuff...and the montey python references, that kind of stuff goes over the line..."
...swing and a miss.
Wait...if they didn't find the outright silly stuff in Fallout 1 and 2 that funny, nor any of the silly sexual situations...what the hell do they think was funny in the games, and what kind of humor are they bringing back in 3??
goffy59
Still Mildly Glowing
ahhh
Bethesda added to list of horrible game developers. At least we still have Blizzard, ID software and Valve. Oh, darn where did all the good games go?
If Baldur’s Gate or Diablo 2 were FPP I wouldn’t touch them with a 20 foot pole. We need a Deus Ex 3!(just hope they dont ruin it like they did the second).
Bethesda added to list of horrible game developers. At least we still have Blizzard, ID software and Valve. Oh, darn where did all the good games go?
If Baldur’s Gate or Diablo 2 were FPP I wouldn’t touch them with a 20 foot pole.
We need a Deus Ex 3!(just hope they dont ruin it like they did the second). OK, I saw the point had been made, however I still want to check my logic reading the following paragraph:
Please correct me if I am wrong. I just saw the statement made is pure bullshit, it as saying "bacause we have the technology to make helicopters, lets scrap cars as obsolete - helicopters offer much better view and technology".
So. SOME people have seen the transition from TB iso to 3rd person Rt as an inevitable step due to "achievement of technology" ? Following that path of logic, it would turn out that as technology advances, ALL games will be FP and RT (read - shooters for the better part). As technology advances, or as people get dumber ? Are dumb games the result of retarded public, or the other way around? I don't even want to start the lengthy discussion how the average gamer is too young, too lazy and too spoiled to actually put some brains in something he plays, so FPS are incredibly popular due to easier digestion.
Please correct me if I am wrong. I just saw the statement made is pure bullshit, it as saying "bacause we have the technology to make helicopters, lets scrap cars as obsolete - helicopters offer much better view and technology".
PaladinHeart
Mildly Dipped
Some time back when I heard that Bethesda had the Fallout license I remember thinking that they could probably make a pretty cool Fallout 3. And I think it's also pretty cool that they made Interplay pay the former BIS employees and such.
I do kinda like Morrowind and Oblivion, but you know what? The Fallout fans are right and Bethesda is wrong. I don't know why they are even bothering to defend themselves...
Here is how it is. They probably don't know how to make it play in third person isometric. So why are they just making excuses that first person is more immersive?
It's kinda like someone taking your shoes away and then telling you to go without shoes because "it's more immersive". Moving the combat to first person perspective really takes a HUGE portion of the tactical gameplay away.
Now for the console rant. Anyone played Morrowind on the PC and on the X-Box as well? Ever noticed how much difference there is in the gameplay? I always feel handicapped when playing certain types of RPG games on a console. Especially strategic games.
I feel like they are taking a strategic type of game and converting it into an action game so that you won't feel as handicapped.
Let's take the pointer for example. In a FPS you just point and shoot. You don't normally have an option to look at something to get more information, use an object on it, etc..
Even in Oblivion it felt clumsy to pick up objects and move them around. Most likely a result of designing it for the console.
What we are getting here is a HUGE tradeoff of interactivity for... "immersion" as they call it. Ultima Underworld is more interactive than Oblivion (by a huge stretch) and it's many years older, even older than Fallout...
So yeah. I was thinking this game might possibly be cool but since they are lambasting the fans with lame excuses I don't really see the project going anywhere. I have an open mind and I could see it possibly being a good game but I always compare first person RPG's to Ultima Underworld and the only one that has impressed me to this day has been Arx Fatalis. If Fallout 3 is at least as good as that then it could be enjoyable..
But it won't be Fallout.
I do kinda like Morrowind and Oblivion, but you know what? The Fallout fans are right and Bethesda is wrong. I don't know why they are even bothering to defend themselves...
Here is how it is. They probably don't know how to make it play in third person isometric. So why are they just making excuses that first person is more immersive?
It's kinda like someone taking your shoes away and then telling you to go without shoes because "it's more immersive". Moving the combat to first person perspective really takes a HUGE portion of the tactical gameplay away.
Now for the console rant. Anyone played Morrowind on the PC and on the X-Box as well? Ever noticed how much difference there is in the gameplay? I always feel handicapped when playing certain types of RPG games on a console. Especially strategic games.
I feel like they are taking a strategic type of game and converting it into an action game so that you won't feel as handicapped.
Let's take the pointer for example. In a FPS you just point and shoot. You don't normally have an option to look at something to get more information, use an object on it, etc..
Even in Oblivion it felt clumsy to pick up objects and move them around. Most likely a result of designing it for the console.
What we are getting here is a HUGE tradeoff of interactivity for... "immersion" as they call it. Ultima Underworld is more interactive than Oblivion (by a huge stretch) and it's many years older, even older than Fallout...
So yeah. I was thinking this game might possibly be cool but since they are lambasting the fans with lame excuses I don't really see the project going anywhere. I have an open mind and I could see it possibly being a good game but I always compare first person RPG's to Ultima Underworld and the only one that has impressed me to this day has been Arx Fatalis. If Fallout 3 is at least as good as that then it could be enjoyable..
But it won't be Fallout.
its all bout money. Takin risks, being creative or simply copying the original games can never be as profitable as mainstream, dumbed down console crap.
but hey I'm sure it will be a playable game, but its not fallout
like you'd want to spend time with a hot chick thats a complete cunt, or drive a ferrari without an engine ;S
but hey I'm sure it will be a playable game, but its not fallout
like you'd want to spend time with a hot chick thats a complete cunt, or drive a ferrari without an engine ;S
But Pete gave us good reason to not buy it even if it's going to be a good gamezamppe said:its all bout money. Takin risks, being creative or simply copying the original games can never be as profitable as mainstream, dumbed down console crap.
but hey I'm sure it will be a playable game, but its not fallout
like you'd want to spend time with a hot chick thats a complete cunt, or drive a ferrari without an engine ;S
Jidai Geki
It Wandered In From the Wastes
You know, the assumption that console users are mindless sheep that take any old shit dumped on their plate is rather prejudiced and ignorant. We can't all afford to spend two month's wages on a super PC that will play new releases for a year at best, and buying/playing a console doesn't make us retards.
That said, this interview gave me mixed feelings. On the one hand the VATS system is sounding very disappointing. I was hoping that the entire game could be played pretty much as Fallouts 1 and 2 were played, entirely turn-based with dice rolls checking for hits etc., but it seems there's no possibility of that now. Sucks to be us.
However, the dialogue does sound a little more promising that that of Oblivion. Hopefully they can at least approximate what we experienced in Fallout.
That said, this interview gave me mixed feelings. On the one hand the VATS system is sounding very disappointing. I was hoping that the entire game could be played pretty much as Fallouts 1 and 2 were played, entirely turn-based with dice rolls checking for hits etc., but it seems there's no possibility of that now. Sucks to be us.
However, the dialogue does sound a little more promising that that of Oblivion. Hopefully they can at least approximate what we experienced in Fallout.
Geki, if you do the math, you'll find a modest pc cheaper in the long run (not to mention giving you more functionality than a console).
as for the console crowd: of course not all a stupid console kiddies. that kinda goes without saying. but regardless, consoles are greatly the reason why we're seeing a dumbing down in PC games.
as for the console crowd: of course not all a stupid console kiddies. that kinda goes without saying. but regardless, consoles are greatly the reason why we're seeing a dumbing down in PC games.
Morbus
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
You don't really get do you? Do you think those who say console gamers are stupid kids have top-notch computers?!?!? õ_Ô You *don't* get it... -_- Most people that have top-notch computers and play every AAA release are just as stupid as most console gamers. Me? I don't generalize. I KNOW there are console players that are intelligent and witty and bright and sexy and whatnot. Just as there are players with top-notch PC's that are all that. It's just that the majority of players, not only console players, are a bunch of assholes that can't tell a hole in the ground from a decent game. Why do you think Oblivion sold so much? Why do you think so many people praise Baldur's Gate as one of the best RPG's of all time? Huh? Wow players? Tell me about them... It's the masses dude, the masses.Jidai Geki said:
Yeah, that's said in did. Said butt thorugh...Jidai Geki said:
quietfanatic
Ancient One
I'm used to hearing all this kind of stuff, but I'm not OK with it.
In the highly unlikely event that it does fail commercially, I wonder if they would sell it on? I doubt it.
In the highly unlikely event that it does fail commercially, I wonder if they would sell it on? I doubt it.
zioburosky13
Vault Senior Citizen
Well, even if he knows this is not true, Pete won't admit he is 'wrong' given that he's the PR guy & PR job is one of the shittiest job on earthPete Hines said:
It takes a great leap to admit 'yeah...we are wrong by turning F3 into a mindless wanton fps game'
Well, I bet they consider this the biggetst marketing trick of them all.zioburosky13 said:It takes a great leap to admit 'yeah...we are wrong by turning F3 into a mindless wanton fps game'
Oh, wait, they really BELIEVED they are making an rpg. Self deception sucks... and is not curable, regretably, much like stupidity.
Re: ahhh
It's in the works:
http://pc.ign.com/articles/789/789321p1.html
Whether or not they'll screw it up, I have no idea.
As for Fallout 3, I've pretty much given up on the idea of having a game that's along the lines of what I've been looking forward to all of these years. At this point, I've just moved towards hoping that any damage to established Fallout canon will be minimal, and possible to explain away.
If one were to set aside the expectations that one has for a Fallout game, I think F3 looks like it could be "fun." Though I have my doubts as to whether it will be as enjoyable - or as memorable - as the first two, it seems like it stands a chance of being at least a decent distraction for a little while.
Whether - and when - I buy will be based on gaming magazine reviews of the final product, as well as "fan" reaction from those who buy and play the game themselves.
goffy59 said:We need a Deus Ex 3!(just hope they dont ruin it like they did the second).
It's in the works:
http://pc.ign.com/articles/789/789321p1.html
Whether or not they'll screw it up, I have no idea.
As for Fallout 3, I've pretty much given up on the idea of having a game that's along the lines of what I've been looking forward to all of these years. At this point, I've just moved towards hoping that any damage to established Fallout canon will be minimal, and possible to explain away.
If one were to set aside the expectations that one has for a Fallout game, I think F3 looks like it could be "fun." Though I have my doubts as to whether it will be as enjoyable - or as memorable - as the first two, it seems like it stands a chance of being at least a decent distraction for a little while.
Whether - and when - I buy will be based on gaming magazine reviews of the final product, as well as "fan" reaction from those who buy and play the game themselves.
