Tim Cain on Fallout and Fallout 3
- Thread starter Brother None
- Start date
Brahmin said:
Fallout is a type of game that Bethesda in their current incarnation has no experience in making, would you still be thinking the same thing if id Software had picked up the license? "Id Software only know how to make FPS games, but they know Fallout is different and I'm sure they'll do a good job!". Yeah, right. The only thing Morrowind and Oblivion have in common with a CRPG is a stat system and a dialogue system that's a piss poor facsimile of a true CRPG dialogue system. What worries me as well as others on this site is that Bethesda thinks that's the only thing you need to qualify your game as a CRPG. They billed Morrowind and Oblivion as CRPG's, and they aren't, or if you quantify CRPG's different than the rest of us, they're awful excuses for the genre.
VDweller
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
You do realize that this sentence doesn't make any fucking sense? As in none whatso-fucking-ever.Brahmin said:
Really? Awesome. Hey, did you know that Interplay was founded by this guy Brian Fargo? He was like super awesome PnP role-player, so I wished Interplay still had the Fallout license. FO3 would have been a totally cool trip (on acid) to the roots and shit.
In every imaginable way. From the font size to the idiotic writing to the design that made decision for you.
http://www.rpgcodex.com/images/news/Quest 1.JPG
There is a sea of difference between knowing something and being able to do something. For example, the creators of the award winning and totally revolutionary RPG Minesweeper may know that Fallout is a different kind of RPG, which doesn't imply that they may be able to make such a game.
Better yet, don't judge the game before you bought it and played it! M i rite?
Point taken, but have you played either of the first two elder scrolls games? As I understand it (based on questionable reviews), they had a far better dialogue system, and were much more rpg-like.mortiz said:
It makes sense, but it doesn't make the point I had been trying to make, not to you at least.. what I was trying to say was that the games are intended for a different audience... it's pointless judging it before they've released any information about what they are doing with it.VDweller said:
No, judge it when you know something about it... at the moment you have no idea what they are doing, you are making wild speculations based on something which is unrelated... it's pointless.VDweller said:
Sure, tell them what you do want, and what you don't want to see, but don't just go "it's going to suck" because you didn't like a game which wasn't intended for you in the first place.
Right, and how long ago was this? Exactly.Brahmin said:
This also only goes to show that they aren't even above raping their *own* series.
Right, and how do you know this?Brahmin said:
The game will be released on the same platform, with the same engine and we know nothing whatsoever about what they're doing. There's no reason at all to believe that they have a different target audience, especially since Oblivion fared so well with their current audience.
Yet you are the one who claims to know their target audience.Brahmin said:
Also, VDweller has consistently claimed to have inside information from an undisclosable source.
The problem with this bullshit reasoning is that this is an indicator that they will move the series we all love away from us as well. Are we supposed to not care about this as well? Because this is exactly what they've done with the TES series.Brahmin said:
Sovz said:
No he isn't, as far as I know.
I'm personally trying to see Bethesda's lack of experience in FO-type games as a good thing. Not because I want them to rape the series, but because maybe they realize what an astonishingly great heap of shit Oblivion was, and want to step away before the stench chokes them to death. IMO, Oblivion sold well based on the hype- but where's the replay value that will keep players coming back to it, and buying replacement discs when their existing ones get trashed? Nowhere, of course, unless you like games that are sort of like sticking splinters under your fingernails and pulling them out, just for the sense of relief when they're gone. If they're smart, or have just plain learned anything from player reviews(not the brown-nosing of professional critics), Bethesda will want to try to put Oblivion behind them. And a good way to do that is to make FO3 an amazing and worthy successor, and a sales success in it's own right, rather than pissing off the large, demanding, and very-hungry-for-more existing FO fan base.
Hellion
Antediluvian Lurker
Brahmin said:
A post taken from the Elder Scrolls Past Games forum (probably the only place in these Fora not infested with morons), with the names of Elder Scrolls games Designers:
Now, Todd Howard is the only guy from the original team still working at Bethesda. Look at his highlighted contribution to the first 2 games of the series, and please tell me how exactly we have to look forward to seeing the good things from the first 2 TES games found in F3.
VDweller
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
I'm a Daggerfall fan (and I did play Arena), but these are not RPGs like Fallout, Arcanum, Ultima, etc. The dialogue system is non-existent. Even if you were right, Bethesda that made Arena and Daggerfall is gone for good and it aint coming back. The key people are gone, the culture has changed, the focus has shifted.Brahmin said:
Is that a fact?
Plenty of info has been released. You need to start paying attention if you are interested in the subject.
Unlike you, of course.
First, I have never said "it will suck". Second, an honest definition of "it sucks" is "I didn't like it", so your point is invalid. Third, it's a Fallout game; if Bethesda isn't making a game for Fallout fans, it shouldn't have slapped the logo on the box, no?
I talked to quite a few Bethesda developers trying to score an interview. Two developers claimed to work on FO3 and shared some info, asking not to be named for obvious reasons (as you may know any mention of RPG Codex at the official forums is deleted; even the name of the site is censored, so I assume that talking to someone from the Codex is a capital offense). When the first official info is released, I'd know if what I've been told is real.Sander said:
Rosh Explains How To NOT Post:
It has come to my attention that people don't really seem to understand how conversation flow and how simple debate can make some points just simply un-needed to go through if people would just bother to think before they post.
So, I've decided to use a convenient example as a basic guide to using reason and logic on a forum, and how to think ahead a few moves.
First, let's take a look at how this multiple straw man argument played out:
Fallacy:
Fallacy = Nice way of saying "BULLSHIT", whether it is in whole or in part. In this example, Brahmin used a fact from Bethesda's origins, and then applied an erroneous claim to it. Arena was released around 1994. After Ultima sold out. After other games were going to hell for having action features as well. And long after Bethesda was established...upon sports games.
Hell, you can figure this out easily from the self-fellating wad of shit a founder himself wrote about Bethesda "setting new standards" in role-playing and anything that remotely has role-playing attached to it, except of course, TES in any form.
False Conclusion:
There was never ANY P&P style to begin with at Bethesda, and Bethesda has no roots in CRPG development.
False Conclusion 2:
The old familiar Argument by Ignorance, again. So because of a few things read in admittedly questionable reviews, and the erroneous point of Bethesda's roots that you pulled from your ass, somehow means that Bethesda knows what they are doing?
Wrong. Debunked.
This entire exchange could have simply been avoided by Knowing What the Fuck You're Attempting to Talk About. The opposite of the Argument by Ignorance. Knowing what you are talking about, or even having some familiarity with it before you post bullshit, saves people a lot of time and annoyance.
Now we get to what I like to call, Argument by Personal Opinion. I think they will do a good job, or it might be fun for me, so therefore they won't do X or will do Y.
I don't need to take that apart for people to see how stupid it sounds.
And what part of "same developers with the same stupid design philosophy" misses your observation? Oh, yes, all of it. Also, you might want to note what information they have released already, they have said plenty.
You can also take a look at what they lied about and bullshitted about for Oblivion, too. That is how they treat their own IP, AFTER Morrowind, and you somehow expect us to believe that Bethesda is suddenly going to design a competent P&P CRG when they haven't been able to work right on their own IP.
Amazing.
Many of us, due to our experience and knowledge in the industry, do have contacts in various companies. Bethesda is no different, and every company has people who DO have integrity but openly tout the company line. Others, like Todd, simply have no spine nor a clue how to design. That Is A Bad Thing.
Don't presume to tell us what to do on this forum when you obviously haven't made yourself familiar with what the developers have already said.
And if you have no clue about the X-Box...then you deserve any flame directed your way.
FACT = Bethesda has been sold out. Since...oh, hey, 2002, despite the remarks at Mobygames. Also, according to the remarks above, the Coffee Bitch is now the HNIC of Fallout 3's design, and he's, uh...clueless in, uh...interviews. IRONY!
It has come to my attention that people don't really seem to understand how conversation flow and how simple debate can make some points just simply un-needed to go through if people would just bother to think before they post.
So, I've decided to use a convenient example as a basic guide to using reason and logic on a forum, and how to think ahead a few moves.
First, let's take a look at how this multiple straw man argument played out:
Fallacy:
Brahmin said:
Fallacy = Nice way of saying "BULLSHIT", whether it is in whole or in part. In this example, Brahmin used a fact from Bethesda's origins, and then applied an erroneous claim to it. Arena was released around 1994. After Ultima sold out. After other games were going to hell for having action features as well. And long after Bethesda was established...upon sports games.
Hell, you can figure this out easily from the self-fellating wad of shit a founder himself wrote about Bethesda "setting new standards" in role-playing and anything that remotely has role-playing attached to it, except of course, TES in any form.
False Conclusion:
Brahmin said:
There was never ANY P&P style to begin with at Bethesda, and Bethesda has no roots in CRPG development.
False Conclusion 2:
Brahmin said:
The old familiar Argument by Ignorance, again. So because of a few things read in admittedly questionable reviews, and the erroneous point of Bethesda's roots that you pulled from your ass, somehow means that Bethesda knows what they are doing?
Wrong. Debunked.
This entire exchange could have simply been avoided by Knowing What the Fuck You're Attempting to Talk About. The opposite of the Argument by Ignorance. Knowing what you are talking about, or even having some familiarity with it before you post bullshit, saves people a lot of time and annoyance.
Now we get to what I like to call, Argument by Personal Opinion. I think they will do a good job, or it might be fun for me, so therefore they won't do X or will do Y.
Brahmin said:
I don't need to take that apart for people to see how stupid it sounds.
And what part of "same developers with the same stupid design philosophy" misses your observation? Oh, yes, all of it. Also, you might want to note what information they have released already, they have said plenty.
You can also take a look at what they lied about and bullshitted about for Oblivion, too. That is how they treat their own IP, AFTER Morrowind, and you somehow expect us to believe that Bethesda is suddenly going to design a competent P&P CRG when they haven't been able to work right on their own IP.
Amazing.
Many of us, due to our experience and knowledge in the industry, do have contacts in various companies. Bethesda is no different, and every company has people who DO have integrity but openly tout the company line. Others, like Todd, simply have no spine nor a clue how to design. That Is A Bad Thing.
Don't presume to tell us what to do on this forum when you obviously haven't made yourself familiar with what the developers have already said.
And if you have no clue about the X-Box...then you deserve any flame directed your way.
FACT = Bethesda has been sold out. Since...oh, hey, 2002, despite the remarks at Mobygames. Also, according to the remarks above, the Coffee Bitch is now the HNIC of Fallout 3's design, and he's, uh...clueless in, uh...interviews. IRONY!
VDweller
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
My confidence in Bethesda has been restored.
http://www.rpgcodex.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=273913
http://www.rpgcodex.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=273913
I appreciate that I haven't worded myself very well, and a few of my points have been misunderstood (My fault, not the readers... My biggest mistake is that I say "you" when I mean "one"), and that I have been misinformed (Most of what I have said is based on (possibly misremembered*) articles that I now appreciate are full of bullshit).
As for people knowing things because of links with Bethesda, well, I wasn't aware of that, and yes, it changes things.
By "back to it's PnP roots", I meant back to the origin of the company, more than back to it's old game style.. I now appreciate that many of its founding members have left, which is something that I was negligent of before, and that I was mistaken about the style of the original ES games... so my comment bears no merit.
I don't know that Bethesda see it as a different target audience, but to me it seems obvious... the games have very different settings which appeal to different people... to me, that is enough to justify calling it a different target audience. What is there that should make me think that Bethesda haven't made this connection?
"same developers with the same stupid design philosophy"
Well, I'm hoping that they will change their design methods because this game is from a set and structured franchise, I'm assuming that they will work with methods similar to the original designers. I am probably wrong to assume this, but then, I tend to be trusting that people will do the right thing.
I don't know what it will be like, and I shall revise my previous statement to what I really intended to say, rather than a quick simplification of what I meant: "I believe that Bethesda have a better chance of making a half decent game than the average Joe on this forum seems to think."
To me the most interesting this about this whole thing though, is your reactions, some people seem to have taken this personally, or tried to get personal and be offensive, this doesn't bother me, I'm just surprised that I've (seemingly) struck such a chord (with my ignorance)
. This is the thing which interests me the most about Internet discussions; the difficulty of knowing what people are meaning and intending to say, and the quantity of people (myself definitely included) who just can't word it right and get an extreme emotional response from other people... If I was studying Social Science I'd write my thesis on it...
*by this I mean that I used to read a lot of crappy articles about old games, and I could be confusing what people have said about a different game with what they have said about the old ES games. I should have checked before I posted.
As for people knowing things because of links with Bethesda, well, I wasn't aware of that, and yes, it changes things.
By "back to it's PnP roots", I meant back to the origin of the company, more than back to it's old game style.. I now appreciate that many of its founding members have left, which is something that I was negligent of before, and that I was mistaken about the style of the original ES games... so my comment bears no merit.
I don't know that Bethesda see it as a different target audience, but to me it seems obvious... the games have very different settings which appeal to different people... to me, that is enough to justify calling it a different target audience. What is there that should make me think that Bethesda haven't made this connection?
"same developers with the same stupid design philosophy"
Well, I'm hoping that they will change their design methods because this game is from a set and structured franchise, I'm assuming that they will work with methods similar to the original designers. I am probably wrong to assume this, but then, I tend to be trusting that people will do the right thing.
VDweller said:
What is it that they have said? I'd have expected it to get posted here in the news forum- this is where I get the majority of my information regarding Fallout, so if it hasn't been posted here then I probably have not seen it. And what has been posted here? Well: "Pete Hines affirms that he can say nothing"... there was a "cool" FO3 poster.. 2 unrelated comments in a questionnaire with Tod Howard... some badly spoken radio interview in which Howard gave out no information whatsoever.. and the biggest bit of soundbite culture I've seen, again with Tod Howard, again saying nothing... None of which tells me anything about the game, aside than that it'll be made using an adapted version of the Oblivion engine, and that it's in the design phase. If you can't back this up then you're no better than me, if you can, then I'll concede to everything you have said and slip back into lurking mode.Roshambo said:
I don't know what it will be like, and I shall revise my previous statement to what I really intended to say, rather than a quick simplification of what I meant: "I believe that Bethesda have a better chance of making a half decent game than the average Joe on this forum seems to think."
To me the most interesting this about this whole thing though, is your reactions, some people seem to have taken this personally, or tried to get personal and be offensive, this doesn't bother me, I'm just surprised that I've (seemingly) struck such a chord (with my ignorance)
. This is the thing which interests me the most about Internet discussions; the difficulty of knowing what people are meaning and intending to say, and the quantity of people (myself definitely included) who just can't word it right and get an extreme emotional response from other people... If I was studying Social Science I'd write my thesis on it...*by this I mean that I used to read a lot of crappy articles about old games, and I could be confusing what people have said about a different game with what they have said about the old ES games. I should have checked before I posted.
Brahmin said:
Like the numerous times, which I even reminded you about, where the X-Box port has been mentioned, since over two fucking years ago. Along with similar comments and intents on where they were going with the title, nebulous yet informative as they are at once. The exact words were "multiple platforms", and given "developing it just like we developed Oblivion", and other comments, then expect the PC version to be a shoddy afterthought. I just have to say "X-Box" so even the X-Box crackheads can figure out what kind of gameplay and target audience I'm talking about. What's your excuse?
If you can't figure out what the X-Box would mean in this equasion given either F
OS or Oblivion, even after I specifically said that you deserved to be flamed if you didn't care to educate yourself about it, then you really need to clue yourself in or go back to sucking on that meat popsicle, but preferably not on these forums.Hint: That's not chicken.
Briosafreak
Lived Through the Heat Death
Brahmin check this, and let's move on and wait a bit on events, shall we?
VDweller
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
Right & wrong are very subjective concepts. What's right for you maybe wrong to Bethesda, from sales point of view.Brahmin said:
http://www.rpgcodex.com/newsarchive.php??multipage=1&GameID=283&start=30
That's the Codex news database for Fallout 3. Unfortunately, Bethesda stopped talking about the game about 2 years ago due to the totally unexpected negative reaction of the ungrateful Fallout fans, but you could find quite a few indications of the design direction like:
"While only in preproduction stages at the moment, the game will use the same technology as Oblivion, and is planned as another open-ended roleplaying game. This game however, will be decidedly darker. Imagine a survival horror-esque version of the Fallout world, with all the things you expect out of the series still intact, but with deeper, more immersive gameplay. The post-apoc theme (with tongue in cheek humor) of the series is still present, with your character having spent the first 20 years of his life living underground. Because of this, his eyes are unaccustomed to the light of day, thus players will have to train their eyes away from light sensitivity by using a special pair of goggles. Todd Howard claims that Fallout 3 will be one of the most original and violent titles ever and will be set in a familiar US city."
Briosafreak said:
Or, to be more exact, this link.
Notice how Pete uses words that rather implies they're doing "innovashun", which I have to re-coin for Saint. It's the "advancement" of a game series by changing the features and core aspects of the game for marketing or foolish developer decisions. Ultima 8 was considered a failure due to innovashun. As was giving FOT and Arcanum RT combat, because the suits demanded it, instead of building another great classic that lives to this day - Jagged Alliance 2. As a result, in chasing numbers, the games in reality blew hard in many aspects due to those compromises. The gamers that have been around for a long time know a serious fact - solid games stay around. They endure, often despite graphics, in their perfect medley of brilliance in interface and design elements.
Unfortunately, to use the name of the series, you tend to imply those same elements, as the initial game defines the standard of quality, general gameplay, and fan expectations. Bethesda is the "miserable failure" of the gaming industry, pandering down to the dumbest of the dumb and those too ignorant to know better. Remember, more than half of America voted for that dumb fuck, and he isn't a good president by far. That people enjoy Oblivion because it's about the only AAA-"quality" game out at this time is not indicative of how good it really is.
Hell, Pete's pretty clueless since he thinks KoTOR had TB combat. But what else could you expect of a PR monkey that still...yet...fails to do their job? It's not that fucking hard, but I can see where it might be a bit challenging to admit that you're full of shit without having the whole hype parade look down at their own feet and get upset.
You would have thought that the initial gripes about their announcements would have made them close up their collective sphincters, but unfortunately that would have had the added side-effect of asphyxiating themselves and a dozen or so fanboys all at once.
VDweller said:
Wow, Bethesda really are a bunch of clueless assholes. "but with deeper, more immersive gameplay" Did this asshole play Morrowind and Oblivion? What makes him think Bethesda are capable of creating a game with "deep and immersive gameplay", it certainly couldn't have been their more recent works. Maybe they're aiming for more awesome and immersive gameplay such as this?
Oblivion sucks balls! BethSoft makes crappy games! The only decent one being Daggerfall...for its time!
Look how bored this Oblivion player is LOL "Wolfy go down!!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXy5p0kWyb4
Look how bored this Oblivion player is LOL "Wolfy go down!!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXy5p0kWyb4
After following a few threads like these, I often wonder how many of the posters are for real.
In case you don't know what I mean, I've read articles about large companies hiring people to visit forums all over the net, for the sole purpose of talking up their products in discussions.
In case you don't know what I mean, I've read articles about large companies hiring people to visit forums all over the net, for the sole purpose of talking up their products in discussions.