Worst Possible things for FO3?

Plank said:
Maybe. I've always thought that, after seeing those first-person 3D static screens of the various locations in F1 and F2 during the endgame sequences and such, it would be pretty cool to be able to play via that view, with concessions made to turn it away from FPS/RPG's like System Shock.
Click to expand...

That would be another Fallout game, when we're talking about making a new Fallout RPG then we all assume and want it to be isometric/3rd Person view with Turn Based Combat.

Making the game use two combat systems just cannot work, it's been proven time after time when game developers have tried this. It's a common error developers do, they think *they* are the ones that can do it.

Not that I want to discurage developers from trying new ideas, but making an RPG use two combat system in a huge task.
 
What if each view had a different combat system?. Isometric could have turn-based, 3rd person could have a real-time stacking system like in KOTOR and BG, and first person could be totally real time. If they equalised all three combat systems so that there wasn't anymore than a graphical difference between the 3, it might work. Although, as you said, it's a huge task.
 
Plank said:
What if each view had a different combat system?. Isometric could have turn-based, 3rd person could have a real-time stacking system like in KOTOR and BG, and first person could be totally real time. If they equalised all three combat systems so that there wasn't anymore than a graphical difference between the 3, it might work. Although, as you said, it's a huge task.
Click to expand...

Again, no one has ever made a game with both combat systems that have either been good or well done. It just doesn't work.

And what you're suggesting is two different games.
 
I for one have been getting a little tired of the turn based combat system of Fallout/Fallout 2. It's too restrictive and doesn't have enough combat options, no evasion maneuvers what so ever, and as with most turn based combat systems doesn't take into consideration realism or logic. If they had a next generation tactical turn based combat system that had functional real-time combat options in the interface, pause options, and maybe a slow motion feature it could be potentially awesome. I mean the original Van Buren had possible plans for the ultimate real-time combat system with pause feature. And there was also talk of being able to switch between an awesome TB system and an even better RT system, Arcanum tried it and failed but that doesn't mean we have to lose hope. After all if they take their time and make sure to test everything to incredible depth it's possible.

If they can pull that off i want them to, a TB system for slow paced strategy fans, and a more dynamically designed RT system for fast paced action fans. If they just made a more functional turn based combat system with more strategy, a hell of a lot more combat/evasion options, stance options, and more attention to realisim and logic I'd love a turn based combat system!!
 
fallout_expert105 said:
I for one have been getting a little tired of the turn based combat system of Fallout/Fallout 2.
Click to expand...

Irony, considering your user name. It is quite obvious at this point you have absolutely no clue why Fallout was designed in the style it was. Hint: It has something to do with the origins of the CRPG sub-genre.
 
LOL good point but I have to say I love Fallout/Fallout 2 it's a fabulous game I respect the current Fallout game engine in place and I do enjoy it very much, also I do understand why it's turn based I just think for Fallout 3 to be half way decent it can't rely on the original TB system. Come on, the original turn based combat system by to day's standards is way too restrictive to be enjoyable, the new Fallout game needs to have a TB system that has at least 100% more combat options for freedom, the ability to change stance with different weapon accuracy penalties, and a hell of a lot of evasion maneuvers to counter balance the logic issue of just standing there while your foe blasts you with a mini-gun.
 
fallout_expert105 said:
Come on, the original turn based combat system by to day's standards is way too restrictive to be enjoyable
Click to expand...
Consittering some japanese companies still hash out RPGs where combat consists of two lines of enemies hopping back and forth and waiting turns, I really don't see how the fallout system is restrictive.
 
While having all of these options for TB would be good, it is not needed, IMO. The combat in FO was modeled off of the combat from P&P RPGs of old. The actual combat is partially abstract and much of it is left to the imagination. During the gun fights, the people seem to be standing around and not doing any evasive maneurvers. This is just a limitation of the graphics and sprites.

In "reality" (as much as this word can mean in a CRPG), the characters are ducking and dodging like they would in RL. That's what the AC score is for. If you do nothing during your turn, you have more points available for hitting the deck or ducking bullets.

By making the combat system so detailed as to take account whether a character is crouching, lying prone, or which direction he's facing may be neat, but I fear it may soak-up too much attention from other elements of the game, such as story or character development. IMO, the combat system in FO and FO2 ain't broke . . . too bad Bethesda is probably going to fix it :?

They better not make FO3 real time . . . fuck, I know they're going to do it anyway. Even having both RT and TB will suck, as it would be an unbalenced mess like Arcanum.

I'm pretty pessemistic about the fate of FO3, and, despite Gavin Carter's statements to the contrary, I'm fully expecting Morrowind with Guns :(
 
Very good points you know what you're talking about, but kneeling, standing, and lying prone could allow various different ways of interacting with our game world. Lying prone could allow us enhanced accuracy with projectile weapons same with kneeling except kneeling would be crucial for sneaking, and would give the ability to go through areas with less chance of being spotted perfect for deceptive characters. And as a balance this would decrease AC points and enhance your foe's chance of hitting you when you're out in the open but decrease your foe's chance of hitting you from a distance. Now I understand that you like the original Fallout TB system but what's wrong with enhancing it's potential, functionality, options, and open ended design? Anyway I'm really hoping that if the new developers put in the time, effort, and money that they increase the engine's logic, realism, and the overall artificial intelligence to go allong perfectly with this system. And by the way I feel that even though the original Fallout's turn based combat system is still playable it feels restrictive and primitive by today's standards I'd love to see more improvement.
 
The combat in F1 still has the most depth of any CRPG I've played. Adding crouched/prone positions is one thing, but realtime/RT-pause? Too much real-time action relies on the player's ability to act, more than the avatar's. I shudder at the thought of it becoming like combat in Morrowind or Neverwinter Nights, just sitting back watching the same weapon swing over and over and comparing health bars, waiting for something to die.

One of the greatest strengths of Fallout was reproducing some of the detailed feel and pace of P&P RPGs, keeping you immersed in your character partly because every action requires your engagement. All events are played out one at a time as if read aloud by the GM.

I love realtime ultra-realism FPS simulations, and wouldn't even mind playing one set in Fallout. CTB worked okay in Tactics, but that was a totally different game. Keep RT away from my RPGs.
 
Now I understand that you like the original Fallout TB system but what's wrong with enhancing it's potential, functionality, options, and open ended design?
Click to expand...

That sounds like another pathetic marketing troll, one who also tried the same tripe for F:POS. Designers who have really worked with combat systems (real ones, not BioWare's ShitScript Punch & Judy System) can tell you that there is nothing functional nor complex about RT combat, but is instead quite the opposite. There is a shitload that you have to abbreviate or just can't use due to having to rely on interface constraints and averaging player reflexes. RT befits action games; TB befits games offering tactics, which the RPG genre has used ever since because it works the best for having a large amount of computations.

There's a reason why you roll dice instead of play quarters.

So you would take Fallout's combat system and turn it into a twitchfest point and click show, or one where you select targets and then passively watch like the Infinity Engine games. You might want to search the forum for more information on that before you post another bit of baseless garbage.

Then there's also the fact that Fallout was designed in the style of P&P RPGs for a reason.
 
There's a reason that Fallout Tactics' combat was subpar to Fallout/Fallout 2. That reason was CTB. Now you want to include more of this real time bullshit into a once awesome franchise whose downturn was spurned by bad philosophy and horrid combat?
 
I'm gonna say this once, I've given up on any form of real-time combat for any depth based Fallout RPG. I've given it a lot of thought and I've come to the obvious conclusion that the turn based combat system is just an obvious choice for such an amazing franchise and also your posts have helped my opinions along in evolution. I love the TB combat system in Fallout, and when I said I'd like to see the original system updated and refined for combat options, the ability to change your character's stance, and overall more freedom for how the system plays out in terms of logic and realism I never said I'd go so far as to make it a real-time/with pause feature. I mentioned the possibility of this in a few of my other posts but now I take it back and I understand that it should stay turn based no matter what, and before you say "Oh he finally gets it" give it a rest I just have different tastes than you but I'm willing to comply when I just take the time to consider what it has in terms of positives. And one more thing I apologize for overly pushing my ideas on others, but that doesn't mean I won't be persistent in my opinions.
 
Now that's a respectable post. Sorry if I sounded harsh in my response. Heh, in my current state of relations with one admin I'm nervous about getting banned for saying THAT, so I know how you feel.

I didn't mind CTB in Tactics, but it wasn't so much an RPG as it was a RTS game set in a loosely Fallout inspired world with some character growth. I have no problem with real-time tactical games, they can have a lot of complexity and present different play challenges. I've just never seen one pulled off in a CRPG with any degree of depth.
 
No, I think it was stupidity like failing to understand the setting composition through your many failed attempts (hell, I basically gave the answer to you away already).

I love realtime ultra-realism FPS simulations, and wouldn't even mind playing one set in Fallout.
Click to expand...

Yes, still clueless.
 
well well , worst thing is a Total change in all of the Fallout universe as we know it.

or "morrowind/fallout/1-person/overpowercharacter start style"

Hope not it will be like morrowind style..
 
I've thought of something and as usual I'm posting it here for you to tell me what's wrong with my idea. The prospect of a real-time combat system scares many devoted Fallout fans, but why can't we have other elements of real-time in the game. For example being able to control automobiles in real-time. That map screen we get whenever we cross hundreds of miles can be useful for really long distance travel, but designing a real-time movement and transportation system could be a nice option. I've always liked the prerendered cinematic in Full Throttle where he's riding his motor-cycle. Oh and one last thing I know Fallout 3 has to have a turn based combat system, and I want a TB system with more context sensitive combat/movement options but I'd love a very rare to use real-time combat option integrated into the turn based combat system. This would work when you're in complete stealth if you're undetected you should be able to engage the un aware enemy with a real-time combat option known as "fast skirmish" it could add the element of surprise needed, and make stealth characters more capable killers.

The "fast skirmish" real-time combat tactic I mentioned would allow undetected stealth characters to sneak up behind an unaware enemy and engage them with an attack(either physical or projectile weapon based)totally in real-time. As soon as this real-time attack has been initiated the game engine auto switches to a turn based combat system, this could be a great perk for a stealth character. I'm still being open in my thinking so please go easy with your opinions. But in my mind the best way this could work would be to use it on one enemy at a time with a silent weapon(perhaps silenced pistol/sub-machine gun). And if this is to work the game engine would have to be upgraded for advancement in logic, realism, and artificial intelligence.
 
fallout_expert105 said:
I've thought of something and as usual I'm posting it here for you to tell me what's wrong with my idea.
Click to expand...

Like how it has jack shit to do with P&P gameplay, as it has been repeatedly pointed out to you that was the intended design style? You have to understand what that means in order to even begin considering pulling anything remotely near "real time" out of your ass. There is too much importance on that aspect, as it is as integral to Fallout CRPG as the setting design.

Go back to Counter-Strike and UT2k4 if that's what you want. Or understand that Full Throttle's design has jack shit to do with Fallout's. Otherwise, stop cluttering up the forum with moronic shit, or have someone change your user name.

EDIT: I just went through your stupidity of "fast skirmish" in terms of mechanics, a bit more fully. It took me awhile to try and apply it towards real design.

That already exists in Fallout's combat system. Only the game assumes you are bright enough to sneak behind someone and manually start combat. Or, for that matter, how you can sneak behind someone and if you should shoot them or otherwise attack, the game starts the combat routine. Such innovashun! They implemented your idea into the past!

Your mission, should you want to continue posting, is to play Fallout without any guns whatsoever. Or just play the Fallout CRPGs (both), as it's obvious you haven't.
 
You really need to lighten up, I've played both Fallout and Fallout 2 in great depth trying different gameplay dynamics and I currently own both, I play them regularly. Why can't I just post an idea? As I clearly pointed out I'm thinking out loud and I've come here for you "experienced RPG fans" to comment on them. I'm just trying new ideas to give Fallout 3 a little more depth, I'm sorry if I upset you but I'm not sorry that I like to think for myself. You're right about the fact that there are similar elements already in Fallout but they're lackluster at best. Anyway I'm sure Bethesda will do a fine job(if they make sure not to be too ambitious, stupid, or make the mistake of not listening to the true Fallout fans). Anyway I'm not into those first person shooter real-time action games you mentioned. I love real-time action and it gives more realistic control in combat situations. That is obvious but yeah I'm getting bored of trying to make up new ways of using more realistic fast paced combat play tactics for Fallout all I get is "stop talking you moron" or "you've obviously never played Fallout leave now!" so fine. I'm convinced that a real-time combat system wouldn't work for the PC version but with a next generation console hell yes. An RT system if properly balanced into the functional game engine with all the proper context sensitive actions, and a few stream lined design changes could be fabulous but it would take time and you'll obviously disagree with me so I'm done. I respect your opinions most of the time you're right just try not to be so harsh with your comments please.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top