To what extent FO3 could be modded?

[Haldgar]

Sander, I didnt just bable about camera view, i gave examples too.

Height does not has to do with only artistry. In fact one of the best height experiences i've had in a game was probaly with Stunt Car Racer. It looked like shit, but there was absolutely nothing wrong at all with the beliavability of height.. Physics can also be very believable without artistry, i think these are the 2 game elements that really doesnt need good graphics to be believable or immersive. But not a problem anyways since most new 3D games looks ok nowadays.

First person view is not a locked camera, you can rotate the view just like you can rotate your head IRL.

Zooming in does not fix that you cant see faces or clothes cleary, you will, obviously, only see them from a certain angle and you can never see it completely like you do in a first person perpective or in real life.

I find it extremly lacking if i can't climb up on a roof or up onto a mountain or dive into the sea to explore it, it makes the game feel really restricted both design and immersive-wise, for very obvious reasons.

..and fog of war sucks. I mean some black shit that partialy covers the screen?? How is that even remotely believable or immersive.. It looks _awful_ too.

It helps gameplay? How does it help gameplay in a FO game that you haven't even played?

I think the only reason many people here wants it is because they've been been playing FO1-2 for 10+ years straight and anything even remotely different would probably make their heads explode..

 

[Black]

...
Look at your left. You didn't have to move your torso, did you?
Now, look at your left in a fpp game without moving your torso.
Oh, snap!
Btw, can you see your feet? I can. And when I'm playing FPP game and I'm looking down, I don't see my feet.
IMMERSHUN-BREAKAR!

I think the only reason many people here wants it is because they've been been playing FO1-2 for 10+ years straight and anything even remotely different would probably make their heads explode..

Wow, that's something new. I've never seen that kind of argument before. Eagerly waiting for "all you want is a carbon copy of Fallout 2".


Shit, I was more immersed in Starlancer than in Morrowind and I played in TPP. And you know why? Because the world was believeable, characters and events seemed realistic. Because my decisions HAD actual effects in the game. When I shot down the elite Black Guard in my 1st mission, people congratulated me, were like "wow dude" and I was even praised in my debriefing.
This-is-fucking-immersion- when the world responds to your actions. Not FPP, TPP, iSO or any other view. Deus Ex was immersive not because it was FPP, but because of the whole fucking world.

 

[Sander]

Sander, I didnt just bable about camera view, i gave examples too.

No you didn't.
Well, that's not really true. You said something abotu being immersed in 'art' by walking around it.
Which I still don't get, because what do you mean exactly by immersion? And what about, say, paintings?

Height does not has to do with only artistry. In fact one of the best height experiences i've had in a game was probaly with Stunt Car Racer. It looked like shit, but there was absolutely nothing wrong at all with the beliavability of height.. Physics can also be very believable without artistry, i think these are the 2 game elements that really doesnt need good graphics to be believable or immersive. But not a problem anyways since most new 3D games looks ok nowadays.

You are mistaking good graphics for good artistry.

First person view is not a locked camera, you can rotate the view just like you can rotate your head IRL.

This sentence is wrong in several ways.

Zooming in does not fix that you cant see faces or clothes cleary, you will, obviously, only see them from a certain angle and you can never see it completely like you do in a first person perpective or in real life.

I find it extremly lacking if i can't climb up on a roof or up onto a mountain or dive into the sea to explore it, it makes the game feel really restricted both design and immersive-wise, for very obvious reasons.

Please explain how these things are not doable in an isometric view.

..and fog of war sucks. I mean some black shit that partialy covers the screen?? How is that even remotely believable or immersive.. It looks _awful_ too.

It's actually a pretty normal representation of Field of View (the other solution is simply not showing characters at all if you can't perceive them, which is just a black fog without the actual fog being drawn).

It helps gameplay? How does it help gameplay in a FO game that you haven't even played?

In an actual Fallout game, you'd have turn-based combat and an interface based in part on tabletop games. An isometric viewpoint helps a lot tactically in this combat setting and feel-wise with regard to tabletop.

I think the only reason many people here wants it is because they've been been playing FO1-2 for 10+ years straight and anything even remotely different would probably make their heads explode..

And I think you just got your second strike for trolling.

 

[ToadBoyDeluxe]

I'm not a mod or anything but did that last line of the post really deserve a strike. I've seen people say a lot worse on this forum and end up with a warning at the most.


To the topic! Charge!!!

I think we will probably be able to do a lot with Fallout as far as mods go but I dont think something like forcing people into a camera angle will be one of them. I'm really looking forward to seeing what mods people come up with for the game except of course for the 7000 or so Dogmeat mods that will pop up.

 

[Wooz]

I'm not a mod or anything but did that last line of the post really deserve a strike.

You're not, so shut up. Kthx.

I'm really looking forward to seeing what mods people come up with for the game

Just to remind you guys, we haven't heard anything yet about Beth's plans to release a toolkit.

 

[Haldgar]

Sander, I didnt just bable about camera view, i gave examples too.

No you didn't.
Well, that's not really true. You said something abotu being immersed in 'art' by walking around it.

Yes that was one thing i said, but i also gave many other examples from a 3D engine perspective (e.g you cant see a very distant city, no sense of height). This is the, hmm, third time something i've sad i gave examples and still youre trying your best not to, either understand this or you just dont read what i post. ..and you're saying i'm trolling? GG.

Which I still don't get, because what do you mean exactly by immersion? And what about, say, paintings?

Why are you even in this discussion if you don't know/don't want to understand what immersion means (i'm sure you DO understand it,' its just that its really convenient to suddenely NOT understand, "trolling" is another word for this). Paintings are still 2D, remember? Please, we've had this discussion already.

You are mistaking good graphics for good artistry.

In any case, believable height can't be done in isometric perspective, e.g you could never look down from a e.g a mountain and "feel" how high above the ground you are etc etc.. This works best from first person view.

First person view is not a locked camera, you can rotate the view just like you can rotate your head IRL.

This sentence is wrong in several ways.

You're very good at saying i'm wrong without giving any arguments to why. That's trolling to me. It's not wrong that your head in real life isnt locked, it's not wrong that a camera in first person view isnt locked. In fact, in both morrowind and oblivion you can even "zoom out" and get isometric or whatever you want from first person view.

I find it extremly lacking if i can't climb up on a roof or up onto a mountain or dive into the sea to explore it, it makes the game feel really restricted both design and immersive-wise, for very obvious reasons.

Please explain how these things are not doable in an isometric view.

I've already explained my views here.

..and fog of war sucks. I mean some black shit that partialy covers the screen?? How is that even remotely believable or immersive.. It looks _awful_ too.

It's actually a pretty normal representation of Field of View (the other solution is simply not showing characters at all if you can't perceive them, which is just a black fog without the actual fog being drawn).

Yeah that works but it's not very believable (one of the merits you said counted). It's an awful represntation of field of view. If im walking in the desert without anything blocking my view i dont see black fog 30-something meters infront of me, in fact i've never seen this black fog. People doesnt suddenly come out of thin air either, that shit belongs in those awful old Final Fantasy games we're you get surprise attacks from nowhere every 5 meters or so, plain awful in every regard.

In an actual Fallout game, you'd have turn-based combat and an interface based in part on tabletop games. An isometric viewpoint helps a lot tactically in this combat setting and feel-wise with regard to tabletop.

You're talking about the other fallouts yes, see this is a new fallout with a totaly different camera, so im pretty sure you're wrong that this game would benefit from locked isometric view. Especially since it's not created from the ground and up with that view in mind.

And I think you just got your second strike for trolling.

Thanks, I don't even need my morning coffee anymore, i just come here and get a strike and i'm totaly woken up. Awesome.

I know you people are conservative and all, but really, that's the only "good" argument you have. If not i'd like to see the advantages i'm totaly missing here, both immersion and design-wise with a locked isometric view (especially in FO3 that's being designed with another camera in mind..). Still not confident enough to share them? Do they even exist?

You're just a rather small, very angry, extremely conservative crowd. The best thing is either to just continue to play FO1-2 for another 10+ years or accept the fact that time changes and that your view can also change.. A third option would be to buy it anyways and then just continue the discussion/hate.. To be honest, that's just a total waste of energy and probably mood.. and so is probably my time spent here (except for mood which is still pretty darn good ). Bye. Have a really good time with Fallout 1 and 2.

 

[Black]

Have a real good time with your selective reading.

 

[ToadBoyDeluxe]

You're not, so shut up. Kthx.

Well I didnt ask for an example but thanks anyway.

Just to remind you guys, we haven't heard anything yet about Beth's plans to release a toolkit.

I think its a pretty safe bet that they will release a toolkit with Fallout 3. The moding community has been huge for their last two games and I'm sure its why more than a few people plan on picking up the game. I dont see them saying no to extra sales.

 

[Wooz]

Agreed, they had a great modding community for their two previous games, but Beth might want to limit modding, as the mods were... better than the game itself. It's bad rep when modders make a better job than your own team.

Or they might indeed release a toolkit.

A pay-per download toolkit.

So no, I don't think it's a safe bet at all.

 

[Sander]

Yes that was one thing i said, but i also gave many other examples from a 3D engine perspective (e.g you cant see a very distant city, no sense of height). This is the, hmm, third time something i've sad i gave examples and still youre trying your best not to, either understand this or you just dont read what i post. ..and you're saying i'm trolling? GG.

Please try to actually read what you wrote in this thread before replying, okay? You claimed that you had given a ton of examples, while you hadn't before that conversation thread started.
Ie. the first real examples you gave beyond walking around art were *after* I asked you specifically for them to which you replied that you'd already given examples.

Why are you even in this discussion if you don't know/don't want to understand what immersion means (i'm sure you DO understand it,' its just that its really convenient to suddenely NOT understand, "trolling" is another word for this).

No, yet again, what do you mean by immersion?
The reason I continue to ask this is because you still haven't explained what *you* understand for immersion and how exactly rotating cameras help that. All you've given are a couple of concrete examples of things you feel work better from a first-person view (which is strangely yet something else than a rotating camera), but that does not explain how this facilitates 'immersion' or what you understand under immersion.

Paintings are still 2D, remember? Please, we've had this discussion already.

Do you live in some alternate dimension where a discussion amounts to nothing more than you posing a statement and then not saying anything more about it because 'you've discussed it already'?

In any case, believable height can't be done in isometric perspective, e.g you could never look down from a e.g a mountain and "feel" how high above the ground you are etc etc.. This works best from first person view.

And this is where good *artistry* comes into play.
A good artist *can* (and will) make height believable from such a perspective.

You're very good at saying i'm wrong without giving any arguments to why.

I think you're very good at being a moron and ignoring things people say, ie. Black's exposition as to why you cannot rotate your head in first-person view as you do in real life to which I was largely referring.

It's not wrong that your head in real life isnt locked, it's not wrong that a camera in first person view isnt locked. In fact, in both morrowind and oblivion you can even "zoom out" and get isometric or whatever you want from first person view.

Wait, what?
You cannot have an isometric first-person view. In Oblivion you can somewhat zoom out to something that looks like an isometric view (but isn't actually properly functional gameplay-wise), but this is completely seperate from their first-person view.

I've already explained my views here.

No you haven't.
You've only postulated 'this can't be done in isometric view' without actually giving any evidence or explanation for it.

Yeah that works but it's not very believable (one of the merits you said counted). It's an awful represntation of field of view. If im walking in the desert without anything blocking my view i dont see black fog 30-something meters infront of me, in fact i've never seen this black fog. People doesnt suddenly come out of thin air either, that shit belongs in those awful old Final Fantasy games we're you get surprise attacks from nowhere every 5 meters or so, plain awful in every regard.

I'm pretty sure I never talked about only being to see 5 metres in front of you, I talked about a representation of field of view. Which by its very definitions means that things are drawn if a character could see them, and not if a character can't see them.

You're talking about the other fallouts yes, see this is a new fallout with a totaly different camera, so im pretty sure you're wrong that this game would benefit from locked isometric view. Especially since it's not created from the ground and up with that view in mind.

I specifically said 'Fallout games' and not 'Fallout 3' when I talked about isometric view.
Yes, Fallout 3 is built from the ground up with a completely different camera and gameplay system in mind.
So, in essence, Fallout 3 is built from the ground up *as a completely different type of game*.

Thanks, I don't even need my morning coffee anymore, i just come here and get a strike and i'm totaly woken up. Awesome.

I know you people are conservative and all, but really, that's the only "good" argument you have. If not i'd like to see the advantages i'm totaly missing here, both immersion and design-wise with a locked isometric view (especially in FO3 that's being designed with another camera in mind..). Still not confident enough to share them? Do they even exist?

I like how you pretend to come up with arguments that we haven't heard a million times over.
Here's some hints:
- Isometric view was invented *after* third and first-person view was invented. So no, 'things change' is bullshit because isometric view *was* the original change.
- There's a very specific design reason Fallout used an isometric view that has absolutely nothing to do with technology of the times.
- Turn-based combat
- I specifically recall saying that very few people support a completely locked camera that cannot be rotated to fit the situation (eg. Van Buren)

You're just a rather small, very angry, extremely conservative crowd. The best thing is either to just continue to play FO1-2 for another 10+ years or accept the fact that time changes and that your view can also change.. A third option would be to buy it anyways and then just continue the discussion/hate.. To be honest, that's just a total waste of energy and probably mood.. and so is probably my time spent here (except for mood which is still pretty darn good ). Bye. Have a really good time with Fallout 1 and 2.

Awwww, we'll really miss you.
Buh-bye. Banned.

 

[ToadBoyDeluxe]

Agreed, they had a great modding community for their two previous games, but Beth might want to limit modding, as the mods were... better than the game itself. It's bad rep when modders make a better job than your own team.

Or they might indeed release a toolkit.

A pay-per download toolkit.

So no, I don't think it's a safe bet at all.

Thats completely ridiculous reasoning on your part and seems to be based entirely on your dislike of the company and not about what they have done in the past. The construction kit being released with the game is pretty much guaranteed. Its what they've done with the last two Elder Scrolls games I doubt it would suddenly change for Fallout 3. Construction kit sells games and companies like sales.

 

[Sorrow]

Didn't they already say that they won't release the toolkit or something like that because of trouble they got with ratings because people made mods with naked characters?

 

[Briosafreak]

We don’t know yet - we’re discussing it. It is something we’ve done for Oblivion, but this doesn’t automatically mean we’ll do the same for Fallout. The truth is, preparing such tools takes a lot of time, and this is time lost to production of the actual game. We shall see.

 

[Wooz]

The construction kit being released with the game is pretty much guaranteed.

We don’t know yet - we’re discussing it. It is something we’ve done for Oblivion, but this doesn’t automatically mean we’ll do the same for Fallout. The truth is, preparing such tools takes a lot of time, and this is time lost to production of the actual game. We shall see.

Ouch much?

 

[ToadBoyDeluxe]

Not much, but certainly a little.

 

[Strike_Reyhi]

really all the true fans just want to play it from Birds eye camera. true isometric in a world that is a reskinned oblivion wouldn't work right.

now i'm just gonna toss it out there, but without the 3 i don't think it'd be causing so much commotion. as it would be a spinoff. instead of false claims to be a continuation.

 

[Wooz]

Agreed. Furthermore, without the "Fallout", it wouldn't cause any commotion.

 

[Mrxknown]

Agreed. Furthermore, without the "Fallout", it wouldn't cause any commotion.

Actually without the "Fallout" it would still cause a commotion. What would you do if they made "DesertLand", but still had the Brotherhood of Steel, mutants, VaultBoy, Pipboy, NukaCola, Radiation King tvs, Supermutants, ghouls, etc?

I mean if that happened, I'm sure people would be yelling, "THAT'S A RIPOFF OF FALLOUT!"

wait, no it would actually be "That's a BAD ripoff of Fallout".

 

[sparkasaurusmex]

Shitloads of work, another year or two waiting for the effects. Plus, I doubt fans would make a game big or good enough, such stuff requires a LOT of time and creativity.

Where have you been? The modding community is sure to put out quality stuff in time. Nothing is too "big or good" for ambitious modders to master. They do it time and again for many games.

 

[sparkasaurusmex]

Agreed, they had a great modding community for their two previous games, but Beth might want to limit modding, as the mods were... better than the game itself. It's bad rep when modders make a better job than your own team.

Or they might indeed release a toolkit.

A pay-per download toolkit.

So no, I don't think it's a safe bet at all.

Construction kit sells games and companies like sales.

True. He's looking at it as if devs pride is somehow hurt just because modders, who have more focus and time and freedom, can be more creative and make higher quality work of their games. Developers and especially publishers love this. Do you think DICE got upset when everyone started buying BF1942 just to install Desert Combat, or Valve because of CounterStrike? No, it does these devs and publishers well to ensure a long shelf life of their games by allowing modders to get their hands on robust editing tools.