Pete Hines interview on SPOnG

Brother None

This ghoul has seen it all
Orderite
And it's a big one:<blockquote> SPOnG: What’s the whole deal with rabid Fallout fanboys desperately worried that Fallout 3 is not going to be a proper RPG?

Pete Hines: Well, at its core Fallout 3 is definitely a role-playing game. If you are of the opinion that any Fallout RPG has to be exactly like the games that came out in 1997 and 1998 down to every feature and detail, that’s definitely not the game we are making. We are trying to make a true successor in the Fallout franchise, something that is a true role-playing game that immerses you in this world, and hopefully brings out the best of what that series is about – which is great tone and setting and themes and characters and player choice… You know, it’s a really interesting, special role-playing system.

If folks are interested in a new Fallout game (as opposed to being slavishly interested in a specific list of demands relating to Fallout or Fallout2); or [they] are just interested in role-playing in general but may not have played the original games; or they are just looking for the next big RPG or the next big RPG coming from Bethesda… we certainly hope all of those folks are interested in what we are up to with Fallout 3.

SPOnG: I suppose the mere fact that there are still ardent Fallout fans out there speaks volumes for the enduring quality of the first games.

Pete Hines: Yeah, not just the quality, but how different the original games were for their time, you know? They really broke the mould of all of the classical fantasy stuff being done around that time.

Bethesda had just put out Daggerfall around that time (1996) for example. Fallout really cut against the fantasy grain and did some pretty unique things: with full facial animations, lip-syncing and that kind of thing. It definitely resonated and has stuck with folks – both rabid and non-rabid; both those who have talked about it every day of their lives since it first came out, and those who just really liked it and can’t wait to play another one.

(...)

SPOnG: One of the features in Fallout 3 that really stands out is V.A.T.S. (Vault-tec Assisted Targeting System) – can you explain how this works?

Pete Hines: V.A.T.S. was really born out of a desire to make the game work best as a first-person game – remember that the original games were third-person with turn-based combat. We feel that first-person is the most immersive way to put a player in a world. However, at the same time we wanted something that stayed as true as possible to role-playing. We don’t want something that rewards the ‘quick-twitch’ FPS player. We’re not trying to reward players who are good at Call of Duty or Halo or whatever.

We want the skills and abilities of your character to determine success or failure. So, one of the things we’ve included is this V.A.T.S. mode allows you to stop time and queue up moves for your character to implement, in almost a compressed time mode. And then we play it out in a cinematic fashion.</blockquote>Link: Pete Hines interview on SPOnG.

Thanks Briosafreak.
 
Pretty good interview, I guess, not too much new information given.

The level of professionalism is once again a point of hilarity. Sneaking in a quick stab at Fallout fans in the intro and calling them rabid in a question is new low of gaming journalism. Way to show professionalism. It's not like all these personal attack on the official press could be insulting anyone, nah, we're just words on the internet, not people.

And using concept art from F:BoS on page 3 and 4? That's pretty funny. A hint, perhaps?

Also, apparently the only thing Pete recognises as Fallout having done differently was not being fantasy, vs., y'know, the whole unique RPG design. Good call, Pete.
 
Pete Hines said:
We want the skills and abilities of your character to determine success or failure.
So that's why you have the mini-games, the lack of low IN dialogue and the real-time combat. Awesome.


Also, does anyone even believe that immersion stuff?
 
Same old.

If this goes on, we might as well compile a Review-o-matic for F3, with random quips about rabid, reactionary fans, how it all looks much better than Oblivion, how everyone is a big FalloutFan, how you can wear the sheriff's clothes and drink from his toilet, and how spectacularly K E W L the head of a sixty feet tall "superzombie" explodes along with eyes the size of Godzilla's balls that come down trashing down the street.
 
Pete Hines: Yeah, not just the quality, but how different the original games were for their time, you know? They really broke the mould of all of the classical fantasy stuff being done around that time.

Bethesda had just put out Daggerfall around that time (1996) for example. Fallout really cut against the fantasy grain and did some pretty unique things: with full facial animations, lip-syncing and that kind of thing. It definitely resonated and has stuck with folks – both rabid and non-rabid; both those who have talked about it every day of their lives since it first came out, and those who just really liked it and can’t wait to
Not quite right Brother None, not only was it not fantasy, but Fallout had full facial animations and lip-syncing! Truly why it has held up so strongly as one of the best RPGs for a decade now.

Pete Hines: So, its little things like this. We’re big fans of the series and what it did and what it was about and we want to stay as true as possible to everything – sound effects, voiceover, music, whatever it is.
I'm glad that icky, stuck-in-the-past attitude doesn't permeate to other bits of Fallout 3's design.

Pete Hines said:
Your biggest foes in the game are these super-mutants that are invading the world and are in a constant battle to push humans out.
So... completely unlike the Daedra in Oblivion then?
 
If folks are interested in a new Fallout game (as opposed to being slavishly interested in a specific list of demands relating to Fallout or Fallout2);

I don't think any Fallout fans are wanting Bethesda to slavishly follow a list of demands. What we do want is Bethesda to make Fallout 3 a true sequel - in spirit and not name only. This means keeping with the original Fallout's:

Gameworld: art style, character design, setting, story tone, dialogue style.
Gameplay: turn-based combat that is mildly tactical, nuanced dialogue options that have an immediate effect, multiple solutions to quests.

Any laundry lists that Fallout fans have been making have those two aspects in mind. I don't think that anyone would be upset with Fallout 3 if it kept the gameworld and gameplay of the original Fallout intact - never mind slight discrepancies in minutia.

What is upsetting is that quite a bit of the public information leads Fallout fans to think that both Fallout 3's gameplay and gameworld will be radically different from the original. Pray that we are wrong.
 
Fallout really cut against the fantasy grain and did some pretty unique things: with full facial animations, lip-syncing and that kind of thing. It definitely resonated and has stuck with folks – both rabid and non-rabid; both those who have talked about it every day of their lives since it first came out, and those who just really liked it and can’t wait to play another one.

(...)
I knew Fallout was a special game once I saw that it had lip syncing. That, more than anything, is what made Fallout unique and special to me.


Brother None has a gift for ... placement. Means so many things at once.
 
So apparently the character's daddy ran off to start shutting down <s>Oblivion</s> FEV Gates in order to stop the Mutant invasion. Game plot revealed!

But it's alright I guess, as long as the series' trademark lip-sync is done right.

"Lip-sync. Lip-sync never changes..."
 
I can't wait to find the space station these cosmic super-mutants are "invading the world" from. Bethsoft employees have broken their silence on one thing though:

"Don’t forget that we are not coming out till Fall 2008"

Good for you lads!
 
Lol, everything I was going to say has been addressed at this point so I just have to say, that's golden.

I also enjoy the way he answered the first question, trying hard to make us look like idiots. "Sure, some people want an exact copy of the original games and so, if you're in that field (i.e. a stupid fool who lives in the past), then you're going to be angry."

Great way to simplify it all.
 
Sorrow said:
Sander said:
Also, does anyone even believe that immersion stuff?
When I hear the word 'immersion', I reach for my Browning!

'Deep' is another word that causes my brain to shut down when used in the context of explaining a feature. Peter Molyneux is the king of that one though.
 
Pete Hines: ...but how different the original games were for their time, you know? They really broke the mould...
Yeah - by having turn-based combat when everything else was real-time, being ISO when the tech to do FPP was there. Why didn't you mention that Pete?
Fallout really cut against the fantasy grain and did some pretty unique things: with full facial animations, lip-syncing and that kind of thing.
Quite amusing that out of all the features, he has to cite lip synch. Like that hadn't ever been done before in pre-rendered footage. Honestly what do they smoke there?

This FPP = immersion argument, is completely voided when they promote the games 3rd person mode and out of body cinematics... if their FPP is so immersive/realistic why do they need to artificially enhance it?
 
Brother None said:
.Pete Hines:
remember that the original games were third-person with turn-based combat.
Duh....doesn't he know the word 'Isometric'?

Brother None said:
Pete Hines:
We feel that first-person is the most immersive way to put a player in a world.
Immersive in First-person view, the next trend of RPG!
Oh wait it has been done since 1980! :roll:
Brother None said:
Pete Hines:
We’re not trying to reward players who are good at Call of Duty or Halo or whatever.
Unfortunately, most of their fans are HALO-lover who might just got their taste of RPG game on a system call X-box and a game call Morrowind.
 
Pete Hines said:
V.A.T.S. was really born out of a desire to make the game work best as a first-person game – remember that the original games were third-person with turn-based combat. We feel that first-person is the most immersive way to put a player in a world. However, at the same time we wanted something that stayed as true as possible to role-playing. We don’t want something that rewards the ‘quick-twitch’ FPS player. We’re not trying to reward players who are good at Call of Duty or Halo or whatever.
Emil Pagiarulo said:
...but we've found in the office playing the game that the third person playback (which only happens in VATS) is a lot of fun to watch. When Todd and I first started prototyping VATS, we played other real time games like Call of Duty and Halo. We'd sit there and say "if I were playing this game and could freeze this moment and go into some kind of targeting system, how would that feel?" Sometimes you want to take a breath and think tactically and not feel rushed. We struggled a long time with the first versions of VATS whether the game should be paused or should we do some slo mo thing. We decided to pause the game and let the player think, be more tactical and not pressure them.
Trying not to reward players who are good at the games you are basing your system around?
 
and then when you come back into this destroyed world you still have people trying to preserve their 1950s hairstyles

Pure. Comedy. Gold.

Edit - Am I going blind, or is that a picture of Cyrus from f:POS on page 4.

I must be going senile.

Why?
 
If folks are interested in a new Fallout game (as opposed to being slavishly interested in a specific list of demands relating to Fallout or Fallout2);


There, you see? that's the logic used to deny the negative opinion of most of the fans of the series, wich are really not demanding remakes of the first games in any way.

I guess it's funny in a way...lack of communication? Bethsoft should really have made their own thing instead of buying the ip.
 
That logic is very convenient. It's also a very effective straw man. Most people who hear this ascribed to us as our opinion take a casual glance at the sites/forums and conclude "looks so, yeah" because from a casual glance, it does look like that.

Maybe someone should do a "we're not interested in a Fallout rehash!" article
 
Back
Top