Should Josh Pull *THIS GUY* Outta retirement?

[213374U]

All we are really saying is that Bethesda sticks to a certain formula when making their games, a formula that will most likely be completely unsuitable for Fallout 3. Whereas Troika could have given us fans exactly what we wanted.

That's right. Mostly. You can freely say that the formula they will most likely use (based on experience from previous games) is different to that used previously in FO games. However, you can't say it will be "unsuitable" until you see the end result.

 

Different ≠ Bad.

 

 

Its just logic, if a develper makes 3 bad games, the chance is very high that the 4th and 5th wil also be terrible. Even more so when the developer in expressively say that they think their way of making games is the best and that they see no reason to change a successful formula.

Incidentally, that is a statement based 100% on personal opinion.

 

Personal opinion ≠ Universal Law.

 

 

Game over.

[Kaftan Barlast]

Incidentally, that is a statement based 100% on personal opinion.

 

Personal opinion ≠ Universal Law.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I dont think youre famliar with the law of Kaftan

 

MY personal opinion = Universal law

 

YOUR personal opinion = false;

if unless (your personal opinion)=(My personal opinion)

 

 

[213374U]

I liek poop.

 

[Shadowstrider]

All we are really saying is that Bethesda sticks to a certain formula when making their games, a formula that will most likely be completely unsuitable for Fallout 3.

 

REALLY? You played their racing titles? And Cthulhu? And Pirates of the Carribean? Magic and Mayhem?

 

Whereas Troika could have given us fans exactly what we wanted.

 

"Us fans?" Us fans who? I only enjoyed one Troika game, and even then marginally. Fans of Troika? Thats nice, I'm glad you guys like their games. Can't please everyone, and they certainly didn't please me.

 

The RPG market is a niche market, and even in this small market Troika didn't exactly have a good reputation. Whether it was bugs, unbalanced combat, lame AI, horrible stories, bad combat... you name it people have had a bad opinion of it.

 

For every person who liked Troika games, there were probably twice as many who didn't.

 

With that said...

 

 

Its just logic, if a develper makes 3 bad games, the chance is very high that the 4th and 5th wil also be terrible. Even more so when the developer in expressively say that they think their way of making games is the best and that they see no reason to change a successful formula.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Its not nice to mention Troika's horrendous track record at the same time you're worshipping the ground it was built on.

[mkreku]

So, please. If you want to discuss, I'm all for it. But keep your blatant fallacies to yourself. 

Sure, I can rub it in your face again if you want. You seem to enjoy it.

 

The point I am trying to put forth (the one passing right beyond your grasp) is that even though Britney may suck as an artist, the company releasing her albums still get the benefit of a doubt if they decide to release some of that whiny emo you're sure to listen to instead (just don't cut yourself because of me, ok?). You know nothing about their next art of work just because you've seen their previous attempts. You know, like going from Descent to Undermountain to Baldur's Gate? Do you get it yet? Of course you don't.

 

Bethesda gets the benefit of a doubt until they have released the game. I am hoping it will be good. Or even great. And I didn't like Morrowind either, one of the worst disappointments ever, but that has nothing to do with Fallout 3.

[Darque]

And Pirates of the Carribean?

 

Not a good example.

 

Even Bethesda wasn't happy with that one. (read that on their forums even)

 

Their Cthulhu game has been released?

[Shadowstrider]

And Pirates of the Carribean?

 

Not a good example.

 

Even Bethesda wasn't happy with that one. (read that on their forums even)

 

Their Cthulhu game has been released?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Uhm... what example?

 

He said that Bethesda has a strict formula they use to make games and that it is not good enough for Fallout 3. I asked if he had played the games, I didn't say they were good games.

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

All we are really saying is that Bethesda sticks to a certain formula when making their games, a formula that will most likely be completely unsuitable for Fallout 3. Whereas Troika could have given us fans exactly what we wanted.

 

 

Its just logic, if a develper makes 3 bad games, the chance is very high that the 4th and 5th wil also be terrible. Even more so when the developer in expressively say that they think their way of making games is the best and that they see no reason to change a successful formula.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Oh come on... That's fallacious, Fallout isn't TES, so why would they approch it as if it was. I find the arguement that something will suck because company X is developing it absolutely retarded.

 

KOTOR & KOTOR2 were made by different companies? Yet, while they're different in some ways I found them pretty damn similar.

 

Fallout 3 will be whatever it is, saying we'll get Morrowind with guns, is just stupid.

 

What I reckon most of you rabid fallout fans actually mean is "Fallout 3 won't be the game I want it to be" and as you all have different opinions on how it should be, well I guess you're gunna be disappointed.

 

Ya really can't say that Trokia would have made it better, Trokia's dead, I liked what they produced but they died because they made buggy software, Fallout 3 by Trokia would have most likely have had issues, purely based on the track record.

 

heh Fallout fans always make me chuckle, they're never pleased.

 

You guys would have bitched even if BIS had released the version they were working on.

 

It's pretty pathetic.

[Darque]

so why would they approch it as if it was.

 

I think one of their main devs was quoted saying that they don't make Fallout style games because that's "not what they do" "

[213374U]

The point I am trying to put forth (the one passing right beyond your grasp) is that even though Britney may suck as an artist, the company releasing her albums still get the benefit of a doubt if they decide to release some of that whiny emo you're sure to listen to instead (just don't cut yourself because of me, ok?). You know nothing about their next art of work just because you've seen their previous attempts. You know, like going from Descent to Undermountain to Baldur's Gate? Do you get it yet? Of course you don't.

 

Bethesda gets the benefit of a doubt until they have released the game. I am hoping it will be good. Or even great. And I didn't like Morrowind either, one of the worst disappointments ever, but that has nothing to do with Fallout 3.

Oh, my. Now you're trying to cast me into an emo kid stereotype? Man, where did that come from? Any more random comments you want to make? You might as well comment on my eating habits while you're at it. If that's the best you can do (and it certainly does as you get more and more lame with each reply), this is going to end badly for you.

 

Now, let's deal with the "substance" of your post. Hell, come think of it, I don't even need to, as I already did. Unfortunately you were so busy trying to appear smart and thinking up smarmy comebacks that you missed it. I'll quote it, though, so you don't have to exhaust yourself:

All we are really saying is that Bethesda sticks to a certain formula when making their games, a formula that will most likely be completely unsuitable for Fallout 3. Whereas Troika could have given us fans exactly what we wanted.

That's right. Mostly. You can freely say that the formula they will most likely use (based on experience from previous games) is different to that used previously in FO games. However, you can't say it will be "unsuitable" until you see the end result.

 

Different ≠ Bad.

As you can see, I actually agree with what you said. However, comparing the sales of ToEE to those of Morrowind does not make for a valid argument regarding the quality of either product, and therefore, the ability of the developers. That's where my Britney Spears comment came from.

 

I don't think I can simplify it any more for you, short of making you some crayon drawings.

[Lyric Suite]

Their Cthulhu game has been released? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Bethesda didn't develop Cthulhu, they are the publisher and did a ****ty job at that considering the game was released without the single stretch of press release other then a small comment on their main page, which was downright criminal considering all the troubles the developers had to go through to get somebody to release the bloody thing.

 

I never liked Bethesda, and now they sank even lower....

Edited December 27, 2005 by Lyric Suite

[Child of Flame]

I hear the game is pretty sweet though, can't wait until it hits the PC.

[Lyric Suite]

heh Fallout fans always make me chuckle, they're never pleased.

 

Are you serious? How could anybody possibly be pleased with this?

 

This is the third attempt at making Fallout 3 already and two companies have disintegrated through the process. Now we get the most unlikely candidate to finish the job and deliver a game that will propably be Fallout in name only.

 

Personally, i can't think of anything more disatrous for a fan of a gaming series...

Edited December 27, 2005 by Lyric Suite

[Blank]

Personally, i can't think of anything more disatrous for a fan of a gaming series...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

how about... a DBZ game not having a Kamehamaha? that would make a lot of fans go super-sayan and kill the developers.

[CoM_Solaufein]

Fallout 3 without the original creators involvement, I won't give them a chance. Look what happened to PoR 2 when it was exchanged hands so many times.

 

Plus it would probably be some lame 3D FPS game.

 

No chance.

[Hell Kitty]

so why would they approch it as if it was.

 

I think one of their main devs was quoted saying that they don't make Fallout style games because that's "not what they do" "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If I remember correctly, it was Pete Hines, the PR guy, said something about "we aren't going to suddenly do iso" or some such. "We probably won't make an isometric game" is a loooooooooong way from "We don't make Fallout style games".

[kirottu]

From the early beth PR I got the feeling they were exited of making Fallout 3, because it is so different from Elder Scrolls series.

 

Fallout will be fallout even without isometric and TB.

[mkreku]

Now, let's deal with the "substance" of your post.

I'm sorry, you failed at Quoting. Next time, try to quote the post you're referring to, and not Kaftan's latest dribble.

I don't think I can simplify it any more for you, short of making you some crayon drawings.

No, please do. Use those crayons of yours! They are probably a better element for you than this oh so complicated board. I'm eagerly awaiting the results.

 

Oh, and while you're at it, try to understand the distinction between a game series and games made by the same company. That's really all that this thread is about, no matter what your lack of comprehension tries to make it out to be.

[Judge Hades]

mkreku, I have no doubt that bethesda knows how to make a solid fantasy CRPG. I expect their fantasy CRPGs to have vast worlds. graphically pleasing, somewhat empty, and lots of various side quests. They do make good fantasy games.

 

Fallout is not fantasy. Fallout is not first person or over the shoulder. Fallout uses SPECIAL which is a turn based rules system. Fallout is a post apocalyptic retro styled science fiction role playing game done ina style no Bethesda game has shown. We have seen what SPECIAl is like in real time or close to real time combat in Fallout Tactics and Lionheart. It sucks.

 

I am expecting to make a PA game with some FO elements and slap Fallout 3 on the label. I am expecting Morrowind (or should I say Oblivion) with guns. I am expecting pure crap. A game that is Fallout in name only.

[kirottu]

We have seen what SPECIAl is like in real time or close to real time combat in Fallout Tactics and Lionheart.  It sucks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No, it didn

[Judge Hades]

No, the combat sucked. Other aspects of those games sucked as well, but the combat definitely sucked because SPECIAL is turtn base and not real time. Real time sucks with the SPECIAL rules. SPECIAL is balanced for turn base combat. It isat the heart of very rules of the game, Kirottu. You will not convince me otherwise.

Edited December 27, 2005 by Judge Hades

[kirottu]

I think turn based with action points translates very well into realtime where actions take different amount of time.

[Judge Hades]

We have seen it done and it was crap.

[Musopticon?]

It does. BG anyone?

[Judge Hades]

BG did not use SPECIAL. That is the argument here. Fallout uses SPECIAL and SPECIAL is turnbase. We have seen how real time works in SPECIAL and it was crap. BG is irrelevant to this argument. BG uses real time and DnD works fun with real time.

 

DnD is not SPECIAL.

Edited December 27, 2005 by Judge Hades