Some Ideas for F3

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

Guest
OK....heres what i think first a keeper is the non-turn based option on Fallout Tactics...i think agian that should be an option...and this time i think and enviroment that you can interact with for example...a bridge that can be destoyed or that is really old and broke-down and you can only go across it one-by-one with your npc...or walls that can be blown out...i mean in the prev. games you you could shoot a rocket at a wall and the wall not even take a scratch...anyways...more enviromental interactions ideas...like braking down locked doors...blocking doors by mooving items in the way or just being able to move stuff...ok let me stop preaching about that and move on...i think unlike FOT you shouldn't be able to control your NPCs but have more control than the first 2 fallouts....i also like the vechiles moving through the streets i am not sure if this idea is workable on a rpg but i'd like it...PLS JUST DON"T MAKE ANOTHER FALLOUT TACTICS PLEASE MAKE A REAL RPG NOT A TACTIACAL GAME PLS!
 
no actually it was me complementing myself because no one else does what so you think of my ideas? also antother idea is the ability to run and shoot...and the ability to jump i think i'd be neat and you could even jump off roofs and stuff and take damage but you could like excape or jump onto some one i think theese are good ideas too.
 
OK, i'll give my opinion. Your ideas or not that bad but, and this is a big one, i'm not overly enthusiastic about them. Usually when you have both turn based and real time combat systems, one of them takes a backseat to the other. Imo, it's better to have one (turn based) system that works well then to have two that are halfassed. As for your other ideas. Let's put it this way. Keep it simple. I mean, everything you are saying may look cool but it would mean more annimations, more script, yada, yada, yada. In turn that would mean that the game would become so large with only eye candy that something suffers. That ussually means a bad and booring storyline.

JR

Nunc ut nunquam
 
well every one has an their opinion...but you sound more like an creator then a player...ya it may be hard to do this stuff but i mean come on...it would be a lotta work but i think it be a huge hit...and i mean it'd be a challange for the creators to do to fix the problems you talked about...but if nothing else last 2 i think are sure winners interactable enviro. and real time fighting (and i know you turn based fans hate us real timers but we have a right to our fav. type of gameplay) realtime is much more exciting and more importantly it's more REAL!
 
another idea too

my friend i talked to is a huge Fallout Fan well here's his idea he said a neat plot should pick up from fallout 2's ending where if you had sex with 1 of the mob bosses's daughters in New Reno (Bishop's i think) then when you beat the game it talk about how she has your child and all he thinks it's a neat idea to play as the son or daughter of fallout 2's hero in New Reno...i think it's an ok idea...just thought i'd post it
 
RE: another idea too

No, i did look at it from the players perspective. I'd rather play an RPG in which you have a lot of choices as how to finish a quest. Look at BG. A whole lot of the conversation trees are exactly the same whether you had a high intelligence or not. You couldn't talk your way out of important fights. In Fallout you could talk the master in committing suicide so you didn't have to fight him. In BG you didn't have a choice but to fight the final boss. As i said, if you have to much eye candy something else has to give. I'd rather play an RPG for the roleplaying and not for it's good looks.
Of course, it's your right to like real time. The only problem i have with it is that it take the strategy out of a fight. Just click and hope for the best. In Fallout, you get time to see your opponents strong and weak sides, espacially with awerness, and act accordingly.
Playing as the son or daughter from the Fallout 2 hero isn't a bad idea. Again only problem is, and remember that i played the Fallout series beginning with Fallout 1, is that in Fallout 2 a lot of the setting of the original was lost. To much politics, cities where to 'clean' and to much frigging trees. In Fallout 1 i had the feeling i was roaming a wasteland that had been destroyed by a nuclear attack and if they want to keep it a post nuclear RPG then they, imo, should make it as such. In Fallout 2 i didn't have that feeling. And i know that it's 80 years after the original and that the world should have recovered a bit but if they say it's a post nuclear RPG i want to see a post nuclear atmosphere, ie the one from Fallout 1.

JR

Nunc ut nunquam
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top