Slowtrain Posted May 13, 2009 Posted May 13, 2009 you folks ain't trying to discuss fo population in terms o' realism, right? might as well point out that the sheer number o' large predators roaming 'bout pretty much invalidates the possibility o' you having a wasteland. you got giant insects, (impossible for multiple reasons) and super mutants (HA!) and miniguns as personal weapons (*groan*). am not sure why folks can stomach such stuff... and then get all twisted by minutiae. is the flinstones... is no more plausible than the flinstones setting. you wouldn't argue population density with flinstones, would you? would be silly to do so, right? HA! Good Fun! Often it is the believability of the minutiae that make that suspension of disblief possible when it comes to the larger impossibilities/implausibilites. Its a pretty basic tenet of fantasy/sf writing. Notice how I can belittle your beliefs without calling you names. It's a useful skill to have particularly where you aren't allowed to call people names. It's a mistake to get too drawn in/worked up. I mean it's not life or death, it's just two guys posting their thoughts on a message board. If it were personal or face to face all the usual restraints would be in place, and we would never have reached this place in the first place. Try to remember that.
crakkie Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) I'd like to see less peaceful anarchistic communities and more iron-handed authoritarian rulers, especially the one controlling the arable land around Lake Mead. Edited May 14, 2009 by crakkie Oh Jimmy, you were so funny. Don't let me down. From habit he lifts his watch; it shows him its blank face. Zero hour, Snowman thinks. Time to go.
Promethean Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 Well, it is the Wasteland. There shouldn't be any really large settlements left. The people in Fallout 1 and 2 had bigger settlements in less time after the bomb.
Aristes Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) I'd like to see less peaceful anarchistic communities and more iron-handed authoritarian rulers, especially the one controlling the arable land around Lake Mead. Some good ol' warlordism. I agree. And remember that warlords often step into power because anarchy sucks, so keep that in mind while you create the warlord characters. Edited May 14, 2009 by Aristes
Killian Kalthorne Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 Well, it is the Wasteland. There shouldn't be any really large settlements left. The people in Fallout 1 and 2 had bigger settlements in less time after the bomb. Yes, but the game engine was simpler and didn't take up as much resources. "Your Job is not to die for your country, but set a man on fire, and take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe."
Gromnir Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 you folks ain't trying to discuss fo population in terms o' realism, right? might as well point out that the sheer number o' large predators roaming 'bout pretty much invalidates the possibility o' you having a wasteland. you got giant insects, (impossible for multiple reasons) and super mutants (HA!) and miniguns as personal weapons (*groan*). am not sure why folks can stomach such stuff... and then get all twisted by minutiae. is the flinstones... is no more plausible than the flinstones setting. you wouldn't argue population density with flinstones, would you? would be silly to do so, right? HA! Good Fun! Often it is the believability of the minutiae that make that suspension of disblief possible when it comes to the larger impossibilities/implausibilites. Its a pretty basic tenet of fantasy/sf writing. some fantasy does strive for internal coherence... assume we got magic, then find plausibility once we makes that implausible assumption. fine. but notion that there is some inverse proportion function at work in sci-fi and fantasy is ... wrong. smaller the detail the bigger the impact on plausibility? uh... no. regardless, as we already note above, fallout is akin to flinstones where in the big and small is all silly. suspension o' disbelief is not something the fo universe honest not seems to strive for... is 1950's b-movie and pulp mag notions o' post apoc... is flinstones. HA! Good Fun! "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) "Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)
entrerix Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 Well, it is the Wasteland. There shouldn't be any really large settlements left. The people in Fallout 1 and 2 had bigger settlements in less time after the bomb. Yes, but the game engine was simpler and didn't take up as much resources. that doesnt excuse the problem, unless you are saying it would be impossible to have larger towns that in fallout 1 using fallout 3's engine. and i really really doubt that is the case. besides you can always break the larger town up into districts to avoid that problem anyway, its annoying but still better than the bizarre "city" with 15 people in it and no farming. Killing is kind of like playin' a basketball game. I am there. and the other player is there. and it's just the two of us. and I put the other player's body in my van. and I am the winner. - Nice Pete.
bhlaab Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 The view distance made the world in Oblivion feel small in a way that Morrowind never did, though I gather the game world was indeed significantly smaller. I never managed to judge the view distance from Megaton, as I got a crick in my neck from looking up those walkways. But I was surprised that Fallout 3 seemed to be going for a wasteland-y feel, even though it was in a major urban area (or remains thereof). I wonder if New Vegas will go for a wasteland or city feel, and whether you can accomplish both with that engine. Oblivion is actually a little bit bigger than morrowind, but it feels smaller just because you aren't constantly going from swamp to desert to sea to town to prarie to ashland whatever like in Morrowind, you've pretty much just got Grassy, Snowy, Beachy. And with all the thick forests and well-defined landmarks they don't play with negative space in quite the same way. The compass pointing directly at each goal doesn't help as the aimless wandering was part of Morrowind's charm-- the fact that the world was "so big" that you couldn't find the stupid cave you were looking for was frustrating but cool. There's a mod to play Morrowind with distant land on and yeah it does make things feel a little bit smaller, but it still feels like "the possibilities are endless!" in a way oblivion just doesnt. Fallout 3 is actually a lot smaller than both, hough to me it feels about the same size as Oblivion. They work with the space better, but I can't help comparing it to the previous Fallout games instead of the previous Elder Scrolls games. And in that regard I feel that it should be a bunch of hub areas like towns connected by vast emptiness. The fact that Megaton and Rivet City were the only substantial towns bothered me, and even then they weren't quite as substantial as any of the towns in the previous games.
Syraxis Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) Quests in morrowind also had you traversing across half the continent most of the time, Oblivion had you walk the equivalent to maybe 5-7 miles from the quest giver to the appropriate location. It made the world seem smaller when in reality it wasn't all that so, least that was what I've been told/observed for myself. Edited May 14, 2009 by Syraxis
Enoch Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 the fact that the world was "so big" that you couldn't find the stupid cave you were looking for was frustrating but cool. You and I have very different ideas about what constitutes "cool." A game wasting my time because it gave me awful directions doesn't count in my book.
Gizmo Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 The reason why I spoke about individuals is that different disciplines which are applied when making a game, art, code, design, the general skillset is interchangable between development teams, people move around alot in the games industry, development studios on the otherhand tend to focus on owning an area of the market. If a studio does branch out this often results in setting up an entirely different team.This mean what though? I mean really? The artist will work as told (and honestly, what need be different from them?); Coders couldn't care less, they design the behaviors asked of them. If someone can't do the job, they give them a different one or let them go... Bethesda have an established fanbase, the Eldar scrolls community, established mechanics which they're used to applying, and established technology and experience with the Gamebyro engine. The first good business decision is to go "How much can we re-use?", there are also a bunch of other questions which need to be considered, but unless you've got the cash and time to build a new development team it doesn't seem sensible to stray too far outside the current norm. The established TES gameplay is unsuitable ~period... The engine I've no qualms with, and they are more than capable of twisting it any which way that they please ~so they could have made the game fit the expectations of the series. I don't believe the team which made FO3 would ever make a NFL or Nascar, so even thinking about it is a waste of time. Some of the individuals on the other hand may very well have, or may do so in the future.Irrelevant no? The point was not "whether they would", but rather "assuming it was given them to make such a game"... Totally different situation entirely, the two don't make ANY sense, it would be like Bethesda actually admitting they know nothing about making games, which they clearly know something about as they've achieved alot of sales. What exactly would you hire a "pro consultant" for on FO 3, that's an absurd it's a ridiculious idea. They don't [about Fallout], and they've proved it time and again using their own words, and press appearances. [and again with some of the changes in the DLC]. I've watched the Bethsoft Fallout threads from day one, and saw the infamous "suggest a perk" contest. [infamous because out of 17,000 entries they picked the one that ripped off Rune and devalues the AP's even more than they are normally]. They have done a fantastic job with the visuals ~the landscapes, the interiors (better than could be expected), They've set the perfect stage, but they shoot themselves in the foot with "out of series gameplay goals" ~designed for fans of different series. They studied Halo and Call of Duty to design their combat component instead of the previous 3 games in the series they were continuing. ~And the toilet drinking... All games have bugs and exploits but that is not something they missed. They had the budget to hire original team members to give them the inside understanding of the series that you just don't get from looking at the final result. ~Its like watching a blacksmith make an ornate Iron fitting... Just watching, and even studying the piece later, will not tell you how its done. Personally I'd have preferred them to have hired one or more of the series devs as consultants for a week (early in the planning stages) instead of Liam Neson. The franchise belongs to Bethesda legally, they can do as they please with it. I imagine that the thinking was to establish a new fanbase and appeal to new gamers. You don't do that with a sequel; What sense does it make to tie your new game to an old name that is not of interest to anyone but a previous fan? 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]. Why bother? You can take the basics and make the rest up and most people won't care. I think the great irony here would be Viking : Battle for Asgard for example, Creative Assembly I'd say they're well known for the accuracy of the Total war series, but Viking : Battle for Asgard is a damn perversion of norse mythology. Hollywood are the kings inaccuracy, they seem to get away with it . So really it depends on what you're intending to achieve with the game, a super realistic FPP title based on welsh myth would never make it past the first round of pitches at most if not all companies. Saying this is a means to avoid the analogy? Surely you catch that the subject itself is moot, its the simple premise that one hires help with a subject they are unsure of. I could point out fifty examples, but I expect giving a face to any would garner replies like "Plumbers have nothing to do with software design", or "Why would I need to hire an electrician to change a fuse" ~these are not the point.... (This is not solely at you ~yours was not too extreme, but so many from Bethsoft's threads take analogies dead-pan literally which is never appropriate.) I don't think Bethesda made a blunder, I believe they revitalised a dead franchise, sold shedloads of copies and if a small minority feel the way you describe, well as much as a shame as that is, it's a small minority. I believe Bethesda made the best Fallout 3 they could, it's not strange that they mixed it up alot, and to be brutally blunt if they had taken the approch of using the previous Fallout mechanics I do not believe that the game would have been as successful, it's all about sales, I do not believe that the FO3 that the NMA and Codexian minority desire would have been as well recieved.Except that this was what the series was; Its what it was founded on and it was the point of the game... To take just the names and the mascot and brand an alien title with its name is disingenuous to say the least. So while you guys are wounded by the results, from a business and development perspective they've released a successful product, and they've recouped the investment.Better left dead IMO... As much as I hate it... the old argument is true... McDonalds sells a lot of hamburgers, but that hardly makes them quality food, or does justice to the concept of a good burger ~But its what the masses want, and what they will pay for. FO3 is [a McHybrid RPGlite] and that's not a bad thing in and of itself, but its dragging the other two down. Consider Relics Dawn of War2, and Blizzard's Diablo 3, and Starcraft 2, and Disciples 3 from Akella/Dat ~sequels all, and it shows. It doesn't show in FO3. *sigh*... Anything I say will end up causing offense. So I'm going to say as little as I can, simply... Yeah, I'd probably want to put off as many rabbid fans as possible and concern myself with making the best product I can. FO3 is actually highly respected by alot of folks within the industry.No offense taken ~I never do... ... But their respect (having read many reviews) often shows little knowledge or concern for the series integrity.
Slowtrain Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) some fantasy does strive for internal coherence... assume we got magic, then find plausibility once we makes that implausible assumption. fine. but notion that there is some inverse proportion function at work in sci-fi and fantasy is ... wrong. smaller the detail the bigger the impact on plausibility? uh... no. regardless, as we already note above, fallout is akin to flinstones where in the big and small is all silly. suspension o' disbelief is not something the fo universe honest not seems to strive for... is 1950's b-movie and pulp mag notions o' post apoc... is flinstones. HA! Good Fun! I don't disagree with you in regard to the Fallouts. My point was just that it would be nice to see video games attempt to adhere to some of the basic concepts of even poor and mediocre genre fiction. I would like to see less self-awareness in game design and more attempts at creating a real suspension of disbelief, that same suspension of disbelief I enjoy in genre novels that wrap me up in their impossible/improbable world for hours at a time. Referring specifically to Fallout 3: I get tired of a game reminding me constantly that it is in fact a game. Not being a particularly big fan of metafiction, when an story starts reminding me constantly that it is fact a story, an artifice, an authorial creation, I tend to lose interest. Its a personal preference, of course, but I would just like to see games work harder at trying to captivate me more like a novel and less like a pinball machine. Edited May 14, 2009 by CrashGirl Notice how I can belittle your beliefs without calling you names. It's a useful skill to have particularly where you aren't allowed to call people names. It's a mistake to get too drawn in/worked up. I mean it's not life or death, it's just two guys posting their thoughts on a message board. If it were personal or face to face all the usual restraints would be in place, and we would never have reached this place in the first place. Try to remember that.
Gizmo Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 you folks ain't trying to discuss fo population in terms o' realism, right? might as well point out that the sheer number o' large predators roaming 'bout pretty much invalidates the possibility o' you having a wasteland. you got giant insects, (impossible for multiple reasons) and super mutants (HA!) and miniguns as personal weapons (*groan*). am not sure why folks can stomach such stuff... and then get all twisted by minutiae. is the flinstones... is no more plausible than the flinstones setting. you wouldn't argue population density with flinstones, would you? would be silly to do so, right? HA! Good Fun! That's just part of the whole... Its [sort of] the same thing as as watching a musical and accepting that all the players burst into song. (It not exactly the same... but its similar). As for what fits and what doesn't... See I can accept a diner crowd breaking into a dance number, and an ex-fiance using a Light Anti tank Weapon at her ex-groom, and I can accept a blind pawn shop owner firing a pistol at a 13 year old as a warning shot, but I could never accept anyone in the film pulling a knife and stabbing someone with it. [i assume that most everyone here will immediately get the film reference ] Fallout had the RadScorpions from Damnation Alley, and it had a few quirks like pulling a minigun out of a skintight blue bodysuit... But on the whole it was quasi serious unless you were out in the wild [unexplored wasteland].
bhlaab Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 the fact that the world was "so big" that you couldn't find the stupid cave you were looking for was frustrating but cool. You and I have very different ideas about what constitutes "cool." A game wasting my time because it gave me awful directions doesn't count in my book. For morrowind, sure. It's a game that's about wasting your time. The trick is to play it over summer break when you're in high school or college.
Gizmo Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) the fact that the world was "so big" that you couldn't find the stupid cave you were looking for was frustrating but cool. You and I have very different ideas about what constitutes "cool." A game wasting my time because it gave me awful directions doesn't count in my book. It was a lie or a mistake... has that never happened to all of us? The same thing is in the original Fallout where one of the early NPC's you meet sends you in not quite the right direction because they don't really know better[and why should they?]. *I find it more believable myself that NPC's are not omnipotent guides all of the time or about all regions outside of their own. Edited May 14, 2009 by Gizmo
Gromnir Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 you folks ain't trying to discuss fo population in terms o' realism, right? might as well point out that the sheer number o' large predators roaming 'bout pretty much invalidates the possibility o' you having a wasteland. you got giant insects, (impossible for multiple reasons) and super mutants (HA!) and miniguns as personal weapons (*groan*). am not sure why folks can stomach such stuff... and then get all twisted by minutiae. is the flinstones... is no more plausible than the flinstones setting. you wouldn't argue population density with flinstones, would you? would be silly to do so, right? HA! Good Fun! That's just part of the whole... Its [sort of] the same thing as as watching a musical and accepting that all the players burst into song. (It not exactly the same... but its similar). As for what fits and what doesn't... See I can accept a diner crowd breaking into a dance number, and an ex-fiance using a Light Anti tank Weapon at her ex-groom, and I can accept a blind pawn shop owner firing a pistol at a 13 year old as a warning shot, but I could never accept anyone in the film pulling a knife and stabbing someone with it. [i assume that most everyone here will immediately get the film reference ] Fallout had the RadScorpions from Damnation Alley, and it had a few quirks like pulling a minigun out of a skintight blue bodysuit... But on the whole it was quasi serious unless you were out in the wild [unexplored wasteland]. am having almost no idea of what you is trying to say. in any event, we thinks that the fallout setting has appeal in part 'cause it can be campy and deadly serious seemingly at same time. is a bad analogy, but we kinda see fo in similar manner as heavy metal, the movie. none o' the heavy metal individual stories were shooting for realism or plausibility... were going for kewl. regardless o' whether you like or hate heavy metal, it would be kinda silly to thinks the movie woulda' been improved with more realism. HA! Good Fun! "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) "Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)
HoonDing Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 Anything is better than simply following a map marker to somewhere, kill something and fast travelling back to pick up your reward. It must be said that travelling in Morrowind easily became as trivial as Oblivion after a while (mark/recall spells, Divine/almsivi intervention, etc), the difference is that at least Morrowind made it a natural part of the world, not just a cop-out for the impatient by clicking on an icon an a map and appearing at said place after a loading screen. The ending of the words is ALMSIVI.
Gromnir Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 "Anything is better than simply following a map marker to somewhere, kill something and fast travelling back to pick up your reward." am thinking you have backwards. insta-travel and map markers may be an imperfect solution, but anything is better than wandering around aimlessly following terrible directions til you at last end up at a cave (a a cave which looks identical indie and out to 20+ other caves) simply to complete an ultimately uninspired and banal quest. even with insta travel back and clear markers, you still gotta travel on foot the first time before you can do your insta-travel trick... those folks who long for exploration still get... just w/o some o' the monotony and confusion. HA! Good Fun! "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) "Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)
Gizmo Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) am having almost no idea of what you is trying to say. in any event, we thinks that the fallout setting has appeal in part 'cause it can be campy and deadly serious seemingly at same time. is a bad analogy, but we kinda see fo in similar manner as heavy metal, the movie. none o' the heavy metal individual stories were shooting for realism or plausibility... were going for kewl. regardless o' whether you like or hate heavy metal, it would be kinda silly to thinks the movie woulda' been improved with more realism. HA! Good Fun! That's a good analogy. * I find that I cannot read your posts without hearing them as might be done by Frank Oz in his best Yoda. [or Grover ] Edited May 14, 2009 by Gizmo
GreasyDogMeat Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 What I like to see is an re-engineered versions of the originals using Fallout 3's game engine and design. Would LOVE to see a 3d engine remake with some tweaks and fixes. Make it so you could type in the currency instead of SLOOOWLY get to 500 caps. Fix the spy in Adytum but no spy issue etc. They could even change all the rules to be more in line with Fallout 3. patiently waiting for riot...
Gizmo Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 It would surely be possible to do it the other way... Use FO3's assets and engine to make a Fallout 1 or 2 clone. I don't know many that would want an outright remake ~the first two are fine already... but I'd be very interested if they did that using a new campaign.
bhlaab Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 I would like to see Fallout 3 remade in the Fallout 2 engine
Tigranes Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 I would like to see Fallout 3 remade in the Fallout 2 engine Yes. Perhaps when you go into combat mode and shoot Three Dawg in the face, there will be a floating text saying "This ain't the good fight, yo." Let's Play: Icewind Dale Ironman (Complete) Let's Play: Icewind Dale II Ironman (Complete) Let's Play: Divinity II (Complete) Let's Play: Baldur's Gate Trilogy Ironman - BG1 (Complete) Let's Play: Baldur's Gate Trilogy Ironman - BG2 (In Progress)
bhlaab Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 I would like to see Max Payne 2 remade in the Daggerfall engine
Bos_hybrid Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 I would like to see Fallout 3 remade in the Fallout 2 engine I'm so glad you don't decide the future of Fallout.
Recommended Posts