Support NeoGAF

[Brother None]

Well? Put your money where your mouth is. I'm not going to dig up your preview. Show me your objectivity.

Trying to shift the burden of evidence? Very last ditch effort. You have clearly demonstrated you haven't even read the piece, hence even by your odd definitions I don't have anything to prove to you.

You've made claims, you apparently can't back them up in any other way than "nuh-huh, you're the one that should prove it!", hence we can dismiss your claims as false. That alright with you?

You're the one that dragged your preview into this.

Maybe you might want to check the title of this topic.

 

[Simon Belmont]

Cute trying to shift the burden of evidence. Very last ditch effort. You have clearly demonstrated you haven't even read the piece, hence even by your odd definitions I don't have anything to prove to you.

Er, no. I told you I don't read your site. I've already been alienated.

Have fun spending all your time critisizing a game that hasn't come out yet.

 

[Simon Belmont]

Maybe you might want to check the title of this topic.

You too buddy, since it doesn't mention your preview anywhere.

 

[Brother None]

Er, no. I told you I don't read your site. I've already been alienated.

Have fun spending all your time critisizing a game that hasn't come out yet.

Have...um...fun criticizing articles you don't read?

And I can't help it that the OP didn't notice the interview and preview is, in fact, a single article. Apparently that's really hard to notice, since you missed it to.

 

[Simon Belmont]

And I can't help it that the OP didn't notice the interview and preview is, in fact, a single article. Apparently that's really hard to notice, since you missed it to.

I fail to see how that makes this thread about your preview.

 

[Brother None]

I fail to see how that makes this thread about your preview.

Because it's about one article, NMA's Leipzig preview/Q&A. Read the original post.

 

[ZombieSupaStar]

I fail to see how that makes this thread about your preview.

Well to be fair I made the thread after seeing the interview linked first from the bethsoft forums but before seeing the preview, i was over there hunting for a more updated version of francescos mod, but hes taking a break , but I added the preview link info into the OP like 5 posts after I started the thread.


That was my fault....

 

[Simon Belmont]

Because it's about one article, NMA's Leipzig preview/Q&A. Read the original post.

You mean the original post that doesn't contain the preview?

 

[Brother None]

You mean the original post that doesn't contain the preview?

ALSO!!!, NMA recounts the Demo with a 4 page preview of what they saw!
http://www.nma-fallout.com/article.php?id=38620

.

 

[Simon Belmont]

Ultimately, I don't give a flying fuck how NMA feels about Fallout 3. Personally, I'm willing to give the developer the benefit of the doubt until their game is finished. I just wish the rest of the 'community' felt the same way. Maybe come off a little bit less like you're willing the game to fail. When it comes right down to it, the guys that owed you somether were Interplay, and they gave you Tactics and BoS. Camp out on their doorsteps with your pitchforks. Maybe wait 'till this game is nearly complete before you label it fail, huh?

 

[ZombieSupaStar]

I think interplay now is just Herve Caen sitting in a small room staring at a phone, desperatly wanting it to ring.....

 

[Simon Belmont]

I think interplay now is just Herve Caen sitting in a small room staring at a phone, desperatly wanting to ring.....

:lol FOOL is the most appropriate acronym ever.

 

[Phoenix]

This game is going to be a piece of shit.


No turn based combat = fail.

Are you fucking kidding me? I have some areas of concern about the game but damn, come on.

 

[Fragamemnon]

Brother None is taking down this thread with the speed and overwhelming verbosity of Dr. Derek Smart. You go boy, and make sure to assault that coke machine on your way out of the press demo in which you failed your check aginst "basic fucking ethics" skill.

There was no "please disclose your ties to any and all fansites" sign at the door. Bethesda never told us not to come, how was I to know it's a crime against the states? The guys taking care of my invitation (Gamernode) surely didn't seem to think they were committing a low, despicable act, or whatever.

As I understand, NMA was denied a seat at the showing, most likely for reasons not relating to your immense collective idiocy at all, though certainly barring your filth from the demo for that reason would certainly be reasonable.

So you decided to basically get YOUR preview in by means of a complicit third party. Did they know that you were going to post a huge blow by blow preview on NMA? Did the EIC's of those sites know what you were doing and were they OK with it (If so, if I was a PR rep I'd toss them off my lists and let them know why)? When you entered the press demo, did you ever, at any point, think that you would be either writing a preview for the site that you claimed to represent or think that you might even be contributing to a preview for the site you claimed to represent?

Your response to Peckham on his blog totally missed this point. It seems that you did behave unethically to get into that press demo, and you did engage in conduct under false pretenses to get information that was not available to the public at large.

I wager that the preview isn't that bad of a read. I haven't read it, nor will I read it, because the manner in which it was obtained is competely reprehensible. Regardless what you and your band of hooligans and retards think of computer gaming journalism, there are more than a few people that do the work because they love the hobby and love the games as much as you and I do. The difference between you and them is that they also know how to follow the rules so that the lines of communication and collaboration between companies and their fans can continue to grow, whereas your eagerness to get the inside scoop with your name slapped all over it has given game PR firms yet another reason not to trust the people who provide us with the news and opinions for games that we haven't plaed yet are very enthusiastic for.

I've been using NMA as a verb now for a while to describe the ability of a rabid, loyal internet fanbase to collectively hate on anything similar item that doesn't jive with their all-consuming brand of nostalgia. I guess now I can either add a new defintion under noun-dishonest internet douchebags, or verb-"to infiltrate into a trade show under false pretenses to get information not intended for the public, and then showboat themselves to the rest of their community". Either one works.

Pro tip-the best gaming boards on the internet are probably SA, Qt3, this one, and another board that I frequent but don't mention where we hold you in even less regard. TTLG is up there too. These boards have a disproportionate number of actual industry and ex-industry people in them, and are in general the best gaming boards I've found on the Internet. If they all agree that NMA is full of goddamn apes, it just might be because, well, it is full of apes.

Note that had you actually gone and posted your probably-excellent preview of the game for the site you actually claimed to be writing for when you entered the demo, and then linked the preview to NMA, this would have likely never ever been an issue.

 

[Takeda Kenshi]

Some of the people in this thread are as 'crazy' as the supposed zealots. Kinda scary.

 

[Great Rumbler]

World-design wise? Yes, TES has some of the most complex, fully-realized world designs around. Combat-wise, though? Hack and slash, nothing more. I probably should have clarified that by saying something about 'strategic and not action-style combat'... this isn't an RPG, it's an action-RPG, or perhaps FPS-RPG. Same genre, it seems, as Vampire: Bloodlines and perhaps the System Shock/Bioshock and Deus Ex games...

The combat in Fallout was hardly the most intelligent and complex portion of the game. It actually rather straight forward if you sit down and think about it. Now, there's things like stats that you have to consider, but it's all explained in a simple fashion through on-screen percentages and damage estimates. The actual combat itself is done through selecting a target you want to attack and then completing as many attacks as you can in your turn. It works really well, but it's not exactly mind-blowing or innovative.

The thing that made Fallout compelling and intelligent is the writing and the amount of choice, both in action and dialog, that were afforded to the player. And those are the things that Bethesda is going to have to work the hardest to nail down just right. That's what's going to make or break this game, in my mind.

Fallout is most definitely NOT defined by its combat.

 

[drohne]

i have never seen so many diacritical marks on the word 'melee'

this site must be serious business

 

[Phoenix]

Fallout is most definitely NOT defined by its combat.

Not too sure about that. If XCom and Fallout did one thing, it was give complexity and color to the system of combat. The whole action point system made it possible to do fun and creative things in combat. There are PLENTY of things about the combat system that simply won't be translatable to the combat system that Bethesda is going to make, and those things will be missed.

 

[Great Rumbler]

Not too sure about that. If XCom and Fallout did one thing, it was give complexity and color to the system of combat. The whole action point system made it possible to do fun and creative things in combat. There are PLENTY of things about the combat system that simply won't be translatable to the combat system that Bethesda is going to make, and those things will be missed.

Don't get me wrong, the combat worked really well in Fallout and there were things about it that were fun and there was certainly nothing at all wrong with it. But, at least to me anyway, it's not what made me want to play Fallout.

To me, it was all the different choices you could make and the freedom of exploring this twisted and broken landscape and having a grocery list of different good and evil things that you could do. The writing was some of the best ever in a videogame and it pulled you into the world that they'd created. And it's not just people talking to you, but you actually participate in a dialogue through a series of choices affected by multiple stats that had a real outcome on where the dialogue went. That's Fallout, not whether the combat system was complex or turn-based or fun or whatever. Though I did enjoy vaporizing people with my laser pistol...

 

[A Black Falcon]

Some of the people in this thread are as 'crazy' as the supposed zealots. Kinda scary.

The post above yours proves that point, that's for sure.

The combat in Fallout was hardly the most intelligent and complex portion of the game. It actually rather straight forward if you sit down and think about it. Now, there's things like stats that you have to consider, but it's all explained in a simple fashion through on-screen percentages and damage estimates. The actual combat itself is done through selecting a target you want to attack and then completing as many attacks as you can in your turn. It works really well, but it's not exactly mind-blowing or innovative.

The thing that made Fallout compelling and intelligent is the writing and the amount of choice, both in action and dialog, that were afforded to the player. And those are the things that Bethesda is going to have to work the hardest to nail down just right. That's what's going to make or break this game, in my mind.

Fallout is most definitely NOT defined by its combat.

Mind-blowing and innovative? No, it's just good, solid turn-based strategic combat, and it's absolutely an integral part of the game. Fallout with Diablo combat would not have attracted the market the game as published did, I can tell you that much for sure... no, the battle system is a hugely important part of Fallout, just as it is for every other RPG ever (except Planescape Torment).

Not too sure about that. If XCom and Fallout did one thing, it was give complexity and color to the system of combat. The whole action point system made it possible to do fun and creative things in combat. There are PLENTY of things about the combat system that simply won't be translatable to the combat system that Bethesda is going to make, and those things will be missed.

Agreed. Strategic and deep... really, the only downside was that you could only control one party member. Give me a party (or control over the guys following me) like I have in a D&D RPG and I'd have been happier. I definitely prefer party-based to single-character in serious RPGs. (oh yes, and there's another thing that's completely impossible in a first-person game of this style... parties.) Anyway though, you're absolutely right that it's not possible to translate much of the Fallout combat system's depth to a first-person game with action combat. The pause system with targetting doesn't make up for it, that's for sure. It might make the game more viscerally fun to play, but as I was saying in my last post, it doesn't make it a better game.

Don't get me wrong, the combat worked really well in Fallout and there were things about it that were fun and there was certainly nothing at all wrong with it. But, at least to me anyway, it's not what made me want to play Fallout.

To me, it was all the different choices you could make and the freedom of exploring this twisted and broken landscape and having a grocery list of different good and evil things that you could do. The writing was some of the best ever in a videogame and it pulled you into the world that they'd created. And it's not just people talking to you, but you actually participate in a dialogue through a series of choices affected by multiple stats that had a real outcome on where the dialogue went. That's Fallout, not whether the combat system was complex or turn-based or fun or whatever. Though I did enjoy vaporizing people with my laser pistol...

On that note, again, you honestly think that the writing's going to be as good? You've played TES games! There's no way... Bethesda does not have writers like Black Isle did, that's for sure.

I wouldn't be surprised if the writing here is better than it was in the TES games, because there's sure to be more focus on it this time, but as good as Fallout? I'd be very surprised, to say the least.

 

[sugaki]

This thread is rich. Not because Brother None posting in here, but because of the foot-in-mouth irony of the posters in here.

So lemme get this straight--a detailed preview of Fallout 3 is pathetic and fanboyish--yet... posting a critique of a critique of a game isn't incredibly nerdy and ridiculous? The closest you've probably been to the game industry is talking to some store clerk at gamestop--but wait, you're posting in GAF, so all of a sudden you're a justified armchair commentator. I laugh at how you think NMA is a cesspool of frothing fanboys--maybe you missed all the X360 vs. Wii threads on here, or the pointless arguments of why game X is better than Y. GAF is one steaming pile of foaming fanboys, all at each others' throats.

Let NMA post whatever the heck it wants. Frankly, you'll never have any of the gaming sites give such honest opinions of previews even if they felt the exact same way.

 

[Brendon]

Fragamemnon, you need to get off your high horse. I had invites to many events at the GC, but due to my own schedule and the fact I didn't get any until it was too late to make it work out, I couldn't attend. Brother None has helped out on our site before, so I asked him if he'd be interested in covering it for us. He attended as a freelancer for GamerNode, wrote a few previews (one of which will go up in the next day or so), and did the usual gig.

Bethesda's Euro PR also emailed me inviting me to their Fallout 3 event. I asked if it was okay if I sent our freelancer instead since I obviously wasn't going to make it to Europe. Guess what? They said sure. He went, got some new information we added on to the previous Fallout previews/used in a few news stories, and asked if he could also write one for NMA. Since it ended up basically being the same thing I already covered a short while ago, I had no issue with him doing that, especially since he already got a bit of new info to use in our coverage.

There's nothing reprehensible about the entire thing. He went covering stuff for my site, covered stuff for my site, and then wrote something up for a huge fan community of the Fallout series in addition to everything else. (Which, by the way, is also one of the most detailed previews on Fallout 3 -- you really shouldn't judge stuff without reading it.) Hell, Bethsoft's PR rep who sent out the invite in the first place even emailed me afterward laughing at the whole thing since it's not the greatest odds my Euro freelancer would happen to be affiliated with NMA.

They had no problem with it, I have no problem with it, and the GC obviously had no problem with it letting BN get in to cover some things for us. Stop acting like he went and forged an application to stealthily sneak in and mock a game he hates for no reason.



*EDIT* Just wanted to make a quick note I do agree with you that a few of the guys at NMA are a little too rabid in their loyalty and will openly hate anything for no real reason. That's hardly something unique to them, though, and BN is easily one of the most rational people on there.

 

[Shake Appeal]

In my head I was slow-clapping Fragamemnon's post as I read. Over the years NMA has made me embarrassed to be a Fallout fan.

 

[Alts]

Yup, this thread is pretty awesome.

People really should read the preview though, even if only to find more ammunition for you anti-NMA or anti-Bethesda crusades.

 

[ZombieSupaStar]

well after the preview from NMA, I wished it sounded like it leaned a little more to the Black Isle syle then Bethesda's, or it had less "LOL DEMO LOL" from response of the PR guy.


being on the east coast i think would give them a bit of room to do things their own way in terms of story (once we get past the early vault stuff obviously), i mean its essentially cutoff from the events in fallout 1 and 2 geographically , and set 100? years later.


aside from the history of before the bombs fell and "Hai guess what I just happen to know about what happened on the other side of the country 100 years ago" type stories im sure they will sprinkle in, itll be up to them.

 

[Chairman Yang]

I'm pretty optimistic about Fallout 3. I say this as someone who's an ardent proponent of turn-based combat (check this thread I made), someone concerned about the rampant dumbing-down in the industry, and someone who didn't particularly like Bethesda's previous output.

 

[cherdman]

Let's assume:

A Fallout game for the hardcore: 500,000 copies sold.
A Fallout game for the Oblivion crowd: 4,000,000 copies sold.

Simple economics. We need to deal with it.

 

[MrPing1000]

You seem to assume that both cannot be catered for within one game. I'm looking forward to Fallout 3. I definately found faults to Oblivion but they definately seem to be getting away from that as best they can, guns and all that. I love the originals, I realise that making a game that followed the last 2 would have been virtually impossible for Bethesda (would probably have pissed NMA off more :lol ), I just hope it still feels like fallout. And erm change the super mutant model.

 

[Fragamemnon]

He went, got some new information we added on to the previous Fallout previews/used in a few news stories, and asked if he could also write one for NMA.

If this is the case, then everything is pretty much legit here. If he's going with your invite and then reporting to someone else who expressly wasn't invited, that's IMO shady. If he is going to the venue, contributing to your coverage, and then wanting to do something on the side, that's no big deal. I might as well pile on Tom Chick over at Qt3's main site for that,and I certainly won't do that.

There's nothing reprehensible about the entire thing. He went covering stuff for my site, covered stuff for my site, and then wrote something up for a huge fan community of the Fallout series in addition to everything else.

Thanks for clearing that up-the claims made on Peckham's blog regarding this specific point were never really refuted publically (though I only looked for an hour or so). I'll read the preview now. I think we can safely bury the issue, though I still think the NMA/Codex folk are a bunch of retards, though I attribute my loathing of gamer nostalgia to that more than anything else.

 

[Fallout-NL]

Brother None is taking down this thread with the speed and overwhelming verbosity of Dr. Derek Smart. You go boy, and make sure to assault that coke machine on your way out of the press demo in which you failed your check aginst "basic fucking ethics" skill.



As I understand, NMA was denied a seat at the showing, most likely for reasons not relating to your immense collective idiocy at all, though certainly barring your filth from the demo for that reason would certainly be reasonable.

So you decided to basically get YOUR preview in by means of a complicit third party. Did they know that you were going to post a huge blow by blow preview on NMA? Did the EIC's of those sites know what you were doing and were they OK with it (If so, if I was a PR rep I'd toss them off my lists and let them know why)? When you entered the press demo, did you ever, at any point, think that you would be either writing a preview for the site that you claimed to represent or think that you might even be contributing to a preview for the site you claimed to represent?

Your response to Peckham on his blog totally missed this point. It seems that you did behave unethically to get into that press demo, and you did engage in conduct under false pretenses to get information that was not available to the public at large.

I wager that the preview isn't that bad of a read. I haven't read it, nor will I read it, because the manner in which it was obtained is competely reprehensible. Regardless what you and your band of hooligans and retards think of computer gaming journalism, there are more than a few people that do the work because they love the hobby and love the games as much as you and I do. The difference between you and them is that they also know how to follow the rules so that the lines of communication and collaboration between companies and their fans can continue to grow, whereas your eagerness to get the inside scoop with your name slapped all over it has given game PR firms yet another reason not to trust the people who provide us with the news and opinions for games that we haven't plaed yet are very enthusiastic for.

I've been using NMA as a verb now for a while to describe the ability of a rabid, loyal internet fanbase to collectively hate on anything similar item that doesn't jive with their all-consuming brand of nostalgia. I guess now I can either add a new defintion under noun-dishonest internet douchebags, or verb-"to infiltrate into a trade show under false pretenses to get information not intended for the public, and then showboat themselves to the rest of their community". Either one works.

Pro tip-the best gaming boards on the internet are probably SA, Qt3, this one, and another board that I frequent but don't mention where we hold you in even less regard. TTLG is up there too. These boards have a disproportionate number of actual industry and ex-industry people in them, and are in general the best gaming boards I've found on the Internet. If they all agree that NMA is full of goddamn apes, it just might be because, well, it is full of apes.

Note that had you actually gone and posted your probably-excellent preview of the game for the site you actually claimed to be writing for when you entered the demo, and then linked the preview to NMA, this would have likely never ever been an issue.

You should probably read the preview.

 

[CushVA]

Huh? NMA and the other hardcore Fallout fansites have been ranting against Bethesda's version of Fallout ever since the day it was announced that they'd bought the license, and the more we see of the game the more we see that they were right... Fallout '3' might end up a decent game of post-nuclear TES (with fewer NPCs), but it sure doesn't look like Fallout.

Anyway, that statement isn't true, of course. Black Isle (Interplay)'s version of Fallout 3 -- codenamed Van Buren -- would have come out maybe three years ago, not eight, and plays pretty much just like what Fallout fans wanted. .

From June, a reminder that not everyone was happy with Van Buren: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6755177&postcount=249

 

[qirex]

No Mutants Allowed represents the absolute worst that internet fan communities can become. Long winded, self righteous and constantly acting like people owe them something because they might have bought a couple games almost a decade ago. They won't be happy with any game that isn't Fallout 2, period and I'm not sure why Bethesda even bothers acknowledging their existence.

One of the producers at Bethesda used to post on Something Awful and when the NMA crowd found out a bunch of them registered and stalked him all over the forum harassing him and posting personal information until he completely removed himself from the community. Thanks, guys!

 

[Muppet345]

Oh man, we've got NMA members right now?

This is awesome. Epic manchildren meltdowns are my favorite part of GAF, and now they just sort of amplified.

 

[Brother None]

Do you guys mind if I kind of ignore all of the trolling attempts? The SA thing is a good example, how the poster kind of forgot to mention how the whole issue was with the Bethesda dev flaming Fallout fans on a public forum and simply getting called out for it, which resulted in attempts from SA users to hack into NMA admins computers, SA admins banning all NMA user accounts just for being from NMA and SA users trying to DDOS NMA into the ground. Yeah, obviously NMA is the bad guy there.

Do you guys often just post outright lies or falsehoods about NMA and then prance around congratulating each other on how much better you are than NMA users? Hey, if it works for you, it works, but the irony is so thick you could spoon it up and eat it.

From June, a reminder that not everyone was happy with Van Buren: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6755177&postcount=249

That's what he said, not everyone was happy with Van Buren. The majority was, tho', Sawyer was just getting frustrated at the constant trolling of Dark Underlord. DU was horrid, back then.

Thanks for clearing that up-the claims made on Peckham's blog regarding this specific point were never really refuted publically (though I only looked for an hour or so).

I figured it was such obvious slander I didn't really need to refute it. Matt's blog post was filled with false assumptions that he has since withdrawn, yet he refuses to apologize for said false accusations.

NMA's never addressed it publicly because we don't consider it worth our time. Everyone checking up on it can see that everything was legit and followed all rules set by GC and Bethesda, it was just deceitful of us not to mention we were from NMA, and we freely admit that, but beyond that it was all legit. So no need for us to defend ourselves. People looking for an excuse to burn NMA will find it no matter what, if half-truths and slander aid them, so be it.

 

[Great Rumbler]

Mind-blowing and innovative? No, it's just good, solid turn-based strategic combat, and it's absolutely an integral part of the game. Fallout with Diablo combat would not have attracted the market the game as published did, I can tell you that much for sure... no, the battle system is a hugely important part of Fallout, just as it is for every other RPG ever (except Planescape Torment).

Yes, it's fun and that's more or less what I sid about it. As to whether it would have been less popular or not if the battle system had been different, I can't speak to that, I can only go from my personal experience with both games.

Had the battle system been different, though still worked with the game, it still would have been a great game. And that's my point.

Agreed. Strategic and deep... really, the only downside was that you could only control one party member. Give me a party (or control over the guys following me) like I have in a D&D RPG and I'd have been happier. I definitely prefer party-based to single-character in serious RPGs. (oh yes, and there's another thing that's completely impossible in a first-person game of this style... parties.) Anyway though, you're absolutely right that it's not possible to translate much of the Fallout combat system's depth to a first-person game with action combat. The pause system with targetting doesn't make up for it, that's for sure. It might make the game more viscerally fun to play, but as I was saying in my last post, it doesn't make it a better game.

So, more fun doesn't make it better? Why not? Isn't that the point of playing a videogame in the first play? And I disagree that using first-person realtime takes out the strategy and complexity. The pause system offers you the ability to plan your attacks better than pure realtime and with die rolls coming back [which makes this game more like Morrowind], it's not just about aiming the mouse. The strategy is different, but it's still present.

On that note, again, you honestly think that the writing's going to be as good? You've played TES games! There's no way... Bethesda does not have writers like Black Isle did, that's for sure.

I wouldn't be surprised if the writing here is better than it was in the TES games, because there's sure to be more focus on it this time, but as good as Fallout? I'd be very surprised, to say the least.

Shivering Isles and the Dark Brotherhood quests tells me that Bethesda has people that are talented in writing. Probably not as much as Black Isle had, but they've got some skill. And the books and journals that have always been well written. If they're following the Fallout style, that book writing skill will be more helpful than it was in Oblivion. But I don't know for sure if they're going to do it that way or not.

 

[qirex]

Yeah, obviously NMA is the bad guy there.

I'm a mod of the games forum there and I had to clean up after that dramabomb so you can try to claim whatever you want but that won't change what happened. The simple fact that somebody insulted somebody else on an internet forum, no matter who they work for, is an unremarkable issue and the "response" to it was spastic and chimplike at best.

Everyone who's ever been associated with the Fallout games and has bothered to deal with NMA on the internet has walked away disgusted, even the people who made the games they actually claim to like.

But everybody's wrong except them, right? :lol

 

[Brother None]

So, more fun doesn't make it better? Why not? Isn't that the point of playing a videogame in the first play? And I disagree that using first-person realtime takes out the strategy and complexity. The pause system offers you the ability to plan your attacks better than pure realtime and with die rolls coming back [which makes this game more like Morrowind], it's not just about aiming the mouse. The strategy is different, but it's still present.

That's all true and fair, and pause can work well for this (need to see more from VATS for this), but considering all RPGs have been going with RT and RTwP, wouldn't it have been more interesting for Bethesda to go with a more expansive, innovate TB system? I agree Fallout's TB had a lot of flaws, but isn't the more obvious solution to that to try and fix the flaws, rather than dump the system>

Shivering Isles and the Dark Brotherhood quests tells me that Bethesda has people that are talented in writing. Probably not as much as Black Isle had, but they've got some skill. And the books and journals that have always been well written. If they're following the Fallout style, that book writing skill will be more helpful than it was in Oblivion. But I don't know for sure if they're going to do it that way or not.

Dialogues in the demo were pretty wordy and expansive. I didn't see much great writing, beyond the highly amusing "Nice hat, Calamity Jane" line. Dad's lines, for instance, were a bit inconsistent and uninteresting. But I dunno how that reflects on the game, need to see more for that.

I agree they have some inhouse talent, especially Emil, though Rolston left and that hurts their writing talent a bit, a lot of their current dialogue devs been a bit inexperienced in game writing (the only experience being Oblivion). But there's some reason for hope, how much hope is reasonable kinda needs more info.

I'm a mod of the games forum there and I had to clean up after that dramabomb so you can try to claim whatever you want but that won't change what happened. The simple fact that somebody insulted somebody else on an internet forum, no matter who they work for, is an unremarkable issue and the "response" to it was spastic and chimplike at best.

Sure, it was a mess, but I'd argue it was a mess because SA overreacted, more so than anything NMA did (arguably we could've handled it better too, but it devolved into cross-site trolling soon, something we have since more actively discouraged). I doubt there were many NMA users trolling SA, since you banned all NMA-related users. There were plenty SA users trolling on NMA, tho' we didn't ban any of them purely on the basis of being from SA. Maybe we should've, if that's such a good policy?

Anyway, don't you think a bunch of guys trolling a forum is of little importance compared to the fact that SA users tried to hack NMA admins' computers and DDOS NMA? I think it's a bit of a different scale, no?

Everyone who's ever been associated with the Fallout games and has bothered to deal with NMA on the internet has walked away disgusted, even the people who made the games they actually claim to like.

Huh? J.E. Sawyer posted to comment on the Van Buren demo recently, Puuk, another Van Buren dev, posts regularly to comment on Fallout 3. Corith, another ex-Interplay dude, is also a regular. Chris Taylor, the lead designer of Fallout and senior lead of Tactics, also dropped by just a few weeks ago to talk to us. And that's just public. The Troika guys don't really post publicly anywhere, but I'm still in regular contact with guys like Leonard Boyarsky and Tim Cain, and even more in contact with the Obsidian guys, especially MCA.

So...that's not true?

 

[qirex]

Anyway, don't you think a bunch of guys trolling a forum is of little importance compared to the fact that SA users tried to hack NMA admins' computers and DDOS NMA? I think it's a bit of a different scale, no?

That's not behavior endorsed by SA and when we catch the people responsible for stuff like that they get banned.

And you seem to have dropped some names there.

 

[Great Rumbler]

That's all true and fair, and pause can work well for this (need to see more from VATS for this), but considering all RPGs have been going with RT and RTwP, wouldn't it have been more interesting for Bethesda to go with a more expansive, innovate TB system? I agree Fallout's TB had a lot of flaws, but isn't the more obvious solution to that to try and fix the flaws, rather than dump the system>

The more obvious solution would be to take what they know how to do well, or at least what they're familiar with, and expand upon that, implementing features and components as needed.

VATS is a first-person, realtime battle system that features a pause-for-accurate-aiming feature which utilizes skill points and is largely based on stats. It's got enough of the old to be familiar and enough of the new to be interesting, I'd say.

 

[Brother None]

That's not behavior endorsed by SA and when we catch the people responsible for stuff like that they get banned.

That's cool. Equally, with the current NMA policies, all cross-site trolling, even posting "those SA guys are a bunch of goons" will be removed and are a banneable offence. Equally, for some time now, unreasonable and/or death threats made to devs or any individuals get removed and are equally a bannable offence. NMA has shown some awful behaviour at times, particularly when Rosh was still admin, but I'll argue it's made strides forward (though not under encouragement of SA :lol )

Now, if I'm to judge SA not by the rules set and the fact that "if you catch people...", would it conversely not be fair of you to do the same? NMA doesn't endorse bad behaviour either, and our staff tries to encourage reasonable debate (albeit with some exception, true). Yet as reasonable as I always try to be, I come here to see NMA's preview flamed simply for being from NMA, or to see the entire community reduced to a soundbite of "the absolute worst that internet fan communities can become".

How fair is that? I can see more flaming and cross site trolling in this thread than I've ever seen on any thread on NMA (well, since the SA thing, I guess), but I'm not going to condemn this entire place on the basis of that. Something is crooked here, and I'm fairly sure it's not me (it might be, tho')

And you seem to have dropped some names there.

I don't follow...

The more obvious solution would be to take what they know how to do well, or at least what they're familiar with, and expand upon that, implementing features and components as needed.

True, but from experience, Bethesda doesn't know how to do deep branching dialogue, meaningful consequences or moral ambiguity well either. Yet is it not reasonable to expect them to give it a shot because of the franchise they're working on, either? I'd consider getting moral ambiguity right a lot harder than getting turn-based combat right, given no experience with either.

VATS is a first-person, realtime battle system that features a pause-for-accurate-aiming feature which utilizes skill points and is largely based on stats. It's got enough of the old to be familiar and enough of the new to be interesting, I'd say.

Quite possibly true.

 

[TheCardPlayer]

I once registered at the RPGCodex but the level of delusion there made me go away ASAP. Those people have problems.

 

[Prime crotch]

I'm still optimistic about the game, but I'm more worried about the writting than anything being this Bethesda.
About NMA hate, all I know is that it's a great place to get Fallout files and info, but the community can be...dificult to say the least. From bitching about Van Buren to Fallout 2, it's seems that most would have been happier if no other Fallout game had ever come out.

 

[Great Rumbler]

True, but from experience, Bethesda doesn't know how to do deep branching dialogue, meaningful consequences or moral ambiguity well either. Yet is it not reasonable to expect them to give it a shot because of the franchise they're working on, either? I'd consider getting moral ambiguity right a lot harder than getting turn-based combat right, given no experience with either.

The freedom afforded in Oblivion was enough to at least provide a little bit of moral ambiguity, the best of which came from the Dark Brotherhood. There were a few times in there where I felt really bad about what I was doing. They're going to have to turn that up, of course, but I think with enough emphasis placed on that aspect that can pull out some nice stuff.

Consequences played a part in Oblivion too. If you're evil, some people won't want to deal with you, and having a criminal record will make sure that none of the guilds will accept you. You're also hounded by the guards when you commit a crime, although this could have been handled better.

As for dialogue, that's where I'm the most worried. Oblivion had a few placed where the dialogue was good, but they were few and far between. The best examples came through in Shivering Ilses, where the developers really got to cut loose and try some things that they wouldn't have been able to do other wise. That, more than Oblivion as a whole, is what gives me the most hope that they can pull this off.

Invariable, Fallout 3 will be compared in virtually every aspect to the previous two games and, while I don't think it'll quite match it, I think they have a decent chance of coming close.

 

[Brother None]

The freedom afforded in Oblivion was enough to at least provide a little bit of moral ambiguity, the best of which came from the Dark Brotherhood. There were a few times in there where I felt really bad about what I was doing. They're going to have to turn that up, of course, but I think with enough emphasis placed on that aspect that can pull out some nice stuff.

I refer you to a Q&A with Emil Pagiarulo, he seems to disagree with your assertion:

I honestly think there’s room for both types of games. I mean, in the Dark Brotherhood in Oblivion, you really don’t have a choice. There’s no moral dilemma. You’re evil. And that’s part of the fun--not having to compromise, not having to worry about what you’re doing is right or wrong. It’s wrong, and you’re going to do it anyway. In Fallout 3, it’s the complete opposite--a big part of the fun is deciding whether to do the right thing, the wrong thing...or not caring if it’s right or wrong, but doing it anyway.

Consequences played a part in Oblivion too. If you're evil, some people won't want to deal with you, and having a criminal record will make sure that none of the guilds will accept you. You're also hounded by the guards when you commit a crime, although this could have been handled better.

I would argue that Oblivion's design intended to stay away from consequences, up from being able to wander everywhere since enemies scale to you anyway, down to being able to lead all guilds. Not being able to join multiple guilds is the very basic level of consequence to a choice.

As for dialogue, that's where I'm the most worried. Oblivion had a few placed where the dialogue was good, but they were few and far between. The best examples came through in Shivering Ilses, where the developers really got to cut loose and try some things that they wouldn't have been able to do other wise. That, more than Oblivion as a whole, is what gives me the most hope that they can pull this off.

True.

Invariable, Fallout 3 will be compared in virtually every aspect to the previous two games and, while I don't think it'll quite match it, I think they have a decent chance of coming close.

I disagree, partially because I don't trust Bethesda's talent that much, partially because I don't think it's their intention to produce something comparable to the originals. We'll see, I guess.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

I still have this horrible gut feeling that Fallout 3 is going to inevitably suck.

 

[Great Rumbler]

I refer you to a Q&A with Emil Pagiarulo, he seems to disagree with your assertion:

I honestly think there’s room for both types of games. I mean, in the Dark Brotherhood in Oblivion, you really don’t have a choice. There’s no moral dilemma. You’re evil. And that’s part of the fun--not having to compromise, not having to worry about what you’re doing is right or wrong. It’s wrong, and you’re going to do it anyway. In Fallout 3, it’s the complete opposite--a big part of the fun is deciding whether to do the right thing, the wrong thing...or not caring if it’s right or wrong, but doing it anyway.

I don't disagree with that, but part of the DB is that must first CHOOSE to be a part of it. It's not forced on you, just as you're not forced to be the good guy all the time. Once you go down that road, though, you pretty much have to see it all the way through though and there's not much in the way of deviation from a set line if you're going to finish. Still, the decision to go one of or the other is still there.

I would argue that Oblivion's design intended to stay away from consequences, up from being able to wander everywhere since enemies scale to you anyway, down to being able to lead all guilds. Not being able to join multiple guilds is the very basic level of consequence to a choice.

Yeah, there should have been something like that in there to encourage you to play as different characters. Hopefully something of that nature will be present in Fallout 3. Consequences to actions do exist in Oblivion though, they just need to expand some things and fix others.

I disagree, partially because I don't trust Bethesda's talent that much, partially because I don't think it's their intention to produce something comparable to the originals. We'll see, I guess.

Well, I liked Fallout 1/2 and Morrowind/Oblivion, so I'll probably be happy either way.

 

[ZombieSupaStar]

I still have this horrible gut feeling that Fallout 3 is going to inevitably suck.

well in the end it will have a construction kit.


we can rebuild it, make it better, faster (slower?), and stronger!

Yeah, there should have been something like that in there to encourage you to play as different characters. Hopefully something of that nature will be present in Fallout 3. Consequences to actions do exist in Oblivion though, they just need to expand some things and fix others.

I think that in some fallout 3 interviews theyve talked about that, and said they wont be having an arc that a character can do everything on 1 playthru. I think they even said they regretted that about oblivion. not sure though

 

[Redbeard]

I'm pretty disappointed in the graphics so far. It looks just like Oblivion, blurry with no shadows anywhere. They need to upgrade that shit at least for the PC version.

 

[FlyinJ]

NMA juniors?

Oh dear.

What's next, Derek Smart?

 

[Brother None]

I don't disagree with that, but part of the DB is that must first CHOOSE to be a part of it. It's not forced on you, just as you're not forced to be the good guy all the time. Once you go down that road, though, you pretty much have to see it all the way through though and there's not much in the way of deviation from a set line if you're going to finish. Still, the decision to go one of or the other is still there.

That's true, but I think it's pretty clear that's significantly different from how Fallout handled moral ambiguity. I think we're agreed, though.

Yeah, there should have been something like that in there to encourage you to play as different characters. Hopefully something of that nature will be present in Fallout 3. Consequences to actions do exist in Oblivion though, they just need to expand some things and fix others.

Agreed. I think they fully intend to, it's just a question of how well they'll handle it, and how good they'll be at deviating from TES norms after half a decade of straight work on one franchise.

Well, I liked Fallout 1/2 and Morrowind/Oblivion, so I'll probably be happy either way.

Fair enough.

I like Morrowind/Oblivion too, but I do expect more from Fallout 3, specifically more Fallout-esque design. A TES post-apocalyptic game would have its own charm, but calling it Fallout 3 would be a bit unfair. We'll see what happens, tho'

I'm pretty disappointed in the graphics so far.

As mentioned before, don't go off on the graphics yet. In the demo, they don't seem to have gone far beyond Oblivion's graphic level, but they have 1.5 years to work on it.