Suggestion thoughts now that you've seen the engine.

Discussion in 'Fallout 3 Discussion' started by PhredBean, Apr 11, 2006.

  1. Roshambo

    Roshambo Antediluvian as Feck

    Apr 3, 2003
    Ratty, how DARE you insult the makers of the Homey D Clown video game!

    Heheh...in all seriousness, Crapstone has been one of the greatest direct-to-abandonware release developers I've seen. Witchhaven II was the exact reason why you DON'T praise crap developers simply because they can squeeze a binary turd out of their compiler.
     
  2. Sina

    Sina It Wandered In From the Wastes

    144
    Aug 3, 2005
    Well, when all is taken into acount its much better than if it remained at interplay in that shithole, or tangled in some legal junk and buried.

    I think those guys are smart enough to know that if they make anything other but Fallout 3, it will not be or sell as Fallout 3 would.
    Which was even proven in real life, unfortunately, so ... spending a few million dollars to end like that awful thing will not be high on their list of priorities...i hope.

    And im glad that thes sell Oblivion so much because they can relax a bit, they don't have to rush....they can invite some outside associates to help out with story, general design and right feel...while they construct a new engine out of Oblivion one so that its nice and rich in detail, isometric with camera control, sand storms, chill fogs...smoke of fires...shadows, realtime sun the moon the stars if need be, radiant A.I molded so it fits perfectly into Fallout world, and everything else a good game needs graphically, and which Fallout 3 kind of deserves after all this time, and then they have a hell of a time with those outside associates , making it.

    And selling it reeaallyyyy gooood.

    So i kind of still have hopes.
     
  3. Ratty Sr.

    Ratty Sr. Formerly known as Ratty Moderator Orderite

    Apr 23, 2003
    Let's not forget Chronomaster, the perfect template of how to take crap on a good sci-fi license. Or Tekwar, the perfect template of how to take crap on a bad sci-fi license. Or Corridor 7, a shooter so terrible that anyone dumb enough to play it had to go through extensive psychiatric therapy to recover from the experience.

    And that concludes the best of Capstone's opus.
     
  4. Xellos

    Xellos Where'd That 6th Toe Come From?

    454
    Feb 10, 2006
    IMO another feature they must include is a console or at least a substitute of it. Tones of work were done by F1 and F2 developers not only to show items but also write sth about them( it applied also to for example short notes of critical hits). This created great atmosphere which shouldn't be wasted.
     
  5. Tycell

    Tycell Still Mildly Glowing

    227
    Oct 12, 2004
    Yes, good point. I think the pip boy message screen DEFFINATLY needs to stay in the game. Also, I have put a lot of thought into it and I belive it might well be a good thing that F3 is going to be made on the oblivion engine. If exacuted correctly (isometric view, no manual aim a la FPS, etc.) could be absolutly fantastic. I mean lets weight up the options here, you've spent a lot of time and resources making a beautiful good engine, its been 'tried and tested' with The Elder Scrolls IV and now they are going to make somthing even more beautiful on it, Fallout 3.

    Its like if you take Half Life 1 and then look at Opposing Force, Opposing force is on the same engine, but its so much better (IMO) because they (Gearbox) have looked at the old engine / game, seen its faults (no game is ever perfect) and then improved on a lot of them, as well as add a lot more features and pushed the engine limits. I am now really looking foward to seeing what Beth' comes up with, I belive they could really do the Fallout Saga justice on Oblivion.

    Ok so its not (in its current state, a la TES IV) really compatible but I think we can safly assume they have already though this through, if not are doing so now, and should come up with an excellent game plan. If they dont, they are not going to sell and they are going to flamed more than a sausage thats fallen throug the grill of the BBQ. Its in their interested to make an excellent addition to the Fallout Saga.

    Yes, there is a lot of opertunity to fuck it up, but there is also a lot of potencial to make somthing really good. Lets just hope its the latter, go Beth'.
     
  6. uncreative

    uncreative First time out of the vault

    5
    May 8, 2006
    My simple hope is that Bethesda takes a hard look at how Heroes of Might and Magic V is shaping up--the game is beautiful thanks to a new engine, but tb combat and classic hereos gameplay are intact. I think that the absolute worst qualities of Oblivion are the larg open map that you can find shrines and dungeons in. Why does this suck? Because I walk into a dungeon and have no fucking clue what the hell these people were doing here or why I'm killing them--why can't I help them? Oblivion felt waaaay too much like some mmorpg (I don't play a single one--a buddy let me play dark ages of camelot on his account, I despised it and maintain that you shouldn't pay a subscription to play a $50 game)--walk around aggro some stupid monster clear this cave out. Even then, oblivion also feels entirely generic. There's a complete lack of variablitiy in items--daedric armor is daedric armor--once I made high enough level to get the armor, I stopped playing. The plot isn't all that great or long, I can figure it out without playing the game, and there are no longer any kinds of rewards--I can't outfit myself any better, I can't develop my character any better.

    The worst mistake bethesda can make with Fallout 3 is to not purposefully design every single area in the game so that there is a discernible backstory, possible actions to take, rewards/consequences for choices and so on. I despise, absolutely despise spending my precious free time wandering around the oblivion map to find generic area with no backstory full of unexplained enemies who hate me for unclear reasons, and just shot my fucking horse, and now I have to get off my goddamn horse so I can actually get my bow out, but I dismounted and my horse is between us and now my horse is dead. Oooh, I think that last sentence became a rant.

    Seriously, fallout was fallout because of the massive attention to detail--playable areas may not have been large, but there were so many compelling things to do that you could spend hours in a town.

    With the engine done, why not use spare resources to properly implement a hyper-in-depth plot. Don't have five hundred residents in a city doing everyday shit but pointless to talk to, have fewer pointless filler people and make the town more alive. Immersion does not equal a crowd, it equals believability and back story and you actually feeling like your character is a resident and participant in the gameworld. Radiant AI is nice regarding what room an npc walks around in and when they're awake, but for fuck's sake, why not design them a personality. I'm not saying make every citizen relevant, fallout 1 and 2 had random one-sentence characters aplenty, but the characters you did talk to where there was a conversation tree, they all felt individual and personable. Hell, I was floored the first time in fallout 2 when some dude in a bar in modoc asked if I wanted to take a roll in the hay.

    Fallout 3 needs tb combat (you can have real-time everything else, hell fallout 1 and 2 did to a certain degree, but actual combat needs to be turn-based, otherwise nobody bothers to take time to think about aiming at their eyes or groin, or maybe I pull a grenade out of my backpack. The player doesn't want to have to develop split-second combat decision reflexes, we want to think and make strategic decisions, even if in "reality" there wouldn't be time to think. That can be done with the oblivion engine I hope. But most of all, fallout 3 does NOT need to have expansive areas filled with pointless crap--especially when there aren't even clues to the locations of a lot of the pointless crap--did I mention how much I hated having to wander around randomly to find a shrine where I could get a quest to find an item. That was retarded. I work and have a wife, I don't want to sit down to take an hour to walk northwest.

    Maybe I got into too much of a rant here.

    Time to go be a productive member of society now
     
  7. Tycell

    Tycell Still Mildly Glowing

    227
    Oct 12, 2004
    Dude... what you just said... needs to be copied down into stone.

    You just... I mean, that was absolytly fucking spot on. If I ever meet you, I'll buy you a pint.
     
  8. Quaid

    Quaid Give dese people air!!

    120
    May 10, 2005
    First Person cRPGs that Rocked:
    System Shock II and Vampire The Masquerade: Bloodlines

    I'm currently playing Vampire and I love everything about the game - except the real time combat system. WAY too 'actiony' for an RPG. I know this has been mentioned time and again on these boards, but I bring it up because I think Troika did everything right with Vampire except the combat.

    The sights and sounds are very immersive. The characters are well done and memorable. The ability to use persuasion, seduction or indimitation (depending on your character) is great. Turning on a radio and hearing the late night host or turning on a tv and seeing the local news story, or even hacking into one of the many computers in the game and gleening extra info on your enemies or surroundings is cool. The sound implemented in clubs or bars is well done - giving you a sense of moving through a loud and energy filled environment.

    So what about the combat? My biggest problem with the real time combat in the game is it doesn't seem to use my character's abilities as much as my own. Sure, his ranged or melee skill affect damage, but it is more a matter of me scurrying my character around the screen and looking for opportunities to hit my opponent or take a shot at the enemy. This is where turn based has no equal. I'd prefer if Vampire was real time during the whole game EXCEPT for the combat sequences (hmmm. didn't Fallout already do something like this?).

    Since Vampire has a closer engine to Oblivion than Fallout does, I am trying to take the best of what Vampire has and properly tweak it in my mind with Fallout's combat system. If that can be done, perhaps there is hope for Oblivion to implement something in the same vein?

    Can we 'freeze' the first person/third person view in the game when combat is entered, and then move into an AP turn-based mode? Could it work with a first person/third person toggle, or would it strictly have to be isometric during combat as previously mentioned on these boards (perhaps a forced isometric perspective during combat sequences?)
     
  9. 21_Blessings

    21_Blessings First time out of the vault

    15
    Dec 6, 2004
  10. RPGenius

    RPGenius Look, Ma! Two Heads!

    398
    Oct 10, 2005
    Hey everyone! Beth troll! Hell, even I outgrew that. We don't have any screenshots or real non generic PR bullshit information on what they're doing with it. I'l be honest, I don't have much hope, but I've stopped whining until they show me some sign of what they're doing with the series.
    I think I speak for most long standing users (I kinda count as one), when I say that we're tired of hearing it.
     
  11. SINK

    SINK First time out of the vault

    9
    May 15, 2006
    This is an extract from an interview between Tod Howard and gamespot on 18th October 2004

    Imo this shows that they're not simply making Fallout 3 an expansion pack of oblivion. It also means they have definitely considered isometric and turn-based combat. They're going to go with what fits the game and i think we should have a little more faith in their abilities.

    Oblivion was a great game and alot of the critisism towards it is based on it not being a crpg. If you get over the fact that it was never intended to be a crpg you might just enjoy it.

    Imo the 2D isometric perspect worked well in 1998 because systems where not able to handle massive 3D landscapes. Now with much more detailed graphics possible (you have to admit that oblivion looked very good) a fallout setting could feel alot more real and immerssive than anything from circa 1998. It would be a shame if it simply stayed the same because games have moved on, time for fallout to move on too.

    Anyone here played Kotor I & II. Now thats how to build a tb 3D squad based rpg, and if fallout 3 is anything like them I think we are in for a real treat. The oblivion engine could easily be modified to work similarly and the gritty nature of a post-nuclear setting is just a case of texturing.

    Cheer up its not all doom and gloom. :D
     
  12. Ratty Sr.

    Ratty Sr. Formerly known as Ratty Moderator Orderite

    Apr 23, 2003
    KotOR? KotOR?!

    This paragraph is so full of cluelessness that it's dangerous. In fact, it just might drive me to suicide.

    I mean, seriously, KotOR?!

    KotOR, with its static world, linear plot (yes, linear, I don't give a shit about that one choice you make about twenty minutes before the end) and pathetic lack of choices and interactivity?

    KotOR, with its chaotic, unmanageable, one-dimensional, woefully unbalanced real-time combat system (yes, real-time - you don't honestly think KotOR is turn-based, do you?), which manages to combine all the worst elements of Baldur's Gate combat and further streamline it and dumb it down for retarded console kids?

    KotOR?
     
  13. SINK

    SINK First time out of the vault

    9
    May 15, 2006
    Kotor has turn-based mechanics underlying its combat system, same goes for baldurs gate. Just because it dosn't pause after every turn and ask you for a command, does not mean its not turn based. It continues with whatever command you last issued or return do a default command if you don't give new commands. Which works pretty well imo and alot of other people think so too. I mean like bg is actually based on d&d rules which demand a turn based combat sytem in order to function and kotor rules work in a similar way to bg rules.

    What is your definition of a non-linear game? If your talking about a game which has no central storline and allows you to pretty much do what ever you like its not kotor its not even fallout, in fact the only games that are like that are managment games like cm and the sims! Kotor II is about as non-linear as rpgs come. There was as many if not more choices to be made as in fallout 2 and the characters you hung around with actually changed personality according to what choices you made which directly imacted the story, that never happend anywhere near the same extent in fallout 1 or 2.

    If simply expressing my opinions makes you want to commit suicide, dude don't even step outside your front door i'd hate to see how the real world my affect your fragile psycological state. There are other decent rpgs out there besides fallout.

    Whats with the overly agressive attidude anyway? I'm not trying to antagonise anyone here, i'm just expressing a view that there is more than a chance of fallout never returning to its original form and that a compromise would not be all that bad. If you don't like it theres no need to directly attack me, unless of course thats all part of your fucked up repressed state-of-mind (no-offence).
     
  14. Sander

    Sander This ghoul has seen it all
    Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Jul 5, 2003
    It still isn't turn-based, this means it has phases underlying its system. Big deal. Everything has phases underlying its system simply because a PC is not an analog device.
    Besides that, turn-based systems have a lot of other characteristics that these silly phase based-like systems don't have. Most importantly, the movements of the opponents and your character are completely seperate, because they happen in different turns. This means, effectively, that the AI has complete freedom and time to calculate what to do next, and the AI can be both a lot easier to write (and hence a lot less buggy), and a lot faster.
    Furthermore, this allows for much greater tactics because of the way you have to think about spending your turn, which is usually in games with a real-time with pause rather different.
    The fact that a system is based on something turn-based doesn't mean it's turn-based, hell, in the case of these games you mention they bastardised to such a degree that it's nowhere near turn-based anymore, and this unbalances things greatly.

    But hell, if you really want to know more about this stuff, go read some older threads about phase-based and turn-based combat. But really do read those threads before you come back, we really loathe having to repeat our arguments here.


    ....
    What?
    Go play Planescape: Torment for fuck's sake. That's some characters with personality and impact on the storyline. KoTOR's characters were bland and boring (except for a few funny moments) and had *no* impact on the storyline itself. Sure, there were a few small moments where you get some more information and whatever, but no actual impact on the story itself happens.

    As for linear games, that's about the story. KoTOR's story is linear as hell. You have barely any impact on it and your led along a line. That's what makes it linear.
    Yes there are, KOTOR is not one of them. It's not even a decent RPG, it has no choices and consequences. Sure, you can pretend to Play evil, but when you threaten someone and you fail your threaten check *you can't even attack the bastard*. What the hell kind of choice is that? Gee, I can threaten him, but you know, I can't even carry through with it.
    It really feels really wrong.
    Then there's the fact that the whole game revolved around boring combat, stupid mini-games and the 'kewl another Star Wars' factor.

    Ah, I love that, 'No offence' (sic), the two words uttered by everyone who know they're offending someone but choose to not take the blame for it. Bullshit. Telling someone he's in a 'fucked up repressed state-of-mind' is offensive. So don't do it. Sheesh.

    And besides that, you come here onto a forum, you spam your opinion (that shows you haven't really read much of previous discussions, thanks for that courtesy) and then expect us all to agree with and not post anything that disagrees with you? That's pretty damn silly.

    EDIT: As for your previous post:
    I won't, because I don't like those kinds of games. But that's just me.
    Our problem with Oblivion is mainly the hype they built up and didn't then didn't live up to. Plus, we are fans of an RPG, when Bethesda creates something they claim is an RPG, and then is so far removed from it as Oblivion is, we get a bit worried.

    For fuck's sake, go read some old threads. This is the most ignorant and the most oft-repeated statement about an isometric viewpoint heard around here. Fact: 3D existed before the isometric viewpoint did. Fact: it had been used in RPGs before as well. Fact: the isometric viewpoint was invented to facilitate everything Fallout aims to achieve: PnP-like gameplay, turn-based combat, classic RPG-feel.
    Plus, 'It's new so it's better!' is retarded in and of itself anyway.
     
  15. Ratty Sr.

    Ratty Sr. Formerly known as Ratty Moderator Orderite

    Apr 23, 2003
    *spoilers ahead*

    Fallout

    Two basic endings to the main plot - you stop the Master or you join the Master.

    Nuances to each ending. Do you go for the Master directly or do you destroy the Vats beforehand? Do you attack the Vats on your own or do you ally yourself with the Brotherhood first? Do you barge in guns blazing or do you sneak? Or maybe you are like me and opt to play Super Mutants' low intelligence against them by dressing up as a Child of the Cathedral? What if you failed to trick Harry the mutant in Necropolis and he captured you and took you to the very heart of the Mariposa facility when you don't even have the slightest clue who the Master is, let alone what his plans for mankind are?

    And then there are the many ways of dealing with the Master himself. Do you take the brutal route, fight your way to him and put a gaping plasma wound on each of his heads, or do you use a more subtle approach and detonate the nuclear device beneath the Cathedral? Or maybe you were perceptive enough to remember that seemingly minor conversation with Vree of the Brotherhood and use the evidence gleaned from it to alert the Master of a fatal flaw in his plan?

    KotOR

    Typical conversation.

    Questgiver:

    Save my beloved ( wife | husband | daughter | son | friend | droid | blow-up doll ) from them accursed ( Mandalorians | Sith | Gamorreans | Sand People | Ecco terrorists | Jehova's Witnesses ), please.

    You:

    1. Of course I shall help you! As a Jedi, it is my duty to protect the innocent. (+ Light Side points )
    2. K, I'll help you. ( - )
    3. I'll help you... for a price. ( + Dark Side )
    4. I'm not interested in helping you.

    And if you choose 4....

    Questgiver:

    But if you don't help me, I won't give you the ( keycard | launch code | discrete magnetoscopic chronoflux invertor ) which you absolutely *need* to advance beyond this point in the game and I happen to have the only instance in the entire fucking galaxy because people who designed this game are fucking hacks whose grasp of CRPG design is rivaled by that of a flat tire.

    1. Of course I shall help you! As a Jedi, it is my duty to protect the innocent. (+ Light Side points )
    2. K, I'll help you. ( - )
    3. I'll help you... for a price. ( + Dark Side )
    4. I want to ask you about something else.
     
  16. SINK

    SINK First time out of the vault

    9
    May 15, 2006
    I was being purposley contradictive of myself in order to emphasise the fact that it was meant to offend him, just as he offended me. Its a common technique used accentuate a statement.

    I can see your point of view and respect your opinion, but extend me the same courtesy and don't immediately insult my intellegence for having an opinion which differs. You don't posses the definitive end on what makes a decent rpg.
     
  17. Ratty Sr.

    Ratty Sr. Formerly known as Ratty Moderator Orderite

    Apr 23, 2003
    That's irrelevant here. What's relevant is that our knowledge of CRPG design is infinitely superior to your own, which makes us qualified to debunk your ignorance.
     
  18. SINK

    SINK First time out of the vault

    9
    May 15, 2006
    That would be relevant if i was commenting on crpgs, but in fact i was talking about rpgs in general, many styles of which you don't even seem to facilitate any chance of liking. Therefore l would say i have more of a relevant opinion on rpgs in general.

    If you do posses such a wealth of knowlege on crpg design that would be commercially viable, why don't you prove it and design a game yourself that is actually published?

    choice 1
    Choose to see this as an insult an reply with an obligatory offense.

    choice 2
    See this as a challenge and go forth with a mission to make the greatest crpg ever, making millions in the proccess. Using your newfound wealth to recreate the fallout landscape in the midldle of the Gobi desert, where you live out your days living in a shack made out of reconditioned parts of a soviet nuclear warhead you purchased from a goat herder.

    choice 3
    Ban me from your forum forum, feel infinitely superior to my feeblemindishness and laugh about it with your buddies.

    choice 4
    Accept i have a valid opinion and get over yourself.

    edit: typo
     
  19. Mephiston

    Mephiston First time out of the vault

    37
    Dec 6, 2005
    I didn't have the pacience to read all the posts so i appologise if this has already been mentioned and dealt with.

    So fallout 3 supposetly uses the oblivion engine. What will that mean for gameplay then? the answer IS JACK SHIT. There is no relation between the engine and the rpg system. An engine is a complex set of instructions which define the game enviroment, such as ligthing, terrain, physics, draw distance restrictions and all that shit. It has nothing to do with how a game will be played and will feel like. Now that doenst mean bethesda won't fuck it up anyway, but i wouldnt be concerned just because a certain engine is being used.

    Simplest example that comes to mind: Anachornox, a final fantasy style rpg that used ....get ready....the quake 2 engine. In fact, if you've played it didn't know already you would have never been able to figure out that it used that engine.
     
  20. Sander

    Sander This ghoul has seen it all
    Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Jul 5, 2003
    The only difference between a CRPG and an RPG is that one is played on a computer, and the other is not.
    In fact, I'd say you're entirely wrong about having more knowledge about RPGs in general because you forget entirely about the much older genre of Pen-and-paper RPGs.
    Interestingly, Fallout was made with the idea to get as much of a Pen-and-paper feeling to it, pen-and-paper games being the originators of RPGs.
    Now, if you look at pen-and-paper, they all have stats and settings and whatnot. The one thing they all have in common, though, is the principle of choice and consequences. No good DM will let a character just be dead after one or two stupid mistakes or evil choices, because that's part of roleplaying. Moreover, a DM will never say 'But you can't attack that guy, he has to live for my quest!' because that would break immersion and show that he pretty much sucks at the quest creating bit.
    So, there have to be a lot of choices in PnP RPGs, a lot more than there are in silly old KoTOR, plus those choices have to have proper consequences, since while a DM may not want to kill a character, he can sure as hell make life harder for him.

    Again, an argument that has been brought up a lot of times, and is still bullshit. We can see what made Fallout a good RPG, that doesn't mean we can make such a game, but it does mean we can criticize games that claim to possess those attributes when they actually don't.

    And get over yourself with the bit about 'I have an opinion, respect it!' It's bullshit. If I have the opinion that all cockroaches are actually evil aliens bent on the destruction of the world through clogging toilets and driving everyone insane, no one has to respect that opinion.
    See, this is a Fallout forum, we've discussed everything what makes Fallout great and why certain things will make it suck to death. Then you come around and claim that we're all wrong and that we need to accept that that's your opinion and that's that. Gee, I'd be hard pressed not to view that as trolling if you look at it like that.

    Lastly, if you can't make any arguments, don't post. 'Respect my opinion' is not an argument, by the way. The way this is headed is nothing but a flame war if you continue to ignore pretty much every argument except for the ones that deal with you and not your arguments. Ratty, that goes for you too.

    Mephiston: Do read all of those posts the next time, it's only two pages and they're not even that long. Apologizing for laziness doesn't make it any better. And yes, your argument has been brought up several times already.