| |
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
|
|
|
|
Val
Risen From Ashes
Joined: 18 Feb 2002
Posts: 14724
Location: Utah, USA |
Apparently crossing my pinkies and toes didn't work. Well, my hopes for a great Fallout 3 were just dashed.
_________________
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 7:04 pm |
|
|
Cryptor69
Head Merchant
Joined: 08 Jan 2004
Posts: 62
Location: Canada / Poland |
Since Bethesda allready got the Fallout rights for all future Fallout games other then MMO then the whole convo about who would make a great fallout game is pretty pointless.
I see things this way : Bethesda will make Fallout 3 in beautiful 3D using the new tech they are working on. The game will be somewhat buggy on initial release but will be a great success. Sequels will follow. Interplay will make the online version, using the 2D iso view, and even though all fanatics continue to preach that this is the way to go, the game will fail miserably.
So as far as I'am concerned things could not have gone any better. I mean really, all Fallout fans should be pleased. Nobody thought that this franchise would live again, this is nothing short of a miracle considering that just a week ago everyone in the right mind was 100% sure that interplay would never even consider selling these rights.
 What can possibly be better than Fallout world in full 3d for us to explore ?
_________________
Life is a Lie, Death is an Illussion |
|
Wed Jul 14, 2004 6:55 am |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
That's easy: a well-made Fallout with turn-based combat and iso viewpoint. Where did you get the idea Interplay would never sell the rights? It was only ever a matter of time before someone got the rights.
So, for those that are in favour of a first-person view, how is the combat going to work?
_________________
Editor @ RPGDot |
|
Wed Jul 14, 2004 1:15 pm |
|
|
EverythingXen
Arch-villain
Joined: 01 Feb 2002
Posts: 4342
|
I must agree my hopes for a good FO3 were pretty much dashed. What set fallout apart was the story, the dialogue trees, the insane critical hits to the eyes. 
None of those would work in a Bethesda engine. Unless they're stepping away from their wireframe first person action RPG specialization for whatever reason... and I can't see that happening.
Ah well. It's Bethesda. Good game or flop we won't know until released... in about 2008 or (more likely) 2010.
_________________
Estuans interius, Ira vehementi
"The old world dies and with it the old ways. We will rebuild it as it should be, MUST be... Immortal!"
=Member of the Nonflamers Guild=
=Worshipper of the Written Word= |
|
Wed Jul 14, 2004 3:34 pm |
|
|
MoonDragon
High Emperor
Joined: 25 May 2002
Posts: 1254
Location: Waterloo, Canada |
Aw crap.
quote:
GameSpy: Since you now have the rights for the franchise on console, is Fallout 3 also coming to consoles?
Pete Hines: Our intent is to develop and publish the game for a number of platforms.
[...]
GameSpy: So are you working with the previous Interplay "Van Buren" assets and developers, or are you starting from scratch with a new engine and assets?
Pete Hines: Too early to talk about that kind of thing.
GameSpy: Will Fallout 3 follow in the footsteps of its predecessor in style of game play?
Pete Hines: Again, too specific.
In other words... it will blow. The PC version will be an after thought of the console version. With all the bugs tossed in without care. After all, Interplay wants console games, not PC games. It will take forever to develop. It will be bland and uninvolving. It will be real time, first person, 3D game. :/
God they should've let it die. But I guess for as long as you can make few bucks from the hide of the dead horse you keep beating it.
_________________
(@) |
|
Wed Jul 14, 2004 9:34 pm |
|
|
Cryptor69
Head Merchant
Joined: 08 Jan 2004
Posts: 62
Location: Canada / Poland |
"After all, Interplay wants console games, not PC games" - Who cares, they are not the ones making Fallout 3.
EverythingXen - Nothing stands in the way of quality Fallout dialogue trees and story to be used in the next gen Bethesda engine - Infact how could one of these possibly stand in the way of other ? Holy man, you can incorporate quality dialogue trees in pretty much any type of a game with any type of an engine.
EverythingXen - Even less stands in the way of "insane critical hit s to the eyes" - Have you ever played any of the 3D shooters ? Say SniiiIIIIiiiiper RiiIIiffllE
Dhruin - What do you mean how is the combat going to work ? Pick up any 3D shooter, holy, people, since when did you all turn into whining altzhaimer patients.
Come on guys, I can't possibly comprehend why all of you are not totally excited about this. Any other company would just make more of thesame, as to where these guys will actually try their best to improove things !
To be honest I'am very dissapointed to see how some of the hardcore fallout fans reacted to this news.
_________________
Life is a Lie, Death is an Illussion |
|
Thu Jul 15, 2004 7:24 am |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
And some of the Fallout fans are disappointed at how people who don't really like how Fallout played and want to change into something they would like to play, have reacted. 
So basically, you want a Fallout shooter? Other than changing Fallout to a completely different type of game, how does it improve things? If you want a post-apoc shooter, why not look forward to STALKER or Nirvana?
When you say "Any other company would just make more of thesame", does it not make sense that lots of us loved Fallout just the way it was? I don't want action combat - I can get that from the games above or HL2, DX:IW or any other shooter. I want a real RPG - one where a character with low agility but high intelligence plays completely differently to the reverse.
Please feel free to respond. I'm passionate about Fallout being turn-based and ISO but I can discuss it calmly and I won't allow a flame war.
_________________
Editor @ RPGDot |
|
Thu Jul 15, 2004 11:15 am |
|
|
Cryptor69
Head Merchant
Joined: 08 Jan 2004
Posts: 62
Location: Canada / Poland |
Some of us are Fallout Fans as to where some of us are 2D iso view fans. I'am a Fallout fan.
I also don;t think that a 3D view means that it's a "shooter". It's just a different view.
When I think of Bethesda Fallout I think of Fallout 1 done in beautiful 3D where I can spend hundreths of hours interacting in the fallout universe. I see a world full of life and very realistic.
I just don't see where this can go wrong ( assuming that they learned from the significant mistakes they made in morrowind ).
_________________
Life is a Lie, Death is an Illussion |
|
Thu Jul 15, 2004 3:19 pm |
|
|
Seth
Last Man Standing
Joined: 23 Jan 2002
Posts: 1008
Location: Faerun |
I’m with Dhruin on this one, Fallout was meant to be turn-based with great story, system, camera angle and all these little things that made many of us coming back countless of times to it.
Don’t get me wrong I love to blow some steam playing FPS, but this is just that blowing, I don’t expect that anybody will do FPS a turn based combat, that’s why I believe that RPG’s shouldn’t be made in real time. After all it all started from PnP.
The first game that comes to mind with that drastic view point change (from the top to first person) is GTA, anybody remember the first one or the second for that mater, but that was basically an action game.
quote:
Originally posted by Cryptor69
I just don't see where this can go wrong ( assuming that they learned from the significant mistakes they made in morrowind ).
Well, just to name a few disasters.
1. Levelling: in MW, it was just enough face your character against some wall, put something heavy on the keyboard and go watch TV for couple of hours.
In Fallout: the most abuse you could probably do is by stealing, but still you were needed in front of PC.
2. Dialogs: MW, I don’t even know where to start.
FO, hands down.
3. Journal: MW, if you were looking for something and just forgot from what town or what name should you looked up, I kept my own notes just to keep tract what should I do next.
FO, granted didn’t have that many quests, but the split by sections was great idea.
4. Ending: By the end of the game no matter what class, house or guilt you choose you were fighter/sorcerer/survivor.
FO You better thing twice where you stick these little points you have earned.
Now I’m not saying that MW is bad game, just it’s not for everybody just like Fallout. How many discussions we went through what’s better Diablo or BG, you just can’t compare two different styles.
quote:
Originally posted by Cryptor69
To be honest I'am very dissapointed to see how some of the hardcore fallout fans reacted to this news.
I would be walking on the walls if the licence went to Troika, but… Bethesda, forgive me but I’m very sceptic to put it mildly. Adding to the all the pieces of information that developers are throwing at us doesn’t help much either, since most of that info is exactly what hard core fans don’t want to hear: real-time, firs-person-view, maybe it would be better if FO stayed dead.
_________________
Money - An article which may be used as a universal passport to everywhere except heaven, and as a universal provider of everything except happiness. |
|
Thu Jul 15, 2004 4:31 pm |
|
|
EverythingXen
Arch-villain
Joined: 01 Feb 2002
Posts: 4342
|
I like 3D shooters, first or third person.... but Fallout needs to be turn based to feel like Fallout to me. I don't want to have to try and manoever the mouse while strafing and using the scroll wheel to zoom to shoot someone in a Fallout game.
It's really that. I know the dialogue can be done in any engine: even Morrowind can handle dialogue trees to an extent. If they get some good writers the story and the character interaction wouldn't be doomed to sucking by default. I remain skeptical of their ability to do so and will until release....
_________________
Estuans interius, Ira vehementi
"The old world dies and with it the old ways. We will rebuild it as it should be, MUST be... Immortal!"
=Member of the Nonflamers Guild=
=Worshipper of the Written Word= |
|
Thu Jul 15, 2004 4:38 pm |
|
|
Cryptor69
Head Merchant
Joined: 08 Jan 2004
Posts: 62
Location: Canada / Poland |
Well I agree on few points with everyone anyways ; It better not be just another fps and dialogues in morrowind suck.
But then again, personally, I don't belive that Fallout was MEANT to be 2d iso or that 3D will make it an fps.
All that's left is to hope that this will turn out well, they sure are going ( getting allready ) about as much press coverage ( on the net anyways ) as any other game ever got. So expectactions are very high. If they make it right they sure could continue making successful expansions etc.. for years and years to come.
One thing that I worry about is the adult content, it;s a big part of what made Fallout the classic that it is, but somehow I doubt they will be brave enough to put that into F3. It's most likelly that it'll be significantly toned down for the general audience, and for this very reason will loose all of its appeal.
_________________
Life is a Lie, Death is an Illussion |
|
Fri Jul 16, 2004 6:30 am |
|
|
Seth
Last Man Standing
Joined: 23 Jan 2002
Posts: 1008
Location: Faerun |
quote:
Originally posted by Cryptor69
All that's left is to hope that this will turn out well, they sure are going ( getting allready ) about as much press coverage ( on the net anyways ) as any other game ever got. So expectactions are very high. If they make it right they sure could continue making successful expansions etc.. for years and years to come.
The funny thing is, all the fans (including me) who wants to have fallout exactly (updated graphics and all that crap goes without saying) like it’s predecessor, are praying to whatever Deities they believe to have as little changes as possible. If you visit any the forum regardless of type of the game, you will find at least one topic related to this latest announcement, and believe you me we don’t have high expectation with Bethesda, just we are scared s***less what they came up with.
quote:
Originally posted by Cryptor69
One thing that I worry about is the adult content, it;s a big part of what made Fallout the classic that it is, but somehow I doubt they will be brave enough to put that into F3. It's most likelly that it'll be significantly toned down for the general audience, and for this very reason will loose all of its appeal.
You just hit bulls eye here.
_________________
Money - An article which may be used as a universal passport to everywhere except heaven, and as a universal provider of everything except happiness. |
|
Fri Jul 16, 2004 6:06 pm |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
One of the things I find amazing are the people saying "Don't over-react! Just tell Bethsoft what you Fallout fans want". Don't get me wrong, there has been some abominable behaviour (on both sides), including some ridiculous histrionics that will achieve nothing.
*But* - tell them what the Fallout fans want? If Bethsoft needs to be told that then they don't understand anything. They shouldn't need to be told that most fans want an iso turn-based game that respects the heritage. Sure, add a modern 3D movable camera and so on but keep the fundamental mechanics similar.
I think it was Biosafreak from NMA (can't remember - I've been everywhere this week) who contrasted Strategy First and MiSTland South doing Jagged Alliance 3. Now, MiSTland did the lamentable Paradise Cracked, so the fans should be very wary of this. But early on Strategy First's Richard Therrion posted on the boards something like "JA3 absolutely must be turn-based" and the fans relaxed - this guy gets it.
_________________
Editor @ RPGDot |
|
Sat Jul 17, 2004 12:06 am |
|
|
Gorath
Mostly Harmless
Joined: 03 Sep 2001
Posts: 6327
Location: NRW, Germany |
The problem is that TB games are commercially no longer an option for devs in countries with high wages.
Those Russian devs can probably make both JA3s for less than $1 Mio combined. (I would estimate closer to 500k than 1 Mio). Bethesda´s budget will be clearly higher.
Given that a great game like Silent Storm only sold less than 10k in North America I don´t see how TB would be possible.
_________________
Webmaster GothicDot |
|
Sat Jul 17, 2004 4:30 am |
|
|
Remus
Overgrown Cat
Joined: 03 Jul 2002
Posts: 1657
Location: Fish bowl |
quote:
Originally posted by Dhruin
So, for those that are in favour of a first-person view, how is the combat going to work?
First, for me, i don't have very specific favor on view point issue. What most important in the end is Fallout 3 should be a fun, excellent game or at least very good. The issue of view angle doesn't directly determines the quality of Fallout 3. It is more a matter of indvidual preferences.
There is contention that since Fallout and Fallout 2 use the isometric view point (semi top-down?), then Fallout 3 must uses the same camera angle, anything else would makes the game unlike Fallout. It's part of Fallout traditions as the fans said. Yet, i can see more important elements of Fallout tradition beside the camera angle: The SPECIAL system, which heavily influences the game, the apocalyptic theme (can it be still Fallout if the story is about something else?), the 1950s music, and the dark humors existed in the series.
And directly to your question, what programmability issues you could have been forseen that prevent combat aspect to be implemented in first-person view? Wizardry 8 used turn-based combat system and worked well in first-person angle.
Fallout, like many other game series (Freespace, Ultima) suffered too much nostalgia and historical burdens. We tend to get stucked with previous ideas and easily refuse anything unfamiliar. Some time ago peoples made complaints why we have so many sequels, why developers is making "more of the same" games. I agree we don't necessarily change things that are working fine before, but we also can wellcome new ideas, new good gameplay elements - or as long as good gameplays to be replaced with good gameplays, not the worse ones.
But i guess that's not the primary point, all the discussions in many forums seem came down to the credibility and capability of Bethesda. In short, some think Bethesda sucks, because Morrowind sucks, or all their games suck big time, so Fallout 3 will surely sucks too.
_________________
 |
|
Sat Jul 17, 2004 9:36 am |
|
|
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Sun Apr 07, 2019 9:36 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
