Obsidian making Fallout: New Vegas

[Gizmo]

nonsense.

 

they win with the Fallout crowd if they start paying closer attention to the original recipe.

~ Speaking of the "original recipe"

 

I have an oddball question to the developers ~and as there is no other fallout thread... Here goes (and don't laugh ).

 

Was Fallout's setting retro 50's ?

 

I ask this because no one I encountered in the game effected any sort of exaggerated 50's appearance.

 

Aradesh and all the Children of the Cathedral wore plain robes, and nobody was sporting buzz cuts or dressed like greasers, and the ladies never had beehive hairdoos or the like [Nicole even had a green mohawk] ~and Vree's glasses were not horn rim "granny" glasses.

Except for the pre-fab vault suits and the vaults themselves (which pre-date the war) nothing that was not derelict and abandoned long since seemed in any way especially 50's looking.

 

So I wondered (as I played the game for the first few times), whether or not the development team had intended rather that it had been retro 50's before the war, but that the present day story would be about the vault dweller emerging from his life long isolation into the sprawling wrecked remains of someone else's paradise [long lost ~and long dead].

 

With Fallout 2 this changed a bit, and you see things like the Brotherhood's experimental energy weapons that all look like Flash Gordon props, and the gangsters... But F2 came after, and I'm curious about the first game and its original premise.

 

I suppose the only few that could really answer this were on the original development team or knew them well and spoke at length about the game.

 

In the end, it was just curiosity of mine, and I never thought to ask it here before. So did Bethesda need to "ham it up" so... or was the 50's aspect dead 200 years earlier in the time line?

Edited April 24, 2009 by Gizmo

[Maria Caliban]

Gizmo,

 

I am not a developer, but I don't believe 'present day' Fallout was retro-50s. Rather that the American society that built the Vaults and participated in the nuclear warfare was retro-50s.

 

I've often wondered if parts of FO were based on Dr. Strangelove.

Did other countries build Vaults as well? Is there a vault gap? Edited April 24, 2009 by Maria Caliban

[Pop]

Gamers tend to bitch about unpolished releases (a rare phenomenon as we all know) but a lot of times it's the only rational business decision. Time cooking something is time it's not served, and time in which profits are not being made. More accurately it's time in which expenditures are being made but no income is being incurred (assuming the developer doesn't have a big hit at the time of development) As such with most games the philosophy has to be "It can be as polished as possible within the time constraints we have, but overall it has to be basically functional." If you can actually play the game without crashing every time, the publisher will often err on the side of just getting it out there. High-profile games with outrageous bugs tend to be outliers.

 

If the publisher thinks it's a big game and they don't require an immediate profit, they'll give it more time. Otherwise you can't really expect the occasional bug fix to really impact sales, especially when you're not casting a wide net so to speak. So as long as it runs, it can be thrown out there.

Edited April 24, 2009 by Pop

[Gizmo]

Gizmo,

 

I am not a developer, but I don't believe 'present day' Fallout was retro-50s. Rather that the American society that built the Vaults and participated in the nuclear warfare was retro-50s.

 

I've often wondered if parts of FO were based on Dr. Strangelove. Did other countries build Vaults as well? Is there a vault gap?

[Promethean]

Gamers tend to bitch about unpolished releases (a rare phenomenon as we all know) but a lot of times it's the only rational business decision. Time cooking something is time it's not served, and time in which profits are not being made. More accurately it's time in which expenditures are being made but no income is being incurred (assuming the developer doesn't have a big hit at the time of development) As such with most games the philosophy has to be "It can be as polished as possible within the time constraints we have, but overall it has to be basically functional." If you can actually play the game without crashing every time, the publisher will often err on the side of just getting it out there. High-profile games with outrageous bugs tend to be outliers.

 

If the publisher thinks it's a big game and they don't require an immediate profit, they'll give it more time. Otherwise you can't really expect the occasional bug fix to really impact sales, especially when you're not casting a wide net so to speak. So as long as it runs, it can be thrown out there.

 

I dunno. RPGs from Japan tend to be much more polished since they cant depend on modders and until this gen they couldnt release patches. I think the whole unpolished thing is a symptom of PC gaming, for better or worse.

[Gfted1]

Gamers tend to bitch about unpolished releases (a rare phenomenon as we all know) but a lot of times it's the only rational business decision. Time cooking something is time it's not served, and time in which profits are not being made. More accurately it's time in which expenditures are being made but no income is being incurred (assuming the developer doesn't have a big hit at the time of development) As such with most games the philosophy has to be "It can be as polished as possible within the time constraints we have, but overall it has to be basically functional." If you can actually play the game without crashing every time, the publisher will often err on the side of just getting it out there. High-profile games with outrageous bugs tend to be outliers.

 

If the publisher thinks it's a big game and they don't require an immediate profit, they'll give it more time. Otherwise you can't really expect the occasional bug fix to really impact sales, especially when you're not casting a wide net so to speak. So as long as it runs, it can be thrown out there.

 

 

Weve all heard the "dur, we ran out of zots" party line. I dunno man, it just seems like more and more is being sacrificed on the altar of making money. Im not just talking about little stuff either, how does an OS wiping uninstaller ever make it out the door? Seriously, not one person uninstalled the game before it shipped? C'mon.

[Aristes]

Maria: I'm one of masses of Fallout fans. That's 1-3. I only dispute that I'm one of the "unwashed" masses! I am meticulous in my personal hygiene!

 

As for the discussion, I'm glad to get away from Oblivion. It's not that I don't think that Oblivion isn't similar in a lot of ways to Fallout 3. It's not that I'm ashamed in any way of playing and enjoying Oblivion. It's just that Fallout 3 is a different game and it's the game on which New Vegas will be built. Anyhow, by introducing Oblivion to the arguments, we open the door for folks to argue for changes that actually move closer to Oblivion and, while I liked the game, I would rather not have Oblivion's level and skill system.

 

One of the reasons I liked Fallout 3 so much more is because of the SPECIAL system. I understand that it was modified for use in real-time, but I think Crashgirl's ideas for taking advantage of the realtime format to use SPECIAL in new ways. Some of the ideas specifically, but the entirety of the idea in general.

 

As for the idea that Obsidian will improve upon the game... I don't know. I think Obisidian can improve some aspects of the game, but improving those aspects might actually diminish others. For example, if the story is too tight, it might be constrictive to some players. Nevertheless, I think Obsidian has shown that they can create compelling NPCs and a tight story while allowing the player a lot of lattitude in terms of good/evil and a good amount of personal freedom.

 

Technically speaking, Obsidian can clearly improve on features in New Vegas, such as enhanced work stations and a more robust ability to craft items. However, Obsidian is not entirely known for the optimization of their game engines. Sorry, Obsidz, but I have to call them like I see them. If they can enhance the feature while tightening the engine, or at least not getting any worse, then they will have won not only a victory for the Fallout franchise, but addressed one of their more glaring deficiencies.

 

I have a lot of faith in the design team to keep the sandbox feel of FO3 while providing a better story and more memorable NPCs. However, I don't think every NPC in FO3 was terrible. Sure, Bethesda dropped the ball on a few and missed some great opportunities with others, but the NPC cast was certainly not the worst I've seen.

 

Until we get more specifics, however, there's not a lot we can discuss in terms of the nuts and bolts of the story or NPC ideas.

[Wombat]

It would be just arrogant to declare a certain style is "true." There are a few factions fan-bases involved...roughly divided, they would be Obsidian, BIS Fallouts, Bethesda and Fallouts 3 fan-bases. Some areas may have conflicts but, probably, there should be some other areas to satisfy a certain fan-base without annoying the others too much. Indeed, assignable resources are limited but I guess there are more conflicts between game-play/level-up system of Oblivion and that of BIS Fallouts. Maybe, the designers have already started to divide possible expectations to preference groups and are wondering what they can do to satisfy each group/segment.

 

Personally, considering that I didn't hate Morrowind and Bloodlines, I guess I'm rather forgiving for game-play but not so in terms of the content such as lore, believable world settings, story, dialogues and NPC interactions, which is considered as the forte of Obsidian, if they haven't changed their human resources dramatically.

 

BTW, talking of NPC interactions, how about Karma system? Was it just simplified good/evil approach? J.E.Sawyer had an interesting approach to the Black Hound, which is more complex NPC reaction system. Even Bioware is going to throw out the good/evil global morality slider in Dragon Age. Is Obsidian going to stick to the karma system or thinking of implementing a different system?

[Gizmo]

It would be just arrogant to declare a certain style is "true." There are a few factions fan-bases involved...roughly divided, they would be Obsidian, BIS Fallouts, Bethesda and Fallouts 3 fan-bases.

Could be... but if you compare the series as a whole, is it not 3 to 1?

*Well 2 to 1 not counting Tactics.

Edited April 24, 2009 by Gizmo

[Promethean]

God I hope the Karma/morality system is gone. Its implementation in most games is insipid and simplistic.

 

I'd prefer if Obsidian focused on a tighter narrative and smaller area, especially given the dev time. I'm tired of seeing games half finished because they have ideas bigger than they could realistically develop.

[Gizmo]

God I hope the Karma/morality system is gone. Its implementation in most games is insipid and simplistic.

If they did it too, wouldn't there be jokes about coming over to the "dark side"?

 

Edited April 24, 2009 by Gizmo

[Tagaziel]

Ditch the karma system wholesale, it's utter rubbish, arbitrarily deciding what's good and what's not, breaking any possible grayness in choice.

[Promethean]

Ditch the karma system wholesale, it's utter rubbish, arbitrarily deciding what's good and what's not, breaking any possible grayness in choice.

 

Well that and the whole stealing and purified water thing that totally broke it. It should only be in games where it makes sense thematically, like the first KotOR.

[Aristes]

I hate the way karma/alignment/moral scales are designed in games, but I like the idea of Karma/influence as a way to show a character's impact on the world. I want a dynamic world where the choices the PC makes has an impact on his fellows and, in particular, his community. That's why I want to see tough times for folks who stray too far from the middle. Knight in shining armor all the time? Sure, but someone's going to use that against you, or at least to his own advantage, eventually. Tough hombre who'll shoot you just as soon as look at you? He's going to make a lot of enemies and folks will avoid him. This isn't as simple as bounty hunters trying to kill you. People will go into hiding or skip town if they know you're looking for them. Some folks will avoid "knight" types because either they're afraid they'll be punished for things they've done or they simply have antipathy for what they perceive as "holier than thou" personalities. What about things the PC can do that other folks won't know? Can the PC do a dastardly act without word getting out to the public? Can the PC boast of his accomplishments in order to improve his reputation? Truly selfless act undertaken by a PC who doesn't go out of his way to ensure he gets credit will likely have limited or no benefit.

 

I don't know if it's possible, but I'd like a more robust system. I'd also like influence to be largely opaque. You know you have influence with someone based on how well you're received and how cooperative and helpful the NPCs are.

[Gizmo]

I don't know if it's possible, but I'd like a more robust system. I'd also like influence to be largely opaque. You know you have influence with someone based on how well you're received and how cooperative and helpful the NPCs are.

I'd like a system where the NPC could talk to the PC for a while, and based on the answers, decide that "This guy might just fall for it", and tell a convincing sob story that would set the PC off on a torch and burn mission against an innocent and defenseless village to return a "hostage" to her father.

(unknowingly slaughtering the family of the boy she'd eloped with)

[TwinkieGorilla]

Well that and the whole stealing and purified water thing that totally broke it. It should only be in games where it makes sense thematically, like the first KotOR.

 

"oh, hai! i 'sploded Megatonzzors but i give you water and now i'm good guy team, lol!"

[Promethean]

Yeah but I dont need it in my face, being playing like another leveling system.

 

If a morality system must be implemented, I'm for it being invisible.

[Gfted1]

I hate the way karma/alignment/moral scales are designed in games, but I like the idea of Karma/influence as a way to show a character's impact on the world. I want a dynamic world where the choices the PC makes has an impact on his fellows and, in particular, his community. That's why I want to see tough times for folks who stray too far from the middle. Knight in shining armor all the time? Sure, but someone's going to use that against you, or at least to his own advantage, eventually. Tough hombre who'll shoot you just as soon as look at you? He's going to make a lot of enemies and folks will avoid him.

 

Hmm, sounds BG-ish with its global reputation.

[Maria Caliban]

I'd like a system where the NPC could talk to the PC for a while, and based on the answers, decide that "This guy might just fall for it", and tell a convincing sob story that would set the PC off on a torch and burn mission against an innocent and defenseless village to return a "hostage" to her father.

(unknowingly slaughtering the family of the boy she'd eloped with)

 

The problem with this is that either someone attacks you first or they don't. If you wander into 'innocent and defenseless' village and no one attacks you, then the average 'white knight' PC will start talking to people - and soon they'll figure out that the convincing sob story was just that. On the other hand, if the villagers attack you as soon as they see you, then they stop being innocent and defenseless.

[Aristes]

Something like the global rep from BG, only far more robust.

[Gizmo]

I'd like a system where the NPC could talk to the PC for a while, and based on the answers, decide that "This guy might just fall for it", and tell a convincing sob story that would set the PC off on a torch and burn mission against an innocent and defenseless village to return a "hostage" to her father.

(unknowingly slaughtering the family of the boy she'd eloped with)

 

The problem with this is that either someone attacks you first or they don't. If you wander into 'innocent and defenseless' village and no one attacks you, then the average 'white knight' PC will start talking to people - and soon they'll figure out that the convincing sob story was just that. On the other hand, if the villagers attack you as soon as they see you, then they stop being innocent and defenseless.

If you break into someone's village at night they'll likely lay hands on you, but also if the village is paranoid/paramilitary they may well shoot at you on sight regardless of the time of day.

 

~Still, the point is not the village, but rather the complexity of the AI that offered you the job instead of just bartering for goods as the player expected.

Edited April 24, 2009 by Gizmo

[Maria Caliban]

If you break into someone's village at night they'll likely lay hands on you, but also if the village is paranoid/paramilitary they may well shoot at you on sight regardless of the time of day.

 

~Still, the point is not the village, but rather the complexity of the AI that offered you the job instead of just bartering for goods as the player expected.

 

How do you 'break into' a village? The village isn't private property.

 

But okay, so you have a highly paranoid, paramilitary village that shoots anyone who sets foot inside of it. Yet somehow, the villagers are 'innocent and defenseless?' And after you've slaughtered everyone, out comes the person you were supposed to save, crying about how you've killed his new bride and her entire family -- but how did he meet them if they shoot everyone they don't know on sight?

 

Just having someone give you a quest because of the dialogue option you'd picked is fine. But the 'trick' quest you describe can't be handled in any reasonable way.

[GreasyDogMeat]

Gamers tend to bitch about unpolished releases (a rare phenomenon as we all know) but a lot of times it's the only rational business decision. Time cooking something is time it's not served, and time in which profits are not being made. More accurately it's time in which expenditures are being made but no income is being incurred (assuming the developer doesn't have a big hit at the time of development) As such with most games the philosophy has to be "It can be as polished as possible within the time constraints we have, but overall it has to be basically functional." If you can actually play the game without crashing every time, the publisher will often err on the side of just getting it out there. High-profile games with outrageous bugs tend to be outliers.

 

If the publisher thinks it's a big game and they don't require an immediate profit, they'll give it more time. Otherwise you can't really expect the occasional bug fix to really impact sales, especially when you're not casting a wide net so to speak. So as long as it runs, it can be thrown out there.

 

I dunno. RPGs from Japan tend to be much more polished since they cant depend on modders and until this gen they couldnt release patches. I think the whole unpolished thing is a symptom of PC gaming, for better or worse.

 

JRPGs are more polished because they are much more linear with a pre-made player character and few if any dialogue options along the way. Nothing wrong with that if the game is charming and has a decent story (Anachronox, Chronotrigger).

[bhlaab]

Use a town-by-town reputation system for NPC responses, and a less tangible karma system for generalized alignment. You know, like Fallout 2 did. It worked.

[FabMan_UK]

How do you 'break into' a village? The village isn't private property.

 

I'd guess in a post apocalyptic world, rules around 'the right of way' would change.