The RPG Genre is fucked up

[Crni Vuk]

...
Oh, you got me wrong. I mean, is the usual coder and concept artist worthy of admiration because he does his job? I mean, admiration? That's what I'm talking about.

Yeah now as that you say it you are right. From that point I can only agree no game that Bethesda has released recently was anything better then mediocre.

You make it sound like the lowly bums who work at Bethesda don't even like games Well, it's always a possibility.

They maybe like games in the way as some cook loves to make food. He might love his work, but it doesnt mean that he has to think about it 24 ours a day. Playing games, making games. Maybe like cooking and eating.

 

[SuAside]

There you go :

http://www.jeuxvideo.com/jeux/videos/0000/00000378.htm

i couldn't check it with sound at work.

well, it's a nice try, but problem is that he makes a lot of noob mistakes for someone that's supposedly is a big fan and is still playing every so often.

maybe he does it to keep it simple, but still.

positive overall, but could've been a lot better.

 

[PastaMasta]

After reading that I'm feeling a little bit sad that my generation of gamers most the part won't experience an RPG game like Fallout 1 and 2. Sure Fallout 3's combat is fun but the rest of it is incredibly hollow. Man, I wish games were as good as they used to be.

 

[Morbus]

Fallout 1&2 had dungeons. Fallout 2 actually had a decent collection of them. I understand that Fallout 3 has more, but you are setting up a false dichotomy that contradicts reality.

As I said, people will make excuses, people will cite inconsistencies of the first two games.

Yes, the dungeons in Fallout 2 were an inconsistency. And Fallout 1 didn't have dungeons. It had areas, sure, but they were NOT related to the usual dungeons found in videogames. They were actual dungeons in the common pen and paper sense, definitely, but since Fallout 3's dungeons are not that kind, it defeats your argument. No, Fallout 1 didn't have dungeons, and Fallout 2 had a few, and they were alien to the series, as many things in that game. Who actually ENJOYED killing all those rats in the garden, for example?

 

[Dionysus]

As I said, people will make excuses, people will cite inconsistencies of the first two games.

Yes, the dungeons in Fallout 2 were an inconsistency. And Fallout 1 didn't have dungeons. It had areas, sure, but they were NOT related to the usual dungeons found in videogames. They were actual dungeons in the common pen and paper sense, definitely, but since Fallout 3's dungeons are not that kind, it defeats your argument. No, Fallout 1 didn't have dungeons, and Fallout 2 had a few, and they were alien to the series, as many things in that game. Who actually ENJOYED killing all those rats in the garden, for example?

If Vault 15 doesn't qualify as a dungeon, then I'd say that Fallout 3 doesn't have any dungeons. You've overstated the case to the point of absurdity, which explains why people don't make that criticism.

 

[Public]

If Vault 15 doesn't qualify as a dungeon, then I'd say that Fallout 3 doesn't have any dungeons.

In Fallout 3 you needed to get through dungeons (underground subway stations) to continue the story, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Dionysus]

In Fallout 3 you needed to get through dungeons (underground subway stations) to continue the story, if I'm not mistaken.

You definitely need to go through Vault 87. Unless you exploit a glitch, there's also a mandatory escort mission in the tunnels under the Jefferson Memorial, although there isn't much to that (I don't know if I would count it as a dungeon).

 

[Public]

(I don't know if I would count it as a dungeon).

Why not?

 

[Morbus]

If Vault 15 doesn't qualify as a dungeon, then I'd say that Fallout 3 doesn't have any dungeons. You've overstated the case to the point of absurdity, which explains why people don't make that criticism.

Because Vault 15 aim is for you to go there and grind and loot.

 

[Dionysus]

Why not?

There just isn't much to it. For example, Fallout 1 begins in a subterranean maze full of beasties, but I don't think of it as a dungeon. However, I guess it would technically qualify as a small dungeon. And if that was all there was to the game, then I would call it a dungeon crawler. But I think Morbo was talking about more extensive tiered dungeons. I can't imagine that he would forget about the rat cave, although he did apparently forget about Vault 15, which was about as dungeony as Fallout can get. Except maybe the Temple of Trials. That thing actually looked like a dungeon.

Because Vault 15 aim is for you to go there and grind and loot.

Yes? There's certainly nothing in it except monsters and loot. Do you have some extraordinarily unique definition of what a dungeon is?

 

[UncannyGarlic]

Because Vault 15 aim is for you to go there and grind and loot.

It may not be the game's given goal for the the area but that's pretty much all you do there. Vault 15 is a well designed dungeon with reasonable motivation and back story, but it is a dungeon when all is said and done. I get what you're saying though, when the player goes there on the first play through they are going there to find the water chip, unlike in games like Oblivion where you wander around and go through dungeons for the sake of exp and loot, but I'd say that that hardly excludes it as a dungeon, it's just a well designed dungeon. I mean Vault 15 is hardly different from Diablo, you have a goal (get the water chip, kill Diablo) and you must travel to the very bottom of the dungeon to achieve that goal.

Vault 15 was a dungeon but it was the only one in the game, it served a plot purpose (thus wasn't extraneous), and it made sense (an abandoned vault).

 

[Crni Vuk]

Yes? There's certainly nothing in it except monsters and loot. Do you have some extraordinarily unique definition of what a dungeon is?

Only when it has a misstres its a dungeon. Technically.

 

[Trithne]

Vault 15 was a dungeon but it was the only one in the game, it served a plot purpose (thus wasn't extraneous), and it made sense (an abandoned vault).

The glow.

But there's a critical difference between how a dungeon should be done, and how it gets done in TES games. And FO3. A dungeon is fine if it makes sense, within the plot and the world.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

The glow.

But there's a critical difference between how a dungeon should be done, and how it gets done in TES games. And FO3. A dungeon is fine if it makes sense, within the plot and the world.

The glow is really a completely different beast than Vault 15 is. Maybe it's a dungeon, it did cross my mind, but I'm inclined to not label it as such because there is more to it than simply killing and looting, even if the back story you obtain there is pretty much through looting (holodisks). I feel that Vault 15 is much more straight forward in being a loot (not much that I remember) and kill (lots of rats and a few mole rats) run while the glow is more about exploring and back story, with (optional?) combat on the way out.

 

[Trithne]

My experience in RPGs would classify The Glow as a dungeon. Not all encounters are combat. The Glow has numerous hazards, starting with the radiation, the traps, the power issues, the security bots if you want to raid it properly.

The argument stands though. A dungeon doesn't have to be a crawl. Raiding a prewar facility for stuff counts as a dungeon, just a good one. Same with V15. V15 is earlygame, not too challenging but enough to get the beginning character some experience and stuff. The Glow is later-game, with hazards more designed for an intelligent approach.

It's worth mentioning: The vats base is a dungeon. All those Super Mutants, the forcefields, etc. The important difference is the base makes sense, you understand why everything is there and the way it is, and you actually have a large number of ways to do it.

The dungeons in FO3, for instance Anchorage Memorial, are simply corridors with enemies, for the most part. The metro? Dungeon crawl. Gameplay in FO3 is about crawling though underground tunnels and shooting shit that's in your way. Or wandering around the surface and shooting shit that's in your way. Look at V87. All there is to do is walk through it killing mutants until your arbitrary goal, in this case the GECK. That's the definintion of a dungeon crawl.

 

[x'il]

(...)Gameplay in FO3 is about crawling though underground tunnels and shooting shit that's in your way. Or wandering around the surface and shooting shit that's in your way (...)

That seems rather like a consequence of it being a First Person Shooter, as in those games that's what you do: you crawl through corridors and tunnels killing any shit that enters your sight with brief open area intervals. So , in CRPG terminology FPS games are just that, dungeon crawlers!!

Hmmm... wonder if they chose that FPS gameplay because of an instinctive mediocrity (in terms of what is good or not for a CRPG) or because they knew that it would make for a dungeon crawler gameplay?

Edit: i am, of course, talking about first person shooter style, not just the first person perspective. But seriously, now that i think about it, the fps style just perfectly suited their needs; it's a perfect excuse.

 

[Public]

Edit: i am, of course, talking about first person shooter style, not just the first person perspective. But seriously, now that i think about it, the fps style just perfectly suited their needs; it's a perfect excuse.

Wait a second. But FO3 was supposed to be a RPG, not FPS. It won "RPG of the Year" award for crying out loud

 

[Trithne]

They went with 1st person PoV because they continue to believe that's more immersive. Forgetting immersion is more about consistency and not having ridiculous bugs.

The gameplay is more a symptom of the same approach they use with the TES games: To them, fantasy is a knight on horseback killing monsters, and to them, Post-apoc sci-fi is a guy with a shotgun creeping through the ruins of DC killing monsters. It's teenage fantasy/sci-fi.

 

[Public]

The gameplay is more a symptom of the same approach they use with the TES games: To them, fantasy is a knight on horseback killing monsters, and to them, Post-apoc sci-fi is a guy with a shotgun creeping through the ruins of DC killing monsters. It's teenage fantasy/sci-fi.

Sometimes this kind of approach works fine for me. A simple shooter/slasher aproach, but not a Role Playing approach.

 

[Morbus]

Because Vault 15 aim is for you to go there and grind and loot.

Yes? There's certainly nothing in it except monsters and loot. Do you have some extraordinarily unique definition of what a dungeon is?

Well, in my opinion, Vault 15 was there for another reason. It was a dungeon in its appearance, but the reason it was there was for storytelling purposes. That's why Fallout has no game-y dungeons. Just old PnP-y ones.

I think.

Vault 15 was a dungeon but it was the only one in the game, it served a plot purpose (thus wasn't extraneous), and it made sense (an abandoned vault).

Exactly. That's what I mean.