Why do so many people here think First Person excludes RPG?

Public said:
My crazy idea is to combine a tactical FPS shooter with most your physical "skills" entirely dependent on your ability. Then lay a deep, branching INTERESTING, consequential (path decided by your choices) storyline where "side" quests are not minor soap opera episodes which have no effect on the outcome but can be 'forks' in the road etc. Think of a tactical shooter with 20 different ending. And when I say "different" I mean completely and utterly separated endings (and in game journeys). This game would either piss of RPG guys who don't like tactical FPS's or piss off tactical FPS guys who don't like deep games...OR it would be the best game ever created. I can dream...(and I do).
Click to expand...

Then don't call it RPG neither tactical FPS. Call it differently, be creative.

BTW, you cannot make "the best game ever", it's impossible because to achieve it everyone should like it and call it the best game ever, but not everyone is the same. Some people like RPGs and FPSs, but some others like RPGs but hate FPSs, and others love strategy games, but hate other genders, etc, etc. You will never satisfy everyone, even if you make a game which can be played as all those styles (RPG, FPS, strategy), there will be always somone who will not like it or even hate it.
Click to expand...
I'm not good at explaining certain things. I know that there is no perfect game that satisfies everybody but my point is that I'm tired of par for the course game making. I don't want par, I want a hole in one.
 
nemetoad said:
TorontRayne said:
Well Final Fantasy is considered a JRPG. Final Fantasy games are pretty straight forward and linear, but at least you have character development and a true stat based gameplay. You can't just *Pew *Pew all the way through.
Click to expand...

Okay so, Final Fantasy: Linear, has pre-programed character development, but is considered an RPG because it has true stat based gameplay. However, unlike what you said you -can- just *pew *pew through it, since that's the only way to level up.

Fallout 3: Somewhat linear in the main quest, but branches out with all the sidequests. Considering what others have said, character development depends on how you play it. Also, almost everything is governed by stats. Even how well you handle a gun without VATS. *Pew *pew gameplay is the encouraged style of leveling up, but you can avoid most combat and -still- reach that level 20.

If anything, Fallout 3 is more of an RPG then Final Fantasy is. It's also first person! yay.... It's crime is being less limited by stats, but more limited by lacking choices.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I guess it does depend on which Final Fantasy you are playing. Certain enemies you can * pew * pew, but others actually require a little thought. I'm not saying by any means that FF is the epitome of RPG's, but calling Fallout 3 more of a RPG..... that's a fucking close one man :lol: .
I found that Final Fantasy 6 and 7 were the high pints in the series. After that it went downhill. I liked FF 8 a lot, but you could * pew *pew through that one too. I give up on trying to find a RPG nowadays that is half as good as some of the ones around in the 90's.
 
I agree, Final Fantasy 6 and 7 were the high points. And yes, I do think Fallout 3 is more of an RPG. Stats govern more in Fallout 3 then in Final Fantasy after all. To me, if KOTOR can be considered an RPG, so can Fallout 3 :) That's my opinion though.
 
nemetoad said:
I agree, Final Fantasy 6 and 7 were the high points. And yes, I do think Fallout 3 is more of an RPG. Stats govern more in Fallout 3 then in Final Fantasy after all. To me, if KOTOR can be considered an RPG, so can Fallout 3 :) That's my opinion though.
Click to expand...

To each his own.
 
nemetoad said:
I agree, Final Fantasy 6 and 7 were the high points. And yes, I do think Fallout 3 is more of an RPG. Stats govern more in Fallout 3 then in Final Fantasy after all. To me, if KOTOR can be considered an RPG, so can Fallout 3 :) That's my opinion though.
Click to expand...
Well the real question is, if Fallout 3 is a good RPG.

I mean. Look even Space Siege and the Doom Cellphone game get today "sold" as RPGs. Maybe one can even argue that they are RPGs. But I think not many here at least will think that it are good ones ...
 
Very true. Comparing it to Fallout 2, it's not as good an RPG. Comparing it to Bethesda's previous game Oblivion? I find it better in some areas, worse in others. It's a better attempt at a freeform game I've seen in ages, but it's not the best. To me, it's an 8/10. Fallout 1 and 2 would be like a... 9 to me really. *shrug*
 
And Fallout 3 for me it's not an RPG, it's a Hybrid.

People don't say Deus Ex was an RPG, even the creators of the game. And when you have a sci-fi setting like in Fallout, put it in FPP but still "the same" mechanics like "SPECIAL" and quests just like in the originals (hell, even TB combat!), then you can call it an RPG, it would work (VTM:Bloodlines for example). Fallout 3 has in some way close designed "SPECIAL", but the stats don't matter really (and cratchety ol joe proved that), they are just there for show of, then the dialogue and free choices don't do much too, the lack of consequances and the main thing...you can play only 2 roles:

1. sneaky murderer
2. mass murderer
(like in many FPSs)

because most of the quests are based on killing (on the begining or on the end, it usually ends with a killing), and "imagining" any roles outside the game (in the RL) does not count.

The only choices you can make are:

1. Do this quest
2. don't do this quest

Fallout 3 is a FPS with RPG elements, a Hybrid, a totally different game style than cRPGs.
 
*blinks* I think you missed a good chunk of the game's quests then. Many quests in Fallout 3 actually -don't- require combat, much like in Fallout 1 and 2. Tenpenny tower quest... you have the choice to kill one group, let the other kill the other, or diplomatically convince everyone in the tower with your speech skill. You also have the chance to exploit some affairs and the like to lower the count of people to convince.

Big town, if you have a high enough stat in science or small guns at least, you can teach them how to defend themselves rather then fight the great big fight.

Trouble on the Homefront... I recall only two people hostile. Most solutions required information digging, sabotoge, or whatever. Once again, another example of non-combat based questness.

To say it's less then in Fallout 1 and 2 is one thing, to say Bethesda completely left it out is another. Yes, they do encourage more combat and the like, I agree that they shouldn't have. However, you're turning a blind eye to a lot of the game with statements like that ^_^
 
nemetoad said:
Big town, if you have a high enough stat in science or small guns at least, you can teach them how to defend themselves rather then fight the great big fight.
Click to expand...

The sneak skill also works in solving Big Town's quest, hiding with the inhabitants, leading the muties to think town has been deserted.

Well actually, it's more like tricking the two mutants sent on patrol, you play "hide" but they don't play "seek" much. Idea is good though.
 
Just to clear something up, a few people seem to have misunderstood my post when I mentioned System Shock and Deus Ex as being hybrids. I said they were hybrids, I did not say they were RPGs or FPS.
 
not a RPG and not a FPS? But they have to be at least "something" [namele FPS/RPG hybrids. If anything Deus Ex and SS2 are closer to shooters then RPGs. And that for a reason].

Fallout 3 is a Shooter sold as RPG (simplified, I know its more on it then just that). Its in my book not more then a Shooter RPG Hybrid, but at least Deus Ex and SS2 had a world that made sense. Fallout 3 not. If Fallout 3 would had the rhetorical quality of Deus Ex 1 the gam ecould easily have been somewhat one of the best games in the last few years.
 
Another disadvantage of FFP is that it is *much* harder to create a believable game world.

When you are actually looking at a raider through the barrel of a gun and seeing bullet by bullet by bullet hit him in the eye dead on, the immersion is gone. The original fallouts solve this problem by having a system based on imagination. If you shot a guy in the head for 0 damage, it probably hit his helmet and ricocheted off. If you shot a guy in the head for 5 damage it probably simply nicked hit jaw or something. When I emptied barrel after barred on some of the harder enemies, it felt very strange, when it wouldn't have playing the originals.

Also, I have said this before, but in the original fallout worlds, the city maps represented the major areas of the city/towns. The map was so big that it was not a hard step to imagine the towns as being bigger than they were represented. In Fallout 3...not so much. Although the towns might have *supposed* to be representational of full sized towns. The illusion fades when you have a character that can look in every nook and cranny of a town and see all there is too see.
 
Re: Why do so many people here think First Person excludes R

Yazman said:
It seems as if many of the people opposed to a first person perspective for Fallout think that a first person perspective excludes a game from being an RPG.

For example, I saw in another topic people debating whether isometric turn based was a design decision or a technical limitation at the time, and somebody made reference to the FPS genre.

A game having a first person perspective does not make the game an FPS, its almost like this concept is inconceivable by many. There are many classic RPGs that were first person games and were RPGs, certainly NOT shooters. Did you never play Ultima Underworld, Lands of Lore, Stonekeep, or Pathways (I would mention Arena but never played it)? A game can be first person without being an FPS..

This is not even to mention games like System Shock which could be described as a great hybrid of the two. Deus Ex epitomises this and it was really an RPG with FPS elements, like a modern version of Ultima Underworld, Lands of Lore, etc.

First Person does not and has never meant that it will be Shooter or an Action game.
Click to expand...
"Fallout 3 is not an RPG because it is in first-person!"

"A true RPG cannot be in first person because the first Fallout was isometric!"

To most of the people on this forum, that argument is reason enough to revile F3. Let's just forget about the fact that, though VATS, the game can be played perfectly well in the 3rd person. It is, in fact, my preferred method of play...
 
Re: Why do so many people here think First Person excludes R

Shattering Fast said:
To most of the people on this forum
Click to expand...

Can I see some numbers on that?
 
Re: Why do so many people here think First Person excludes R

Fallout fans said:
"Fallout 3 is not an RPG because it is in first-person!"

"A true RPG cannot be in first person because the first Fallout was isometric!"
Click to expand...
Oh, I see what you're doing here. You're conflating the terms "RPG" and "Fallout" so that the factual statement "All Fallout games should have a trimetric perspective" becomes the ridiculous opinion "All RPGs should have a trimetric perspective."

That little bit of word-trickery allows you to change the discussion from one of facts to one of opinions, ultimately leading to the That's-Just-Your-Opinion-Therefore-Fallout 3-is-Great Defense that is so tired and useless.
 
Re: Why do so many people here think First Person excludes R

Ad Astra said:
Fallout fans said:
"Fallout 3 is not an RPG because it is in first-person!"

"A true RPG cannot be in first person because the first Fallout was isometric!"
Click to expand...
Oh, I see what you're doing here. You're conflating the terms "RPG" and "Fallout" so that the factual statement "All Fallout games should have a trimetric perspective" becomes the ridiculous opinion "All RPGs should have a trimetric perspective."

That little bit of word-trickery allows you to change the discussion from one of facts to one of opinions, ultimately leading to the That's-Just-Your-Opinion-Therefore-Fallout 3-is-Great Defense that is so tired and useless.
Click to expand...

Ouch, ya got me, hoss! My evil plot to undermine the debate...foiled again!

In all seriousness, though: in the debate over whether Fallout 3 is a true "Fallout" title - taking into question it's FP perspective, it's lack of "dark humor", and it's real-time combat - there really aren't any points to be made besides opinions. The fact of the matter is that I think a Fallout game is made of different things than you do. It's as simple as that.

It's not a "fact" that Fallout 3 is a lesser game because it diverges so much from its predessecors...it's an opinion. This debate has always been about opinions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top