Fallout 3

[Rhomal]

In fairness Grom while I only read last few pages I am not even sure what you are arguing about expect it seems to me just to start a argument. *shug* Certainly thats your choice but seems like splitting hairs then anything of real substance. I never understood what your chip on your shoulder has been to JE. You seem to go out of your way to attack a guy over the yrs whos one of, IMO, the best minds for RPGs in modern times.

 

But at least JE speaks to you, hes never liked me from the start for some reason even when I was a proponet of obsid since nwn2 was announced and ran nwn2news and worked close with other obsid devs. Be thankful he argues with you rather then talk to a supporter of his company. hehe

[J.E. Sawyer]

regardless, you may have issues with how bethesda implements vats, but to suggest that manual dex way is the Legit way is, at the very least, arrogant, and disheartening... a disturbing pov from a crpg developer.

 

HA! Good Fun!

If you beat Throne of Bhaal with the Ascension mod, that requires some planning. Building a character to make consistent VATS head shots in F3 doesn't really compare. Fallout 3 is an entertaining game, but the mechanics bothered me on a lot of levels. When I scored a head shot outside of VATS, that required some effort on my part. Scoring a head shot in VATS required virtually nothing.

 

People who can't manually score a head shot against a still target in F3 or who can't build a character that can consistently score head shots in VATS have one thing in common: they are huge n00bs who should probably not play video games or operate a motor vehicle. I'm sorry if that attitude is disheartening to you.

[Aristes]

hahaha I bet the mods don't cut out a big chunk of this thread because you guys are fighting.

 

Personally, I rarely used VATS. Not because it was "too easy" or some other nonsense, but because I'm too impatient to watch the chunks spew. In fact, I think the best combat builds will inevitably rely on VATS. I agree with J.E. about the efficacy of headshots outside of VATS. My experience was that I was far more devastating if I was patient enough (ugh) to wait for a scoped head shot against a stationary opponent. I disagree in that I think this was true of non-scoped ranged weapons such as Lincoln's repeater and the hunting rifles.

 

I agree with Gromnir that VATS is perfectly legit. I didn't see a problem with it. Even if it were a design flaw, which it isn't, VATS is part and parcel of the game. Anything the design team puts in a game is certainly legit to use.

 

Oh, and before I read in detail all of the arguments, I will say that I didn't need manual dexterity to set off traps. No shooting the mines with my sniper rifle. I used grenades for that.

[J.E. Sawyer]

Sure, it's fair game. I used VATS head constantly, all through F3. It was not challenging at all and I certainly wouldn't take offense to anyone telling me that it was the easy way through the game. Because it was. There was no problem I could not solve through the application of VATS head and the use of a bunch of stimpaks.

 

If you don't think there's a design flaw in having two combat mechanics (VATS head + unlimited stim use in inventory) that allows you to bulldoze everything in the game, fair enough. I don't agree.

[Amentep]

"I thought Josh's use of "legit" had to do with taking the shot and actually GETTING a headshot, as opposed to lining it up, having it look like a head shot but pull the trigger and get an arm or chest shot (or a miss entirely)."

 

yeah? what is your point? is not legit in a crpg to let your character's stats replace necessity of manual aiming? how so? is an unusual pov for a developer o' crpgs.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

My point is that I (apparently wrongly) was interpreting the use of "legit" in quite a different way that you were, and in a way that was irrelevant to stats or builds or what have you. But since I seem to have wrongly read the relevant text I shall bow out of the discussion.

 

People who can't manually score a head shot against a still target in F3 or who can't build a character that can consistently score head shots in VATS have one thing in common: they are huge n00bs who should probably not play video games or operate a motor vehicle. I'm sorry if that attitude is disheartening to you.

 

I went the VATS headshot rout personally. Although I did get tired of seeing extreme mutant close up while I shot them repeatedly in the face.

[Aristes]

In fairness Grom while I only read last few pages I am not even sure what you are arguing about expect it seems to me just to start a argument. *shug* Certainly thats your choice but seems like splitting hairs then anything of real substance. I never understood what your chip on your shoulder has been to JE. You seem to go out of your way to attack a guy over the yrs whos one of, IMO, the best minds for RPGs in modern times.

 

But at least JE speaks to you, hes never liked me from the start for some reason even when I was a proponet of obsid since nwn2 was announced and ran nwn2news and worked close with other obsid devs. Be thankful he argues with you rather then talk to a supporter of his company. hehe

 

 

Better to be abused than ignored, eh? heh heh

 

Anyhow, Gromnir is being extremely confrontational, sure. ...But I understand his argument perfectly. It's important to establish the priorities of the game design. Namely, that CRPGs rely exclusively or almost exclusively on the character rather than the player skill. I agree with this idea in principle. For someone who adheres to this view, even one small word like "legit" can mean quite a lot when it seems to favor player rather than character ability. The idea behind the word is more important than the literal meaning of the word itself.

 

However, I will say that every game, even tabletop RPGs, rely on player ability. Your character might have an intelligence of 5 but you will devise complex plans that require a much higher intelligence to form and implement. Your characater has a charisma of 3 but you give a long speech to the other party members regarding an upcoming battle and convince them to follow your advice. In CRPGs, your character might have a low dexterity, but you manage to contrive a way to shoot an enemy and quickly hop onto some rocks in order to shoot the mirelurk at will. All of these are part and parcel of games where there is an unavoidable overlap between player and character abilities.

 

Where Gromnir is entirely right is that player abilities are never more legit than character abilities in a CRPG. I don't think J.E. meant it that way, but that's something only he can say. The way I took it is that rather than legitimate, he meant that the only way to use the scope is outside of vats. It's not that a scoped shot is more legitimate outside of vats. It's that, if I'm not mistaken, it's impossible to use your scope in vats. So, if you use a scoped shot, and wait for the target to stop and remain stationary long enough, you'll have a higher crit chance than if you use VATS. Of course, I'm always trying to reconcile disparate views, so who knows? :shrug:

[Aristes]

Well, that's part of the problem (VATS easiness). Yes, you can use stimpacks quickly and easily and you can obtain them in huge numbers. If you're careful about scrounging them, you will have a humungous number of them very early even on very hard. I agree on that issue.

 

I don't think VATS is overpowered in and of itself. I think it makes combat a lot easier. I'm with Amentep in that I don't want to look at slowmo closeup shots. I imagine VATS is much more of a game breaker with a few of the perks, which I have not taken as yet. My next run will rely on those perks, but it's stalled at the moment while I wait.

 

None of it is a design flaw in that I found the game entertaining. Now, before you beat on me, wait a sec. You're a game designer. I respect that. You've been involved with a couple of my favorite games. Certainly the original IWD is perhaps my second favorite CRPG and IWD 2 is in the top ten. It's your job to look at a game, even a commercially/critically successful game, and find ways to improve it. From an outside view, there's a lot of tweaking that would make VATS/Stimpack better.

 

Stimpacks in FO games have generally been both abundant and overpowered. VATS is an imperfect adaptation of the action points for FO3. ...But making my way through the game was still fun, so I personally don't know what I'd do to fix it. I trust that you would have better ideas in that regard than I ever will.

[Gromnir]

"If you beat Throne of Bhaal with the Ascension mod, that requires some planning. Building a character to make consistent VATS head shots in F3 doesn't really compare."

 

building a fo3 character to take advantage of knockdown effects, sans vats, also not take planning.

 

virtually every game has design flaws. you has made 'nuff d&d games to realize that by now. more complex a game rules gets, the more loopholes you is gonna necessarily provide.

 

regardless, play vats or sans vats not = Legitimacy. a crpg developer who not seem to get that a crpg should rely on character stats rather than player skillz should be a little bit embarrassed, but perhaps you feels you is beyond reproach. too bad. as noted already, single head shots against still targets is hardly the extent of the game... as overpowered as such stuff can be in fo3, it ain't the sure-fire one-trick pony josh suggests it is, but regardless, josh's distinguishing game between legit and __________ is clearly contrary to spirit o' crpg genre.

 

btw, if only a total n00b cannot make such shots as josh Decrees legitimate, then how can they BE legit? if any yutz can do, then what really distinguishes from vats? you really ain't making sense.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Rhomal]

> Better to be abused than ignored, eh? heh heh

 

heh..Not sure 'abused' is that path I prefer.. acknowledged I exist would be nice however. If I did something to offend him a least a chance to appologize, clarify whatever I did/said would be appreciated. I have always spoken high of him, obsid and the devs I befriended there so not sure what I ever did unless he takes my gripes with some of the bioware folks to heart.. Anyways.. moving on..

 

> Anyhow, Gromnir is being extremely confrontational, sure. ...But I understand his argument perfectly. It's important to establish the priorities of the game design. Namely, that CRPGs rely exclusively or almost exclusively on the character rather than the player skill. I agree with this idea in principle. For someone who adheres to this view, even one small word like "legit" can mean quite a lot when it seems to favor player rather than character ability. The idea behind the word is more important than the literal meaning of the word itself.

 

While I understand what you and grom is saying, it does seem a small thing (in the big picture of crpg design) to make such a fuss/argument over, but that may just be me. I agree priorities in game deisgn is is critical. However the aspect of this specific point fo said deisgn does not seem as importent as being made out to be, but again perhaps thats just me. Last game I designed/wrote from start/finish was a multi-player D&D type text BBS door game. So I certainly don't have the expertise of JE of more modern game design so what do I know.. heh

 

> However, I will say that every game, even tabletop RPGs, rely on player ability. Your character might have an intelligence of 5 but you will devise complex plans that require a much higher intelligence to form and implement. Your characater has a charisma of 3 but you give a long speech to the other party members regarding an upcoming battle and convince them to follow your advice. In CRPGs, your character might have a low dexterity, but you manage to contrive a way to shoot an enemy and quickly hop onto some rocks in order to shoot the mirelurk at will. All of these are part and parcel of games where there is an unavoidable overlap between player and character abilities.

 

I agree. In PnP or CRPG gaming metagaming creeps in to some degree. Even the best RPers catch themselves from time to time at least, the medium is moot.

 

> Where Gromnir is entirely right is that player abilities are never more legit than character abilities in a CRPG. I don't think J.E. meant it that way, but that's something only he can say. The way I took it is that rather than legitimate, he meant that the only way to use the scope is outside of vats. It's not that a scoped shot is more legitimate outside of vats. It's that, if I'm not mistaken, it's impossible to use your scope in vats. So, if you use a scoped shot, and wait for the target to stop and remain stationary long enough, you'll have a higher crit chance than if you use VATS. Of course, I'm always trying to reconcile disparate views, so who knows? :shrug:

 

I agree with your interputaion. But as you said only JE nows for sure. Well said BTW!

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I agree. In PnP or CRPG gaming metagaming creeps in to some degree. Even the best RPers catch themselves from time to time at least, the medium is moot.

 

In PnP, a guy playing a Rogue doesn't fare better than another guy playing a Rogue because he's physically nimbler than the other player.

[Aristes]

I agree. In PnP or CRPG gaming metagaming creeps in to some degree. Even the best RPers catch themselves from time to time at least, the medium is moot.

 

In PnP, a guy playing a Rogue doesn't fare better than another guy playing a Rogue because he's physically nimbler than the other player.

 

In PnP, an intelligent gamer more conversant with the rules will fare better than a less intelligent ignorant player of the same class. Years have DMing have shown this to be the case. The character doesn't play itself. For that reason, the player's personal abitlities and insights will always impact character success, even in PnP.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

In PnP, an intelligent gamer more conversant with the rules will fare better than a less intelligent ignorant player of the same class. Years have DMing have shown this to be the case. The character doesn't play itself. For that reason, the player's personal abitlities and insights will always impact character success, even in PnP.

 

Which isn't any kind of counterpoint to what I said since I clearly didn't question player ability in itself, just the degree to which it it used.

[mkreku]

It's just a question of personal preference. Some people want the layer of abstraction to be thick (PnP fans) and some want it to be as thin as possible (ME!). Arguing over the fact that Josh has a preference is.. since I'm under moderation I'll just call it useless. But you know what I really mean.

[Aristes]

Yeah, I guess you've got it there, DR. In a PnP game, you can use your more cereberal personal advantages. It's not like better reflexes gives you better dice rolls. haha In a CRPG, the player can use his reflexes to give him an advantage as well.

 

What do you mean exactly, mkreku? We're here to discuss gaming stuff. If this discussion doesn't have merit, then probably nothing else we discuss here does either. Anyhow, you're a Swede. Whatever you mean, I could proabably placate you with a beer or a couple of shots of vodka or something.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Actually, I'm not that big into PnP nowadays. I had some good sessions over the years, but looking at it nowadays just makes my head hurt. I've lost the ability to care about rules lawyerism to a degree. I couldn't even muster enough brainpower to come up with builds for NWN; most of those I've tried came straight out of NWVault. The one thing I retain from those days, and which I carried over to electronic gaming in terms of cRPGs, is about giving every player a means to play their character. This is why I could play just fine through Deus Ex, Vampire: Bloodlines, Gothic 3, Elder Scrolls and what little time I spent with Fallout 3. It's not a question of my ability as a person being used. As mentioned before, to deny its existence is to deny one of the core aspects of role-playing.

 

I think the issue has more to do with how player ability is used. Tigranes makes a good, even if obvious point - a gamer that has an edge in planning and improvisation skills is going to have an edge over someone who doesn't. But that's fine, because Player Characters are vacant constructs. We are their conscience. That's rule number one for every game genre and subgenre. Troops don't move by themselves. Chess isn't one by taking your hands off the board. Frogger is gonna stand there and get squashed if you don't help it cross the road. And the main rule for cRPGs is Player Characters aren't going to display a semblance of personality if you don't intervene.

 

 

What gets to me in a game like Fallout 3, where your reflexes play an important aspect of the game and character in terms of combat, is just how your player ability comes to a point where it risks becoming a more legitimate model of gameplay than the character's ability. Presumably, there are some who defend turn-based is the only adequate way of pulling it off, but I find that a narrow approach. In fact, the Infinity Engine games - and others like Darklands and X-Com: Apocalypse that spawned them - show the opposite.

 

So if Josh's point is basically "that's how videogames are nowadays, chuckles, get with the program NYUK NYUK NYUK", that's fine. I'm not condemning nor trying to change the system, since it's a waste of time to tell people games should try to appeal to everyone in a consumer market because a) everyone has a different mindset on how to achieve that, and b) it's morally bankrupt to criticize someone's stance on videogame development just because we are selfish raggamuffins who want things our way. And it's certainly not without merit to consider you can move away from all the pointless fluff of the more simulationist concepts of PnP when discussing cRPGs. A background stealth check doesn't get in the way of me physically controlling a Player Character to sneak about, for instance.

 

But the more you're straying from that and the more you're opening the game to a new kind of audience, you're also leaving out the other part. PnP was a polarizing experience in which only people with good improv skills and understanding of the rules could get anywhere. With the move to computers, we established a middle road of sorts; clearly, input mechanisms that allowed players to adopt their own playstyles was terribly popular - again, the Infinity Engine games were an example. For all the backlash it got on other elements, Arcanum did this as well. But with the genre finding progressive success by virtue of its reflex-driven input, you're now providing another kind of polarizing experience by excluding those that want to play a role without having to physically "act" it.

 

You won't be able to play a Combat Boy in Fallout 3 the same way you could in Fallout 1 or 2. Mkreku pointed out it's a preference and to a degree, it is... If we were discussing preferences. But the problem is one of legitimacy of control over the character. And the problem isn't that you have to twitch around to play a gunslinger, the problem is twitching around is the *only* way you have of playing a gunslinger. What used to be an option is nowadays becoming mandatory. Yes, let's argue that people with better planning skills can play better than those that can't, shunning away certain players. But let's also discuss how those with better reflexes are also going to play better than those who don't have them. PnP, and turn-based, and "old RPGs" were polarizing because they forced on players a certain kind of gameplay. Fallout 3 shares the same herd mentality, only in reverse.

Edited December 18, 2008 by Diogo Ribeiro

[Tigranes]

The point is that monkeyhopping on Josh's back for how he plays FO3 (a game already built in such a way) and extricating some elaborate state-of-the-industry out of it lacks logic and sense.

 

Fallout 3 is built in a certain way. Unmodded, it very clearly gives advantage, both in terms of competitiveness and convenience, to either VATS or real-time in certain situations. There's no way to pursue the 'pure CRPG' combat play that Gromnir is pounding fists about within the game, so whatchagonnado? I do keep thinking how much I'd prefer FO3 combat with isometric TB, but that doesn't mean I'm going to try and play it like isometric TB while I'm in the game. That's an exercise in futility.

 

Anyway. I've found about a hundred locations, and well.... FO3 doesn't give you too many quests, does it? I've run out and now I have to go find dad, it seems. I just heard you get railroaded once you do. 23 hours in and the wasteland is starting to, very slightly, lose its charm, though.

 

edit: oh, its Dioooogo!

 

how your player ability comes to a point where it risks becoming a more legitimate model of gameplay than the character's ability.

 

It's always been 'legitimate'. We could devolve into an eternally unresolvable WHAT IS RPG dance-round-the-campfire, but you know, it's always been a legitimate model of gameplay. Many gamers enjoy it, and many gamers are able to identify with their characters and not worry at all about the curious merge between their aiming skill and that of, say, J C Denton's. If you are saying this in terms of the traditional Western CRPGs in the tradition of Fallout, IE games and so forth, well, in so many ways, Bethesda diverged from that line a long time ago. Someone who doesn't know the history will come and play FO3, and associate it with Oblivion, Stalker or whatever, rather than FO1/2, simply because of visual style, presentation/delivery, etc. So I don't think FO3 is that relevant or powerful.

 

Certainly, some morons in the world of 'journalism' and in the public will continue to claim how FO3 shows that no game should ever EVAR be TB, etc, etc, how every game should follow FO3, but... y'know.

 

I think the point I'm trying to make is that FO3 appears sufficiently different to the average gamer, so that rather than associating itself with traditional tactical western CRPGs and dragging them along its path, it's sort of the black sheep, and is more likely to influence games in the other side of the spectrum. After all, games like King's Bounty, MOTB / SOZ and so forth didn't worry about Oblivion.

[Aristes]

I can't say that I agree with every inference from your post, DR, but it was damned good. Actually entertaining as a read in and of itself. Great op ed.

 

as for you, Tigranes, I'd say that you're right about quest lines. Not a lot of actual lines, but there is some drama that they managed to convey some story by use of the environment pretty well. For example, the minefield area where you search the houses and see the charred remains of a couple lying in each others' arms. ...Or saving some poor bastard who's strapped with explosives. I think there's a lot of story there for you to discover, even if you don't perform quests do uncover it.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

its Dioooogo!

 

:crowds boo and hiss:

 

Oh, I'm not going into the definition of RPG. The Nameless One's skin is as smooth as baby's arse compared to the scars I've got from those debates. Suffice to say, I think I could resume my point with this. A cRPG is founded on both player and character ability. The more the axis tilts in favor of one of them, the other becomes increasingly meaningless. And I think there's no point in adhering to a gameplay convention when it's little more than a fetish to keep players hung on genre conventions.

 

In fact, when Deus Ex: Invisible War came out, I was on the opposite side of most people since I had almost no problems with weapon skills disappearing. Why bother, really? I prefer that to schizoid character abilities telling me I can't do something but then having the game let my player ability override them.

 

 

King's Bounty... Man. Even more than MotB and SoZ, that is the one game making me want to sell my soul to get my gaming PC fixed

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I can't say that I agree with every inference from your post, DR, but it was damned good. Actually entertaining as a read in and of itself. Great op ed.

 

I think "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" probably applies best

[Tigranes]

Aristes: yeah, there's a lot of non-story bits. I actually haven't bothered to go to the Minefield yet (I lied my way past that in the quest), but will check it out.

 

I think its quite silly how they let you disarm a mine instantly though, if you hear the 'beep' you can just look down and spam E. Hey, free mine! Been avoiding doing that recently, quite fun having to jump out of the way hoping not to lose a leg.

 

DR, I agree with you in general, I was just saying how silly it was to extrapolate JE's design philosophies from the way he plays FO3, which is already built to only allow certain types of play.

[Aristes]

I can't say that I agree with every inference from your post, DR, but it was damned good. Actually entertaining as a read in and of itself. Great op ed.

 

I think "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" probably applies best

 

If you're no Shakespeare, I'm no Donne. Take the compliment, you yutz!

[Gromnir]

"The point is that monkeyhopping on Josh's back for how he plays FO3 (a game already built in such a way) and extricating some elaborate state-of-the-industry out of it lacks logic and sense"

 

did anybody do such a thing? only criticism made by Gromnir were directed at josh personal, as a developer... no state-of-the industry stuff from us. please review: josh decreed that those poor fools using vats to gets head shots were not playing legit. what? really? oddly 'nuff, although Gromnir much prefers turn-based gameplay, we typically found non-vats fo3 combat to be more efficacious, so josh's condemnation not touch us personally. the knockdown effect of a victory rifle, coupled with spam shots from a scopped .44 for anthing that did manage to get close, proved to be our mo for last 2/3 of game. even so, we feels some concern and consternation that a developer o' crpgs would have such a contemptuous attitude o' the way many chose to play fo3. those who use vats weren't doing legit?

 

am understanding why tig wants to stick up for an obsidian developer, and loyalty to the hosts is admirable enough quality, but in this case we thinks that your characterization o' "the point" and your loyalty is both misplaced an unfounded. josh is the guy who spat a little ridicule in the direction o' those folks who not likes twitchy gameplay, and you is defending. bad cess.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Tigranes]

am understanding why tig wants to stick up for an obsidian developer

 

And why would I do that? All you are doing is conveniently using that Moderator tag to pigeonhole me and then take pot shots - not unlike what you're doing with Josh. Please.

 

All I am saying is that, in my opinion, your argument is needless and nitpicky. Josh ridicules those who don't like twitchy? Please, that's more sensitive than [insert non-PC stereotype here].

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Really? If you sneak up behind them then get them in the head, it's a crit more than half the time, for me.

 

I think sneaking increases the chance of a critical hit - but my character was not very stealthy and thus I cannot say that I am sure about that. Oh well, sounds like I'll need to take another run through the game....

[Gromnir]

am understanding why tig wants to stick up for an obsidian developer

 

And why would I do that? All you are doing is conveniently using that Moderator tag to pigeonhole me and then take pot shots - not unlike what you're doing with Josh. Please.

 

All I am saying is that, in my opinion, your argument is needless and nitpicky. Josh ridicules those who don't like twitchy? Please, that's more sensitive than [insert non-PC stereotype here].

 

 

where we mention your mod tag? if we were gonna blame mod status we would mention it. there is always a tendency of the Faithful to defend the developers. you is a glassy-eyed fanboi? probably, 'cause you sure as hell ain't just saying we is needless nitpicky. spin-doctoring (which, in the spirit o' Inigo Montoya, don't mean what you seem to think it means,) and some other inaccurate descriptors has been thrown our way by tig, in defense o' a guy who seemed to try and go out of his way to insult a large % of people who played fo3... and a significant portion o' historic crpg fans. heck, is lucky that Gromnir responded to josh and not some o' the codexians or others.

 

*shrug*

 

actually, if not for the tag we woulda assumed you were a brit, 'cause those guys loves to mindless defend the monarchy, eh?

 

HA! Good Fun!