RPGVault talks to Pete

you could make it so that there are more interesting npc rather than the 3-5 in a town and the rest just walking in circles mumbling to them selves.
 
<blockquote>Fallout is something we've talked about internally for a long time. I'm pretty sure we made the initial approach. I don't remember when. I believe it was something we talked about with our president, Vlatko, at one point, who probably made the initial contact. Again, it's something that has been brought up internally, every now and then, for a long time.
</blockquote>

If they've been talking about it for a while, why are a lot of the basic design decisions of the game still too early to tell? You think they would have decided in these early discussions long ago whether it would at the very least be first or third person... :-\.

And I like you jaberwocki, you can stay. (sorry for the randomness, just reading his posts they sound good to me).
 
Darque said:
"greater good" is too subjective.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Everyone has an idea of what they, personally, want. The devs have general and specific ideas of what the community wants.

They mix that with their talents and strengths, as well as the changes and risks they want to take in order to make the next installment better than the previous one.

Its fine to fight against selling out and ruining FO3...but that doesnt necessarily mean things stay 100% the same.
 
they just need to do the same thing as the vb team new good engaging story, new coat of paint, make some skills more useful, and keep iso, special and T.B. based combat. (sorry bout grammar never paid attention in english class through geade k-12 and eng 110)
 
GameDev said:
Exactly. Everyone has an idea of what they, personally, want. The devs have general and specific ideas of what the community wants.

They mix that with their talents and strengths, as well as the changes and risks they want to take in order to make the next installment better than the previous one.

Its fine to fight against selling out and ruining FO3...but that doesnt necessarily mean things stay 100% the same.
Click to expand...

Except for the fact that this fan base is atypical.

We're not going to just buy something that's Fallout in name only.

If they don't give us what we want, they aren't going to be able to sell us on what they think they want.

And what the fan base wants from Fallout isn't something that changes on a dime... it's been put out pretty clearly from massive numbers of fans as to what we think Fallout is.

If they want to improve something, I personally have no problem with that... so long as they keep it in line with what is "Fallout" and don't sacrifice what is already "Fallout" at the same time.

This wasn't a random move on Bethesda's part, they probably aquired it because there is such a large fanbase that they can sell to.

Would it make sense to alienate that fanbase?
 
Darque said:
GameDev said:
Exactly. Everyone has an idea of what they, personally, want. The devs have general and specific ideas of what the community wants.

They mix that with their talents and strengths, as well as the changes and risks they want to take in order to make the next installment better than the previous one.

Its fine to fight against selling out and ruining FO3...but that doesnt necessarily mean things stay 100% the same.
Click to expand...

Except for the fact that this fan base is atypical.

We're not going to just buy something that's Fallout in name only.

If they don't give us what we want, they aren't going to be able to sell us on what they think they want.

And what the fan base wants from Fallout isn't something that changes on a dime... it's been put out pretty clearly from massive numbers of fans as to what we think Fallout is.

If they want to improve something, I personally have no problem with that... so long as they keep it in line with what is "Fallout" and don't sacrifice what is already "Fallout" at the same time.

This wasn't a random move on Bethesda's part, they probably aquired it because there is such a large fanbase that they can sell to.

Would it make sense to alienate that fanbase?
Click to expand...

I agree with all of what you've said. I think that you can see that there might be the glimmer of possibility that the essentials can be repackaged in a new refreshing way that is new and yet not traitorous....unlike some around here :)
 
Hmmm.

Well I dont think its necessary...just probable. FO3 will "probably" lack at least one element that people deem to be super-extra-vat-dipped important.

Also, its not too much of a stretch to think that people wanting to create new and better will change things. Thats what all the fuss is about. I dont think anything absolutely has to be lost..but that something probably will be.
 
GameDev said:
Again this is a question of distilling the "essential" from the "worthwhile."

Surely for the greater good you could remove some things and add others to advance the experience and make it better than what came before?
Click to expand...

If you had been paying attention, and you obviously have not, then you would have noticed that if it doesn't fit the style of the games previous, then it will be a problem.

I've already pointed this out, but like the crass little shithead netnewbie trash that you've persistently proven yourself to be, you've decided to butt into a couple of threads without bothering to do much research about the topic. You're a little late, as usual. Just like your plans to cash in on that shitty MMOG idea of yours.

I also hate pointing out many instances where deviating from the established formula has killed off entire game series, even after the highest part of the series. Maybe you should go back to advising people to invest into Interplay and leave the real game development to those who understand the industry, and as I've pointed out before, how sequels thrive and fail.

I'm tired of your clueless attention whoring, so you're finally gone. I seriously hope you don't disillusion any of your "development team" when you're attacking the MMOG windmills you've stacked up. I hate it when someone has a bad experience in development when their lead is a bungling and rude fool. Remember, you earned the abuse, shithead.
 
this is my first post on the NMA forums, though i've been visiting NMA for a couple years.

i really dont understand some of the reactions that some of the fallout fans have.

fallout 3 is comming, for me thats enough, i know that bethsoft can pull this over.

I've played, morrowind and its two expansion packs, and lemme tell you that they are quite good, just check, rpgdot.com tho see the high ratings that TES have.

Of course im also a big fan of fallout, and i've been waiting for a sequel for ages.

That Morrowind has its weak points its true, dialogs just to name one, but its a quite good game.

I really dont get some things, whats the fuzz if fallout 3 dont have ISO view?, and please dont tell me that ISO is cannonic, cause its not. in fact Bethesda will determine now whats cannonics, and whats not, you like it or not. they have the right , so they make the rules now. of course they must listen to the fallout fanbase, if they want to pull out a decent game.

Also whats the point with Troika?, i've played both troika's games, and they are "ok" but just ok, nothing more.
why would troika make a better fallout 3 than bethsoft?, and of course i know that some of the original fallout devs work there .

Whats freaking me out is that there are a lot of nos and nots out there, why we just dont wait until we see something? before we make any judgment.

we're burning this game before its even started.
 
Where not burning the idea of fallout 3, infact it will be a high point in many of our lives*1 but we wish it to actualy BE fallout 3, not some game with the name FO3 and no resemblence to the previous 2 fallout games.

Yes, sometimes newer graphics and a newer engine can do great things for a game.
But Fallout is not such a game
Fallout isnt meant to be some fancy graphics media whore, it's meant to be a GOOD cRPG that focuses on gameplay and TRUE RP elements.

That said, it would be e xtremly good if they took many of the FRMs from FO/FO2 and updated them quite a bit, maybe even making more weapon types that you can see being held and such.


Personaly, I'd be happy if it was the same engine used for FO/FO2 simply further updated.


That said, what they have said so far shows that they dont think that they can make fallout as it truly is, so theyre going to make it their way.







*1 If done as a true fallout game, with ISO view, SPECIAL, true RPG, etc etc.



edit, spellng
 
vanheirecu said:
this is my first post on the NMA forums, though i've been visiting NMA for a couple years.
Click to expand...

Liar.

i really dont understand some of the reactions that some of the fallout fans have.
Click to expand...

See above, otherwise you'd have understood the situation a bit more. Sort of like F:POS' announcement.

fallout 3 is comming, for me thats enough, i know that bethsoft can pull this over.
Click to expand...

When it's contrary to their preferred design, published design materials, and it's been said by the PR guy to be as they do best, which isn't a "top-down isometric view like in Baldur's Gate-style games", then you might want to think a bit about your glowing fanboyism.

I've played, morrowind and its two expansion packs, and lemme tell you that they are quite good, just check, rpgdot.com tho see the high ratings that TES have.
Click to expand...

So? Just because someone makes a dungeon crawler that is templated to hell and back, that doesn't really mean that they can develop something of Fallout's character. TES's success is completely irrelevant in this regard.

I really dont get some things, whats the fuzz if fallout 3 dont have ISO view?, and please dont tell me that ISO is cannonic, cause its not.
Click to expand...

You mean canonic? In case you've been living under a rock, or have been a Fallout fan for as long as the announcement has been made, canon has already been established. For them to deviate from canon would be suicide, as has been proven in the past with a number of examples.

Yes, you don't get a few things, the first of which is that the isometric viewpoint is part of the presentation of the game. Check the loading screens if you need a clue, but you've been a Fallout fan for what...two days now?

For not bothering to lurk on the forums and deciding to post with a lie, I'll just say goodbye now.

in fact Bethesda will determine now whats cannonics, and whats not, you like it or not. they have the right , so they make the rules now. of course they must listen to the fallout fanbase, if they want to pull out a decent game.
Click to expand...

This is purely hilarious.

Also whats the point with Troika?, i've played both troika's games, and they are "ok" but just ok, nothing more.
why would troika make a better fallout 3 than bethsoft?, and of course i know that some of the original fallout devs work there .
Click to expand...

It doesn't take much to see why. Of course, your ignorance also points out that you're a liar, again. There's really no way you could miss that many comments about F:POS, the press releases over that, and more, if you had bothered to keep yourself informed. At the very least you're just ignorant and not a liar, so I'll just cull your presumptuous ignorance since you didn't bother to have any courtesy towards those in the topic. People who have already debunked the garbage you've posted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top