Todd Howard on the Hot Seat

[Cimmerian Nights]

I do kinda like the direction they're heading with the old music they've selected.

I Don't Want to Set the World on Fire was already selected as a first choice in FO2, but didn't make (licensing issues?).

I don't think "edginess" or "rugged credibility" is really the problem. More like bad taste and not knowing good game design if it was shoved down his gullet.

It's as big a problem.
It kind of goes without saying that the mastermind whose greatest contribution to RPGs has been blunt axes, wikidialogue, and a persuasion minigame wasn't going to suddenly embrace and maintain fidelity to Fallout's PnP RPG pedigree. That's a given.

But let's look at Todd's milieu setting-wise - the epic, high fantasy, knights on white horses, princesses in high towers, tired, cliched, derivative, drama-queen, copycat bullshit.

Fallout is quite the opposite in it's downplaying of epic or dramatic aspects, absence of magic, more real-world setting, favoring of realism, cynical storytelling, and pathos.

Throw TB/ISO out the window, because based on the writing acumen as displayed in Beth's flagship TES, I think the intellectual stimulation, depth, grittiness and compelling nature one came to expect from the writing and dialogue in a FO game will likely dissappear as well. And that could've been it's saving grace in many's eyes.

 

[Ausir]

I Don't Want to Set the World on Fire was already selected as a first choice in FO2, but didn't make (licensing issues?).

For FO1, actually. And later for Van Buren.

 

[shorrtybearr]

But let's look at Todd's milieu setting-wise - the epic, high fantasy, knights on white horses, princesses in high towers, tired, cliched, derivative, drama-queen, copycat bullshit.

True...but it sells and thats what the industry is all about. Very very rarely do you come across a trend setter or a visionary these days.

Come to think about it you didnt really come across them in the old days either, i'd guess the ratio is about the same except the premotion and marketing side aswell as the backing of the producers is pretty much the first requirement you have to meet in todays market. (not saying it wasnt important then, just less so)

One of my close friends is in the industry and he said he comes across so many great and fresh ideas from up and coming developers but when he forwards them onto the producers all he gets at the next meeting is a thousand reasons why its not cost effective or their isnt a big enough market. (I.e. its not financially safe).

His conclusion was simple: the producers do not play games.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Is Fallout itself not a manifest example of the success of something that purposefully eschewed the trendy conventions du jour in favor of more sustainable, longer lasting, gaming principles and conventions? Here's a game who's raison d'etre was to buck trends when everyone else was bending over backwards to clone Diablo. It's no wonder Fallout still has a following today, but the flash-in-the-pan copycats have faded into oblivion. Once you strip away the trends and the shiny graphics you're left with little of substance. That may be what sells to the masses, but I ain't buying it.

As far as developers, I'd look at guys like Sid Meier and Gary Grigsby, starting with their early work with prolific publishers like Microprose and SSI. They each have 25 years and counting of pushing gaming in new directions rather than kneeling to what marketing tells them to. That's why they're still here and Garriot is not.

I Don't Want to Set the World on Fire was already selected as a first choice in FO2, but didn't make (licensing issues?).

For FO1, actually. And later for Van Buren.

Thanks for the correction.

 

[TheSHEEEP]

Future Shock actually rocks...

I'm still playing that game from time to time on my old PC... He's kind of right sayng the game was way ahead of its time.

 

[Zaptoman]

I actually kinda liked future shock as well. You can shoot the moon. It says "ouch". Hehe.

 

[Makagulfazel]

IGN: What's a place in the world that you love going to?
Todd Howard: My bed. Awesome.

...
Totally, dude.

I concur.

 

[shorrtybearr]

That may be what sells to the masses, but I ain't buying it.

Will you still buy FO3 though?

 

[Eyenixon]

Is Fallout itself not a manifest example of the success of something that purposefully eschewed the trendy conventions du jour in favor of more sustainable, longer lasting, gaming principles and conventions? Here's a game who's raison d'etre was to buck trends when everyone else was bending over backwards to clone Diablo. It's no wonder Fallout still has a following today, but the flash-in-the-pan copycats have faded into oblivion. Once you strip away the trends and the shiny graphics you're left with little of substance. That may be what sells to the masses, but I ain't buying it.

As far as developers, I'd look at guys like Sid Meier and Gary Grigsby, starting with their early work with prolific publishers like Microprose and SSI. They each have 25 years and counting of pushing gaming in new directions rather than kneeling to what marketing tells them to. That's why they're still here and Garriot is not.

I Don't Want to Set the World on Fire was already selected as a first choice in FO2, but didn't make (licensing issues?).

For FO1, actually. And later for Van Buren.

Thanks for the correction.

Diablo was released the same year as Fallout earlier in the year and by Fallout's release there was a whopping 0 Diablo clones and a whopping 1 game announced that actually cloned it.

Whoopee generalizations. Diablo clones didn't start popping out of the woodworks spontaneously till after Diablo II.

EDIT: Sid had taken his ideas from popular games such as MULE and Kampfgruppe. No one is truly original in this industry unless it's late 70s or early 80s, and then it just gets slim.

We give Fallout so much credit because it did something mildly different and excelled at it. You can't expect every game to be the Jesus of innovation.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

That may be what sells to the masses, but I ain't buying it.

Will you still buy FO3 though?

In all earnest, no.
Why would I buy a game that bears no resemblence to the gameplay of the first, and only middling similarity to some post-apocalyptic elements that aren't exclusive to Fallout anyway? I realize the name Fallout will be on the box, but I need more than that to compell me to spend the cash and time on this one. See, I'm not one of these miserable people that played Oblivion umpteen times and bashes it every step of the way. Why would I subject myself to that? I don't like Bethesda's brand of shallow McRPGS that use bloom to blind people to the fact that there's no substantial gameplay or narrative behind them.

I'm 32, I've played a lot of lackluster, sub-par, poseur games in my day. That aspect of gaming will never change regardless of technology. I've got a job, kids, mortgage etc. I'm not a H.S. stoner anymore that has all day to throw away on mediocre games. That forces me to be a snob. I can't waste time on bad movies, bad books, and bad games. So I'll pass on Daikatana II, or Oblivion 2 or FOBOS 2 or Fauxllout or whatever they want to call this one. I'm one of those fans they dismissively marginalize in interview after interview anyway, I'm too small a demographic to pander to you see.

I will however take great relish in every opportunity I can to ridicule Bethesda, it's leaders, and that which they try to pawn off as RPGs.

It's cute that they still think they're doing a Fallout game, but excuse me for not joining in on the charade. Seriously, it's like the Emperor's New Clothes, they are selling something that's not what it is, to people who don't know what it is supposed to be, and everyone's head's are so far up each other's asses they are blind.

I'll pass on Fallout 3. You can probably count me out for 4 and 5 or any other Bethesda "are pee gee" Fallout or otherwise as long as Todd is at the helm.

edit:

We give Fallout so much credit because it did something mildly different and excelled at it. You can't expect every game to be the Jesus of innovation.

Fallout wasn't innovative or progressive, it was a throwback to the pen and paper RPGs and the fundamental mechanics of those games. It's back-to-basics approach, it's adherence to PnP principles and it's intended basis in GURPS. It's more of a return to form than the other RPGs of that time or just about any other.

 

[shorrtybearr]

Cimmerian Nights, hehe Fair enough

 

[Makagulfazel]

We give Fallout so much credit because it did something mildly different and excelled at it. You can't expect every game to be the Jesus of innovation.

Almost every other game can go shove a egg-roll up it's underside. Sadly, with Bethesda behind the wheel, it looks like F3 can go ahead and order some egg rolls, too.

They'd probably prefer a Fatman shoved up in there.

 

[Phil the Nuka-Cola Dude]

Howard has an impressive track record of pushing gaming into territory that few other designers would dare to go. Where most designers tend to think in terms of simplicity and economy, Howard's games have been defined by a staggering sense of scale and immersion that few others can match.

It's like Bizarro world.

I lol'd, +1 internets.

We give Fallout so much credit because it did something mildly different and excelled at it. You can't expect every game to be the Jesus of innovation.

We give Fallout credit because it is an excellent game, not because it "excelled at doing something mildly different". Fallout has withstood the test of time, and is just as playable as ever; 11 years after release.

Do you think people are going to be playing The Elder Scrolls V: Fallout 11 years from now? Fuck no.

 

[4too]

It Takes One To Know One

It Takes One To Know One



Cimmerian Nights:

... But let's look at Todd's milieu setting-wise - the epic, high fantasy, knights on white horses, princesses in high towers, tired, cliched, derivative, drama-queen, copycat bullshit. ...

shorrtybearr:

True...but it sells and thats what the industry is all about. ...

@ C Nights

This IGN writer is not from the tradition of 'press' journalism. Never was a 'golden age' except in the mind's eye. He's a disciple of advertisement copy writers.

This scribbler is not a friend of the consumer. This copy is a tainted information conduit.

Michael Thomsen:

... Howard has an impressive track record of pushing gaming into territory that few other designers would dare to go. Where most designers tend to think in terms of simplicity and economy, Howard's games have been defined by a staggering sense of scale and immersion that few others can match. ...

This shameless pandering is *epic* in it's own small pond.
Surprised - didn't need a loyalty oath to enter the web site.
This drips of 'nex gen' ideology yet is timeless in it's deification ladder onto the nex' big band wagon.
It is the branding of Bethesda via the rock star anointing of a sales generating game producer.
It is third party action committee sales élan and is what is industry standard when the game in the box is not enough to justify buying the box.

Presidents, premature preemptive invasions, and permanent Republican / Democrat majorities are ^sold^ this way too.

People lie, people die, nothing new here move on to the nex' side show - nex' power point slide show.

Epic this or epic that,
copy this or copy that,
this IGN scribbler has an audience to sell to just like Bethesda,
and the same situational ethics to guide him .

Takes a thief to catch a thief ... teh evil genius scribbler acknowledges the entertainment producer 'mastermind',
{no Bond or Austin Powers to trigger the holistic scheme divulging - not at the last reality reel - yet}

The whole image building show never stops.

Awaiting the drum beat chorus ... OBLIvion With GuNS --- OBLIvion With GuNS!

Well, shorter observation ... IGN article is 100% warm and fuzzy. This -hot seat- more illusion weaving about an illusionist spinning ...
but for all those with out sales among your sins, let me take you all back to this --->
reality based cliche -->
... takes one to know one.



////////////////

Recent NMA news post: Prima will do a hint book for FO3.
If they are as slickly written as this over the top Todd Howard adulation perhaps that's the way to sample Bioshock, Mass Effect, and alas FO3,
if one can be at Half Price Books when they are dumped onto the remainder dust heap.
If not, the list retail price for this collectable is a third of the basic box ?


Since in this Nex Gen Era ideology is the driving motivation, the one true immersion, may have to consider AOD box copy as voting with my U.S of Haliburton Dollars.





4too

 

[Eyenixon]

We give Fallout so much credit because it did something mildly different and excelled at it. You can't expect every game to be the Jesus of innovation.

Fallout wasn't innovative or progressive, it was a throwback to the pen and paper RPGs and the fundamental mechanics of those games. It's back-to-basics approach, it's adherence to PnP principles and it's intended basis in GURPS. It's more of a return to form than the other RPGs of that time or just about any other.

The setting. The setting. And it excelled with that, Jesus woofer.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Re: It Takes One To Know One

The setting only differentiated it from other games superficially (a setting without many exclusive PA elements that hadn't already been seen in Mad Max, A Boy and His Dog, Canticle for Leibowitz et al).
Anyway, if Fallout's setting is so intrinsically fascinating, someone would have to explain FOBOS to me again.

This scribbler is not a friend of the consumer. This copy is a tainted information conduit.
...
It is third party action committee sales élan and is what is industry standard when the game in the box is not enough to justify buying the box.
...
Epic this or epic that,
copy this or copy that,
this IGN scribbler has an audience to sell to just like Bethesda,
and the same situational ethics to guide him .

Takes a thief to catch a thief ... teh evil genius scribbler acknowledges the entertainment producer 'mastermind',
{no Bond or Austin Powers to trigger the holistic scheme divulging - not at the last reality reel - yet}

The whole image building show never stops.

Awaiting the drum beat chorus ... OBLIvion With GuNS --- OBLIvion With GuNS!

I'd like to nominate 4too as official Fallout community poet-laureate.
You really have a talent for distilling things down to their essence, and the prose is a welcome departure.

 

[Ausir]

How many retro-1950s post-apoc settings are there?

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

How many retro-1950s post-apoc settings are there?

What percentage of Fallout's setting doesn't lead back to the three sources I listed above? Sure, I'll give it credit for being the black sheep of the RPG herd, but I think it's the gameplay that was what differentiated, not the setting. Look, just because some weren't consciously enjoying the intentions of the game developers (in their efforts to recreate the PnP experience) doesn't change that. I like the FO setting, it's the icing on the cake, but without the cake (substantive gameplay) it's just empty calories (Tactics & FOBOS).

Todd and Co., have clearly confused liking the setting with liking the game and it's underlying gameplay. I beleive Fallout's universe was good because of the people working on it and not because of some intrinsic value. Replace those people wholesale with the brainpower behind Oblivion, give it the same engine, physics system, AI etc. one can reasonably extrapolate what the end result will be.

 

[Ausir]

None of the 3 sources you mentioned are retro-futuristic. Tactics and FOBOS weren't very faithful to the Fallout setting - they contained no or nearly no retro elements.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Not to put to fine a point on it, but when I look back and compare Fallout to it's RPG contemporaries, it's a better RPG than others because of the PnP RPG elements, not because of 1950's retro-futurism.