Nemo0071
-
Posts
236 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Nemo0071
-
-
Its a bit annoying to have a multihued PC because the clothes I'm wearing doesn't actually reflect the color I chose on my face (which was hard to gauge anyhow in that little dark screen)
About that, on more than one occasion, I came across a Talon Company merc. whose face is pale white, while his body is pitch black. Hilarious the first time you see it, annoying after that. Don't know if it's relevant to what you just said.*
Also, I managed to do this:
I had a character with a fairly light skin color.
-I went to Pinkerton and used the option to change skin tone, made it pitch black, ended dialogue. All was normal.
-Then I loaded my quicksave from just before the operation. Face white (as it was in the save), body dark (as it was after the operation). Pretty much the same thing with the Talon Company merc.
-I exit the game, restart the game, load my quicksave, and I'm back to my normal character. All was right with the world.
It seems a relatively easy to solve issue, easier than the crashes at least.
* Just saw your edit. Yep, it's the same damn thing. Not the one I mentioned about skin color changing operation, though. I wasn't wearing any clothing/armor at that point. I think it has something to do with how the game handles savegames (how it loads them / what it loads exactly etc.).
-
My guess would be there won't be any crash fixes. I'm fully expecting the NV to be just as crashprone for me as FO3 was.
Some people don't have problems with crashes, so it's not a universal issue that would need to be addressed. Those of us who have the problem are just going to have to keep dealing with it. My guess, anyway.
Because I had the same problem on 2 different PCs (and two different games), my guess is:
a) It is fairly common, if not universal
b) The game has a grudge against x64 systems and/or nvidia 200 series cards
c) I'm just plain and simple unlucky. Along with a whole bunch of other people
However, I fear the same thing: No changes to the engine. It'd be time consuming; time Obsidian doesn't have...
One can always hope, though.
-
I haven't played Oblivion but when I read on the net about how FO3 uses the same engine, how the crashes were present in Oblivion too... I simply coudn't believe how they could make a game like FO3 without solving those issues. That's just..... wrong. After all the fuss they made over the game, it simply crashes. Regularly.
We can only hope Obs can do something about it...
EDIT: And here I am, saying these things as a quicksave-happy gamer. I can't imagine how frustrating it would be if I lost 1+ hour gameplay or something...
-
I enjoyed Fallout 3, but it has a lot of fairly significant issues that need (or hopefully will) be addressed. The whole toilet/sink, etc implementation doesn't seem a large or important enough issue to warrant further developer time. It works OK. Best for the developers to leave it be and address other issues.
imo.
I couldn't have said it better. I'm simply pointing out all those little things that bugged me in FO3, in case they want to address them AND have the time to do so. If they have to prioritize the issues because of time/budget restrictions, I'm confident, as gamers themselves, they'll have no problem selecting the more important ones first.
Like the CRASHES..!
God, they made me hate the engine...
-
Drinking from toilets seems a petty way to spend development time though. No offense meant.
I'd say simply using the same sequence that was used for other water sources (which is what Bethsoft did) was the opposite of "spending development time". I would even call it..... lazyness. No offense.
Btw drinking from water hydrants didn't make much sense either, but I'll let that one slip...
-
I think people were talking about the toilets in FO3 a while ago, but don't know if someone mentioned this:
They could (and should) be usable (I'm talking about actually using them of course, not drinking out of them like in FO3
) simply by initiating a fade-to-black-mini-cutscene thingy, much like the ones you see when you are treated by a doctor.And the best part is?
The action should flush some of the radiation out of your system. Radaway could greatly increase this amount, etc.
It would subtly but perfectly fit in with the whole realism / survival-in-the-wasteland theme.
-
Obviously, when you're catering to the Xbox...it's such a broad and generally casual crowd...you can't release the vanilla game this way, unless you include the word "ZOMFG! OPTIONAL HARDCORE MODE MUTHA****A!" on the box detailing how there's actually a challenging game inside, just in case you wanted one.
I for one would like to see as much optional diversity as possible (not just hardcore mode, btw), in the given time / budget for development, because I'd like to be able to tweak the hell out of my (vanilla) game, and everyone else to be able to do the same (or not tweak it at all). And yeah, it is a broad crowd (and I'm not just talking about Xbox), which is why I hope obs devs can find the "middle ground" on this...
I think it all comes down to multi-tasking on programmers' account, and a fully customizable "gameplay options" menu. That would be heaven.
-
BTW the reason I'm getting into an annoying level of detail while discussing hardcore mode or gameplay in general is because I think these details are the things that should be "reminded" to the devs. Otherwise, they can simply look up popular mods (as mentioned above) to get a general idea what the players want in the game, and obviously they did, with the weapon mods and hardcore and whatnot...
-
The tightened weightlimit caught my eye, though. What I meant (and sould've probably said too) was a gridspaced system made so that strength would still determine how much one could carry, but the inventory would determine how many, so to speak. Could be 2 miniguns and 3 sets of different armor weighing 200 units of total of 250 units and eating up all space. Or could be 2 miniguns and a set of powerarmor weighing 250 of 250 and eating up only half of the space. Stuff like that.
I would also like to see a combination of space limit and weight limit myself. Though I don't know if it would be practical, in terms of development, if they're just going to use the inventory system in FO3 (or a slightly modified version of it); because it was text-based, and so, didn't support any kind of space limit.
Also, balancing could become an issue now because the "Strength" stat (apart from Strong Back and such) won't be the only thing determining how much you can carry. Remember none of the Fallout games so far had a "space" limit so it would be a big change for the franchise.
But now that I think about it, it could be countered with a perk like "Deep Pockets" or something, expanding your inventory space...
As for the quote you put, it is true, but aren't our "unpro" suggestion put here to show somewhat along which lines we, as "fans" and "customers" would like to see the game to be made - at least that's the way I understand it.I feel the same way.
What I put in here is simply what I'd like to see in the game.Well, I mean, we're giving ideas away for free after all... If they need 'em, they're here. If not, no harm done imo.
-
I think it must have been mentioned a thousand times before, but it can't be stressed enough:
Something needs to be done about the crashes in FO3.
It's a sad fact that one of my favorite games also holds my all-time crash record (gamer for about 15 years now, that's telling something), with a blue screen and a couple of reboots thrown in to the mix. They practically became part of the gameplay for me. Honestly, I'm waiting for a self-destruct next.
Did they mention they will adress this issue (with the graphics engine)? Sorry I haven't done my homework.
Don't know if it helps / is relevant but I had the same problem on two different rigs, both with 200 series nvidia GPUs. Also the crashes almost always happen in interiors with a lot of yellow tinted textures. Just saying.
-
Odd. So, if I coud have a character holding 1000 paperclips, which are coded at 0.01 lbs. but display at 0.1 lbs., would his total encumberance be 10 or 100? The first result would be confusing to the player, but the latter result would be rather silly from a verisimilitude point of view. Making tinier items weightless might be the least-bad end result there.
Hmm. Maybe, for displaying the weight of really light items, they could go with "0.0" as in trivial, instead of "--" as in weightless. This way they could give every item a logical/plausible weight parameter, and for display, simply insert a code to round down the ones with a weight < 0.1
I think it's easier in practice than it sounds.
EDIT: Before anyone asks, yes, for some players the "0.0" thing might be confusing at first, but I'd still go for it.
-
One inventory thing I found odd was that there doesn't actually appear to be an upper limit to how much you can carry. At one point I had around 50 pistols and about 60 rifles in my inventory. My carry weight was around 530 lbs, but I was over-encumbered at 200. There's no way I should have been legitimately walking around with 530 lbs, much less shooting enemies in the face while slow-walking. So has there been anything said about a max carry weight for FO:NV?
Hell, I carried THOUSANDS of pounds at some point while I was playing around with my stashed gear.
In Fallout Tactics (not sure about FO1/2) there was a 2-level max weight system. When you hit the first limit, you became encumbered and couldn't run, just like FO3. When you hit the second, you became "immobilized"; practically nailed to the ground. There was even a cute little icon for it with a completely dismembered Vault/Pip Boy. Fun times...
Maybe they can use a similar system.
I don't think there should be any objects without weight. Like...nothing.The inventory system in FO3 supports objects with weight/value under 1 pound/cap (e.g. Grenades or Packs of Cigarettes: 0.5 lbs)
If it goes all the way down to 0.1 lbs (or lower), I don't think the devs will have a hard time giving everything some weight. Even a piece of paper. That would be interesting.....
Also note that (iirc) some objects didn't have weight in FO1&2 (like stimpaks). They just took up space in the already long list of items you had to scroll through. Like I said, all these systems worked in their own way. I'm all for improving them.
-
Since we have 0 feedback except the fact that devs "do" read our comments, all I / we all forumites can do is to list the things (within reason and time budget) we would like to see in the game and hope that my suggestions, everyone's suggestions for that matter, affects the development just a tiny bit to make the game better.
I don't know, just the fact they're following the topic is enough for me. After all, they're the ones who know in great detail which mechanic could/should be included in the game in the time they got, and how.
But if they're reading it, it's gonna more or less affect their perspective, and so, the game; one way or another. Trust me.
-
I found Fallout 3's inventory to be way more ergonomic than the originals'. But ergonomy isn't really relevant in a gameworld where everything is so trivialised that you find so much stuff all around the *wasteland* and you have to carry it all the time because *everything happens all the time in the wasteland*: Armor and guns break down all the time and you have to fix them; Enemies with ridiculus HP charge you all the time and you run out of ammo, you get damaged, poisoned, radiated and crippled all the time so you need a huge amount of meds etc.
If my gun broke down, or i got radiated, crippled etc. few times in a playthrough and i had to search for needed items and they were scarce, i would consider it an important thing, an entertaining challenge, not the boring, repetitive chore it was.
I agree. To address Slowtrain's point of "balancing" as well as what you just said, I would definitely consider:
- Higher radiation resistance from anti-rad suits & power armor - Less dependence on radaway & rad-x. Your eyes should pop out when you find this kind of stuff in a highly irradiated post-apocalyptic wasteland, dammit.
- Random encounters to be more trivial AND more scarce (instead of sentry bots, albino radscorpions and deathclaws all over the place above level 22 or so; makes you wanna abuse fast travel even if you like manual exploring/trekking) - Less dependence on any other drug, including stimpaks, so they can have weight.
- One gun/armor of the same type to be more than enough for "spare parts" as the game suggests - No need to carry that extra armor(s) around.
OR,
- Repair with scrap metal which is plentiful. Now that would make my day. It would also make sense with repair skill: Being able to choose the necessary components from a pile of junk. Now that's skill.
-
In playing FO3 again, I'm collecting Teddy Bears for my house in Megaton.
And intact Garden Gnomes. Too bad its not easier to place these things.
I wonder why that sounds so familiar.....
-
...Since I'm kind of a "loot freak" I almost always have a hard time managing my gear. So I thought;
How about an option to "lock" specific items in your inventory, or be able to reach them only through some sort of a sub-menu?
I'll try to explain: You have different types of weapons/apperal/whatnot that you carry around -some of them you use, some just random loot to sell/stash, the ones you use/keep being fully repaired, unique, hotkey assigned, whatever. You just wanna be able to do your bartering/stashing without fear of accidentally ditching your own gear, and thus, without delay. Same function could also prevent using unique gear to repair casual ones (as I noticed not all unique gear is "protected" in FO3's repair system)
Oh. Never-mind. Well, actually...let me address this issue. Can we just assume that we won't be able to carry every bit of every damn thing on the planet as if it is weightless and our rucksacks bottomless? I absolutely HATED the absence of inventory management in that game. In Fallout 1 & 2 I was constantly struggling to figure out just what it was that I really needed to carry on me at all times, what I could store and come back to, or what I could keep in the trunk (in Fallout 2). I hope, at least, that ammo having weight again is an indication that our inventories will be more realistic and challenging.
Well, that's the reason why I'm so interested in this "hardcore mode". I have similar tastes in that department, you see. But the thing is, as a gamer, I tend to play every game by its own rules, as in, if I'm allowed to carry stuff around in my seemingly bottomless pockets (rocket launchers come to mind), then I will. And I guess the same goes for everyone whose priority is gaming rather than RP ing.
Inventory management in FO 1&2 worked in their own way, and so does FO3's. I expect FO:NV to have a similar system, and it can be improved, is all I'm saying...
Oh, just one more thing: Even if ammo & stuff has weight (as they should) I don't think that'll stop me from carrying as much junk around as possible
-
Hmm I was playing FO3 and had an idea. Since I'm kind of a "loot freak" I almost always have a hard time managing my gear. So I thought;
How about an option to "lock" specific items in your inventory, or be able to reach them only through some sort of a sub-menu?
I'll try to explain: You have different types of weapons/apperal/whatnot that you carry around -some of them you use, some just random loot to sell/stash, the ones you use/keep being fully repaired, unique, hotkey assigned, whatever. You just wanna be able to do your bartering/stashing without fear of accidentally ditching your own gear, and thus, without delay. Same function could also prevent using unique gear to repair casual ones (as I noticed not all unique gear is "protected" in FO3's repair system)
-
If He knows, then it's predestination -- choices aren't yours at all, any more than a rock "chooses" to obey gravity. The rock is most definitely not aware that gravity is about to ruin its day, but it will.
Ahh, but what I'm saying is, af far as my beliefs go, creatures with free will (in this case, Satan) have an "exception". You see, while the action of the rock (falling down) is predetermined by gravity, it's not the same with those who have free will. They are given choices (unlike a rock). Even choices to "work around" the predetermined rules of the game (e.g. flight, in this case).
-
Nothing too exciting, oh I got this new mouse it's not just any mouse tho its the razer mamba it has 5600 dpi laser sensor, its pretty sweet to use
Today, for the first time in a looong while, I thought of a "mouse" as an animal/pet. Lasted until I saw Razer. Strange feeling...
-
This is pretty trivial, and getting way too complex. Simply put, the integrity of most of the features in hardcore mode would evaporate if you could flick it on and off, it makes zero sense.
What would make more sense is the option to choose which hardcore features to start the game with. e.g. I'd probably untick 'drink water'.
You got me at "integrity"
For the other part, I agree wholeheartedly. More customization/options is always a plus for me. Kinda reminds me of the gameplay options menu in Civilization IV... And that reminds me of the whole game, but, that much detail would be just silly I guess
EDIT:
But really, i think options are always good, and restrictions are always bad. There are many exploits in games, but they ultimately ruin your own experience if you do them, so it's just a matter of personal discipline. I see no point in trying to make a game (or any kind of software) completely idiot-proof.No argument there. However, Tigranes did have a point about integrity. I don't how exactly it affects the game (programming-wise), though.
-
Understand that I have no particular attachment to hardcore mode. (...) But since it is there, and it is expressly labeled "hardcore", it really seems to make no sense to have people able to flick it on and off on a whim. If you want to play a hardcore-type, just becuase you want to, then go ahead and play that way. addign a swithcable hardcore mode doesn't appear to be adding anything to the game. It appears mostly a silyl PR thing that gets good press but little else.
Ooh I see the problem now, and it's mostly my fault
You see, I did want a realistic gameplay style/choice, badly. Especially after playing a first person pov Fallout game; it really helps with getting in character, you know. And I never thought of it as "hardcore mode" per se, just realistic mode.EDIT: Also we should keep in mind that the ability to turn HM on/off anytime adds to the "playability" aspect of the game without bothering the true hardcore veterans (too much). I'd say it would be a solid design choice.To me, it just seems if playability is an issue, then the obvious choice is not to use HC mode in the first place. Save it for an additional challenge after you've done a couple playthroughs without it.
Yes, that's exactly the thing I would do, if I was considering playing on normal mode at all. I'll probably play through such a promising title multiple times, two times being minimum. But the thing is some people (a considerable portion, imo) won't. That's why I specifically mentioned "playability" and "design choice" as in they can just add those little "helper" aspects with little to no effort and allow the "single playthrough" kind of people to enjoy & appriciate the game a bit more.
It feels like I've got into too much detail for such a trivial option of the game but... Just wanted to mention, I guess. "All the little things matters" and all...
-
Umm. If God is possessed of both omniscience and the quality of existing outside of time you ascribe to him (I agree with that, as it makes everything even more absurd), it all amounts to Him dropping a stone and then kicking it afterwards, in punishment for falling. He would have known before creating Satan that he would disobey and be punished. Ergo, no free will at all -- either He cannot predict what His creations will do (back to the irresistible force paradox), or He created Satan knowing he would betray Him.
Of course, if God exists outside of the realm of logic...
Arghh... I can't resist the urge to get involved.
So here goes. First of all:
the choice would be Satan's alone, but God would already have known his choice because from God's perspective the choice had already been made.This. The fact that God knows what someone will do doesn't necessarily conflict with free will, i.e. personal choices. Satan can make his choices, so can we; this is free will. God knowing about them before we do them is a different matter; something about being all-powerful & all-knowing and all that good stuff.
Of course, if God exists outside of the realm of logic...Yes, actually He does exist outside of "the realm of logic" as we know it. If He was something more understandable/comprehensible/tangible, like, say, the superhuman gods of Greek mythology (e.g. Zeus), then He would be more human/whatever and less "God", wouldn't He?
I am of course referring to the "God" in Muslim and Christian beliefs.
-
I don't know.. it's true that it can be exploited, but what's the point? It's not like playing in Hardcore mode gives you any benefit, and switching it during your playthrough gives you the possibility of testing it and deciding if you like it or not without having to replay from the beginning if you find the game too easy/too hard.
Well, I think the point made in the Bethsoft thread is a good one: by looking at it that way, you end up playing against yourself rather than the game.
If hardcore more is switchable at any time then the point and purpose of a hardcore mode is completely defeated: what could be less hardcore than turning hardcore mode off when it got umm hard?
I must disagree. Here's why:
I see the "hardcore" mode as an option for having a more realistic game, rather than a challenge that must be overcome. Of course, those who want to take that challenge (myself included) are welcome to it. As for others, well, I think they should be free to have their own tastes, right?
Actually I think there was a very similar discussion about the quicksave feature in the game (or rather, saving anytime, anywhere) and how it will function in hardcore mode. Any thoughts on that?..
EDIT: Also we should keep in mind that the ability to turn HM on/off anytime adds to the "playability" aspect of the game without bothering the true hardcore veterans (too much). I'd say it would be a solid design choice.
-
Today, I had a semi-official job interview at a semi-professional game dev company. Will see what happens next...
Oh, also today I finally started actually posting after 3 days of being lost in old threads. Man, you guys are chatty...
What I put in here is simply what I'd like to see in the game.
Fallout: New Vegas
in Computer and Console
Posted
Oh, make no mistake, I wouldn't consider myself a geek, and I'm definitely not a programmer.
I was just trying to point out that this kind of customization would put the heaviest strain on programmers. "Game Designers", otoh, will frequently scratch their heads while messing with the skills, stats, choices etc. and how they affect the game. Which brings me to the second part of your post.
Although I don't like categorizing builds as "combat boy" or "science boy", I get what you mean, and I like the idea. Thing is, for example in FO3 if you were a "science boy" you had the option of hacking turret control terminals and turn them against enemies, but to be able to get to that terminal in the first place, you also had to be a decent "stealth boy". My point is, it's all about balance. Balance of skills by way of their strengths and weaknesses, enabling the player to create his/her own build however he/she sees fit, instead of trying to "fit in" with the predetermined specialization restrictions of the game. It's an RPG, after all...
Oh and btw, it may have been mentioned before but, combat skills affecting how much damage a weapon causes (ranged weapons) is just wrong. Should combat skills affect accuracy/spread? Definitely. Weapon maintenance/condition? Of course. But once it hits the spot, a mini nuke is a mini nuke. Shouldn't matter how hard you pull the trigger. Duh.