What combination of genre/setting would you prefer?

E

eff-out

First time out of the vault
Open query: All things being equal, would you be more excited about an isometric turn-based game in the sword and sorcery genre or a real time first person game in the post-nuclear genre?

I'll go first: post-nuclear.
 
What is a "isometric turn-based" game? A turn-based strategy game? A tactical shooter a la Jagged Alliance?

If, on the other hand, you mean "a pen and paper emulating RPG in the sword and sorcery genre or an FPSRPG in the post-nuclear genre", then obviously the pen and paper emulating RPG.

Heck, it's not even theoretical, I am more excited about Age of Decadence than about Fallout 3 even though I find AoD's setting completely uninteresting (if original).
 
All things being equal?

The iso game. But only because RT's been glutting the market for years and it's been YEARS since I've seen a bigger release with TB/Iso.
 
eff-out said:
Open query: All things being equal, would you be more excited about an isometric turn-based game in the sword and sorcery genre or a real time first person game in the post-nuclear genre?

I'll go first: post-nuclear.
Click to expand...

Dedfinitely the former. I'm looking forward to AoD more than to FO3 now.

Hell, I'd even prefer a Fallout-style game in the Elder Scrolls setting to an Elder Scrolls-style game in the Fallout setting.
 
Okay. That's what I suspected, I guess. I like post-nuclear roleplaying (partly because sword and sorcery have glutted the market for...ever) more than I dislike real time first person games. You guys dislike real-time first person games more than post-nuclear roleplaying. That's an equation I can get my head around.

That's cool. We just valued different things about Fallout. I think what made it hard for me to understand at first was that this site seems to be devoted to post-nuclear gaming news (in addition to just fallout news, obviously) so I assumed otherwise. For all I know, BN probably runs another site for medieval fantasy type RPGs.
 
That's cool. We just valued different things about Fallout. I think what made it hard for me to understand at first was that this site seems to be devoted to post-nuclear gaming news (in addition to just fallout news, obviously) so I assumed otherwise.
Click to expand...

Note that aside from sporadic news about other post-nuclear games, NMA also posts news about Age of Decadence, which is a Fallout-style game set in a Roman Empire-like world.
 
eff-out said:
I like post-nuclear roleplaying (partly because sword and sorcery have glutted the market for...ever) more than I dislike real time first person games. You guys dislike real-time first person games more than post-nuclear roleplaying. That's an equation I can get my head around.
Click to expand...

Sure, that's why we're here.

But if you're seriously going to try and make it look as if our opinion that Fallout 3 should hold to the core gameplay elements and the core setting of the Fallout franchise as something that comes down to "personal preference", I'm going to have to give you a strike for trolling.

Because this isn't about personal preference, and I'm sick and tired of people trying to dodge the argument by pretending it is. We're not for cutting anything out of Fallout, we're not for adopting a Fallout sequel to our personal preferences, that's for other people.

eff-out said:
I think what made it hard for me to understand at first was that this site seems to be devoted to post-nuclear gaming news (in addition to just fallout news, obviously) so I assumed otherwise.
Click to expand...

We tried running a Troika sub-fansite for a while. The PA things are generally filler news, tho', this is a Fallout site and nothing else.

eff-out said:
For all I know, BN probably runs another site for medieval fantasy type RPGs.
Click to expand...

No. I do work for GameBanshee, tho', which is a general RPG/MMORPG site.
 
It depends. Which one has RPG elements? The isometric turn based sword and sorcery could be something as simple as Battle Chess.

But, then again, the FPS post nuclear game could also be something as simple as.. Doom: Hell on Earth... with a total of 8 amazing colors!

Hmm.. reminds me of Blizzard's April Fools joke. x]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8U-7MZGieYY

Edit: BTW there is an isometric TB style RPG called Dofus. You have about 20 seconds to take your turn but it's still turn based. It's very unique among MMO's as far as I know. I find it quite addictive. There are no "choice & consequences" though. Not that you'd ever expect any MMO to have anything like that. =P Unless of course you consider being aggressed because you belong to one faction or another being an example of C&C. I don't.
 
Brother None said:
But if you're seriously going to try and make it look as if our opinion that Fallout 3 should hold to the core gameplay elements and the core setting of the Fallout franchise as something that comes down to "personal preference", I'm going to have to give you a strike for trolling.
Click to expand...

Here's why it has to come down to personal preference: otherwise, you're saying Fallout fans who look forward to Fallout 3 do so because they like the "wrong things" about Fallout. Do you see how that becomes a problem?

Maybe I don't know what counts as trolling, but I'm not saying these things to just piss you off.

PaladinHeart said:
It depends. Which one has RPG elements?
Click to expand...

All things being equal.
 
PaladinHeart said:
It depends. Which one has RPG elements? The isometric turn based sword and sorcery could be something as simple as Battle Chess.

But, then again, the FPS post nuclear game could also be something as simple as.. Doom: Hell on Earth... with a total of 8 amazing colors!

Hmm.. reminds me of Blizzard's April Fools joke. x]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8U-7MZGieYY

Edit: BTW there is an isometric TB style RPG called Dofus. You have about 20 seconds to take your turn but it's still turn based. It's very unique among MMO's as far as I know. I find it quite addictive.
Click to expand...
Indeed. It's a terrible hypothetical which is far to general for it's results to be worth anything. It's like asking whether someone would rather listen to acoustic or electric music.
 
eff-out said:
Here's why it has to come down to personal preference: otherwise, you're saying Fallout fans who look forward to Fallout 3 do so because they like the "wrong things" about Fallout. Do you see how that becomes a problem?
Click to expand...

Huh? I'm saying our argument comes down to keeping everything of the basic design philosophy of Fallout, which naturally includes both the retro-50s post-apocalyptic setting and the pen and paper emulating RPG style. It's a factual argument on franchise fidelity, it is unrelated to personal preference.

I'm not saying people who look forward to Fallout 3 are doing so for the wrong reasons, I'm just saying they're cherry-picking bits of Fallout based on personal preference, something we simply do not do.

Many of us love the more modern RPGs. I certainly love some of them, Gothic 2 is one of my favourite games of all time. But I'm not about adapting Fallout to my personal preference, Fallout is what it is regardless of how I feel about it.
 
For the record, I wasn't trying to rope anyone into something with my question, It was an honest question. As far as it being a terrible hypothetical, I think most people have a preference, if you don't have a preference I don't expect an answer.

I'll narrow it down though, excluding only "pen and paper emulating" because that's a can of worms I can't get my head around:

The two games are ABSOLUTELY the same in amount and quality of choice, rpg elements, writing/dialogue/story, etc. etc. The only differences are that one is a Sword and Sorcery themed Isometric Turn-based game and one is a Post-apocalyptic themed real-time first-person game.

I would choose the post-apocalyptic game because aside from having my own proclivities lean that way, I'm also kind of struck by the dearth of games in that genre.

This is not meant to resolve any questions or disputes on the quality/lacktherof of Fallout 3, only to establish for my own edification where the majority's thematic druthers skew.
 
eff-out said:
I would choose the post-apocalyptic game because aside from having my own proclivities lean that way, I'm also kind of struck by the dearth of games in that genre.
Click to expand...

What? There are currently about half a dozen post-apocalyptic games in development. Zero pen and paper emulating ones. Where's the dearth, exactly?

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. (Q2 2007) (PC)
Hellgate: London (Q4 2007) (PC)
S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Clear Sky (2008) (PC)
Fallout 3 (Fall 2008) (PC, XBox 360, PS3)
Rage (when it's done) (PC, XBox 360, PS3, Mac)
Borderlands (Q4 2008) (PC, XBox 360, PS3)
Edge of Twilight (TBA) (PC, Xbox)
Wasteland 2 (TBA) (TBA)

eff-out said:
This is not meant to resolve any questions or disputes on the quality/lacktherof of Fallout 3, only to establish for my own edification where the majority's thematic druthers skew.
Click to expand...

Ok, but then we're majorly off-topic, so I'm going to split. And really, for all clarity, this question has buck-all to do with our attitude towards Fallout.
 
But if they know it's a picture of Manuel Noriega then they might not like it anymore. (I don't know who he is. Just saying.. =P)
 
The genre / setting is not so important as long as the game delivers. But I advise staying away from the generic fantasy genre (orc-elf-dwarf mix) unless it's LotR. It would be best to do something original for the change.
 
a decent postapocalyptic momorpuger. since i find all the single playing quite uninspired, id totally switch to multiplayer; and since i find sp rpgs get a bit tedious after a while, id like the new ideas and competition in a large online community.

hmm yeah, that would make my e-peen harder. a PA momorpuger with gripping pve story, good and balanced pvp and outstanding service. lulz.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top