Students of Fallout

[PaladinHeart]

Hmm... You mean the 15 mounted units rolling more than armour value on D6?

Sorry but I wouldn't know about that (having never played or studied the tabletop version). All I know is when playing the Mark of Chaos, Battle for Middle Earth, etc.. games that the guys with long pointy sticks always win, hands down. One or two of them might die in the process, but the core thing here, for me, is that X always beats out Y, regardless of how lucky Y happens to be.

Sure a cannon (sp? lol) might completely miss, or it might hit and completely decimate the squad, but that's a cannon. 10 to 20 bullets don't often all go to the exact same spot. If that were the case then single shot shotguns would also be capable of killing someone fully decked out in power armor.

 

[Morbus]

Ehhh. Man, don't list Darklands first. If he happens to play it first, he'll hate you. Really, if he finds Fallout too confusing, he'll be completely overwhelmed by Darklands.

That's his fault, not mine.

 

[TTTimo]

Pretty interesting article. Very nice, how things turned out in the end.

I got into Fallout 2 when it came out at 14 years of age. Never read the manual, yet managed to get in to the game just fine. It was the first RPG game that I tried, and I had no prior experience in other forms of RPGs. Just by following the compelling intro story and looking at the various stats and stuff, I managed to figure out roughly what needs to be done and how to go about it. First few tries were of course confusing but after that it was smooth sailing. Only problem being I did not know about character builds so mine was not the most optimal, but still was fun to play. Not sure if the generation gap in thinking has to do with getting used to the system (due to upbringing or teaching methods), but at least people know a good game when they try it.

I guess the thing that sucked me in was the cool back story as well as uncovering things along the way. That alone was enough to make me get used to the gaming system. Turn-based is still not my main preference for playing, but I like it best for the way it makes you think of many options you can go about reaching your goal. No game in recent memory has a menu that is as fun to tweak with as Fallout1/2 (well, maybe except the inventory).

...with big companies dominating the market and turning it into virtual Hollywood. There is no purpose in turning games into movies but nobody listens.

I have always preferred games over television just because games make you think. Well, they used to anyway. Most games nowadays are slowly just to replace TV or movies, which is a shame because games are meant to stimulate your thinking and problem solving skills. If a game is a twitch fest it just defeats the purpose. Might as well play those arcade games where you have to bash the button quickly.

 

[Brother None]

I can't believe all the comments about Fallout being unrelenting, non user friendly or tough to get into

Seriously, has the gaming audience fallen this far? The game is intuitive, easy to understand clearly sends you in a specific direction to start with. There's nothing confusing about it. Have we become so used to handholding that this type of game is considered unrelenting? Have these guys never played RPGs from the early-to-mid 90s?

They should be handed Wizardry 3 to see how far they get there. Jesus H. Christ, I know these types of responses exist (I've seen a forum post where someone was asking, I shit you not, how to get out of the Fallout 1 rat cave), but I would expect more from more mature players.

Anyway, it does lead to an interesting point that the article kind of skirts; can you actually offer an experience like Fallout does without automatically being somewhat unforgiving? Doesn't handholding automatically destroy the experience that the originals offered? Is tough gaming required to make these kind of games good and rewarding?

 

[Public]

Edit: And if i were to compare Fallout 3 to any movie it would be Highlander 2.

IMO "Highlander:The Source". Check it out if you haven't seen it...it's awful and it'll make you wanna puke.

Hey, I love games and all, and consider myself a hardcore gamer,

Many people consider themselves- very creative personalities and all that. Their close friends also say that "OMG ur so creative! I luv u! Ur my hero!"
But in reality...they're not creative.

but...aren't we taking this a LITTLE too far? Games are supposed to be fun, amirite? Not about how smart you can prove yourself to be. They are supposed to ENTERTAIN you, and if it's a simple type of game that does that, then what's the problem?

And think about one thing... what means "Entertaining"? Plus, what does mean "fun" for people, and how people get "fun" from which things?

I'll give you a hint

"Everyone is different"

Edit: The article was great. Finally, something interesting to read.

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

Heck I played it without a manual (manual was in Spanish), and I still managed to go to places like Necropolis and the Glow before I figured out what the strange icon above the user interface meant (I had gained experience).

 

[marko2te]

i was fifteen when I played the demo and it was many things but not confusing and that was probably one of the first RPG-s i ever played.

 

[Lexx]

Seriously, has the gaming audience fallen this far?

I think, it is more a kind of generation thingy. It's the same like I could never get into Wasteland. I tried it often and I tried it hard, but I can not come into the game. Never played it years ago and now I think, I am to stupid for that. It's the same with other old games that I never have played. It is pretty hard to get into it from a today's-perspective.

 

[Pope Viper]

For what reason? Not "glitzed" up enough?

What couldn't you get into?

 

[Sorrow]

I had no problems with getting into Wasteland. I just had to read the manual.
On the other hand I stopped playing it after my team got killed off. I didn't want to do the same things again.

 

[Lexx]

For what reason? Not "glitzed" up enough?

What couldn't you get into?

No, well, maybe a little bit. It is just a kind of different and more difficult. I play(ed) lots of old games even today, but the ones that I didn't played years ago are nearly impossible for me today.

 

[Pope Viper]

Hmmm, I see.

Guess I've always enjoyed the old stuff, no matter what. I even loaded up Autoduel and Return of Heracles the other day.

Good times.

Not to mention this:

A review in Computer Gaming World viewed the game positively, noting, "The game design is clean, the graphics excellent and no bugs were found." The immense difficulty of the game was noted, as was the long learning curve. In emphasis, the review suggested bypassing the permanent death feature of the game and expensive in-game clones (backup saves) by making a copy of the character disk, to return to in case of character death.

 

[Rev. Layle]

I certainly think an offsetting portion of Wasteland (even for me) is that half of the story is in that damn *paragraph book* It was always just jarring to pick up the book and look at "paragraph 115" just to get the right password.

I know it was somewhat of an effective from of copy protection in the mid-80s (and perhaps saved space on the already packed discs of the game, esp, Apple 2 and C-64 versions) - still, it was annoying.

Also, Wasteland is almost more open-ended in how you approach tasks than even Fallout. While there is really only one successful outcome to the game, there were so many ways to solve some quests it may have been an overwhelming gameplay style at the time. In addition, there ARE ways in Wasteland to completely make yourself stuck with a ZERO chance of getting out. There are certain key items that can be destroyed or just get physically stuck in certain places (watch out for Finster's Mind - the part of the game I dread the most still; also, another place, is the missile, without the right password, you are stuck and can never get out - although, this may be a punishment for not reading the right paragraph, assuming that you did not have the paragraph book, and maybe an illegal copy of the game?)).

Even the first time I played it as a game on my C64 back in like 86-87 (was that the release date) it took me a couple of months to actually figure out what I was really doing... once I actually found the right actions to get into the real story hook, THEN it was non-stop playing until the end (and then over and over again)

 

[TTTimo]

Anyway, it does lead to an interesting point that the article kind of skirts; can you actually offer an experience like Fallout does without automatically being somewhat unforgiving? Doesn't handholding automatically destroy the experience that the originals offered? Is tough gaming required to make these kind of games good and rewarding?

One thing's for sure, that is the kind of game you will remember for a long time. And I mean it in the best sense.

 

[Pope Viper]

@Rev.

You think that was annoying, I believe it was the first Sim City that had a magenta piece of paper that had various symbols printed on it.

When installing, you had to find the correct code sequence, and enter the corresponding password to progress.

Now THAT was a pain in the ass.

 

[Fade]

I can't believe all the comments about Fallout being unrelenting, non user friendly or tough to get into

Seriously, has the gaming audience fallen this far? The game is intuitive, easy to understand clearly sends you in a specific direction to start with. There's nothing confusing about it. Have we become so used to handholding that this type of game is considered unrelenting? Have these guys never played RPGs from the early-to-mid 90s?

It's not that they have fallen so far. More what they are assuming about the game & what you are assuming. The background I come from is P&P and as result the interface for Fallout was a no-brainer. If all you are used to is FPS then you'll over-look all the clues that Fallout gives and as result it will be confusing as hell.

They should be handed Wizardry 3 to see how far they get there. Jesus H. Christ, I know these types of responses exist (I've seen a forum post where someone was asking, I shit you not, how to get out of the Fallout 1 rat cave), but I would expect more from more mature players.

Anyway, it does lead to an interesting point that the article kind of skirts; can you actually offer an experience like Fallout does without automatically being somewhat unforgiving? Doesn't handholding automatically destroy the experience that the originals offered? Is tough gaming required to make these kind of games good and rewarding?

What exactly do you mean by "these kind of games"?

Handholding is something of a buzzword. Even Fallout had some of it. Move your mouse over a stat & up pops a box with info on what it does. Did that automatically destroy the game? Not in my opinion, so it's more the amount of handholding that is the problem. Which means you have to know who you are marketting the game to. A casual player who is only going to try playing your game for 10 minutes before giving up needs a ton of handholding. While most of the NMA crowd find that level of handholding un-necessary and annoying.

Which is not to say everyone who considers themselves 'casual gamers' wouldn't enjoy less handholding & a 'tougher' game. Genres have been merging for awhile now & the big companies are helping that along by trying to grab the most cash they can. As result games are becoming more similar and bland; at least in my opinion. You can see some of the same thing in Movie industry in how Hollywood acts. I just hope that more indie game developers show up and cause the genres to seperate out again.

 

[Herr Mike]

It's hard for me to get into old games, even ones I used to play. Pixellated graphics are too big of a turn-off. I still think Fallout looks pretty good though.

I loved the obscure sci-fi RPG Sentinel Worlds when I was a kid, and finally found the sequel a few years ago. I gave it a try, but it just wasn't doing it for me.

I find the old Infocom text-only games to be far more playable than games with such primitive graphics.

 

[Rev. Layle]

It's hard for me to get into old games, even ones I used to play. Pixellated graphics are too big of a turn-off. I still think Fallout looks pretty good though.

I loved the obscure sci-fi RPG Sentinel Worlds when I was a kid, and finally found the sequel a few years ago. I gave it a try, but it just wasn't doing it for me.

I find the old Infocom text-only games to be far more playable than games with such primitive graphics.

To be honest, that sequel (Hard Nova, right?) was even hard for ME to get into when it first came out. I dunno, something about it didn't seem right at the time, maybe the concept of Sentinel Worlds 1: Future Magic was novel - but the sequel seemed samey with more detailed graphics.

 

[Ausir]

I enjoyed Wasteland for a while, but was never able to finish it too.

 

[TTTimo]

It would be cool if those older games could have their graphics updated to better suit today's machines. Even for Fallout... imagine the exact same Fallout, but in 3D graphics. Same mechanics, same isometric perspective, only updated to 3D for larger resolution and detail, with the added benefit of 3D enabled effects to make the world even more believable.