| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
BillSeurer
Village Dweller
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 2
|
"unbalanced skills and characters from the beginning"
That's Fallout all right. The combat and the way skill increases are handled are incredibly weak. Maybe Bethesda will fix it. |
Tue Jul 13, 2004 2:06 pm |
|
|
Greyslayer
Village Dweller
Joined: 16 Jul 2003
Posts: 10
Location: USA |
In response to the personal attacks:
Morporkian
"A few words for you, kind sir; try not to rant about things what you seemingly know nothing about."
The only thing I said that wasn't based on personal experience was Interplays role as I only know the end result.
As for not knowing about these games. Here is a piece of advice for you "Kind Sir". Don't assume. I've played Fallout 1 three times from start to finish and Fallout 2 I've lost track it's been so many. Morrowind I suffered through to the end. It's an open game, incredibly long, so takes time. Believe me when I say that I took great deal of time exploring. Early in the game I was impressed until I made MANY realizations of the horrid flaws therein.
I'm making a comparison. Offering points. You? Simply flaming me because you don't like what I have to say. "There's so much wrong in this text that I can't even begin to comprehend" then call me a child. Did I call you anything? No. That would lead one to believe you're simply a Bethesda fanboy. Right.
------
Guest
"There really are a number of stupid children posting here."
Right off a personal attack.
"Stop using the word 'rape'"
And worse, a "Guest" that isn't even registered trying to dictate what another posts. If "rape" is inappropriate in this context (I don't see how as it fits perfectly many would agree) then let a moderator tell me, censor, or delete my comments. I was not trying to be cool, nor was I trying to be intelligent. Thanks for the advice though. I'll keep that in mind next time.
"That Bethesda made Morrowind does NOT mean FO3"
True, but Bethesda has a history of the same kind of nonsense. There is reason to believe Fallout will be ruined. Good enough reason based on history. Especially the utter failings regarding dialog.
"If you'd played Morrowind and actually READ stuff"
I did force myself to read many of those tedious stories. And I couldn't care less about them. It wasn't particularly enjoyable and added next to nothing to the lifeless world. What bothered me the most was the generic NPCs with wooden personalities and repetitious dialog. This is a game like Everquest. You could do well enough with one NPC in each town. Or maybe the entire world. At least I wouldn't have to run.. no JUMP to the next town to get some worthless piece of information.
Morrowind survives only because it is large, open, and has many possibilities. The meat of those possibilities is rank and soured. Not worth bothering with. Most things great about Fallout are failings of Bethesda games. You talk about Background? Stories? This was almost non-existent in Fallout. Boy! Good thing we'll have a great story and in depth books to read in FO3! Another Fanboy it seems like. |
|
Tue Jul 13, 2004 3:09 pm |
|
|
Danicek
The Old One
Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 5922
Location: Czech Republic |
@Greyslayer
You (of course) have right to express you opinions and feelings. And you did it in your little "review of Morrowind". I also do not find valuable points ind Guests post.
So now to the point: I do not agree with you in many points. Mainly:
Morrowind and previous titles of this series were good, sound and famous games. But Fallout is bigger legend.
People love TES series. And they do it because it contain good games.
Morrowind was problematic sequel. Extremely long waiting made nearly biggest hype ever. And what we saw was "not so perfect game". Probably too open ended, too huge, not so full of content. Still it brought several good things.
Still I do not find it reasonable to make conslusions in way you did. TES games are far from worst games ever and Bethesda is far from worst company and is not looking only for gold.
So there are of course reasons to be afraid of - that they will transform Fallout into "something like Morrowind". But to love Fallout is good beginning. And they love Fallout. Certainly it looks like they will make it different from Fallout 1 & 2. It doesnt mean that it will be bad, however it makes me sad. Classical RPGs like Fallout (and for example BG series) are rare thing nowadays. So I would rather see new typical Fallout comming out than new "new style" RPG. |
|
Tue Jul 13, 2004 3:40 pm |
|
|
Guest
|
hello! i'm new to rpgs! how do i kill things? |
|
Tue Jul 13, 2004 5:51 pm |
|
|
Val
Risen From Ashes
Joined: 18 Feb 2002
Posts: 14724
Location: Utah, USA |
*depressed sigh*
_________________
Freeeeeeedom! Thank heavens it's summer!
What do I have to show for my hard work? A piece of paper! Wee!
=Guardian, Moderator, UltimaDot Newshound=  |
|
Tue Jul 13, 2004 7:16 pm |
|
|
Pinky's Brain
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 28 Nov 2002
Posts: 40
|
It might not be Morrowind with guns, but without top down view and turn based combat it wont be a true sequel to the Fallout games either. |
|
Tue Jul 13, 2004 7:38 pm |
|
|
Guest
|
Hay guys!
I would like to be a Fallout-fan too! "Morrowind suckz!1one! Bethesda is teh devil!"
Can I play?  |
|
Tue Jul 13, 2004 9:25 pm |
|
|
Guest
|
You people flaming other's for stating their oppionion are killing me. Everyone has the right to their own oppinion.
If you like 1st person twitch rpgs like Morrowind and not a fan of TB or top-down isometric view then of course you would be happy that bethesda got the Fallout liscense.
You would also be happy if they got the BG3 liscense. You would not be happy if a dev that made only TB iso games got the TES liscense.
But logic leads you to believe that any sequal should have the same core mechanics as the prevoius game, or the same gameplay, hense the term sequal.
Would Gothic 3 really be gothic if it was iso and TB? No. I would like it a lot better and would buy it, but it wouldn't be Gothic 3. As it is now, I won't because I don't like twitch action games. I also won't buy FO3 from Besethda because I don't like twitch action games.
I wouldn't have bought Van Buern either because FO is a TB only game. TB/RT amalgamtions stink. I love FO 1 and 2 and would gladly pay $150 for a FO3, but without a pure TB game it will never be a FO3. It can be FOBOS 2, FOT 2, or "FO: Something besides 3" but never FO3 unless it incorporates all the mechanics of FO1 and 2. It can "improve" on them and make them better or "more dumbed down" for the slower and less bright console market. It can have new features and new never before seen content. But in order to have a 3 on it, which denotes it is a sequal to FO1 and 2, it can't have different mechanics. |
|
Tue Jul 13, 2004 10:28 pm |
|
|
BillSeurer
Village Dweller
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 2
|
"But in order to have a 3 on it, which denotes it is a sequal to FO1 and 2, it can't have different mechanics."
Including all the broken ones? Fallout was great for its setting and plot. The actual game system is rather weak. |
|
Tue Jul 13, 2004 11:14 pm |
|
|
Lorgosin
Head Merchant
Joined: 10 Aug 2002
Posts: 69
Location: Sweden |
It's sad that this has all turned into a flame war about Morrowind. When I heard the news I was happily suprised. Not because of the history of Bethesda, but because of their obvious intentions. Let me explain:
Bethesda has always been a developer with vision. They try to create true open-endedness. I'm not saying they have totally succeeded, some games were even crap. They should be given credit for trying though, since we all know how uncommon that is in the buissness. Whith failures comes lessons that I am sure will be applied to future games.
As for the cries for isometric view and turn-based combat, I suspect nostalgia. I'm not saying I don't like the systems, in fact i love them. What most people fails to see however, is that they are all means to an end. Turnbased is good because it gives you time to think, something that a pause-based system (like in BG) does just as well and more dynamically. Isometric view is obviously implemented for a better view of the situation, especially with a party. If Bethesda comes up with a better solution I'd be thrilled.
Finally I would like to urge everybody to wait for the result and juge the game by it's own merits. To me the frenchise has always been second to the game. I trust Bethesda to give it their best (noone can blame Bethesda for not trying)and experiment, thereby moving the art of game development (yes it is an art) forward. |
|
Tue Jul 13, 2004 11:47 pm |
|
|
Greyslayer
Village Dweller
Joined: 16 Jul 2003
Posts: 10
Location: USA |
Danicek:
You're right. I have to appologize for the ranting. Let me explain. I had just logged onto this site and read the news. As you can probably tell I never was impressed with Morrowind and other Bethesda games such as Daggerfall either. Fallout 1 & 2 I absolutely LOVED. In fact FO2 is my favorite RPG of all time. Yes it was buggy and had it's own problems. But to hear that a Dev like Bethesda is doing 3 was just ... well horrifying is alittle too dramatic, yet I could almost say that  . I shouldn't put Bethesda down so much. Morrowind and kind did have vision and many other interesting aspects. I, like others, am just very worried about how they will handle FO3 based on their past styles and inclinations. For us Fallout is a cherished memory. Some don't even want Fallout to continue, fearing sequels will tarnish the series. I'm not going that far, but I did have other hopes for developers. In the end, you are right. I have jumped the gun out of worry and should just wait and see. And pray that Bethesda does the ultimate RPG of all time justice. Again, sorry for the very negative posting. |
|
Wed Jul 14, 2004 1:30 am |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
@BillSeurer, there are several balance issues but I can't think of a better character creation and development system. Can you?
@Lorgosin, of course nostalgia is a part of the desire to maintain TB, ISO gameplay. Isn't that the whole point in buying a license - attracting existing fans who liked the previous games? Bethesda is a recognisable brand and could readily establish their own franchise (just as they did with TES) if they want to do their own thing (post-apoc or not).
One of the other reasons is that many Fallout fans believe the character system is one of the best (if not the best) system ever and SPECIAL was developed for and within a turn-based combat structure. The BioWare pause-play system does not do it "more dynamically" but if you are a fan of that system we probably won't agree on that. However, it's important to note that most Fallout combat involves ranged weapons and a change to pause-play has an even bigger effect than for melee. Remember that in most Bio games you have a party where you can use frontline tanks to engage enemies and create some space for ranged characters. Or should this be changed as well?
I know this is unlikely to sway you but please consider reading Gareth Davies Treatise on Combat to Pink Floyd, which discusses TB vs RT combat. Gareth worked for Microforte who developed Fallout Tactics.
_________________
Editor @ RPGDot |
|
Wed Jul 14, 2004 1:51 am |
|
|
Lorgosin
Head Merchant
Joined: 10 Aug 2002
Posts: 69
Location: Sweden |
Dhruin: Thanks for the link, I enjoyed the article. It summed it all up pretty good. Perhaps I wasn't totally clear before. I usually prefer turn-based (I'm a huge fan of TBS and boardgaming). I just wanted to point out that there are advantages to both systems and that the important thing to me is to get a system that doesn't rely on my reflexes and that I get a good dose of strategy. Besides, even with a seriously flawed combat system a game can still be good. Morrowind is an example of that (no need to flame me, I know some of you disagree). As for buying the licence I see the world and style as most important. If the feeling is the same I'm happy. Finally: thank you for discussing in a civilized manner. |
|
Wed Jul 14, 2004 4:21 am |
|
|
Remus
Overgrown Cat
Joined: 03 Jul 2002
Posts: 1657
Location: Fish bowl |
| New Q&A session from Gamespot |
|
Gamespot conducted another short interview with Bethesda, and this time with Todd Howard.
quote:
GS: Fallout is one of the most beloved franchises of all time--are you worried about meeting gamers' high expectations?
TH: I worry about meeting our own expectations. We take this stuff as serious as anyone and are more critical of what we do than the fans. We're very careful in how we handle franchises. I think people can look at how we've treated the Elder Scrolls and know that we'll give the same care to Fallout. We pride ourselves in keeping franchises relevant and bringing something fresh to the market with each game. That being said, I'm sure there's a vocal minority that wants to kill us for even attempting to do it--but they wanted to kill Peter Jackson too, so you have to ignore that and just do something great that you'd love to play.
_________________
 |
|
Wed Jul 14, 2004 5:27 am |
|
|
Gorath
Mostly Harmless
Joined: 03 Sep 2001
Posts: 6327
Location: NRW, Germany |
This is exactly the correct attitude. Bethesda should create their own interpretation of Fallout and name it FO3.
I personally don´t care if they replace SPECIAL or TB combat or whatever else. I´m not interested in this theoretical stuff. The one and only question which will decide whether or not I´m going to buy FO3 is : "Does it feel like Fallout?"
_________________
Webmaster GothicDot |
|
Wed Jul 14, 2004 7:51 am |
|
|
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Tue Apr 16, 2019 9:39 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
