Todd Howard on X-Play, again

[Brother None]

Todd Howard's appearance on X-Play is available on the G4 website - clocking in at about 5 minutes, talking to the producer about the "Action RPG", which features "open-world gameplay, numerous endings and - most importantly - gruesome apocalyptic violence".

They discuss flaws from Oblivion and taking that knowledge into Fallout 3, to which Todd answers that it's mostly about learning to use the hardware. They (again) discuss combining RPG gameplay with first-person shooting.<blockquote>Over the last year we've really nerfed back how bad your character aims, as it was frustrating for people, it is more how much damage you do. But then your arms can get crippled so you aim worse.</blockquote>They continue to discuss VATS, how SPECIAL doesn't have classes, fixing the level scaling (apparently you "visually see the barriers, particularly down-town with the super mutants"), violence done well.

Link: Face Time: Fallout 3's Todd Howard.

Spotted on BethBlog.

 

[Phil the Nuka-Cola Dude]

...someone who plays a lot of these games is gonna pick it up and they expect it to perform like a first person shooter

Are you shitting me?

That really says a lot about their target audience.

*edit*

... And these kind of games, particularly our games; are like 100 hours long. You're gonna kill thousands and thousands of things, and thats really where; if you can make that moment entertaining; over and over and over again, everything else is kinda gravy in the game

Really really REALLY says a lot about their target audience.

 

[Seymour the spore plant]

Over the last year we've really nerfed back how bad your character aims

One small step for the Toddler, one giant leap for pure-FPS Failout.

as it was frustrating for people

Boo-fucking-hoo. You invited that issue by turning to FP, Todd, might as well show some balls and actually challenge your audience for once in your life - and theirs, I would imagine. First that "less than people think" line about choice and consequences, now this? It's getting real hard to see this as a RPG by any standards.

it is more how much damage you do

Like, say... Oblivion? Only, with guns?

 

[Jiggly McNerdington]

That would be more along the lines of Mass Effect. Which if Fallout 3 ended up like Mass Effect that wouldn't be entirely terrible. Not as great of an RPG, but a pretty enjoyable shooter. I'd prefer it to be heavier on the RPG, but I could live with it.

Then again, it'd be competing with Stalker: Clear Sky, which sounds pretty awesome if it ends up how they're saying.

 

[Eyenixon]

I'm pretty sure Clear Sky will crush FO3 in Europe, even if it is PC only.

 

[Forhekset]

fixing the level scaling (apparently you "visually see the barriers, particularly down-town with the super mutants")

...the hell?

 

[Brother None]

That would be more along the lines of Mass Effect. Which if Fallout 3 ended up like Mass Effect that wouldn't be entirely terrible. Not as great of an RPG, but a pretty enjoyable shooter. I'd prefer it to be heavier on the RPG, but I could live with it.

I've said before that VATS looked much like ME combat to me. I have played neither game, so it's just a visual impression.

I hear ME is more of an action RPG with a lot of cinematic effects than much of an RPG, tho'. I s'pose Fallout 3 could be heading in much the same direction, replacing cinematic effects with open-world wandering.

I'm pretty sure Clear Sky will crush FO3 in Europe, even if it is PC only.

Uh...no.

fixing the level scaling (apparently you "visually see the barriers, particularly down-town with the super mutants")

...the hell?

I think he means there are recognizable points where you can see you're changing from one area to another; maybe there's a physical barrier (stacked cars? Oh wait no, they explode), or maybe on area looks more desolate than the next.

 

[Eyenixon]

I'm pretty sure Clear Sky will crush FO3 in Europe, even if it is PC only.

Stalker sold more than 1.5 million copies. More than 900,000 of them were in the CIS alone, the rest of the hundred thousands were in the outside world.

I say Clear Sky has a pretty good shot of at least trumping Fallout 3 a little bit.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

[<blockquote>Over the last year we've really nerfed back how bad your character aims, as it was frustrating for people, it is more how much damage you do.</blockquote>

Bring out the training wheels!

God forbid that you should actually allow the player the challenge of getting their ass kicked once in a while in a game genre that's supposed to utilize character skill.

 

[Brother None]

Bring out the training wheels!

God forbid that you should actually allow the player the challenge of getting their ass kicked once in a while in a game genre that's supposed to utilize character skill.

I wish that was what bothers me the most.

Y'see, I can get pretty frustrated to in real-time RPGs in which I can't hit the enemy despite clearly swinging my sword straight to him. It looks - and it is - really stupid.

But that's because we have two factors here that just have problems working with each other. One is intuitive and convincing first-person real-time combat, the other is the pen-and-paper-inherited influence of character skill.

These two can be made to work with each other to some extent, but the basis of the problem begins with prioritizing. You can never make them work together perfectly, so then the question becomes which one you sacrifice for the other.

For RPG designers of the stamp we like it's no contest - it is more important to have a proper system set up where character skill is the basic determinant.

For Bethesda it's also no contest - first-person real-time "immersive" combat comes first. No matter what. If character skill gets in the way, we just nerf its influence.

Good show, I guess.

Good show.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

For Bethesda it's also no contest - first-person real-time "immersive" combat comes first. No matter what. If character skill gets in the way, we just nerf its influence.

No doubt. Kind of makes all the lip service to stats, skills and this being an RPG just that - lip service.

The sad part is, they probably have their target market pegged. Not a discriminating group that even wants the more intermediate or advanced RPG elements, I don't even think they want to be bothered by the illusion of it.

Too much of a learning curve you see!
Not too worry, Uncle Todd is here to flatten out that bell curve, so that even the marginally inaccessible can be made mediocre and lackluster to the enjoyment of the lowest common denominator.

That's his milieu.

Nerf on Todd!

 

[Stag]

I think it's kind of a good sign for Bethesda that I hated that G4 douchefag more than Todd Howard. God, is that guy irritating. Although, to Torr's credit, that douche nozzle is the single more irritating person to ever walked the face of the Earth. Adam whatsisface, I hate you. I hate you.

Anyway, about the game.

It sounds fun. Having played Mass Effect, my feelings are a bit more relaxed towards action rpgs. However, having also recently played Oblivion, I have doubt in Beth's ability to do a good "real world" game. Oblivion's npcs sucked so much shit.
(Also, haha, Todd sounds like a nerd.)
(Also, fuck, Todd likes game controllers too much.)

 

[Snackpack]

I wish that was what bothers me the most.

Y'see, I can get pretty frustrated to in real-time RPGs in which I can't hit the enemy despite clearly swinging my sword straight to him. It looks - and it is - really stupid.

But that's because we have two factors here that just have problems working with each other. One is intuitive and convincing first-person real-time combat, the other is the pen-and-paper-inherited influence of character skill.

These two can be made to work with each other to some extent, but the basis of the problem begins with prioritizing. You can never make them work together perfectly, so then the question becomes which one you sacrifice for the other.

I was thinking about this myself the other day. I think a working solution would be to simply make the attack roll when the attack button is clicked, and then if it misses, animate a miss. For this to work I guess there would have to be some sort of targeting system so the game knew what you were attacking as soon as you clicked.
It may be a nightmare for animators but I think it would allow for convincing looking FP combat with pure P&P mechanics.

This however only works for melee combat. The only thing I can think of for ranged is something similar to Deus Ex's tightening reticule based on skill.

I gotta say, the guy in the background of the pic in your sig has a similar expression on his face as I imagine I had when I frist saw it. "What the fuck is that thing!? and what is it trying to do to that lady!??"

And on topic:

Every new piece of Fallout 3 news seems to make things worse. And the way Howard said "people who play these games..." in the interview leaves me wondering if he is now or ever was a gamer himself. I'm embarrassed that I was once cautiously optimistic when I heard the news that Bethesda was resurrecting Fallout.

 

[Jiggly McNerdington]

I hear ME is more of an action RPG with a lot of cinematic effects than much of an RPG, tho'.

That's fairly accurate. The whole "Choices and consequences" line doesn't play out a whole lot in Mass Effect, but if you enjoy the combat/enjoy shooters, the options available to you are pretty enjoyable. And the "Bad space cop" or "Good space cop" dialog options work much better than the story in most shooters.

Mass Effect kind of left me confused after I played it. If I sat and thought about it, most of the RPG parts were relatively weak. Skill improvement was fairly minor, dialog was fun but mostly meaningless, and the NPCs were pretty generic and dull. But even with all that, I had a lot of fun. I'd hope for more from Fallout 3, but it wouldn't be a complete waste for me if it ended up that way.

I was thinking about this myself the other day. I think a working solution would be to simply make the attack roll when the attack button is clicked, and then if it misses, animate a miss. For this to work I guess there would have to be some sort of targeting system so the game knew what you were attacking as soon as you clicked.
It may be a nightmare for animators but I think it would allow for convincing looking FP combat with pure P&P mechanics.

That's kind of what Bioware did in Neverwinter Nights 1, which didn't work half bad. There were a variety of parry/block/dodge animations that would play during combat, and which usually (Though not always) synch with the attack and go together well.

Unfortunately Obsidian kind of gave up on that in NWN2. It's still there in sort of a half-assed form, but it doesn't work nearly as well. Just one of many little things in NWN2 that irritate the piss out of me compared to NWN1. I have a harder time playing the damn thing even though it has a better campaign.

 

[Dracon M'Alkir]

... "You have your seven SPECIALs.."

Let's correct him so he doesn't get it wrong in another interview.

Strength
Perception
Endurance
Charisma
Intelligence
Agility
Luck

 

[Lingwei]

Over the last year we've really nerfed back how bad your character aims, as it was frustrating for people, it is more how much damage you do. But then your arms can get crippled so you aim worse.

The reason why Oblivion's combat fell so far into the pure action camp and had little of the RPG influences was due to the enchanting system they had. Since you always hit it meant that so long as you had a weapon with an enchantment on it you were capable of doing lots of damage even if you had a low skill in that weapon. It meant that if you had a sword skill of 100 but an unenchanted sword that did 15 points normally you would do less damage than if you had an axe skill of 10 but had a 20 point fire enchantment on the axe.

Since Fallout 3 won't have enchanting this problem shouldn't be there.

 

[Pope Viper]

... "You have your seven SPECIALs.."

Let's correct him so he doesn't get it wrong in another interview.

Strength
Perception
Endurance
Charisma
Intelligence
Agility
Luck

Didn't you love how he had to pause and think about it for a second.

Especially (no pun) considering how they've hyped the fact that they've remained true to the concept of it.


Putz.

 

[Moving Target]

[Since Fallout 3 won't have enchanting this problem shouldn't be there.

Oh I'm not so sure. Were you here when the concept art was released? The blurb with one of the artists went into a bit of detail about scrounging for stuff to fix equipment. And there was the infamous 'flaming sword.' It seemed like there would be upgrades... sort of similar to enchantments, really.

Of course there's no official word- and probably won't be any official word before the game's released, based on how tight-lipped Bethsoft is- but I'd put money on something like enchantment showing up in FO3. 'Course, it won't be CALLED enchantment. Probably upgrades, or 'super-extra-great-ultra-upgrade-o-tron.'

 

[Phil the Nuka-Cola Dude]

Oh I'm not so sure. Were you here when the concept art was released? The blurb with one of the artists went into a bit of detail about scrounging for stuff to fix equipment. And there was the infamous 'flaming sword.' It seemed like there would be upgrades... sort of similar to enchantments, really.

Of course there's no official word- and probably won't be any official word before the game's released, based on how tight-lipped Bethsoft is- but I'd put money on something like enchantment showing up in FO3. 'Course, it won't be CALLED enchantment. Probably upgrades, or 'super-extra-great-ultra-upgrade-o-tron.'

You could upgrade your weapons/armor in Fo2.

I wouldn't put it past beth to include some cheesy elder scrolls references in the form of random encounters though.

 

[Bad_Karma]

I wouldn't put it past beth to include some cheesy elder scrolls references in the form of random encounters though.

A Mudcrab Encounter 100% or some strange looking NPC's talkin about them..
But really, i think such a thing would be hillarious...