What did Bethesda actually do better than Black Isle?

[Sander]

gothics(2) npcs were all scripted. and as soon as you take the script away, the I in AI crumbles to dust. for all its faults, radiant ai is a step forward. beth, for some reason, just doesn't want it to do more than walk around awhile and then sit on a chair for a few hours. in my game, the ai only went roque _once_(two imperial archers pumping each other full of arrows in the woods).

Actually, this isn't a step forward. The idea of giving NPCs goals and means to achieve them isn't exactly new or exciting. It's a very simple form of AI, and apparently a very broken one at that.
The fact that Gothic got much better results with Scripted AI shows what they did wrong.

Also, the line between a scripted AI and Radiant AI is nearly invisible. The only thing that's different between the two is the means of coding the script.

 

[marko2te]

gothics(2) npcs were all scripted. and as soon as you take the script away, the I in AI crumbles to dust. for all its faults, radiant ai is a step forward. beth, for some reason, just doesn't want it to do more than walk around awhile and then sit on a chair for a few hours. in my game, the ai only went roque _once_(two imperial archers pumping each other full of arrows in the woods).

Actually, this isn't a step forward. The idea of giving NPCs goals and means to achieve them isn't exactly new or exciting. It's a very simple form of AI, and apparently a very broken one at that.
The fact that Gothic got much better results with Scripted AI shows what they did wrong.

Also, the line between a scripted AI and Radiant AI is nearly invisible. The only thing that's different between the two is the means of coding the script.

Worlds of Gothic look actually alive and far better then either Morrowind, Oblivion or F3

 

[bhlaab]

Also, the line between a scripted AI and Radiant AI is nearly invisible. The only thing that's different between the two is the means of coding the script.

I disagree. Scripting rarely falls apart completely.

Radiant AI is such a dumb idea. Let's make every part of the game heavily designed except for the NPC AI which will move about and complete tasks completely dynamically. I can't forsee how the two could ever contradict one another!

 

[sentorio]

But there is a big missing part in the inventory. There is no detailed information about guns, or no proper information about armours.

It doesn't tell me if the gun has a good range, or what's the damage res. of an armour. Also no detailed background about the guns either.

 

[bhlaab]

But there is a big missing part in the inventory. There is no detailed information about guns, or no proper information about armours.

It doesn't tell me if the gun has a good range, or what's the damage res. of an armour. Also no detailed background about the guns either.

It does tell you the DR of armor

 

[Ausdoerrt]

I think combining skills was a good idea, especially as the level cap is 20. Another thing is that in Fallout 3 you actually have to invest skillpoints in skills such as sneaking/stealing, explosives and lockpick. I already have hard time enhancing my combat skills. In the original Fallouts you never actually had to spend any points in any of these skills. Sure a higher lockpick skill spared you some time and trouble, but that was it. Also, how many times did you actually use throwing? Be serious. What about doctor, aside from healing that crippled cow in Modoc?

If you think that Sneak and lockpick were useless in FO1+2 then you never tried to make them useful. A character with Sneak+Lockpick+melee or small guns can rape any major base in the games better than a str-oriented character. Not to mention some very big stashes only available through lockpick.

What does lockpick in FO3 do for you? Nothing really, EVERY important door has a key to it somewhere, and most of the time its a little extra minor loot anyway.

Throwing was kind of useless in FO1 until endgame, but i can really see myself using a throwing-oriented chara in FO2

 

[Lucifer Sam]

Actually, this isn't a step forward. The idea of giving NPCs goals and means to achieve them isn't exactly new or exciting. It's a very simple form of AI, and apparently a very broken one at that.

like i said. in my game the AI went completely bonkers only once. but from things i read in the forum i can understand that some people don't really see it with the same eyes i am when a whole town starts killing each other or npc's walk against/stare at the wall for minutes. but at least the do somethings out of the ordinary while gothic has the same old song every playtrough.

Also, the line between a scripted AI and Radiant AI is nearly invisible. The only thing that's different between the two is the means of coding the script.

i'd like to argue against it, but beth has shown to be quite incooperative in providing me with any arguments besides hype fabricating trailers.

well...they... they flank you and use grenades to smoke you out of cover!

@marko: on the outside, maybe. but as soon as you dig a little deeper gothic was your 0815 fantasy world with evil wizards/demons and holy paladins. the first two games had a nice flair to it nut after a while i got really sick of hearing "bleib stehn du lump!" and other "gritty" comments of the characters and the repetive chat from khorinis inhabitants. it came alive on screen, but stayed stonecold in my heart and head.

 

[Touquet]

Perhaps it's already been said but,
Beth do some kind of a good Fallout shooter with what they already have.
Some of the spirit is there I must admit but I'm still "wishing" more of the game.
For the AI, I have some bug like those in Oblivion, critter are not moving... Target practice! But they add an AI.

 

[MisterBibs]

Let's see...

* Like the OP, merging First Aid and Doctor. I've always felt that FA and Doctor as seperate skills would be fine in a tabletop RPG (where the DM can specifically define a specific injury and a specific way of healing it, which would need a specific skill), in computer RPGs, it's all about getting your HP higher.

* Much more immersive.

* Each city / major ruin has a drastically higher 'personality' than F1 and F2's did. I suppose a lot of this is about graphics, though.

* Bethesda made the Deathclaws actually scary. F1 and F2? Plasma rifle to the eyes, they never get in range. F3? In my experience, they see you before you see them, they run really fast, hit really hard, and have a tendency to kill Dogmeat very quickly. (In other words, one must reloard.)

There's more, but I was just reading the Fallout wiki on something and I wanna check it out, heh.

 

[sentorio]

But there is a big missing part in the inventory. There is no detailed information about guns, or no proper information about armours.

It doesn't tell me if the gun has a good range, or what's the damage res. of an armour. Also no detailed background about the guns either.

It does tell you the DR of armor

Sorry, my bad. I thought DR was conditions sort of information, now I figured out it's related with the condition but does not imply the current condition which make sense (just like in guns). Still missing range and descriptions though...

 

[Erny]

Fallout 3's inventory management may be an improvement on the original games, but it still looks like arse. Being a bare improvement over ten years isn't anything to write home about.

The sad thing is, there is not much else

And I fully agree that the overall interface stuffed into a small PIPboy window under several layers is horrible. Screams 'made for console'. Where is a hotkey for maps?

And I miss the item pictures and descriptions too

 

[Slaughter Manslaught]

While the inventory might be somewhat an improvement, the character sheet is horrible.

I agree. Seeing the character sheet in ONE WINDOW is not a bad idea. In fact, it's pretty good.

 

[popej]

The potential is there, I mean there is no denying the fact that Beth's engine could be used to make a fantastic Fallout game. They just managed to forget about the depth, humour and human element that characterised Fo3's predeccessors.

Some guy on the Bethesda forums put it perfectly....

Fallout 3 is like an offline MMORPG, it seems like the goal is not to enjoy the storyline, atmosphere and immersion. Instead the goal is to complete side quests in order to get a virtual house, fill it with virtual furniture, marry a virtual wife and have a virtual dog follow you about.

Those weren't his exact words but I think he hit the nail on the head. A vast open sandbox world is great but you can't sacrifice depth and character to have it. Theres very little direction in Fallout 3, the main quest is just kinda, "meh, so what?" It's just like one of the many other fedex/kill monster quests that grace the game.

While there should be an option to try and progress through the main quest early in the game, it shouldn't actually be easy or even possible until you've gained the experience and gone around doing all the other things in the game world. This way its channeling you towards a higher purpose. Instead they've simpily made the same mistake that they made with Oblivion all over again and we're left with a universe with no character as a consequence.

Of course as far as Bethesda are concerned it wasn't a mistake because they'll be making millions... I sometimes think that their main source of inspiration for Oblivion and Fallout 3 weren't the TES games & Fallout 1 & 2 respectively, I think that their main source of inspiration was the f***ing Sims!

 

[madmaligor]

The potential is there, I mean there is no denying the fact that Beth's engine could be used to make a fantastic Fallout game. They just managed to forget about the depth, humour and human element that characterised Fo3's predeccessors.

Some guy on the Bethesda forums put it perfectly....

Fallout 3 is like an offline MMORPG, it seems like the goal is not to enjoy the storyline, atmosphere and immersion. Instead the goal is to complete side quests in order to get a virtual house, fill it with virtual furniture, marry a virtual wife and have a virtual dog follow you about.

Those weren't his exact words but I think he hit the nail on the head. A vast open sandbox world is great but you can't sacrifice depth and character to have it. Theres very little direction in Fallout 3, the main quest is just kinda, "meh, so what?" It's just like one of the many other fedex/kill monster quests that grace the game.

While there should be an option to try and progress through the main quest early in the game, it shouldn't actually be easy or even possible until you've gained the experience and gone around doing all the other things in the game world. This way its channeling you towards a higher purpose. Instead they've simpily made the same mistake that they made with Oblivion all over again and we're left with a universe with no character as a consequence.

Of course as far as Bethesda are concerned it wasn't a mistake because they'll be making millions... I sometimes think that their main source of inspiration for Oblivion and Fallout 3 weren't the TES games & Fallout 1 & 2 respectively, I think that their main source of inspiration was the f***ing Sims!

Heres to hoping that they listen and dig a lot deeper in that respect. /cheer

Though in a weird way I actually am having a bit of fun decorating my shack....the Z key is your friend! But your right, its a lot closer to the Sims than is comfortable.

On a side note - Another thing they did very well is traps. I actually cuss out loud "Oh Fu#%" when I hear that beep beep from a hidden mine in the grass, or the "ting" of the trip wire I didn't pay attention to. So far I have ran into a pretty decent collection of traps, from wires to mines to snares to rigged computer terminals. Oh and that baby carriage thing...the first time I saw one and went up for a closer look to see what a dead nuked baby looked like...I thought to myself "Why is it blinking?"

 

[DOF_power]

The potential is there, I mean there is no denying the fact that Beth's engine could be used to make a fantastic Fallout game. They just managed to forget about the depth, humour and human element that characterised Fo3's predeccessors.

Some guy on the Bethesda forums put it perfectly....

Fallout 3 is like an offline MMORPG, it seems like the goal is not to enjoy the storyline, atmosphere and immersion. Instead the goal is to complete side quests in order to get a virtual house, fill it with virtual furniture, marry a virtual wife and have a virtual dog follow you about.

Those weren't his exact words but I think he hit the nail on the head. A vast open sandbox world is great but you can't sacrifice depth and character to have it. Theres very little direction in Fallout 3, the main quest is just kinda, "meh, so what?" It's just like one of the many other fedex/kill monster quests that grace the game.

While there should be an option to try and progress through the main quest early in the game, it shouldn't actually be easy or even possible until you've gained the experience and gone around doing all the other things in the game world. This way its channeling you towards a higher purpose. Instead they've simpily made the same mistake that they made with Oblivion all over again and we're left with a universe with no character as a consequence.

Of course as far as Bethesda are concerned it wasn't a mistake because they'll be making millions... I sometimes think that their main source of inspiration for Oblivion and Fallout 3 weren't the TES games & Fallout 1 & 2 respectively, I think that their main source of inspiration was the f***ing Sims!

If you talk about F1 I might agree to some level, but F2 ?!

Also in F1/F2 you could skip the main quest (it's ladder) even more that in F3.

You could marry a virtual wife and have a virtual dog follow you about in F1/F2. F2 pioneered gay/lesbian marriage, and also you could sell you other half to the slavers.

So what are you talking about, less options, a liniar game ?!

 

[Ihniwid]

On a side note - Another thing they did very well is traps. I actually cuss out loud "Oh Fu#%" when I hear that beep beep from a hidden mine in the grass, or the "ting" of the trip wire I didn't pay attention to. So far I have ran into a pretty decent collection of traps, from wires to mines to snares to rigged computer terminals. Oh and that baby carriage thing...the first time I saw one and went up for a closer look to see what a dead nuked baby looked like...I thought to myself "Why is it blinking?"

Yeah the baby carriage!! I found one too and thought "Oh cool lets see what a ghoul baby looks like" and then yeah the beeps started and I scratched my head...died a few seconds later.

I agree the traps so far have been really nifty. The rigged shotty at the front door is also pretty cool. Its in a church near megaton, I'm sure a bunch of you have found it.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

If you talk about F1 I might agree to some level, but F2 ?!

Also in F1/F2 you could skip the main quest (it's ladder) even more that in F3.

You could marry a virtual wife and have a virtual dog follow you about in F1/F2. F2 pioneered gay/lesbian marriage, and also you could sell you other half to the slavers.

So what are you talking about, less options, a liniar game ?!

This:

Fallout 3 is like an offline MMORPG, it seems like the goal is not to enjoy the storyline, atmosphere and immersion.

 

[Docnemo]

Developed a combat system that maintained the strategy and satisfaction of aimed shots and action points but without the painfully slow turn-based process.

I'm sorry but I strongly disagree here.

Melee combat, like it was in Morrowind, is a clickfest, it plain sucks, it is unfun, it involves no strategy, and is especially bad when you consider the animations.
Range combat is equally bad ; it's spam click with very little else. When playing a FPS, I know I can kill that NPC with 2 headshots using my shotgun, and that other one with 1, while in the meantime destroying that tank by using a grenade. Hence, I will use some strategy to take them out quickly before retreating. In Fallout 3 ? Not so much. I will click until they are dead, and often I will just run up to them so I can headshot them and be done with that bad excuse of a shooter.
The max payne mode is also very bad, especially because it reminds me of the turn based Fallouts. You just select some body part to blow up, hope it works and you can finally do something that doesn't involve fighting.

It's like saying the combats in Arcanum were great played real time ; all you did was spam that one attack as fast as you could so they'd all die. I never really liked Baldurs Gate-style combats either, but at least they were somewhat strategic and nice to watch.

Finally, you can't speak of "satisfaction" or even of "combat system" without speaking of AI. Right ? RIGHT ? Morrowind 3's AI is really bad too. They rush up to you. They fire on you with their minigun, while you hide behind a pillar, killing them while they reload or wander away like brain deprived chickens ; they will never learn, never try anything.
A few years ago, Half life mobs used grenades to lure you out ; in Oblivion 3, I've seen a mutant use a grenade, but I was just in front of him, a bit uphill, and he just blew himself up, like his brothers did when they tried to use that missile launcher. So much for super fighting mutants. Crysis was short, but the combats were quite fun, so I thought ; they tried to surround you, gathered, prepared ambushes. Fallout 3 ? There are "mob camps" that you roflstomp over.

I don't even understand how you can think the combats are good. Of course I had a laugh when I blew my first heads and legs off. I love Happy Tree Friends too ; but you'll notice, they don't just blow heads off. They do it with style.

 

[tekhedd]

On the other hand, the medic doesn't heal, his task is to rescue and stabilize the patient so that he can be transported to a doctor.

"Well, a doctor cures people. A medic just helps people feel more comfortable... while they die."
--Doc (Red vs. Blue)

I personally think that it makes perfect sense to have them as separate skills... from a realism perspective. From a gameplay perspective, I never could see the point of spending precious skill points on something that I'll only need if I'm a poor shot, so combining them into one is like you get double-value from your points. That seems like an advantage to me, even if it's at the expense of realism.

 

[madmaligor]

Ok I just stumbled onto a mutant to mutant conversation tonight while sneaking up on a pair of guards. Holy Hilarity Batman! I almost shot beer through my nose.

All of a sudden I found myself stopping to listen to a bunch of side conversations I never knew existed. NPC's that are near each other or walk up to one another have some truly interesting, some informative, some very funny, and some very, how shall I put it, mind numbingly dull, conversations.

It runs the gambit but it can really help with the immersion. It just goes to show you, when you don't stop to smell the roses, you can miss that they were even there.

*edit* I just wanted to add btw, that not all NPC's interact. But from what small amount of samples I was able to gather, there are quite a few. A really good one was sneaking up on a pair of raiders, when the "caution" lit up red while sneaking one peeled off and said "I know your out there!" and I moved away a bit then stood still. He eventually went back to his post and I heard him say "I thought I heard something." then the other guy said "Probably just a rat. I hate rats."