Tim Cain on Fallout and Fallout 3

[SuAside]

well, lets not forget the original setting and the dark humor. that on it's own could totally ruin a FO sequel, of course.
but the stuff in the sig are the things i expect Beth to poop on most.

 

[Jarno Mikkola]

Fallout 3 needs everything in SuAsides sig: Isometric view (3D will do)/SPECIAL/non-linear story/turn-based combat/versatile quests/dialog trees.. (before I started debating in this thread I assumed that Bethesda had already planed to use all of that stuff, because thats what fallout is! now I realise that they probably don't... now I'm as pissed off as the rest of you.)

Actually as Bethesda is still in the pre-production stage of the game, I think that they are trying to sort out how much of the features they will take to the game, and how to best implement them into the engine. So they should be looking into the fan forums, to find out which of these the fans beg for them to put in.

Well, lets not forget the original setting and the dark humor. that on it's own could totally ruin a FO sequel

Well, if they put a good engine together, I am going to personally pay for every add-on's material they want to put in, so for me these are just that, add-ons, I will pay to play with a very good engine, just like some pay to play the world of warcraft. But, if it's from the #%%hole, I will just download it from the net.

 

[Brahmin]

Well, lets not forget the original setting and the dark humor. that on it's own could totally ruin a FO sequel

I never said that.

 

[mortiz]

Incorporating things like an isometric view, turn based gameplay etc is only half of the battle however. Even if Bethesda incorporate everything from Fallout (and I doubt they will), it's still possible they'll fuck up the game itself. Take Fallout 2 for example, it took most of the elements that made Fallout, even improved a couple (such as better handling of party members) but I'm sure a large portion of NMA would agree with it was by far and large inferior to Fallout.

Bethesda still have to create compelling characters, an intriguing story line, interesting locations and a "Fallout" atmosphere even after they've nailed down the nitty gritty of the game. From what I've seen in Oblivion and Morrowind I don't think Bethesda have writers and designers capable.

 

[dev]

for me isometric camera isnt needed

i would play fallout with third-person view but... only then if game would have amazing graphic (and it will have, because its oblivion engine) and great animation (which sucks in oblivion)

third-person camera would give better visual asspects than isometric

for example we are staying on hower dam and looking down

in isometric camera it wouldnt be possible

try to imagine mindblowing graphic, camera behind our guy and amazing view of destroyed city, dark clouds etc - that would be much more spectacular than isometric camera

to hold the atmosphere important is how game looks, how music sounds etc not where is the place of the camera

of course if it would be in our ass then it wouldnt be cool

but third person camera would kick ass much more than isometric

in my opinion of course

now you can kill me, hehe 8)

 

[Punck_D]

try to imagine mindblowing graphic, camera behind our guy and amazing view of destroyed city, dark clouds etc - that would be much more spectacular than isometric camera

Maybe in "The Postapocalyptic Scrolls: Wasteland Sightseeing", but not in my turn-based Fallout.

 

[Brahmin]

The point of isometric isn't to dazzle people with graphics, Fallout doesn't need dazzling graphics, it needs dazzling game play... other people will explain why isometric is better with far superior wording than me, so I won't get in their way.

FO3 should have 3 camera modes, 1st, third, and isometric. Isometric should be the standard camera mode for combat and wandering, sure, it can have a semi movable camera (think The Movies, or Theme Park or black and white or something)... 1st for dialogue, and 3rd as a switchtoable thing to satisfy jobbers like you

 

[zioburosky13]

I will buy gameplay over shiny graphic. Small improvment which supports today's eye-candy is okie for me but turning F3 into a 'OMG ! My eyes!' game is a failure in my book.

Really, recent games have too many bombastic visual effects yet not many has great and memorable gameplay element. After playing too many FP-'role-playing' game (*cough*), I miss the old isometric, 2D graphic of Fallout (and arcanum. And planescape..)

 

[Sorrow]

Fallout 1 has great graphics and animations, so I don't understand why great graphics in Fallout 3 would be wrong.

Art and the Zen of Role-Playing Games

Our artists are using a wide-range of tools to create the unique look and feel of Fallout. Detailed animations, numerous scenary objects and different wall styles, and a rather neat looking interface are all just a small part of the total art requirements we're beating out of our artists. While the majority of art is being rendered using different 3D packages, we are also using 2D and clay models to round out the art -- using the best tool for the particular job. Fallout should be the most graphic intensive 3rd-person perspective RPG to date.

 

[SuAside]

Fallout 1 has great graphics and animations, so I don't understand why great graphics in Fallout 3 would be wrong.

i dont think you'll find anyone on this site saying FO3 with great graphics would be a bad thing, Sorrow...

but i think most will agree it's not a necessity, and it certainly shouldn't be the focus of the game developement.

 

[Dracon M'Alkir]

I'm now more afraid of Roshambo than I was a little while ago. How that deathclaw avatar fits him is just.. chilling

 

[LouisH]

I like the FO 1 &2 graphics also. The graffiti walls of Reno the dirty cluttered motel rooms! Those graphics gave so much feeling to the enviroment.I wish they kept those graphics and just added bigger citys and maps. Who cares about Oblivion graphics it just means steeper hardware requirements.

 

[Roshambo]

for me isometric camera isnt needed

That's fine. But uh...exactly who are you, and what bearing does your personal opinion have with the design of Fallout, the expected design of a Fallout sequel, and the fact of game series dying when they are bastardized into something they never were intended to be*?

* - Unless it's fed to the X-Box whores, and then it's called a "success" by "widening the franchise's market". Unfortunately, it just gets sales from people too young to have played quality from before Bethesda takes false credit for innovation, kids who only have experience on one or two consoles, and also sales from those too stupid to drool over graphics without any regards to the impact it would have upon the gameplay development. That Bethesda preys on this ignorance and deems it a sucess, at the cost of their previously established audience, is purely sickening.

That is one reason why I haven't had respect for Bethesda since Morrowind. The hype around it proved that they were a bunch of lying, manipulative, unscrupulous, greedy, and shitheaded bunch of asswipes that don't care what they say or do, but as long as they can get money, that's all that matters. Fine, fuck 'em, they're whores.

i would play fallout with third-person view but... only then if game would have amazing graphic (and it will have, because its oblivion engine) and great animation (which sucks in oblivion)

So you want them to again focus upon graphics without much concern towards the gameplay. Noted.

third-person camera would give better visual asspects than isometric

And then (regardless of your personal opinion, this time equated as fact), after Bethesda has focused upon the shiny shit, again as per the focus for their TES series, what about the gameplay "ass"pects?

for example we are staying on hower dam and looking down

in isometric camera it wouldnt be possible

try to imagine mindblowing graphic, camera behind our guy and amazing view of destroyed city, dark clouds etc - that would be much more spectacular than isometric camera

For one, a movie or similar, or even a overlooking point from something in-game (remember, it's a role-playing game, so the player shouldn't be aware of more than the PC generally knows - which is why like in Fallout and JA2, perception determines which enemies you see/character is aware of) or even from a map view screen like in Fallout, would accomplish this without compromising the design style. Which is tabletop P&P, mixed with a bit pf sci-fi pulp comic feel, from around the EC Era of Comics. If you don't know what either is by now, learn quick before you reply.

Welcome to Design Integrity 101. First lesson: Knowing what the fuck you're working with/talking about.

to hold the atmosphere important is how game looks, how music sounds etc not where is the place of the camera

Again, thank you for sharing your opinion with us.

Now fuck off if you're going to equate it as fact. I'll again point out the tabletop style of gameplay mixed with the pulpish design of the graphics.

of course if it would be in our ass then it wouldnt be cool

but third person camera would kick ass much more than isometric

in my opinion of course

Too bad you didn't really bother to differentiate stated opinion and fact half of the time in this post. I'll give it a "D+" for effort.

 

[Dracon M'Alkir]

* - Unless it's fed to the X-Box whores, and then it's called a "success" by "widening the franchise's market". Unfortunately, it just gets sales from people too young to have played quality from before Bethesda takes false credit for innovation, kids who only have experience on one or two consoles, and also sales from those too stupid to drool over graphics without any regards to the impact it would have upon the gameplay development. That Bethesda preys on this ignorance and deems it a sucess, at the cost of their previously established audience, is purely sickening.

That is one reason why I haven't had respect for Bethesda since Morrowind. The hype around it proved that they were a bunch of lying, manipulative, unscrupulous, greedy, and shitheaded bunch of asswipes that don't care what they say or do, but as long as they can get money, that's all that matters. Fine, fuck 'em, they're whores.

I agree, Bethesda really ripped a gigantic tear into my heart when I saw the craptastic job they did with Oblivion. It was basically like..

Normal Employee #1: "We've got a large and loving fanbase, thousands of people have placed their faith and their admiration for our works into us. They are depending on us to make an excellent game that will bring honor once again to our name..."

Todd Howard: What the fuck are you talking about? Good gameplay doesn't sell! Graphics do! You're fired for trying to put us out of buisness.

Normal Employee #2: But, sir..

Todd Howard: You're fired too! *door shuts* OK, NOW LETS CRUSH THE FANBASE FOR MORE SALES! Y'know?" (Interplay style - FOOS)

Insane Employee #1: Coding for XBOX360..

R.I.P Old Bethesda.

 

[Mick1965]

Most of us here are in agreeance as to what features we'd like to see in the next Fallout game: ISO, Special, TB etc etc. These features are a framework for the Fallout games, but they alone do not make the FO games. We can push and push and hopefully, just maybe, Bethesda might listen and implement some, or even all of these features that we love so much. But would that make the game good? Or would it just be a hollow facsimile of the past FO games; just another Oblivion but with a different view and mechanics.

Based on what I've read and seen about Bethesda and Oblivion I'd question whether they have the capability to build a good CRPG, even if they stayed true to the original FO.

Mick

 

[Odin]

Oh fights *takes out popcorn* carry on..

 

[dadioflex]

Most of us here are in agreeance as to what features we'd like to see in the next Fallout game: ISO, Special, TB etc etc.

Nothing stopping Beth making a FO3 that was true to the design and spirit of the original games.

It would be a bummer having to pay fifty thousand dollars a copy to cover their costs when their potential market is only a few thousand people though.

Honestly an isometric Fallout game is the sort of thing you're going to see (and I mean you ARE going to see it if Beth's past performance is anything to go by) on a mobile phone not a state of the art console or PC. Or it's the sort of project that gets picked up by Manifesto games not a major publisher. Look at Aveyond.

 

[Morry]

I do see it as a chance for the mainstream gaming community to embrace the Fallout series. From what I have seen, casual gamers that have been shown the original Fallout games were quick to appreciate the detail that went in to those games. Even if Fallout 3 is a gross mutation of the original quality of the series, it may just show the light to the uniformed masses about what it could/should have been. This could then persuade Bethesda to adopt a more traditional stance with further Fallout titles.

 

[MrBumble]

I do see it as a chance for the mainstream gaming community to embrace the Fallout series.

Maybe...but is it what we really want ? A whole bunch of new Fallout 3 fanboys probably claiming that Fallout and Fallout 2 sucked because "tehy didnt hav teh shiny grafix !!!11!!!!!!" and "tehy ar to complicated. Geck ? WTF ? llo ! I prefer survival horror ! "

. From what I have seen, casual gamers that have been shown the original Fallout games were quick to appreciate the detail that went in to those games.

How come that NMA has such a big ass blacklist ? http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/blacklist.php
Well, I'm not an expert of Fallout though, I'm more a fan of the design but still I don't think I'm totally clueless about it. Did you ever read the elderscrolls boards ? Scary shit !

This could then persuade Bethesda to adopt a more traditional stance with further Fallout titles.

It's more likely to persuade Bethesda to do more oblivionesque dumbed down rpg's since people seem to like them. You know that Neverwinter Nights 2 is to be released soon, don't you ? There's Icewind Dale 2 also, not to forget KOTOR 2...I wonder what could stop them to do a poop Fallout 4 if Fallout 3 sucked but sold well nevertheless.

 

[Roshambo]

I do see it as a chance for the mainstream gaming community to embrace the Fallout series.

Again, for those too slow to keep up with a topic, or who can't be bothered to lurk, this is not a good thing.

From what I have seen, casual gamers that have been shown the original Fallout games were quick to appreciate the detail that went in to those games.

"Durrr! Guns and mutants and things!" That is what the common gaming idiot believes Fallout is, and the console trash that comprises Bethesda's target audience is much, much lower on the mental scale. The industry has dumbed down the audience into accepting anything as long as it's shiny and on console. Hell, there are even people who believe that super-mutants are not integral to the Fallout setting.

Face it, the mainstream has been dumbed down too far for them to appreciate a game with the quality, attention to gameplay and design, and depth of Fallout. The mainstream trash got their wish with FOS, and it sucked ass and flopped. Now, Fallout 3 promises to be as dumbed down and raped as Oblivion was to TES.

Even if Fallout 3 is a gross mutation of the original quality of the series, it may just show the light to the uniformed masses about what it could/should have been. This could then persuade Bethesda to adopt a more traditional stance with further Fallout titles.

Really? The same foolish idea didn't stop Interplay from greenlighting FOT2 and FOS instead of finishing a Fallout 3 with their own people, even after some of their lying suits claimed that buying FOT would give Interplay the money to finish a Fallout 3. Instead...well, you see where it went to.

Even so, showing Fallout to the masses usually gets a dumb nod and a "you shoot things, right?" kind of reply. Just take a look at the replies of many dumbshits like IAN_SUCKS on the Fallout 3 forums for a good example. Untermenschen like that are too stupid to understand the setting and too Oblivious wasting mommy and daddy's hard earned money on trash software to care.