Gorth Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 It would mean there's a lot of free-roaming through areas that are likely to be devoid of anything but desert. Somehow I like that, but could mean an awful lot of empty territory. How do people feel about that? Not if done like the first games... map travelling with the potential of discovery of special locations and encounters. Travelling was never really boring because travel time was "accellerated" (Sp?). “He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowPaladin V1.0 Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 As long as I don't have to walk free roaming is fine. I have to agree with Volourn. Bioware is pretty much dead now. Deals like this kills development studios. 478327[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorth Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 (edited) As long as I don't have to walk free roaming is fine. Come to think of it, has there ever been a game with that feature (a game of "some" size), that was actually funny doing it ? If so, what did they do right, if not, why is there still a risk of it being added to a game ? Edited March 1, 2006 by Gorth “He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astr0creep Posted March 1, 2006 Author Share Posted March 1, 2006 Boiling Point was just one big map, loaded once when you launch the game. You could enter a vehicle and drive from one end of the map to the other without loads. So maybe something like Boiling Point, in the Fallout Universe, could be very interesting. http://entertainmentandbeyond.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowPaladin V1.0 Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 (edited) Getting around in GTA is fun. If I were doing it.I'd push the timeline forward a bit and go for a more Car Wars/Autoduel open map. Not many models of car, but the ability to customise them almost as much as your character. It's easy enough to make no go areas for vehicles if you want to avoid people runing over everything in sight :D Edited March 1, 2006 by ShadowPaladin V1.0 I have to agree with Volourn. Bioware is pretty much dead now. Deals like this kills development studios. 478327[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Gothic and Gothic 2 had vast worlds that were still fun and interesting to explore.. ON FOOT. I think the key is to make them detailed and non-generic. If I start recognizing patterns in the terrain (Boiling Point), it kind of kills the fun for me. If I explore and explore but never feel it is worth it (Morrowind) I start hating the great wide open. But Gothic/Gothic 2 had that great balance between rewards and boredom. Just when you start feeling bored, a ruined castle (for example) pops up on the horizon. That's how I want it done in Fallout 3. The problem is that you have to hire map designers who are really passionate about their work so the maps don't become fillers. My dream game would have a huge world and vehicles. Not vehicles like in GTA, where they blew up all the time and you just grab a new one. Vehicles like in.. uhm.. I have no clue, but vehicles that you feel attached to, that you can upgrade as the game progresses (better armour, better tires, stronger engine, bigger gas tank, better headlights, mounted cannon, stuff like that). Of course, in a Fallout universe, the cars would be very rare and part of the exploration rewards could be new parts for the car.. [/dream] Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaftan Barlast Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 (edited) What I would want Bethesda to implement(which they most likely wont since "its not what they do best" to quote them) is Real dialoguenot the keyword or topic variety they did with Morrowind and have continued in Oblivion. Without dialogue, there is no roleplaying. well, except deciding wether to shoot generic enemy #957 in the head or chest or wether youll collect mushrooms for generic NPC #48 or find the lost FedEx parcel for generic NPC #92 Edited March 1, 2006 by Kaftan Barlast DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Players of the Ultima and Wizardry games would disagree! " Let the fun begin!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowPaladin V1.0 Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 My dream game would have a huge world and vehicles. Not vehicles like in GTA, where they blew up all the time and you just grab a new one. Vehicles like in.. uhm.. I have no clue, but vehicles that you feel attached to, that you can upgrade as the game progresses (better armour, better tires, stronger engine, bigger gas tank, better headlights, mounted cannon, stuff like that). Of course, in a Fallout universe, the cars would be very rare and part of the exploration rewards could be new parts for the car.. [/dream] <{POST_SNAPBACK}> AutoDuel. It's ancient , but it's suprising no one ever did a follow up. I have to agree with Volourn. Bioware is pretty much dead now. Deals like this kills development studios. 478327[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 I would really like it if there was an old Highwayman you can restore and fuel up with powercells :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diogo Ribeiro Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Without dialogue, there is no roleplaying. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Dialogue itself isn't guaranteed to provide roleplaying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6 Foot Invisible Rabbit Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 (edited) But it helps. Alan: Doesn't matter if I call you out on something or not. It seems that you are making it a vendetta against everything I post by insult and ridicule. Darque: Why bother? People here will just say that I am being stupid or that I am being unreasonable, or in your words "inflexible" even though what I like to see would include real time combat and first person view. Edited March 1, 2006 by 6 Foot Invisible Rabbit Harvey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 (edited) Alan: Doesn't matter if I call you out on something or not. It seems that you are making it a vendetta against everything I post by insult and ridicule. Nope. Actually out of respect for some requests by other posters, I've taken it easy on you. Edited March 1, 2006 by alanschu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6 Foot Invisible Rabbit Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 I just like to have a civil chat about games without the insults or the constant "irony" bullcrap. If you cannot then I will seek moderator intervention. Harvey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calax Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 I think it'd be fun if your "quest" was instead of somthing to save a colony or city or somthing was to save sombody close to you... por exemple, the PC is a middle aged man who was but a young boy of 17 when the disaster happened. he and his girlfriend were able to hide in an abandoned missle silo, or somthing big like that, in russia (cause we all know the russians were paranoid) and started living out of there. eventually it became a small community as more survivors started finding their way to the silo. so eventually the silo becomes one of the first cities. When it's safe to go out the community simply sprawled out side with the silo's top door acting as an entrance to the residential district or somthin like that. but you don't have everything you need because your community is a group of stragglers. anyway.. the PC and his (now) wife are living together when she gets sick. so the pc sets off on a quest to save his wife by either A) finding a doctor, B) finding a miracle cure (ie mutated plant) or somthing like that. maybe in one of the endings the wife dies and you continue your life as a wanderer who does odd jobs. Or in another you find another woman who captivates you and you start finding reasons why to not save your wife... thus the story is more personal rather than "Save teh WORLD you supid n00b!" Victor of the 5 year fan fic competition! Kevin Butler will awesome your face off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 When you've consistently flipflopped on a great many issues, including Fallout 3, it's difficult to take what you say too literally. As for the most recent "irony" comment, it's clear you and I just have different definitions of what a "middle-ground" is. I don't consider it to be "flexibility" to have exactly the game you want, with extras added in for other people. Allowing the inclusion of game components that you don't have to use is just an added bonus, and in no way will affect you at all. It doesn't seem flexible to me at all. I'm quite confident that the inclusion of a first-person view or real time combat would be rejected, if it meant cutting into any of the "traditional" Fallout items. It's easy to ask for extra, bonus stuff that doesn't affect your play style. I'm sure everyone would like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6 Foot Invisible Rabbit Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 That sounds a little too specific. In character creation a player should be able to create any specific character he wants within the SPECIAL rules system and the game reads what perks, skills, and gender the player chose and places the PC in an starting point instance based on how what the character is focused on. Kind of like what ToEE tried to do with the alignment system, but something more developed and has a larger impact on the overall scope of the game. Harvey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6 Foot Invisible Rabbit Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 I'm quite confident that the inclusion of a first-person view or real time combat would be rejected, if it meant cutting into any of the "traditional" Fallout items. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, not really. If there are resource constraints on its development I would compromise to the point that CTB style of FOT would be acceptable to me as long as we can control the speed (using a gauge like in the patched version of Lionheart). Also I don't think a free roaming camera is too much to ask for or that hard to implement. Harvey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 That is actually a compromise, and was not something I had read into any of your previous posts. Before it just looked like "I don't mind if they add new stuff, as long as I get all the stuff I want." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calax Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 That sounds a little too specific. In character creation a player should be able to create any specific character he wants within the SPECIAL rules system and the game reads what perks, skills, and gender the player chose and places the PC in an starting point instance based on how what the character is focused on. Kind of like what ToEE tried to do with the alignment system, but something more developed and has a larger impact on the overall scope of the game. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> well it's pretty open ended... the only real thing that the character needs for my senario is a significant other. heck you might get to pick a few of their traits as well so you could have gay's, lesbians, strait and maybe a threesome family going on. Victor of the 5 year fan fic competition! Kevin Butler will awesome your face off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6 Foot Invisible Rabbit Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Yes, I do agree that is how it looked and read. Silly me. Of course my way would be optimal in my opinion. If they make the game "turn base" using SPECIAL as NWN/KotOR is "turn base" for d20 I would be satisfied. Harvey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BattleCookiee Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Also I don't think a free roaming camera is too much to ask for or that hard to implement. Camera placement and such can be very difficult. Remember the many games where such a camera * Makes you see behind walls * Get against walls, blocking your view of the character * Would make enemies hard to see due to "wrong camera point" * Causes all kind of graphical glitches if aimed wrong And most of these are even for "fixed camera angles"... freeform would be a bigger pain... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6 Foot Invisible Rabbit Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 (edited) It worked quite well for NWN. Edited March 1, 2006 by 6 Foot Invisible Rabbit Harvey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 True enough. But they had to extend upon it in an expansion pack though didn't they? Though having it in NWN doesn't really tell us how difficult it is to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BattleCookiee Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 It worked quite well for NWN. For every game that has camera placement correct there are 5 who screw up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts