Support NeoGAF

[Mimir]

As a Fallout fan, I would have loved the game to be turn based and have a bird's eye view, but I can accept a first person real-time game if the setting, writing, and quest design were intact. However, from what Bethesda has shown, the setting is most definitely NOT intact, and from Bethesda's previous games we can expect terrible dialog and quest design.

Some of the quotes from NMA are pretty stupid, but most of them aren't bad at all. The super mutants look nothing like the ones from the original games, the combat system does sound like crap, and dropping lots of skills is not a good thing.

 

[Clevinger]

However, from what Bethesda has shown, the setting is most definitely NOT intact

How is the setting "most definitely NOT" intact by what they've shown?

And I doubt they've cut "lots" of skills so much as they likely merged some of them.

 

[besada]

:lol :lol :lol

Golden comments.

And virtually all of them will buy it, just to fuel their next ten year rage.

 

[Clevinger]

They'll likely pirate it out of spite and then secretly enjoy it.

 

[besada]

So much so that it prompted Josh Sawyer, then lead designer on the project, to produce this gem:

That quote is amazing.

 

[Frenck]

I don't get how the setting isn't intact.

How could it be any more intact?

If the game was in 2D and would reuse a lot of assets?

 

[Clevinger]

Probably make the jump-suits skin tight, make the Super Mutants look closer to the original... uh

That's all I can think of. The Supes look weird, but it's not a big deal. And I like the jump suits.

 

[Draft]

It's a grenade launcher. You're cracked.

Nuclear Grenade Catapult, actually. Please read the illegal scans before commenting.

 

[Mimir]

How is the setting "most definitely NOT" intact by what they've shown?

First, the vault should have opened 150 years earlier, there shouldn't be super mutants (that look like orcs) on the east coast, the Brotherhood of Steel should be fading in strength and they shouldn't be anywhere near that area, and the vault suit doesn't look like the original at all. It looks like they took more inspiration from Fallout Tactics and Brotherhood of Steel rather than the original two games.

 

[Clevinger]

Didn't the Super Mutants go east after FO1? And isn't it possible that there's more than one military base/research facility with FEV in the country?

Also, here's concept art from Fallout for Super Mutants:

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Image:Super_Mutant_1.JPG

 

[Mimir]

I doubt there was more than one Master though that decided to mass produce super mutants.

 

[Draft]

Well what are you gonna do? I mean, yes, as a Fallout nerd, I understand that it makes no sense for Super Mutants to be on the east coast, or even alive, but they're iconic in the game, so sure, include them. But man the redesign is kind of painful, and that image of the super mutant with the club. Ugh. Hopefully that's some isolated shit. You never know?

 

[Clevinger]

Without the leadership of their creator and his lieutenant, the mutants divided into at least three factions. One of them decided to leave California and find a place for themselves somewhere in the East.

.

 

[Mimir]

And by Fallout 3's timeline, they should all be dead.

 

[Clevinger]

Well, my Fallout knowledge is clearly inferior.

 

[Draft]

Please keep in mind that you are dealing with SUPER NERDS here. Mutants live a long time, longer than humans for sure, but FO3 is taking place around 150 years after Fallout 1. So while a few might be kicking around, they're probably pretty decrepit by this point. Certainly in no shape to be swinging around Navarro's +3 Club of Smashing.

 

[Frenck]

If the game was closer to Fallout 1 and 2, and by closer I mean exactly like them just with modern 3D graphics and higher production values, the NMA folks would probably complain about Bethesda for not having brought any original ideas to the franchise most likely they would be accused of stealing from Black Isle and being copycats.

It's not about the game anymore they'll always want the exact opposite of what they're offered because it became some sort of meme to hate every attempt at making a decent Fallout game.

There is NOTHING Bethesda can do to silence them.

Right now they complain about the vault uniforms being baggy style and the super mutants looking different, the technology being advanced and the lack of desert locales. If the game had all of that corrected they would complain that a vault somewhere in Washington D.C. would be similar to the vaults in California and that they don't have any new technologies in there even though the game is a sequel, they would complain that the super mutants have the same armor, the same look and the same weapons as the completely unrelated tribes in California and they would complain about Washington looking too much like a desert.

I can imagine all the "It's not canon, what are they doing to Fallout?"-whining.

 

[syllogism]

Imagine the outcry if Fallout 3 did NOT have super mutants or the Brotherhood. Regardless, there are too many holes in Fallout mythos to argue whether BoS should or shouldn't be on the east coast.

 

[Avalon]

Personally, I don't mind first-person. These last couple of months, I've grown quiet fond of it, especially in RPGs. The rest of the gameplay ideas for Fallout 3 sound pretty damn good too. Honestly, I don't care what they do with things like the battle system as long as it retains the same level of challenge as the original games. Thing that worries me the most about the gameplay is how lenient it might be... In Fallout I and II, everything mattered and the game was not afraid of kicking your ass if you ****ed up. I don't want this game to have dozens of do nothing skills, I want everything to matter.

 

[Mimir]

Personally, I wouldn't have minded. The Brotherhood is overused, and they were almost dead in Fallout 2 anyway. Bethesda will probably portray them as the good guys that are trying to save the world for altruistic reasons, rather than the selfish assholes that they originally were.

I would prefer they come up with something new, but if they actually come up with a good reason, then I could accept super mutants (as long as they don't look like orcs).

 

[besada]

but FO3 is taking place around 150 years after Fallout 1.
So while a few might be kicking around, they're probably pretty decrepit by this point. Certainly in no shape to be swinging around Navarro's +3 Club of Smashing.

They are maybe long lived? Maybe someone has been creating them? Maybe a different form of Supermutant evolved on the East Coast than in Utah? Maybe the people complaining lack any imagination than the fever dream they've been carrying in their heads for years, and therefore are impossible to please short of a "Fallout Construction Set" where they can make their own perfect Fallout, and then write themselves angry letters because a point of continuity doesn't match?

As for the club, you mean the fire hydrant on a big stick, clearly the cobbled together weapon of a stupid but brutally strong mutant? Yeah, that's so out of place in a holocaustal world filed with ruins.

 

[Drek]

Actually, up until it was cancelled, a lot of the NMA type folk were saying Van Buren would be shit and a deviance from the original games. So much so that it prompted Josh Sawyer, then lead designer on the project, to produce this gem:

I said Fallout fans implying the whole series, not the NMA crowd who aren't willing to consider anything else outside of strict adherence to their views of Fallout. Hell, they'd probably be pissed if every last member of Black Isle got back together with an unlimited budget and turned out Fallout 3. Same way many Fallout fans bickered over Fallout 1 v. Fallout 2 until they had the impending Van Buren and now Bethesda's Fallout 3 to rally their hatred around.

As a Fallout fan, I would have loved the game to be turn based and have a bird's eye view, but I can accept a first person real-time game if the setting, writing, and quest design were intact. However, from what Bethesda has shown, the setting is most definitely NOT intact, and from Bethesda's previous games we can expect terrible dialog and quest design.

Some of the quotes from NMA are pretty stupid, but most of them aren't bad at all. The super mutants look nothing like the ones from the original games, the combat system does sound like crap, and dropping lots of skills is not a good thing.

There's no proof that they're dropping lots of skills, and the combat system is still yet to be fully seen. Don't hate the game for things we have no idea about as of yet.

I'm saying I've seen no evidence that they haven't adhered to the world. Every single thing I've seen from the trailer and these shots fits easily into the FO world in my mind. I see people having problems with the supermutant and the mace he carries, but I don't really understand why, since there are hammers in the originals, and freakishly large mutants in the original. I've seen people complaining about possible underground tunnels (which DC has plenty of in the real world) but those people must not have played Fallout recently, because it's rife with narrow, claustrophobic tunnels. Giant mutant pigs and rats, anyone?

As for the BoS not being able to handle a mutant, what indication do you have that these BoS have anything in common with the ones we've met previously? They're on the opposite coast, and we have no idea how long after the war this is. Maybe these are proto-BoS, still weak and just getting by? And the 19 year old won the battle not with heroics, butwith his superior knowledge of old tech, something he should have from being vault born.

As for how complex the quests are going to be, neither of us have any idea. GI's coverage was glancing at best regarding the actual content of what they saw. Maybe it will be every bit as deep and complex as the originals. Maybe it will be deeper and maybe it will be shallow. In regards to my optimism, the fact that Bethesda has delivered this much and that the devs obviously (to me) seem to care about the franchise and are willing to put up with the never ending bullshit from the NMA crowds makes me think they're going to do their best to give us the rich and deep quests and side jobs we want. But let's not overglorify Fallout, either. For every complex quest, there were two "Find out who's killing my Brahmin" quests, every bit as simplistic as Oblivion. Bethesda can do good quests, but the ones in Oblivion are wildly uneven. The fact that the game apparently runs and looks great a year from release does give me optimism that they've created a schedule that will allow them to give the game the depth it deserves.

So, considering how much Bethesda has targeted this game at the fanbase, from using S.P.E.C.I.A.L. and VATS to letting people take the targeted shots we all want to take to yes, getting the Inkspots and Ron Perlman, I think they deserve the benefit of the doubt. What is it (other than Oblivion, which is a different game, and targeted at a much wider audience [hence the T vs M ratings]) that makes you think they're going to do a crappy job?

This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say irrational optimism. A different, neophant BoS? Knowing how to pull a trigger of a weapon a different man had better? Assuming there is some extra depth to everything they just opted to not show everyone? Why play the role of an apologist so damn early on when we have every right to be skeptical and reserve praise for when they actually earn it?

There were ample opportunities in an hour demo to show off some of the things that we have questions on and they chose not to. Now maybe thats just because they don't want to give anything away this early, or maybe its that they just don't get it. But why assume they'll get it right? Oblivion certainly didn't and at least in my opinion was a big step back from Morrowind because they were too busy making a console friendly experience.

There's a lot of frill shit the purists are complaining about, like how a vault suit fits or what a mutant looks like. Thats aesthetics and I can give a ton of leeway to it. I like that they've jumped to the east coast because it lets them separate from the mythos already built around the west coast. I think they could do some great things with DC and getting to skulk around abandoned subway lines and tunnels isn't anything worse than random caves and old ant filled temples. The aircraft carrier run aground sounds awesome, and seeing some of our capital's most recognizable monuments in ruins and reappropriated by post-apocalyptic societies is a great touch. I absolutely love the constant usage of radiation levels, the wear and tear on weapons, and the ability to piece mail them together. I only hope that extends to armor as well, making for incredibly unique looking characters each play through.

There's a lot more ancillary elements to Fallout 3 that I absolutely love. I think it'll be a really good game. But there isn't anything shown so far, or in Bethesda's recent past, to suggest that we should sit back and assume they'll create the moral ambiguity in storytelling and decision making that made Fallout such a great series in the first place.

I'm still keeping an open mind though as should any real Fallout fan because this is the only chance we get at a sequel and Bethesda has a lot of talent on their staff. I don't see any reason to get pumped up for it yet though until Bethesda proves that the core aspects that make a Fallout game are in there.

 

[Mimir]

There's no proof that they're dropping lots of skills, and the combat system is still yet to be fully seen. Don't hate the game for things we have no idea about as of yet.

They've already announced that there will be 14 skills.

 

[besada]

It's not about the game anymore they'll always want the exact opposite of what they're offered because it became some sort of meme to hate every attempt at making a decent Fallout game.

It's because they have been playing this game in their heads since Fallout 2. Every RPG they played after that was tainted by its brilliance, and no Fallout game could ever compare to the years and years of thought and opinion they've put into how Fallout 3 should be. Each one of them wants THEIR Fallout, which is the saddest and funniest thing about NMA: they don't even agree with each other about what a real Fallout should be. And there's that word "should". The posts from NMAers here and there are rife with the word should, as if there is a Platonic ideal of Fallout 3 and any deviation from that model is heresy.

 

[Draft]

They are maybe long lived? Maybe someone has been creating them? Maybe a different form of Supermutant evolved on the East Coast than in Utah? Maybe the people complaining lack any imagination than the fever dream they've been carrying in their heads for years, and therefore are impossible to please short of a "Fallout Construction Set" where they can make their own perfect Fallout, and then write themselves angry letters because a point of continuity doesn't match?

As for the club, you mean the fire hydrant on a big stick, clearly the cobbled together weapon of a stupid but brutally strong mutant? Yeah, that's so out of place in a holocaustal world filed with ruins.

You are preaching to the converted there, my angry friend. While I have many and more reasons there SHOULDN'T be Super Mutants, I understand why their MUST be Super Mutants. Save your ample reserves of vitriol for the NMA forums. Register an account there. Go beat some people up. You might relax a little.

 

[syllogism]

They've already announced that there will be 14 skills.

So they are dropping/combining 4 skills? Considering how useless many of them were, this is hardly outrageous. I can see them combining Doctor/First aid and dropping Outdoorsman, Gambling and perhaps Throwing. Science and Repair could also be combined, quite a few reasonable possibilities really. Even Van Buren was going to have only 13.

 

[besada]

Why play the role of an apologist so damn early on when we have every right to be skeptical and reserve praise for when they actually earn it?

First, I enjoyed the rest of your post, but I'm getting tired of talking about it, frankly, so I'm not going to itemize.

If I'm being an apologist, does that mean you're attacking Bethesda? Personally I'm comfortable saying we have a different opinion regarding the likelihood of Bethesda getting it right. For some reason you think Bethesda sucks. I don't. I'd guess it was because you didn't like Oblivion, which you keep comparing this game to. They're different games, man. If you continue to look through "Oblivion with guns" glasses, you're going to hate the game, but it's not Bethesda doing it, it's you.

I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt largely because they never did anything to make me think them dishonest or crappy. Oblivion was what it was supposed to be, a very open, easy to play First person RPG. It used cliched settings and stories, because they ensure that it's not too freaky for the biggest audience. They developers acknowledge that in the interview and say that they're doing something different for Fallout 3. I don't see any reason to assume they're lying.

 

[besada]

You are preaching to the converted there, my angry friend. While I have many and more reasons there SHOULDN'T be Super Mutants, I understand why their MUST be Super Mutants. Save your ample reserves of vitriol for the NMA forums. Register an account there. Go beat some people up. You might relax a little.

Man, I'm not the slightest bit angry. I'm just an agressive debater, so please, no hard feelings. I like to write a good line, and sometimes it comes off as more hyperbolic than intended. I do really understand why people are worried, and I even get why the NMA guys are the way they are. It's about being able to evaluate the game aside from fifteen years of built up nostalgia, but Fallout and Fallout 2 will never go away, and no new game can dim their brilliance.

 

[Drek]

They've already announced that there will be 14 skills.

Yeah, and there were 18 in Fallout 2. Are we really going to complain if they redefine them some?

The original Fallout skillset:
* 6 combat skills: Small Guns, Big Guns, Energy Weapons, Unarmed, Melee Weapons, Throwing.
* 8 active skills: First Aid, Doctor, Sneak, Lockpick, Steal, Traps, Science, Repair.
* 4 passive skills: Speech, Barter, Gambling, Outdoorsman.

First Aid and Doctor could easily be combined, I found them rather overlapping myself. lockpick and Traps? Currently these both fall under the security engineering profession in our world and many role playing games have done the same. Speech and Barter are both talking skills, it makes a game more challenging to have them separate, but combing them and lowering effectiveness can get the same results, etc..

Its not like they're going with "gunz", "melee", "surgical", "thiefin'", and "people skillz". 14 implies a pretty worthwhile depth, wait to see the implementation before you assume they're dropping lots of skills and dramatically changing the gameplay.

 

[Draft]

I mean look. Lot of positive stuff in the article!

SPECIAL is back.

Lots of skills (and yeah, lots were redundant or unused. Outdoorsman?)

Graphics are great. Visually, the scenery is perfect. The VD and other humans look great. I'm not wild about the Super Mutant redesign but nothing's perfect.

Plenty to be excited about. I mean I'm not excited because there's a lot of stupid stuff too, but goodness is there. Some. I mean a little.

 

[Prime crotch]

Don't forget gore, can't wait to see what will happen when I use a mini-gun at close range.

 

[Drek]

First, I enjoyed the rest of your post, but I'm getting tired of talking about it, frankly, so I'm not going to itemize.

If I'm being an apologist, does that mean you're attacking Bethesda? Personally I'm comfortable saying we have a different opinion regarding the likelihood of Bethesda getting it right. For some reason you think Bethesda sucks. I don't. I'd guess it was because you didn't like Oblivion, which you keep comparing this game to. They're different games, man. If you continue to look through "Oblivion with guns" glasses, you're going to hate the game, but it's not Bethesda doing it, it's you.

I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt largely because they never did anything to make me think them dishonest or crappy. Oblivion was what it was supposed to be, a very open, easy to play First person RPG. It used cliched settings and stories, because they ensure that it's not too freaky for the biggest audience. They developers acknowledge that in the interview and say that they're doing something different for Fallout 3. I don't see any reason to assume they're lying.

Actually, I quite like Bethesda's library of games. Daggerfall was great, Morrowind too. Oblivion was a let down because they consolized and simplified the mechanic that made the other two so enjoyable. Thats my issue. Bethesda has never had the best writing but it wasn't bad. Its that Oblivion was a regression.

Personally I think they could pull off a pretty significant reclamation with Fallout 3. I don't think it'll be Oblivion with guns, I think that if done right their implementation of VATS could make for the ideal combination of real time and turned based gameplay that we all probably want in a next generation RPG. Using a very slightly refined SPECIAL system is great as it should give us tough choices but still leave us with a capable character. There's a lot I really like.

Honestly, short of Obsidian or Bioware making this there isn't another company I'd want on this. But its got a long ways to go still and there isn't enough shown yet to make a real judgment call. There's stuff I really like and stuff I really don't. It'll take a lot more to swing me either way so until then I'll chose to just sit back with an open mind and not be an optimist or a cynic until I feel there's some legitimate proof behind it.

I'll say this for sure though, I have more faith that it'll at least be a good game, maybe not a good fallout game, but a fun play through none the less after this preview.

 

[Muppet345]

As a Fallout fan, I would have loved the game to be turn based and have a bird's eye view, but I can accept a first person real-time game if the setting, writing, and quest design were intact. However, from what Bethesda has shown, the setting is most definitely NOT intact, and from Bethesda's previous games we can expect terrible dialog and quest design.

The guy who did the Dark Brotherhood quests for Oblivion is on the Fallout 3 staff. So, no, the quests should be incredibly awesome.

 

[Draft]

The guy who did the Dark Brotherhood quests for Oblivion is on the Fallout 3 staff. So, no, the quests should be incredibly awesome.

Well 1/10th of the quests should be incredibly awesome.

 

[Muppet345]

Well 1/10th of the quests should be incredibly awesome.

If we're lucky, they cloned him several times and made him design the entire game.

Who did the Thieves Guild quests in Oblivion? Those were incredibly awesome, too, but overshadowed by the Dark Brotherhood. If they got that guy on, too, that's even more quality.

 

[FrankT]

Just had a chance to sit down with the new Game Informer. Simply put, this game is going to be amazing.

 

[nubbe]

Unarmed, Lockpick, Speech, Science, Repair and Gambling (51%) are all the skills you need.. I need.

Bethesda seem to be on the right track and whining about view point is really anal.
But I would hardly give them the benefit from doubt. It is not as if their track reckord woos anyone. Thier best efforts Morrowind and Oblivion, as good as they are, they didn't shine untill the mod community refined their proposal.

 

[Deacan]

Man all this arguing, am just happy we are getting Fallout 3.

 

[Chairman Yang]

I'm pretty much happy with everything I've heard about the game so far. Turn-based IS better, but it's not like Fallout 1/2 really took advantage of that system, so I can forgive Bethesda if the game is real-time with some turn-based elements to add depth. The concerns about the writing are understandable, but Oblivion's weaknesses in the area were really a result of the game structure and design. I saw enough writing quality in parts of Oblivion to allay my concerns, quite frankly.

Also: I think this game might be the next Deus Ex, and give new life and direction to the genre that was killed by the execrable Deus Ex: Invisible War.

 

[Phoenix]

- No level scaling like oblivion, you walk into a high level area, you die horribly.

THANK YOU MERCIFUL GOD!

 

[blindrocket]

I finally got to pour over the Game Informer and I am quite impressed. This game is going to be amazing. I will be getting it for PS3 so hopefully it turns out as fantastic on the system as Oblivion for PS3 did.

 

[Mimir]

Also, here's concept art from Fallout for Super Mutants:

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Image:Super_Mutant_1.JPG

That's from Fallout: Tactics, which had terrible super mutants.

Also, here's a good write up on why I think Fallout 3 won't be very good:
http://rpgcodex.com/content.php?id=149
The writer is making his own RPG that looks like it will be much better than Fallout 3.

 

[Clevinger]

Oh christ, the RPG Codex... The site that makes NMA look tame in it's rabidness and vitriol. :lol

 

[Mimir]

There are a lot of idiots on the Codex, but there are also some really intelligent posters. Several RPG developers post there, including MCA and Tim Cain.

 

[-ImaginaryInsider]

And virtually all of them will buy it, just to fuel their next ten year rage.

"Steal it" would probably be more accurate:

Random NMA poster: I would have bought that game..but the way it looks like now ill download it.... Sad

If you don't like it, don't buy it...it's as simple as that.

And for all the people complaining about "dumbed down consolelization", the bullcrap above is one of the bigger reasons why developers ended up developing for consoles in the first place.

 

[Clevinger]

including MCA and Tim Cain.

Not much during the years I lurked. There were probably a handful at most by Cain. I also saw Leonard Boyarsky post there, but it was only to debunk a bullshit rumor one of them started to smear Bethesda.

The guy who wrote the article is a joke, despite the game he's working on (how many years has he been saying "this year" now? How many years since he started the project? 4, 5?). I left the site once he devolved it from a good place for RPG discussion to, hey, let's obsess over Bethesda's PR unhealthily and feed my ego.

The arrogance and vitriol of the site has actually become quite stifling. I think one of the big problems is they don't realize that propaganda that's perpetually positive and propaganda that's perpetually negative are both utter shit.

 

[antispin]

I was as skeptical about Bethesda handling F3 as some of you are -- consolised, bad dialogue, inept NPCs, boring quests, etc -- from my brief exposure to Bethesdas games (pretty but lacking soul, was my conclusion). However, I recently started playing Oblivion after NWN2 left me wanting more RPG loving.

Now, Oblivion's no Fallout but it is a competent RPG (although 'dungeon crawler' would be a more appropriate label). It does some things amazingly well -- attention to detail being the most striking aspect. The evident care and love that the designers have put into construction the dungeons left me greatly impressed. Yes, the NPCs are weak (thus far), the dialogue and verbal interactions suck (I don't presume for them to get better), but as Chairman Yang mentioned above, the game does show competent writing through its various tomes. So Bethesda does have the skills and core competency, and perhaps the thousands of NPCs that they had to create for Oblivion diluted each one's personality. Another problem with Oblivion is that its melee combat sucks. This could be much, much better. (As an aside, I found the concept of tagging skills as you level up in Oblivion, similar to the SPECIAL system.)

My perfect Fallout 3 would have elements from several games:

1. The DNA of the Fallout universe (SPECIAL, the combat, the world, and the humour)
2. First-person view. After playing and loving STALKER, I was hoping F3 would also do first-person
3. A good melee combat system: turn-based ideally, if not, see Dark Messiah for how it should be done real-time
4. Party interaction similar to BG2 or even KOTOR
5. Lots of gore
6. Dogs and children

And then we have the scans. I think Bethesda is doing a good job balancing the old with the new. The orc with the hammer is ugh; not too sure about how a party will be handled (if Bethesda is going to create a party system as in NWN 1, then please don't even bother with allies). Everything else sounds great: music, combat, world, weapons, and the Bethesda attention to detail -- this could be a great offering.

The only suck is that the game is at least one year away.

 

[Clevinger]

Yes, the NPCs are weak (thus far), the dialogue and verbal interactions suck (I don't presume for them to get better), but as Chairman Yang mentioned above, the game does show competent writing through its various tomes.

I don't think NPCs or dialogue has ever been a big focus in The Elder Scrolls series. Or if it could even be a realistic focus with the number of NPCs in TES versus most RPGs. Rather, they seem to put the brunt of the writing on lore, which has been very rich.

 

[Smiling Bandit]

So... Can you rape children and then murder them? Because without this it's not Fallout!

 

[Uncle]

"Steal it" would probably be more accurate:

I was always under the impression that the Fallout series was heavily pirated. Maybe they are just keeping true to themselves by being assholes?