One thing that really bothers me about Bethesda is their lack of any intent or desire to involve any former FO talent. So they went through the trouble of acquiring the license, and can do what they want with it, but without the involvement of any former FO talent, it's just an empty name. Obviously some of these people just aren't available because they're employed elsewhere. But I haven't heard of any attempts to include anyone originally associated with FO 1 or 2. This more than anything sours me on the whole Bethesda/FO3 thing.
Sure I want TB and Iso, but I just get the feeling that it isn't going to happen. They've said they're going to do what they do best, and it's based on the Oblivion engine, so there's no reason I can think of that it won't be a FPS, unless they say differently (they're not saying anything so...). From a purely commercial standpoint it makes sense too. Unfortunate and disappointing but realistic.
Game mechanics aside, what really breathed life into FO for me was the world itself, and not just the settings or characters (commodities that can be licensed out) so much as the dialogue, the dark humor, the nihilistic tone, the bleak atmosphere. I find it hard even now to articulate what the "FO vibe" is, but who better to define and develop it than the people who did so in the first place, thus making FO a franchise worth buying?
I'm just skeptical that anyone could make a game in the spirit of the original Fallouts without any input from the folks involved in them. I'm not questioning that Bethesda can make a quality game, I just don't see any reason to believe it will be a good Fallout game, or that there's any intent to make it one.
What bothers me about Bethesda/FO3
-
Cimmerian Nights
- Striding Hero
- Posts: 1367
- Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 10:51 pm
- Location: The Roche Motel
What bothers me about Bethesda/FO3
You can't argue with a good blow job -George Carlin
i'm beta-testing it right now
shut the fuck up, lying swell guy..... fallout 3 is still in beta...... and im lovin it so far so shut the fuck up swell guy...... its alot like fallout1, only 3dBloodlust wrote:Well i am playing the finished version right now (installed it from the gold copy of the game) and i can tell you it sucks.Huge with shiny graphics and absolutely no gameplay value.In short,A FUCKIN'BORING raping of the fallout franchise
-
Cimmerian Nights
- Striding Hero
- Posts: 1367
- Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 10:51 pm
- Location: The Roche Motel
I didn't intend to incite Bethesda-bashing.
The reason I thought of this is I've finally got around to playing Thief 3. I felt there are a lot of paralells with the two 'franchises'. Both were two game series, based on the same respective engines, by now defunct development teams. Both games still are high water marks in the genres they represent. Both were taken on by another dev house for the third installment amid much anticipation.
I was a little put off by Thief3 at first, it took some getting used to the new engine. The more I played and got used to it, the more I liked it. What held my interest and finally made me concede that this was a game worthy of the Thief name were the familiar things from the first two games - the reliance on sound as much as sight, the dialogue, the creepy music/settings/mood, credibly frightening monsters, the voice acting, those animated cutscenes. I could see the influence of previous talent in it! It wasn't a Looking Glass game, but I could see some of their fingerprints on it - and I suppose that's the best I was gonna get. But that's what I expect from a game called Thief.
That's the least I want from FO3. Otherwise it's just a name.
The reason I thought of this is I've finally got around to playing Thief 3. I felt there are a lot of paralells with the two 'franchises'. Both were two game series, based on the same respective engines, by now defunct development teams. Both games still are high water marks in the genres they represent. Both were taken on by another dev house for the third installment amid much anticipation.
I was a little put off by Thief3 at first, it took some getting used to the new engine. The more I played and got used to it, the more I liked it. What held my interest and finally made me concede that this was a game worthy of the Thief name were the familiar things from the first two games - the reliance on sound as much as sight, the dialogue, the creepy music/settings/mood, credibly frightening monsters, the voice acting, those animated cutscenes. I could see the influence of previous talent in it! It wasn't a Looking Glass game, but I could see some of their fingerprints on it - and I suppose that's the best I was gonna get. But that's what I expect from a game called Thief.
That's the least I want from FO3. Otherwise it's just a name.
You can't argue with a good blow job -George Carlin
-
DarkUnderlord
- Paragon
- Posts: 2372
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 7:21 pm
- Location: I've got a problem with my Goggomobil. Goggo-mobil. G-O-G-G-O. Yeah, 1954. Yeah, no not the Dart.
- Contact:
Re: What bothers me about Bethesda/FO3
In all honesty, I'm skeptical that even the original creators of Fallout would be able to create a game in the spirit of the original. While Troika's games showed they could do something, they certainly weren't on par with what Fallout was. Arcanum came close and Bloodline's story I thought was superb - but forget about ToEE (remember it's combat though - best turn-based combat EVAR). The combat and other mechanics in those games though had me believing more and more that Fallout is somewhat of a fluke. More to the point: That combining all the good aspects into one single game is a fluke. ToEE's combat with the story depth of Bloodlines and the quests of Arcanum. Killa killa but it never happened.Cimmerian Nights wrote:I'm just skeptical that anyone could make a game in the spirit of the original Fallouts without any input from the folks involved in them. I'm not questioning that Bethesda can make a quality game, I just don't see any reason to believe it will be a good Fallout game, or that there's any intent to make it one.
Take heart in the fact that the Bethesda devs are doing their research. We know they've been using the Vault given the number of complaints Teatime kept sending to me from Bethesda asking when it would be back up.
I *hope* they go for something different, take what would be considered a risk and develop a turn-based, isometric game. I *hope* they're capable of making an involving dialogue system. I *hope* they're able to make something more then Fed-Ex quests. I *hope* they understand what linearity and lack-of-player-choice is.Though given the way Bethesda seem to work, it's going to be years before we even know the slightest bit of detail.
I think I should know better than you, seeing as I'm beta-tester and you're just some random fuck from the internet... It's pretty good, actually. It's pausable real-time, and the pause system is really intelligent and very configurable. A bit clumsy at times, but you can even write your own event handler scripts for it in Python in a snap. I like how scaleable it is.Ashmo wrote::: rubs eyes ::
Eyum... Fallout 3 is in pre-development. That's not even pre-alpha.
You guys have a weird tumor.
Fed-Ex quests aren't bad. Fallout had lots of them.
However the thing is that a quest should in generally be more complex than just "Get item A to person B". There should be a realistic reason, a realistic story for it. Also it shouldn't be that obvious.
The lost watch in Fallout 2 was a typical Fed-Ex quest in a way. So was the membership quest of the Thieve's Guild in Fallout 1 or the McGuffins both games used as initial main quest ("Get the GECK/WaterChip").
In a way even the "Rescue Tandi" quest was a Fed-Ex one.
However most of these quests were a little more complex than just "Get item A to person B". Getting the item was usually a more complex task that allowed for multiple variations depending on your playing style.
The choices aren't always as obvious as they are in the "Spy on Gizmo" quest in Fallout 1 ("Place the bug or get the confession"), but they are there, and that's what makes a good -- or at least a somewhat more interesting -- quest.
Apart from feeding you in-game information, the Moore quest (VaultCity->NCR fed-ex quest involving a briefcase) was pretty bad, for example. What justified it was that you'd get into interesting business if you decided to complete it. Same with the Mordino/Ramirez (I think) quest (which actually was a bit more complex because you could open the briefcase).
They're not particularily interesting or complex, but they serve as good introductions into different places or pieces of storyline.
However the thing is that a quest should in generally be more complex than just "Get item A to person B". There should be a realistic reason, a realistic story for it. Also it shouldn't be that obvious.
The lost watch in Fallout 2 was a typical Fed-Ex quest in a way. So was the membership quest of the Thieve's Guild in Fallout 1 or the McGuffins both games used as initial main quest ("Get the GECK/WaterChip").
In a way even the "Rescue Tandi" quest was a Fed-Ex one.
However most of these quests were a little more complex than just "Get item A to person B". Getting the item was usually a more complex task that allowed for multiple variations depending on your playing style.
The choices aren't always as obvious as they are in the "Spy on Gizmo" quest in Fallout 1 ("Place the bug or get the confession"), but they are there, and that's what makes a good -- or at least a somewhat more interesting -- quest.
Apart from feeding you in-game information, the Moore quest (VaultCity->NCR fed-ex quest involving a briefcase) was pretty bad, for example. What justified it was that you'd get into interesting business if you decided to complete it. Same with the Mordino/Ramirez (I think) quest (which actually was a bit more complex because you could open the briefcase).
They're not particularily interesting or complex, but they serve as good introductions into different places or pieces of storyline.
I agree, the fact that FO1&&2 oftan forced you to think or try a bit harder even for simple quests (such as the watch) was really a lovely feature.
Even those simple quests werent that simple, and they could easily go wrong (hydroelectric magnetosphere regulator).
This brainteasing minor quests really added to the enjoyment of the games.
Even those simple quests werent that simple, and they could easily go wrong (hydroelectric magnetosphere regulator).
This brainteasing minor quests really added to the enjoyment of the games.
Well just look at Junktown. If you worked for Marshal MacGuyver, you had to fetch the incriminating evidence, either by sneaky sneakery or by chatting up Gizmo, playing the badass. But if you wanted to work for Gizmo, you could. You could go and whack Killian, as I recall.
Beth even said they wanted to avoid that kind of thing with Oblivion, the whole choosing irrevocably between one side or the other. They had it in Morrowind, kind of, and the little kiddies they all pissed and moaned because certain quests were cut off when you went down a certain path. You know, maybe like a non-linear RPG would.
That's the key issue here. Not having quest opportunities that are bound to your actions will derail FO3. Let's hope they morphed their flagship ES line into the catch-all, dumbed down, bubblegum FPSRPGPOS with broad youngster appeal on purpose, and then maybe the goal was to have the FO line as the more 'pure,' more RPGish RPG series. If that was the plan, then maybe, just maybe, it'll all work out.
Beth even said they wanted to avoid that kind of thing with Oblivion, the whole choosing irrevocably between one side or the other. They had it in Morrowind, kind of, and the little kiddies they all pissed and moaned because certain quests were cut off when you went down a certain path. You know, maybe like a non-linear RPG would.
That's the key issue here. Not having quest opportunities that are bound to your actions will derail FO3. Let's hope they morphed their flagship ES line into the catch-all, dumbed down, bubblegum FPSRPGPOS with broad youngster appeal on purpose, and then maybe the goal was to have the FO line as the more 'pure,' more RPGish RPG series. If that was the plan, then maybe, just maybe, it'll all work out.
Yeah, that's it exactly. Maybe they did have a greater purpose in mind. ES will draw all the kiddies, and since they said FO3 will be a mature game, then maybe it will be mature in all aspects, like with gameplay that's worth a shit.VasiKKa wrote:...one big sandbox...
Choices, consequences, some unforseen and some plain as day. Yeah, not only did being a slaver close off some quests, it made people not like you, and so it might make other quests harder. On the other hand, it may have afforded some economic opportunities, but again, not necessarily equal to the opportunities you could have gotten by not being a slaver. Actions have consequences, and maybe that's even more important than dialogue.
I mean, what good is great dialogue if it doesn't get anywhere? If it has no meaning or consequence? If they do have great dialogue in the works, then I don't want the great dialogue to be one big happy reacharound.
-
Fa11lloutfan_15
- Strider
- Posts: 759
- Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 7:24 pm
This is the first time I've felt optimistic about Fallout 3 without feeling there is more hope than reason behind it. Thank you.box wrote:Yeah, that's it exactly. Maybe they did have a greater purpose in mind. ES will draw all the kiddies, and since they said FO3 will be a mature game, then maybe it will be mature in all aspects, like with gameplay that's worth a shit.
You're welcome. Surely, I'm speculating. And probably someone else said it first, but maybe that's the logic behind it all.
Certainly, Beth likes to draw new customers in with ES. Maybe once the wee ones are hooked on that childish, sandbox Oblivion game, the kiddies'll grow up and want to play something a bit more RPGish and difficult. Stages. Baby steps. And now that I'm done shilling for Beth...
I'm just hoping that a deal is worked out whereby the original games are re-released with the third, not that we need any more copies, but so that the kiddies might have a chance to play them first.
Actually, that's a big thing, because how much FallOut foreknowledge in order to understand what's going on in 3 would go a long way in determining how shitty the game is going to be. I'm going to go and add that to the FO3 interview questions thread right now, actually.
Certainly, Beth likes to draw new customers in with ES. Maybe once the wee ones are hooked on that childish, sandbox Oblivion game, the kiddies'll grow up and want to play something a bit more RPGish and difficult. Stages. Baby steps. And now that I'm done shilling for Beth...
I'm just hoping that a deal is worked out whereby the original games are re-released with the third, not that we need any more copies, but so that the kiddies might have a chance to play them first.
Actually, that's a big thing, because how much FallOut foreknowledge in order to understand what's going on in 3 would go a long way in determining how shitty the game is going to be. I'm going to go and add that to the FO3 interview questions thread right now, actually.
