New Fallout 3 screens

[Musopticon?]

And I'm going to laugh now, because in your feeling of importance you failed to add anything to the thread.

 

Unless you follow up with an explanation, that is.

[Pidesco]

My problem with Fallout 3 is not the supposed change from Original Fallout Goodness^tm, but rather that the last two Elder Scrolls games, were from my perspective, horrible steps backwards in the series, and generally in the genre. As such, given my complete lack of trust on Bethsoft's design skills, I really can't see much fun coming out of a game developed by them. It's been twelve years since they released a game I enjoyed. And I used to adore the bastards.

[Starwars]

My problem is a change from the Fallout goodness, but I also agree with your post. I never played Arena, but I played Daggerfall around the time it came out. I did play the game a lot, mostly due to being drunk on the freedom and enormous world offered. But it's not what I'd call a good game, I was very frustrated with it. Daggerfall was an enormous cup of potential, but it wasn't even close to being filled.

 

Come Morrowind, I thought it'd be a grand upgrade of Daggerfall, with annoyances removed and features polished etc. I thought Bethesda would try to fill the cup up. But instead they shrank the cup itself (whew, far out man), and the same was done with Oblivion.

[Hurlshort]

And I'm going to laugh now, because in your feeling of importance you failed to add anything to the thread.

 

Unless you follow up with an explanation, that is.

 

Along with this post, @\NightandtheShape/@ will receive a complimentary copy of "You Got Served" available in DVD and VHS format.

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

And I'm going to laugh now, because in your feeling of importance you failed to add anything to the thread.

 

Unless you follow up with an explanation, that is.

 

Oh I purposely didn't add anything because I wasn't aware that anyone cared how bloom and HDR work, and the fact that our friend made the comment that bethseda needed to learn how to set up their bloom settings sort of upset me as I felt it was ignorantly stated and felt that it should be pointed out.

 

It was a misconception, as the bloom and HDR settings are only part of the equation.

 

They're both effects that deal with exposure and apply a certain amount of blur to the scene, generally speaking a gaussian blur.

 

Bloom deals with scene saturation and intensity within a threshhold, where HDR works in a slightly different way as it deals more directly with colour exposure levels. The result is directly linked with how a scene is lit.

 

Basically what should have been pointed out would be that bethseda need work on setting up their scene lighting and exposure levels.

 

Most of the problem with Bethseda's approch actually comes from the fact they apply too much blur to scenes with objects which are overly lit inregards to their specular highlights.

 

The problem isn't just with how the bloom is set, it's more to do with the specular highlighting of particular objects and general colour options in general in regards to their threshhold.

 

These fallout3 shots also appear to have a certain level of desaturation applied to them, not quite to the extremes of GoW, but still somewhat desaturated.

 

Sorry if you thought my previous comment offensive in some manner.

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

And I'm going to laugh now, because in your feeling of importance you failed to add anything to the thread.

 

Unless you follow up with an explanation, that is.

 

Along with this post, @\NightandtheShape/@ will receive a complimentary copy of "You Got Served" available in DVD and VHS format.

 

Which has been aptly returned to said sender.

[Hurlshort]

And I'm going to laugh now, because in your feeling of importance you failed to add anything to the thread.

 

Unless you follow up with an explanation, that is.

 

Along with this post, @\NightandtheShape/@ will receive a complimentary copy of "You Got Served" available in DVD and VHS format.

 

Which has been aptly returned to said sender.

 

That's too bad, it features Kirsten Dunst back when she still acted in movies and it has the semi-evil vampire slayer from Buffy as well. You're missing out.

[Sand]

It's good that I was never a fan.

 

I think it's great that they are using existing assets to base their game on.

 

I just don't like games that use a name then end up being totally different what their namesake is. It doesn't matter if it is Fallout, Baldur's Gate, Half Life, Crysis, or whatever. If you are going to use an established name, use an established setting, then be as true and accurate to that name and setting as possible. Innovations is all fine and good unless those innovations makes the new game something completely different that what the original was.

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

And I'm going to laugh now, because in your feeling of importance you failed to add anything to the thread.

 

Unless you follow up with an explanation, that is.

 

Along with this post, @\NightandtheShape/@ will receive a complimentary copy of "You Got Served" available in DVD and VHS format.

 

Which has been aptly returned to said sender.

 

That's too bad, it features Kirsten Dunst back when she still acted in movies and it has the semi-evil vampire slayer from Buffy as well. You're missing out.

 

I prefer bukkake LMFAO

[Tigranes]

Hey Starwars, this is quite different from NMA's reception isn't it?

 

I think even treating F3 as a completely new game in a universe where F1/2 never existed, several large flaws loom over the screenshots, some of which may or may not be rectified by the final game:

 

1. Quality

I don't know much about graphics tech so I'm not going to comment about that, I'm just commenting on what can be seen: individually, not much seems wrong and you can find some neat stuff they've put in there. Put together, it doesn't feel consistent, and its quality seems, indeed, like a PS2 game. Notably, I would point out the greasy sheen on the supermutant in second to last picture, and the flatness of the power armour in the last picture, both legacies of Oblivion; how, just like in those games, Bethesda's graphics department appears to have a problem in making characters look like they belong in the environment they've made. Apart from the super bloom (or NightandShape's accurate corrections on that matter), I think that really makes the eyes go 'huh?'.

 

2. Direction

The art direction is, as I said before, very very obviously 90's postapocalypse as opposed to 50's. I wonder if Bethesda is doing this on purpose. Leaving aside the fact that this of course makes things look very un-Fallouty, this makes the game's look very generic and swamped by other games which have explored such settings already. Whereas the 50's postapocalyptic setting gave them an opportunity to create a game that would be very unique in the way it looks and feels compared to the Rainbow Sixes, Deus Exes, Stalkers and whatnot, they have chosen for some reason to throw away this advantage. What I fear may happen is that this will then come together with some clearly 50's objects like the Pipboy, and end up an eery and unbecoming juxtaposition.

 

3. Special Effects

One thing that hasn't been mentioned this thread much: the special effects suck. By that I mean all those projectiles and gun effects. I have no idea how they look in reality, but what they've effectively done here is make a bland, low-colour-intensive environment, throw in flat glossed characters, then a few firecrackers and giant laser beams all together for a very disconcerting end result. I don't know why every burst of gunfire has to create a sfx larger than the person's face, and the laser beams are big enough to hold up a Greek temple. Now I'm sure that in early/mid game at least you won't be blowing up cars with nuclear weapons wherever you go, but it's still overdone and adds to the central problem that we can identify from the screenshots - a lack of a clear direction and the consequent loss of cohesion and immersion.

 

Of course, this is all speculative and they're not done yet. Hopefully, when we seem some gameplay videos, it'll be more encouraging.

[Moatilliatta]

Does anyone know whether Bethsoft has made any comments regarding modability? Mods for a fallout game could be rather interesting.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Not that I know of, although I would not be surprised if they made something like the ESC Set...

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

Hey Starwars, this is quite different from NMA's reception isn't it?

 

I think even treating F3 as a completely new game in a universe where F1/2 never existed, several large flaws loom over the screenshots, some of which may or may not be rectified by the final game:

 

1. Quality

I don't know much about graphics tech so I'm not going to comment about that, I'm just commenting on what can be seen: individually, not much seems wrong and you can find some neat stuff they've put in there. Put together, it doesn't feel consistent, and its quality seems, indeed, like a PS2 game. Notably, I would point out the greasy sheen on the supermutant in second to last picture, and the flatness of the power armour in the last picture, both legacies of Oblivion; how, just like in those games, Bethesda's graphics department appears to have a problem in making characters look like they belong in the environment they've made. Apart from the super bloom (or NightandShape's accurate corrections on that matter), I think that really makes the eyes go 'huh?'.

 

2. Direction

The art direction is, as I said before, very very obviously 90's postapocalypse as opposed to 50's. I wonder if Bethesda is doing this on purpose. Leaving aside the fact that this of course makes things look very un-Fallouty, this makes the game's look very generic and swamped by other games which have explored such settings already. Whereas the 50's postapocalyptic setting gave them an opportunity to create a game that would be very unique in the way it looks and feels compared to the Rainbow Sixes, Deus Exes, Stalkers and whatnot, they have chosen for some reason to throw away this advantage. What I fear may happen is that this will then come together with some clearly 50's objects like the Pipboy, and end up an eery and unbecoming juxtaposition.

 

3. Special Effects

One thing that hasn't been mentioned this thread much: the special effects suck. By that I mean all those projectiles and gun effects. I have no idea how they look in reality, but what they've effectively done here is make a bland, low-colour-intensive environment, throw in flat glossed characters, then a few firecrackers and giant laser beams all together for a very disconcerting end result. I don't know why every burst of gunfire has to create a sfx larger than the person's face, and the laser beams are big enough to hold up a Greek temple. Now I'm sure that in early/mid game at least you won't be blowing up cars with nuclear weapons wherever you go, but it's still overdone and adds to the central problem that we can identify from the screenshots - a lack of a clear direction and the consequent loss of cohesion and immersion.

 

Of course, this is all speculative and they're not done yet. Hopefully, when we seem some gameplay videos, it'll be more encouraging.

 

 

The PS2 couldn't create anything remotely close to the quality that can be seen in the pictures, the textures are quite obviously much higher in resolution than the PS can begin to handle.

 

All's said I do agree that the general quality just seems to be lacking something I just can't put my finger upon it... I think it's the self shadowing on the characters.

 

The flame/explosions seem fairly good, but I agree with the sentiment that the muzzle flashes aren't excellent.

 

It doesn't look anywhere as bad as folk seem to be saying it does.

 

Special effects are extremely difficult to get just right...

[Dark_Raven]

What if Elder Scrolls V underwent a similar change? Fans would cry bloody murder.

 

An isometric, turn-based, 2D Elder Scrolls Fallout game would be cool.

[Fenghuang]

After a brief look at them I'd say the textures are pretty horrid, but the underlying models are pretty nice, and the atmosepheric bits/architecture are awesome. Hopefully they'll fix the textures up before shipping and these are just some placeholder-y stock textures they had on hand.

 

That head pop is terrible. A lot of this must be placeholder stuff. I can only hope.

 

The head pop is the only one I really liked.

 

Though probably not for the right reasons (meaning I'm not really sure it would work for the game). It has an incredibly stylized almost cel-shaded comicbooky/painted feel to it and I find the contrast between the model/gore and the surrounding white environment really pretty to look at.

 

Ugly graphics, probably a sucky story, lame console port. Way to go and f*** up a good series Bethy!

 

The series was dead before they got their hands on it, so what if they screw up something that most people had forgotten about.

 

It's good that I was never a fan.

 

I think it's great that they are using existing assets to base their game on.

 

There are fans and then there

[Pop]

The fans are the not crazy people who are willing to admit that the Fallouts, while awesome, really haven't aged all that well (along with other Infinity Engine games)

What do you mean by "haven't aged well"? I mean, I'm with you on everything else, but for the most part, the strength of the IE games were never in the visuals. No game really ages well, and as such it's not really a good measure of quality. If you're implying better games have come out since then, well, them's fighting words.

[Humodour]

Oh man, everything I've seen about Fallout 3 so far sucks.

 

They're trying so hard make their own game as well as emulate the best attributes of the old games... but failing at doing both.

[Tigranes]

The PS2 couldn't create anything remotely close to the quality that can be seen in the pictures, the textures are quite obviously much higher in resolution than the PS can begin to handle.

 

Oh, indeed. You're probably right. My point though is that it clearly gives an impression of an aged and jaggy game. It's been pointed out to me, too, that the shadow are... well, lacking.

[Starwars]

Does anyone know whether Bethsoft has made any comments regarding modability? Mods for a fallout game could be rather interesting.

 

They've said that it would be good, but there seems to be a lot of doubt and "maybes" and "it would take a lot of work" so far, so I'm not sure. It doesn't seem to be prioritized in the same way as for the Elder Scrolls, so I wouldn't bet on it.

[Fenghuang]

The fans are the not crazy people who are willing to admit that the Fallouts, while awesome, really haven't aged all that well (along with other Infinity Engine games)

What do you mean by "haven't aged well"? I mean, I'm with you on everything else, but for the most part, the strength of the IE games were never in the visuals. No game really ages well, and as such it's not really a good measure of quality. If you're implying better games have come out since then, well, them's fighting words.

 

Well.

 

I really don't think the graphics, or the combat in any of the IE games have aged at all well.

 

For the Fallouts, the parts I liked was the creativity shown in the design of the game world, the setting, the retro-futuristic tech, and some of the writing.

 

A lot of the writing wasn't even all that great, I'd say the majority of it was good, a pretty decent portion of it was above average, and a little bit of it was completely awesome. I also enjoyed the openendedness.

 

What I'm saying is I think a lot of the people who praise the Fallouts above all others let nostalgia color their evaluation of it too much.

[Tigranes]

A lot of the writing wasn't even all that great, I'd say the majority of it was good, a pretty decent portion of it was above average, and a little bit of it was completely awesome. I also enjoyed the openendedness.

 

I think that's about as good as you can hope for, at least in video game writing, so far. Flashes of brilliance covered in a very consistent level of good that makes it both memorable later on and enjoyable at that moment. Torment too had its flashes of utter brilliance, but even those who liked the writing will say some of it was comparatively filler-ish.

 

On IE graphics - well I don't think I'm qualified to say. BG2 was my first real taste with computer gaming and it's come to define my perspectives, and I spent my highschool years (early this decade) looking at all these exciting new 3D games come out, except 3D was still new and it looked all jaggy, blocky, and horrible. I'd maintain that, as a personal opinion, the best of IE games continued to be preferable to early 3D until, for RPGs, the era of Jade Empire, NWN2, Oblivion. 3D has its obvious advantages but I think it took a while for those to outweigh the problems they took years to overcome - so much jaggy, so much blocky, so much generic. Even now I think they hold different appeals; in most well-made 3D graphics I marvel at the special effects and the lighting/shadows, or just the way I can be immersed in a 3D environment; in 2D I look for the handdrawn touches that give it character, like looking at moving paintings. But I accept that this also has a lot to do with opinion and formative years, and for some 2D is simply out of the question now. (Every time I play Fallout and other mid-90's games it takes me a while to get over the graphics jump.)

[Humodour]

I disagree. I play Fallout and IE games once every year or two. They constantly keep me going combat-wise, though story and dialogue wise it sometimes gets dull because I've memorised most of it.

 

And graphics never bothered me too much. Like, I prefer IWD1/PST/BG1 graphics to IWD2 and BG2 and NWN1.

 

I'm totally cool with 2D isometric, even now.

[Dark_Raven]

The old games like BG and Fallout, its not all about the graphics. Its, yes really this is true so don't be surprised, its about the story and character. WoWsers! Most of the games these days lack that. They focus on the graphics. Most 3D game graphics are s*** to begin with any how.

[kirottu]

The old games like BG and Fallout, its not all about the graphics. Its, yes really this is true so don't be surprised, its about the story and character. WoWsers! Most of the games these days lack that. They focus on the graphics. Most 3D game graphics are s*** to begin with any how.

 

I like this. First you say graphics don

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

The PS2 couldn't create anything remotely close to the quality that can be seen in the pictures, the textures are quite obviously much higher in resolution than the PS can begin to handle.

 

Oh, indeed. You're probably right. My point though is that it clearly gives an impression of an aged and jaggy game. It's been pointed out to me, too, that the shadow are... well, lacking.

 

I've a fair ideal what's happening, they just need to rework the artwork slightly and make the shadowing less extreme... But that doesn't solve everything.

 

Fallout 3 is fallout in name as far as I can see... I'm willing to give it a fair shot though, I'm one of those folks who actually likes Bethseda's work peroid. That all said I do understand how die hard fans must feel, but as I was never a die hard fallout fan (I like the game alot I just see a million and 1 problems with some parts of it).