.jpg.ce846aae50e732dc4985eb712252381f.jpg)
Kjarista
-
Posts
148 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Kjarista
-
-
If you want to try a real MMO, try Gemstone from Simultronics. Complex character design, extensive and even "scientific" magic system, friendly spells can kill players. Haven't played in several years, so I'm unaware of any changes. It's a professional MuD, so no graphics.
It's certainly not for everyone, bu no graphical MMO can beet it's completelness and complexity.
-
Is there anyway to give NPCS better gear? I'm trying to give the caravan guard betters armor, but I'm not having much luck. I tried to do a pickpocket and put some armor in rather than take something out, but they got all hostile and started shooting me. Which wasn't in the plan.
ALso, if you give NPCS stimpacks will they use them?
They will use stimpacks.
Reverse pickpocketing is the only in game way I know of, except for using the console commands to give them equipment or make them essential (on PC). There are several mods. Using something like FOMM to manage mods makes them easy to manage load order and toggle on/off. I would suggest using mods.
If you have Broken Steel, chances are that the caravan merchants, left to their own devices, will get killed by Enclave patrols, and it's not uncommon to find them dead from normal mobs.
-
I'm too busy banging broads and making loads of cash to play MMOs. That is, when I'm not bench-pressing kirottu.
PS: "Bench-pressing" is a euphemism.
What, in your dreams? You sound like a 12 year old.
-
Tig nailed it. ES games in general are really impressive for the first few hours after you bust out of prison. Underlying flaws and general shallow-ness take more time to figure out, and reviewers tend to rush and focus on first impressions.
There are plenty of us out there who really like these games, warts and all, and I'm sure that most folks are willing to overlook faults in their favorite games as well. I've put hundreds of hours into each of these games, and yes, there are faults...some substantial, but these are still great games.
-
Okay, we've talked about Oblivion to the death here. But I'm referring specifically to the reviews. Why in the world are they able to secure such solid review across the board for such a crappy game? Are they paying the reviewers?
Probably because they are not crappy games. Fallout 3 deserves great reviews. We all understand the problems the traditional franchise fans have with FO3, and I can certainly understand why many folks who post here have problems with the game, but it's still an excellent game.
-
I would say that Fallout 2 spent more time being intentionally silly than Fallout 3.
I read that a lot these days about Fallout 2. I'm not sure how much truth there is to it, or how much it is just the thing to say atm.
I didn't play a lot of Fallout 2 (compared to Fallout) so my memory of it is not very good. The areas that I do remember best: Klamath, The Den, Redding, I don't recall as being silly or having any particular silliness associated with them.
Perhaps some examples from those who remember Fallout 2 better than I do would be in order.
The biggest problem with FO2 for me were the special encounters, which were out of character and out of the gameworld. Encounters like the Monty Python Bridgekeeper, Star Trek space shuttle, and many others were, to me, inappropriate for an RPG.
I don't mind humor, even a bit of silly humor, but it can be done in character, and consistent with the gameworld.
-
Here is a question I have. Will there be a GECK (the Fallout Tools Set) made specifically for Fallout: New Vegas, or will the one already released by the only one we need to make mods for the game? If that is the case will New Vegas and Fallout 3 resources be interchangable?
Let's hope so. Wouldn't that be interesting...being able to mod with resources from both games.
-
I wonder if you'll be able to kill children in this one.
Probably not, but I really think they'd get away with it if they made them die with less gore/decapitations than everything else.
Apparently, games that have killing children are banned in many countries, so I doubt it will be done.
-
Hmm. The preliminary results are not what I was expecting. MMOs don't seem to have sticking power.
Because the Obsidian board has a large and diverse set of posters. Those 11.6 million people who play World of Warcraft are all flash in the pan and have been for five years now.
Hmm.. I don't know about that.. if we assume that the votes represent gamers in general, that still means that 25% of all gamers play MMOs, that's a pretty huge share. And ~50% have played it in the past and might come back for a good title.. I would be pretty happy with those numbers if I was running a MMO buisness.
I think that many gamers, particularly RPG players, tend to not be interested in the social aspects of MMOs, and that social aspect, ultimately, may be the only feature that makes MMOs worthwhile. If we grade MMOs using single player standards, they don't fare well.
I still play WoW, not because of what the game provides as much as hwat my friends and guildmates provide....the social interaction, the shared experience.
-
[i hate gun talk]awww, c'MON! didn't anyone play that aqua pura quest that i was skronkin' about earlier today? this was the first moment since i got FO3 that where i actually got really excited! i'm wondering if anybody knows of any other moments where dialog or gameplay is actually effected by actions like i wrote about in the spoiler. i mean, it's REALLY something i'd like to see in FO:NV and hope to see more of in FO4. it's just the sort of little things like this which when added up always impressed me about the original games.[/i hate gun talk]
I read your post and though ti was cool. It is always ncie when a developer antic[ates the player and you do something like you did, and Boom, the game has an answer.
That is classic crog dev work righ there.
ANd, yeah, sorry for the gun talk. I don't usually go on like that, but the inconsistency of the "Chinese Assault Rifle" being present in such numbers and that it fires a NATO round, is just one of those odd little things that sits in my head when I play FO3 and bugs me.
I mean, yeah its a game so who cares. But I would argue, why do something inconsistent in a gameworld if you don't have to?
Well, there aren't that many Chinese assault rifles around, and there are still Chinese (ghouls) all over Mama Doche's and little stashes of bodies all over the Wasteland. Regardless, a weapon is only good if there is ammo for it, and it may ahve been possible that the CARs were rechambered, either by wAstelanders, using AR parts, or by the Chinese themselves, with the idea of using captured American ammo. (US ARmy had conversion kits in stock in Korea designed to rechamber N. Korean AKs to 7.62 NATO).
All conjecture, of course. Frankly, the ammo type really doesn't bother me that much. I figure if ammo is being manufactured somewhere, the caliber selection would bound to be very limited.
-
Well, if somebody goes over there feel free to bring back news, if you can.
thx.
It's just as quiet over there, with the same sort of speculation.
This is the worst time in the development cycle for us....we know it's coming, but we don't know anything about it.
-
Neither do I think Obsidian is allowed to give away any details without greenlight from Bethesda.
The Beth devs made it sound like any news would be posted over there. Who knows, though.
-
but its bite-sized so it doesnt over-complicate the writers jobs. having tons and tons of quests with the same level of attention to detail, interesting characters, good dialogue, and choices&consequences is what I would consider the easiest and best route to take with the new game.
I'd agree with this, and add that some of these side quests should be placed far away from the quest hubs, so that there is more reason to explore the world. This assumes, of course, that there is a world to explore, and not just hot spots on an overland map.
-
Gromnir got the company line from bioware regarding no-win scenarios. biggest problem they had were that the game testers would not accept a no-win situation... would try over and over until frustration mounted. is ways 'round that though.
as for what players want... is not a good idea to base all game development choices based on what players ask for. give the player a game that has everything that the Average Gamer wants, and you will hear endless complaints o' cliche and boredom n' such.
HA! Good Fun!
part of the problem with no-win scenarios is the expectation of the player. TO some degree crpgs have trained us that there will always be a "trick" or a "hidden" catch that makes a scenario winnable.
If we could be retrained a bit to not try so hard to make every scenario winnable maybe it wouldn;t be so frustrating for people?
I understand the argument, but the purpose of a product is to meet and satisfy the expectations of the customer, not vice versa.
-
I don't think it is neccessary to write enormous branching critical paths to just give consequences some teeth.
Sure, but if we want those consequences to effectively change the game world, each consequence, in combination, dramatically increases the number of outcomes (squares it? It's been a long time since I studied statistics), and each outcome needs to take into account potentially a great number of world factors. These things get complex real fast.
Some consequences are easier...like the ones that only affect the state of the character. If you go down the evil path, for example, you should expect real world consequences of that action. Social consequences like this are a bit easier, if we have a robust faction system.
Thing is, from our other discussion, the player is going to have to feel that they are "winning", no matter what they do, because if they think they are losing, they will complain and quit playing. We'd like to see this game being sold a year or two after published, if possible.
-
[ Destroy Megaton and you can still complete the Survival Guide quests.
TO me, that is just totally crazy. And I am not knocking on Bethesda here. I'm quite sure they did it because they knew if they didn't people would complain, and they probably just didn't want to hear it.
There are other games, like shooters, where consequences are not important (or even important at all), but in a crpg, I think they really have to be. It's waht roleplaying is all about.
Besides, since video games are infinitely replayable, you can always go back a second time and not blow up megaton and do the quests then.
I agree with you here, but if the developer want to get good return on investment, teh game has to appeal to more of the market than the roleplayers, which has traditionally been niche.
-
There is nothing wrong with VATS. Don't like it, don't use it. Simple. Unbalanced or overpowered items, skills or whatever? Don't use them. A lot of us power gamers enjoy such things.
The only problem with that relates to what Pop mentioned briefly earlier. It is hard to balance the game for both RT combat and for VATS. WHat works well in one area, works not so well in another. And what you end up with is two competing systems, neither of which really works.
If the game was actually dedictated to VATS-only combat and a lot of effort was put into making VATS-only combat balanced and enjoyable and interesting, it would probably be pretty fun.
The gam, to me anyway, seems that it is balanced for non VATS combat. Using VATS makes the game much easier. Since I don't much care for VATS, I like it that way, but tastes differ.
-
"The earlier Fallouts provided many side quests of course, and the decisions made on those quests played a big part determining the ending cutscenes."
such stuff is a cop-out insofar as meaningful is concerned. is no different than giving 5 different options at end of game... doesn't actually change anything that haapened during game, but gives you a different end sequence?
*snort*
such stuff should not get any kind applause from fans as it is the easiest sorta approach.
HA! Good Fun!
Well, I want a gold plated Ferrari, but I settle for a Focus because I can't afford the Ferrari. It would be possible to load a game with decisions that branch in combination that would make the national telecom grid look lame, but imagine th cost of that. The cutscenes in teh original fallouts were fun, I thought, and they were easy to do. Heavily branched quests are not easy to do.
-
I don't really expect anything included in Fallout 3 to be removed for F:NV. People are calling for integral aspects of combat to be removed because, ostensibly, they sucked, but there's no indication of how the absence of things like VATS will actually make the game more enjoyable. There's a difference between changing something to one-up your predecessors and changing something to better the game. It should probably be stressed that Obsidz is not going to overhaul F3 for NV (unless they use Onyx instead of Gamebryo, which would be a screwball on top of the curveball that is this game existing in the first place) it's not going to be isometric, it's not going to be turn-based, it's going to use VATS. It doesn't make sense to subtract features and add new ones when you can cut out half the work and just add features. It's how Obsidz has worked before.
I think that's right. We can hope for improvements in dialogue and story, perhaps better sets of choices and consequences, but I agree that it's not likely that any of the major systems are going to change much.
-
how 'bout create encounters and opportunities in game wherein the protagonist won't win.
There has been a long standing discussion in the MMO world about how many players just don't like to be held accountable for "bad" in game decisions. Conversly, almost, many players seem to want to play evil characters without suffering any consequences for doing so. Keep in mind here taht these players are probably not RPG players.
You see the result of this in FO3. Destroy Megaton and you can still complete the Survival Guide quests. Don't like being totally evil? There are ways to fix that in game.
The trick then, is to challenge RPG players and still have the game remain approachable to non RPG players.
-
am not a big fan o' eye and groin being returned to fo. as we noted, those targetable areas got some rationale for the hand-to-hand and melee folks, but otherwise they not make much sense. heck, it would be neato to give close-range fighters an opportunity to aim for knees and inside o' foot while we is at it, but is not always the case that more options is better. would rather see current vats system tweaked without adding complexity.
HA! Good Fun!
I'd like to see the whole VATS thing removed.
WHy the heck do you need it for in a first person action game anyway? Just make all your targets have location specific damage, and if you manage to shoot someone in the groin in real time combat, then great, location specific damage + criticals + whatever extra effects you want.
FO3 needs to embrace its first person action game nature; not try to hide from it.
There were a lot of people complaining that they didn't want real time combat because they thought that such a system would have player skill trump character skill. Some folks even argued that they couldn't play shooters. I find FO3 to require minimal physical skill, as do most people, I think.
-
I used to be much bigger fan of the non-linear, free form, side quests up the wazoo, crpg experience. But somewhere along the line it just stopped doing much for me.
Need not be mutually exclusive. The earlier Fallouts provided many side quests of course, and the decisions made on those quests played a big part determining the ending cutscenes. many of the quests didn't really change the world, but it was fun to see how your decisions changed the future. This sort of thing would be much easier to code, I'd guess, and and it's still somewhat satisfying.
-
I would really like it if RPGs weren't perpetually calling upon players to endlessly replay the plot of Yojimbo going into every goddamn town on the map. But I don't think there's any way Obsidz is going to avoid that.
In the demo of Fallout, it was hilarious, though. As Chris Avellone mentioned in a relatively new interview, Van Buren was to have a twist in this scheme.
While at Black Isle Studios, Avellone worked on Fallout 3 on-and-off for about six years, before it was cancelled and Bethesda purchased the rights. His vision of Fallout was also built on this idea of hate, specifically that he was sick of tracking down and killing the big, evil, bad guy.Avellone realised that in all RPGs, the most powerful bad-ass in the world wasn
-
am actually a little surprised to see the numbers o' people that seem to favor the kotor2 kinda approach. given the history o' the franchise we were thinking that the fanbase (the Faithful in particular) would be advocating the "non-linear" approach. one would expect that josh (personal as 'posed to profeshnul) would favor the de-emphasis o' the critical path, but that is simple conjecture on our part.
I noticed that too. I chalked it up to a desire on the part of supafans to be against whatever it is that Bethsoft was doing. Perhaps the old Fallouts are too similar to the new ones in their structure. With KOTOR and NWN and other games of their type, when you're on the main quest you're on the main quest, whereas in the Fallouts, you're going to Navarro to pick up the key fob but there are 6 or 7 other different things you can do while you're there, and the steps you have to take to advance the main storyline aren't portrayed as being particularly important. I liked that about Fallouts 1 and 2 (it was more the case in 2 but whatever)
I think that's what I mean by linear. I would like any quests, especially the MQ to be sufficiently open to leave it to do other things, and then pick it up later. I don't want to be railroaded down the main quest with no other options, which to me, is a big problem in many RPGs these days, and it's probably THE reason I tend to like playing Beth games.
Witcher enhanced edition bis
in Computer and Console
Posted
Witcher is one of the games I've wanted to play but haven't gotten around to. This is a nice move for me.