Obsidian making Fallout: New Vegas

[Pop]

As I recall the rationale for removing eye shots was that it was too difficult to render in a 3D engine. In the isometric engine of the first fallouts the nitty gritty of gunfights was largely left to the imagination and thus you could have shots to minute parts of the body. In a 3D engine it's hard to visually distinguish an eyeshot from a headshot. Furthermore with such a minute target you wouldn't be able to hit half of the time at the least because of how targets move in real time and the opportunities for obfuscation (target turns his head slightly and you've got a headshot instead of an eyeshot). Hell in the first Fallouts you could eyeshot someone from behind. It isn't that easy. It's probably not worth the time trying to implement it correctly.

 

Groin shots would be marginally better, seeing as how the area to be targeted is greater. However I doubt Bethsoft would sign off on it after passing over it in F3.

[GreasyDogMeat]

Whats this that Feargus has against the boards?

[crakkie]

In a 3D engine it's hard to visually distinguish an eyeshot from a headshot. Furthermore with such a minute target you wouldn't be able to hit half of the time at the least because of how targets move in real time and the opportunities for obfuscation (target turns his head slightly and you've got a headshot instead of an eyeshot).

 

You would just cycle through the body parts until it says "Eyes" and their eyes are highlighted. Then the shots ignore the collision detection and just do damage based on your roll and what you targeted. Eyes are already modeled in Fallout 3 characters (they bounce all over the place after headshots), so targeting/highlighting them wouldn't really be much of an issue. Same goes with removing them when you land a lethal shot. Can't you target something's arm if they're turned to the side and the arm is concealed?

[Gfted1]

Wait, how did shooting one eye out make them blind? That breaks IMMURSHUN!

 

who said "one"?

 

Heh, I was just busting chops. So in the originals, could you choose a specific eye? Would a targeted eyeshot take out both eyes?

[Aristes]

Whats this that Feargus has against the boards?

 

Just my perception. Nothing to it really, other than I do recall him talking about shutting down the boards at one point and the fact that most of the official boards for their games are on someone else's server. Could just be because, except for Alpha Protocol, they've all been sequels or spin offs or whatever.

[TwinkieGorilla]

Heh, I was just busting chops. So in the originals, could you choose a specific eye? Would a targeted eyeshot take out both eyes?

 

nah, it was just eyes, plural. i always thought of it as a shot which ranged from getting debris/shrapnel in the enemies eyes to going right through the eye into the skull. the text box was always a nice touch for those aimed shots too.

[entrerix]

i'd like to see a return of "knockout" attacks, when a crit to the head could knock an enemy out for a few turns before they get back on their feet. it would be a way of making targetted melee and h2h more worthwhile.

 

plus a little more variation in the effects of hitting things is always a nice addition - hardly necessary (unlike good characters, dialogue, and story) but fun nonetheless.

 

also, i will never EVER get tired of putting

[intelligence]

in the front of a supremely stupid and badly written sentence.

 

why?

 

because its goddamn funny.

 

I actually hope that obsidian sticks one of those retard gems into the game somewhere as a joke.

[Syraxis]

also, i will never EVER get tired of putting

[intelligence]

in the front of a supremely stupid and badly written sentence.

 

It'd be sweet if we met a relative of Three-dog in New Vegas, but he/she won't be able to fight the good fight with their voice because his/her tongue was cut out.

[HoonDing]

also, i will never EVER get tired of putting

[intelligence]

in the front of a supremely stupid and badly written sentence.

 

why?

 

because its goddamn funny.

Bethesda should sell T-shirts marked with that little conversation.

 

Gotta hand it to them though, those conversations in Girdleshade (sp?) with the "plow her bean field" and all that, were hilarious. Not to mention the Lady Killer/Black Widow ones.

[TwinkieGorilla]

also, i will never EVER get tired of putting

[intelligence]

in the front of a supremely stupid and badly written sentence.

 

why?

 

because its goddamn funny.

 

I actually hope that obsidian sticks one of those retard gems into the game somewhere as a joke.

 

 

same here. i can't get tired of it. it's just so hilariously perfect in it's inanity. ya gotta love Bethie. you know what would be really funny is if Obsidian fixed SPECIAL and made it meaningful again...so that a low intelligence would give that modifier [intelligence] and all your responses would be as idiotic as that one. just simply repeating what the NPC says back to them. oh joy would that be ultimate lulz!

[Syraxis]

Bethesda should sell T-shirts marked with that little conversation.

 

Anyone feel tempted to email Hines and suggest this?

[Nightshape]

Bethesda wanted to make THEIR interpritation of the Fallout universe, you don't have to like it, but it's only natural that a company would use the same format for their interpritation of a game.

~Its natural to assume that a professional can change styles to suit the project, while the amateur is stuck doing what they are accustomed to, and feels "out of their element" when asked to change.

 

For an individual this is true, but for a large development team working with a specific budget you actually end up increasing the development time frame, increasing the development costs as a result, it's not so much a question of, could they have?, as much as, why the hell would they?. You don't turn out a product that is going to increase your development costs and timeframe when you have an option of going with techniqiues which are established just to please the self proclaimed elite fans, especially if the market data says you're going to shift more units by going with your established route.

 

So in otherwords, it's a bad idea to change a formula which is established by a studio, especially when you have technology in place?

 

If Bethesda had made Fallout 3 in the manner which the Codexian and NMA folk desired it would have SUCKED even more, not because isometric and turn based are bad, but merely because Bethesda have 0 experience doing such things.

Hire a pro then (if even just as a consultant).

 

Yeah, because hiring all the right people for the right jobs is that simple! "Hey guys you're all being made redundant because the Codexian, and NMA folks want THEIR fallout 3, while they're only numbering a few hundred we're going to have to hire an entirely new team with the correct skill set to appease them".

 

Atleast I haven't just proclaimed Gizmo to be an ignorant SOB, so that's an improvement right guys?

[Gromnir]

also, i will never EVER get tired of putting

[intelligence]

in the front of a supremely stupid and badly written sentence.

 

why?

 

because its goddamn funny.

 

I actually hope that obsidian sticks one of those retard gems into the game somewhere as a joke.

 

 

same here. i can't get tired of it. it's just so hilariously perfect in it's inanity. ya gotta love Bethie. you know what would be really funny is if Obsidian fixed SPECIAL and made it meaningful again...so that a low intelligence would give that modifier [intelligence] and all your responses would be as idiotic as that one. just simply repeating what the NPC says back to them. oh joy would that be ultimate lulz!

 

special were meaningful? when? back when outdoorsman were virtual pointless? when first aid and dr. were split? special is so kewl; the system lets you play as you wish. right. how many folks start off with gifted perk and tag small guns? more than half? how many o' you said, "agility is my dump stat,"? etc. special had loads o' potential, but it were a mess from a balance pov and it were less meaningful than you suggest considering there were maybe a handful o' builds you see repeated +80% o' time.

 

...

 

am sick and tired o' the Church o' Cain preaching a return to goode olde tymes that never were. special were a pretty nifty system and we like it loads... but we sure not wanna resurrect. Gromnir gets criticized for being old fashioned-- the word curmudgeon has come up more than once in polite conversation. even so, the fallout faithful makes even Gromnir seems downright progressive... revolutionary even.

 

am also not quite sure why the idiot's response from fallout is held up as some kinda proof o' gaming goodness. if special were balanced proper then you makes int meaningful via skill points n' such anyways. typical obsidian game invariably gots a few unique Intelligence dialogues that is available only to the smarties... such stuff were available in fo3. but have moron dialogues for every encounter seems likes a whole lotta work for relative nil payoff. make int. meaningful by actual balancing o' special rather than cheese o' idiot's response? would be a novel addition to fallout franchise as fo1, 2, and 3 not do a very good job o' balancing special.

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Killian Kalthorne]

i'd like to see a return of "knockout" attacks, when a crit to the head could knock an enemy out for a few turns before they get back on their feet. it would be a way of making targetted melee and h2h more worthwhile.

 

plus a little more variation in the effects of hitting things is always a nice addition - hardly necessary (unlike good characters, dialogue, and story) but fun nonetheless.

 

also, i will never EVER get tired of putting

[intelligence]

in the front of a supremely stupid and badly written sentence.

 

why?

 

because its goddamn funny.

 

I actually hope that obsidian sticks one of those retard gems into the game somewhere as a joke.

 

Writing good dialogue is an art and harder than one would think, and Bethesda is behind the curve by a good 5 to 6 years compared to Obsidian and Bioware, but they are improving since Morrowind. If they don't revert back with TES5, by TES6 or Fallout 5 we may have Bioware level dialogue. By TES8 or Fallout 7 they might reach where Obsidian is currently at.

[GreasyDogMeat]

Some of the dumb dialogue I could pass as your character wasn't really saying those exact words.

 

For example, when you reach Megaton and ask the Sheriff if he has seen your father 'a middle aged guy', they couldn't exactly have discriptive text as the dad changed depending on your particular race. Likewise, the infamous Three Dog using your voice comment... I just imagine my character actually said something intelligent... like it was the old Oblivion one word system.

 

Terrible defense of some terrible dialogue but it works for me.

[bhlaab]

also, i will never EVER get tired of putting

[intelligence]

in the front of a supremely stupid and badly written sentence.

 

It'd be sweet if we met a relative of Three-dog in New Vegas, but he/she won't be able to fight the good fight with their voice because his/her tongue was cut out.

 

I think it would be funny if the radio in new vegas was completely mercenary in nature. Like you'll be walking along and just hear happy jingles for Slaver services "Tired of Tribal Tantrums? Bored of Bow-Legged Boors? Well, thanks to our patented inspection process, when you choose the Khans for your servant needs you only get the brightest and strongest! The quickest and the most alert! So remember, when you see the Khan branding on their arm, you know that stands for K-wality!"

 

Even though I was playing a super good guy, I had to kill three dog because I got sick of his constant preaching.

[bhlaab]

Some of the dumb dialogue I could pass as your character wasn't really saying those exact words.

 

For example, when you reach Megaton and ask the Sheriff if he has seen your father 'a middle aged guy', they couldn't exactly have discriptive text as the dad changed depending on your particular race. Likewise, the infamous Three Dog using your voice comment... I just imagine my character actually said something intelligent... like it was the old Oblivion one word system.

 

Terrible defense of some terrible dialogue but it works for me.

 

It's tough to blame the writers too much for it because of the ridiculous 80 character limit. So instead of actual dialogue you're left with brief summaries of gigantic concepts.

>I can't believe my Dad is dead

>I'm glad my Dad is dead

>I've accepted that my Dad is dead

>Goodbye!

[Aristes]

Oh forget it. Why should games be art? Why not just be games? *shrug* It's probably pointless. Let's just say that the dialogue in Fallout 1/2 is not exactly Pulitzer prizewinning material either. Maybe games will be art someday, but in the meantime I want games to be fun.

 

Of course, I have the sudden desire to install American McGee's Alice and play it again.

Edited May 13, 2009 by Aristes

[Aram]

Eh, I've played more than a few games with writing on par with at least your better than average film--and not just RPGs. There are enough that when a game isn't up to snuff, one tends to notice it.

 

I'm as sick of Fallout 3 ranting as anyone, but I have to say that the writing in Fallout 3 was a noticeable step down from 1 & 2, and the biggest disappointment for me personally. I see good dialogue writing in an RPG as when it actually feels like you're handling a real conversation, rather than just working your way through dialogue options until the responses start to loop, and you find the options that either trigger "walk away" or "attack." The best game I ever played for this was Planescape--the talk with Ravel and others are simply great. Fallout was the beginning of good dialogue trees in games, at least for me--an art which evolved through Black Isle into Planescape. Fallout 2 was even better in many ways though the constant pop culture references, silliness, bugginess, unfinished feel, and obvious breaking of the fourth wall, in my opinion, made it inferior. Fallout 3 was a step down even from the original and certainly from what other RPGs since have established for us.

Edited May 13, 2009 by Aram

[Amentep]

Some of the dumb dialogue I could pass as your character wasn't really saying those exact words.

 

For example, when you reach Megaton and ask the Sheriff if he has seen your father 'a middle aged guy', they couldn't exactly have discriptive text as the dad changed depending on your particular race. Likewise, the infamous Three Dog using your voice comment... I just imagine my character actually said something intelligent... like it was the old Oblivion one word system.

 

Terrible defense of some terrible dialogue but it works for me.

 

When I read the "Fight the Good Fight" Intelligence dialogue the first time, in game, I thought my character was using intelligence to be sarcastic.

 

Like "Oh...you 'fight the good fight'quotes> with your...voice". That basically the character was saying 3 Dog was full of it.

 

Maybe I'm just too charitable.

Edited May 13, 2009 by Amentep

[TwinkieGorilla]

Writing good dialogue is an art and harder than one would think, and Bethesda is behind the curve by a good 5 to 6 years compared to Obsidian and Bioware, but they are improving since Morrowind. If they don't revert back with TES5, by TES6 or Fallout 5 we may have Bioware level dialogue. By TES8 or Fallout 7 they might reach where Obsidian is currently at.

 

experience is not synonymous with talent, wit or creativity. most of the dialogue when not appearing poorly written, was embarrassingly juvenile and corny. while it's always said in these arguments that FO1 & 2 were not exactly up to the level of dramatic satire as Richard Brautigan or Samuel Beckett...much of the dialogue had me despairing or laughing just as hard. you either know how to write well or you don't. Bethesda does not nor will they ever until they hire people who do.

 

Some of the dumb dialogue I could pass as your character wasn't really saying those exact words.

 

i see this whole "you make up your own game with teh imagination!" defense on the Bethie boards all the time. there's a name for this: irrational justification.

 

It's tough to blame the writers too much for it because of the ridiculous 80 character limit. So instead of actual dialogue you're left with brief summaries of gigantic concepts.

>I can't believe my Dad is dead

>I'm glad my Dad is dead

>I've accepted that my Dad is dead

>Goodbye!

 

yeah, but you're sort of illustrating a point here. you have 3 choices which are all going to point to the same NPC reaction. Bethesda wasted most of their character limit giving us the appearance of their game containing rich, branching dialogue with tons of choices. instead we got the same few phrases worded slightly differently over and over. anyway, that's not even the worst of it. as i've said before, the worst of it was watching Bethesda try waaaaaay too hard to be witty, funny or "cool" with their dialogue. like, uh...i know developers are pretty epic nerds most of the time but these guys take the cake. it all clicked when i watched their DVD. srsly. that's one office i'd pay to escape.

 

Oh forget it. Why should games be art? Why not just be games? *shrug* It's probably pointless. Let's just say that the dialogue in Fallout 1/2 is not exactly Pulitzer prizewinning material either. Maybe games will be art someday, but in the meantime I want games to be fun.

 

i've actually argued many times that videogames cannot truly be art because their primary goal is capital gain. art, in it's pure form...exists because the artist has something inside which needs to be purged. selling your art should be an afterthought meant to expose yourself to the greatest audience possible. but creating art with the intention to constantly compromise in order to make money immediately changes it from art to commodity. though i WILL argue to the death that some games are, to use a turn of phrase, more of a "work of art" than others. some games held onto their integrity and sunk their artistic principles so deep into them that they said "i hope people want a game like this. here goes nothin'" and you know what? that's why we have games like Grim Fandango, Fallout and Planescape.

 

so anyway, the heck's yr point? that we're demanding Fallout be "art"? no. look, writing decent to average dialogue isn't that tough. the amount of head-slaps or eyes rolled while reading FO3's dialogue is heretofore unsurpassed by any game, ever.

 

 

Eh, I've played more than a few games with writing on par with at least your better than average film--and not just RPGs. There are enough that when a game isn't up to snuff, one tends to notice it.

 

I'm as sick of Fallout 3 ranting as anyone, but I have to say that the writing in Fallout 3 was a noticeable step down from 1 & 2, and the biggest disappointment for me personally. I see good dialogue writing in an RPG as when it actually feels like you're handling a real conversation, rather than just working your way through dialogue options until the responses start to loop, and you find the options that either trigger "walk away" or "attack."

 

glad you brought that up as i was just about to. nothing felt natural and the choices seemed either completely obvious or empty and arbitrary. i got so sick of the embarrassing dialogue of FO3 that i just started clicking through it all so i could get on with the game (not to mention the half-assed voice acting got old real quick).

 

When I read the "Fight the Good Fight" Intelligence dialogue the first time, in game, I thought my character was using intelligence to be sarcastic.

 

Like "Oh...you <finger quotes>'fight the good fight'</finger quotes> with your...voice". That basically the character was saying 3 Dog was full of it.

 

Maybe I'm just too charitable.

 

errr, yeah. yeah you are. i'll just leave it at that.

[Gizmo]

For an individual this is true, but for a large development team working with a specific budget you actually end up increasing the development time frame, increasing the development costs as a result, it's not so much a question of, could they have?, as much as, why the hell would they?. You don't turn out a product that is going to increase your development costs and timeframe when you have an option of going with techniqiues which are established just to please the self proclaimed elite fans, especially if the market data says you're going to shift more units by going with your established route.So in otherwords, it's a bad idea to change a formula which is established by a studio, especially when you have technology in place?

Is a team not made up of individuals? I'd say any team of professionals can adjust their work to an adjusted goal. If Their next game were for the NFL, or Nascar... (and it was worth a lot to them, do you really believe that they would not make it multiplayer and just clone Fallout 3? Do you think they would make tha NFL game in First Person?)

 

As to extending their development cycle ~That's what they did with FO3 isn't it? They added things like partial dismemberment and raised the string limits for Dialog, and shader support. I mean, as close as it is to Oblivion its still got major differences that added to the development schedule far more time than perhaps anything suggested by fans that know the series better than them. ~(and they do)

 

If Bethesda had made Fallout 3 in the manner which the Codexian and NMA folk desired it would have SUCKED even more, not because isometric and turn based are bad, but merely because Bethesda have 0 experience doing such things.

Hire a pro then (if even just as a consultant).

~Hire a pro consultant ~that's what they had for America's Army ~they had access to a military gun expert and someone who knew every piece of equipment that they were to make/model and have behave correctly (enough).

 

If you're localizing a game for Romania [or Korea, or Germany, or Spain]... you hire someone that speaks the language and knows the customs /idioms / taboos. That's doesn't make your team redundant, it gives them a heads up to things they do not know, or might never perceive.

 

If your game is a super realistic FPP title based on Welsh myth, would you have only the regular folks from the office write it for you(?), or would you at least hire a consultant that knows the material very ~very well and would know the names and the dates and the meanings ~[and not need weeks to research it].

 

Yeah, because hiring all the right people for the right jobs is that simple! "Hey guys you're all being made redundant because the Codexian, and NMA folks want THEIR fallout 3, while they're only numbering a few hundred we're going to have to hire an entirely new team with the correct skill set to appease them".

 

Atleast I haven't just proclaimed Gizmo to be an ignorant SOB, so that's an improvement right guys?

Its not their game, its their hobby, and its Bethesda's blunder; Sure they made a bundle of cash by slashing the wrists of our hobby and using its life blood for their twice resurrected FPS/RPG-lite. But its not a proper series continuance and it omits most if not technically all of the game aspects that would mark it as a sequel. ~A sequel should not need to be branded, its usually plain to the eye ~and Fallout3 does not look like an advanced Fallout 2, does not play like one, and does not read like one (nor react like one). It is for all intents TES4 Edited May 13, 2009 by Gizmo

[HoonDing]

Gizmo, do you think/expect Fallout: New Vegas will look & play like an advanced Fallout 2?

[Gizmo]

Gizmo, do you think/expect Fallout: New Vegas will look & play like an advanced Fallout 2?

Not without mods

 

 

~But one never knows... Its not beyond all possibility for a pleasant surprise. ~Its better to hope for the best.

Edited May 13, 2009 by Gizmo

[TwinkieGorilla]

god i hate this one ****ing thread bull****.