Why fallout 3 is different then Fallout 1 and 2

[del_diablo]

well its not like that Fallout 1 is that old that all its gamers died suddenly from senility. And now as the market is biger then ever (when it comes to numbers of players) its just fair to say that a game with the same complexity and interesting story like Fallout 1 definetly would at least make the same kind of success as it did back then.

And with the right visuals like really good graphics I would assume it could attract a lot of gamers even.

Lets take a look at Oblivion shall we? The game sucks shitloads, but it got its own religion of worthship for being a great game. Why is that? Its because of the age/decade we are in. Everybody is making medicore game X, and medicore FPS 3. Then Oblivion comes along, with its suckyness. Its ages over most games and people start worthshipping it, BUT anybody who got into Morrowind would join the people who agree that Oblivion are shit.
Fallout 3, is a step over Oblivion but it is far below Morrowind. As an RPG game, it fails still. I can mention F3 got a "best story of the year" award, which pretty much points at the problem. This decades game sucks ass, thus when you finaly make something medicore it will get praised.

On the other end of the rod: Fallout is pretty much the height of RPG, if we get to the RP part. Nr1 suffers a few minor flaws, which they fixed into nr2. Both games are separate games, but they are still in the same series and story.
The reason its selling like hot bread, is because partly of F3. People think its good, but they notice the nr 3 and thus there must be 2 other games and maybe a heap of spinoffs. The word about the actually good games then spread and it sells like fresh bread out of the oven. Which hits the causal markeds nail, also reffered to as critial hit.

The only real weakness Fallout 1+2 got, is when you fight a BIG crowd of enemies. 1 moves, then 1 moves, then another moves, continues for a minute if your lucky. That us just minorly annoying.
Which is easy to fix, just make sure that that groups move at the same time instead of 1 and then 1 actor.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

The only real weakness Fallout 1+2 got, is when you fight a BIG crowd of enemies. 1 moves, then 1 moves, then another moves, continues for a minute if your lucky. That us just minorly annoying.
Which is easy to fix, just make sure that that groups move at the same time instead of 1 and then 1 actor.

Well, it is a pretty old game, and maybe the idea didn't exist back then yet. Still, nobody ever complains about that in modern RPG or SLG, like Final Fantasy Tactics, or whatnot.

On the other hand, that system you describe existed (though a bit bugged) in Temple of Elemental Evil by Troika. So it's not like it's impossible.

 

[SRN]

The only real weakness Fallout 1+2 got, is when you fight a BIG crowd of enemies. 1 moves, then 1 moves, then another moves, continues for a minute if your lucky. That us just minorly annoying.
Which is easy to fix, just make sure that that groups move at the same time instead of 1 and then 1 actor.

Well, it is a pretty old game, and maybe the idea didn't exist back then yet. Still, nobody ever complains about that in modern RPG or SLG, like Final Fantasy Tactics, or whatnot.

On the other hand, that system you describe existed (though a bit bugged) in Temple of Elemental Evil by Troika. So it's not like it's impossible.

I... I think I'm in love. You did not only hit the nail on the head, you banged it down using a sledgehammer, shot another in with a nailgun and managed to take out Beth's entire evil mastermind think-tank using only the sentence "Black Isle Studios".

 

[Crni Vuk]

well I hope it doesnt tourn out again in this useless "tourn based combat is boring" debate since what ever anyone might think or like it or dont like it. Tourn Based combat has its place in some games.

I mean do people never get eventualy the idea that some exactly like games like Jagged Alliance or Fallout 1 for their gameplay ? People play chess cause its "chess" not cause its something else or couse it should be like something different (and TB combat is somewhat similar to chess if done well). It doesnt mean Fallout 1 was not something that could be improved in its gameplay and combat but what is inherently flawed? Not in my eyes.

I would neither go and attempt to now tell people that are in love with shooters how boring their game is cause of its repetitive, fast and action filled content. Why? cause its all just relative and subjective. Some like it others dont. Played for years unreal tournament 99, Ut2k3 and UT2k4 and I loved those game for what they are. Shooters. Fast shooters. Why should they be changed in something else they never have been designed for in the first place only to please some obscure crowd and their ideas about a "game" ?

 

[Ausdoerrt]

^ Imagine how popular chess would be if it was real-time, had tits and was on fire?

 

[NOPR]

No - the difference between Fallout 1+2 and Fallout 3 is like the difference of a book and a movie !!!

And as more and more books get replaced by movies and the average human knows more and more about movies than about books (other than the title and its description), it's the same with the game industry and its consumers changing. From players liking complex strategy, good stories, a lot of reading and hard puzzles, etc. towards the real time action gamer enjoying stunning 3d worlds, a lot of kick-ass action, astonishing graphical and accustical athmosphere, mind blowing visuals, extreme hard difficulty when it comes to control the immediate action, etc.

 

[Danilh]

No - the difference between Fallout 1+2 and Fallout 3 is like the difference of a book and a movie !!!

And as more and more books get replaced by movies and the average human knows more and more about movies than about books (other than the title and its description), it's the same with the game industry and its consumers changing. From players liking complex strategy, good stories, a lot of reading and hard puzzles, etc. towards the real time action gamer enjoying stunning 3d worlds, a lot of kick-ass action, astonishing graphical and accustical athmosphere, mind blowing visuals, extreme hard difficulty when it comes to control the immediate action, etc.

Oh yeah, because good stories and fast action are total opposites(Max Payne series disprooves that). And complex strategy must come with a good story(X-com had a great setting, but very little story whatsoever)

You do know most of the games played back then(oh i hate to use this vague expression) were the action/arcade games, like mario, 2d shooting, contra, doom , this kind of thing. There never was a "golden age" of CRPGs, it's just that this genre/niche is mostly restricted to indie developers nowadays.

extreme hard difficulty

pfft

 

[Ausdoerrt]

extreme hard difficulty

You mean because it lags like shit so there's a 2-second delay?

 

[NOPR]

Oh yeah, because good stories and fast action are total opposites(Max Payne series disprooves that). And complex strategy must come with a good story(X-com had a great setting, but very little story whatsoever)

Why shouldn't it be impossible for a movie to be better than a book or a good game with modern graphic and action to have a better story than an old story based game ? I didn't say impossible - it's rather statistical and rare to see such things.

Just consider the amount of design work that has to be done going into those modern games - it's almost 100 times more than story and quest design. And most consumers are console gamers that prefer this amount of design to give them the action. The old rpg gamers are maybe 1% of the game market ! Bethesda and other producers are going for mainstream and Fallout 1+2 is for the niche market considering the design principles. Just like high literature plays vs. a blockbuster movie.


Another look at specifically bethesdas games and their dialog system. Dialog got less and less, because now you need voice acting instead writing, so choices got less and responses got the same whatever you did, because voice acting isn't as cheap as writing. And the dialog system isn't good with behaviour changes on a great scale without risking blowing up the system to dialog bug hell. Ever seen mods that completely change dialog behaviour of bethesda games ? Ask yourself why ? Or ask yourself why a NPC has a lot to tell about the global politics and yet you can't speak with him about his family members (even after killing them) ? And it's not only bethesda games that suffer this fate - the core reason is the voice dialog system.

Not to forget that modern 3d games don't allow massive mesh structural changes, like collapsing cities or fortresses burned down. It's possible to have some of such rare events - just not massively. And NPCs with their dialog and travel packages and AI would have to be altered seperately (bug hell) - you can't do it easily with those type of systems.

So why wonder about Megaton just altered to unaccessable ruins ? No reactions other than radio and a few NPC dialog lines ? Travel routes of merchants not changed ? Why wonder that releasing the modified FEV didn't kill 90% population but just the lone wanderer and a few dummies ? Why the player can't join the enclave and turn the major settlements into enclave outposts ? - those engines are just too limited when it comes to world changes. Those engines can't even change the face of a single living settlement !

You do know most of the games played back then(oh i hate to use this vague expression) were the action/arcade games, like mario, 2d shooting, contra, doom , this kind of thing. There never was a "golden age" of CRPGs, it's just that this genre/niche is mostly restricted to indie developers nowadays.

The old games had their own problems. For example just read fallout 2 walkthrough what you shouldn't do to avoid unsolvable quest bugs. And a lot of other things reducing the fun and frustrated players back at that time too. Come to think of Fallout 1+2 it never was too realistic about fallout survival and it wasn't rather a deep story with smart plot and twists than more a well designed world with lots of humor, parody, ministories and freedom. Although "golden age" never means everything was gold - just the amount of high quality games hitting a peak if you review it decades later.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

I dunno, the amount of CRPGs and console RPGs that are at least decent didn't really decrease - it's just most of them are made in the Eastern Europe, or in Japan, and don't even always reach the English-speaking world. Of course, there aren't so many classics these days, but evaluating "today" versus "all of the time before" is a naturally biased perspective.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Just consider the amount of design work that has to be done going into those modern games - it's almost 100 times more than story and quest design. And most consumers are console gamers that prefer this amount of design to give them the action. The old rpg gamers are maybe 1% of the game market ! Bethesda and other producers are going for mainstream and Fallout 1+2 is for the niche market considering the design principles. Just like high literature plays vs. a blockbuster movie.

Just 1 % ? Do you have even any kind of "hard data" or source for that kind of claim?

I mean not that I am saying now those "old RPG players" as how some describe them (though I dont feel that old with my 24 years) would be now a very big target audience but I doubt one has to downplay it either.

Action games have always sold a lot more compared to very story heavy RPGs. And it was never ever a issue in the past at least. Why? cause companies knew about that. Cause they managed to still make a living and the heads could still drive their Bentleys. The issue was that some wanted to drive Ferraries instead of Mercedes and run for a market they have not designed games in the first place (see Interplay and a few other companies).

We talk here about just a short time. People that played Fallout 1 and liked it for what it was are not suddenly dead. Or suddenly only love action games. ANd I doubt EVERY new player would throw away a game only cause it has a complex story and challanging gameplay. If anything many of the european developers which manage now to become bigger now prove that the market is SCREAMING for such kind of games and changes away from the usual mainstream and the next CoD UO OAAHO 12423445 game.

And the console market as well proved with Final Fantasy, Metal gear Solid and some other games as well that they can and WANT to play from time to time very complex games. Complex in gameplay AND story. But obvously to make such kind of game takes SKILL while to design something like Oblivion or anythin similar can be thrown together rather easily compared to games like Fallout 1 or Metal Gear Solid for example. I mean yeah ... fantasy is for some as they say (Todd himself) "killing things from the back of a horse".

 

[nemo00]

I can't really get it why a third person, (isometric) view is considered obsolete, and who the hell came up with this idiotic concept that first person offers more immersion. From my point of view, firs person, is sooo God dam frustrating, I mean I am playing an RPG, so i want to be focused on the story and quests, and not being bothered by the fucking path finding (why didn't beth at least bother to put a minimap somewhere on the screen is beyond me). I always got lost in those annoying vaults, and i've spent half of the time trying find the way from point A to point B trough the damn metro lines. In isometric, or bird's eye view or whatever you wanna call it, this problem is nonexistent, having a better view of the entire map, getting from point A to B being limited mostly by your character development path (lockpick, science, charisma etc.), and not by your orientation skills. In my opinion if somebody wants to do a proper rpg the classic view is the only way to go. I mean if first person is so revolutionary, why aren't they using it in RTS games (they tried it on couple of occasions but it didn't really work out, simply because it doesn't fit the general concept). So everybody who keps saying that the way rpg's were done a couple of year ago is because of technical limitations should think a little bit more, if they are capable of such complex operations (and judging by the complexity of the quests in fallout 3 I very much doubt it).

Oh and the minigames who the fuck invented them and thought "hm lets put them in RPG-s for extra immersion"(yeah I know Bioware in Kotor, but at least those were card games and a small race sim witch were pretty ok, and could almost completely avoid them), I mean if I already invested 100 skillpoints in my lockpicking skill then why am I supposed to be bothered by a lockpicking minigame, I mean it is an RPG and not a real life simulation, you can't go both ways the genres being mutually exclusive (at least from my point of view).

And about the graphics and the work that was put into it, that everybody is so fond of may I ask what is so graphically intense about F3, I mean there are only a couple of textures and models that repeat themselves, which if summed up are more repetitive than the ones used in F1, and F2, which were "technically limited". I mean in the previous games on every map you could see the art (no it is not a typo) and soul of the designers. I have played a hundreds of games all bragging to have amazing graphics, but I still haven't yet found one that awakes in me the same amazement as baldur's Gate 2. Now that game was art, I remember staring at the statue of Lathander for half an hour like it was a painting, the combination of the music, and the design that was put into that part, still amazes me, so anybody who argues about the graphic complexity of modern games should again think again. I personally believe that what we today call amazing graphics in games are not so much the merit of designers (who are extremely lazy or at least sloppy because of marketing deadlines), but more likely that of the raw computing capacity of modern hardware.

 

[Khold]

Just 1 % ? Do you have even any kind of "hard data" or source for that kind of claim?


And the console market as well proved with Final Fantasy, Metal gear Solid and some other games as well that they can and WANT to play from time to time very complex games. Complex in gameplay AND story. But obvously to make such kind of game takes SKILL while to design something like Oblivion or anythin similar can be thrown together rather easily compared to games like Fallout 1 or Metal Gear Solid for example. I mean yeah ... fantasy is for some as they say (Todd himself) "killing things from the back of a horse".

Sigh.


Really?

 

[Danilh]

You know that lack of concordance with another part of the argument doesn't invalidate the first part.

If you're attacking the assumption in the end of his post, that's something to be debated on. But if you're trying to disprove the importance of hard data, you're committing a fallacy.

 

[Crni Vuk]

...

Sigh.


Really?

Not sure if youre serious or ironic.

But I suggest reading the review from Vince about Oblivion from the RPG Codex which strange enough got for some "reason" banned on Bethesda boards.

Oblivion Review

And now someome tell what takes more skill to develope. Fallout 1 or Oblivion. From gameplay and story aspects.

 

[Asmo]

I'm just curious when one of the true believers who continually blast Bethesda is going to man up, buy the rights and build the game "the way it's meant to be"...

I'm the first to admit that Beth's interpretation of things (and their bug ridden game) isn't exactly my cup of tea, and that they have considerably dumbed down both the Elder Scroll's franchise and the Fallout franchise in the effort to make cross platform mass consumer games.

Of course, the company who built FO1 no longer exists... Most of the staff that moved to Troika produced games that were filled with potential that was reminiscent of FO1, but were more bug ridden than FO3. Eventually they went tits up as well...

Meanwhile the pedestrian tripe peddlers are chugging along quite nicely. When it comes to a question of artistic integrity vs commercial success, it would appear that commercialism wins.

Which brings me back to square one. The only way you guys are ever going to see a Fallout sequel the way you want it is if you make it yourselves...

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

I'm just curious when one of the true believers who continually blast Bethesda is going to man up, buy the rights and build the game "the way it's meant to be"...

Well that is a stupid first question, none of us here run multi million dollar owning game developers.
Even if we all patched together (unlikely) we wouldn't be able to amass the money Zenimax would ask for the franchise, if they would sell it in the first place.

Second, there have been and there still are fan attempts at modifying Fallout 2, the problem is that such a project can take a long time as most people here work or go to school and do something like a project in their spare time.
Combine that with the fact that people sometimes leave with or without any reason and you have a hard time holding a development team together.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Which brings me back to square one. The only way you guys are ever going to see a Fallout sequel the way you want it is if you make it yourselves...

well one might have the right to hope at least " a bit" while thinking about Fallout : NEW VEGAS. While it might not have better gameplay then Fallout 3 the chance is there that it might have at least a much much better Story then Fallout 3, and better NPCs. With more and interesting Dialogues. You can say about Obsidian what you want. But their games definetly ARE better then Oblivion.

 

[Asmo]

Well that is a stupid first question, none of us here run multi million dollar owning game developers.
Even if we all patched together (unlikely) we wouldn't be able to amass the money Zenimax would ask for the franchise, if they would sell it in the first place.

It's about as likely as prayer or blind luck which is currently what we are stuck with.

We all wait with baited breath to see what Obsidian are going to do. ; )

Second, there have been and there still are fan attempts at modifying Fallout 2, the problem is that such a project can take a long time as most people here work or go to school and do something like a project in their spare time.
Combine that with the fact that people sometimes leave with or without any reason and you have a hard time holding a development team together.

I understand that mate. Just giving a realistic appraisal of the situation. What we want and what we get may remain two entirely separate things.

well one might have the right to hope at least " a bit" while thinking about Fallout : NEW VEGAS. While it might not have better gameplay then Fallout 3 the chance is there that it might have at least a much much better Story then Fallout 3, and better NPCs. With more and interesting Dialogues. You can say about Obsidian what you want. But their games definetly ARE better then Oblivion.

Absolutely. Very interested to see what they come up with. Hope springs eternal and all that. ; )

 

[DaPinkMadCow]

Why f3 is different than previous games? Because its better. I know what ya think. "guy is a noob". Well, i first played fallout just before part two came out. I became hardcore fan before installation was on 10 %, hehe.
fallouts were the best games of all times. But right from begining i knew some things sucked. It was definitly combat, view, lack of realism when it comes to survival stuff, SPECIAL system, the wasteland/travel map, game was unfinished (f2), not very hardcore ect... Damn, lot of problems!
Now, i was sure fallout 3 will be failure, i wasnt even intrested when the game came out. When i finally checked it out i was shocked. It went in direction i would like it to be. Still there is one big general problem. It is you -hardcore fan, hehe. Game had to have some of the old problems just to be accepted by the fans.
I must say i dont understand why they did it. "Satisfy the hardcore fan" quest is imposible to complite so why waste time and resorces?
And yes, fallout 3 is worse than f1 and 2 in dialogs and most of times at quests. this i cannot forgive them. But you must realise what just happened. Fallout saga ressurected. DAMN! i finished f2 over 20 times. ENOUGH! If they changed game at the core by makeing FPP-real time combat they can take it further. Destroy the SPECIAL, destroy VATS, destroy pip boy, put some ultra realism in flashpoint/arma/vbs style, make story line so hardcore you will be arested, quests that CANT be complited in any way (death traps), enviroment so hostile that gg allin would crap his pants and you have my perfect fallout.
there just one problem, you probably wont sell it.