Wilderness Search Realism for Fallout 3

[Wounded Ronin]

As much as I like 1000 yard sniper shots I agree that for a game about a lone wanderer that probably wouldn't work. Mad Max would have ended at the first conflict if the muscle car gangs had a couple snipers who could just plink out the main character immediately. Fallout is explicitly not realistic because it has things like ghouls, desert travel where you can walk from Bakersfield to LA without food, water, or a hat, etc.

If you want 1000 yard sniper shots I'd actually recommend the version 1.13 mod of Jagged Alliance 2. That has a *very* satisfying system of optics and line of sight and a large collection of real world rifles. You can indeed remove someone's head with a barret who is halfway across the map as long as you've got line of sight and a trusty spotter.

 

[Akudin]

Agreed, 1000 yd shots have no place in RPGs about messainic desert wanderers. Sander, there is more to a CRPG design than algorithms. If a digitized topographic map has a set of terrain type values coded into it that topographic map software recognizes, then you can write a translator package that will convert the topographic map into fallout terrain, or better yet, make fallout engine run on the topographic map that's already digitized and has oodles of data. Yes, you have to convert it into post-apocalytptic landscape, but that's a minor detail aftre making the engine work ona different map.

 

[requiem_for_a_starfury]

but that's a minor detail

You don't half talk crap. For one thing Fallout's post nuclear landscape would be so different from ours that it wouldn't be a minor detail to destruct. The landscape would be so different that for all that effort you might as well stick to the standard way of map making.

Secondly it would most likely need more than a translator package, more like having the engine designed around using topographical data from scratch.

 

[Briosafreak]

Agreed, 1000 yd shots have no place in RPGs about messainic desert wanderers. Sander, there is more to a CRPG design than algorithms. If a digitized topographic map has a set of terrain type values coded into it that topographic map software recognizes, then you can write a translator package that will convert the topographic map into fallout terrain, or better yet, make fallout engine run on the topographic map that's already digitized and has oodles of data. Yes, you have to convert it into post-apocalytptic landscape, but that's a minor detail aftre making the engine work ona different map.

True, that is the Oblivion way for instance. It does become a bit repetitive after a while, don't you think?

 

[Sander]

Agreed, 1000 yd shots have no place in RPGs about messainic desert wanderers. Sander, there is more to a CRPG design than algorithms. If a digitized topographic map has a set of terrain type values coded into it that topographic map software recognizes, then you can write a translator package that will convert the topographic map into fallout terrain, or better yet, make fallout engine run on the topographic map that's already digitized and has oodles of data. Yes, you have to convert it into post-apocalytptic landscape, but that's a minor detail aftre making the engine work ona different map.

Last.goddamn.time: do.some.goddamn.research! You *still*do not know what you're talking about.

Sure there's more to cRPG design than algorithm design, but it's *very important* because what you want to do needs to be doable. I would like to see learning AI at the human level in Fallout. I just don't go about saying 'just do it, it's easy!' because, quite simply, it's not feasible. Somehow, though, you don't seem to be able to understand that it *isn't* feasible even though your remarks have *no* basis in reality.
I think the new rank fits.

Here's why:

- 'Just' writing a translator package isn't 'just' writing a translator package, it is creating pattern recognition software that *flawlessly* recognises all terrain features and automatically knows what they are. You are a *moron* if you think this is somehow easy or feasible for a gaming company to do.

- 'Just' converting it into post-apocalyptic landscape would mean a painstakingly difficult job with the detail you need for flawless pattern recognition of this kind.

- Now that you 'have' pattern recognition, you need to build areas that actually *fit* that pattern recognition. Ie. you have to build modular parts of areas that 'fit' what the engine sees on the map. Again: very, very hard. Very little results.

Now here's the easy way with pretty much the same results:
You manually assign area codes to the map. Each area code represents a certain type of terrain and thus affects what map you get when you stop there/get a random encounter there.
You also manually build a few interesting spots and add them to the map, you may also want to build a few random encounter versions of this.

Now guess what? *This was already in Fallout 1 and 2.*

 

[Akudin]

Sander, you sound like an apologist for the corporate numbers crunchers who took over the gaming companies and kept F3 from happening. You spend more time thinking how it couldn't be done than vice versa. Did I say that it has to be Ai that does it? Sure, a staff of human developers can create a playable map, it just has to conform to terraform topography. To the argument that a fallout nukewar would blast it beyond all recognition, I say not really. A 20 MEG explosion that would level New York wouyld only leave behind a 350 yard crater though it will vaporizer everything in the mile and a half radius. Hence, the world will be dsestroyed, but the mountais and valley, the CONTOUR LINES will remain the same. And those are key to making realistic combat system/exploration.
To your notion that 1000 yrds shots that would ruin the game, I say you take the easy way out. If you weren't prone to orthodoxy and sticking to the comfort of the familiar, you would make the 1000 yard shots a reality in the game world, but functioning rifles, optics, ammunition, sniper skills and the knowledge base to pull it off next to impossible. Amazing how you lack imagnation for a creative type. Or maybe it's not imagination, just the attitude, as you sit here and try to fend off all attempts to make an F3 anything other than the comeback of the F2.

 

[Sander]

Sander, you sound like an apologist for the corporate numbers crunchers who took over the gaming companies and kept F3 from happening. You spend more time thinking how it couldn't be done than vice versa.

YOu mistake having a clue for being a pessimist.
I recall the remark 'an optimist is just a poorly informed pessimist' from somewhere.

Did I say that it has to be Ai that does it?

Considering the fact that you don't know the meaning of the abbreviation AI, yes:
'then you can write a translator package that will convert the topographic map into fallout terrain'
There you go, it says that you want people to write a computer program to do it for you. Again: it shows exactly how you have *no clue*. Now go educate yourself for fuck's sake!

Sure, a staff of human developers can create a playable map, it just has to conform to terraform topography. To the argument that a fallout nukewar would blast it beyond all recognition, I say not really. A 20 MEG explosion that would level New York wouyld only leave behind a 350 yard crater though it will vaporizer everything in the mile and a half radius. Hence, the world will be dsestroyed, but the mountais and valley, the CONTOUR LINES will remain the same.

...
Did you look at the Fallout 1 and 2 maps? Did you put them side-by-side with the real world maps? No?
GO DO SO!

And those are key to making realistic combat system/exploration.

...
What? What the fuck does the way you determine your gameworld's looks have to do with the *combat system*?

To your notion that 1000 yrds shots that would ruin the game, I say you take the easy way out. If you weren't prone to orthodoxy and sticking to the comfort of the familiar, you would make the 1000 yard shots a reality in the game world,

Here's you one post ago:
'1000 yd shots have no place in RPGs about messainic desert wanderers.'
Memory-loss much?
I explained this before and in greater detail *in this goddamn thread*: 1000 yard rifle shots might be neat but essentially mean instant death for anyone, *including the protagonist*. Hence, they might be realistic, but they are far from a useful and good addition to the game.
A game is not about realism, but about solid design.

but functioning rifles, optics, ammunition, sniper skills and the knowledge base to pull it off next to impossible. Amazing how you lack imagnation for a creative type. Or maybe it's not imagination, just the attitude, as you sit here and try to fend off all attempts to make an F3 anything other than the comeback of the F2.

*sigh*
Go smoke a hash pipe, retard. Just because I don't fancy indulging in 'but this could be done!' fantasies that have no basis in *any* reality whatsoever doesn't in any way mean that I wouldn't welcome welcome change.

Now, I'm giving you one final, last chance. Come up with an actual *argument* in favour of why the whole topographical deal could be pulled off, or shut up. You are *still* just restating your own moronic opinion without any basis in facts or reality.

 

[Angrim]

God, this is starting to remind me of this.

 

[Morpoggel]

Amen to that Brother...

 

[Wooz]

Ahahah.

That thread was awesome.

 

[Morpoggel]

"We totally need volcanic islands with silt beaches and barricades because it's like totally possible that people live here and therefore we need it because what if a ship crashed there and the survivors started surviving there and then you run into a tribal clan!!!"

I think that's a short summary of the entire thread...

 

[Briosafreak]

That was too harsh Sander, we have better things to do than being all worked out with posts for Fallout3 that aren't very well thought, in time we'll redirect them to the official Fallout3 forum, for now there's no need to be all worked up for nothing. of course you're the admin and do what you want, I'm just "advising".

 

[Sander]

That was too harsh Sander, we have better things to do than being all worked out with posts for Fallout3 that aren't very well thought, in time we'll redirect them to the official Fallout3 forum, for now there's no need to be all worked up for nothing. of course you're the admin and do what you want, I'm just "advising".

*shrugs*
I don't have anything better to do.
I'm just getting a bit tired of dealing with yet another clueless idiot who won't provide even a single argument after three pages of posts.

I appreciate it, though, Briosa. I might be getting a wee bit too worked up.

 

[Akudin]

Sander, today's computers can scan and classify fingerprints, they can stimulate flight in real time,and they can direct machines to design their own tools to make products that it was directed to make. With all this being possible, I think that it is quite possible to make a game which makes possible realistic wilderness exploration and outdoors tactics. There is more to design and conceptualization than just computer programming. F1 and F2 did a great job compensating with art and scripting for the limitations of software, but this doesn't mean that F1 and F2 can not be improved upon. With regards to 1000 yard shots, they may not belong in the game, but they still have to be accounted for and here is why: When Da Vinci, Michaelangelo, and Shakespeare created their art, they were doing more than just creating art, they were trying to represent reality, the world as they know it, through their artwork. That is why Da Vinci would dissect a lizard beofre painting it. That is the essence of realism. For the same reason Willem Dafoe learned how to be a counterfeiter before acting in "To Live and Die in LA". In the same spirit, ytou may not allow the 1000 yard shots in the game, but you should still account for their existance.

More realistric portrayal of wilderness combat travel and exploration will add to the game. It can best be done through the addition of contour lines and range of visibility based on rterrain cover (thinking third person isometric perspective) . Line Of Sight perspective was already developed for the Fallout Tactics, so terrain realism will make the game more complex, allowing for tougher challenges since Lone Wanderer will have more opportunity for cover and concealment.
But here is the thing, with all the possibilites, F3, if it ever comes out, will be driven as much by Marketing consideraztions as was Fallout Tactics. Which will probbalyu mean some sort of a first person shooter/CRPG to compete with the games of the similar type currently popular on the market. PLANESCAPE Torment was arguablty the greatest CRPG experience but it was considered a commercial flop! If I was as dedicated to the Fallout gaming as you, I'd have seen the writing on the wall, collected a subscription and created my own F3 using the cheap labor in India or Peoples Republic Of China, oh, and I'd have used some legality in naming to avoid the whole business about licensing etc. Inbstead, you are waiting for the fifth year (?) for the F3 at the mercy of the numbers crunchers, while hiding behind the little that you think you know and acting the Head Cheese on the fan site. The joke's on you, Sander.

 

[Sander]

Sander, today's computers can scan and classify fingerprints, they can stimulate flight in real time,and they can direct machines to design their own tools to make products that it was directed to make. With all this being possible, I think that it is quite possible to make a game which makes possible realistic wilderness exploration and outdoors tactics.

Not.in.the.way.you.want.it. Not for a game design company especially.
Developing flawless pattern recognition that can build entire areas from a random given map is completely farfetched, and creating such software would be worthy of at least a doctorate in Computer Science at MIT. *It is not feasible, least of all for a game design company*.
Fuck it, this is getting tiring. Once more: provide arguments. 'I think' is not an argument, it's a statement. Either provide some arguments, or stop it.


[quote="Akudin" There is more to design and conceptualization than just computer programming.[/quote]
Design and conceptualisation *always* has to take into account technical limitations.
Other than that, you are not talking about design and conceptualisation. Taking a real-life map, having it computer adjusted for a PA setting and then have that analysed by pattern recognisition to build a game map has *nothing* to do with design but purely with *implementation*.
The design and concept would be 'I want a map where I can stop anywhere and look around'. That's design. You keep talking about implementation.

F1 and F2 did a great job compensating with art and scripting for the limitations of software, but this doesn't mean that F1 and F2 can not be improved upon.

Oh, yeah, because I really said that Fallout 1 and 2 were perfect and could never be improved upon.
Moron.

With regards to 1000 yard shots, they may not belong in the game, but they still have to be accounted for and here is why: When Da Vinci, Michaelangelo, and Shakespeare created their art, they were doing more than just creating art, they were trying to represent reality, the world as they know it, through their artwork. That is why Da Vinci would dissect a lizard beofre painting it. That is the essence of realism. For the same reason Willem Dafoe learned how to be a counterfeiter before acting in "To Live and Die in LA". In the same spirit, ytou may not allow the 1000 yard shots in the game, but you should still account for their existance.

Are you fucking serious? Are you this much of a retard or just fixated on being right? It is a game. The most important thing about any game is the following: the target audience must enjoy themselves, or have other emotions evoked in them. That's it. 1000 yard sniper shots do not add *anything* whatsoever to the game.
Tell me, please, how they add anything to the game? At all? Other than frustration, that is?

Da Vinci wouldn't have dissected a lizard if it hadn't taught him something about the anatomy of the lizard and hence the proper way to draw it. The same goes for Willem Dafoe, it helped him create a realistic character. However, 1000 yard sniper shots *do not teach you anything at all* about creating a 'realistic' environment.
Also, what the fuck do you even mean by 'accounting for it' in this context?

More realistric portrayal of wilderness combat travel and exploration will add to the game.

'wilderness combat travel and exploration'? Eh...what?
Also, stop calling it 'wilderness'. It's a wasteland, for fuck's sake, not a jungle.

It can best be done through the addition of contour lines and range of visibility based on rterrain cover (thinking third person isometric perspective) . Line Of Sight perspective was already developed for the Fallout Tactics, so terrain realism will make the game more complex, allowing for tougher challenges since Lone Wanderer will have more opportunity for cover and concealment.

Yeah, that's neat, what the fuck does this have to do with *everything else* you've been spouting off in this thread? This is an issue for a combat engine, not for 'wilderness' design or 1000 yard sniper shots.

But here is the thing, with all the possibilites, F3, if it ever comes out, will be driven as much by Marketing consideraztions as was Fallout Tactics. Which will probbalyu mean some sort of a first person shooter/CRPG to compete with the games of the similar type currently popular on the market. PLANESCAPE Torment was arguablty the greatest CRPG experience but it was considered a commercial flop!

No it wasn't, it was a moderate success. It certainly wasn't a flop.

If I was as dedicated to the Fallout gaming as you, I'd have seen the writing on the wall, collected a subscription and created my own F3 using the cheap labor in India or Peoples Republic Of China, oh, and I'd have used some legality in naming to avoid the whole business about licensing etc. Inbstead, you are waiting for the fifth year (?) for the F3 at the mercy of the numbers crunchers, while hiding behind the little that you think you know and acting the Head Cheese on the fan site. The joke's on you, Sander.

You can't win an argument so now you go troll?
Strike one for trolling.

 

[Akudin]

I already said, never mind an unlimited map, let it be a small and limited topographic map designed by creative guys with light pens. Forget about massive amounts of software. Why the 1000 yard shot? because they change the atmosphere of the game. It's not the 1000 yard shot, but if the outdoor map did topographic scale justice, even cobat over 100 yards would add challenges, since the opponents can slip from your line of sight after the first shot and sneak up on you. Forget about limited resouerces of the game software company, because I am talking limited maps here, just realistically portrayed. Besides the improvement in the combat play, considerations like looking for shelter and finding places of likely habitation, tracking other parties, going through old campsites lookign for clues. This needs not be done through software, but can be scripted and/or written. This will add another dimension to the game.

 

[RPG of the year!!]

This will add another dimension to the game.

Yes. I too yearn to roam a Fallout world where 99.9% of the time you find nothing whatsover while combing the wasteland for some miniscule signs of habitation, and ranged combat is a hide-n-seek sniper game over long distances of wilderness. If only Bethesda puts your formula to use, they could singlehandedly win the war against tedium!!

Who do I petition to erect a statue in your honour!?

 

[GatewaysToAnnihilation]

What's wrong with the good ol' map?


I love hoping for a nice random encounter while a dot moves across a grey plain.


Maybe some 3D rendered "movie" of what your character sees, somewhere on your pipboy-screen, to brighten things up, but that's all...

 

[Sander]

I already said, never mind an unlimited map, let it be a small and limited topographic map designed by creative guys with light pens. Forget about massive amounts of software.

A small map? Fallout is about a large, empty wasteland. Not a small, concise OBlivion-sized map.

Why the 1000 yard shot? because they change the atmosphere of the game. It's not the 1000 yard shot, but if the outdoor map did topographic scale justice, even cobat over 100 yards would add challenges, since the opponents can slip from your line of sight after the first shot and sneak up on you.

Yes, again, why would the 1000 yard shot add anything?
You're talking about using cover and terrain here, this has nothing to do with incorporating 1000 yard shots.

Forget about limited resouerces of the game software company, because I am talking limited maps here, just realistically portrayed. Besides the improvement in the combat play, considerations like looking for shelter and finding places of likely habitation, tracking other parties, going through old campsites lookign for clues. This needs not be done through software, but can be scripted and/or written. This will add another dimension to the game.

OH, for fuck's sake.
It's a wasteland. It's huge, empty, and 'searching around for clues' is akin to searching for a needle in a haystack. That's what Fallout is meant to convey.

 

[Akudin]

Wastelands are never empty, nor are they even WASTED. I love hiking railroad tracks along the industrial blight and past ruined factories. I been to the deserts of the southwest where Fallout takes place. Precisely because of the emptiness of the place, any camp and any trail stands out like a sore thumb. Any sign of habitation stays on forever. That is the missing dimension. That might be irrlevant in the real desert except to the archeologists, but it becomes extemely so, in the post nuke world, where wasteland holds hidden tribes and alien technology and other weird encounters, as in Biblical desert and in the world of ancient hinduism after the war of Apocalypse in Bhavagat Gita, it's no accident that the two headed cows are named Brahmin and the first character you encounter in the shady sands is named Adesh. Terrain forms the atmosphere. So much so, that the desolateness, the opportunities for cover and the long-range firearms created the feeling of Wild West, that was embodied in Western fiction of Lois L'amour novels. Fallout 1 and 2 have captured their own post apocalypotic atmosphere, but the short periods of travel combined with reasonably large, albeit exotic settlements creates the feel that the Fallout world is settled like ours, for 30 seconds you zip along a map and you are in town, dealing with another ugly mug. In the Fallout you don't get the feeling that 99% of the people died or of the massiveness of the devastation. Even Fallout Tactic stays away from taking palce int he ruins of Chicago, promised in the opening film. Now, if the Lone Wanderer had spent more of the game time traveling, having to maintain food and water, look for shelter while dodging radscorpions and seeing abandnment, desolation and destruction oin the world scale, the scarcity of the human settlement might sink in a little better.