What the fans really want!

[Morbus]

See, now that's a reasonable response.

What do you mean "now"? I had the very same attitude in my previous post But I'm positive you mean "now" regarding the difference between my post and the others'.

Well, each one is as he is, but, then again, I don't think insulting is the best solution for this. However, people have to understand (as it has been discussed before) that repeating the the same thing again and again and again (it hurts my head just to thing of it) is tiresome...

...and may lead to this kind of attitude and responses...

 

[BoisBrule]

I can see how it would be tiresome... but perhaps it needs to be remembered that when a FO fan comes across this site, and sees "suggestions and ideas".. well, I'm not certain that the average guy is going to read every single comment that has come before.

But point taken.

it doesn't change my mind. But point taken.

I beleive that somewhere in between FO: TES and "FO: the same game with new paint" lies the perfect game, one without stat- ignoring minigamesm for one. That's my $0.02. It's not worth more than your $0.02... but it's certainly not worth any less... especially to game developers. Business is business... and numbers talk.

 

[Morbus]

That's my $0.02. It's not worth more than your $0.02... but it's certainly not worth any less... especially to game developers. Business is business... and numbers talk.

That's the undeniable and unfortunate truth Our only hope, however, is to change those numbers according to our needs. I.e., counter-hyping... Informing... Arguing... And fighting for a better world... erhm... I mean, fallout.

 

[BoisBrule]

...and as for Fallout not ever intending to be "real", fine. I can't even begin to argue that point, and to be completely fair, I can see why Fallout but different can't be "Fallout"... just like Hockey with soccerballs isn't Hockey.

So, If I can accept that Fallout needs to be turn based and isometric, (and I'd still be first in line to play it), can someone please also make a real-time PA "Adventure Game" as well? Why not "Fallout Adventures?" Roll your eyes all you want... you know there's a demand for it. Is it just the use of the name "Fallout 3" that you find so offensive? If it wasn't marketed as a sequel... but as a "Game set in the world of..." would that be more acceptable to you guys? Or is it that you absolutely must have a prettier, updated version of the game you love so much? ...and no, I'm not being a smartass, I'm asking a serious question.

Personally, I as a fan of the genre, would like a PA RPG/Survival Sim....and I don't mean "survival horror" either... no more than the standard horror that would accompany life in such a world. I do agree that such a game could not be called Fallout 3 and does not continue in the spirit of the series... but "Fallout the First Person Adventure Game" still sounds like a lot of fun. Some of us are fans of the genre first (I grew up watching Dystopian action flicks, everyone I could get my hands on), and Fallout gave us our best taste of playing in such a world... but some of us want the flavour of the world, not the game, so if Bethesda does make FO: TES... it will sell. For better or worse for the series, it'll sell. and it will be fun for what it is... even if it's not what you expected.

Now... having played both games, what would I like to see in a "true to the gameplay & spirit of Fallout" FO3?

Streamlined combat, I always found it took too damn long.
a higher quality musical score with greater variety.
a more intuitive menu interface
a more primiitve setting, presented as a prequel, set in a dying world as opposed to a newly sprouting one.

 

[requiem_for_a_starfury]

From the looks of recent newsposts you might just get your wish. Which is another reason you got a hostile response.

FP games are two a penny, the format pre-dates isometric and now that they've learned to make graphics even more shiny and less boxy it seems everything has to be FP these days, you don't need to change the viewpoint to have good graphics. Personnally I'm sick to death of FP games, I've always prefered third person and isometric, even top down but that's my £0.02.

As to realtime, well I don't see how you can have a perfect rpg and RT as you wouldn't be roleplaying a character but gameplaying an engine. Unless that is, all you care about is running around shooting things. Some of us just happen to be fans of TB combat, and Fallout was and still is one of the best examples of a TB game. Sure it's not perfect, and like everything wouldn't suffer from a bit of an overhaul but that can be done without drastically changing everything. Go to a flight sim forum and tell them how much you liked the game, but the next release should concentrate on the arcade mode and leave out all the complexity. Then you'd see hostility.

Fallout is greater than the sum of it's parts and isometric and TB aren't the be all and end all of the game but they are part of the vital compontents that made it what it is. Mess with the forumula and you just might turn gold into lead.

 

[Sander]

PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 19:58 Post subject:
Fair enough... so why not FP exploration and Isometric combat? best of both worlds? I feel that Fallout could benefit from some truly hairy moments... not knowing what's around that corner until it's too late for example. I would like to see more effort put into making the world feel more "real", I guess. Yes, having every encounter result in a charging monster running at you a la Oblivion would get tiresome, as would the frenetic mono-directional combat of GoW. But to take the best elements of both of those games and tweak them in to something truly original and befitting the FO gameworld would be pretty incredible. Combat in FO, while fun... could have used a bit more strategy, beyond shoot move, shoot move, shoot move...

...
What the fuck? Do you really, honestly think that Gears of War has more strategy than Fallout?
Also, 'shoot move cover shoot move cover' isn't exactly more strategic than 'shoot move'.

As for recreating the P&P experience... I thought the P&P experience was an attempt to take real-world, real-time experiences and make them playable sitting around a table? So here we sit, with technology that makes it possible to play one of those roles in real time... yeah it's not perfect, but shouldn't it be the ultimate goal?

No. P&P is about playing a role that is not defined by your own skills. Hence why you don't have real-time combat, since real-time is always player-skill-based combat, as opposed to character-skill-based combat you have in Fallout.

It's also a *recreation* of P&P games. I've yet to see a P&P game that uses real-time combat, so using real-time combat would also not be a recreation of P&P games.

and as for calling me names and tossing around expletives... chances are you'd cross the street to avoid me if you saw me coming, most people do. Mind your manners. I did not come in here and start tossing around insults and expletives, nor do I deserve them.

Yes, yes you do. What you did is the equivalent of coming into a random debate without doing any research at all. That's rude, inconsiderate and just plain old ignorant. We have an archived part of the forums for a reason. So give me a break with the whining.

if you spoke to me like that in person, I'd stuff your teeth down your throat. I expect a certain amount of childish chest-pounding in internet forums, especially those based around video games, but watch your mouth. I'm not here to disrespect you, I expect no less from you.

Then why did you bust into a random thread without even being considerate enough to do some reading?

Your call, you can continue to be an internet tough guy, or you can speak to me like you're in the room with me, your call. I'm here simply because I'm a huge fan of the games, and I'm incredibly interested in where they're going. Fact is, real time FP or turn based isometric game, I'm still first in line when it hits the shelves.

...
Errrr....you'd actually buy a shitty Fallout 3 just because it has the name 'Fallout' on it?

...and as for Fallout not ever intending to be "real", fine. I can't even begin to argue that point, and to be completely fair, I can see why Fallout but different can't be "Fallout"... just like Hockey with soccerballs isn't Hockey.

So, If I can accept that Fallout needs to be turn based and isometric, (and I'd still be first in line to play it), can someone please also make a real-time PA "Adventure Game" as well? Why not "Fallout Adventures?" Roll your eyes all you want... you know there's a demand for it. Is it just the use of the name "Fallout 3" that you find so offensive? If it wasn't marketed as a sequel... but as a "Game set in the world of..." would that be more acceptable to you guys? Or is it that you absolutely must have a prettier, updated version of the game you love so much? ...and no, I'm not being a smartass, I'm asking a serious question.

...
It's a *sequel*. Sequels are supposed to be in the vein of their previous games. Otherwise it's called a *spin-off*.

 

[BoisBrule]

Gotcha.

There was no debate on this thread whatsoever... so I didn't butt into a debate. I'm a fan. This is what I want. Therefore I made a post in a thread about "What fans want"... go figure. I read a lot of what's on this site, and I still offered my ideas on "what this fan wants". If you don't want someone to post in this... then change the title to "what would you like to see in FO 3, but make sure it is exactly what the rest of us want to see".

I get it, what THIS fan wants is not exactly popular around here... so be it.

And I never said GoW was strategic... actually I said the "frenetic mono-directional combat of GoW"... so pull your head out of your ass before you try pointing fingers.

You also chose to ignore the part where I mentioned that some of us like the feel of Dystopian Worlds, and came to Fallout simply because it was the best option out there for gaming in such a setting.

Choose to ignore whatever parts of my posts you wish, so that you can better impress whoever the hell it is you're trying to impress. You're king of this little section of the web, I hope it makes you happy.

Now... do you care to answer my question, or just wanna waggle your nuts a bit more?

I repeat: Is it the "Fallout 3" part of the equation that you detest so much? Would you shit yourself as bad if it weren't named "3"... and was a game "set in the world of"?

 

[Sander]

Gotcha.

There was no debate on this thread whatsoever... so I didn't butt into a debate. I'm a fan. This is what I want.

This thread isn't isolated on this forum. There have been many debates about this. The least you could've done is read *any* of them.

Therefore I made a post in a thread about "What fans want"... go figure. I read a lot of what's on this site, and I still offered my ideas on "what this fan wants". If you don't want someone to post in this... then change the title to "what would you like to see in FO 3, but make sure it is exactly what the rest of us want to see".

No. You came in and used *every* stupid argument we hate around here ('Wouldn't it be cool?' 'Franchises evolve' 'It's better!!11') without any argumentation whatsoever.
We appreciate solid logic and factual arguments. You offer neither, you only offer 'I like it that way!'. Neat. But completely irrelevant.

I get it, what THIS fan wants is not exactly popular around here... so be it.

And I never said GoW was strategic... actually I said the "frenetic mono-directional combat of GoW"... so pull your head out of your ass before you try pointing fingers.

Nice. 'Please don't act like a tough guy.' 'Get your head out of your ass'

Other than that, you may want to learn the importance of context. You were talking about making it a real-time game, adding in GoW's cover, and then said 'I want the game to be more strategic.'
Gee, what a weird conclusion I came to then.

You also chose to ignore the part where I mentioned that some of us like the feel of Dystopian Worlds, and came to Fallout simply because it was the best option out there for gaming in such a setting.

Oh, sorry, I didn't realise I was obligated to comment on everything you post.
How is a dystopian setting relevant to the gameplay mechanics?

Choose to ignore whatever parts of my posts you wish, so that you can better impress whoever the hell it is you're trying to impress. You're king of this little section of the web, I hope it makes you happy.

I ignored no part of your argument that was relevant to the issue of gameplay mechanics. Get off your high horse.

Now... do you care to answer my question, or just wanna waggle your nuts a bit more?

I repeat: Is it the "Fallout 3" part of the equation that you detest so much? Would you shit yourself as bad if it weren't named "3"... and was a game "set in the world of"?

I already answered that, although indirectly. Maybe you'd want to brush up on your reading skills. I have little problem with a spin-off. I don't 'hate' tactics either, and that's a spin-off. I don't see how it would be very 'Fallout' if all it took from Fallout was the setting.

But that's not the point at all. We're not talking about a spin-off. We're talking about Fallout *3*. The official sequel. So we want something that is an actual sequel instead of a spin-off.

 

[BoisBrule]

You keep coming back to mechanics... I was unaware that this was a "Gameplay mechanics" only thread, it's titled "WHAT FANS REALLY WANT"... I'm not a programmer... I merely posted what I "want" to see in a Fallout game. I "want" to see cover being utilized and a more strategic combat setting... I want to see a more atmospheric gameworld, where a dark, scary, ancient hole in the ground feels like a dark scary ancient hole in the ground, and not 2-D monster closet. I've obviously stepped into an online Bulletin board that takes this shit waaaaay too seriously.

You don't WANT these things.. so be it.

Now settle down, you're acting like an angry three year old.

Guess what!I play games because they're fun. I don't start online religions devoted to them, I don't tattoo logos on my ass, I don't get all worked up when a business makes a solid business decision, based on solid finanical numbers. It's a business, plain and simple. If I'm not the target market, then I am completely irrelevant... that's simple economics.

If Bethesda makes a FP Fallout game, don't buy it and vote with your wallet. Now, if you're getting all bitter because your years of online bitching and moaning about how it's gonna be a cock-up have fallen on deaf ears, then that's a different issue. Could it be that you are in fact outnumbered and represent a small enough fanbase that they just don't give a shit? The world's full of pissed off fans of all genres, what makes you special?

I rolled into this site because I'm a fan of the f*&king game, and figured I might get an idea of what's going on with FO:3. I didn't realize that some of you would be more emotionally attached to a cRPG than you are your own children. It's a game... take it easy.

And if you're all so certain of how it's gonna turn out... then why are you all still bitching about it? Isn't that just a waste of time and energy?

 

[Sander]

You keep coming back to mechanics... I was unaware that this was a "Gameplay mechanics" only thread, it's titled "WHAT FANS REALLY WANT"... I'm not a programmer... I merely posted what I "want" to see in a Fallout game. I "want" to see cover being utilized and a more strategic combat setting... I want to see a more atmospheric gameworld, where a dark, scary, ancient hole in the ground feels like a dark scary ancient hole in the ground, and not 2-D monster closet. I've obviously stepped into an online Bulletin board that takes this shit waaaaay too seriously.

...
What the fuck? You start to talk about gameplay mechanics. eg.First person view, real-time combat. I comment on that, and then you somehow manage to twist that into something illogical?

What the fuck is wrong with you?

You don't WANT these things.. so be it.

I don't want these things, but unlike you I used factual arguments as to why they don't fit a Fallout game.

Now settle down, you're acting like an angry three year old.

Guess what!I play games because they're fun. I don't start online religions devoted to them, I don't tattoo logos on my ass, I don't get all worked up when a business makes a solid business decision, based on solid finanical numbers. It's a business, plain and simple. If I'm not the target market, then I am completely irrelevant... that's simple economics.

If Bethesda makes a FP Fallout game, don't buy it and vote with your wallet. Now, if you're getting all bitter because your years of online bitching and moaning about how it's gonna be a cock-up have fallen on deaf ears, then that's a different issue. Could it be that you are in fact outnumbered and represent a small enough fanbase that they just don't give a shit? The world's full of pissed off fans of all genres, what makes you special?

I rolled into this site because I'm a fan of the f*&king game, and figured I might get an idea of what's going on with FO:3. I didn't realize that some of you would be more emotionally attached to a cRPG than you are your own children. It's a game... take it easy.

And if you're all so certain of how it's gonna turn out... then why are you all still bitching about it? Isn't that just a waste of time and energy?

Strike one for trolling.

Did you even read the Glittering Gems of Hatred articles?

 

[Lumpy]

- The entire game is based on SPECIAL.

Yes, and the entire game was based on the story of the Vault Dweller, the West Coast, the Master's plan, etc. Doesn't mean that Fallout 3 has to contain any of those elements.
If Bethesda made a system that would be just as true to the spirit of Fallout as SPECIAL, it would be perfec-fucking-tly fine. Will they? Probably not. But SPECIAL isn't God.

 

[Sander]

Yes, and the entire game was based on the story of the Vault Dweller, the West Coast, the Master's plan, etc. Doesn't mean that Fallout 3 has to contain any of those elements.

No, and those things weren't the basis of Fallout either. The basis of Fallout story- and settingwise was the 50s sci-fi setting, with dark irony attached.
If you made a Fallout game without that, you wouldn't be making a Fallout game at all.

If Bethesda made a system that would be just as true to the spirit of Fallout as SPECIAL, it would be perfec-fucking-tly fine. Will they? Probably not. But SPECIAL isn't God.

See, SPECIAL *is* an essential part of Fallout. There is no reason whatsoever to come up with a new system.
That's not to say that SPECIAL is perfect.

 

[Lumpy]

Yes, and the entire game was based on the story of the Vault Dweller, the West Coast, the Master's plan, etc. Doesn't mean that Fallout 3 has to contain any of those elements.

No, and those things weren't the basis of Fallout either. The basis of Fallout story- and settingwise was the 50s sci-fi setting, with dark irony attached.
If you made a Fallout game without that, you wouldn't be making a Fallout game at all.

True enough. I would add choices and freedom to those. But I don't consider SPECIAL to be an essential element.

If Bethesda made a system that would be just as true to the spirit of Fallout as SPECIAL, it would be perfec-fucking-tly fine. Will they? Probably not. But SPECIAL isn't God.

See, SPECIAL *is* an essential part of Fallout. There is no reason whatsoever to come up with a new system.
That's not to say that SPECIAL is perfect.

Maybe they wanted to have turn-based combat. Ideally, say that they decided that combat should play a minor role in the game, and real-time would only make it move faster, to allow the player to focus on the dialogue.
Of course, that's not what Bethesda will do. I bet it will be 90% combat, like TES or BG. But nevertheless, there could be reasons not to use SPECIAL.

 

[Sander]

True enough. I would add choices and freedom to those. But I don't consider SPECIAL to be an essential element.

Choices and consequences aren't part of the setting, but yeah.

Maybe they wanted to have turn-based combat. Ideally, say that they decided that combat should play a minor role in the game, and real-time would only make it move faster, to allow the player to focus on the dialogue.

Then it wouldn't be Fallout. Mainly because that limits choices.
Other than that, Fallout has always been about recreating the P&P experience. An essential part of that is the turn-based combat.

But nevertheless, there could be reasons not to use SPECIAL.

Yeah, that reason being that they get the GURPS license. Which would be pretty awesome.

Other than that, no, there's not really a valid reason not to use SPECIAL. SPECIAL was specifically designed to work with the game and its possiblities, which is what Tim's comment in that link is all about.

 

[uratransformer]

It would be cool if the player had the ability to drive a v8 interceptor replica. I know it doesn't stay true to the highwayman's style, but i am too poor to build the interceptor myself.

 

[Marines]

Trolling

Here's an idea: why don't you fuck off to a Stalker, or HL2, or Gears of War fan forum and pander your bullshit over there. Wouldn't it be easier to post your retarded wishlist somewhere where it could actually fit instead of coming here and saying how much you want to completely rape a game which has nothing whatsoever to do with your brainfarts?

...Stalker, or HL2, or Gears of War...

Unfortunately, that is the crowd F3 will ultimantly be marketed to.

 

[Wooz]

 

[Jimmious]

The ideal would be an implementation of some JAGGED ALLIANCE 2 stuff in the turn-based combat engine of Fallout 2.
Now that's what I'm talking about. Crouch,prone,zoom,snipe
Pure tactical heaven!

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

The ideal would be an implementation of some JAGGED ALLIANCE 2 stuff in the turn-based combat engine of Fallout 2.
Now that's what I'm talking about. Crouch,prone,zoom,snipe
Pure tactical heaven!

I have a feeling FO3 is going to make everyone a lot fonder of FO: Tactics.

 

[radnan]

I made the massive mistake of taking the time to read the VAN BURREN design docs and details at http://falloutvault.com

now i'm really feeling pissed
after reading it all i really feel the game dynamics, ideeas and especially openness of the quests and locations were excellent and the right step in the right direction

so .. this may come late but:

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!

Fuck you interplay !

Beth should really read those and see the kind of thoughts that are behind real rpgs !

p.s. reading that thing is like dying reallly really slow )