Videogamer preview

Brother None

Brother None

This ghoul has seen it all
Orderite
Yet another preview. Nothing new, really, though here's a reviewer who's honest about not knowing what the heck Fallout is.<blockquote>It'll take something pretty special to follow The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. Bethesda Softworks' must-own next-gen RPG ushered in the new generation of consoles spectacularly well, offering hundreds of hours of gameplay in a world impossible to imagine only a few years ago. Its success, though, must have put some pressure on the developer. With a legion of new fans and a hardcore army of long-time followers, only something of truly epic proportions could follow Oblivion. It's a good job Bethesda had Fallout 3 up its sleeve then.

For Fallout 3 to have the success of Oblivion it's going to have to be more than a game for hardcore fans. Vault 101 and Pip boy mean nothing to most people, and they didn't to me either. This didn't stop the game, demoed by Bethesda's Peter Hines, looking extremely promising and very different to the fantasy setting of Oblivion.
(...)
On to the dangers you'll face then. During our demo these came in the form of mutants and Ghouls. Super mutants are your biggest foe in the game, with super mutant strongholds being set up across the wasteland. You'll also face Ghouls (humans exposed to extreme amounts of radiation), with one particular variant being so full of radiation that it glows. How easily you spot these enemies depends on your perception stat, with high level characters seeing enemies on their radar much sooner than beginners.
(...)
Despite the lengthy demo, it still seems as if we've only seen a fraction of what the final game will have to offer. Bethesda is currently targeting an autumn 2008 release on Xbox 360, PS3 and PC, although it seems as though it won't ship until everyone is completely happy with it. There's no denying its potential to be a grittier, more action heavy RPG than Oblivion, but until we get some extensive hands-on time, it's hard to say if it'll be just as epic.</blockquote>Fallout 3 first look on videogamer.com.
 
Despite the (always sad) usage of the word "epic", I'm glad to see that some people can keep their fandom of a developer toned down enough to realise a 1-hour showing isn't enough to judge how good or bad a game is going to be. At least not enough to go "game of the year", like vg247 did.

Though this is kind of weird:
How easily you spot these enemies depends on your perception stat, with high level characters seeing enemies on their radar much sooner than beginners.
Click to expand...

Something is confusing here. If it's a stat, it shouldn't matter whether you're a beginner or high level, since it won't change much (maybe +1 from a bobble head). So huh?
 
He was referring to high level perception in comparison to low level perception. I just think it was a terrible use of words.
 
I was caught by the usage of the word "radar"...


It seems the motion scanner will be making a cameo in this game, if this preview info isn't just some journalistic fabrication.

on a side note tho:

the perception stat shouldn't affect how a mechanical scanner works, and I second your HUH?

I would expect the perception stat to only affect combat rolls and chance to hit in VATS (I know there aren't dice anymore but you know what I mean), since I can see perfectly well, and the game is designed as a FPS.

Unless there's some sort of fog of war or a distance smearing effect on the visuals, the perception stat doesn't really apply to how soon enemies are visible to the player in the light of day.

In fact, it would seem that the player character's ability to see them doesn't really matter, since the player's skill is aiming the gun/weapon. (unless of course you choose to use VATS)

The only realtime and meaningful effect I can think of for perception is to limit the light radius around the player character at night so that the player can't see all the enemies lurking in the shadows before the player character should be able to.

I hope that made sense. :)
 
Maybe they'll make the draw distance stat-dependant for a more immersive experience :)

Or maybe this so-called "radar" won't be the classic motion sensor, but simply a gameplay feature without any story backdrop (think the automap in GTA) that is more or less accurate based on the player's Perception.
 
I question the use of the word "radar" as well. Who knows, maybe you don't hear your radar beep if your PE is not high. It really doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense, but I'm not going to get all up in arms about it because clearly the guy doesn't know much.
 
whirlingdervish said:
I was caught by the usage of the word "radar"...


It seems the motion scanner will be making a cameo in this game, if this preview info isn't just some journalistic fabrication.
Click to expand...

I don't think he's talking about that. I think he's talking about this:

In the main screen, the lower-left-hand corner shows the PC's hit points and a compass which appears to show the location of friendly nearby NPCs in green and of hostile nearby NPCs in red.

We spotted that one in the demo. It appeared to be able to see through walls. It, and detecting via VATS, is determined by perception.
 
I've decided that so long as Fallout 3 isn't as mind-numbingly boring as Oblivion, I'm going to give it a fair shot, fucked-up combat system and all.

I gave Oblivion another try a few days ago and played for a couple of hours. I came to the same conclusion that I did the first time I tried playing it: the game's biggest problem is that it is simply boring. I like the fantasy genre quite a bit, but Oblivion is sleep-inducing. Nothing about the game makes me want to continue playing it after creating my character.

I only hope Fallout 3 isn't the same. I don't possibly see how it can be, given the universe Bethesda was given to work with...but you never know.
 
"grittier, more action heavy RPG than Oblivion"

So guns are more action heavy than sword+magic??

How can an RPG be more action heavy than Oblivion, and still be called an RPG?
I thought the emphasis was on getting this product better in dialogues, not in action :roll:
 
syllogz said:
How can an RPG be more action heavy than Oblivion, and still be called an RPG?
Click to expand...

Fallout was much more action-heavy than Oblivion, at least the way I played them. For example: in Fallout, I never ran away from a fight.

I thought the emphasis was on getting this product better in dialogues, not in action :roll:
Click to expand...

Oh, I think I see the problem here. The author only saw the same combat-heavy preview clip everyone else has (apparently) been shown.


Unfortunatley, I don't forsee them showing dialogue-based character interaction in any great detail before release, but maybe they'll surprise everyone at E3.
 
I don't understand how they will have mutants all over the capital wasteland who are all on the same side. The only way this would make sense is if there is a new "master," and that would just be really piss poor writing.

Take this with a grain of salt because I'm not 100% but I believe that all of the mutants in Fallout 1 were telepathically influenced by the master. Even considering this, there were only mutants in a few key places. Mutants in Necropolis (I forget why), mutants defending the military base (where the vats were?), and mutants defending the master himself. And with all that set up there were still only what, a few hundred of them? Furthermore once the link with the master was broken the mutants gained free will, and in Fallout 2 they no longer hated humans, or even collaborated.

Yet somehow in Fallout 3 there are a bunch of camps of mutants, probably populating a bunch of "dungeons." So what, a new master fell in a separate vat of FEV, was deranged enough to be mutated into having the same goals, found new people and computers to merge with, gained telepathy, stole new people out of vats to make more mutants...

That is one serious stretch, or a complete rip off of the original plot. It makes sense to carry on from F1 but part of the point of F1 was that the mutants themselves were a tool of the master, not that they were an independent faction that wanted to kill humans for no reason.

The alternative I suppose would be that a dude fell into a separate vat of FEV, turned into a mutant, and decided to make more people into mutants. But I don't understand how he would influence those mutants to hate humans. Following the canon those mutants would simply have their own goals like the mutants in Broken Hills. Yet somehow they have reformed into a new army that is out for human blood.

This is obviously all conjecture since they haven't released details of the plot. In addition I suppose it's unfair to expect Bethesda to be creating a deeper plot than, "those mutants are evil lets git em!" But it is essential to what Fallout means that at the very least the characters have real motives.
 
I've been pretty open to a new fallout 3 so far but the Perception quote has me worried. If they f*** with S.P.E.C.I.A.L. it's going to get bloody.
 
Bodybag said:
Fallout was much more action-heavy than Oblivion, at least the way I played them. For example: in Fallout, I never ran away from a fight.
Click to expand...

bsmeteroe7.gif
 
Immersion! FUN! Super Mutants, Glowing ghouls that GLOOO (yey bioilluminescence) Immersion.

Immersion means not having to pause for an extended dialogue when all you want to do is kill the whole town of postapocalyptic retards( who lhave no future anyhow cos you know, NO KIDS)
Immersion is using a small nuclear warhead to kill a big mutant in visible range away from you!!! thats true immersion !! you nuke someone and are so immersed that you nuke yourself!!!
Immersion is finding out that the fallout universe has changed since the last fallout game and you no longer have to worry with confuzing conversation!
Immersion is first person perspective! exploding cars, exploding mutants, exploding dogs!!! exploding trees! expoding birds!! exploding stones!!!! and thats actually IMMERISON and FUN!( i know these arent all confirmed but... surely exploading stones are fun!!!).

MAybe the new fallout will be about the revival of the eugenics movement of america: eliminate all pests to society like ghouls and supermutants! The only reason your father leaves is because he is the only man that realises how wrong this is, ironically on your journey to find him you anihilite all that he stands to defend, and in the end kill your father!!
im guessing the ending options for a ghoul town will be:
-killing everybody with weapons
-nuking the town
-blaming one ghoul that he stole anothers gold watch after taking it yourself!!!! and start a ghoul civil war... (ghoul town population : before 2 : 0 after)
- forcing ghouls into slavery
- forcing ghouls to EXPLODE ( fun )
- telling them that "town A" would welcome their presence, but you really know that they are waiting for them with machineguns :D YEY!
- make the ghouls realise they are verry bad and make them commit suicide!

Who am i kidding the game will not have so many varied choicec.
 
Bodybag said:
Fallout was much more action-heavy than Oblivion, at least the way I played them. For example: in Fallout, I never ran away from a fight.
Click to expand...

I can get through Deus Ex with less fights than Fallout, does that mean Fallout is more action heavy than Deus Ex?

Duh no.

Bodybag said:
Oh, I think I see the problem here. The author only saw the same combat-heavy preview clip everyone else has (apparently) been shown.

Unfortunatley, I don't forsee them showing dialogue-based character interaction in any great detail before release, but maybe they'll surprise everyone at E3.
Click to expand...

Guh whatnow? The second preview spends almost half its time on the long character creation session, it's not action-heavy at all, not compared to the first preview demo.

The first preview demo also had plenty of dialogue, it's more that the previewers don't seem to care, and are considering this an FPS/RPG - in that order.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top