New Fallout 3 screens

[Moatilliatta]

The Bloom is a bit excessive but still seems to mesh quite well with the steel walls, and for all we know those lamps are future-lamps^TM and are supposed to be like that in the retro future.

 

It makes me want to actually be in the safe confines of the vault, and that spells success to me. Bethesda tends to be alright in creating atmosphere when they actually try.

[Tigranes]

Yes, you're right - we are treading old ground, rn.

 

I mean,

 

yeah, some of the stuff they have announced is patently retarded. But I'm hoping the game will have some other redeeming qualities.

 

that I can agree with 100%.

 

Anyway, the screenie Zero posted is one of my favourites* - since rest of the time, they won't have those birthday hats and stuff. Then I think it will look very nice. Maybe a little too close to Fallout actually, because everything we've seen of the Vault suggests that, visually, is a very close replica of the original. We have heard in some journalist reports that the Vault itself is quite very different from the rest of the world in this aspect - from what I've seen so far I would agree with that. But we'll see (The Magnificent Proviso).

 

 

*As long as we can turn bloom off.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

That's why I answered to your post with "explain", and the "jumping to conclusions" thing was in response to Xard's general overview of the game as a whole. So yeah, my comment was pretty justified. Don't be so quick to point and laugh next time, RP.

 

But in the response, you quoted the line I wrote. In a general context, it came off as something else, ie, assuming I was talking of the game as if it would be nothing more than a shootfest.

 

 

Again, explain yourself?

 

It's an image focused on what is presumed to be "cool", because it breaks the game down into recognizable aspects that 12 year old fetishists can **** to: menacing beasts, big guns, background explosion. Machismo at its finest. You can find hundreds of similar production images for other games that do the exact same thing instead of focusing on other important aspects of the game. Whether it's representative of the game in its final shape is up for debate, but I am only talking of what the image conveys for that particular scene - not the game.

[Darque]

I don't know why, but the more I read about the new Fallout, the more I'm willing to give Bethesda the benefit of the doubt here.

 

As for the screens... they are... shiney.

[Hurlshort]

Bethesda is very good at making fairly enjoyable games despite terrible design decisions. Plus their community usually fixes the most glaring issues after a couple months. That's why I'm really not worried about Fallout 3, it will be playable and it will look nice.

[Slowtrain]

Bethesda is very good at making fairly enjoyable games despite terrible design decisions. Plus their community usually fixes the most glaring issues after a couple months. That's why I'm really not worried about Fallout 3, it will be playable and it will look nice.

 

 

IF they release a construction kit.

[Volourn]

"Bethesda is very good at making fairly enjoyable games despite terrible design decisions."

 

ES series sucks. Bethesda si eaisly the worst successful game developer ever. Espicially in terms of RPGs. At best, FO3 will be okayish; but I doubt it. Thankfully, I was smart enough to avoid Oblivion altogether due to past horrible experiences with Bethesda games.

 

I'm just worried I'll get suckered into giving FO3 a chance simply because of the name.

 

Fo screens look nice; but that's not what it needs.

[Dark_Raven]

I don't know why, but the more I read about the new Fallout, the more I'm willing to give Bethesda the benefit of the doubt here.

 

As for the screens... they are... shiney.

[Darque]

[Xard]

HOW SEQUELS ARE PROPERLY DONE AND YET ANOTHER REASON WHY BETHESDA IS PHAILING

 

 

I made Sand-argument for the lulz, oh dear

 

Edited June 29, 2008 by Xard

[Meshugger]

lulz

[Slowtrain]

The thing that concerns me the most is how incredibly little info Bethesda has released about the game. They have released almost nothing substantive and we know almost nothing about all major parts of the game. The game is now about 2 months from release and all we are still getting is the same trivial intro playthrough from Pete Hines. We don't even know if a construction kit is going to be made available.

 

Perhaps Bethesda is just waiting to make a big PR splash with a bunch of info in a few weeks. Perhaps they are still fine tuning the game and don't feel ready to show it yet (which is pretty concerning about the quality of the game if they don't yet feel ready to show any part of it, given the release date is now right around the corner). But my concern is they know that what they have put together isn't that great or isn't going to make a lot of people happy and they are just holding back as long as they can from going public with it.

 

If they had good stuff to show and talk about, don't you think they would be showing and talking about at least some of it by now?

 

Hopefully, this is alll groundless fear, but I don't recall either MW or OB having this degree of hush hush around its last couple months of development.

[Jorian Drake]

Oblivion with guns.

nonono, it is "Orcs with gunz"

 

Bethesda is very good at making fairly enjoyable games despite terrible design decisions. Plus their community usually fixes the most glaring issues after a couple months.

I miss the times when one was able to play a great game without community mods or fixes...

 

 

 

That is now way too rare

Edited June 29, 2008 by Jorian Drake

[RangerSG]

I have to agree that I'm concerned about the lack of specifics regarding FO3. That said, to me the screenshot is very nice, and it does make me feel like that would be a safe place in a mad world.

 

As for the D3 vs FO3 article. Sorry, I'm not convinced by it. Certainly if the Vault screenie was put next to the original FO Vault 13 screenie, it WOULD look very similar. So I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt and be cautiously optimistic while not buying any of Bethsoft's hype.

[Bos_hybrid]

HOW SEQUELS ARE PROPERLY DONE AND YET ANOTHER REASON WHY BETHESDA IS PHAILING

 

 

I made Sand-argument for the lulz, oh dear

 

Just another fanboy, whining about the camera. Time to move on people. Buuuut if its like Oblivion in story and dialogue... Then I'll be heading the pack with sausages strapped to my chest running at Bethesda's headquarters.

[Tigranes]

Just another fanboy, whining about the camera. Time to move on people. Buuuut if its like Oblivion in story and dialogue... Then I'll be heading the pack with sausages strapped to my chest running at Bethesda's headquarters.

 

Camera angles are not necessarily related to historical period of game development, despite common belief. Personally, I wouldn't mind not having isometric at all, actually, if the 3pp offered was actually playable. It was crap in Oblivion, and there are reports that it's crap in FO3 as well (but we'll have to see for ourselves).

 

Hopefully, this is alll groundless fear, but I don't recall either MW or OB having this degree of hush hush around its last couple months of development.

 

I don't remember anymore so I'm sure someone will correct me, but wasn't it similar with OB where they had that one video of the woman shooting arrows at the wall and stuff, and it turned out all prescripted and fake? I mean, I know that video was fake and it was like a centrepiece, but I forget if that was the only video around or what.

[Volourn]

I'm no fan of Bethesda; but that article is beyond stupid. It's 2008; not 1998. It's time to get with the program. The graphics for D3 aren't all that impressive, sorry. FO3 has it beat in that way. Meh.

 

I hate when articles force me to defend Bethesda in any way.

[Bos_hybrid]

Camera angles are not necessarily related to historical period of game development, despite common belief. Personally, I wouldn't mind not having isometric at all, actually, if the 3pp offered was actually playable. It was crap in Oblivion, and there are reports that it's crap in FO3 as well (but we'll have to see for ourselves).

 

Reports the 3rdp view is crap in F3, seriously how does anyone know that? The few previews are singing its praises... Much like they did with Oblivion.........

[Tigranes]

how does anyone know that?

 

....previews that said third person view is crap?

 

Notably, not even those previews that just regurgitate old press material explicitly say that 3pp is excellent.

 

As I say, it's all provisional until we see it ourselves (which, knowing Bethesda, will probably be after release), but yeah.

[Hell Kitty]

What previews said the third person perspective was crap? It was definitely tacked on for Oblivion, but I thought they were pushing it as the primary perspective for F3. I haven't been keeping up.

[Starwars]

They have definetely said that they're paying more attention to 3rd person, but I also remember a preview that said it still really sucked. Can't remember which one it was though. First person is definetely the primary perspective though.

[trulez]

I wish they did it the way Bioware did Mass Effect, but I'm fairly sure they wont, which makes me sad.

[Volourn]

BIO > BETH

 

3rd Person > 1st Person

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

3rd Person > 1st Person

 

Both have their uses and advantages, but I have to agree Fallou looks like it's turning into a shooter and not an RPG.

[Slowtrain]

If I am playing a single character game I prefer a first person view regardless of gametype. When I have control of a squad or a small group though some sort of non-first person view is pretty essential.

 

I actually found the third person view in Oblivion pretty playable for melee and general movement. Ranged attacking was pretty difficult though. Since I would imagine that the bread and butter of FO3 combat is going to be ranged, I think the devs pretty much have to give first person view the priority, unless they implement some serious auto-aim functionality.