Obsidian making Fallout: New Vegas

[Kjarista]

lol @ "prop placement" = story telling.

 

Its a sad day for crpgs when story is reduced to a bunch of skeletons gathered around a bathtub.

 

OMG LOOK ITS A STORY.

 

lol. Its amazing what Bethesda gets away with.

 

I guess ez mode is better: Hey, no imagination required., and you don't even have to think about what you see. Here is the story, in your face, just like it's TV.

[Slowtrain]

lol @ "prop placement" = story telling.

 

Its a sad day for crpgs when story is reduced to a bunch of skeletons gathered around a bathtub.

 

OMG LOOK ITS A STORY.

 

lol. Its amazing what Bethesda gets away with.

 

I guess ez mode is better: Hey, no imagination required., and you don't even have to think about what you see. Here is the story, in your face, just like it's TV.

 

 

Sorry, dude. You seem like a nice sort, but the entire concept is sooooooooooo ludicrous I can't even go there. No offense, hey.

 

 

ps: those sort of atmospheric things are nice. Cute. Sweet. Etc. I'm not knocking them. They are NOT a story.

[Aristes]

Here's my question, if the story talks about a big battle and you're alive at the end of it, is it "lulz. Look at the dead bodies they put all around us! I mean, they gave us text, that should be enough to let us know there was a battle." The design teams have always used the art and graphics to help convey the story. What's so bad about going one step further?

 

The folks complaining about the vignettes need to see them as something to augment writing. Attention to detail is a good thing. Using the environment as a tonic for the imagination is a good thing. Taking advantage of the medium is a good thing.

 

Honest to goodness, I simply don't understand why this is a big deal. Maybe I missed the post somewhere up above that said that we shouldn't have any story at all because of vignettes? This animosity for them is just... strange.

 

EDIT: I agree, once more, that they don't take the place of the story at all.

Edited May 4, 2009 by Aristes

[Kefeinzel]

So displaying something visually is deep and enriching, and using text to describe something is ez mode.

 

There's this box I have in my house that plugs into the wall and uses images instead of text to tell stories. I forget what it's called though.

 

To recap, using images and prop placement to tell stories, is apparently deep and enriching, not like TV at all.

Using text to tell a story and describe things in depth like a book, "like TV; ez mode"

 

Your argument is truly cohesive, coherent, and rational. I applaud you, sir.

[Slowtrain]

Honest to goodness, I simply don't understand why this is a big deal. Maybe I missed the post somewhere up above that said that we shouldn't have any story at all because of vignettes? This animosity for them is just... strange.

 

 

I'm not knocking them for what they are. No one is that I can tell. They add a little something to the game.

 

ALthough I would point out once I've seen many many skeletons laying in various poses on beds, bathtubs, etc surrounded by various items, they stop being interesting. Beth overkilled it pretty bad.

 

But the concept that somehow putting these things around in any way, even a teeny tiny amount, offsets the need for characters and narrative, and action and reaction and consequences etc and so forth. No. Just no.

 

I'm not saying you are saying this, btw. Just responding to your question.

[J.E. Sawyer]

Sorry, dude. You seem like a nice sort, but the entire concept is sooooooooooo ludicrous I can't even go there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mise_en_sc%C3%A8ne

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

Hey! We don't have to take that from a Japanese cowboy.

[mkreku]

Its amazing what Bethesda gets away with.

Yeah, they're enhancing the game for a few thousand people.. Amazing what they get away with.

 

The backgrounds were dead in the previous Fallout's. You HAD to rely on speech bubbles because there was nothing else.

[Slowtrain]

Sorry, dude. You seem like a nice sort, but the entire concept is sooooooooooo ludicrous I can't even go there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mise_en_sc%C3%A8ne

 

 

Dude, come on. No one here is saying they don't have a postive effect on the game.

 

But they are not stories.

 

I could create a story around them in my head if I want to. But then I'm WRITING the story, one possible story, based on one frozen moment.

 

That's all it is, Josh, one frozen moment.

 

Again, I'm not saying its a bad thing. Or not effective at times.

[Malcador]

Its amazing what Bethesda gets away with.

Yeah, they're enhancing the game for a few thousand people.. Amazing what they get away with.

 

The backgrounds were dead in the previous Fallout's. You HAD to rely on speech bubbles because there was nothing else.

 

Good to be part of a crowd.

 

I guess ez mode is better: Hey, no imagination required., and you don't even have to think about what you see. Here is the story, in your face, just like it's TV.

 

Fallout 3's got a lot of symbolism, for sure.

[Tagaziel]

What Fallout 3 did well was to tell stories indirectly, using graphics as well as text (terminals) and voice shorts (holotapes). I find it more interesting to look at the surroundings and piece together what happened there. I would perfer this form of storytelling...the indirect way, to more "in your face" type of storytelling. Direct,e explicit storytelling has it's place to be sure, but so does the indirect approach.

 

But this way of building and decorating the world to make it an exciting and varied place to visit (with lots of immersion enhancers/mini stories/ props/whatever) was sorely lacking in the first two Fallout's. It's actually a first for the Fallout series and a big step forward in my opinion.

 

So I assume the Glow, Vault 15, Sierra Army Depot, New Reno, various random encounters, Klamath (canyon in particular) etc. are just my hallucination?

 

The backgrounds were dead in the previous Fallout's. You HAD to rely on speech bubbles because there was nothing else.

 

So here you are, stating that Fallout 3's vignettes are subtle storytelling yet completely ignore the backgrounds of Fallout 1 and 2 discarding them. You're either purposefully ignoring them or simply haven't played either of the games. The backgrounds are very rich, except they rely on a combination of text and visual cues, while Fo3 only relies on visuals (and robs itself of an opportunity for the writers to exercise their skills... though maybe it's a blessing, since Beth's writers aren't exactly the best).

Edited May 4, 2009 by Mikael Grizzly

[Slowtrain]

Its amazing what Bethesda gets away with.

Yeah, they're enhancing the game for a few thousand people.. Amazing what they get away with.

 

 

No one is arguing that they don't enhance the game. No one. Stop beating that drum. No one thinks it would be a better game without them.

[Pop]

This thread went from barely passable to totally retarded in the span of a few hours.

 

What happened

[Malcador]

With regards to little touches, anyone else miss flavour text for items ?

[mkreku]

No one is arguing that they don't enhance the game. No one. Stop beating that drum. No one thinks it would be a better game without them.

You're arguing from a point of pure ignorance and preference. Stop beating the drum that because your imagination fails, noone can tell a story through proper scripting, art design and asset placement. They may not be great, epic stories, but they're more than "frozen moments".

[Kelverin]

Fallout 3's got a lot of symbolism, for sure.

Symbolism? Writing? Who needs em? All you need is....

[Tagaziel]

With regards to little touches, anyone else miss flavour text for items ?

 

I do. It's really annoying, especially after going straight for Fo3 after finishing the two previous games. I grew to rely on the descriptions to the point where primitive pictograms only confuse me.

Edited May 4, 2009 by Mikael Grizzly

[Slowtrain]

This thread went from barely passable to totally retarded in the span of a few hours.

 

What happened

 

 

You know, Pop, I have to say. If you weren't around to constantly remind us how ludicrous our trivial arguments are, I might lose faith.

 

Which makes me wonder of course, why do you come here? Since every trivial argument we engage in is pretty much beneath you?

[mkreku]

So here you are, stating that Fallout 3's vignettes are subtle storytelling yet completely ignore the backgrounds of Fallout 1 and 2 discarding them. You're either purposefully ignoring them or simply haven't played either of the games. The backgrounds are very rich, except they rely on a combination of text and visual cues, while Fo3 only relies on visuals...

Actually, I have played them, several times, and in my memory they used speech bubbles to describe.. well, virtually everything. I assumed it was because of the top down view and the low detail of the graphics (low resolution). But feel free to refresh my memory of what visual cues the previous Fallout's backgrounds contained.

[Pop]

This thread went from barely passable to totally retarded in the span of a few hours.

 

What happened

 

 

You know, Pop, I have to say. If you weren't around to constantly remind us how ludicrous our trivial arguments are, I might lose faith.

 

Which makes me wonder of course, why do you come here? Since every trivial argument we engage in is pretty much beneath you?

Most of the time the board isn't stupid.

 

It's just when people set their minds to it.

[Slowtrain]

They may not be great, epic stories, but they're more than "frozen moments".

 

One can imagine a story around them, certainly, if one wishes to do so.

[Gorgon]

Skeletons locked in a lover's embrace with some sob story entered into their computer.... sure, if only there weren't one in every shack.

[Malcador]

Well stirring one's imagination to invent some backstory for the skeletons to be hugging isn't really storytelling. You could easily have 2 individuals that'd waste their time to come up with background for why they were there and so forth. That's what she's arguing. The nurse's log at Germantown is telling a story and helps to, uh, enrich the background for Fallout 3, for example.

Edited May 4, 2009 by Malcador

[Slowtrain]

This thread went from barely passable to totally retarded in the span of a few hours.

 

What happened

 

 

You know, Pop, I have to say. If you weren't around to constantly remind us how ludicrous our trivial arguments are, I might lose faith.

 

Which makes me wonder of course, why do you come here? Since every trivial argument we engage in is pretty much beneath you?

Most of the time the board isn't stupid.

 

It's just when people set their minds to it.

 

 

Its a gaming board. Arguing endlessly about things that have no real relevance beyond here is part of that. Depending on how relevant one feels an argument is is going to affect how either worthwhile or stupid it is to argue it.

 

For me, the concept of story in a crpg, what it is and what it does, is pretty important.

 

While I am on a gaming board.

[Nightshape]

Sorry, dude. You seem like a nice sort, but the entire concept is sooooooooooo ludicrous I can't even go there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mise_en_sc%C3%A8ne

 

 

Dude, come on. No one here is saying they don't have a postive effect on the game.

 

But they are not stories.

 

I could create a story around them in my head if I want to. But then I'm WRITING the story, one possible story, based on one frozen moment.

 

That's all it is, Josh, one frozen moment.

 

Again, I'm not saying its a bad thing. Or not effective at times.

 

Player narative, and story telling through gameplay are what games can do different to movies in terms of story telling. Enviromental features re-enforce this, its a additive feature which increases immersion, each element is likely placed based on some untold story which is driving the level design.

 

For the most part, I've always felt that games encourage the player to actually write part of the story themselves, but hey, Its your game!