Diogo Ribeiro Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 AT LEAST PEEPS AT Obsidian know what Fallout is all about unlike Bethesda. Yes. Talking plants, horny ghouls, porn movies and experience for finding obscure pop references is what Fallout is about. Nuclear cars. NUCLEAR FREAKING CARS! What the hell are they smoking over there? The Micro Fusion Cell, used to power up the Highwayman, was a self-contained fusion plant. So, you're basically saying it's unreasonable to have nuclear car engines but appear to have no issues with each MFC being a small, portable nuclear fusion plant.
Spider Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 The Micro Fusion Cell, used to power up the Highwayman, was a self-contained fusion plant. So, you're basically saying it's unreasonable to have nuclear car engines but appear to have no issues with each MFC being a small, portable nuclear fusion plant. Thank you for being the voice of reason when I was too lazy myself. I'd also like to point (to all those sounding the alarm over it) out that a nuclear catapult (it's not a nuclear cannon, the screenshot makes it look vastly different to a cannon) doesn't have to be anything that launches mini nukes. It could be that it's powered by nuclear energy or that the material it catapults is nuclear in it's nature. Or the dirty bomb thing someone else suggested. Regardless of which, it's hardly less probable (and certainly fits better into the retro 50-ish feel) than bloody gauss weaponry, especially gauss weaponry that can be held in one hand.
Diogo Ribeiro Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Thank you for being the voice of reason when I was too lazy myself. I'm from the Codex - I can't be the voice of reason!!1!1! I'd also like to point (to all those sounding the alarm over it) out that a nuclear catapult (it's not a nuclear cannon, the screenshot makes it look vastly different to a cannon) doesn't have to be anything that launches mini nukes. It could be that it's powered by nuclear energy or that the material it catapults is nuclear in it's nature. Or the dirty bomb thing someone else suggested. Regardless of which, it's hardly less probable (and certainly fits better into the retro 50-ish feel) than bloody gauss weaponry, especially gauss weaponry that can be held in one hand. I still think the concept of the nuclear catapult is silly, even when placed side by side with weaponry like a Gatling Laser. As you said, it could be argued just what "nuclear catapult" itself means or how it operates, but not only does it seem a bit off in that 50's pulp comics feel, it's also a bit incongrous in a gameworld where radiation seems to be a grave concern. You have to measure the rads for stuff like water but are using a weapon that catapults nuclear material? There better be some drawback to using it, at least.
Diamond Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 "Nuclear catapult" is not technically implausible. The problem is that it just does not make sense in this game. Usually, you'd want to fire with something like that to a distance of a few kilometers, I don't see how this fits game scale and combat system. Handheld nuclear catapult is, however, incredibly cheesy. Not even Fallout-humor-type cheesy, just cheesy.
Spider Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 It's easily not my favorite part either. But until we actually know what it is and how it works, I just don't see any cause for alarm yet. And even if it is incredibly stupid, it'll hardly break the game if it's the one thing that is.
Sand Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 (edited) The only way Bethseda is going to make Hades happy is to send him free copy of Fallout 3, but instead of computer game it holds couple of sheets of paper, dices, and piece of note saying "You Edited June 18, 2007 by Sand Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand"
metadigital Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 The only way Bethseda is going to make Hades happy is to send him free copy of Fallout 3, but instead of computer game it holds couple of sheets of paper, dices, and piece of note saying "You OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT
Sand Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 I am wondering what else they are changing in Fallout and the SPECIAL rules system. How much worse can it get? Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand"
metadigital Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Why do you care? You already don't like it. OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT
Xard Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 (edited) I never understand why some people want perfect emulations of PnP. That's what PnP is for Edited June 18, 2007 by Xard How can it be a no ob build. It has PROVEN effective. I dare you to show your builds and I will tear you apart in an arugment about how these builds will won them. - OverPowered Godzilla (OPG)
Sand Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 I never understand why some people want perfect emulations for PnP. That's what PnP is for I don't. I want Fallout to be Fallout. No more and no less. Fallout 1 and 2 emulated PnP gaming, therefore so should Fallout 3 if it is to be a proper Fallout game. Now if Fallout 1 and 2 didn't then Fallout 3 shouldn't as well. Fallout 3 is suppose to be a SEQUEL not totally different game. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand"
Sand Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Why do you care? You already don't like it. Morbid curiosity. I am curious to see how much Todd Howard, a supposed Fallout fan, will butcher the franchise. He and his crew might out do Interplay in that regard. Just maybe. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand"
Diogo Ribeiro Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 I never understand why some people want perfect emulations for PnP. That's what PnP is for By that logic, why would people want to play perfect emulations of Formula 1 racing? That's what real racing is for. The same applies to hunting games, flight simulators and others.
Sand Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Good point, RP. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand"
jaguars4ever Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Anyone whose played Arcanum will know what a joke "weapon degradation" (aka let's trek back 5 levels of the dungeon after every bloody hit to find a blacksmith 'cause the designers insisted on placing freaking LAVA MONSTERS that swarm at turn-of-the-century stop motion animation speed!) can be.
Sand Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Good point, RP. Ok, I feel dirty now. Oh, come on. There is nothing wrong with being dirty. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand"
Enoch Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 I never understand why some people want perfect emulations of PnP. That's what PnP is for The better objection is that any SP CRPG imitation of PnP is destined to fail because it doesn't include the one thing that makes PnP worthwhile: other people and good gamemastering. Without these elements, the pretense of imitating PnP gameplay is nothing more than an artificial limitation on the CRPG maker's creativity. Sure, it inspires some nostalgia for people with memories of fun PnP experiences, but that's not worth crippling the experience for everyone else. It's better by far when game developers adapt their approach to what works best in a SP CRPG environment instead of importing the limitations of the table-top game.
Sand Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Well, it worked in Fallout 1 and 2, and could have worked for Fallout 3. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand"
Xard Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 I never understand why some people want perfect emulations of PnP. That's what PnP is for The better objection is that any SP CRPG imitation of PnP is destined to fail because it doesn't include the one thing that makes PnP worthwhile: other people and good gamemastering. Without these elements, the pretense of imitating PnP gameplay is nothing more than an artificial limitation on the CRPG maker's creativity. Sure, it inspires some nostalgia for people with memories of fun PnP experiences, but that's not worth crippling the experience for everyone else. It's better by far when game developers adapt their approach to what works best in a SP CRPG environment instead of importing the limitations of the table-top game. Thanks Enoch, that's what I was thinking about ("sometimes" my communicating sucks). Trying to emulate PnP feeling should never be main goal for CRPG. I never felt Fallout being much like pnp gaming anyway. SPECIAL, Turn-based combat etc... none of it screamed about pen & paper more than any other random crpg like BG2. Well, maybe TB combat did. Most "pnpish" games I can come up with are old Gold Box games and Temple of Elemental Evil. How can it be a no ob build. It has PROVEN effective. I dare you to show your builds and I will tear you apart in an arugment about how these builds will won them. - OverPowered Godzilla (OPG)
Diogo Ribeiro Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 The better objection is that any SP CRPG imitation of PnP is destined to fail because it doesn't include the one thing that makes PnP worthwhile: other people and good gamemastering. Except that argument is based on the assumption that good players that participate in a session and a good Game Master are a constant in PnP, when this isn't true. Bad GM
Spider Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Weapon degradation and the need for backup weapons is completely compromised by an infinite inventory, though. If I can carry thirty-six rifles and pause to swap between them mid-battle, then the mechanic is just an irritant. Fallout 3 will hardly feature infinite inventory. With all the importance they are placing on the wasteland feel (irradiated water, degradable equipment for example) they're hardly going to remove the enumberance system that was present in both the original Fallouts and in Oblivion. I agree with your point in general, just don't think it applies here. Unless you know something I don't?
Llyranor Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Completely different games, but weapon degradation in Fire Emblem was pretty cool. Finite inventory per character, finite resources, and having to balance out use of weapons with each of them having finite uses. Nice touch for a SRPG. In any case, I too want FO3 to be as much a bastardization of the franchise as possible, so that I can play martyr again! Then I can justify quitting gaming forever. Until the next franchise ready to get butchered. Or until I want more attention. Whichever comes first (the latter!). You can call me Mr. Morbid Curiosity! (Approved by Fio, so feel free to use it)
Nick_i_am Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 I'm happy just as long as there are warewolves (Approved by Fio, so feel free to use it)
Enoch Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 The better objection is that any SP CRPG imitation of PnP is destined to fail because it doesn't include the one thing that makes PnP worthwhile: other people and good gamemastering. Except that argument is based on the assumption that good players that participate in a session and a good Game Master are a constant in PnP, when this isn't true. Bad GM
Recommended Posts