Sawyer on Fallout3 again

Briosafreak

Briosafreak

Lived Through the Heat Death
After the news on J.E. Sawyer thoughts on weapons and skills we got a few comments that i posted at the Interplay message boards.
So the Lead Technical Designer of Fallout3, er, i mean Project Van Buren took some time to discuss those comments.
Here`s a few examples:
<blockquote>
Dan:Fallout had a very good system... Why change it?
The Fallout system (At least in Fallout 1) was pretty well balanced, now, you can go and change it, but why?

Sawyer: I don't think it's balanced at all, looking at the weapon stats.

Dan: You have a working system, some tweaking might be in order, but changing it for no apparent reason? I don't see the point.

Sawyer: I honestly think you might need to play Fallout again and see how the weapons break down -- either that or break open a stat book and compare the weapons. The small guns are designed to become obsolete, thus rendering the small guns skill obsolete. Try to think of this from the perspective of playing Fallout 1 for the first time. You don't know where to go to get the .223 pistol as soon as you want it. You don't know all of the patterns for character building that come from playing the game over and over again.

In the past few weeks, a lot of people in the division have been playing Fallout and Fallout 2 again. A lot of them got close to the end of the game and realized that they had made "worthless" characters -- characters that for whatever reason had skills that were ultimately ineffective for dealing with the challenges they faced. Small guns fell into that category for both games. Watching someone fight the master with a small gun, even the .223 pistol, is a sad affair when compared to someone using a plasma rifle (turbo or not).

The .223 autoloader does 20-30 points of standard damage with a 30 range, 5 AP cost. The plasma rifle does 30-65 plasma damage with a 25 range, 5 AP cost. Most armor in the game either has a lower plasma DR and/or a lower plasma DT, Tesla Armor being the notable exception.

If you can explain to me how any of the small guns are as good as their counterparts in energy weapons, I'd like to hear it. Honestly, I don't see how anyone other than a masochist would try to go through the game with small guns only when energy weapons are so clearly superior, side to side. It eventually makes the small gun skill less far useful, overall.

ColJac:they do need 3 categories, just not big, small, and energy...
they need big, small, and huge guns..

Sawyer:I had considered this, but I do think that six combat skills in Fallout is one skill too many. Maybe I'm being overly concerned with that limit.

Locutus:Good idea is with the conventional, plasma and laser weapons range and also with using two guns at the same time.
But the idea with one handed weapons being small guns and two handed being big ones is... well isn't good.
And also using a big gun will mean having both inventory slots occupied. This sucks as hell!

Sawyer: I don't think it really sucks, I think it's just the price you pay for using a heavy weapon. High caliber firearms (other than energy weapons) tend to be bigger guns. Rifles are usually a lot more accurate at range. Miniguns are huge and can level town hall meetings.

Saint_Proverbius: Another thing I find problematic about his approach is that it's too much like a D&D deal. Basically, you have pistols or rifles as your choice. Either you have two handed or one handed weapons instead of a distinction based on a more arbitrary classification.

Sawyer: I'm rarely concerned with how things seem, only how they are. But I don't understand how it's like a D&D. D&D splits up every single weapon into its own proficiency type, and you often have to spend an entire feat just to decently use one weapon. And this distinction is entirely arbitrary because it is designed for convenience. When a player picks up a gun, the second they click on it in inventory, they will know that it is either a small gun (1-handed) or big gun (2-handed). A less arbitrary, more "realistic" approach would be to have skills based off of weapon types like handguns, assault rifles, submachineguns, etc.
</blockquote>
And a very important quote from Sawyer again:
<blockquote> If people don't agree with my suggestions, they should feel free to question them. Just having the title of lead tech. designer doesn't make me infallable, nor does it preclude the possibility that a gamer could suggest something worthwhile.</blockquote>

And there are much more, go and read the thread.
So keep posting those ideas and suggestions, either at that thread on Iplay , or on the Fallout 3 Suggestions and Ideas forum here on NMA , as in the comments on this news.
 
n the past few weeks, a lot of people in the division have been playing Fallout and Fallout 2 again. A lot of them got close to the end of the game and realized that they had made "worthless" characters -- characters that for whatever reason had skills that were ultimately ineffective for dealing with the challenges they faced. Small guns fell into that category for both games.
Click to expand...

Are you stupid or just an asshole? That's a tweaking issue.
 
Saint_Proverbius: Another thing I find problematic about his approach is that it's too much like a D&D deal. Basically, you have pistols or rifles as your choice. Either you have two handed or one handed weapons instead of a distinction based on a more arbitrary classification.

Sawyer: I'm rarely concerned with how things seem, only how they are. But I don't understand how it's like a D&D. D&D splits up every single weapon into its own proficiency type, and you often have to spend an entire feat just to decently use one weapon. And this distinction is entirely arbitrary because it is designed for convenience. When a player picks up a gun, the second they click on it in inventory, they will know that it is either a small gun (1-handed) or big gun (2-handed). A less arbitrary, more "realistic" approach would be to have skills based off of weapon types like handguns, assault rifles, submachineguns, etc.
Click to expand...

Well, okay, then I'll say that is how it is, not how it seems. Two handed sword profficiency, two handed gun skill, pretty much the same thought train there. Both are realistically based since pistols are different from rifles and long swords are different from claymores, but..

Screw realism.

As someone pointed out over at DAC, D&D is primarily played in parties. It's okay to have a character locked in to using long swords while another is using clubs and another is using bows. That's okay because there's several people there to divide up that loot between and make up for the strengths and weaknesses of the others.

To put it in a Fallout perspective, this would be like one character having pistol skills for SMG, and another having rifle for sniping. It takes two characters to make up for both ranged and devastating up close fire. The big problem now lies in that Fallout isn't a party game. Party game dynamics, even though they're based in realism, need to be tossed in favor of something that will allow a player to SMG the bad guys up close and switch to longer range if need be.

The way Fallout's gun skills are set up now actually works. The only problem with them is that there are no Big Guns and Energy Weapons for low level characters. Make a few low tech energy weapons and big guns for lower-mid level characters, and go from there. A blunderbus would be a great Big Gun for low levels, for example.
 
Been replaying FO and FO2, too, over 2003.

FO on MAC.

About the time the powder weapon skills get over a hundred, start REPONDING to the loss of point matching and develope other skills.



Anticipating energy weapons from the first sample seen, use 'Tag '
and get the "2 fer" bonus.

Last night.

Seem to have "good enough" energy skills to kill Nightkin in two shots at close range in the Cathedral, with Turbo Plasma Rifle. Stumbled on that Tarot Reader in Adytown and have LUCK of 7, too.

Building "trendy" UBER Melee or hammer fanning trick shootin' characters and whining about end game deficiencies?
If the game is GOOD ENOUGH, I'd go back and build a new start. So this makes my game play different to the cited I'play replayers.
Don't like where their choices took them so they want to change a game system rather than CHANGE THEIR GAMEPLAY. Can't COPE with
the game system, why bother to play it? If I can build up my me'ger twitch skills to negotiate shooters, what is keeping these EXPERTS from playing the game as it was designed?

But I forgot, they're replaying to IMPROVE FO. Quid pro Quo? Improve
FO 'foe' whom?

Just from the quoted sample here in this news blip, I quess we'll see guns akimbo, but it remains to be seen if it'll be a long path of training akin to uber melee or snipers. Maybe this will balance the gameplay for folks that are quick to say stuff "sucks" (..you know....hopely as an intensifier..you know... and not mere puntuation,...you know....).

So the intent of the "realism", two inventory slots for rifles and big guns etc., is shifting to "game balance". Saving the "ass" of "unbalanced" character developemnt by hasty, or reflexive, or 'twitchy' players? What will result in the time saved by streamlining weapons' handling, micro managing NPC's in squad tactics, in REEL Thyme? Certianly not to climb a rich and rewarding Speech tree, and sample the FORBIDDEN FRUITS [*] of untraveled pathes of new
Knowledge.

Well no evidence there, so too early to judge.


But. Two inventory slots taken.......for Daisy Cuttin' gatlings and Long guns,....

Do they anticipate a "third" slot for use of Stealth Boy device in combat? Or. Going to have a "paper doll" inventory screen to dress up like the fantasy RPG's?

[*""Ain't no Garden of Eden, Ain't no angels above...this ain't the Summer of Love""] [BlueOysterCult]

4too
 
Some of you all might not agree with me, but I've got an idea for a system to equal them all out.

First, There are 4 damage types, each weapon is a combination of them. Object, Concussive, Heat, and Electricity. Lets say a frag grenade deals 40 points of damage, you take 20 points of object from the shrapnel, 10 points from the concussion, and 10 from the heat. Your armor treats these as separate attacks. Now, of course, you would roll to show how much damage each one does. A theoretical weapon stat is as follows

Plasma Rifle, 5 ap, two handed, range 35
damage potential
object- 0-0
concussive- 0-0
heat- 20-40
electricity- 15-25

Second, weapons are either two-handed, one-handed, or braced. One-handed weapons take one-slot, two-handed weapons take two slots, and braced weapons take three. One-handed weapons are things like pistols and grenades. Two-handed weapons are things like rifles and assault rifles. Braced weapons are mini-guns and things that are very cumbersome to hold in one hand.

Third, you have three slots instead of two, one is a pocket for access in combat. You can carry a two-handed weapon in one hand but not use it. You switch items in a hand and in a pocket for one ap. Two-handed weapons and braced weapons cannot be put in the pocket.

Fourth, your character is either right or left handed. The hand you are not good with takes a penalty. Note: this doesn't affect two-handed or braced weapons.

Fifth, you can use two one-handed weapons but it costs extra ap and has the penalties for the hand you aren't gifted with. Late in the game a perk should be available to make the small guns skill keep up with energy weapons in usefulness.

Please tell me what you all think of my idea, I'd like some feedback.
 
Sir,

The Small Guns skill, as well as the Big Guns skill, in Fallout 1 was indeed somewhat useless.

In Fallout 1.

I notice Fallout 2 wasn't mentioned in the discussion, but you might have heard of it. It's the one that everyone raved over and whose sales dwarfed its predecessor's. It included fun things like Bozars, Gauss Weapons and H&K G11s. With such advantages, energy weapons no longer had a huge advantage.

Now, at the end of the game, the guns start getting very, very powerful. Quick shooters with Avengers and snipers with Gauss Pistols rip large holes in all comers very quickly. However, that's what the end of the game for. The player should have a preponderance of firepower to deal with what's up against him. If he's going to try to resolve the situation via high-power ventilation, he should probably need it.
 
One thing I think that screws Big Guns in Fallout and Fallout 2 is the lack of a Big Gun rifle that isn't burst fire or doesn't have some sort of friendly fire issue. The rocket launcher has that backwash problem, flame thrower is conic fire, and burst.. We all know what that can do to friendlies.
 
On SP's post

Perhaps what we need, Dr. Prov, is the Croatian RT-20 special purpose rifle. Firing 20 * 110 mm Hispano rounds, this monster rifle has a range of up to 1800 meters and will have decent performance against lightly armored vehicles. It can fire AP and HE rounds. How's that for highly accurate big gun fire?

http://world.guns.ru/sniper/sn56-e.htm :twisted:
 
Before rocket launchers, there were sniper rifles so big, they were used for killing tanks. Something like that was what I was thinking about for a non-burst Big Gun. Something like that would be a good idea considering power armor.
 
It would be canon as well to pull a single shot helicopter cannon or rail gun, if such were developed, and have it in a fair state of disrepair and be incredibly rare. Balance issues would be important, but it could be made to work.
 
SeanDMan said:
It would be canon as well to pull a single shot helicopter cannon or rail gun, if such were developed, and have it in a fair state of disrepair and be incredibly rare. Balance issues would be important, but it could be made to work.
Click to expand...

Gauss weapons are rail guns.
 
Yes, but:

The slug is a lot smaller than would be one on a helicopter mounted variation

It's not a big gun
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top