Obsidian making Fallout: New Vegas

[TwinkieGorilla]

My responses were short, so I'm sorry if this didn't come across, but the only argument I was trying to make is that Bethesda did (in my opinion) a good job in setting up their environments/atmospheric tone in F3. I understand that this is part of a larger discussion involving storytelling in general, but I do feel that visual atmosphere is an important element of storytelling, whether it's in theatre, movies, or games.

 

hey man, i completely agree. that's what bugged me. people (mainly FO3 apologists) are constantly trying to peg me for a "hater" as if i'm this one-dimensional guy with a one-dimensional outlook on the game. i actually really like a whole lot of stuff about that game, no joke. but my whole thing...one of the posts which set this mess off was that i refuse to buy that "visual storytelling" as a viable replacement for written storylines, dialogue, quests, choices, consequences, all that stuff which the genre has always meant. Bethesda has added this awesome sandbox element to it for sure..but how long can you play in an empty sandbox?

[Llyranor]

We just don't take kindly to Bethesda-bashing around these parts, is all. It's not in our nature.

[Malcador]

Bethesda has added this awesome sandbox element to it for sure..but how long can you play in an empty sandbox?

 

Some are pushing 200 hours of that already. Amazing, but, what can you do - quibbles about storytelling are for obsessive nerds, hah. And really it's hardly Bethesda bashing to criticize something they did in Fallout 3.

[TwinkieGorilla]

Some are pushing 200 hours of that already. Amazing, but, what can you do - quibbles about storytelling are for obsessive nerds, hah. And really it's hardly Bethesda bashing to criticize something they did in Fallout 3.

 

yeah, and you know as well as i do what those 200+ hour type-folks tend to do (house decorating, fake LARPING, dress-up, etc).

Edited May 5, 2009 by TwinkieGorilla

[skuld1]

hahahaha, i started actually quoting people and then i noticed how many more posts i had to go to get to the end, gave up, read Pop's post, agreed and said "screw it."

 

also, for the record: Kaji, my argument is not a strawman and if you really want to dance i'm ready to spin in circles.

 

also, Sawyer, no offense man...but you're starting to lose what faith i had left in this project. you're starting to sound like a Beth dev. you do realize that Mise en Scene isn't the argument, right? i hope you're just being errr..."contrary" for the sake of it and not...ugh. no. i don't even want to think you've got the hook, line and sinker in yr mouth.

 

Edited for, um, words.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

(snip)

 

speaking my mind = drama queen? nice try.

[Sarkus]

Some are pushing 200 hours of that already. Amazing, but, what can you do - quibbles about storytelling are for obsessive nerds, hah. And really it's hardly Bethesda bashing to criticize something they did in Fallout 3.

 

yeah, and you know as well as i do what those 200+ hour type-folks tend to do (house decorating, fake LARPING, dress-up, etc).

 

You keep thinking that if that's what it takes for you to feel comfortably superior to everyone.

[Malcador]

I thought that title was reserved for Kjarista :D

 

Anyway, yeah, the crowd of people that sink endless hours into roaming around...explains the success or the consequence of MMORPGs I guess. Couldn't see myself wasting that much time for the life of me. That was nice about exploring in FO2, you ended up in all the places with at least some reason to do so. Given that those type of players -seem- to be the majority, I doubt they'd ever bother with improved story elements, what would the players care?

[Mikhailian]

Boarded up buildings is lame. Who the hell is going to board up a building so you can't enter it after a nuclear war?

I remember the Denver VB design docs detailing how social order had broken down shortly before the bombs fell. Mass rioting, firebombing, etc.

I think the short version went... population boom, unemployment, food rationing, riots, new plague, more riots, nukes.

[TwinkieGorilla]

You keep thinking that if that's what it takes for you to feel comfortably superior to everyone.

 

superior? damn, dude...i don't even KNOW you. wtf? i couldn't care less about what people do. you want to play Second Life? fine. but that's not why i play Fallout and that's not the type of game Fallout began as.

[Slowtrain]

I think FO3 did some things well, but I like to think of this thread as a place where we can talk about making improvements where FO3 did not do so well.

 

SO it would seem, at least to me, that criticisms of FO3's gameplay are more generally useful and interesting than are praises of said gameplay.

[mkreku]

Then why are you losing faith in my ability to make this a good game?

Drama queens are like that. "The super mutants don't have flat heads?! BETHESDA KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT THE LORE!! I WILL BOYCOTT THAT PART OF THE CONTINENT FROM NOW ON!! FALLOUT IN NAME ONLY!!1!".

 

I'm glad J.E. Sawyer seems to have moved on with the times, with the new ability for story-telling that's available to him and seemingly embracing new technology with all its advantages and disadvantages.

[Kefeinzel]

My responses were short, so I'm sorry if this didn't come across, but the only argument I was trying to make is that Bethesda did (in my opinion) a good job in setting up their environments/atmospheric tone in F3. I understand that this is part of a larger discussion involving storytelling in general, but I do feel that visual atmosphere is an important element of storytelling, whether it's in theatre, movies, or games.

 

I think the divergence happening here is where you think it's a good element of storytelling, other people see that that's pretty much most of what bethesda did to the detriment of the already ghastly main story, and are worried due to the previous game that it might continue that way.

To me, it's good to hear that you consider it an element of storytelling and that there needs to be an actual story with good quality writing for it to connect to, unlike in FO3.

 

But that's just my two cents.

[Darth InSidious]

I've been found out. Because I think the development of atmosphere is valuable, I am inherently opposed to primary methods of traditional storytelling. Words, themes, and characters are my enemy. I am the destroyer of your dreams. Sorry it had to come to this.

You mean this game isn't going to be a textual cornucopia lengthier than the KJV a la Torment?

 

You, sir, are the spawn of Beelzebub. THE SPAWN OF BEELZEBUB I TELL YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Now if you'll excuse me, the men in the white coats are coming (ha-ha)...

Edited May 5, 2009 by Darth InSidious

[Gizmo]

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.

Low rez :lmao:, IRRC Oblivion defaults to tha same rez as Fallout 1.

 

Graphics in Fallout were archetypal and served as markers of class and function; Fallout 3's graphics are generic bloom and vroom eyecandy that serves the same function as arcade game hook/attract demo's.

 

nope. i wasn't saying that, i'm not saying that, and it wasn't the point. i think you know this though.

Then why are you losing faith in my ability to make this a good game?

Fallout 3 is a good game; Fallout 3 is also the wrong game.

You making a good game is assumed, and ranks as par for the course;

The unanswerable question is are you going to make the right game or just a standalone FO3 expansion?

*[which is what I think a lot of us dread ~but I can only speak for myself...]

Edited May 5, 2009 by Gizmo

[mkreku]

Low rez :lmao:, IRRC Oblivion defaults to tha same rez as Fallout 1.

So, to sum it up: you're arguing that your old 2D game isn't low res because some other game unrelated to the discussion defaults to its lowest possible setting and this somehow proves that your 2D game isn't low res..?

 

Are you trying to win an award for dumbest, most pointless argument ever?

 

Graphics in Fallout were archetypal and served as markers of class and function; Fallout 3's graphics are generic bloom and vroom eyecandy that serves the same function as arcade game hook/attract demo's.

Useless opinion. So you think your favourite game has better graphics than a game you hate? Gee, what a surprise

 

The only thing generic here is you. It's like you're reading off a NMA/Codex script. It's old.

[Malcador]

Drama queens are like that. "The super mutants don't have flat heads?! BETHESDA KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT THE LORE!! I WILL BOYCOTT THAT PART OF THE CONTINENT FROM NOW ON!! FALLOUT IN NAME ONLY!!1!".

 

I'm glad J.E. Sawyer seems to have moved on with the times, with the new ability for story-telling that's available to him and seemingly embracing new technology with all its advantages and disadvantages.

 

Mind the shards of glass. Issue was with it being done poorly, not with it being done. But oh well.

[TwinkieGorilla]

The only thing generic here is you. It's like you're reading off a NMA/Codex script. It's old.

 

my favorite thing about you is how you call people out for doing the exact thing you are consistently and perpetually prone to doing. lolerskates!

[Gizmo]

So, to sum it up: you're arguing that your old 2D game isn't low res because some other game unrelated to the discussion defaults to its lowest possible setting and this somehow proves that your 2D game isn't low res..?

 

Are you trying to win an award for dumbest, most pointless argument ever?

nope...

I have won because resolution has nothing to do with anything; If Oblivion could achieve is graphics in 640x480, then Resolution is not that limiting. *And for the record, art need not be photo realistic to be better. Study a few road signs sometime... They're not much in the way of fine art, but they are carefully crafted to impart their meaning. In Fallout the art was carefully crafted to impart what it represented.

 

Also... since you brought it up; I will say that I consider the heads in Fallout 1 to be superior to the heads in Fallout 3. Again Resolution (or even 8-bit color) has nothing to do with anything. The ideas are more inspired, and better done using the resources given.

 

Useless opinion. So you think your favourite game has better graphics than a game you hate? Gee, what a surprise

 

The only thing generic here is you. It's like you're reading off a NMA/Codex script. It's old.

What game do I hate?

 

~Besides (as I mentioned above), "better" is very subjective and can mean "better suited", "better priced", "better accuracy", "better style", "better originality", "better detail".... (incidentally ~More detail is not always better, and this is something that most Black Isle games excelled at IMO).

Edited May 5, 2009 by Gizmo

[cronicler]

Lovely discussion. Let me spell this put slowly then. Compared to todays modern titles; Fallout 3 was a Average-Above Average title. We can argue this all day but in every area it had either medicore or poor grades compared to other games. What it had in good quality was diversity. It had a lot of different aspects in it that you could explore and have fun.

 

The problem is the fact that having a very long list of "to do" and a lot of "cool/Holywood" to put in the game meant that the details were lost. We aren't here to bash the game because we are mean gamers. We bash and whine about those points because we really want them to become better and become an overall better game.

 

Also this story without writing discussion did remind me one of the sore points. I really hope in the NV we don't see as many working computers as 3. Or to be more precise I really hope we don't see computer terminals sitting in random locations. I have no problems to see the Hero connecting his pipboy/portable computer to "might have something in it" ruined computers / ruined terminals etc and power them locally and then hack them/search their file systems/whatever. This is a very small detail but the divider that makes a game very good or medicore is really hidden in details.

 

Details like Backpack, Pockets, Carrying Harnesses, Survival Kit, Pipboy...

 

Anyone who has done some long, more than 2 days long, trekking / hunting trips can tell you about the survival kit (also known as if I am abducted by aliens" or "If i have to stay at a motel" kit.) Basically you carry a few bullets, a lighter, a spare underwear, 2 or 3 spare socks, 1 pair of fingerless gloves, some wire, duct tape, some basic medicine like caffeine and Vit. B&K tablets, some water purifier tablets etc in a little bag (Usually people prefer fanny or strap on leg bags).

I would have loved to see something in like this in the game as It is a game with "Survival in Wilderness" aspect. You start out with a small kit containing your critical and/or expensive resources like your improvised lockpicks from Amada, very basic medical equipment (a lancet that you acquired from dad's office, a needle nose pliers..), some connector cables to hook up your pipboy to universal system sockets. These would allow you to only access the basic functions like treating gunshots, opening basic locks etc. As your skill grows you could manufacture your new and better tools or buy better tools to gain access to higher difficulty options.

This is another little point that could have made the game more... realistic? enjoyable? It would have stopped getting weird feelings from "You need X skill to access this" errors. Yes they have the same limiting effect but devil is in the details.

Edited May 5, 2009 by cronicler

[Gizmo]

I have no problems to see the Hero connecting his pipboy/portable computer to "might have something in it" ruined computers / ruined terminals etc and power them locally and then hack them/search their file systems/whatever. This is a very small detail but the divider that makes a game very good or medicore is really hidden in details.

Reading that, I had the vision of a Dev made Easter Egg, where the pip causes a fullscreen "BSOD" ~but green, and a reformat warning

 

I remember being "antsy" about the last time the pip asked for a reformat.

Edited May 5, 2009 by Gizmo

[Jaesun]

You know we could debate the fault's/good things of Fallout 3 until the end of time (2012). Perhaps we should provide some actual discussions on making Fallout:New Vegas a kick butt RPG, developed by Obsidian.

 

I'll start:

 

VATS is awful. Does JE have an idea to actually make this..... better other than a giant cheat mode?

Can you make stats actually mean something this time (read, replayability) And not put bobbleheads everywhere.

Slow down leveling, and NO LEVEL SCALING. Make some areas just very difficult.

[Promethean]

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.

 

Not to mention why are the skeletons still there after so long. Its just like how every building and house hasnt been raided in 200 years, none of the food has gone bad, tons of terminals work despite the lack of plausible electrical sources, there are no farms and the wooden frames of house are still there. The whole game is confused about when the bombs really dropped it seem.

 

Not to mention I believe it was J.E. who posted how 98% of radiation could be removed from water by sifting it through earth. Which kinda makes the main plot look really dumb.

Edited May 5, 2009 by Promethean

[thepixiesrock]

Obsidian forums you are played.

 

Played.

[cronicler]

Promethean: Just assume that 20 years have passed since the bombs instead of 200. I'm really not sure why the devs were so insistent on the 200 year part but the whole game felt better if you just assumed it was WWIII +20 or so