Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Nemo0071

  1. Ok, now I have a bad feeling about this... I'm kind of disappointed with the 50's theme myself, I was expecting some wacky futuristic stuff... But goo as aliens? All over? I hope that's not the best this game will have to offer...
  2. I stand corrected. Happy now? Anyway, remember how FO2 had that feeling even in wacky open environments in the middle of the desert (e.g. New Reno)? All I'm saying is it could be possible, with a little color tweaking, to achieve the same effect. A small but crucial effect that made the originals unique, imo. I think western gamers / developers love their "blingz" Oooh shiny...
  3. On another note: The music / ambient sounds. In FO3 the music worked pretty well for the "desert adventure" that FO3 is. But in NV, I'd prefer something more "Fallout-y" to really get that eerie atmosphere going again...
  4. As most of you probably noticed (and enjoyed) FO 1&2, while visually inferior to today's games, had that claustrophobic, even scary atmosphere that FO3 lacks. In FO3 they tried to give us the "scary" in the form of ambushing feral ghouls, lurking yao guai / deathclaws etc. and I'm not exactly a fan of horror games. I just liked the feeling that something baaad is going to happen around the corner, not the fact that it actually happens. Even running around in DC ruins covered in grey rubble or metro tunnels with wrecked trains couldn't convey that feeling. I think it's largely due to the color palette / textures / lighting used in FO3. When used out of place, even a slight blue/green hue can succesfully take all the fun out of a well designed environment / atmosphere. I think this could be (more or less) overcome with a simple lighting tweak. For me, the ideal color palette for any FO game would be ash grey + blood red + dusty yellow + radioactive green. Actually, dirty / dark / neutral colors overall...
  5. Same here on all points, including the first line. I think you meant F9 though... I remember saying almost exactly the same thing to a friend some time ago. There was something that made the originals special which cannot be clearly explained. You might call it "soul" I guess. And with Obsidian, I believe that soul will return, simple as that. That's why I know I'll enjoy it both as a great FPRPG and a great Fallout game.
  6. Love it. Will prevent a lot of confusion on my part. A very small yet very important tweak in FO3's inventory system imo. Ammo subtypes as in hollow point / armor piercing etc.? I didn't know they were back... This keeps gettin' better and better...
  7. I don't know about confirmation, but that wouldn't make any kind of sense, so I'd say no. Hell no. Don't think of it as the Hard-Boiled mode in Max Payne (or something like that). From what I understand, it'll be more of a gameplay preference than a "difficulty level".
  8. But still, he/she might have 10 Luck That would be f***ing hilarious, in a good way... And that's something I'd kinda expect. The good doctor lends a helping hand for no reason, yeah right. It's Fallout, dude. Everyone has their agenda... I just realized I may have a bit too high hopes for this title... But again, who doesn't?
  9. That's what I meant by 'story thing' And yeah, medicine / science may be far more advanced, but to survive being shot in the head AND left to die in the desert, you have to be a superhuman or something. It's almost like you start the game with your lvl 30 char from FO3 Which reminds me, the weapons are also more advanced... Hmm it could be a shot through the cheeks or something, you have a point. But then it wouldn't be very professional, would it?
  10. It's funny they never mentioned that the "new developer" is actually the, uh... old developer. Also, I still can't get my head around this "shot in the face & born again" dilemma. Wouldn't it feel more natural if they had just beat the courier into a pulp? Both the 'facial reconstruction' and being found alive would make more sense... Oh well, I guess it's a story thing.
  11. You mean Iron Man? Also, Supermutants = The Hulk Nonono, wait, that's not what I meaAAARGH IT BURNS!!
  12. Ignorance is a bliss, as they say... But don't worry, they'll learn the truth. When they're ready. /mystery
  13. Sounds like a sensible way to cater to the different fan bases. And I honestly (want to) believe that will be the case.
  14. Spoiler? PS:T comes to mind... Not to get excited but, is "Lawful & Chaotic" coming back?
  15. A personal favorite. Also the gun responsible for making me someone who laughs at people being dismembered. Bozar also reminds me that every weapon should have a clear indicator of which skill it belongs to. Yep, not everyone's gonna be happy about it (surprise) but it would definitely prevent confusion when it comes down to it. Bozar had that effect on me ("it's pretty big, but, uh, is it a Big Gun?" kind of effect. After all, sniper rifles were considered "small guns", weren't they?). In addition to that, I would love to see 'Small Guns' skill renamed to something like 'Conventional Firearms' or such. e.g. Sniper rifles are not small, but they are conventional weapons that only come with a scope and require regular maintenance (i.e. theoratically, usage is simply lock & load, point & click; pretty much the same as pistols). Or, at the bare minimum, they don't touch anything else, and only draw a clear line between small guns and big guns by way of a weight limit. Like, it's heavier than X pounds? It's considered a "big gun". If not, small gun. "Clear line" is the key here, it should be clearly mentioned in-game, at least in the in-game help for those who don't like to RTFM.
  16. Love the idea. Especially the part about low INT - "Me like game. Want play game 2 hour." --- Wait / Cancel ---
  17. I'd let pretty much any game designed by Tim Schafer to be my kids' babysitter. At worst, they'd develop a sense of humor. At best..... well, my imagination is not that rich.
  18. Btw, didn't van Buren have something like that? The superweapon platform in question was even going to be the end-game location if I'm not terribly wrong... I think it's living (!) proof as to how this sort of thing can be implemented in the Fallout world (even in the story), and make perfect sense while doing so.
  19. Oh come on... No need to make such a big deal out of it, it's just a matter of preference. I hardly ever used the Fat Man even when I had tons of ammo* and it never bothered me sitting in my living room. A friend of mine otoh used it on raiders. To this day, I still don't know why. Raiders FFS. And seriously, how can you guys (all the people crying out "OMG it's ruined!!!") think of it as an abundant source of ultimate destruction... It's obvious that it's use will be limited, one way or another. It could have limited uses, it could be a near-end-game opportunity, it could be a real PITA to get your hands on the "remote" etc. It could even be part of a quest like Rosbjerg said. So, as long as the remote stays out of my hotkeys (you use it only when you use it) it'll be a welcome addition to our arsenal. It's called variety, you know... * I collect many mini nukes (what?), save the game, go berserk, have fun while going berserk, load the game, go back to playing the game as normal. And yes, it's fun. Edit: Yep. Sorry for the late post.
  20. Nah... Maybe in a scenario like FO2 where you start in a tribal village (spears only), but even then you could get a gun at the first "civilized" village. In FO1 and FO3 you even left the vault with a gun, which is the sensible thing to do, vaults being isolated and all. As for the others, people have been scavenging for, what, hundred-something years? There should be usable (some even in pretty good shape) guns out there. But of course, because equipment didn't deteriorate in FO1&2, this wasn't a balance issue. They simply placed the gear around in a scale of "everyone's sidearm" to "once in a lifetime". Problem solved, everyone happy. When Beth introduced damage/condition and repair for equipment, they sort of had to make loot plentiful. That's the reason I recommended (did I?) a system that includes equipment repair with scrap metal / spare parts / random junk. See above for repair. The thing about science & repair combo for the more hi-tech gear... That would definitely be interesting, but I guess it would require a whole new repair system so I wouldn't hold my breath to see it in NV. Well, console kiddie or not, if they like playing RPGs, they should be ready for the consequences, right?
  21. Nice. that's exactly what I was hoping for. And if they let you control your team (by way of radio commands, maybe? like in Operation Flashpoint but more user-friendly) it would be perfect. Also, even though I liked the all-around-the-world feel of the original, it's common sense that the USA-only and mission-only things will allow more specific design, rather than the "generic encounter map". Btw I played UFO:ET for a while and it's been great so far. I can recommend it to the die-hard fans of TB X-Com. I'm still looking forward to this FPS with high hopes though. Oh, one last thing. UFO:ET doesn't take place on Earth, just some fictional Earth-like planet. So, no Florida or Tokyo base for me... But other than that it's basically X-Com with better (and unfortunately a bit more "colorful") graphics & UI.
  22. Yeah, I figured it out as well, even the first time I was playing Fallout 2 (I played it before 1, and that was even the first RPG I played, btw) I just sorta knew energy weapons would be "wow, dude, energy weapons" and therefore not available from the get-go. I didn't even tag it, I knew it was a job for after half-game. And yes, FO 1&2 did have a good balance and feel overall, except for the occasional "less useful" skill (not worth tagging, some not even worth investing in). Bethesda (I think) tried to address these balance issues (you might call them "unfairness among skills") by trimming the number of available skills (lowering them to a mere 13) but making them more worth your time / skill points. But while they're at it, they broke energy weapons. They made 'em expensive "pew pew" toys in the hands of laymen, visual effects and all, and made them available pretty much everywhere... The same thing with Big Guns. They were "big" in size, weight & numbers, and nothing else. I really hope Obs devs will be the ones to get it right this time.
  23. Jagged Alliance 2 handled that somewhat better by being real time when not in contact with enemy forces. When getting a visual on the enemy it switched to tactical combat. That would have been nice on some of those X-Com missions Yeah, but how often did you actually see any of the enemy in X-Com? You shoot one alien and suddenly you're taking fire from all corners of the map, far beyond your visual range. Good point. Bad memories. As much as I would've liked to provide some kind of positive criticism in hopes of having the slightest impact on that game, what's done is done (loong ago). And if the new game is going to be an FPS, the most I would expect (and definitely hope for) is a damn fine FPS, with the strategy elements intact. @ Gorth That sounds a lot like the original Fallout games, in which that system worked pretty good for me.
  24. I know it's just personal taste, but when I played X-COM for the first time a few years ago (I was kind of having a retro campaign on DOSBox at the time), I loved one part of it and hated the other. I loved the whole strategic "base building + allocating funds & resources + research + intercepting UFO's around the globe" thing, but the TB combat just didn't "click" with me. I don't have anything against TB combat in general as long as it's well-designed and well-executed, mind you. Maybe it just wasn't dynamic enough to keep me interested, maybe it lacked a proper, easy-to-use UI, maybe it was that thing someone mentioned, "taking too long to find that last alien on the encounter". Whatever the reason, it just got annoying after some point and caused me to drop the game altogether. A game I loved otherwise and still want to go back to. My point is, as everyone knows, FPS genre is the thing right now. That is to say, it's much easier to make AND sell an FPS game with decent quality nowadays. So, if they manage to implement a good squad-based FP combat and also keep the strategic elements I mentioned above, it would be a blast (for me). If not, it would be "meh". All in all, I think it's better to try than not. I'll probably try out UFO: Extraterrestrials in a few days. I wonder if they managed to make TB combat a bit more.....enjoyable.
  25. Logically, you are right. If you have played a game called Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines, however, you may change your opinion but I think Slowtrain nailed it: As a game-play, your option feels wrong. Yeah, I understand the whole thing about RPGs and their own dynamics. Like Amentep said, I myself have rolled with it in general. But; When this happens in, say, an isometric view turn-based RPG, I don't mind at all. But when the game is in first person view, i.e. when genres get mixed, I think my expectations from the game gets mixed up accordingly. I haven't played Bloodlines, so I wouldn't know, but I think when the game is in FP POV, in real time etc., things start to get a bit more up close & personal (rather than a turn-based chess game) and only than it starts bugging me. Like the 3 feet or the mini nuke examples. All in all, needless to say, it's just personal opinion. I love hearing what other people has to say.
  • Create New...